What are general issues with SpC, MiC, and the Complete books?

[Ozreth]

Do you all generally allow these books? What are issues people have with them regarding balance etc?

Also, while I'm here, the SpC dosen't contain PHB spells does it? Or spells from setting books like FRCS, Ebberon etc? Just ones that weren't published in source books but magazines, adventures etc? Same with MiC?

Thanks!

[Shazek]

Spell Compendium and Magic Item Compendium contain updated items and spells from all sorts of sources, including prior published books. Balance isn't too bad in the Completes and Compendiums; they increase the power level and number of options significantly, but there isn't much in the way of truly broken content present. The worst offender is probably Dweomerkeeper, but that's from a Web Enhancement to Complete Divine, not a part of the book itself. There are no PHB spells in Spell Compendium, to my knowledge.

[Ozreth]

Spell Compendium and Magic Item Compendium contain updated items and spells from all sorts of sources, including prior published books. Balance isn't too bad in the Completes and Compendiums; they increase the power level and number of options significantly, but there isn't much in the way of truly broken content present. The worst offender is probably Dweomerkeeper, but that's from a Web Enhancement to Complete Divine, not a part of the book itself. There are no PHB spells in Spell Compendium, to my knowledge.

Gotcha! Thanks. Increasing power level is a little bit of a concern to me, but maybe it's not so bad.

[GilesTheCleric]

Increasing power level by adding more books favours martials. T1 is t1, starting in core. It doesn't get any worse/better than that (except for things like stpe and dweomerkeeper, as noted - but those are new classes, not changes to existing ones).

SC might add some FR spells, but certainly none of the really good/abusable 3.0 ones. I don't remember seeing any Eberron spells in it. My biggest complaint with the book is that it renames spells - I much prefer things like Mordenkainen's Force Missiles to Force Missiles, but that's just a flavour thing.

[HunterOfJello]

One general issue is people not looking up and double checking information from the Errata. The errata fixes a lot of issues that crop up and fix lots of important problems. (They also miss tons of important fixes, but that's another discussion.)


One thing worthy of note about the SpC is that it significantly boosts the usefulness of paladin, ranger, and bard spells. It changes the lists from being mostly next to useless to being generally acceptable.

[DR27]

Increasing power level is a little bit of a concern to me, but maybe it's not so bad.I'd get over it, sounds like that's the way you're leaning anyways. They aren't filled with campaign-ending spells like the PHB is, and underpowered mundane classes are given some nifty things. Those nifty things might be "more powerful" than PHB options, but they still are leagues behind caster power.

[Big Fau]

I'd get over it, sounds like that's the way you're leaning anyways. They aren't filled with campaign-ending spells like the PHB is, and underpowered mundane classes are given some nifty things. Those nifty things might be "more powerful" than PHB options, but they still are leagues behind caster power.

Body Outside Body is fairly game-breaking, but even then there's far fewer per book than Core (seeing as Core has encounter-ending and campaign-wrecking spells of every level). It's easier to deal with the broken of non-Core than to try and deal with Core stuff.

[nedz]

MiC seems to rewrite the item costing rules so that MiC items are better value for money. I'd choose one method or the other for consistency, it doesn't really matter which since a DM will vary the loot for balance anyway.

[Feytalist]

Spell Compendium adds a few FR and Eberron spells. Think body of war, which turns you into a warforged juggernaut.

What the Completes add is options. Especially Complete Champion, for Devotion feats, and Complete Scoundrel, for luck feats and skill tricks. More options make the game more interesting, which is generally a good thing, I feel.

[Person_Man]

The primary problem with the Complete books is the low wheat to chaff ratio. In each book, there's maybe 1 or 2 classes or prestige classes and 2-4 Feats worth looking at. The rest of it is garbage.

The Compendiums are much more worth while. And in general, if I were limited to half a dozen books as a player, it would be PHB, MIC, SpC, Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Battle, and Expanded Psionics.

[Essence_of_War]

Editing/dev-testing is a big issue with the completes. As Person_Man indicated, power level is all over the place and ranges over at least an order of magnitude. Utility is all over the place from borderline-useless to ALWAYS useful.

