XP & Magic Items... [Archive] - Wizards Community

XP & Magic Items... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
geoffmcc
01-30-05, 11:24 PM My group and I have been experimenting with the following house rule. It allows for the XP penalty for creating magic items to be spread out over the whole of the party, so that the primary spell casters don't take the hit when creating magical items. However, there is a bit of bookkeeping involved.

There is no up front XP cost when creating a magic item. Each player pays the XP cost during each encounter or whenever the PC's get an XP reward. The XP penalty per encounter is = (base cost)/25/100. Or, for charged items, the PC user pays the XP when s/he uses a charge at the cost of (base cost)/25/ # of charges.

For example: Bob the Barbarian wields a +1 flaming great axe and +2 studded leather armor. He is attacked one night out in the woods while he is stalking a mastodon by a gaggle of nasty harpies. He kills the screeching she-scavengers, and takes an XP penalty (Bob gives up a part of his “soul” to feed the magical energies of his equipment as he uses them), (8k +4k)/25/100 = 4.8 (or rounding up to 5) from the amount gained from slaying the harpies. To heal himself after the fight, he drinks a potion of cure light wounds and pays (50/25)=2 XP. The next day, he finally tracks down the mastodon and after a brief scuffle, is able to skin it and bring the trophy home to his family (he takes another 5 XP penalty after this encounter as well).

For low cost magical items, the DM could always charge the player a minimum of 1 XP per use. Also, I’ve only been charging the players based on the “magical” cost, not the material (just 4k for the +2 bonus, not the 250gp for the chain shirt).

Some other rules that are affected by this method are the price of magic items. They are 80% of the original price because the creator doesn’t expend any XP at a cost of 5gp per 1 XP. However, we’ve been playing that the cost of creating a magic item is still 50% of the original cost. As a DM, you could also compensate for the cheaper magic items by dispensing a smaller cash award to the players.

This method gives the choice to the players how much do they really want that big magic item/s as they will have to pay a larger amount for the more that they use. And mundane and alchemical equipment become (slightly) more attractive.

Any critiques or questions?
HailSpork
01-31-05, 06:36 PM It doesn't make a lot of sense to charge XP for an item, but it makes less sense that they're taking a penalty *after* the item is crafted.

Btw, I'm fairly certain that the cost of the armor and masterwork is not included in the XP cost calculations. Only the 4k for a +2...
Adrez Nesnsid
01-31-05, 07:34 PM The XP cost for creating magic items always seemed counter-intuitive to me. Its like the more magic items you make, the worse you become at it, but, as HailSpork said, charging the XP after item creation seems even more counterintuitive.

I have a couple of alternate suggestions for countering the counterintuitive nature of the XP costs:
- 1. You could track the number of xp that they would normally need to have spent to build the magic item (and possibly multiply it by two or some other low (but above one) number). These XP aren't deducted, but the spellcaster's acquisition of new hit dice and hit points lags behind by that number of XP; That is to say, that from then on, whenever they level up, they do not gain the hitpoints and hit die from that level until they exceed the XP requirement to attain that level by the number of XP that their magical item production has cost them (although they gain skill points, saves/saving throw bonuses, special abilities, feats, ability score increases, and possibly base attack bonuses normally)
- 2. Magic item creation could deal the creator ability damage which lasts for an extended period of time and cannot be healed by any spell cast by a caster whose caster level is lower than the item's caster level (possibly modified upward by one or two).
Lina_Inverse
01-31-05, 11:40 PM exp and levels have always inpart measured lifeforce or your soul.(hint energy drains were always there)

so the exp cost is bluntly,putting yourlifeforce into the item allowing its enchantments to last eternal,while exp costing spells drain a portion of your lifeforce on casting.
Adrez Nesnsid
02-01-05, 09:26 AM exp and levels have always inpart measured lifeforce or your soul.(hint energy drains were always there)

so the exp cost is bluntly,putting yourlifeforce into the item allowing its enchantments to last eternal,while exp costing spells drain a portion of your lifeforce on casting.

And that's something which has always bothered me. Why do/should they use the same statistic to measure two entirely different things (lifeforce and experience) when they don't have anything to do with each other.

