PDA

View Full Version : Semi-Cursed Items



Tor the Fallen
2007-11-02, 03:22 PM
How fair/game breaking would it be, as a DM, to hand out powerful magic items that have serious drawbacks? That way, I could hand out magic items that make a character more powerful at one thing, but less good at another. Like a headband of intellect +4, a 16,000 gp item, out of reach for anyone below a certain wealth level, but it also incurs a -5 penalty to any wisdom based rolls. The players would be under no obligation to use it; they could even sell it (for a quarter the price of +4 headband). But if the party wizard wanted to buff his spells up a little more, he could hold onto it.

Basically, the curse effects would be like negative enchantments. A -1 Flaming Sword, for instance, would add +1d6 fire damage to attacks with the sword, but incur a -1 penalty on attack and damage rolls. I would value it (write it down in my big DM book of what the player's total wealth is) as a +1 weapon, rather than a +2.

This way, I could hand out items with cool, high level powers, but not worry (totally) about the party trashing every monster, or stumbling around like WoW characters.

Lochar
2007-11-02, 03:24 PM
How fair/game breaking would it be, as a DM, to hand out powerful magic items that have serious drawbacks? That way, I could hand out magic items that make a character more powerful at one thing, but less good at another. Like a headband of intellect +4, a 16,000 gp item, out of reach for anyone below a certain wealth level, but it also incurs a -5 penalty to any wisdom based rolls. The players would be under no obligation to use it; they could even sell it (for a quarter the price of +4 headband). But if the party wizard wanted to buff his spells up a little more, he could hold onto it.

Basically, the curse effects would be like negative enchantments. A -1 Flaming Sword, for instance, would add +1d6 fire damage to attacks with the sword, but incur a -1 penalty on attack and damage rolls. I would value it (write it down in my big DM book of what the player's total wealth is) as a +1 weapon, rather than a +2.

This way, I could hand out items with cool, high level powers, but not worry (totally) about the party trashing every monster, or stumbling around like WoW characters.

In theory I don't see a problem with it, except that fluff it's kinda hard when you identify something. "Gives +4 int bonus, -5 Wis rolls unless you're moderately wealthy." How would an item know that?

Altair_the_Vexed
2007-11-02, 03:28 PM
This makes some sense. Careful how you cost the items, though.

One of my ideas along these lines was to have cursed items actually be useful for certain character classes / races / alignments / cultures... that sort of thing. For example, that +1 Farshot Flaming Longbow only functions properly if blessed once per day by a cleric of the right deity, and inflicts fire damage on anyone of the wrong alignment who tries to shoot with it. If the PCs get the curses lifted (at some cost - calculated to be at least half the normal cost of the item), they have a pretty good bow.

That deals with the wealth limits issue, by putting an "activation" cost on the item. However, in my game, I never gave out items that were half-way useful, like the OP suggested in his example.

Belkarseviltwin
2007-11-02, 03:31 PM
In theory I don't see a problem with it, except that fluff it's kinda hard when you identify something. "Gives +4 int bonus, -5 Wis rolls unless you're moderately wealthy." How would an item know that?

I think what the OP meant is that there are two kinds of headband, the normal one (as in the DMG) and the cheap one which gives you the Wis penalty. The idea of a headband of intellect that has a Wis penalty is interesting fluffwise as well- an item that turns the wearer into an absent-minded genius!

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-02, 04:07 PM
In theory I don't see a problem with it, except that fluff it's kinda hard when you identify something. "Gives +4 int bonus, -5 Wis rolls unless you're moderately wealthy." How would an item know that?

No, I mean, the item was fashioned in such a way as to make you smarter at cost to your ability to be aware of your surroundings. Rather than actually MAKING you smarter, it just borrows from another part of your head. That made the price of crafting cheaper, since it doesn't have to use so much magic.

The demand for such items would also be depressed, as it essentially negates any caster's good save (and Feeblemind would be absolutely devestating).

Of course, the PCs won't be allowed to craft this stuff, since it'd be easily breakable. It's magic from another era....

Or, they could be allowed to make it, but I'd have to come here every single time they wanted to make something. Or, I could flat out tell them that the magic they're wishing to use a) needs an additional feat and/or b) the magic that is harnessed has a tendency to do unpredictable things (read: if it's broke, you're going to lose it).


I think what the OP meant is that there are two kinds of headband, the normal one (as in the DMG) and the cheap one which gives you the Wis penalty. The idea of a headband of intellect that has a Wis penalty is interesting fluffwise as well- an item that turns the wearer into an absent-minded genius!

Precisely!

Jasdoif
2007-11-02, 04:11 PM
Of course, the PCs won't be allowed to craft this stuff, since it'd be easily breakable. It's magic from another era....