As an example, consider that Kensai, one of the better martial non-ToB PrCs ever printed, and Reaping Mauler (borderline useless) are both in the CW. Consider also that Acolyte of the Skin (worse than any base caster class) is in the same book as Mage of the Arcane Order (fantastic, flexible caster PrC) and Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil (actual bonkers).

I really like MiC. It has rules for adding/combining magic item effects which are super useful. It also includes a number of nifty class specific items (Hexbands for the Hexblade!), and eternal wands (who doesn't like those!). I'm less familiar with the SpC, but I like that it provides a ton of elemental-ish spells for the Shugenja :smalltongue:

[Grod_The_Giant]

"Power creep" is a relatively meaningless concept in 3.5. Core already has the strongest classes (cleric, druid, wizard) and some of the weakest (monk, paladin, fighter). Some of the best feats (quicken spell, power attack) and some of the weakest (weapon focus, toughness, all of the +2/+2 skill feats). Some of Many of the most broken spells (gate, polymorph, glitterdust...) and some of the weakest (magic aura, polar ray). There's an enormous spread. Future books do a better and better job of landing their material towards the middle of things-- not as good as a wizard, not as bad as a fighter.

In any case, SpC is wonderful because it's a huge source of spells, all in one place. It gives you a better ratio of options:book shuffling than anything else out there. MiC is less important, but it does have a lot of cool, unique items in it-- including wondrous items that are actually worth the price. The Completes... they're the most bland splats out there, in my opinion. They present a handful of useful stuff, but most of CArc, CDiv, and CAdv are crap. CMage, CChamp, and CSco are better.

I'd say that, on the whole and discounting subsystems, the SpC has the best (most) new spells, the PHB2 hasthe best set of new feats and base classes, and the MiC has the best new items (duh).

[Chronos]

The Compendiums do not re-list material from Core (except that the MIC has new loot tables that include both Core items and MIC items), but they do include material from pretty much all other books that were published before them. In particular, the Spell Compendium includes spells from Complete Warrior, Arcane, Divine, and Adventurer, sometimes slightly changed from their original versions.

The biggest advantage with these books is these books is that they add more options, but the biggest disadvantage is that these options are disproportionately for casters. Spell Compendium is of course the worst for this, since it contains nothing at all for noncasters, but any full-casting progression PrC is viable for a wizard, sorcerer, or cleric, and I'm pretty sure that all of the Completes contain at least one of those (many of them extremely easy to enter). The non-caster PrCs, meanwhile, are mostly geared to very specific character types, and often come with ridiculous prerequisites or crippling drawbacks.

The Completes are also the source of such things as Persistent Spell, which is either unusably bad if you're actually adjusting spell level, or overpowered good if you're finding some way to apply it without adjusting spell level. As well as one of the more popular ways to avoid adjusting spell level, Divine Metamagic. Complete Mage and Complete Champion also include the reserve feats, which are basically just Wizards deciding to throw out all pretext of the one limiting factor spellcasters are supposed to have.

Overall, I wouldn't recommend allowing or banning whole books at a time. But if I were to do so, I'd be more inclined to allow MIC, Complete Warrior, Adventurer, and Scoundrel, and disallow Arcane, Divine, Mage, and Champion. No, this isn't fair to casters. That's kind of the point.

[DR27]

Complete Mage and Complete Champion also include the reserve feats, which are basically just Wizards deciding to throw out all pretext of the one limiting factor spellcasters are supposed to have.Reserve feats aren't bad at all - they don't show up mundanes, while incentivizing casters to tone down the power level. Touch of Healing directly benefits mundanes through allowing their limited resource (HP) to be extended.

[Agincourt]

Yes, I agree with DR27. Reserve feats discourage the 15 minute adventuring day by making it possible for casters to keep going. Furthermore, "Touch of Healing" is really going to benefit melee characters by allowing for out-of-combat healing. I wouldn't hesitate to let any of the reserve feats in my game.

[Gnaeus]

The Completes are also the source of such things as Persistent Spell, which is either unusably bad if you're actually adjusting spell level, or overpowered good if you're finding some way to apply it without adjusting spell level. As well as one of the more popular ways to avoid adjusting spell level, Divine Metamagic.

