Question for players regarding magic level

Shia_Luck

How much magic is approppriate do you think?

HotU was well into +7 items with lots of immunities and spells on many items and you end around lvl27 iirc. DO you thik this magic level is too high or about right or too low?

How about +10 @ lvl 40? (+1 every 4 lvls)
How about +5 @ lvl 40? (+1 every 8 levels)
How about +4 @ lvl 40 (+1 every 10 levels)

This is to inform the magic level on a module I am building.

Thank you in advance for all answers.

Have fun

FreshLemonBun

It depends but the answer is that the D&D 3rd edition system was built to consider the acquisition of magic items. If you check the DMG tables for wealth by level you'll find that this represents how much the PC can have acquired by their current level. Next check the treasure rules to find the frequency for how often they get magic items in an encounter by level. It also supplies tables to determine which items are awarded, and then when constructing items it provides a method to calculate the costs.

About +7 seems appropriate for an epic level character facing epic level threats. However if you check the item creation rules then not all of the items in NWN are possible in D&D, so you can also take that in account and remove those particular items. You can't have items that grant a dodge bonus to AC for example, it's specifically called out and forbidden.

Then again in D&D it's also possible that your magic items break and it's not possible that a looted chest produces more magic items again later. So if you take that into account as well you should probably make more powerful items exceptionally rare.

I'm not sure you should ask players what to do in regards to how you reward them because it might end up having the wrong outcomes. I've played on a so-called "low magic" world before where they allowed player created magic weapons, with a +3 cap and so on. What ended up happening was that people just created magic weapons with only damage dice, and because of how NWN works by default it multiplied on criticals. The enhancement bonus was provided by other magic sources so it completely violated the D&D magic item rules. The effect was that these so-called low magic weapons were actually punching at the weight of epic weapons in D&D.

So my advice is use the D&D rules as a guideline:
A bonus over +5 is epic, a single extra damage dice in NWN is worth about a +2 cumulatively, damage dice of one elemental type over 1 die is epic, no dodge. No immunities except to single specific spells/effects or critical hits, single type elemental immunities are for epic level items, permanent global immunities are for epic level artifacts.

Shia_Luck

Thanks for your answer. I can easily avoid the issues of the low magic world you mentioned by scripting only 1 type of extra damage possible rather than using lvl limits, but your post does intrigue me elseways as well.

I dont have DMG for 3.0 so can I ask if it scales the protection spells like premonition stoneskin etc to be more than +5? I know it has proper epic spells instead of feats called epic spells, but I wonder if this is not something to address in terms of balance at epic levels because +7 weapons basically make all DR spells useless.

All other thoughts welcome too.

Have fun

FreshLemonBun

Well only stoneskin exists in d&d and other similar named spells do completely different things. Epic spells on the other hand do increase the protection but it costs one feat in the table top game and they are functionally like epic magic items in that they have a cost and rules to develop, you can then cast as many as your knowledge (arcana for arcane, religion for divine, nature for druids) ranks divided by 10.

http://www.d20srd.org/indexes/epicSpells.htm

Epic mage armor for example costs 414000 gp and 16560 xp to develop. To make an epic spell like stoneskin but with no + limit (which is simplified to dr/magic and dr/epic magic and dr/- in 3.5) you would also need a couple of hundred thousand gold.

You could develop epic spells for your module or you could decide to use "spell components" that are paid before casting to increase the protection value of those spells into epic levels. Either way the magic has to somehow factor in costs so that it's comparable to the costs of comparable epic items. By level 40 there really isn't much in the system that holds players back, they should be able to take on gods. If you want epic levels but slower arms race then you can scale back the pc wealth.

Alternatively you can choose to not have epic items but that has it's own limitations.

Nic_Mercy

In a "low magic" campaign that still goes to 40, I'd say +5 should be the limit. For me though, a more satisfying lvl 40 world goes to about +8 but that's also adjusting spells and itemizing gear to avoid some of the worst methods of abuse.

Spells like Stoneskin, Greater Stoneskin and Premonition would scale higher than the default based on caster level, so say at level 40 caster level, a wizard's Premonition might provide DR up to +8 so only the highest +weapons can penetrate it, with Greater Stoneskin capping at +7 and Stoneskin capping at +6. That has the double benefit of incentivizing single classing in some cases and it also makes it so the higher level spells really are more powerful than lower level equivalents. By default a +5 or higher weapon ignores them all equally.

As it stands, gaming for a high AC is far and away easier than gaming for a high AB. I'd first decide what I want the maximum possible AB be in my world and then make efforts to ensure that the max possible AC is no more than 7-10 points higher than that so the best player AB vs the best player AC has a 50% to 65% chance to hit. At the same time I'd try to also look at what the average AB's and ACs will look like for players and balance most mobs accordingly so that the mid tier AB's and ACs have a reasonable chance to compete against most of the high end enemies, with only the most challenging foes requiring the highest ABs, ACs and caster level.

But everyone's idea of what's good, what balanced, and whats fun is different.

Aaezil

The numbers dont matter as much as are the environments/encounters fun and or interesting/challenging?

