Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - Greyhawk becoming too high-powered?
    Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion
    Greyhawk becoming too high-powered?
    Author Message
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 13, 2002
    Posts: 1077
    From: Orlane, Gran March

    Send private message
    Wed Dec 27, 2006 4:38 pm  

    CSL... I understand the "flavor," concept, and it is one that has bothered me off and on. The fact that there are +1 swords is not nearly as irritating as the fact that there is a magic sword.

    I still disagree that the prevelence of magic items is different than in earlier years; but the ability to make magic items affects the weave of it all.

    I worked with various system ideas for special materials (al la mithril, admantium, etc.) and for a masterwork system that allows for increased pluses and maybe a superior sharpness characteristic (for example) as a way to alleviate this irritiant and yet maintain the gaming system. The problem quickly became complexity, and I worried with it no longer.
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Apr 26, 2002
    Posts: 538
    From: Canada

    Send private message
    Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:50 pm  

    Anced_Math wrote:
    CSL... I understand the "flavor," concept, and it is one that has bothered me off and on. The fact that there are +1 swords is not nearly as irritating as the fact that there is a magic sword.

    I still disagree that the prevelence of magic items is different than in earlier years; but the ability to make magic items affects the weave of it all.


    Pretty much what I was thinking. It doesn't matter if they're all +1 swords, +2 giant slayers, or sun blades-the fact that all these guards wield magic swords as if they're common is what irritates me so.

    Perhaps my opinion has been colored by the number of 3E FR products I've read...SKR's "Lords of Darkness" FR product had a ridiculous number of high-level villains, all with their own networks of spies, and characters like Szass Tam and Halaster Blackcloak have "hundreds" of magic items. Blagh.

    So I suppose it's less to do with GH than with the writings of Reynolds, Elaine Cunningham, and Greenwood et al. who seem to treat magic as if it's something easy to come by, and that having a magic sword or shield is of no consequence at all.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Wed Dec 27, 2006 6:06 pm  

    Well, its easy enough to ignore the stuff you don't like. I didn't like Restenford or any of the Bone Hill material for the same reason. Everyone plays the game differently and always has. There's a huge range of material for GH (and any game world), written by different folks without a lot of regard for the kind of nebulous details we are talking about here. So Restenford is dramatically different from Orlane or Saltmarsh. A game that only appeals to one style of player doesn't really make the kind of money or impact that D&D has.

    Third edition is moving farther towards one end of the spectrum, probably the most populous one since the designers aren't idiots. But it can still be played in any style the DM and players want. Don't like fast leveling and heavy magic? Just don't give out the same level of xp and magic 'recommended'. Its not like its hard to rebalance monsters for a different paradigm. DMs have to tune encounters to their campaign as it is.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 13, 2002
    Posts: 1077
    From: Orlane, Gran March

    Send private message
    Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:08 am  

    One advantage of 3rd ed., is that if you dont like something, you can easily change it and not have to rewrite the rules. Unearthed Arcana is an excellent resource for just this type of problem.
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 03, 2006
    Posts: 18


    Send private message
    Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:50 pm  

    I think many people will be surprised to find basic 3rd edition is not the magic is everywhere, high level NPCs are running amok.

    According to the DMG p139 if you do the math there are only 12 characters of each class (14 classes) within a metropolis (25,001+ pop) whom are above 5th level. This does not differ greatly from what one would find in 2nd edition. A 5th level NPC has access to magic armor or shield, not even a magic weapon. (pages 113-127 DMG) In essence it does seem that the basic 3rd edition is based on Greyhawk standards. The additional material does pose a problem. The experience table as has already been mentioned is the greatest problem, but one easily worked around. Trouble also arose when the powers that be realized catering to players would result in greater sales. I am sure they saw the sales of the Players Handbook compared to the DMG and presto a million books catering to players full of prestige classes, feats, and new character races. These are all optional. There has been many instances where abused spells or prestige classes have been updated to provide better balance. Notably the Complete books and spell compendium. The point buy system is a move in the opposite direction.

    FR is a huge reason options for power gaming exist. FR has had good sales. My major issue with FR is the desire to be bigger, better and more powerful. When making the change to 3rd edition many of the characters (Drizzt) magic items and others have seen a great decrease in power.