Persistent spell is not as bad as you suggest. In the combo you mention, caster spends 3-4 feats (extend spell, persist spell, DMM Persist, maybe extra turning) to make buffs last all day. Unless you then also allow multiple Nightsticks (which are in Libris Mortis) to stack with each other, they can only do it to one or two spells per day, because it takes 7 turn attempts per persist. I'm not saying that it is weak, but it isn't so strong that it overshadows all the other things that a full caster can do with 4 feats and some gold. The word I use for an option that is worth getting, but not so strong that it overshadows all other options, is "balanced". (there are other ways to break Persist spell, but that isn't really one of them).

[Firechanter]

One issue that all 3.5 sources share is the ratio of chaff to good stuff. Very roughly speaking, I'd say that about 90% of splatbook material is crud, 7-8% is decent and 2-3% is awesome.

Some players enjoy figuring out what's the good stuff and what's a trap, but others are annoyed by this.

[DR27]

One issue that all 3.5 sources share is the ratio of chaff to good stuff. Very roughly speaking, I'd say that about 90% of splatbook material is crud, 7-8% is decent and 2-3% is awesome.

Some players enjoy figuring out what's the good stuff and what's a trap, but others are annoyed by this.This would be the real argument against splatbooks, not "powercreep." Trap options are always a bad thing, and one of the greatest things about ToB was that it didn't provide those traps to players.

[Chronos]

Quoth Agincourt:

Yes, I agree with DR27. Reserve feats discourage the 15 minute adventuring day by making it possible for casters to keep going.
They make it possible for casters to do something. As in, there was actually one thing that casters couldn't do, and they took away that limitation. That's a terrible idea.

If you want to discourage the 15 minute adventuring day, put time limits on a mission. The casters will still be able to deal with it, but they'll at least need to make an effort.

[JaronK]

Casters could already do the long days, they just had to pick spells like Animate Dead. These meant your character wasn't actively doing much, but their contributions were huge.

Reserve feats don't add to caster power, they just let you shoot lasers. Shooting lasers is fun. It's not stronger than a zombie hydra, though.

All in all, those books are not as powerful as core. If you want a less powerful, more balanced set, it would be better to leave out the core base classes than the ones added later (Archivist, Artificer, and Erudite being the only seriously broken base classes outside of core).

JaronK

[Vaz]

Body Outside Body is fairly game-breaking, but even then there's far fewer per book than Core (seeing as Core has encounter-ending and campaign-wrecking spells of every level). It's easier to deal with the broken of non-Core than to try and deal with Core stuff.

That requires a Core prc to break, however. Just say 'no'.

[Killer Angel]

Increasing power level by adding more books favours martials.

Unless we're talking bout SpC. :smalltongue:

[Harrow]

Reserve feats require casters to keep high level slots around so it helps with the 'nova' problem. I think this is a good thing.



Unless we're talking bout SpC. :smalltongue:

Actually, IIRC that book has lots of great spells for Bards, Rangers, and Paladins. Fighters and Monks are still having a bad time, but it doesn't just help Wizards, Clerics, and Druids.

[DarkSonic1337]

Suppose I were making a "no core classes" game. I would also ban whatever tier 1 base classes are left.

Are there any prestige classes I should also ban (considering the now limited base class entries)?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Suppose I were making a "no core classes" game. I would also ban whatever tier 1 base classes are left.

Are there any prestige classes I should also ban (considering the now limited base class entries)?
Ur-Priest jumps to mind.

[nedz]

Here's a PrC list.


Anima Mage
Beholder Mage
Cancer Mage
Disciple of Dispater
Dweomerkeeper
Halruuan Elder
Hathran
Hulking Hurler
Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil
Incantatrix
Moonspeaker
Planar Sheppard
Rainbow Servant (Beguiler or Warmage entry). Also Spells per Day is as per Table, not Text.
Red Mage
Sandshaper
Shadowcraft Mage
Skypledged
Soul Eater
Tainted Scholar
Thrallherd
Thrall of Juiblex
Ur-Priest
Walker in the Waste
Warshaper

[Fax Celestis]

All in all, those books are not as powerful as core. If you want a less powerful, more balanced set, it would be better to leave out the core base classes than the ones added later (Archivist, Artificer, and Erudite being the only seriously broken base classes outside of core).