GM_ODA

For our server we chose to soft-cap items, with a +1 per five levels of PC being the rule of thumb. This means items mostly top out at +8 on our server, but a PC crafted extreme item could go as high as +10 in rare circumstances.

dTd

I've always liked low magic, +1 the normal mid level, +2 max, with +3 being uber rare or DM granted. I leave the spells mostly alone, I prefer magic to actually mean something, if you want a +5 weapon you need
Greater Magic Weapon" so yes high level casters will be more powerful. I also only go to lvl 20 but recently I've been trying out increasing to 23.

Shadooow

I am into high magic, however I do think that +7 is more than enough. At least for armor and items granting AC. With more than +8 players are able to get riddiculously high AC which is then harder and harder to match by AB as if you are on +7 items right now and increase the items that are accessible to +8, all players (eventually) gets +4 AC (+1 if you also have boots and they didn't reach +20 dodge ac cap yet), but ab will increase only by +1 (and some classes like clerics won't get even that +1).

Nic_Mercy

One thing that I did on my old PW that I felt was a good change was to make it so ALL weapon and armor/shield buffing spells would be automatically dispelled if the person was targeted with a dispelling effect of any sort.

This was important to me because I wanted permanent magic items to be meaningful and matter. It seemed unfair that someone could buff themselves and or others into +5 gear (or better depending on mods) with impunity. I didn't give every mob a dispel but certain mobs did have it and most of the uber endgame boss types had it. Permanent magical items were seen as way more valuable on my pw and I felt that was the way it should be.

Shia_Luck

Thank you all so much for your thoughts!

@FreshLemonBun That does sound a little more complex than I want for this world, but bringing the economy into is a very interesting idea and could well inform another choice I have to make at some point. Thanks for your feedback and the d20 link

@Nic_Mercy Changing the DR spells is certainly the easiest way to combat higher weapons and having more reason to take caster levels beyond 26 (undispellability (Is that a word? *grin*) is something that would work well in my world I think. My favourite solution so far On your other point the rate of dispels is one thing that seems to be working well so far, as enemy casters are often armed with spell breach or Mord at higher levels and I want to make things as familiar to players as possible. I will keep that solution in mind tho.

@Aaezil Well, this will be a full on Hack 'n' Slash fest and PvP will be a possibility so I do need to give consideration to the numbers, but your point is well taken. Hopefully the screenies assuage your worries on environment.

@dTd This was along the lines of my first thoughts for rebalancing as I like low magic too, but if I can accommodate what players expect (some feedback I got was along the lines of the items aren't powerful enough), and balance it I will try to. It will go to lvl40 tho so perhaps in this case +5 is about right

@GM_ODA , @Shadooow Thanks. Yes, I really don't want to get that power creep so AC becomes impossible to hit. I might try +5 to lvl20 as people tend to expect (tho +4 is still tempting) and then slowly introduce +6 and +7 items in the epic levels. I guess the weapons can go higher than the AC items so maybe stop those at +6.

Thanks again all, and all further comments most definitly welcome

Have fun

WarChiefZeke

To put +7 in perspective, major deities were often depicted as wielding +5 weapons. At best.

Tyr could leave his sword Justicar in a treasure chest for you to find and it would be trash loot in HOTU.

FreshLemonBun

Did HoTU have vorpal weapons?

Shia_Luck

@WarChiefZeke oh! Wow, that is quite a different perspecctive.

@FreshLemonBun Is that another perspective? It's an interesting one too. If it was a question then IIRC it's not an option in the toolset.

All comments welcome

Have fun

jsaving

Also keep in mind that 3rd edition D&D imposed a steep gold-piece cost on spells like stoneskin (250gp per casting) and raise dead (5000gp per casting). Making those spells free is a pretty big ramping-up of character power -- though to be fair, lots of DMs did the same thing in those days.

Prince_Raymond

Here's another perspective: The D&D 3rd Edition DMG had a specific table regarding magic weapon enhancement bonuses in relation to their special abilities. The maximum modified bonus of any crafted weapon was +10, meaning that the weapon created could have any combination of bonus to attack and damage (ranging from +1 to +5) and special abilities equal to or less than a +10 modifier. The least powerful special abilities added a +1 modifier to the total market value while the more powerful abilities added +2, +3 , +4 or even +5 (Vorpal hehehe). A +5 Vorpal Greatsword would be at the maximum modified bonus, so it would demand the highest market value for that weapon type. The items found in the DMG not applicable to this table were artifacts belonging to certain deities. For example, the Mace of St. Cuthbert is described as being a heavy mace +5 with the Holy, Lawful and Disruption abilities. If memory serves me, anyone wielding the Mace of Cuthbert could cast Searing Light from it at will. Thank you for reading, and happy gaming to all.

WarChiefZeke

jsaving said:

Also keep in mind that 3rd edition D&D imposed a steep gold-piece cost on spells like stoneskin (250gp per casting) and raise dead (5000gp per casting). Making those spells free is a pretty big ramping-up of character power -- though to be fair, lots of DMs did the same thing in those days.

