What would change if magic items dc's were affected by the players ability scores?

[VladtheLad]

So all items in 3.5 and pathfinder (with the exception of staffs ) have a standard dc. What would change if the dc's went sth like this:

Weapon and armor. 10+spell level+ the ability mod that adds to your attack modifier
Wondrous/Rings/Rods: 10+spell level+charisma mod.

With caster level equal to character level.

Would it unbalance the game?

[Biggus]

First thing that occurs to me is that it would make UMD incredibly powerful, so much so that it might need splitting into two skills or otherwise restricting.

[MisterKaws]

Would make UMD extra-dumb, increase the power of Artificers to scarily dumb levels, and make all casters spend absolutely every single cent of their WBL on daily-use wands and staves.

[VladtheLad]

Wait, I am not suggesting any changes to wands and staffs though.

Maybe the title mislead you? I kinda clear it up in my post.

[Bphill561]

This can already be partially done with the Enhance Item feat which changes the items DC to the creators ability score modifier. Or course the creator is not necessarily the user, but I doubt you will find these items for sale normally unless your party crafter makes them. And if your crafter does make them, most likely that will be the highest score anyway.

For caster level equal to character level, I think you might have to change prices. I guess that is already built into staffs, but some low level items could become disproportionate in power.

[Falontani]

Cl would probably not be a good idea, however dc's would be interesting. However I agree that it would make umd more powerful. I would suggest adding it as either a feat, a class feature for partial casters, or both.

[MisterKaws]

Wait, I am not suggesting any changes to wands and staffs though.

Maybe the title mislead you? I kinda clear it up in my post.

Oh didn't see the staff exception.

Even with that being the case, there's still the problem with all the other equipments, especially if you add Ancestral Relics and Legacy Weapons to the mix. Suddenly you might have someone that's terrifyingly close to a Muscle Wizard.

Which, depending on your game, may or may not be something you want to happen.

Actually now I want to play Muscle Wizard with an Ancestral Relic. Maybe Anointed Knight too while at it.

[Mato]

A: Definitely a clear power increase.

In the context of the OP's post, UMD does not become much more powerful than it already is and enhance item's potential is still higher. However, keying the save DCs of weapons and armor off of strength & dexterity is dangerous. In D&D the easiest ability score to increase is strength, two prime spells examples are bite of the werebear (+16) and giant size (+32) while a race/template example could be a wild proto-orc (+10 for +0la & 1/day rage for +14). It's terrifyingly easy to produce impossible to save against DCs and when you get into being able to spam them multiple times per turn it exacerbates the situation.

That is why sudden stunning, which uses charisma, is so deadly in the hands of a barbarian. The Save DC against being disarmed and losing a turn may only be 10~22 after other magical charisma-enhancing gear, but the barbarian delivers up to three to four of those in the same round with the goal of his opponent rolling low. Now imagine if the save DC was 30+.

[Psyren]

Would it unbalance the game?

There are already ways to do this in Pathfinder, e.g. Magician Bard (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/archetypes/paizo-bard-archetypes/magician/) or just plain crafting the item with a higher CL/DC. I'd say it's fine as long as there's a cost or tradeoff rather than simply removing the existing rule.

[Jack_Simth]

So all items in 3.5 and pathfinder (with the exception of staffs ) have a standard dc. What would change if the dc's went sth like this:

Weapon and armor. 10+spell level+ the ability mod that adds to your attack modifier
Wondrous/Rings/Rods: 10+spell level+charisma mod.

With caster level equal to character level.

Would it unbalance the game?
Lots of things would change. Take a Ring of Telekinesis. Goes from a niche utility item to a worthwhile save or lose against a lot of opponents, and a very nice primary attack with most of the rest.

In general, it would be a power boost. The nasty bit would come with weapons that have low dc save or lose riders. Those would be completely bonkers with this change.

[Psyren]

Yeah sorry, I was only thinking of spell trigger and spell completion items. If this is meant to apply to other things like wondrous items, rings and rods too (i.e. things that can be used without being a caster oneself), then yes, that's a huge change.

[VladtheLad]

A: Definitely a clear power increase.

In the context of the OP's post, UMD does not become much more powerful than it already is and enhance item's potential is still higher. However, keying the save DCs of weapons and armor off of strength & dexterity is dangerous. In D&D the easiest ability score to increase is strength, two prime spells examples are bite of the werebear (+16) and giant size (+32) while a race/template example could be a wild proto-orc (+10 for +0la & 1/day rage for +14). It's terrifyingly easy to produce impossible to save against DCs and when you get into being able to spam them multiple times per turn it exacerbates the situation.

That is why sudden stunning, which uses charisma, is so deadly in the hands of a barbarian. The Save DC against being disarmed and losing a turn may only be 10~22 after other magical charisma-enhancing gear, but the barbarian delivers up to three to four of those in the same round with the goal of his opponent rolling low. Now imagine if the save DC was 30+.

I actually don't mind it creating some weird situations outside of the core. I mean any such change will find some feat or spell it has a weird interaction with, so I don't very much for bite of the werebear/sudden stunning etc. However you are correct that it does break even within the Core, hust the Core Barbarian can get higher dc's than other melee classes and ofcourse it will be broken when combined with giant sized creatures.

