[4e] Artifacts

[Hal]

I just realized that I know nothing about artifacts in 4e. Since I don't own any of the DM books (DMG, Open Grave, Draconomicon, etc.), this makes some sense.

Are there any artifacts in the DM books, and are any of them interesting in any way? If not, has anyone introduced any into the system yet?

I've actually come up with one that I'd like to try someday (not DMing at the moment). I'd put it in a spoiler box if I could, but I don't really know how to do that. I won't bore you with a DM's description of the item, just the mechanical parts. Tell me what you'd change about this:

(Insert cool artifact name here)
Neck slot

When this item is worn, it grants the following powers:

At-Will
Free Action
The player may use an Encounter or Daily ability that has already been spent. When the player does so, they immediately take Xd6 damage, where X is the level of the ability they are using. This damage may not be resisted in any way.

At-Will
Free Action
The player may take another Action Point. If the player does so, they immediately take damage equal to their Healing Surge value. This damage may not be resisted in any way.

At-Will
Free Action
This power allows the use of an additional Action Point per encounter. When this power is used, the player immediately takes damage equal to their bloodied value. This damage may not be resisted in any way.

Death
If the player should drop to 0 or fewer hit points by the damage inflicted by the use of this item, several things happen. The power used to generate the damage still goes through. The player is immediately considered dead; they cannot make any saving throws to prevent death. In addition, the player cannot be resurrected by the Raise Dead ritual; their soul is now trapped in the item.

So, would you use that in a game? You'd have to add in a bunch of non-combat effects to really make it an effective artifact (NPC reactions to it, quests associated with it, etc.). Of course, if you don't like using big MacGuffins in your games, you could just make it a high level magic item that has serious drawbacks. I can't decide if the ability damage should be d4 or d6. Also, I realize that a leader colluding with whoever wears this would really make life difficult for the DM, but 1) that strategy will seriously tax the normal healing a party needs during combat, and 2) as a DM, I would definitely make the regular use of this thing have consequences beyond HP damage.

Thoughts?

[Kurald Galain]

"The player may use an Encounter or Daily ability that has already been spent" suffers from the same mistake that WOTC is apt to make, to wit, that certain low-level dailies are much more powerful than higher level dailies, and the punishment for reusing them is trivial.

Take 1d6 damage to cast SLEEP at will? Yes please!

In general, dailies (and to a lesser extent encounter powers) are balanced by the fact that you can use them once per day, not by their level.

Will you tell the players in advance how much damage they're going to take, and what the consequences are? I would not use "bloodied value" and "surge value" here, because they're static - the player knows they're perfectly safe as long as they have at least X hit points. That's no fun; I'd make them random values instead, and roll them secretly, and perhaps increase them if overused.

[tcrudisi]

I just realized that I know nothing about artifacts in 4e. Since I don't own any of the DM books (DMG, Open Grave, Draconomicon, etc.), this makes some sense.

Yep. I'd strongly advise picking up a copy of the DMG. There are several artifacts statted in it.

So, would you use that in a game? You'd have to add in a bunch of non-combat effects to really make it an effective artifact (NPC reactions to it, quests associated with it, etc.). Of course, if you don't like using big MacGuffins in your games, you could just make it a high level magic item that has serious drawbacks. I can't decide if the ability damage should be d4 or d6. Also, I realize that a leader colluding with whoever wears this would really make life difficult for the DM, but 1) that strategy will seriously tax the normal healing a party needs during combat, and 2) as a DM, I would definitely make the regular use of this thing have consequences beyond HP damage.

Thoughts?

I would not use it for fear of it breaking the game. Without giving an actual example, artifacts in 4e have a "happiness" rating (it is actually called concordance). It ranks from less than 0 to 20 how happy it is to be with you based on a number of factors. The higher your score, the better it functions for you. If it is unhappy or angry, it actually refuses to work well for you.

However, artifacts really aren't that broken. For instance, I am looking at one right now that functions as +2 chainmail and can just do a few minor abilities. Yeah, it's definitely more powerful than your standard +2 chainmail, but not so much that I would be scared to hand one out. Plus, I really like the new rules that an artifact will only stick around for a few levels and no more.

I realize I'm not helping much when I say this, but: "Go buy a copy of the DMG." Especially since you are considering running a game. Besides artifacts, you'll be missing out in the coolest rules in the game: the ability to use Athletics and Acrobatics to do damage. Come on, who hasn't wanted to swing from a chandelier and drop-kick a bad guy into a fireplace? Also, if you are going to run a game, the DMG is truly invaluable.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Invaluable? It's essential if you want to play the game!

