DMing: Giving your players magical weapons?

[Dulenheim]

you guys know some of me by now, and here I come looking for good advice in the playground of Giants.

Recently, my Kingmaker party has reached level 6. One of my players has already gone prestige, others are all around kicking arse. In a good way.

Then I noticed that the second Kingmaker Book (River runs red, for anyone interested) gives leave for the dm to give the players a magical weapon that fits their characters. It was just 1 magical weapon at first, but then I decided to give each player something.

How eager should I be to give the guys some new "shiny" toys? Does anyone has a personal tale of things gone "horribly wrong" or "incredibly right" about DM's giving magical weapons to their players?

Mostly, I want to see if giving them the prize will not ruin the game later on. Thanks in advance to everyone here. :D

[Aegis013]

The most horribly wrong I've had was the DM decided magic items were all half price, effectively doubling our WBL. Then giving us special custom legacy items that did not have drawbacks (and were supposed to have different benefits) but we never found out what the benefits were as the game ended before we gained any benefit from them.

Oddly enough that's also the most incredibly right I've had. It was a fun game, in general.

[Gavinfoxx]

Buh? The game has a wealth by level chart for a reason, you know? Though I think Pathfinder removed this for some reason.

Just make sure they have relatively close to that in useful gear -- give them the opportunity to have say in what they want -- and you'll be good.

Remember, a level 100 fighter loses to a level 2 Allip without a magic weapon.

And don't just limit it to, you know, magic weapons. There is lots of interesting gear all over the place, things that can shore up weaknesses and limitations in the party quite well.

Let me put it this way: by level 6, D&D 3.5e assumes that characters will have somewhere around 13000 gp of useful magical items appropriate to their class.

With this, by this point, you can have magic weapon, magic armor, save boosters, an item that gives you tactical teleports, an item that gives you tactical flight, items so that you always have food and shelter all the time, things that improve your primary stats, several healing items, some minor skill boosters, a flying mount, etc. etc. You can't have ALL of those on one character, but you can have a good amount of it on any one character!

[Canarr]

Giving your PCs magical weapons *can* be a mistake, if they prove too powerful for the level of your game. Years ago, when I GMed a rogue campaign, I made the mistake of equipping an enemy guild leader of lvl 6-7 with armor of invulnerability and a sword of subtlety. The PCs killed her, looted her, and then I had one 4th level rogue equipped to one-shot sneak most enemies around, while another was basically unkillable by mooks with regular weapons (DR 5/magic).

No, I didn't equip that NPC correctly by level. Yes, I should have.

My point is: there's nothing wrong with giving your players shiny goodies; on the contrary, it'll make them happy, which translates into more fun for all concerned. Just make sure the goodies aren't *too* shiny.

[Fitz10019]

I think it's better to give the players the opportunity to shop for (or in some other way choose) magical items. Handing someone an item with the expectation that they should be happy about your choice is a form of railroading.

Whenever possible, the players should be making the choices.

[ClothedInVelvet]

You can also make things appear shinier than they really are. Certain items will be really cool, but destabilize the game less than others. For example, I played a halfling rogue and acquired a hat of disguise at a low level. Even though it was worth 1800gp, it wasn't very destabilizing because she mostly used it to imitate other characters and, in general, be a little snot. On the other hand, a necklace of fireballs (type 1) was cheaper, but would have made my character much more powerful in a couple combat encounters (could have outclassed the sorcerer).

The point is, you can give your players awesome things that don't ruin the game. You just need to think things through carefully before you give things away.

[sonofzeal]

- Gold and trade goods are great. You want players having some choices, and gear is a nice one. WBL tables are a nice starting point, just to determine the scale. A lot of encounters won't have loot, so when you do give stuff out it should be a healthy fraction of that level's wealth gain. Going from 6th to 7th should net around 6000 gp, so you can drop four-digit wealth without worrying too much.

- While gold and trade goods are nice, they aren't memorable. Nobody's going to care about that Cloak of Resist +3 that they picked up between sessions. They will care about a dragonscale cloak that gives Resist 3 to all elements which they got after slaying the Sorcerer Melphorian. It's not necessarily better, but it's got more resonance and more subjective worth to them. Also, it's got potential plothooks, and those are always good.

