Itemless 4E?

[Fishy]

In the previews and design documents for 4th Edition, Wizards said outright that one of their goals was to turn down reliance on magic items. 4th Edition characters would be extraordinary people in their own right, by virtue of their powers, not their toys. The words 'Christmas Trees' were thrown around a lot.

Then they went and published a system where a 2nd level character is expected to own a +1 sword. Thanks, guys.

I've been playing with the idea of an extremely low technology setting- no cities, no convenient caravans, and very little metal. The kind of setting where a bronze spear is an awe-inspiring weapon. While I could simply file off the numbers and re-flavor magic items as something else, I'd like the PCs to be armed with nothing but their wits and abilities, and I feel like 4E gets me almost all the way there and then drops the ball.

What changes need to be made to run 4E with no items? Fox Only, Final Destination.

Give everybody Weapon and Implement Expertise for free? Change the critical hit rules to add some sort of scaling +Nd6? Go in with a marker and change every "10+X+1/2 level" to "10+X+2/3 level"? How do I handle Paladins in Plate Armor without Plate Armor? Has anyone tried this, and how did it go?

[Kurald Galain]

In the previews and design documents for 4th Edition, Wizards said outright that one of their goals was to turn down reliance on magic items.
Yeah, that one failed big time :smallbiggrin: later on in that same article they said they turned it down to a limit of twelve items per person, not counting utilities.


What changes need to be made to run 4E with no items? Fox Only, Final Destination.
Well, the math gets screwy because certain bonuses are expected of players. Also, the game could get more monotonous because PCs lack the extra powers.

I would suggest (1) to give players a +1 bonus to hit, damage and defenseper five levels (probably at 3, 8, 13, 18, 23, 28); essentially, you're giving them a +X weapons and armor while pretending that you're not doing that. And (2) give players an extra utility power at level 4, 8 (and on) to account for the fact that they don't get item powers. If this is too low power for your party, (3) give everyone an extra feat or two, and let them spend feats on item abilities. For instance, instead of getting a cloak of resist fire, spend a feat on resist fire.

The criticals? I wouldn't worry about those, actually. That mechanic primarily exists to give players something to roll when they get a crit.

[HMS Invincible]

The lowest magic level that I've heard of is just 1 weapon and 1 armor. Each PC gets a legacy/artifact that stays with them and upgrades as they progress. The ac bonus and the attack roll bonus is all they really need to fight anything you can think up. The party can jerry rig a solution to everything else.

[Tengu_temp]

Here, I made rules for such a thing:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108334
They take extra crit damage and masterwork armor bonus under consideration, and scale more gradually than a simple +x bonus every several levels. If you want to add the equivalent of item powers to the mix as well, you can simply let the players use an extra utility power once per day per tier.

[Oslecamo]

Just out of curiosity, why all the item hate? What's the problem with using shiny toys to win the day? Heck, isn't it actually what makes us special compared to all other animals in the world?

Also, I must say I really don't see any real difference between gaining +1 from your shiny sword or gaining +1 because the rule of cool/plot/fun says so.

[Kurald Galain]

Also, I must say I really don't see any real difference between gaining +1 from your shiny sword or gaining +1 because the rule of cool/plot/fun says so.

Neither do I, in fact.

Actually, all of these "no item" campaigns really boil down to "giving PCs items while pretending that you're not". The alternative, obviously, is to use monsters that are a few levels lower, problem solved. The CR system is largely arbitrary anyway.

[Tengu_temp]

Also, I must say I really don't see any real difference between gaining +1 from your shiny sword or gaining +1 because the rule of cool/plot/fun says so.

You don't, but a lot of people do - they prefer if a hero's power comes from his own strength, not from the magic items he's using. Note that the Christmas Tree effect exists very rarely in actual stories, and is mostly an invention of RPGs and video games - a lot of people would rather if their games were closer to these stories.

[Master_Rahl22]

As for item-less 4E, I think the easiest solution, and the one least likely to leave the party crippled, is to give the party magic items without giving them magic items, like has already been talked about.


The CR system is largely arbitrary anyway.

From everything I've seen, the CR system in 4E actually works, unlike the CR system in 3.x

[Kurald Galain]

From everything I've seen, the CR system in 4E actually works, unlike the CR system in 3.x

Two words: Needlefang Swarm.