I've noticed something however. Artifact weapons are almost always weapons that the average player will not use. Who'd be interested in the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, a greataxe weapon? The executioner's axe weapon, introduced in Adventurer's Vault, is simply better. Who needs cool powers when you do more raw damage with every swing? Why would someone want to use the Soul Sword, a greatsword artifact, when they can use a more powerful non-artifact fullblade instead? Why use a longsword weapon if you can use a bastard sword instead?

Every artifact weapon out there is simply inferior to the better base weapons that 4e has introduced. No one uses greatswords or greataxes or longswords. They use fullblades, executioner's axes and bastard swords.

[tcrudisi]

Invaluable? It's essential if you want to play the game!

I couldn't agree more. I tried twice to edit the word "invaluable" out to replace it with something more appropriate ... so imagine my surprise when I come back and see that it was not changed.

I've noticed something however. Artifact weapons are almost always weapons that the average player will not use. ... Every artifact weapon out there is simply inferior to the better base weapons that 4e has introduced. No one uses greatswords or greataxes or longswords. They use fullblades, executioner's axes and bastard swords.

I also agree with this statement, but it's an incredibly easy fix. Just change the weapon type to that of whatever the players would use. Heck, it is an artifact. Who's to say that the "Axe of the Dwarvish Lords" can't become an Executioner's Axe? I know, it's not RAW. But it is the DM's job to step up to the plate when handing out magic items and make them useful to the players. The same thing holds with artifacts.

[Burley]

I wouldn't say that it really is "essential," Zousha. You can play a decent game with the PHB and MM, exclusively. It's got all the rules that you need. The DMG is a lot of suggestions and play style tips.

[tcrudisi]

I would consider the DMG essential: diseases, poisons, skill challenges, puzzles, traps, treasure parcels, artifacts, ability to increase/decrease monster levels, monster templates, creating monsters, and the ability to use Acrobatics and Athletics to make attacks, among other things.

I can't imagine a D&D game without those things.

[FoE]

1) Artifacts aren't meant to be introduced lightly. You don't search some random goblin's body and take the Eye of Vecna out of his knapsack. Usually they're tied in to some great purpose, ie. the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords may not be as damaging as an executioner's axe, but how else are you going to unite the dwarfs against the invading demon army?

2) Most artifacts ain't weapons.

[Reverent-One]

I've noticed something however. Artifact weapons are almost always weapons that the average player will not use. Who'd be interested in the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, a greataxe weapon? The executioner's axe weapon, introduced in Adventurer's Vault, is simply better. Who needs cool powers when you do more raw damage with every swing? Why would someone want to use the Soul Sword, a greatsword artifact, when they can use a more powerful non-artifact fullblade instead? Why use a longsword weapon if you can use a bastard sword instead?

Because to use the executioner's axe, or the fullblade, or the bastard sword, you have to take a feat, and some people may not have the room to take a feat that only gives a couple of extra points of damage per weapon dice with the restriction of having to use a very specific weapon.

So yes, some players do use the greatsword, greataxe, or longsword instead of the "superior" weapons.

[Hal]

Okay, so I get the impetus to pick up DMG etc. It's not that I don't want to; it's just that my weekly game is pretty well set on DMs for the next few months. I figure I'll save money on books in the meantime.

In any case, I never considered the effect that controllers would have on this. I guess I'd ask people how they would deal with this? I like the idea of an item that allows the player to sacrifice his health to do more in combat, but clearly the scheme I had set up before doesn't work well. Since such a thing can potentially be game breaking, it does need to be an artifact, but I don't want it to have drawbacks so trivial that the player doesn't even think twice before using it.

I like the "concordance" factor. I'd actually considered something like that for this thing; the more you use it, the more it starts activating on its own. Player tries to use one power and it uses a different one, or it just starts generating action points without warning.

So, is there a way to keep the "use spent powers" idea without breaking the game? This item still works if it is kept to generating action points (or the use thereof). Or is that also too powerful? If so, how would you change it?

[FoE]

The concordance thing is more like "if the artifact is pleased with you, it grants you additional bonuses and access to other powers" and "if the artifact is displeased with you, it actively tries to screw you over".

