Magic Items
- Thread starter Dreamingfurther
- Start date
Saephis
Squire
Alavatar said:Jorundr said:
Like a Spirit Link?
I love all the ideas floating around here! I just wish there was a way that allowed casters to actually implement things like these effects.
Indeed, while Plot-created items can incorperate a lot (If not all) of these ideas, it'd be nice if PC's could go about creating some of them via ritual.
waaay back in 93 and 94 rituals didnt stop at level 9 they went all the way to level 15. admittedly these would now be known as LCO effects and LCO rituals but they had things like
Bestow Claws, Razor claws , Giant Strength - Hill Giant and similar rituals.. they were all capped at a total but werent too bad.
Bestow Claws, Razor claws , Giant Strength - Hill Giant and similar rituals.. they were all capped at a total but werent too bad.
As regards the build spell vs. item spell that stems from Expanded Enchant, I feel (as others appear to as well) it would make sense to change the incant from the quick'n'easy "Activate <Spellname>!" to something a little more involved. My personal suggestion would be "Activate <Itemtype>: I now recite the full spell incant." So "Activate Ring: I call forth a Dragon's Breath," "Activate Sword: I grant you the power of a Magic Blade," or "Activate Pants: With mystic force I Release you." This does a few things: it addresses the OOG incant speed issue, it represents the activation of the item IG being recognizable, and it makes individually powerful items more noteworthy: if an NPC is tossing around two or three "Activate Monkey Skull: I grant you the gift of Death!" it makes his (or her) Monkey Skull a worthy target for an attempted Shatter or Disarm spell, and it makes the Monkey Skull even more memorable than it would have been simply by virtue of being a monkey skull.
Dan "Holy Run-on Sentence, Batman" Beshers
Dan "Holy Run-on Sentence, Batman" Beshers
Deadlands of Old
Baron
Yeah, but Dan, no one wants to have to say "Activate my grandmother's donated broach: I summon a force to shatter grandmother broach." It's just too personal.
Gary
Gary
I play in another larp that is "<Activate> Dragon's Breath, I call forth a dragon's breath"
magic items are still used but far and away they are not as useful as they were when it was simply <activate> Magic Armor.
it just slows the game down some and inda devalues magic items.. I dont have a major preference I would prefer the <activate> X but ultimately I can play in both games.
magic items are still used but far and away they are not as useful as they were when it was simply <activate> Magic Armor.
it just slows the game down some and inda devalues magic items.. I dont have a major preference I would prefer the <activate> X but ultimately I can play in both games.
Hoyce said:
Oh.
I guess I'll be modestly proud and go have lunch.
Dreamingfurther
Baron
I agree that adding the incant to magic items would slow down their use in the game. That’s the point. =\ Too bad after all in the end this is a moot point because like it was said the owners sadly voted down the "activate <<incant>> <<spell name>>" proposal to slow down magic items.
Pantzike
Scout
Alavatar said:
It's not just a band-aid solution... it's one of the steps in the solution. There is not just 1 right answer that is one simple tweak. Many times a solution is a few small tweaks here and there.
Making it so a caster can cast faster then a pocket scholar is a start.
Does it address the entire problem of pocket scholars? No.
Does it mean that Activating 2 Prison spells in a row takes longer then casting 2 of them (or about the same time), instead of being much much shorter? Yes. I feel that's a step in the right direction.
A good second step could have been requireing the item to be held, or worn and a packet touched to the item, before the activate(incant). Just that would have gone a long way in making casters better casters than items in a combat scenario, without making them completly useless. And for people who use both hands for fighting, you could still wear items, so that you could still use them, also I always have a few packets in my fingers even when im using two swords. This would also give a slight advantage to using a single weapon, or two hander(no having to tuck your sword before casting)... couple that with allowing two handers to block when held 1 handed, and two handers become a more solid choice.
MKing
Scout
I have been playing a scholar my entire time playing this game..I started back in '89 ... I have no problem with the way actives work...none at all...the idea to me is that "great" magic was used to create the item..why should it be harder to cast from an item..someone very "powerful" created the item using their own spell/s .... thats just how I see it...so it should be "easier" to cast out of an Item...now..I think that someone should only be able to "carry" so many items at any give time...
~Matt K.
~Matt K.
Alavatar
Baron
The problem is not the speed at which you can activate magic items, it is the abundance and readily available magic items that can be acquired (most commonly through GS).
Making it take longer to cast is not going to dissuade people from having magic items. And it doesn't exactly "even the playing field" because some people can cast faster then others simply by virtue of being able to enunciate better. I have trouble enunciating at fast speeds, so my Prision takes about 1.5x longer to cast then some of my fellow casters.
Increasing verbal length doesn't even touch the problem, it just puts a safety blanket over it so you can't see it as easily.
I also agree with Matt K.
Making it take longer to cast is not going to dissuade people from having magic items. And it doesn't exactly "even the playing field" because some people can cast faster then others simply by virtue of being able to enunciate better. I have trouble enunciating at fast speeds, so my Prision takes about 1.5x longer to cast then some of my fellow casters.