[Oslecamo]

Note that the Christmas Tree effect exists very rarely in actual stories, and is mostly an invention of RPGs and video games - a lot of people would rather if their games were closer to these stories.

Let's take a quick glance at the story wich originally inspired D&D, LOTR, and it's main character:

Frodo- elvish cape, sting, mytrhil chain, the One Ring(aka ring of invisibility), elvish rope, elvish bread, star inside a bottle

Those are no less than 7 powerfull items wich Frodo gets troughout the adventure and allow him to bypass the most dangerous situations, thanks to the power of the items themselves. He takes an hit from a troll and survives because of the chain, hurts the unhurtable oponents thanks to sting(plus orc detection), bypasses the sentinels of Mordor themselves thanks to the star in a bottle. At best you can argue that the ring demanded a strong will to use, but the rest is pure item power allowing the character to move forward.

Merry and Pippin on the other hand get pimped out by numerioan armor and daggers( the later gotten as loot from a tomb), and then the ent drincks. By the end of the book they're literally glowing from all the items they got during the story, and they even manage to help take down a boss just because of their magic weapons.

Gimli gets his ass saved several times due to his powerfull dwarven armor, while Sauruman by the end of the second book is almost only relying in trinkets and items to challenge the heros.

By the end of the book as the halflings return home it's stated that the road bandits themselves dare not attack them because they're so shiny with all the equipment they got during their adventure.

So no, I wouldn't say that the Christmas effect was a creation of videogames and RPGs, considering the influence that LOTR had in fantasy.

[Kurald Galain]

Frodo- elvish cape, sting, mytrhil chain, the One Ring(aka ring of invisibility), elvish rope, elvish bread, star inside a bottle
Cape, rope and bread are neither a magical item nor powerful.
Sting and the star are probably magical, but not powerful.
Mithril chain is probably powerful, but not magical.
The One Ring is, of course, a major artifact, but one that has dire consequences when used.

So, that example is almost entirely irrelevant. Indeed, the characters from DMOTR regularly point out that they never get any loot worth having.



Merry and Pippin ... take down a boss just because of their magic weapons.
Heh. No, that was the "no man can kill me" prophecy.

[KillianHawkeye]

Okay, I'm going to make a craaaaazy suggestion: Just don't use items. Don't change anything else, just use the system as is. Without items.

Wait, wait, hear me out!

Yes, the monsters will be harder. But if you're trying to stylistically simulate an epic tale of heroic adventure, shouldn't the monsters be harder? Wouldn't the enhanced difficulty only make sweet victory ALL THE MORE satisfying? Now of course, I haven't tried this myself, but I bet with a good DM it would work out better than you're all thinking.

At least give it a try! :smallwink:

[dr.cello]

Magic swag definitely happens a lot in fiction; the big difference is it's seldom just purchased, or constantly being acquired throughout the adventures. It actually has very little, I think, to do with the fact that magic items are being used, and a great deal with how they are acquired.

In LOTR, Frodo has his magic gizmos for over 2/3 of the books. He doesn't cycle through magic weapons and armor as time wears on, but sticks with what he started with basically the whole time.

Whereas, with 4e, assuming you purchase or acquire a magic item at each enhancement, by the time you get to level 30 you've gone through at least six magic Xs per item slot. Assuming you only buy a weapon, armor, and neck-slot item, you will go through no fewer than 18 magic items through your career. Odds are you'll pick up a lot more than that, between gloves, arms, boot slots, wondrous items, etc.

That, to me, is a bit excessive.

I like the idea of magic gimmicks that level up with the party. That would cut things down a great deal. If every magic item you picked up acted that way, you'd only need six or so throughout your career.

The biggest problem there is the fact that you'd be screwing with the wealth-by-level guidelines. What are you supposed to spend money on if not magic doodads?

[Tengu_temp]

Now of course, I haven't tried this myself, but I bet with a good DM it would work out better than you're all thinking.


If you can barely hit or avoid the blows of an ordinary mook (6 points of attack/defense difference at level 26+), and killing it takes ages, you do not feel accomplishment when you finally take it down - you feel relief that the extremely frustrating fight is finally over.