...and even then, those are mostly broken due to poor writing (Archivists and spells from lists other than druid and cleric, Erudite's unique powers per day), or making an actual effort to break the game (Blastificer, Omniscificer, St. Perudite), both of which can be solved with a quick discussion before the game begins.

[JaronK]

Suppose I were making a "no core classes" game. I would also ban whatever tier 1 base classes are left.

May I suggest the following "replacement core"? It works pretty well and covers most of the same character concepts, but everyone's way more balanced.

1: Factotum (replaces Wizard and Rogue)
2: Warblade (replaces Fighter and Barbarian)
3: Swordsage (Including Unarmed Variant, replaces Barbarian and Monk)
4: Crusader (Replaces Cleric and Paladin)
5: Warmage (Replaces Sorcerer and Wizard)
6: Dread Necromancer (Replaces Cleric, Sorcerer, and Wizard)
7: Beguiler (Replaces Rogue and Sorcerer)
8: Bard (Bardic Knack and Divine Bard available, can replace Cleric a little)
9: Warlock (Replaces Sorcerer)
10: Ranger (Wild Shape Variant available, replaces Druid)
11: Binder (Replaces Cleric, Sorcerer, Rogue, Wizard)

It's a pretty balanced group. Nobody as strong as the Sorcerer, but nobody as weak as the Monk either.

JaronK

[Chronos]

One issue with that "replacement core" list is that there isn't anyone there that can fill the healer role. Sure, the crusader, bard, binder, and even factotum can cure hitpoint damage, but you're going to have a hard time dealing with curses, ability drain, blindness, deafness, petrification, etc. And death, too, of course. Now, maybe you want to run a gritty, high-risk game like that, but it's at least something you need to be aware of.

[JaronK]

One issue with that "replacement core" list is that there isn't anyone there that can fill the healer role. Sure, the crusader, bard, binder, and even factotum can cure hitpoint damage, but you're going to have a hard time dealing with curses, ability drain, blindness, deafness, petrification, etc. And death, too, of course. Now, maybe you want to run a gritty, high-risk game like that, but it's at least something you need to be aware of.

True, but the Healer is a horrible class to play as and the Cleric and Favored Soul are too strong. Honestly, I'd just have weaker Tier classes available as NPCs, so you have to go to a Healer to get ability drain and the like cured. This does make certain monsters scary, but is that so bad?

JaronK

[Firechanter]

One issue with that "replacement core" list is that there isn't anyone there that can fill the healer role.

QFT. There simply is no T3 Cleric replacement. A Divine Bard doesn't get access to all the necessary spells, and anyway any spontaneous caster will want to use his precious Spells Known on other things than band-aids.

And for that matter, Spontaneous Cleric doesn't cut it either, for the same reason. Either you ignore the restorative spells and aren't much of a healer, or you take them and are reduced to the role of a healbot, which players hate.

[Icewraith]

UMD + Scroll of Restoration etc. A smart party will have a couple of ability damge/drain/status removing scrolls on hand anyways in case the spellcasters get petrified or similar.

[Firechanter]

FWIW, for a T3 Cleric replacement I had the idea of doing the following:

Cleric Chassis, but
Spell Progression of a Bard, or a new custom 7-level spell progression;
Spontaneous Caster, main spellcasting stat WIS, but Save DCs set by CHA;
Spells Known as usual, PLUS all restorative spells for free, plus Domain spells
(or possibly Spirit Shaman spell retrieval method)

Some restorative spells may need to have their level lowered, to make up for the reduced spell progression.

Haven't tried it ingame, though.

[Fax Celestis]

One issue with that "replacement core" list is that there isn't anyone there that can fill the healer role. Sure, the crusader, bard, binder, and even factotum can cure hitpoint damage, but you're going to have a hard time dealing with curses, ability drain, blindness, deafness, petrification, etc. And death, too, of course. Now, maybe you want to run a gritty, high-risk game like that, but it's at least something you need to be aware of.