I've also had difficulties on the same lines with the concept that creatures gain skill points from racial HD; Why should a creature be more adept at things and have a higher limit as to its potential mastery of an ability, simply because you most likely (depending on actual dice rolls) have to hit it a lot of times in order to kill it? :confused:
geoffmcc
02-01-05, 08:36 PM With this house rule, I'm not trying to change the mechanic of exchanging XP for magic, I'm trying to change it so that the whole party stays at approximately the same XP level (given that they all have relatively similarly powered magic items). I think that the XP for magic payment is in the D&D system as a game balancing game mechanic, basically, as well as what Lina mentioned earlier. If you get rid of this mechanic then you would have to consider something else, or else your world would become overly concentrated with magic items (not that a lot of D&D worlds already are).

The fluff behind this method is quasi-Tolkien, in that there is a negative aspect to using magic items consistantly/constantly. (There were dire consequences for Golem and Frodo when they used the Ring).

As for your last question, don't classes get extra skill points as the character gets more HD? I think its just to make sure that the creatures are up to the challenge of fighting the characters. If a minotaur had +0 ranks in Spot, it wouldn't be much of a challenge for an invisible character. Also, the skills laid out in MM are just suggestions, you can change what your monster is skilled in for variation.
Adrez Nesnsid
02-02-05, 02:21 PM The fluff behind this method is quasi-Tolkien, in that there is a negative aspect to using magic items consistantly/constantly. (There were dire consequences for Golem and Frodo when they used the Ring).

In that case, wouldn't it be more appropriate for magic item use to deal negative levels to their users, with a person who overused the item too much thus rising as a hostile wraith, true to Tolkien's form.
geoffmcc
02-04-05, 10:01 AM Again, I'm not trying to go to any level-draining extreme, because I think that the game is made for PC's to utilize magic items without too much penalty. I'm just trying it out so that PC spellcasters don't take the hit if they decide to create magic items, while keeping the XP cost (I'm just trying to spread the XP cost to the whole party).
Drachasor
02-04-05, 12:34 PM Just let someone contribute all of the XP to an item if they want to (but they have to be there for all 8 hours every day of item creation). It's the easiest way to handle it if you want to avoid too much imbalance with XP costs.

Or you could get rid of XP costs and go to a more 2nd Ed. solution. Have casters go after rare components and materials to make their items (and allow the recharging of wands and other charged items without getting these materials). Of course, things are still tricky for scrolls and potions a bit, but perhaps one trip could net enough materials for many scrolls/potions (or you just pay more to make these items, 5g/XP you would have payed).

Or use the 3.5 Ed experience rules (calculate the Challenge rating, then calculate the experience for each member vs. that challenge rating seperating, then divide by the number of people in the party). Casters won't get more than a level behind with that, really.

-Drachasor
HailSpork
02-04-05, 05:15 PM The fluff behind this method is quasi-Tolkien, in that there is a negative aspect to using magic items consistantly/constantly. (There were dire consequences for Golem and Frodo when they used the Ring).

Yeah, but no dire consequences for using sting or such. Gandalf had the Elven ring of Fire, and he seems fine.
The downside of using rings in LotR is not because they're magical, but because Sauron poured part of his soul into the one ring, which all other rings are linked to; and I don't mean he spent 1/25th the gp cost in xp, I mean it has a decent chunk of his soul in it. The difference between using a magic item and using a magic item that contains part of the soul of an evil (for all intensive purposes) deity is massive.

If you're just trying to keep the XP costs similar, here are a few reccomendations:

1) Crafting pool. Give the mage so much extra XP per level that can only go into spells and making equipment. If you have the Eberron book, see the artificer. If artificer is allowed in your game, give him double the pool or such. Or, instead of giving XP per level, give out XP per crafting feat.

2) Cooperative crafting. When the mage crafts the fighter's sword, they both work on it together (even though the fighter doesn't really know how), and the fighter can voluntarily give some of his XP to supplement the mage's.