Whereas, with 4e, assuming you purchase or acquire a magic item at each enhancement, by the time you get to level 30 you've gone through at least six magic Xs per item slot. Assuming you only buy a weapon, armor, and neck-slot item, you will go through no fewer than 18 magic items through your career. Odds are you'll pick up a lot more than that, between gloves, arms, boot slots, wondrous items, etc.


Remember that there's always enchanting of the items you already have - more often than not this is actually the preferred option, as you get precisely the same enchantment as you want. It's entirely viable to use the same sword at the beginning and at the end of the game - only that it's nonmagical at level 1, but a +6 vorpal blade at level 30.



The biggest problem there is the fact that you'd be screwing with the wealth-by-level guidelines. What are you supposed to spend money on if not magic doodads?

WBL doesn't exist in a campaign with little/no magic items, obviously. Not to mention that you can spend the cash on things other than items - alchemy, rituals, and most characters have some individual pursuits they can pump cash into.

[KillianHawkeye]

If you can barely hit or avoid the blows of an ordinary mook (6 points of attack/defense difference at level 26+), and killing it takes ages, you do not feel accomplishment when you finally take it down - you feel relief that the extremely frustrating fight is finally over.

Yeah, this is where the "having a good DM" part comes in. Obviously, you'd have to design encounters a little differently in this situation, but anybody could get the hang of it pretty quickly I'm sure. Most mooks would probably end up being minions here.


At least give it a try! :smallwink:

:smallwink:

[pasko77]

If you can barely hit or avoid the blows of an ordinary mook (6 points of attack/defense difference at level 26+), and killing it takes ages, you do not feel accomplishment when you finally take it down - you feel relief that the extremely frustrating fight is finally over.


I think it can be solved lowering by a 20% the expected CR of encounters.



Remember that there's always enchanting of the items you already have - more often than not this is actually the preferred option, as you get precisely the same enchantment as you want. It's entirely viable to use the same sword at the beginning and at the end of the game - only that it's nonmagical at level 1, but a +6 vorpal blade at level 30.



That's a good suggestion.
Also, allow talents that simulate magic effects, as Vorpal.

[Oslecamo]

Cape, rope and bread are neither a magical item nor powerful.
Sting and the star are probably magical, but not powerful.
Mithril chain is probably powerful, but not magical.
The One Ring is, of course, a major artifact, but one that has dire consequences when used.


This is LOTR we're talkcing about. There's no diference between "magic" and "very well crafted".

After all, the cape allowed Frodo and his teammates to hide in the middle of nowhere, the rope burned golum and unknotted itself(plus they wouldn't have gone ver far away whitout it), and the bread broke the laws of thermodynamics.

Also your definiton of "powerfull" need reworcking. Managing to bypass the resistances of a super monstruous spider know for being tougher than dragons certainly isn't "powerfull". Bypassing the sentinels of Mordor themselves(and scarying away said spider) is also clearly a piece of cake. Oh, boy, one wonders how Sauron wasn't just curbstomped by a random thug with such lousy guards.



So, that example is almost entirely irrelevant. Indeed, the characters from DMOTR regularly point out that they never get any loot worth having.


Yeah, because pointing to a random webcomic is very relevant.

[Cybren]

Or you could just suck it up, not give them tons of magic items, and thus tone down the strength of their enemies.


Okay, I'm going to make a craaaaazy suggestion: Just don't use items. Don't change anything else, just use the system as is. Without items.

Wait, wait, hear me out!

Yes, the monsters will be harder. But if you're trying to stylistically simulate an epic tale of heroic adventure, shouldn't the monsters be harder? Wouldn't the enhanced difficulty only make sweet victory ALL THE MORE satisfying? Now of course, I haven't tried this myself, but I bet with a good DM it would work out better than you're all thinking.

At least give it a try! :smallwink:


more or less what he said.

[Kurald Galain]

Also your definiton of "powerfull" need reworcking. Managing to bypass the resistances of a super monstruous spider know for being tougher than dragons certainly isn't "powerfull".

So what you're saying is that they used a piece of bread to kill a giant spider. Yeah, right.

[ashmanonar]

Two words: Needlefang Swarm.

Yea, there are definitely monsters that are way more problematic.

For the most part, though, I think the encounter level system actually works pretty well.