UMD or NPC.

[Chronos]

I was assuming that clerics didn't exist at all, and thus that scrolls of their spells didn't exist, either. Though I suppose that there could be NPC Healers making the scrolls. In which case you probably ought to allow PCs to be Healers, too, if the player really wants to play a healbot (hey, don't ask me, some folks do).

[TuggyNE]

I was assuming that clerics didn't exist at all, and thus that scrolls of their spells didn't exist, either. Though I suppose that there could be NPC Healers making the scrolls. In which case you probably ought to allow PCs to be Healers, too, if the player really wants to play a healbot (hey, don't ask me, some folks do).

You can allow PCs to play Aristocrats or Commoners or Experts too, if you like, but strong discouragement is almost always the word of the day toward those.

[Big Fau]

FWIW, for a T3 Cleric replacement I had the idea of doing the following:

Cleric Chassis, but
Spell Progression of a Bard, or a new custom 7-level spell progression;
Spontaneous Caster, main spellcasting stat WIS, but Save DCs set by CHA;
Spells Known as usual, PLUS all restorative spells for free, plus Domain spells
(or possibly Spirit Shaman spell retrieval method)

Some restorative spells may need to have their level lowered, to make up for the reduced spell progression.

Haven't tried it ingame, though.

Gestalt NPC Adept with Paladin or something. Problem solved.

[nedz]

FWIW, for a T3 Cleric replacement I had the idea of doing the following:

Cleric Chassis, but
Spell Progression of a Bard, or a new custom 7-level spell progression;
Spontaneous Caster, main spellcasting stat WIS, but Save DCs set by CHA;
Spells Known as usual, PLUS all restorative spells for free, plus Domain spells
(or possibly Spirit Shaman spell retrieval method)

Some restorative spells may need to have their level lowered, to make up for the reduced spell progression.

Haven't tried it ingame, though.

What you would need is something like the Beguiler/DN/etc.
Well we have the Healer, just need to make it more interesting, ..., a lot more interesting.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Gestalt NPC Adept with Paladin or something. Problem solved.
Heck, Adept is already T4. Give it a better chassis, spontaneous casting from the entire list, more spells/day, maybe slap on a few "Advanced Learnings" or a domain or two, and you've got yourself a solid T3 divine caster.

EDIT:

What you would need is something like the Beguiler/DN/etc.
Well we have the Healer, just need to make it more interesting, ..., a lot more interesting.
Add a couple classic cleric buffs per spell level (bless, prayer and the like) and you should be good. Let it cast spontaneous off the entire list, too.

[DR27]

It won't be accepted (it's homebrew and therefore ignored for some reason), but Oskar's Healer Retool (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133118) would be the ideal class for a "Replacement Core."

Healbot, but not.

[alanek2002]

I Would generally avoid Complete psionic. There are a couple of pages of worthwhile material, and a 1 or 2 of more powerful material (Anarchic Initiate anyone?) and a large pile of refuse. "hey! lets make certain Powers be subject to Damage reduction! And restrict summoning much more than any other system!"

[Chronos]

Plus, I don't think there's anything in Complete Psionic that actually works like it's supposed to. It seems like every class and feat in that book has some dysfunction or another.

[jedipotter]

Do you all generally allow these books? What are issues people have with them regarding balance etc?



I'm fine with the SpC, my magic fix house rules takes care of any problems here.

I often ban MiC. Too many players always want the same dozen items for every character. And ''always want'' is a red flag. And the MiC has way too many poorly worded, broken or worst of all cheap magic items. I've had players walk out after reading my house rule of ''An enveloping pit is just a normal portable hole, unless you qualify to activate the relic power of the item. But is is just easier to say ''No Mic''.

The complete books are a mixed bag of good stuff, bad stuff, horrible stuff and crazy broken stuff. I often bad them. More often I will say ''this or that'' from a book, but not the whole book.