The permanent death rule is a bit much; even the Eye and Hand of Vecna don't kill you permanently when they ditch you. (They do, however, disintegrate you and make it impossible to be reintegrated without a missing eye/hand.)

[Hal]

The permanent death rule is a bit much; even the Eye and Hand of Vecna don't kill you permanently when they ditch you. (They do, however, disintegrate you and make it impossible to be reintegrated without a missing eye/hand.)

The death effect isn't so much to make death permanent, but to give the DM an excuse to send the players on a side-quest for the other player's soul.

[Kurald Galain]

Invaluable? It's essential if you want to play the game!

Only if you're a beginning DM.

If you've got some experience running any other kind of system (including 3.5) then there should be nothing in the 4E DMG that you don't know already.

[Mystic Muse]

The death effect isn't so much to make death permanent, but to give the DM an excuse to send the players on a side-quest for the other player's soul.

might be a bad idea. seems like there are also too many drawbacks on the item to make much use of it but I'm not the best DM. also certain actions ingame give you extra or less points with the item

whenever you gain a level up you get a +1d10 to the items concordance.(this is on all artifacts that I've seen)
this is a damaging clearly cursed thing so associate it with and evil god and make the concordance go down when facing denizens of this god. like -2 every time you fight with a drider (lolth) or goblins, hobgoblins and gnolls. (gruumsh) (only once per encouter though otherwise it'll happen way tooo quick) the bonus giving things and detrimental things are for you to decide though. I just suggest not making either of the things go over two unless you know it won't happen very often.

also make it so that if the concordance goes down to zeroit INSTANTLY kills the person. makes them want to avoid breaking the rules of the collar that much more. also it gives it a higher chance depending on what you choose of the player dying than in battle depending on the party.

however I would not use this in a campaign. I just don't see it going well

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Because to use the executioner's axe, or the fullblade, or the bastard sword, you have to take a feat, and some people may not have the room to take a feat that only gives a couple of extra points of damage per weapon dice with the restriction of having to use a very specific weapon.

So yes, some players do use the greatsword, greataxe, or longsword instead of the "superior" weapons.

Some players? Virtually EVERY build in the optimization forums over at the WOTC boards has a proficiency feat as the first feat in the build. And the optimization boards are the very first place I visit every time I want to make a new character. I mean, how else do you avoid building a character that sucks?

[Reverent-One]

Some players? Virtually EVERY build in the optimization forums over at the WOTC boards has a proficiency feat as the first feat in the build. And the optimization boards are the very first place I visit every time I want to make a new character. I mean, how else do you avoid building a character that sucks?

And there's your problem, your assuming the character optimization boards represent the majority of all D&D players. How do you avoid building a character that sucks? By having at least a 16 in the primary attribute and at least a 14 or so in the secondary attribute for the class, that pretty much covers it for 4e. Now, following the charOp boards will result in a character that is even better, statistically, but you won't be gimped if you don't follow every piece of advice they have. Should someone want to make build decisions based on the character concept or roleplaying idea they have though, the charOp boards are probably not the place they're going to get most of their ideas.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

1) Artifacts aren't meant to be introduced lightly. You don't search some random goblin's body and take the Eye of Vecna out of his knapsack. Usually they're tied in to some great purpose, ie. the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords may not be as damaging as an executioner's axe, but how else are you going to unite the dwarfs against the invading demon army?

2) Most artifacts ain't weapons.

1) I know that, but it seems like unless the character is built to wield the kind of weapon the artifact is, it's just inefficient. Take my paladin for example. I'm striving to get the Soul Sword, which is a greatsword, and my paladin uses a bastard sword and a shield. The flavor is perfect for him, but he'd screw himself over in combat if he tried to use it to fight with.

2) I know that too, but those artifacts do not need to have the entire build focused around them, like a weapon does. Plus, the only Armor artifact I'm aware of, the Invulnerable Coat of Arnd, has a power that allows you to change it between its original chainmail form to scale armor or plate armor. No other artifact has an option like this, and when I proposed to my DM that while my character prepared to take the Soul Sword, that the Soul Sword could have a similar property. My DM replied that I would need to change my build instead, and has refused to budge on the issue. So now I've changed my build, which doesn't really work well anymore since it was made before the awesomeness that is the PHB 2 came out, and I can't improve the build anymore without altering my base stats, which my DM will not let me change anyway. So I'm stuck with a paladin that sucks, striving for a weapon that he won't be able to use effectively, and he's only level 2!