    Another problem has been the presentation of epic spells well beyond reasonable caster level. How high does someone need to be to cast a spell with a 300 spellcraft check? Yet they are in the ELH, Sandstorm, and Frostburn. Stormwrack thankfully obstained.

    SKR will get a big hit on the next one and that is the powergaming examples presented in Dragon. Example- If you are a monk with an 18 wisdom and 18 dex who takes the dodge feat, you can have a AC 19 at first level and a better AC than the fighter in the group.

    As mentioned the Adventure paths can be difficult to integrate. By spacing out the adventures with other homebrewed adventures you can have them very much be a part of your GH campaign. (If the xp is reduced then characters will not be high enough in level for the next stage)

    My bottom line is- core 3rd edition is not overpowered but one needs to be careful when introducing non-core material.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 18, 2004
    Posts: 218


    Send private message
    Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:05 pm  

    Just a couple of comments... directed at nobody.

    NPC classes aren't as bad as assumed in a few posts here. A fairly low-level NPC can take 10, use masterwork equipment, and have a few assistants also take 10 for an assist bonus, and make almost anything in the book (including Masterwork items). Example: A lowly 3rd level Expert Widgetcrofter with 12 Int, 6 ranks of Craft (widget), a 1st level assistant, and access to Masterwork artisan's tools (55 GP) can 'take 10' for a result of 21 every day of his life. Since nothing on the charts except for some Alchemical items have a DC above that, this is fine.

    Levels in various editions do not correlate. In 1st edition, 9th level was pretty much the threshold for epic play. In 3rd edition, 20th level is that threshold. Everything else scales off of this, including rate of levelling.

    The market likes high-powered play. Disagree if you will, but I find that DMs like "grim and gritty", but players like "epic heroics". And really, I don't think this has changed much over the years.

    The rules for XP are some of the most commonly misinterpreted out there. The rules assume a party of 4 PCs with about a 25 point buy and magic items proper to their level, will have to meet 14 challenges of their level before leveling up. If you have four encounters per session, and meet once a week, your characters should level about every 3-4 weeks, and should hit level 20 in just under two years (assuming occasional breaks for holidays, etc). Any variation from these assumptions (number of characters, point buy, magic item value, etc), and you're not doing it right.

    Now, if you want some problems with 3.5 play... These are as I see them, and most can be handled by a bit of creativity.

    The erosion of DM authority has been going on for a while now. Nowhere in the 3.5 DMG does it mention that these rules are just guidelines, and the DM is the final arbiter. "Rule 0" is no longer mentioned, but pains are taken to detail how house rules should be implemented, and why. "Because I said so" is no longer a valid argument. This is a huge problem, especially in dynamic gaming groups. Yes, I'm aware that player freedom is the Big Trend, but the DM is in charge of the table, not some nebulous Social Contract, and definitely not a democratic vote. The last line of my House Rules is that the DM is in charge, period.

    The players know all the rules. This is related to the loss of DM authority, in that players watch a man run 40' and hit someone, they know he's either a monk or a barbarian. There are ways to handle this, but most entail a lot of creativity (new races, classes, monsters, items, etc).

    Telas
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Dec 07, 2003
    Posts: 176


    Send private message
    Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:02 am  

    Telas wrote:
    Levels in various editions do not correlate. In 1st edition, 9th level was pretty much the threshold for epic play. In 3rd edition, 20th level is that threshold. Everything else scales off of this, including rate of levelling.


    I never saw name level as the threshhold of epic play and I would counter that 6th is the new "name" level rather than 20th anyway. Why? Many of the abilities characters gained at about 9th level in AD&D are available at 6th in D&D3. Paladin and ranger spellcasting (barring bonus spells) and especially the Leadership feat become available here. The followers generated thus were the true mark of name level for many classes.

    Now, the comparison breaks down when matching spell levels available for the full casting classes, but they don't match if 20th level is the new 9th either.