[DR27]

And ''always want'' is a red flag. And the MiC has way too many poorly worded, broken or worst of all cheap magic items. I've had players walk out after reading my house rule of ''An enveloping pit is just a normal portable hole, unless you qualify to activate the relic power of the item. But is is just easier to say ''No Mic''.Wow, are people that shallow that they don't let you talk about why you enforce that rule? (assuming that you are allowing at least the 50ft deep rule, and letting them conceal the opening through other means)

MiC isn't that bad though - most of the items are centered on giving players additional options. That's a good thing, players should always have interesting things to do mechanically. Just because they want the items doesn't make the book bad. You thinking that "they want these things, ergo ban" - that makes you a douche. Try and think of how your players might be right, and how you might be wrong, instead of "easier to be omnipotent."

Look at List of Necessary Magic Items (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187851) - as much is in the DMG as the MIC. The difference is that the MIC gives you options at lower levels, and the DMG says "you have to spend eleventy billion gp and get a persistent version of what you want or nothing at all." The MIC gives you the same thing in a limited version a capped number of times a day in exchange for a lower price.

[Lactantius]

MiC isn't that bad though - most of the items are centered on giving players additional options. That's a good thing, players should always have interesting things to do mechanically.

I agree with this quote, but generally and independant of the source for those options.

That's why I like prestige classes (or better, dislike core classes) since they don't grant you sort of "perks" that often.
Ironically, the cleric and wizard fall into this category.
If they would get perks each level, players wouldn't get off to prestige classes that often.
And IMHO, such class perks can exists perfectly besides full spellcasting.
Full spellcasting is what makes Tier 1 Tier 1, but players tend to forget that they are limited resources. Perks thus, could be unlimited of at least add more limited options, but, after all, still MORE than only cast spells.

Concerning MIC, I like that book since it adjusted the horrible prices for many items so that players can really afford it.
Just don't use the few broken items like the belt of battle and you are fine.

[JusticeZero]

Meh, get the newest Psionic stuff and backport. Vitalist is what, T3? Otherwise you'll end up having to kick back to something like an Adept, maybe with lots of bonus feats or something.
I was specifically asking about this one awhile back. Where was it... Ah, here. (www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=299764)
I should actually sketch to see if a Wilder can be made into a passable healer type...

[Story]

I often ban MiC. Too many players always want the same dozen items for every character. And ''always want'' is a red flag.

Not necessarily. You wouldn't ban Cloaks of Resistance or +Stat items even though every player wants them, right? The whole point of the MiC is to make quirkier items that are actually competitive with the big six. And some things, like the Artificers Monocle, are just fixes for problems in the original rules.

[Harrow]

I find it funny that someone would ban MiC on grounds of players always picking the same handful of items out of it because the entire basis of the book was players always choose the same 'Big 6' items which are really boring and make a lot of characters oddly similar. It was meant to make interesting items cheaper and more available, but you are right, most people do just go for healing belt, anklets of translocation, and belt of battle.

Looking through it, I can understand why. A couple of items, like the ones I listed, and some of the augment crystals are pretty decent, but most of the things are overpriced and I would never buy when that money could instead go to constant bonuses, utility wands, pearls of power, chaos flasks, shapesand, marvelous pigments, feather tokens, and other, similar items.

[Firechanter]

As a player in such a game, I would say: MIC banned? So we get to buy all the un-MIC-nerfed items and properties? Wheee!

:smallwink:

[nedz]

As a player in such a game, I would say: MIC banned? So we get to buy all the un-MIC-nerfed items and properties? Wheee!

:smallwink:

Which items did MiC nerf then ?

[Essence_of_War]

The Torc of Power Preservation got beaten REALLY hard with the nerf hammer in MiC.

Check out the one in the SRD.

Now check out the one in the MiC.

Yeah. Rough beats. :smalleek:

[nedz]

I don't own MiC and I can't find the Torc in the SRD :smallconfused:

[Karnith]

I don't own MiC and I can't find the Torc in the SRD :smallconfused:
Well, here's the torc in the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/items/universalItems.htm#torcofPowerPreservation).

[Chronos]

The Magebane weapon mod was much better in Complete Arcane (when it worked against anything with SLAs) than in MIC (when it specified invocations). And the psychoactive skin of the chameleon gives an enhancement bonus in the SRD (which stacks with almost everything), but a competence bonus in the MIC (just like every other skill-boosting item).