[Irreverent Fool]

It would probably take some convincing to get me to try a system where you don't get shiny new magic items every so often (actually I play M&M sometimes so maybe that's not so true), but I can definitely understand the reasoning. A hero should be a hero even when he picks up a regular sword. Sure, the magic sword might be nice, but he shouldn't need a magical sword to fight any more than he should need a magical horse to ride (though he probably will at higher levels since adventurers can go through nonmagical horses like popcorn).

I was reading some pulpy old barbarian books I got from a used bookstore not too long ago: Brak the Barbarian (more of an homage to Conan than a rip-off). In one particular story, Brak's broadsword gets broken, dropped off a cliff, disarmed, taken away when he is made prisoner, broken again, and left in the head of a giant monster. He isn't forlorn upon losing his tool, he merely takes another one when he knocks out the evil sorceress' guard with his bare hands.

And the OP has a good point. If the system is designed around the idea that characters are supposed to have a weapon with specific properties at specific levels, why not build that into their class?

...though doing this in 4e would bring the game even more dangerously close to Progress Quest (http://progressquest.com/). :smallbiggrin:

I'm mostly kidding, don't flame me.

obnoxious
sig

[Artanis]

In the previews and design documents for 4th Edition, Wizards said outright that one of their goals was to turn down reliance on magic items. 4th Edition characters would be extraordinary people in their own right, by virtue of their powers, not their toys. The words 'Christmas Trees' were thrown around a lot.

*stuff*

"Tone down" doesn't have to mean completely removing, you know. In 4e, you only really need three magic items (Weapon, Armor, Neck), with the rest just being nifty extras. Items in other slots will help, but are far from necessary. Compare that to how many items you absolutely had to have in 3e.

[Fishy]

And they succeeded in doing that, and created a game that plays great and feels like D&D, but I was wondering if I could twist their creation to match my whims.

I'm not too thrilled at the idea of giving players items that aren't items, but it certainly works.

Toning down the CR of the encounters seems like it might work smoother. Looking at the magic item list, you're 'supposed' to get an item-magical +1 to attack and defenses every 5 levels, on top of the automatic +1 you get every 2 levels. So, just in terms of die rolls and whether or not attacks hit, a naked party should be able to handle a challenge (2*(Level/5)) CR lower than normal.

That doesn't account for Nifty Item Powers or magical critical hits, but for some reason I feel better about giving extra powers than I do about giving random numerical bonuses. Probably with some sort of pseudo Multiclassing.

Still doesn't quite solve the problem of naked paladins, though. Maybe that has to be a fake item- Instead of 'ability to wear armor X', you get +X to your AC as a class feature and we call it a day.

[BillyJimBoBob]

I like the concept, because much fantasy fiction does have "our hero(s)" either using whatever items they might have for the duration or perhaps picking up one or two items which they then use for the duration. This is a far cry from any version of D&D, where at a certain level a +1 weapon found in the monster hoard is simply something to be sold off just like any other common item.

[Sebastian]

There three main problems in an itemless 4e campaign:

bonus; easily fixed, just give the bonuses without the items, I think there is a option obout it in one of the books.

options; especially at higher level you often use all your encounter and daily powers before the fights are even half way, you need the magic items to have something more interesting to do than just spamming at will powers.

and last; what are you using all the millions of gold pieces that you find around for if you can't buy/create magic items? it is not like there is anything else useful you can buy. :)

[Colmarr]

So what you're saying is that they used a piece of bread to kill a giant spider. Yeah, right.

No, he's saying that the (allegedly non-powerful) Sting was able to harm Shelob, a creature of dreaded capability, and that the (allegedly non-powerful) Star was able to scare her away.

But I think you knew that :smallsmile:

[CharPixie]

Alternatively, subtract -X from all monster defenses and attack roles, where X is 1/5 of the monster's level, rounding where you will. As long as you allow the players to buy Masterwork armour at levels 16 and 26, then you'll have silently upgraded the players without items.

[MickJay]

and last; what are you using all the millions of gold pieces that you find around for if you can't buy/create magic items? it is not like there is anything else useful you can buy. :)

Same thing people did with gold in earlier editions, buy land, titles, castles, start running their own duchy/kingdom and invest in it. When you don't have a magic mart around every corner, players become more interested in stuff that does not offer immediate mechanical advantages.