    Now, for the rest of your post, spot on. Especially the erosion of DM authority stuff.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Tue Jan 02, 2007 2:16 am  

    The accessibility to magic has certainly increased with the current edition of the game. In 2e, a mage had to be 9th level to brew a potion or scribe a scroll, and a cleric had to be 7th level to brew a potion and 9th level to scribe a scroll. Both mages and clerics could only make other items upon reaching 11th level. Compare this with 3e+ requirements:

    Scroll: 1st level
    Potion: 3rd level
    Wondrous Items: 3rd
    Arms & Armor: 5th
    Wands: 5th
    Rods: 9th
    Staves: 12th
    Rings: 12th

    Due to the slackening of requirements, that's a pretty big difference in the level of accessibility to magic items for the lower level chum, even though many magic items do have a level requirement tacked onto them as well. Magic item construction used to be restricted to higher level characters period, and more often that not possessing them because of this, and therefore the lower level chum were even less likely to have them. The end result is that now all of those lower level npc spell casters are not only able to make magic items to begin with, they are more likely to have them. And the more likely it is for them to have magic items in the first place, the more likely it is that they are for sale to others.

    Prior to 3e+, if somebody made a gift of a magic time to you, that was a big deal. Going back to the Temple of Elemental Evil, what is the main reward for saving the crown prince (which results in the joining of two influential nations to boot!!!)? Yes, that's right- a +1 ring of protection. Shocked A couple of characters get something much more decent, but only a couple. So, a +1 ring of protection is awarded by two nations to the stalwart heroes for achieving a goal of massive importance. The pc's in my campaign did cherish those awards to be sure, even though some of them already possessed a +1 ring of protection (or better) already. And of course, some of those awarded +1 rings were subsequently lost to the dreaded Item Saving Throw Chart. The DM giveth, and the DM taketh away.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 18, 2004
    Posts: 218


    Send private message
    Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:02 am  

    callmeAndydammit wrote:
    Telas wrote:
    Levels in various editions do not correlate. In 1st edition, 9th level was pretty much the threshold for epic play. In 3rd edition, 20th level is that threshold. Everything else scales off of this, including rate of levelling.


    I never saw name level as the threshhold of epic play and I would counter that 6th is the new "name" level rather than 20th anyway. Why? Many of the abilities characters gained at about 9th level in AD&D are available at 6th in D&D3.

    ...

    Now, the comparison breaks down when matching spell levels available for the full casting classes, but they don't match if 20th level is the new 9th either.


    I can see that argument, but we're comparing the PCs against their environment and antagonists, not against each other. In 1e AD&D, the most powerful dragon in the books had 88 hit points; in 3.5, a Great Wyrm has 536 hit points. Shocked

    The reason I refer to 9th as the threshold of epic play is that is the point at which you're "off the charts", as it were. Spells are still gained, but magic isn't exactly a 1:1 correlation, either; it's far more powerful relative to other things in 1st edition play. (Remember suffering as a low level magic-user, until you learned Fireball?) :)

    While I like both styles of play, I truly appreciate that 3rd edition has balanced and simplified a few things, although one can make it very complex with all the new books. The trade-off is that the DM is no longer making up rules on the fly. This is similar to modern auto mechanics who no longer need an intuitive understanding of what's going on inside a motor because they have all these electronics telling them. While this can make up somewhat for a mediocre DM, it no longer encourages DMs to get better. And that's a real loss.

    Telas
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2002
    Posts: 1049
    From: Sky Island, So Cal

    Send private message
    Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:04 pm  

    Cebrion wrote:
    The accessibility to magic has certainly increased with the current edition of the game. In 2e, a mage had to be 9th level to brew a potion or scribe a scroll, and a cleric had to be 7th level to brew a potion and 9th level to scribe a scroll. Both mages and clerics could only make other items upon reaching 11th level. Compare this with 3e+ requirements:

    Scroll: 1st level
    Potion: 3rd level
    Wondrous Items: 3rd
    Arms & Armor: 5th
    Wands: 5th
    Rods: 9th
    Staves: 12th
    Rings: 12th



    My campaign has more magic, and in particular more standardized magic (gp value, regular purchase and sale) then most posters on here, but I do see a big distinction between minor and major magic.

    IMC, any caster can manufacture a magic item, but that item can only duplicate spells that the creator can actually cast. Thus, there are plenty of rings of magic missile, because any 1st level mage can make them, but far fewer wands of fireball, since you need to be at least 5th. And a sword+1? Well, that is a permanent item, which means access to Permanancy, which means minimum 16th level caster. Thus, not many.