3) Components. Kill a dragon? Keep the blood! Let's say that dragon's heart blood (not all... we want to make only some of the corpse worth retrieving) is worth 50 xp for crafting, more if it's particularly suitable (like making a dragonbane weapon, or red dragon heart blood to make something with fire resistance)

4) Limited downtime. If the party has limited time to craft, then you could just forgo the XP costs. One of the reasons why there is an xp cost is so they can't just sit around crafting items over and over again. Be careful with this though; after they slay the Fire King who threatens to kill every elf in the world, they may have much much more downtime and may end up very well-equipped.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
geoffmcc 01-30-05, 11:24 PM	My group and I have been experimenting with the following house rule. It allows for the XP penalty for creating magic items to be spread out over the whole of the party, so that the primary spell casters don't take the hit when creating magical items. However, there is a bit of bookkeeping involved. There is no up front XP cost when creating a magic item. Each player pays the XP cost during each encounter or whenever the PC's get an XP reward. The XP penalty per encounter is = (base cost)/25/100. Or, for charged items, the PC user pays the XP when s/he uses a charge at the cost of (base cost)/25/ # of charges. For example: Bob the Barbarian wields a +1 flaming great axe and +2 studded leather armor. He is attacked one night out in the woods while he is stalking a mastodon by a gaggle of nasty harpies. He kills the screeching she-scavengers, and takes an XP penalty (Bob gives up a part of his “soul” to feed the magical energies of his equipment as he uses them), (8k +4k)/25/100 = 4.8 (or rounding up to 5) from the amount gained from slaying the harpies. To heal himself after the fight, he drinks a potion of cure light wounds and pays (50/25)=2 XP. The next day, he finally tracks down the mastodon and after a brief scuffle, is able to skin it and bring the trophy home to his family (he takes another 5 XP penalty after this encounter as well). For low cost magical items, the DM could always charge the player a minimum of 1 XP per use. Also, I’ve only been charging the players based on the “magical” cost, not the material (just 4k for the +2 bonus, not the 250gp for the chain shirt). Some other rules that are affected by this method are the price of magic items. They are 80% of the original price because the creator doesn’t expend any XP at a cost of 5gp per 1 XP. However, we’ve been playing that the cost of creating a magic item is still 50% of the original cost. As a DM, you could also compensate for the cheaper magic items by dispensing a smaller cash award to the players. This method gives the choice to the players how much do they really want that big magic item/s as they will have to pay a larger amount for the more that they use. And mundane and alchemical equipment become (slightly) more attractive. Any critiques or questions?
HailSpork 01-31-05, 06:36 PM	It doesn't make a lot of sense to charge XP for an item, but it makes less sense that they're taking a penalty after the item is crafted. Btw, I'm fairly certain that the cost of the armor and masterwork is not included in the XP cost calculations. Only the 4k for a +2...
Adrez Nesnsid 01-31-05, 07:34 PM	The XP cost for creating magic items always seemed counter-intuitive to me. Its like the more magic items you make, the worse you become at it, but, as HailSpork said, charging the XP after item creation seems even more counterintuitive. I have a couple of alternate suggestions for countering the counterintuitive nature of the XP costs: - 1. You could track the number of xp that they would normally need to have spent to build the magic item (and possibly multiply it by two or some other low (but above one) number). These XP aren't deducted, but the spellcaster's acquisition of new hit dice and hit points lags behind by that number of XP; That is to say, that from then on, whenever they level up, they do not gain the hitpoints and hit die from that level until they exceed the XP requirement to attain that level by the number of XP that their magical item production has cost them (although they gain skill points, saves/saving throw bonuses, special abilities, feats, ability score increases, and possibly base attack bonuses normally) - 2. Magic item creation could deal the creator ability damage which lasts for an extended period of time and cannot be healed by any spell cast by a caster whose caster level is lower than the item's caster level (possibly modified upward by one or two).
Lina_Inverse 01-31-05, 11:40 PM	exp and levels have always inpart measured lifeforce or your soul.(hint energy drains were always there) so the exp cost is bluntly,putting yourlifeforce into the item allowing its enchantments to last eternal,while exp costing spells drain a portion of your lifeforce on casting.
Adrez Nesnsid 02-01-05, 09:26 AM	exp and levels have always inpart measured lifeforce or your soul.(hint energy drains were always there) so the exp cost is bluntly,putting yourlifeforce into the item allowing its enchantments to last eternal,while exp costing spells drain a portion of your lifeforce on casting. And that's something which has always bothered me. Why do/should they use the same statistic to measure two entirely different things (lifeforce and experience) when they don't have anything to do with each other. I've also had difficulties on the same lines with the concept that creatures gain skill points from racial HD; Why should a creature be more adept at things and have a higher limit as to its potential mastery of an ability, simply because you most likely (depending on actual dice rolls) have to hit it a lot of times in order to kill it? :confused:
