One big Item or Lots of Little Items?

[Eddieddi]

So I've been playing D&D for a while now, and I've found that character creation has one really time-consuming part at higher levels, (Not including picking your spells!) Purchasing magical items. So I have a question for other players: Do you have a set list of items you work your way through? do you purchase 1 'expensive' item in a attempt to maximise your power? or do you buy lots of smaller items to prevent someone stealing your one 'super item' as it were? If either, what are your favorite items to get? (Lets say 10th level money here). And what are your starting money spending ratios, Armor to weapons to magical equipment to other.
Mostly curious how other players do this sort of thing.

[noob]

It is preferable to get only one item if you are going to be subject to disjunction and that you have a way to re-roll a single save and if you do not have such thing then spreading the equipment for minimal cost is a good idea.(basically optimize for getting the effects you want at the lowest cost unless you are facing disjunction and that you have a way to reroll a limited number of saves in which case put all the enchants on one item)

[DeTess]

I usually spend my gold on a variety of different items, as (especially for defense) this is more efficient gold-wise. For example, a ring of protection and amulet of natural armor +1 are 4000GP together, while a single amulet of natural armor +2 is 8000 GP. I also prefer to have some utility magic items lying around. Offensively, it's often better to have one big weapon than lots of smaller ones, but if you know that occasionally you'll need a particular property to defeat enemies, but you won't need it the rest of the time, it might be better to just have it on a separate weapon than try to add that bonus to your main beatstick as well.

[noob]

I usually spend my gold on a variety of different items, as (especially for defense) this is more efficient gold-wise. For example, a ring of protection and amulet of natural armor +1 are 4000GP together, while a single amulet of natural armor +2 is 8000 GP. I also prefer to have some utility magic items lying around. Offensively, it's often better to have one big weapon than lots of smaller ones, but if you know that occasionally you'll need a particular property to defeat enemies, but you won't need it the rest of the time, it might be better to just have it on a separate weapon than try to add that bonus to your main beatstick as well.

It is very close to the truth if you live in an universe without disjunction or if the effects you have to reroll saves have no limits in number of uses in one turn(for example pride domain is a reroll that happens for each natural 1 with no limits other than one reroll per save meaning that having multiple items does not makes them more vulnerable).(which is the case of the majority of the people)

[DeTess]

It is very close to the truth if you live in an universe without disjunction or if the effects you have to reroll saves have no limits in number of uses in one turn.(which is the case of the majority of the people)

True, I am ignoring Disjunction. However, I think this is a spell that's highly unlikely to come up in most cooperative campaigns that have magic items as a right, instead of a privilege. I doubt most DM's would use this spell in the normal course of events, as it's basically a big '**** you' to your players if you just casually throw it around, not to mention the fact that it could obliterate inter-party balance. In the situations where it does matter (such as when the loss of all magic items is an important plot-point), then the big magic items will likely bite the dust as well.

[zlefin]

I basically go through the standard boosters (stats, saves, ac, armor/weapon, basically anything that has a +X to it).
I spend around 1/3 on the weapon;
up to 1/3 on armor/shield, and the rest on other boosters.

I may skim through the magic item compendium tables for slots at an appropriate price range for miscellaneous items that happen to fit the build.
Then I buy consumables with what's left.

[ElevenSided Die]

I generally avoid playing in games that start at high level, specifically so I don't have to think about this question :)

But when I do, it seems to depend on the character. If I'm playing a fighter, barbarian, or other martial class character, I tend to get 'one big item': either a weapon or armor, depending on the character. If I'm playing a wizard, I'll get a lot of 'little things'; my wizards tend to be pack rats. And so on, and so forth, depending on what my character 'needs'.

[Psyren]

There's a standard list that the game's math expects every character to at least consider. These are called the Big Six:

- Ability Score Boosters (mental and physical)
- Cloak of Resistance
- Amulet of Natural Armor
- Ring of Protection
- Magic Weapon
- Magic Armor (+Shield)

For non-gish casters, the latter two are foregone in favor of a larger consumables budget (e.g. staves) as well as caster-specific items like rods and pearls. But the first four are near-mandatory for everyone, otherwise you'll likely be spending money on resurrections instead.