[Nightson]

1) I know that, but it seems like unless the character is built to wield the kind of weapon the artifact is, it's just inefficient. Take my paladin for example. I'm striving to get the Soul Sword, which is a greatsword, and my paladin uses a bastard sword and a shield. The flavor is perfect for him, but he'd screw himself over in combat if he tried to use it to fight with.

2) I know that too, but those artifacts do not need to have the entire build focused around them, like a weapon does. Plus, the only Armor artifact I'm aware of, the Invulnerable Coat of Arnd, has a power that allows you to change it between its original chainmail form to scale armor or plate armor. No other artifact has an option like this, and when I proposed to my DM that while my character prepared to take the Soul Sword, that the Soul Sword could have a similar property. My DM replied that I would need to change my build instead, and has refused to budge on the issue. So now I've changed my build, which doesn't really work well anymore since it was made before the awesomeness that is the PHB 2 came out, and I can't improve the build anymore without altering my base stats, which my DM will not let me change anyway. So I'm stuck with a paladin that sucks, striving for a weapon that he won't be able to use effectively, and he's only level 2!

1) Why? It's a heavy blade just like the bastard sword.

2) Your DM sucks.

[Colmarr]

Virtually EVERY build in the optimization forums over at the WOTC boards has a proficiency feat as the first feat in the build.

Perhaps, but most CharOp builds I've seen focus on damage, and contrary to somewhat popular belief, only one role really demands damage optimisation. There are far more important things IMO for defenders and leaders to worry about.

1)Take my paladin for example. I'm striving to get the Soul Sword, which is a greatsword, and my paladin uses a bastard sword and a shield. The flavor is perfect for him, but he'd screw himself over in combat if he tried to use it to fight with.

Why? He'd be unable to use his shield (the same as any other greatsword wielder), but he'd be able to retrain his Bastard Sword proficiency into another feat. And presumably the artifact has some groovy powers that make those changes worthwhile.

How is he "screwing himself over"?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

1) Why? It's a heavy blade just like the bastard sword.

2) Your DM sucks.

1) I thought sword and board builds were inherently different than two-hander builds

2) I know, but he's the only one running a 4e game on the forum I play on except for me. And I can't play in a game I DM.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Perhaps, but most CharOp builds I've seen focus on damage, and contrary to somewhat popular belief, only one role really demands damage optimisation. There are far more important things IMO for defenders and leaders to worry about.

The difference between a d8 and d10 damage is the difference between being crushed beneath Orcus's heel and then raised as a horrid shambling ghoul, or severing the foul fiend's head in a single blow winning kingdoms and titles and even godhood!

Why? He'd be unable to use his shield (the same as any other greatsword wielder), but he'd be able to retrain his Bastard Sword proficiency into another feat. And presumably the artifact has some groovy powers that make those changes worthwhile.

How is he "screwing himself over"?

I've already made those changes, but his stats are CRAPTASTIC.

Behold:

Str 14
Dex 12
Wis 13
Con 13
Int 10
Cha 18

I tried to play a balanced, non-dragonborn paladin who was good at everything, and now he sucks!

[Asbestos]

1) I thought sword and board builds were inherently different than two-hander builds

2) I know, but he's the only one running a 4e game on the forum I play on except for me. And I can't play in a game I DM.

This is fun.

1) Not really when you're a paladin. For fighters who have powers that matter if you have a shield or not, yes, for you, no.

2) Sadness.


@KG: I'd say that if you're serious about DMing 4e the DMG will be darn useful. Those templates, artifacts, poisons, traps, hazards, etc are pretty useful. I do concede that a good chunk of the book is going to be 'I read this in a previous edition'. But the crunch man, the crunch will not be like that.

[Colmarr]

The difference between a d8 and d10 damage is the difference between being crushed beneath Orcus's heel and then raised as a horrid shambling ghoul, or severing the foul fiend's head in a single blow winning kingdoms and titles and even godhood!

lol. I assume (in fact pray) that you are joking. For fighters (with their 7[W] and 10[W] powers) and strikers the difference between d8 and d10 might be important, but for most other classes there are much better feats out there.

For example, Inspiring Save (a Martial Power warlord power that allows them to give up the bonus healing on Inspiring Word to allow the target to make a saving throw instead) strikes me as much more useful than a +1 average damage per [W].

Now, superior weapon proficiency might very well show up in most melee or ranged builds, but that doesn't mean that they're the best feats. It simply means that there aren't 15 better feats out there for the build.