Or, they could be allowed to make it, but I'd have to come here every single time they wanted to make something. Or, I could flat out tell them that the magic they're wishing to use a) needs an additional feat and/or b) the magic that is harnessed has a tendency to do unpredictable things (read: if it's broke, you're going to lose it).Alternatively, they can choose to craft items of this sort for a reduced price...however, they have no control over what the drawback will be. They can find out firsthand when the thing is done.

I figure it'd be more expensive to embed precise drawbacks, even though they will naturally reduce the final market value. If they want to take a gamble to save some cash, hey...make it a gamble!

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-02, 04:16 PM
Alternatively, they can choose to craft items of this sort for a reduced price...however, they have no control over what the drawback will be. They can find out firsthand when the thing is done.

I figure it'd be more expensive to embed precise drawbacks, even though they will naturally reduce the final market value. If they want to take a gamble to save some cash, hey...make it a gamble!

Oh, that's great! Awesome! Yes! Thank you!
Buahahahaha!

Kaelik
2007-11-02, 04:18 PM
A -1 Flaming Sword, for instance, would add +1d6 fire damage to attacks with the sword, but incur a -1 penalty on attack and damage rolls. I would value it (write it down in my big DM book of what the player's total wealth is) as a +1 weapon, rather than a +2.

Well since Flaming is only a +1 anyway treating that as a +1 weapon is gimping the characters. The suggested weapon should have value equaling a non-magic weapon.

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-02, 04:44 PM
Well since Flaming is only a +1 anyway treating that as a +1 weapon is gimping the characters. The suggested weapon should have value equaling a non-magic weapon.

Which is overpowered.

Jasdoif
2007-11-02, 05:08 PM
Which is overpowered.I can see the marketing campaign, though.


GET UP TO 800%* EXTRA FIRE DAMAGE ON YOUR WEAPONS, ALL FOR THE LOW LOW PRICE OF 5% LESS ACCURACY!

*800% extra damage assumes average strength, minimal wound size and optimal fire damage against a creature vulnerable to fire. See wizard for details.

MCerberus
2007-11-02, 05:19 PM
There's also a good list of "drawbacks" in the DMG. I also like the crazy one I came up with that gender reverses you when you wield it but you turn back when you put it away.

I call it the "No Sword Sword"

Starbuck_II
2007-11-02, 06:46 PM
There's also a good list of "drawbacks" in the DMG. I also like the crazy one I came up with that gender reverses you when you wield it but you turn back when you put it away.

I call it the "No Sword Sword"

"Yes Sword Sword" if female I take? :smallbiggrin:

Shisumo
2007-11-02, 07:02 PM
I'm so making a Maul of the Trouser Titans now.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-02, 07:17 PM
GET UP TO 800%* EXTRA FIRE DAMAGE ON YOUR WEAPONS, ALL FOR THE LOW LOW PRICE OF 5% LESS ACCURACY!

:thog: little man talk funny. thog rage! take pretty sword from dead body!

MCerberus
2007-11-02, 07:53 PM
And there's also the Assassin's Blade that glows bright pink and giggles when you unsheathe it.

Kaelik
2007-11-02, 08:01 PM
I can see the marketing campaign, though.


GET UP TO 800%* EXTRA FIRE DAMAGE ON YOUR WEAPONS, ALL FOR THE LOW LOW PRICE OF 5% LESS ACCURACY!

*800% extra damage assumes average strength, minimal wound size and optimal fire damage against a creature vulnerable to fire. See wizard for details.

Well I'm not saying that it isn't better then a non-magic weapon, especially if you end up facing something with DR. I'm just pointing out that if he's going to do away with the "must have a +1 before other enchants" he might as well just make it a Flaming sword at +1 instead of giving a weird penalty.

Course if it's a THF you are looking at -3 damage +1d6 fire, which isn't really any more powerful.

Jasdoif
2007-11-02, 08:40 PM
:thog: little man talk funny. thog rage! take pretty sword from dead body!"Caveat Emptor" in its purest form, right there.

Dervag
2007-11-02, 11:10 PM
Thog isn't emptoring. Thog is barbarianing.

Jasdoif
2007-11-02, 11:15 PM
Thog isn't emptoring. Thog is barbarianing.I don't think Thog is bewareing, either.

Although, Thog might be a good solution to over-the-top advertisements in general.

MCerberus
2007-11-02, 11:26 PM
:thog: When Thog see big shiny ice lizard won't smash good, Thog get talky man's burn sword. Burn sword smash lizard good. Thog buy puppies with lizard money.

F.L.
2007-11-03, 03:39 PM
Puppies for the cleave infinite attacks combo?