Maybe base it off bab derived from class levels sth like bab+5-10 and maybe even say you can only make an opponent save once per round?

[VladtheLad]

Lots of things would change. Take a Ring of Telekinesis. Goes from a niche utility item to a worthwhile save or lose against a lot of opponents, and a very nice primary attack with most of the rest.

In general, it would be a power boost. The nasty bit would come with weapons that have low dc save or lose riders. Those would be completely bonkers with this change.

My intention is to make many low save dc items more keepable when found as random treasure and incentivise players to use other enhancements that the straight up bonuses, or at least keep items that already have them.

Would such weapons be bonkers? I mean even disruption from Core when used against undead would have around 24 dc? save at level 20, not sth undead at that level will auto loose against.

By the way thanks for all the responses, they are very helpful.

[Jack_Simth]

My intention is to make many low save dc items more keepable when found as random treasure and incentivise players to use other enhancements that the straight up bonuses, or at least keep items that already have them.

Would such weapons be bonkers? I mean even disruption from Core when used against undead would have around 24 dc? save at level 20, not sth undead at that level will auto loose against.

By the way thanks for all the responses, they are very helpful.
Consider Eyes of Charming: They're at-will, DC 16 in the base game (Charm Person, Heightened to 4th, with a +2 ability modifier). Put them on the party Sorcerer. They're still at-will, but it's nearly on par with the Sorcerer-8's Charm Monster.

Take the Crystal Ball with Telepathy. That 1/day Suggestion is now very, very meaningful. It's also MUCH better at getting past folks' defenses.

Take the Eyes of Petrification. Those 10 rounds of a gaze attack are now a high DC, wide area (range isn't listed....) save-or-lose.

Take the Harp of Charming. That's now the stuff of legends in the hand of a skilled Bard.

Basically, a bunch of the stuff nobody looks at twice because of the low DC's now save the casters a lot of spell slots, and often do more (Eyes of Petrification don't have a target count limit, for instance; at a level where a Sorcerer would just be starting to cast it, he can instead end encounters with a bunch of folks).

[Elysiume]

I have mixed thoughts on this. There are a ton of cool-looking magic items that have an interesting or unique ability that calls for a DC 11 will save on a 25,000gp item (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/e-g/eyes-of-doom/) (not that this is particularly cool or interesting buuuuut). By the point where it's not a huge portion of a character's WBL the save DC is an absolute joke. On the other hand, blanket rules like this can definitely result in some easier to abuse items.

[Florian]

It depends. There's a huge number of thematically cool items around that nobody uses because either the cost/benefit ratio is off, or the save DCs for the abilities that makes the item interesting is so low as to be a joke.

I mean, it´s cool to have stuff like Necklace of Fireballs or a Flame Blade that can also shoot fiery rays couple of times a day, but the scaling... Oh my!

Personally, I'm all in favor of making the DCs scale, but I think it will only work when removing non-specific items and avoid individual items.

[VladtheLad]

Consider Eyes of Charming: They're at-will, DC 16 in the base game (Charm Person, Heightened to 4th, with a +2 ability modifier). Put them on the party Sorcerer. They're still at-will, but it's nearly on par with the Sorcerer-8's Charm Monster.

Take the Crystal Ball with Telepathy. That 1/day Suggestion is now very, very meaningful. It's also MUCH better at getting past folks' defenses.

Take the Eyes of Petrification. Those 10 rounds of a gaze attack are now a high DC, wide area (range isn't listed....) save-or-lose.

Take the Harp of Charming. That's now the stuff of legends in the hand of a skilled Bard.

Basically, a bunch of the stuff nobody looks at twice because of the low DC's now save the casters a lot of spell slots, and often do more (Eyes of Petrification don't have a target count limit, for instance; at a level where a Sorcerer would just be starting to cast it, he can instead end encounters with a bunch of folks).



I have mixed thoughts on this. There are a ton of cool-looking magic items that have an interesting or unique ability that calls for a DC 11 will save on a 25,000gp item (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/e-g/eyes-of-doom/) (not that this is particularly cool or interesting buuuuut). By the point where it's not a huge portion of a character's WBL the save DC is an absolute joke. On the other hand, blanket rules like this can definitely result in some easier to abuse items.


It depends. There's a huge number of thematically cool items around that nobody uses because either the cost/benefit ratio is off, or the save DCs for the abilities that makes the item interesting is so low as to be a joke.

I mean, it´s cool to have stuff like Necklace of Fireballs or a Flame Blade that can also shoot fiery rays couple of times a day, but the scaling... Oh my!



Yeah basically that's my intent, to turn items that nobody uses into maybe's or at least to "not clearly worth it to immediatly sell back for another +1 bonus somewhere".
I think what I described might work but invariably it will conflict with certain items, so the DM might need to filter some out. Still I would propably still allow stuff like Eyes of Charming and Petrification.

It seems the charisma added to wondrous items and rings works better than the strength/dex added to weapons but maybe I will try out the bab+10 rule or better yet 10+spell level+1/2 of the users bab and see what happens.


Personally, I'm all in favor of making the DCs scale, but I think it will only work when removing non-specific items and avoid individual items.

What do you mean by "removing non-specific items and avoid individual items"?