Most items, though, got improved when they went into the MIC, usually by having their price reduced.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Which items did MiC nerf then ?

From the top of my head, MageBane got really nerfed too, in CArc it functioned against anything that casted spells or had SLA (so 90% of the MM), in MiC it "only" works vs. spells and Invocation users (so Warlocks and DFA unless there is an obscure monster which gets invocations).



I don't own MiC and I can't find the Torc in the SRD :smallconfused:

the Torc in MiC got changed to only funciton 5/day IIRC-

Personally I houserule them as Greater (original) versions, usually keeping the original price and the lesser version (which is the updated one).

In the case of the Magebane I'd change it to a +3 equivalent propierty at most (extra 2d6 damage and +2 won't break the game).

Edit: Swordsage'd

[Roguenewb]

In that replacement core, Adept would probably get along just fine. They have a pretty sweet spell list, and in that D&D they have unique access to a lot of powerful spells, which probably makes them worth using anyway. I've come within a hair of playing Adepts in normal D&D. In that scenario, access to the super powerful magic does require careful thought, and you definitely pick up power as you go along. If you wanted to pump them a little, give them a domain and a domain slot of each level.

[Essence_of_War]

I don't own MiC and I can't find the Torc in the SRD :smallconfused:

In SRD, Torc is expensive, but it saves you 1 PP on every power you manifest.

In MiC, Torc is comparably cheap, but it only functions for 5 manifested powers per day. It's effectively +1PP and +1 ML 5/day.

[nedz]

Ah, it's a Psionic item: I was looking under Magic Items :smallsigh:

I was aware that MiC changed lots of things from the Completes, and that the pricing scheme was different to the DMG/SRD (and generally cheaper).

[Chronos]

Quoth Dusk Eclipse:

In the case of the Magebane I'd change it to a +3 equivalent propierty at most (extra 2d6 damage and +2 won't break the game).
At +3 it'd probably be fine, but it was certainly broken at +1. When you can get a +1 weapon mod that's worth significantly more than +2 against almost all monsters worth mentioning, and which stacks with Greater Magic Weapon, that's too good.

Actually, even at +3, it'd still probably be the go-to choice, once you could afford weapons that expensive. The +2 is worth +2, and each +1d6 is worth about +1 (compare to the energy enhancements or to Holy), making that about as good as +4. The only catch is that there are a few things it doesn't work on, but at high levels, that's what, the Tarrasque and single-classed fighters, barbarians, and rogues?

[Dusk Eclipse]

I think the main issue is the +2 enhancement bonus, 7 (average) damage isn't that much and frankly most enemies the weapon would work against are doing it rong if they are caught in melee combat.

I'd say +4 would be too much 16,000 GP for +9 damage is frankly absurd in my opinion.

[jedipotter]

Wow, are people that shallow that they don't let you talk about why you enforce that rule? (assuming that you are allowing at least the 50ft deep rule, and letting them conceal the opening through other means)

No? Unless your a kobold true believer/worshiper of Kurtulmak, then it is just a normal portable hole.



MiC isn't that bad though - most of the items are centered on giving players additional options. That's a good thing, players should always have interesting things to do mechanically. Just because they want the items doesn't make the book bad.

Well, I'm not a fan of ''options''. I've tried the house rule fix for the annoying items, but players often just forget them and that leads to arguments and problems. So banning the book is much better.

[Big Fau]

No? Unless your a kobold true believer/worshiper of Kurtulmak, then it is just a normal portable hole.


That's remarkably unfair. What's so bad about your players having a portable base?

Edit:


Well, I'm not a fan of ''options''. I've tried the house rule fix for the annoying items, but players often just forget them and that leads to arguments and problems. So banning the book is much better.

Oh, so you just don't want your players having nice things.

[jedipotter]

That's remarkably unfair. What's so bad about your players having a portable base?

So you think an item that is ten times better then a portable hole should be cheaper then a portable hole? How does that logic work? The +5 weapon should be worth 100 gold, but the +1 weapon is worth 1,000gp?





Oh, so you just don't want your players having nice things.