[ArendK]

There's a standard list that the game's math expects every character to at least consider. These are called the Big Six:

- Ability Score Boosters (mental and physical)
- Cloak of Resistance
- Amulet of Natural Armor
- Ring of Protection
- Magic Weapon
- Magic Armor (+Shield)

For non-gish casters, the latter two are foregone in favor of a larger consumables budget (e.g. staves) as well as caster-specific items like rods and pearls. But the first four are near-mandatory for everyone, otherwise you'll likely be spending money on resurrections instead.

Casters I might grab the AC boosters if I have excess money. I play defensively with spells anyways. But otherwise, I agree with your assessment.

[Hamste]

Whether I go one big item or not depends on how the DM rules adding effects after creation or not. If they don't allow it, I will almost certainly go one big item but don't sell things I can use. Makes it so I don't have to upgrade as often (where I lose half what I spent on it) and more likely to find an item I can use randomly. If they do, I'm more likely to keep many smaller items as I don't have go through the pain of reselling items I bought for gold instead just enchanting them.

[Kurald Galain]

In the hands of a clever and/or tactical player, lots of little items with activated powers are going to be much better than one item. I tend to spend about half my wealth on standard pluses (e.g. belt of str/dex, magic armor, cloak of resist, etc) and the other half on activated items.

Most of my fave items are in this guide (www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?423754-Myrrh-Frankincense-and-Steel-Kurald-Galain-s-Guide-to-the-Magus), and its item section also applies to most other classes that are either melee-based or an arcane caster.

[daryen]

These are called the Big Six:

- Ability Score Boosters (mental and physical)
- Cloak of Resistance
- Amulet of Natural Armor
- Ring of Protection
- Magic Weapon
- Magic Armor (+Shield)
Given the above, what pluses are expected at what level?

So, for martials, at what level is a +1 weapons required? A +2 weapon?

For any, what magic AC bonuses are required at what level? How about save bonuses?

And, for casters, what level are primary casting attributes expected to be at for which levels? Obviously, you need the minimum stat to at least case your current level of spells, and if you rely on save dependent spells, you will need to just max the start as hard as possible to get hard saves. But, outside those extremes, what should your primary stat be at for various levels? (And, actually, if you are heavily save dependent, what do you need then?)

So, while knowing the Big Six is a help, what coverage do you need for the various levels?

[Psyren]

Given the above, what pluses are expected at what level?

So, for martials, at what level is a +1 weapons required? A +2 weapon?

For any, what magic AC bonuses are required at what level? How about save bonuses?

And, for casters, what level are primary casting attributes expected to be at for which levels? Obviously, you need the minimum stat to at least case your current level of spells, and if you rely on save dependent spells, you will need to just max the start as hard as possible to get hard saves. But, outside those extremes, what should your primary stat be at for various levels? (And, actually, if you are heavily save dependent, what do you need then?)

So, while knowing the Big Six is a help, what coverage do you need for the various levels?

There's a mini-guide in my sig to help you answer that very question - WBL and Enhancement Bonuses Summary (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16416299&postcount=21).

[Kurald Galain]

Given the above, what pluses are expected at what level?

I use what I call the "barbarian benchmark". Take a barbarian with straightforward choices, i.e. maximum strength, the biggest sword he can find, and power attack. If your character can match that, he's doing fine. And yes, I'm well aware that characters, including barbarians, can be optimized well above this amount. The question was for a baseline, not a world record. A decent AC benchmark is 15+level, and a decent saving throw benchmark is 3 + 0.75*level. Finally, I try to have at least 8*level hit points on each character.

For instance at level 5, aim for
+10 to hit (e.g. 5 bab, 4 str, 2 rage, 1 magic, -2 power at)
23 damage on a full attack (e.g. 7 weapon, 9 str, 1 magic, 6 power at)
+7 to saving throws (e.g. 4/1/1 class, 2/0/2 rage, 2/2/1 ability scores, 2/2/2 cloak)
20 AC
40 hit points


Of course, that's going to vary by campaign. But numbers like these should give you no problem with level-appropriate encounters.

