Comments on: Weapons and Armor: A +2 What, Sir? (Part 1 of 2)

By: Phatboi

Phatboi — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:52:27 +0000

Ryan,

Thank you for such a diplomatic response. In theory, I love your suggestions. Undoubtedly some people’s games will be improved by your article. To that I tip my hat.

By: Ryan Costello, Jr

Ryan Costello, Jr — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:14:28 +0000

Thanks for so much feedback, everyone. My aim was just to have a bit of fun at the expense of a metagame pet peeve of mine, and it’s been fun seeing how varied other people’s opinions are on the subject. Phatboi, I particularly think that replacing + with level is internally consistent with how characters categorized magical things by power, and is a good compromise between the original rules and my suggested alternative.

By: TimsterMon

TimsterMon — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 01:53:26 +0000

Love it. My only potential concern is when other magical weapon attributes are already taken that could seem better in this naming schema, or that might confuse the weapon’s actual attributes.

By: Wolfgang

Wolfgang — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 23:36:53 +0000

Part 2 of the series is now up!

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:40:11 +0000

One recommendation I’ve seen is to keep the numbers, but make it sound just a LITTLE more mystical. Rather than a first level Spell, it’s a Spell of the First Circle. Sure, mages should know their discrete magical power, but there may be better ways to phrase it. For weapons and armor, I think I ended up settling up Minor, Lesser, Moderate, Major, Greater, or something along those lines. I think this system is a bit more fun, though.

By: Phatboi

Phatboi — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:26:27 +0000

Jem, I left out a good portion of my rationale. In many cases, magic in D&D operates on discreet levels e.g. first level spells, Mage Armor duration is always hour increments, cost to produce a +1 item is always the plus squared x 1000, etc. IMHO, it is far more immersion breaking to act like these truths of D&D would have no impact on the people the create, buy, and sell these items. So “+1″ isn’t describing the bonus to “to hit and damage” which I agree has no meaning to the charcter, but describes the magic enhancement i.e. level of magic enchantment that was used to create the item. To answer the question…”+2 levels of magic power that were put in the sword and that determined the cost you paid for the item, shopkeep.”

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think characters would talk about armor or weapons based on the weapons stats. But but a weapon having three levels of enchantment or five levels of enchantment is not only knowable, but knowable with perfect information (Identify spell) and unavoidably knowable by the creator.

And finally, imposing upwards of twenty different labels to describe +1 through +5 items isn’t immersion bang-for-the-buck…but that’s just my personal opinion.

By: Matthew Stinson

Matthew Stinson — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 14:20:28 +0000

Don’t know how I feel about handing out a whacking-staff, but okay
No, this is a great idea, been calling +1 items Masterpiece items for a while now.

By: Jem

Jem — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:03:24 +0000

Err. Medium staff, etc.