Increasing verbal length doesn't even touch the problem, it just puts a safety blanket over it so you can't see it as easily.
I also agree with Matt K.
So, I posted this when this thread started, and I'm not sure if people just thought it was crap, or if it got lost in the shuffle...
Since I have a relatively high opinion of my own ideas, I figure it got lost and I'll repost it ;-)
Thoughts?
You get X number of items that you can use, and then the first time you purchase a 1st, 5th, & 9th level spell (of each school, so people who dual school get more of a benefit) it increases X by one. Not +1 for each spell of that level, just for the first one. You can probably throw in an increase of 1 per Y formal levels
Rituals cast directly on your spirit don't count, but spirit linked items do. (Essentially making your spirit a "free" item.) Spirit linked items also automatically count against you.
Originally, X started as 5, but more because I thought it was a good starting point, as 3 seemed to low, and 10 seemed to high. 5 seems like a happy medium to me. I could also see giving the bonus out at 3, 6 & 9 (more beneficial to "real" casters, as opposed to "cast from scroll guy"
When you go through logistics you pick out the appropriate number of items that you want to be able to use for that logistics period, and you can switch them out at the next one.
These items can still be stolen, but can't be used by the person who steals them until the next logistics.
If you find an item, you can use it after the next time you go through logistics. Though a possible alternative to this is that an appropriately aspected permanent (or limited) COP can allow you to "attune" to an item, but only if you have a free slot for it, the circle will not allow you to swap out items.
Since I have a relatively high opinion of my own ideas, I figure it got lost and I'll repost it ;-)
Thoughts?
You get X number of items that you can use, and then the first time you purchase a 1st, 5th, & 9th level spell (of each school, so people who dual school get more of a benefit) it increases X by one. Not +1 for each spell of that level, just for the first one. You can probably throw in an increase of 1 per Y formal levels
Rituals cast directly on your spirit don't count, but spirit linked items do. (Essentially making your spirit a "free" item.) Spirit linked items also automatically count against you.
Originally, X started as 5, but more because I thought it was a good starting point, as 3 seemed to low, and 10 seemed to high. 5 seems like a happy medium to me. I could also see giving the bonus out at 3, 6 & 9 (more beneficial to "real" casters, as opposed to "cast from scroll guy"
When you go through logistics you pick out the appropriate number of items that you want to be able to use for that logistics period, and you can switch them out at the next one.
These items can still be stolen, but can't be used by the person who steals them until the next logistics.
If you find an item, you can use it after the next time you go through logistics. Though a possible alternative to this is that an appropriately aspected permanent (or limited) COP can allow you to "attune" to an item, but only if you have a free slot for it, the circle will not allow you to swap out items.
Dreamingfurther
Baron
The limit on number of items is a good idea but I also wondered what people thought about the idea to make magic items sort of like scrolls and potions that nobody complains are better than their respective spells?
tieran said:
Bob (fighter) the powergamer has maxed out his number of magic items he can carry. Jim the earth caster on his team gets hit with a death spell. He knows Jim has a life item on him, but because of the new rules he can't use it. Basically the life item is usless to your self if you are the only one that can use it.
Yup. So Bob and Jim need to be a little smarter about where they put their items...
or maybe they should go make a friend ;-)
While that may be a weakness in the system, I don't think it is a huge one. People can plan out who gets what, based on whatever they want. If they res because they chose poorly... well then they'll be like that nazi in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.
or maybe they should go make a friend ;-)
While that may be a weakness in the system, I don't think it is a huge one. People can plan out who gets what, based on whatever they want. If they res because they chose poorly... well then they'll be like that nazi in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.
Justin/Tieran:
In your proposal, are we imposing a limit on the number of items available, or the number of ritual effects? If you put down a limit on the number of items available, you will see a tremendous devaluation of single effect items. When people know that they can only carry, say, 5 magic items, 2nd grader math shows that they have a maximum of 100 ritual effects in items available to them. It may cause the pocket scholar issue to valley for a bit, but once people know the limit is coming, they can and will begin making only super items with a minimum of 10 rits. This will in turn make having magic items MORE situationally unbalancing, since basically every item will be adding a huge increase in power.
I just don't think you'll see any major lasting paradigm shift with this.
-Dan "Miscellaneous Evil Entity's Advocate" Beshers
In your proposal, are we imposing a limit on the number of items available, or the number of ritual effects? If you put down a limit on the number of items available, you will see a tremendous devaluation of single effect items. When people know that they can only carry, say, 5 magic items, 2nd grader math shows that they have a maximum of 100 ritual effects in items available to them. It may cause the pocket scholar issue to valley for a bit, but once people know the limit is coming, they can and will begin making only super items with a minimum of 10 rits. This will in turn make having magic items MORE situationally unbalancing, since basically every item will be adding a huge increase in power.
I just don't think you'll see any major lasting paradigm shift with this.
-Dan "Miscellaneous Evil Entity's Advocate" Beshers