- Following the second point I tend to always hand out shiny trinkets. Sometimes they're vastly ahead of supposed WBL, if you actually calculated their value. And it has never once been a problem. As long as you know what you're giving out, you should be fine. Just don't let them re-sell unique items, especially not if they try to fast-talk you into getting a mountain of gold out of it. Unique items are unique, you can always arbitrarily give it a low price, or a reason that merchant wouldn't want it. Arcane Marks can be used to track possession, and anything thusly marked might not be sellable at a normal store.

[Krazzman]

In a 1st Level Campaign that sadly broke apart the DM let me find a Hat of Holding. I found it awesome, being a Human Warlock, completely in Forest Clothing made by fae...and a bright Red Magic Hat(sort of like the one from gandalf) of Holding.

It made me happy, but as I said sadly it broke apart. Maybe introduce a Magician that gives them upgrades to one equipment they have (for the warrior types new weapons etc.). But let them decide.

In my first campaign I got a +1 Freezing Longsword...I had focused on Shortswords and Bows. I was happy anyway cause: Magic Sword :D

Our Archer-Fighter got a +2 Flaming Shock Greatsword. He gave it to the Paladin shortly after being reincarnated into a Goblin. He wasn't that happy about that.

[DigoDragon]

The approximate enhancement bonus of a shiny magical weapon I give out as treasure is equal to the groups average level divided by 4. This guideline has worked well for me and they stay pretty well balanced.
Right now my party average level is 7 and everyone has a +2 magic weapon, or in some cases a +1 weapon with a special ability equivilent to an additional +1.

Second rule of thumb I use: Ensure that most of the magical weapons given are things players will be interested in using. I try to keep track of weapon preferences because if I don't, its a sure bet all those shiny weapons will get pawned off for cash.

My players are dangerous with cash. :smallsmile:

[GnomeGninjas]

The party was on a quest for an +4 vorpal dagger. I beleive the DM wasn't planning on us keeping it because he had an npc who was travelling with the party steal it via DM fiat. One party member tried to disarm him and the DM declared that the attack of opportunity killed him, then the half ogre tried to disarm him and since he had all ready used his attack of opportunity to kill the first person the half ogre succeeded. Now the party has a +4 vorpal dagger at level 4. I left pretty soon after that but I assume that it has been messing up some stuff.

[Kansaschaser]

The only people that are really going to benefit from a magical weapon will be a martial character. Spellcasters use spells to get what they need.

EXAMPLE: My DM was running a game where I played a Spellcaster and most of the other players were playing martial (Warblades, Fighters, Rogues, etc...) characters. The DM decided to give each player a Legacy weapon. During the entire course of the game, I never once lifted my magic weapon to attack anyone. I was too busy casting spells. I would rather have had a Headband of Intellect +6 instead of that stupid legacy weapon.

So if you're going to "give" the players a magic item, at least find out what they want. As a DM, I normally ask the players for a "Wish List" of items for their characters and I'll try to make sure they are scattered in the loot every now and then.

[eclipsic]

Does anyone has a personal tale of things gone "horribly wrong" or "incredibly right" about DM's giving magical weapons to their players?
[EDIT: It's not a magic "weapon", as such, but it really did give them a huge edge in battle.]

I think this qualifies for both "horribly wrong" and "incredibly right":
I DM'ed a long campaign (2/month for 2 years) that took 5 characters up to 12th level. I was pretty good about found magic items and gold, and players converted what they couldn't use gold to fund their wizard's crafting expertise. Everything worked fine until they established a base by buying an abandoned manor house near a large town. The next time they were adventuring, I had them run across a trap that made use of a "chest of holding". It was essentially a 3'x3'x5' chest with a portable hole in it (10'x10' room; Goblet of Fire (?) gave me the idea). I thought they'd bring the chest back to their manor house and use it for cool storage.

Unfortunately, before they got it home, the session ended. The next week, several of the players couldn't make it, including the player carrying the chest, so, since they were associated with a wizard's guild and owed them some money, I made up a side quest and had the missing players' characters teleported away for that session.

Which wasn't awful, until the players actually DID make it home, and one of them said, "You know, our crusader is size Large, and that chest is just about the right size for a (big) backpack..."

So, of course, from then on out, they had the orog crusader walking around with this huge chest strapped to his back. Which is also not a big deal, until the party wizard acquired a teleport scroll. The first time they tried to teleport, I informed them, with great relish, that teleport only allowed the wizard to teleport himself and three others, and there were four others in the party, and one of them was large, so the wizard wouldn't be able to teleport the entire party. And then the stoopid wizard said, "Hey, why doesn't everybody get in the chest of holding, and then the chest counts as the orog's gear and I can teleport one Large creature."