    Also, the magic item creation requires a a save vs. magic by the caster at a number of different points. Thus, while it is in theory possible for a first level mage to make magic stuff, in practice they end up dumping in huge amounts of cash to offset their frequent failures, and occasionally kill themselves in the bargain.
    _________________
    My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Tue Jan 02, 2007 8:52 pm  

    I'm assuming that Permanency ruling is a house rule of yours? Because its not a requirement of the normal enchanting rules, which are rather generous, IMHO.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2002
    Posts: 1049
    From: Sky Island, So Cal

    Send private message
    Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:05 pm  

    Vormaerin wrote:
    I'm assuming that Permanency ruling is a house rule of yours? Because its not a requirement of the normal enchanting rules, which are rather generous, IMHO.


    PHB2, description of spell Permanancy;

    Quote:
    The permanency spell is also used in the fabrication of magical items (see the 6th-level spell enchant an item). At the DM's option, permanency might become unstable or fail after a long period of at least 1,000 years. Unstable effects might operate intermittently or fail altogether.


    PHB2, description of spell Enchant an Item;
    Quote:
    No magic placed on an item is permanent unless a permanency spell is used as a finishing touch. This always runs a 5% risk of draining 1 point of Constitution from the wizard casting the spell. Also, while it is possible to tell when the basic spell (enchant an item) succeeds, it is not possible to tell if successive castings actually work, for each must make the same sort of saving throw as the item itself made. Naturally, an item that is charged--a rod, staff, wand, javelin of lightning, ring of wishes, etc.--can never be made permanent. Magical devices cannot be used to enchant an item or cast magic upon an object so prepared, but scrolls can be used for this purpose.


    DMG2, section "Creating Other Magical Items";
    Quote:
    Finally, if the item is to hold its magic for more than a single use, a permanency spell must be cast. This locks the trapped magic into the vessel, empowering it at the command chosen by the wizard. If the permanency is not used, the vessel only holds charges equal to the number of spells cast upon it.

    _________________
    My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:34 pm  

    Huh. That's quite a bit different than what's in the DMG and PHB. Are those spells used to create magical items without the item creation feats and xp loss? (I don't have those '#2' rule books, if that wasn't obvious). If they are requirements on top of the item creation feats' listings, that's quite a sharp drop off in the power of enchanting. Harsher even than the 1e days in some ways.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:14 pm  

    Those are 1e/2e spell descriptions if I'm not mistaken, so there are no feats required. You just needed to be of the appropriate level to cast the Enchant an Item and Permanancy spells. Things worked very different back then. Either you could cast the proper spells to make permanent items or you couldn't make them at all.

    And you of course had to be WAAAAY beyond "unthinkably high level" to even do that! ZING!!! Laughing

    Maybe Kirt is using a conglomeration of rules though (I'm not sure).
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:35 pm  

    No, what he says is that those are rules in the Players' Handbook #2 and DMG #2 (both of which are 3.5e rule books). Not owning those, I don't know how they relate to the rest of the enchanting rules in the DMG1 and PHB1, neither of which mention those spells.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2002
    Posts: 1049
    From: Sky Island, So Cal

    Send private message
    Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:20 pm  

    Sorry for the confusion. I wasn't even aware that 3.5 had a DMG2. I think I would sooner call it DMG3.5 then.

    The quotes I listed were from second edition.

    Would it be more clear to use PHB2E and DMG2E then?

    I thought it was bad enough that there is another Unearthed Arcana.

    So long as I don't have to use the product code, I'm good.
    _________________
    My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:39 am  

    Ah ha. Yeah, it was definitely much more difficult to make any sort of magic item in the older editions. Nowadays, its a feat, some xp, and the right spell knowledge. The main restriction is knowledge of the appropriate spells to match the effect on the item. Some items need a lvl 18 caster, but 'simple' +1 and +2 items can be made by quite low level characters if they want to.