[zlefin]

I found a good benchmarker awhile ago.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CCxnAb8apicr3fOrSCEFNRwHlzRieMrXm6ld9-uLAFc/edit#gid=0

[Jack_Simth]

Single item vs. Multiple smaller items:

Well, which is "better" depends on how you weight a couple of different things:

1: Right now vs. Later
Player A has a +2 Ring of Protection (8k), a +2 Amulet of Natural Armor (8k), and +3 Bracers of Armor (9k); that's 25k to increase Player A's AC 7. Player B has a +5 Bracers of Armor, and has spent 25k to increase AC by +5. Player A is clearly in a better place. Until a +3 Ring of Protection and a +3 Amulet of Natural Armor show up in a treasure haul. Player A's AC goes up by 2 (to +9 over without items) with those two switch-outs. Player B's AC goes up by 6 (to 11, no switch outs needed). They may not know it, but player A was prioritizing "now" while player B was prioritizing "later", just due to random treasure hauls. If you don't expect the game to last overly long, A has it better. If you do, B has it better. There's a common and obvious exception to this, which lead us right into:

2: Crafting time
If you get a lot of down-time for crafting, then of course you can fairly cheaply customize all your gear. If all stuff is sold, and all money is spent on Crafting, then you can of course keep up the "right now" optimization of the above indefinitely (you wear the +3's, sell the +2's, and use the money to upgrade some aspect of the set - change that +3 Bracers for a +5, say, and you're tied with B, but can keep it up when you run across a +4 Ring of Protection). This is, however, highly campaign-dependent, and also requires that you have those build resources in your party. Know your campaign.

3: Nat-1's
Items are subject to destruction on natural 1's on saves (and many are very fragile). If you can reroll... why'd you get that one on your save? In the case of multiple smaller items, you lose less than you do with one big item. If your saves are good and you've got rerolls, you're probably fine. However, this isn't the only thing that can take gear offline:

4: Disjunction
In Pathfinder, this is temporary; in 3.5, it's not. Debilitating either way.
a: With a Reroll: Saves your bacon in the "one big item" camp. You're going to lose stuff in the "many small items" camp. One big is better.
b: Without a Reroll: With one big item, you're "all or nothing" and that's swingy-enough that you've got a good chance of being entirely out of the fight. With many small items, it's essentially a percentage off. Many small is usually better here.

... and so on. There's going to be more. Targetted dispels vs. items, for instance, are worse for the one-big-item guy.

[Rynjin]

S
3: Nat-1's
Items are subject to destruction on natural 1's on saves (and many are very fragile). If you can reroll... why'd you get that one on your save? In the case of multiple smaller items, you lose less than you do with one big item. If your saves are good and you've got rerolls, you're probably fine. However, this isn't the only thing that can take gear offline:

The chances of it actually happening are pretty slim though. You need to roll a 1 on your save vs a damaging AoE spell and then an item is randomly selected to take damage. If it doesn't come up headband or belt you're probably fine.

If you do end up hit by it, just cast Make Whole.

I'm unclear why people are acting as though "one big item" is viable in the first place. You're increasing the cost exorbitantly for the benefit of...not getting hit by a 9th level spell once in a blue moon?

[Psyren]

The chances of it actually happening are pretty slim though. You need to roll a 1 on your save vs a damaging AoE spell and then an item is randomly selected to take damage. If it doesn't come up headband or belt you're probably fine.

If you do end up hit by it, just cast Make Whole.

I'm unclear why people are acting as though "one big item" is viable in the first place. You're increasing the cost exorbitantly for the benefit of...not getting hit by a 9th level spell once in a blue moon?

Not to mention drastically increasing your chances of a Sunder or Steal ruining your day

[icefractal]

Fewer big items isn't going to help against Disjunction unless you have:
1) Literally one big item, rather than the more likely 2-3.
2) An unused reroll ability.

And the kind of GM who uses Disjunction much would probably use Sunder too, and that's a case where one big item hurts.

Also, if you have the ability to get custom items like "everything in one", why not go one step further and make them entirely sunder and Disjunction proof?
1) Make your items slotless and in the form of small pearls.
2) Have a Ring of Sustenance as one of those items.
3) Swallow all your items.