"But, wait!" I said, "You can't teleport a portable hole!" To which they replied, of course, "The wizard's guild guys teleported the chest that one time!" and...well, damn. So, six levels before he should have been capable of it, my wizard was loading everybody into a portable hole and teleporting them around my world. Combine that with a base of operations and numerous scrying spells, and my players became terrors to behold, able to pop in and out of various monstrous strongholds, treasure rooms, bedrooms, and what-have-you. I didn't feel comfortable covering up my mistake by specifically targeting the orog or wizard, but I did, once or twice, incapacitate the orog, so it made it difficult for the others to climb into the chest of holding. And once I incapacitated the wizard. And once I even had an enemy spellcaster with a Dimensional Lock in her repertoire, but it never became an issue.

Seriously, though, I loved the image of those folks riding around in the portable hole in a chest on the back of an orog so much! The character used an ogre mage mini, with a chest mini strapped to his back with a bright red pipe cleaner, so the physical representation was even better than the image. That chest became a sort of 6th player in our game, and at the time we went on hiatus (last year), the party wizard was toying with the idea of taking the Craft Construct feat so he could turn their beloved chest into some sort of modron-like golem. *sigh* I really miss that campaign....

[danzibr]

you guys know some of me by now
Know some of you?

Whenever possible, the players should be making the choices.
I agree with this. When I give players items it's because I know they want it. Like, they described their build to me, told me they want an item, and... then it happened.

I thinks it's best to give them money and let them buy what they will, or if it's something that can't be bought (like someone reaaaaaaaaaally wants that lesser artifact), then throw it in the game.

You can always give out a couple Decks of Many Things for fun.

"But, wait!" I said, "You can't teleport a portable hole!" To which they replied, of course, "The wizard's guild guys teleported the chest that one time!" and...well, damn.
Ahh hilarious. I love this.

[ericgrau]

DMs that give out way too much are called Monty Haul DMs and it does turn out bad. The game gets too boring and easy. But a little too much and having stronger monsters to match doesn't hurt.

And don't only give out weapons. Don't forget the less exciting magic items like those that give passive bonuses or the PCs will fall behind in other areas. Especially defensive bonuses since without them monster attacks will be painful. You're essentially increasing monster attack bonus and save DCs when you let PC defenses fall behind. And these are monsters that you already made stronger to keep up with the rich PCs. Then PCs start instantly dropping to massive attacks yet so do the monsters (from the super weapons) so you can't tone them back without them getting steamrolled. So... ya, defensive items prevent games of rocket tag.

Also agreed on allowing shopping.

[Sturmcrow]

If you give them +1 weapons, sure no problem, if you give them Vorpal swords well then uh oh.

I ran a game where I gave everyone a magic heirloom at first level. Until they unlocked the item though it was just like a masterwork version. Then around 4th level I think they unlocked the magic portion and the items worked as +1 weapons, as they leveled the items leveled. That way I never had to worry about putting in treasure in odd places to keep up their WBL and they had something special that was important to them (Their Grandfather's staff, the Longbow their mother used etc)

[Sutremaine]

Consider using something like the legacy weapon rules, but as a guideline. Make the weapons powerful enough to use now, and upgrade them as dramatically appropriate and also WBL-appropriate if your players aren't being dramatically appropriate. Neat little effects that won't break anything but which each player would really like would probably go down well.

[sonofzeal]

If you give them +1 weapons, sure no problem, if you give them Vorpal swords well then uh oh.
Eh. Vorpal is overrated. It only kicks in on a nat20, not any crit. It also doesn't scale.

Consider: a +5 Greatsword of Collision is way more effective at lvl 3 than it is at lvl 20. Monsters have low AC and low hp, so the extra attack and damage is deadly. Handing that out early means the weilder will almost auto-hit and probably auto-kill most monsters.

A Vorpal sword by contrast does almost exactly the same thing at every level, namely auto-kill things that need a single head <5% of the time. Nothing increases that except your chance to confirm a crit, and it's still capped at 5%. And while a high level character might fight more exotic enemies that are less likely to use heads, there's low-CR things that are immune too, like a few Constructs, some Oozes, some Plants, mindless Undead, Swarms....


tl;dr - A Vorpal Sword is exactly the kind of "high level drop" you don't need to worry about. It will make players feel epic and badass, but is unlikely to make a huge difference overall.