I've already made those changes, but his stats are CRAPTASTIC.

... I tried to play a balanced, non-dragonborn paladin who was good at everything, and now he sucks!

I don't think those stats are as "craptastic" as you think they are. They're perfectly viable. Not CharOp material, but that just brings us back to the original point. CharOp is not necessary to have a viable, effective, enjoyable D&D character.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

lol. I assume (in fact pray) that you are joking. For fighters (with their 7[W] and 10[W] powers) and strikers the difference between d8 and d10 might be important, but for most other classes there are much better feats out there.

For example, Inspiring Save (a Martial Power warlord power that allows them to give up the bonus healing on Inspiring Word to allow the target to make a saving throw instead) strikes me as much more useful than a +1 average damage per [W].

Now, superior weapon proficiency might very well show up in most melee or ranged builds, but that doesn't mean that they're the best feats. It simply means that there aren't 15 better feats out there for the build.

We have two strikers, two defenders (including me), one leader and no controllers, and everyone else is optimized better than me. I feel like a fifth wheel! Like I contribute nothing!

I don't think those stats are as "craptastic" as you think they are. They're perfectly viable. Not CharOp material, but that just brings us back to the original point. CharOp is not necessary to have a viable, effective, enjoyable D&D character.

Then why is it that when I ask for a build that simply works I get flooded with ideas on how to make DA BESTEST BUILD EVAAAAARRR?! And why do the best builds not rely on artifacts? It's like they never allow for the possibility that the character might get an artifact and thus should make do without them.

[Asbestos]

Then why is it that when I ask for a build that simply works I get flooded with ideas on how to make DA BESTEST BUILD EVAAAAARRR?!

Because that's the way the boards work. Honestly, most builds will work fine, but knowing what's optimal can be useful if you want to know how far from optimal you are.

And why do the best builds not rely on artifacts? It's like they never allow for the possibility that the character might get an artifact and thus should make do without them.

Hopefully NO builds should rely on artifacts. They are meant to be rare and special things and don't hang around for your entire adventuring career.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I suppose rely was a poor word choice. It's like they don't allow for the possiblity of an artifact coming to the character. A build that I like is all sword-and-board, and doesn't account for a two-handed weapon like the Soul Sword, and almost every build I like has a proficiency feat as the first feat taken, unless the first feat is Melee Training, in which case its usually the second. It's like the people who make these builds play with DMs who explicitly say NO ONE IS GETTING AN ARTIFACT, PERIOD!

[FoE]

And why do the best builds not rely on artifacts? It's like they never allow for the possibility that the character might get an artifact and thus should make do without them.

Because you can only get an artifact if the DM decides you should, which isn't something you should plan for.

Mind you, if I was the DM, I would give my players an artifact they could actually use.

A build that I like is all sword-and-board, and doesn't account for a two-handed weapon like the Soul Sword, and almost every build I like has a proficiency feat as the first feat taken, unless the first feat is Melee Training, in which case its usually the second. It's like the people who make these builds play with DMs who explicitly say NO ONE IS GETTING AN ARTIFACT, PERIOD!

Or maybe they have semi-reasonable DMs that give them appropriate loot.

Is this the same prima donna DM with the lesbian doppelganger?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Yes, it's the same DM.

No, the lesbian doppleganger is played by someone else. And the lesbian doppleganger has asked my male paladin out on a date.

[Asbestos]

No, the lesbian doppleganger is played by someone else. And the lesbian doppleganger has asked my male paladin out on a date.

That doesn't make a lick of sense.


Anyway... as Colmarr stated superior weapon prof is often overrated since not all builds need be damage focused. If you come across that magical longsword or greatsword and want to grab it... grab it! Train out your bastard sword prof for something else at your next level and train it back when the sword eventually peaces out, which probably won't be for a few levels.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

That doesn't make a lick of sense.


Anyway... as Colmarr stated superior weapon prof is often overrated since not all builds need be damage focused. If you come across that magical longsword or greatsword and want to grab it... grab it! Train out your bastard sword prof for something else at your next level and train it back when the sword eventually peaces out, which probably won't be for a few levels.

Well, the person playing the lesbian doppleganger doesn't make a lick of sense most of the time, especially since before his character asked mine out on that date, she traumatized him by tricking him into letting her give him a BJ.

You're probably right, though I think I'll want to tweak my build to include Melee Training and forget about Heavy Blade Mastery.