[unseenmage]

I normally buy/build Constructs so my items have their own action economy.

That said, many cheaper Constructs gets me through lower levels while at higher levels I always wind up regretting the horde of low CR minions that could otherwise have been regular combat/stat boosting items.

On the other hand, one big Construct that gets outclassed at higher levels is even worse. At least the swarm can roll for 20s.

[Fizban]

The chances of it actually happening are pretty slim though. You need to roll a 1 on your save vs a damaging AoE spell and then an item is randomly selected to take damage. If it doesn't come up headband or belt you're probably fine.
If you do end up hit by it, just cast Make Whole.

The spell does not restore the magical abilities of a broken magic item made whole
Make Whole won't save you (in 3.5 anyway), but knowing the order of operations makes the risk even less random:

Determine which four objects carried or worn by the creature are most likely to be affected and roll randomly among them.

In order of most likely to least likely to be affected.
1st Shield
2nd Armor
3rd Magic helmet, hat, or headband
4th Item in hand (including weapon, wand, or the like)
5th Magic cloak
6th Stowed or sheathed weapon
7th Magic bracers
8th Magic clothing
9th Magic jewelry (including rings)
10th Anything else
Knowing that only the top four are in danger, you can simply make sure your big ticket items are not shield, armor, headgear, held item, or cloak (in case you drop something). Note that shield, armor, held item, and stowed item don't say magic so they can just be mundane, and robes fill the armor slot so even without armor you might get those to take a hit.

Objects are indeed quite fragile, often with only 1-2 hp even for metals. That said they are objects for reduced cold, fire, and electricity damage on top of the save for being attended, and many are fluffed as being made of adamantine at no apparent cost. I'd say metal items aren't at serious at risk until 6th level spells are around, unless the DM is making very frequent use of sonic and acid attacks.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I like to take some small items and one big item.

I usually get:
- Necklace of Adaption
- X of Resistance (+5 if I have the gold)
- +1/2 magic weapon
- The belt that give +4/6 on all the abilities
- Anti-death attacks item

[Calthropstu]

Casters I might grab the AC boosters if I have excess money. I play defensively with spells anyways. But otherwise, I agree with your assessment.

I have a pfs sorcerer whos ac is 8 at 12th level. People look at me wierd when I say this.
Then they wonder why I take no damage in combats. Good ol summon monster.

[Rynjin]

Make Whole won't save you (in 3.5 anyway), but knowing the order of operations makes the risk even less random:

It will in Pathfinder though.


Make whole can fix destroyed magic items (at 0 hit points or less), and restores the magic properties of the item if your caster level is at least twice that of the item. Items with charges (such as wands) and single-use items (such as potions and scrolls) cannot be repaired in this way. When make whole is used on a construct creature, the spell bypasses any immunity to magic as if the spell did not allow spell resistance.

The main issue are certain items with weirdly high caster level requirements (magic weapons being the biggest offender), but a lot have surprisingly low ones (even a +6 Headband only requires CL 8; You only really get in trouble when you have the Mental Superiority variant that needs CL 16 to make and 32 to fix).


Knowing that only the top four are in danger, you can simply make sure your big ticket items are not shield, armor, headgear, held item, or cloak (in case you drop something). Note that shield, armor, held item, and stowed item don't say magic so they can just be mundane, and robes fill the armor slot so even without armor you might get those to take a hit.

Objects are indeed quite fragile, often with only 1-2 hp even for metals. That said they are objects for reduced cold, fire, and electricity damage on top of the save for being attended, and many are fluffed as being made of adamantine at no apparent cost. I'd say metal items aren't at serious at risk until 6th level spells are around, unless the DM is making very frequent use of sonic and acid attacks.

They're less fragile than you might think. Even a non-magical dagger (the most fragile of the above items) can take 22 Cold/Fire/Electricity damage before breaking (2 HP, 10 Hardness, and half damage) and 24 to destroy. A mere +1 dagger jumps up to being able to take 36 before breaking and 48 before being destroyed (12 HP, Hardness 12, half damage).