[Sturmcrow]

tl;dr - A Vorpal Sword is exactly the kind of "high level drop" you don't need to worry about. It will make players feel epic and badass, but is unlikely to make a huge difference overall.

I was using it as an example cause its got like a +5 modifier and I couldn't think of other ones with similar mods

[sonofzeal]

I was using it as an example cause its got like a +5 modifier and I couldn't think of other ones with similar mods
Still, it's the perfect example of when to ignore pricing guidelines.

As another example, I once gave a player a +2 Merciful Ghost Touch Throwing Returning Rapier. There's no way that sword should have been worth over three times his WBL. A +1 Rapier of Collision would have been more powerful for a fraction of the price.

The pricing tables are fine for when players are picking out their own gear, but as a DM it's the perfect opportunity to make use of what's normally a "trap option", since you aren't restricted by those tables.

[Oscredwin]

Just make sure they can't sell that "+2 Merciful Ghost Touch Throwing Returning Rapier" for 1/2 market price.

[sonofzeal]

Just make sure they can't sell that "+2 Merciful Ghost Touch Throwing Returning Rapier" for 1/2 market price.
"BEHOLD the legendary Sword of the Wintermoon! It functions as a mighty +2 Merciful Ghost Touch Throwing Returning Rapier, but only for blue-eyed humans from Chancellorville named Hubert. Witness its power and REJOICE, for it is now yours to wield as you see fit!"

[ericgrau]

Or more realistically the shop owner says "throwing returning?? How am I supposed to find a buyer for this? I'll give you 1/4 standard market value because there's no way I'll be able to sell it at full price." Or similar.

[Hylas]

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gamemastering.html

About halfway down you can see a "wealth by level" chart. A general rule of thumb is that the wealth should be divided up into four equal-ish parts. 1/4 for weapons (or offense), 1/4 for armor, 1/4 for other defensive or wondrous items, and 1/4 for consumables.

If you want the players to choose then give them loot in the form of coin, artwork, jewels, or baskets full of chickens, and have a nearby mages' guild ready to make them whatever they need.

[deuxhero]

"BEHOLD the legendary Sword of the Wintermoon! It functions as a mighty +2 Merciful Ghost Touch Throwing Returning Rapier, but only for blue-eyed humans from Chancellorville named Hubert. Witness its power and REJOICE, for it is now yours to wield as you see fit!"

What's the UMD check for that?

[Zubrowka74]

The party was on a quest for an +4 vorpal dagger.

Vorpal dagger ? Vorpal, dagger ? A dagger is a piercing weapon. What next, vorpal arrows ??

[deuxhero]

Srd says "Piercing or slashing".

[Zubrowka74]

Awww man, I'm getting old... :smallsmile:

[deuxhero]

Now why short swords are piercing only...

[Dsurion]

Vorpal dagger ? Vorpal, dagger ? A dagger is a piercing weapon. What next, vorpal arrows ??I like to imagine this happening like you're watching Looney Toons, with the arrow stopping just before the enemy's face, then hacking it off like an axe.

[Zubrowka74]

A flamming vorpal arrow would solve the learnean lumi half-golem problem (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238433), though.

[sonofzeal]

What's the UMD check for that?
High enough that there's no market for it, except as an art piece, which probably won't get you more than a fraction of its official value. So hey, if they want to sell it, sure, but they get gold in proportion to their WBL.

[eclipsic]

Vorpal dagger ? Vorpal, dagger ? A dagger is a piercing weapon. What next, vorpal arrows ??

This was my first thought, also.

[JadePhoenix]

This was my first thought, also.

Daggers were piercing or slashing, last I checked. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm)

[Zubrowka74]

Daggers were piercing or slashing, last I checked. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm)

And short swords are piercing only ? But Captain, that's illogical...

[rot42]

Vorpal dagger ? Vorpal, dagger ? A dagger is a piercing weapon. What next, vorpal arrows ??

Serpentstongue arrows in Races of the Wild deal piercing and slashing damage. Vorpal does not specify melee only in the DMG, but the tables in the Magic Item Compendium do list it only in the melee section. In a real game this would all fall under DM discretion, of course.

[GnomeGninjas]

Srd says "Piercing or slashing".

That's true but if it was piercing only I doubt that the DM would have cared, he let it instakill a 3 headed snake made out of snakes:smalleek: on a 19.