    Anyway, there is a PHB I and PHB II as well as a DMG I and DMG II for 3.5e. Lots and lots of rulebooks, if you want to bother with them.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 13, 2002
    Posts: 1077
    From: Orlane, Gran March

    Send private message
    Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:57 am  

    There are lots of rulebooks. However, of all the books out there I would suggest the PHB II (3.5) and DMG II (3.5) for the frugal purchaser. They are my favorite of recent publications.
    CF Admin

    Joined: Jul 28, 2001
    Posts: 630
    From: on the way to Bellport

    Send private message
    Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:19 pm  

    This was a fun thread to read, especially posts by Kirt and Samwise regarding detecting and forgetting magical treasures in 1e and 2e campaigning and Cebrion's reminder of failing saving throws in 1e.

    "All your items are GONE!!!"

    "the dreaded Item Saving Throw Chart. The DM giveth, and the DM taketh away."

    ROFL! but :(

    Regarding experience and leveling in 3.5e, I've found the groups that I've enjoyed most have met on average once every 3 weeks and lasted approximately two years on average. I think the vaunted "averages" that WotC propogated about campaign longevity are short.

    However, in age, race, and education (31, Chicano, an attorney), I think I'm peripheral to the mainstream of the industry's targeted audience, which I think tends to be younger or older than me, racially white, and with a college education.

    Also, I tend to award less treasure than the mandated amounts although I design encounters with those numbers in mind.

    Ending this post by returning to "creep," I affirm several other posters' comments that our focus should be on DMing evocative stories and enjoyable games.

    A few years ago, I had a 30-something Living Greyhawk RPGA DM and con organizer praise a game in which the PCs encountered some ghouls, a ghast, some traps, and a mummy. He remarked that he realized the monster was "merely" a mummy but had enjoyed the session immensely.

    Perhaps related, last month, a session in the local gamestores attracted a teenage onlooker, who seemed obviously entranced by the somewhat absurd laugter, dice-rolling, and talking at our table.

    This is our hobby, making up stories of people and things that don't exist in places and times that never were, yet always are.

    I'll stop braying now.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2002
    Posts: 1049
    From: Sky Island, So Cal

    Send private message
    Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:25 pm  

    Warning: SPOILERS for G series


    mtg wrote:
    This was a fun thread to read, especially posts by Kirt and Samwise regarding detecting and forgetting magical treasures in 1e


    For some reason, the one that always sticks in my mind is from G1, Steading of the Hill Giant Chief. In the entry hall, there is a magic sword (don't remember if it is flame blade or frost brand) sticking in the wall, disguised as a torch sconce. The giants have nothing better to do with their magic weapons than pretend they are torches!

    I have DMed two parties through the G series. Neither one has thought "Gosh, an empty entry room. Maybe we should cast detect magic in case there are magic items hidden here." So the sword has gone unclaimed...


    In the category of DM giveth and taketh away, the party found the ring of three wishes that was just LYING OUTSIDE IN THE SNOW in G2, and saved it until G3. Then they found the titan in chains, drugged. Man, with a titan in our party we could KICK BUTT! So they used a wish to clean the titan's system of drugs and he agreed to join them. The very next room they entered was the EEG temple. The Titan saw the alter, failed his save, and died on the spot. It still is part of party lore as the worst wish ever.
    _________________
    My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Dec 07, 2003
    Posts: 636


    Send private message
    Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:14 am  

    I think the early mods were intended for tournament play rather than ongoing campaigns so magic items were all over the place. Unfortunately, they set the tone for pretty much all future mods! DM's discretion required...

    It was far more fun playing Castle Amber and getting permanent spell-like and exceptional abilities!
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 03, 2002
    Posts: 41
    From: Whitehorse

    Send private message
    Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:19 am  

    Kirt wrote:
    Warning: SPOILERS for G series

    For some reason, the one that always sticks in my mind is from G1, Steading of the Hill Giant Chief. In the entry hall, there is a magic sword (don't remember if it is flame blade or frost brand) sticking in the wall, disguised as a torch sconce. The giants have nothing better to do with their magic weapons than pretend they are torches!


    ...but how many of the Hill Giants can cast Detect Magic to even know that it was a magic sword? ;)
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:44 pm  

    The real qustion should be, who put it there in the first place and cast the illusion over it? Zagyg? Laughing
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.38 Seconds