DM needing advice on Weapon of Legacy

[....]

A player in my campaign recently came to me and said, "Hey, I made a Weapon of Legacy for my character. You should look over it so I can use it."

Now, I don't have a problem with giving characters these things; but it sort of bothers me that he'd make one specifically for his character he's playing in this campaign; and then expect me to just say, "Yeah, sure, you found it in a ditch". It amounts to him giving himself new class features that no one else can have.

I haven't seen what he made, yet, but I'm thinking I won't let him have it.

Am I a bastard for doing this? Someone give me some input.

[Starsinger]

Just a little, especially if it turns out to be not broken or anything. But I can totally agree with your bastardness, it can be a bit upsetting when a PC says "I want X Y and Z, and I designed W to give it to me."

[Zincorium]

If he didn't mention it to you beforehand, definitely hold off until you feel like it. This could be past the end of the campaign, even.

It's good to work with player expectations, but this is going a bit beyond what could be reasonably expected, and there's no reason to give it to them without the player earning it.

My personal suggestion would be to have the legacy weapon in the hands of an NPC who is also qualified to use it and has 'powered it up' for their individual use. It gives you a chance to showcase exactly what the weapon could do when the player has invested time and resources into it. Ideally, the NPC would be (obviously, if possible) too tough for the player to defeat alone and force him to work with the group to get it.

[Mewtarthio]

That player has submitted a homebrew item to your campaign world. You're well within your rights to refuse it.

[AKA_Bait]

A player in my campaign recently came to me and said, "Hey, I made a Weapon of Legacy for my character. You should look over it so I can use it."

Now, I don't have a problem with giving characters these things; but it sort of bothers me that he'd make one specifically for his character he's playing in this campaign; and then expect me to just say, "Yeah, sure, you found it in a ditch". It amounts to him giving himself new class features that no one else can have.

I haven't seen what he made, yet, but I'm thinking I won't let him have it.

Am I a bastard for doing this? Someone give me some input.

Yes. I'm afraid you are being a child born out of wedlock about it. From what I can see the player hasn't done anything wrong. He created something of a type you have not had a problem giving players then he gave it to you to see if it was ok. Where is the problem here? You would get to decide if he get's it and how he get's it. Free plot hook!

Look, if he had just said 'here's a weapon of legacy I just gave my character' then you would have a beef because he would be stepping on your DMly toes. Since he didn't do that and just gave you something he would like his character to have you should look at the thing before you decide one way or the other.

It's ok to tell him no, just don't do it because he had the umbridge to make your job a little easier.

[Edea]

Is he a warlock? If so, be careful with allowing Legacy Champion.

Otherwise, of course you're not being a bastard, at least not from the way you're describing this situation. The appropriate question from your player would have been something like this:

"I would like to try and become a Legacy Champion, but I'm not sure I want my LW to be one of the examples in the CoL supplement. Is it possible for us to create a new one, and then work it into the campaign? Maybe as a quest, involving all of us, and then each person gets something special at the end of it (my special being the weapon/class, of course)."

But no, it looks more like a demand to me. So accept/decline at leisure.

[....]

It's ok to tell him no, just don't do it because he had the umbridge to make your job a little easier.

I don't mind him having it, its just that the way he said it; it was like I was just going to make it pop into his hand.

When I see it, as long as it isn't broken (which is a possibility with this fellow. He's currently playing a cleric who averages almost 20 damage every hit at level 3) I'm sure I'll find a place for it in some baddies loot. Just the idea that he could just have it instantly sort of got on my nerves.

[AKA_Bait]

I don't mind him having it, its just that the way he said it; it was like I was just going to make it pop into his hand.

When I see it, as long as it isn't broken (which is a possibility with this fellow. He's currently playing a cleric who averages almost 20 damage every hit at level 3) I'm sure I'll find a place for it in some baddies loot. Just the idea that he could just have it instantly sort of got on my nerves.

Well if he expected to have it instantly then yeah, you have an issue. I got the impression he was giving it to you to review and place in where you felt appropriate.

[Edea]

Huh. LC loses caster levels, so more power to him :/.

[Ralfarius]

I would say tell your player to cram it with some legacy walnuts. Take the weapon, tell him to focus on the campaign on hand, and if he doesn't constantly pine after it, give it to him when it would be best for the plot.

There's nothing wrong with designing for your character to excel at what they do. Many of my characters have been reasonably optimal with their builds. However, I feel like some people would benefit from planning their character's development in a story sense. No matter how you slice it, "poof, got a magic weapon!" isn't very cohesive to story development.

[Telonius]

Am I a bastard for doing this? Someone give me some input.

Yes, but so is your player.

He should have checked with you first. Granting items is not for the player to determine. Homebrewing something without the DM's knowledge, then springing the finished product on the DM without warning, is likely to annoy the DM.

That said, you are the DM and are in a position of responsibility because of that. Check out what he has. If it looks like it's not brokenly good, and isn't game-wrecking for the fluff, allow it. But make him work for it. And make it absolutely, utterly clear that all future homebrews should be pre-approved by you before he starts working on them.

[Techonce]

I am currently running an Age of Worms campaign and one of the characters has a Weapon of Legacy.

The difference in my situation is that the Weapon is a new Weapon of Legacy.

He character is the founding character. We laid out a basic plan for the powers over the next few levels, but we are adjusting things based on events that have happened to his character. It works out quite well, but the player is also one that tends not to powergame and goes more for Roleplaying stats.

Instead of having the player find the WoL, they could be the founding character.

Stats on the PC:

Half Orc Pit Fighter (urban barbarian)
Founding Event: Single handedly laying the smack down on a Lesser Ebon Aspect
Least Ritual: Fighting a creature that represented the three religions of the Ebon Triad.
Powers: Weapon MOrph (PC can change the weapon from a Double Axe to Gauntlets and back as a move action.)

Enlarge self 3/day.

Cure Light Wounds (self) 3/day quickened

The rest are TBD.

[Justin_Bacon]

A player in my campaign recently came to me and said, "Hey, I made a Weapon of Legacy for my character. You should look over it so I can use it."

Now, I don't have a problem with giving characters these things; but it sort of bothers me that he'd make one specifically for his character he's playing in this campaign; and then expect me to just say, "Yeah, sure, you found it in a ditch". It amounts to him giving himself new class features that no one else can have.

I haven't seen what he made, yet, but I'm thinking I won't let him have it.

Am I a bastard for doing this? Someone give me some input.

Check it over carefully. WEAPONS OF LEGACY builds can be broken (like pretty much anything), but for the most part its overly-conservative and the weapons it creates usually aren't any kind of "bargain" compared to other items.

So all you've really got here is your player saying, "I'd really like X." As long as X is balanced, I've never seen the point in thwarting your players' desires.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net