I always enjoyed these restrictions. Makes it so rest abuse isn't a thing in tabletop. Casting powerful spells means something in tabletop DnD.

OlvynChuru

I don't see anything wrong with "high enchantment" items. At the end of the day, a +5 sword really isn't that much more powerful than a +1 sword. It simply deals 4 more damage and is somewhat more accurate (and accuracy is less important when you're higher level and you can hit things on low rolls regardless of your weapon).

However, there are certain kinds of items that tend to be very overpowered. In particular, you should not throw around items that give immunities or high defense against effects that a lot of enemies use (e.g. mind-affecting abilities, movement-affecting abilities, physical damage types). There are many enemies that rely entirely on one of these to harm you. If you wear the Greater Brawler's Belt, which grants 20/- resistance to bludgeoning damage, then just about every fighter-type enemy that attacks for bludgeoning damage will be unable to do anything to you (the same goes for slashing or piercing fighters if you wear one of the other two belts).

I would argue that the three belts that give you 20/- damage resistance of each physical damage type are more overpowered than a +10 weapon, maybe even a +20 weapon. You should not be able to get immunity to everything enemies can do to you.

Prince_Raymond

@OlvynChuru For the purpose of overcoming damage reduction, a +5 melee weapon would be considered head and shoulders more powerful (and far superior) to a +1 melee weapon. In AD&D 2nd Edition, a great wyrm red dragon's DR was +4. There was no +4/numerical value, meaning you're attacks would do no damage to it without a +4 or better weapon equipped. I agree, accuracy is less important to a high-level character, but that high enhancement bonus on your weapon comes in real handy when fighting a monster with DR from the hells. Thank you for reading, and happy gaming (and holidays) to all.

Shia_Luck

Prince_Raymond said:

Here's another perspective: The D&D 3rd Edition DMG had a specific table .... The items found in the DMG not applicable to this table were artifacts belonging to certain deities. For example, the Mace of St. Cuthbert is described as being a heavy mace +5 with the Holy, Lawful and Disruption abilities. If memory serves me, anyone wielding the Mace of Cuthbert could cast Searing Light from it at will. Thank you for reading, and happy gaming to all.

@Prince_Raymond
Wow! HotU is really overpowered! I'm no cleric expert but searing light is a mediocre spell and well, while holy avangers might be rare generally in NWN modules (IMHExperience ofc), Lawful and disruption tend to be given away on maces et al at quite early levels.

OlvynChuru said:

I don't see anything wrong with "high enchantment" items. At the end of the day, a +5 sword really isn't that much more powerful than a +1 sword. It simply deals 4 more damage

I agree the damage can be less significant at lvl40 for a damage dealing build. AAs, Ran/Ftr/X, Monk kama and the hundreds of others that focus on pure weapon damage could lose 4 damage and not really notice but as @Prince_Raymond said, when it comes to beating damage Reduction the attack bonus is hugely important.

OlvynChuru said:

However, there are certain kinds of items that tend to be very overpowered. In particular, you should not throw around items that give immunities or high defense against effects that a lot of enemies use (e.g. mind-affecting abilities, movement-affecting abilities, physical damage types). There are many enemies that rely entirely on one of these to harm you... You should not be able to get immunity to everything enemies can do to you.

I could not agree more! A core design principle of my module is emphasis on the build of your character. There will be zero immunities on items (unless someone can come up with a good argument for one? I will listen I promise. It's the purpose of this thread, no? *grin*) For example, once Ghostly visage is no longer useful for its DR because everyone has +1 weapons, a window opens where a 5/- brawlers etc belt treats all classes equally. But when to introduce it? should it be introduced at all? These are the types of input I need to hear (in this case, detailed, so thank you for expressing that @OlvynChuru because I need to hear both detailed and general issues people have).

So , while there will be no immunities (unless convinced otherwise) should there be bonuses to saves? if so? How much do you want and why?

Equal~ish usefulness for skills and builds within a war environment is what I am trying to acheive.

Ideally, every build, ECB guild builds included, will face an occasional enemy they will be scared of.

Hve fun

Prince_Raymond

@Shia_Luck A mediocre spell cast from an item at will as a 20th level caster.

Shia_Luck

@Prince_Raymond At 20th level makes a huge difference to NWN I agree. It'd be about 13 (without checking wiki) It does to me just empahsise how overpowered HotU items are tho. Is that your poinmt or do you see the unlimited uses as more powerful an ability. (Using an item in NWN usually negates all your attacks that round so at high level it is not that useful. (OFC I doubt that limitation exists in DnD, *grin*)

Have fun

Prince_Raymond

@Shia_Luck Considering that the first printing of the D&D 3rd Edition Core Rulebooks were released on August 10, 2000, almost 2 full years before the release of NWN Classic, I would agree that HotU items are very much overpowered in comparison to the "artifacts" listed in the DMG. My point being, I doubt the writers of the core rulebooks anticipated expanding the rules beyond 20th level gameplay. Thank you for reading, and happy gaming (and holidays) to all.