geoffmcc 02-01-05, 08:36 PM	With this house rule, I'm not trying to change the mechanic of exchanging XP for magic, I'm trying to change it so that the whole party stays at approximately the same XP level (given that they all have relatively similarly powered magic items). I think that the XP for magic payment is in the D&D system as a game balancing game mechanic, basically, as well as what Lina mentioned earlier. If you get rid of this mechanic then you would have to consider something else, or else your world would become overly concentrated with magic items (not that a lot of D&D worlds already are). The fluff behind this method is quasi-Tolkien, in that there is a negative aspect to using magic items consistantly/constantly. (There were dire consequences for Golem and Frodo when they used the Ring). As for your last question, don't classes get extra skill points as the character gets more HD? I think its just to make sure that the creatures are up to the challenge of fighting the characters. If a minotaur had +0 ranks in Spot, it wouldn't be much of a challenge for an invisible character. Also, the skills laid out in MM are just suggestions, you can change what your monster is skilled in for variation.
Adrez Nesnsid 02-02-05, 02:21 PM	The fluff behind this method is quasi-Tolkien, in that there is a negative aspect to using magic items consistantly/constantly. (There were dire consequences for Golem and Frodo when they used the Ring). In that case, wouldn't it be more appropriate for magic item use to deal negative levels to their users, with a person who overused the item too much thus rising as a hostile wraith, true to Tolkien's form.
geoffmcc 02-04-05, 10:01 AM	Again, I'm not trying to go to any level-draining extreme, because I think that the game is made for PC's to utilize magic items without too much penalty. I'm just trying it out so that PC spellcasters don't take the hit if they decide to create magic items, while keeping the XP cost (I'm just trying to spread the XP cost to the whole party).
Drachasor 02-04-05, 12:34 PM	Just let someone contribute all of the XP to an item if they want to (but they have to be there for all 8 hours every day of item creation). It's the easiest way to handle it if you want to avoid too much imbalance with XP costs. Or you could get rid of XP costs and go to a more 2nd Ed. solution. Have casters go after rare components and materials to make their items (and allow the recharging of wands and other charged items without getting these materials). Of course, things are still tricky for scrolls and potions a bit, but perhaps one trip could net enough materials for many scrolls/potions (or you just pay more to make these items, 5g/XP you would have payed). Or use the 3.5 Ed experience rules (calculate the Challenge rating, then calculate the experience for each member vs. that challenge rating seperating, then divide by the number of people in the party). Casters won't get more than a level behind with that, really. -Drachasor
HailSpork 02-04-05, 05:15 PM	The fluff behind this method is quasi-Tolkien, in that there is a negative aspect to using magic items consistantly/constantly. (There were dire consequences for Golem and Frodo when they used the Ring). Yeah, but no dire consequences for using sting or such. Gandalf had the Elven ring of Fire, and he seems fine. The downside of using rings in LotR is not because they're magical, but because Sauron poured part of his soul into the one ring, which all other rings are linked to; and I don't mean he spent 1/25th the gp cost in xp, I mean it has a decent chunk of his soul in it. The difference between using a magic item and using a magic item that contains part of the soul of an evil (for all intensive purposes) deity is massive. If you're just trying to keep the XP costs similar, here are a few reccomendations: 1) Crafting pool. Give the mage so much extra XP per level that can only go into spells and making equipment. If you have the Eberron book, see the artificer. If artificer is allowed in your game, give him double the pool or such. Or, instead of giving XP per level, give out XP per crafting feat. 2) Cooperative crafting. When the mage crafts the fighter's sword, they both work on it together (even though the fighter doesn't really know how), and the fighter can voluntarily give some of his XP to supplement the mage's. 3) Components. Kill a dragon? Keep the blood! Let's say that dragon's heart blood (not all... we want to make only some of the corpse worth retrieving) is worth 50 xp for crafting, more if it's particularly suitable (like making a dragonbane weapon, or red dragon heart blood to make something with fire resistance) 4) Limited downtime. If the party has limited time to craft, then you could just forgo the XP costs. One of the reasons why there is an xp cost is so they can't just sit around crafting items over and over again. Be careful with this though; after they slay the Fire King who threatens to kill every elf in the world, they may have much much more downtime and may end up very well-equipped.