You pretty much WANT this to happen to your weapon or shield, they're probably fine.

Adamantine then likewise is not "fluff" (unlike 5e), and everyone who doesn't need mithral on their armor should make both it and their weapons adamantine most of the time. A +1 Adamantine dagger (12 HP, 22 hardness, half damage) can eat a solid 42 damage spell without taking ANY damage, and requires a 68 damage one to destroy (which is a tall order for a single spell, most of the time your dagger will end up being unscathed as adamantine, and it has less than half the HP of even a longsword, which is half a greatsword which is waaaaay less than any suit of armor, a chain shirt having 20 unmodified).


I have a pfs sorcerer whos ac is 8 at 12th level. People look at me wierd when I say this.
Then they wonder why I take no damage in combats. Good ol summon monster.

This is great for PFS, but wouldn't fly in a normal game. The only reason you aren't getting attacked by monsters (particular archers or casters) who are tired of being pounded by summons is PFS GMs aren't allowed to deviate from the monster tactics stated in the scenario. Unless the tactics are open ended or specify they attack the back line or casters, the GM is stuck playing them as braindead softball enemies that use Vital Strike on the front line PCs instead of full attacking for 3x the damage and ****.

[Calthropstu]

This is great for PFS, but wouldn't fly in a normal game. The only reason you aren't getting attacked by monsters (particular archers or casters) who are tired of being pounded by summons is PFS GMs aren't allowed to deviate from the monster tactics stated in the scenario. Unless the tactics are open ended or specify they attack the back line or casters, the GM is stuck playing them as braindead softball enemies that use Vital Strike on the front line PCs instead of full attacking for 3x the damage and ****.

I had gms try to kill him. Several times enemies took attacks of opportunity trying to kill him because they hated the summon spam. I had one gm throw the final boss of one of the specials, a mythic nalfeshnee, at him.
0 damage. I use a combination of fly, dimension door and invisibility to avoid melee combat with protection from arrows to avoid archer damage. It works well.

[Rynjin]

...None of those things protect you from the Mythic Nalfeshnee. Was he letting you use Dimension Door as an Immediate or something?

The Nalfeshnee can also fly, but more importantly has an AoE Daze and at-will Feeblemind and Greater Dispel. It has True Seeing, so Invisibility is null, as are a lot of the other classic caster defenses like Blur/Displacement and Mirror Image.

So unless you were wasting your turn on a Readied action to Dimension Door if hit, and the GM was softballing the Nalfeshnee by having it attempt to melee you for whatever reason, I'm not sure what was up there.

Unless you're also Mythic? That changes the game; Mythic PCs are very easy to break.

[Calthropstu]

I kept dimension dooring when he tried to melee me, and kept saving against his abilities. My movement speed is also base 60, 90 with haste up, thanks to robes of arcane heritage.

[Rynjin]

I'm just baffled as to why he attempted to melee you at all, ever.

[Coretron03]

I had gms try to kill him. Several times enemies took attacks of opportunity trying to kill him because they hated the summon spam. I had one gm throw the final boss of one of the specials, a mythic nalfeshnee, at him.
0 damage. I use a combination of fly, dimension door and invisibility to avoid melee combat with protection from arrows to avoid archer damage. It works well.

Any archer at all using a non-magical at a level where you fight CR 14 creatures (+whatever mythic added on) shouldn't really be a threat. Invisbility is pointless as the Nalfeshnee has constant true seeing. And Diemension Door when the demon has greater teleport at-will? Doesn't seem like the soundest strategy. Depends on your exact level though to dertermine you saves and such and how Mythic the Nalfeshnee is to be exact though.

[Psyren]

I had gms try to kill him. Several times enemies took attacks of opportunity trying to kill him because they hated the summon spam. I had one gm throw the final boss of one of the specials, a mythic nalfeshnee, at him.
0 damage. I use a combination of fly, dimension door and invisibility to avoid melee combat with protection from arrows to avoid archer damage. It works well.