Just not annoying things. Too much in the MiC does not follow the rules or is just plain wacky.

[Big Fau]

So you think an item that is ten times better then a portable hole should be cheaper then a portable hole? How does that logic work? The +5 weapon should be worth 100 gold, but the +1 weapon is worth 1,000gp?


Just not annoying things. Too much in the MiC does not follow the rules or is just plain wacky.

The DMG's prices are horribly inflated. The Portable Hole should be around the same price as the Handy Haversack, but it isn't. Also the Pit is a Relic, an item type specifically stated to be more powerful than standard items. The Portable Hole should cost around 2K, but the developers apparently thought it was too good (same with the Bag of Holding).

They outright stated in the MIC that some items are just overpriced in the DMG (and there are still examples in the MIC itself). A +10 weapon shouldn't cost 200K as that's an obscene chunk of GP even for the 20th level WBL, which only hurts noncasters. A noncaster should be able to afford 2 or even 3 +10 or +8/+9 weapons by 20th level (one or two melee ones for the TWFing guys, and one ranged backup weapon or a similar layout). Trying to do that with the prices in the DMG is going to eat your WBL to the point that you can't afford the basics your class needs to allow you to contribute.

All your banning of the MIC did was punish the characters who relied on items to begin with. The Tier 1s and 2s don't really care too much about the MIC outside of the Belt of Battle and maybe one or two other items, it's the Tier 3s and lower that make the most use of it. Nerfing them because of items like the Enveloping Pit and Belt of Battle is unreasonable since you could just as easily not allow those specific items.

The item pricing "rules" in the DMG are little more than poorly-thought-out guidelines, and need a serious revision. The MIC is an improvement over those rules, even if it didn't fix everything that was wrong with them.

[Fax Celestis]

So you think an item that is ten times better then a portable hole should be cheaper then a portable hole?

Considering in order to get the full mileage out of the enveloping pit, you need to be a cleric of Kurrulmak with the ability to sacrifice (permanently) a sixth-level slot, or have 11 HD and spend one of your nine lifetime feats on True Believer, yes, it is worth the decreased cost per the rules outlined in the DMG.


Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use
Even more restrictive than requiring a skill, this limitation cuts the cost by 30%.

Not listed is "requires a feat or burnt spell slot to use", but we can assume that will cut the price probably another 20% considering the comparative 10% pricing of "requires a specific skill".

So we're already down to 25,000. It's not 3400, to be sure, but honestly how often have your players even bought one (or wanted to)?

[Kazyan]

To see jedipotter's point, think of all the usual items someone grabs when MiC is open, and then ask yoirself how many of the less-common ones are actually used. The MiC has a treasure trove of interesting stuff, but a lot of optimizers don't go digging, instead just picking the best stuff from hearsay.

Like, there's a neato Amulet of Wordtwisting for party faces, but it's not undercosted--merely appropriately so--so it never gets mentioned. I think this is Jedipotter's point. You want MiC? Here's a banlist. Go diving. Oh, nobody ever wants anything not on the banlist? Then let's not waste each other's time.

[Fax Celestis]

Like, there's a neato Amulet of Wordtwisting for party faces, but it's not undercosted--merely appropriately so--so it never gets mentioned. I think this is Jedipotter's point. You want MiC? Here's a banlist. Go diving. Oh, nobody ever wants anything not on the banlist? Then let's not waste each other's time.

Except that's not what he said.

[Agincourt]

To see jedipotter's point, think of all the usual items someone grabs when MiC is open, and then ask yoirself how many of the less-common ones are actually used. The MiC has a treasure trove of interesting stuff, but a lot of optimizers don't go digging, instead just picking the best stuff from hearsay.

Like, there's a neato Amulet of Wordtwisting for party faces, but it's not undercosted--merely appropriately so--so it never gets mentioned. I think this is Jedipotter's point. You want MiC? Here's a banlist. Go diving. Oh, nobody ever wants anything not on the banlist? Then let's not waste each other's time.

Without knowing what specifically would be on a banlist, it's hard to know for sure, but there are many options in the MIC I love. A DM would have to ban about half the book before I agreed we were wasting each other's time.