That's easy to challenge, your GMs need to git gud :smalltongue:

[Calthropstu]

Any archer at all using a non-magical at a level where you fight CR 14 creatures (+whatever mythic added on) shouldn't really be a threat. Invisbility is pointless as the Nalfeshnee has constant true seeing. And Diemension Door when the demon has greater teleport at-will? Doesn't seem like the soundest strategy. Depends on your exact level though to dertermine you saves and such and how Mythic the Nalfeshnee is to be exact though.
You're forgetting a key component of my strategy: teammates. I dimension door to a spot that if the nalfeshnee goes after me, my teammates can attack it. If he leaves me alone, I summon. I had something like 20 celestials on the board trying to attack him. I couldn't be ignored, I couldn't be attacked... my gm was quite frustrated. And with a pounce barbarian with flight on my side, and a bard beefing all my summons, it was seriously a mess.
Even so, it was a nasty fight that we nearly lost.

Also, true sight only goes out to 120 feet. Dimension door can go 400 feet +40 feet per lvl. Invisibility + ddoor = escape from almost anything.

[Rynjin]

You're forgetting a key component of my strategy: teammates. I dimension door to a spot that if the nalfeshnee goes after me, my teammates can attack it. If he leaves me alone, I summon. I had something like 20 celestials on the board trying to attack him. I couldn't be ignored, I couldn't be attacked... my gm was quite frustrated. And with a pounce barbarian with flight on my side, and a bard beefing all my summons, it was seriously a mess.
Even so, it was a nasty fight that we nearly lost.

Also, true sight only goes out to 120 feet. Dimension door can go 400 feet +40 feet per lvl. Invisibility + ddoor = escape from almost anything.

Here's the thing I mean...in games that aren't PFS, the monsters can strategize too.

The Nalfeshnee could, as an example, simply Greater Teleport away and come back in 2 minutes when all your summons and round/level buffs are gone.

I had a dragon steal my Barbarian's weapon, fly off, and come back to fight us when our buffs had run out once. It was pretty brutal.

[Calthropstu]

Here's the thing I mean...in games that aren't PFS, the monsters can strategize too.

The Nalfeshnee could, as an example, simply Greater Teleport away and come back in 2 minutes when all your summons and round/level buffs are gone.

I had a dragon steal my Barbarian's weapon, fly off, and come back to fight us when our buffs had run out once. It was pretty brutal.

Oh sure he could have.
And all my summons would have promptly been unleashed on the rest of his demonic army and we would have crippled his attack. This was not a fight he could afford to lose, nor was it a fight we could afford to lose. It was the high commander of an army of demons. And when the high commander of a demon army runs away, the army itself folds.
We had already eliminated most of his lieutenants on the field while other parties took down other key points. It was all or nothing for him.

[Rynjin]

Oh sure he could have.
And all my summons would have promptly been unleashed on the rest of his demonic army and we would have crippled his attack. This was not a fight he could afford to lose, nor was it a fight we could afford to lose. It was the high commander of an army of demons. And when the high commander of a demon army runs away, the army itself folds.
We had already eliminated most of his lieutenants on the field while other parties took down other key points. It was all or nothing for him.

Now I'm even more confused. What exactly is the scenario here? He has a demon army but is trying to 1v25 fight the party?

[Calthropstu]

Now I'm even more confused. What exactly is the scenario here? He has a demon army but is trying to 1v25 fight the party?

Middle of a major battle, army v army. Our group, the high level party, was charged with taking down enemy leaders while the lower level parties took down key emplacements or defended key emplacements for our army. We took down an abyssal dragon, a couple groups of high level demons and a major assault force. The rest of the groups did remarkably well, keeping our siege weapons firing as well as disabling their major siege weaponry. With our party on the field, it was clear that the demonic army could not bring its greatest weapons to bear without us destroying it, and the only thing that seemed capable of taking us out was the commander itself.
So, to rally his demonic troops he had to take us down. He may have had a run away condition once he lost so many hp, but our pounce barbarian triple critted him doing about 100 damage in a single go dropping him after one of his teleports to me. The bard. He should have gone at the bard really... he was the reason anything could hit him at all. Most of my summons needed nat 20s anyways. My plan was to put so much stuff on the field, nat 20s were inevitable.