Level restrictions on items

[miltonyorkcastle]

For some reason I sort of think this has come up before, but because my limited search turned nothing up, and I don't have time for an extensive search, I'm going to bring it up with a new thread (obviously).

So, yeah, will there be any sort of level/skill/class/whatever restrictions on items?

The fact that there will be no classes or alignments in the classic DnD sense sort of helps answer the question, but the possibility still exists.

I personally hope we don't have level restrictions at all. It's a pain in the rear trying to come up with a non-ridiculous way of explaining IC why my character can't use an item, especially something as trivial and simple as, say, a club.

Granted, that means the equivalent of a level one (all low skills) character could, for instance, use a mithril longsword (and might even be able to get his hands on one), but I suspect when it comes to the RP server, we'll have to rely somewhat on respect and players' care for the integrity of the world (Yeah, I know, that's like relying on a feather to stop a bullet ). Of course, he'd still not be much good with the sword, even if it looks really nice.

[Dorax Windsmith]

Sounds like the makings for a really good episode of Mythbusters...."Can a feather stop a bullet?"

[ycleption]

What if items gave variable benefits according to skill level, so that it didn't matter as much that a low level could get their hands on a mithril equivalent sword?
Something like, 1st tier/copper weapons give no benefit.
2nd tier/adamantium are the same as copper, until someone gets to the fifth level in the weapon skill line.. at which point it multiplies damage by 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc., for each additional skill level, since a fighter has learned how to use the better weapon's advantages more effectively
3rd tier/mithril kicks in at the tenth skill rank, and gives a damage multiplier of 1.5, 1.7, 1.9 for each additional skill rank.

Obviously I'm just throwing out numbers, but I think that kind of thing makes sense, and gets around the the "um.. mithril is too heavy for me... yeah, that's it..."

[miltonyorkcastle]

Not a bad idea at all, ycleption.

[Gulnyr]

Yeah, it seems for a skill-based system that it should matter less what the longsword is made of than what maneuvers and tricks the swordsman knows.

This is kind of tangent to the topic, but maybe the material a piece of equipment is made of shouldn't automatically determine its "level." Or, to say it differently, there would not be a distinct hierarchy where one material is always better than another. While adamantium and mithril (or their equivalents) would probably be more expensive and be status symbols, an item created from them wouldn't necessarily be better than the same item made from more common resources (but still could be, of course). That would mean basically that each resource that could be used to create an item would have something favorable about it that put it on par with other materials, making different materials better in certain circumstances. That kind of gets rid of the whole idea that material would determine the "level" of a piece of equipment.

[ycleption]

In a game setting, the thirst for better equipment is part of what drives players. Using different materials is just one way of representing the things that make one weapon better than another: the weight, the balance, the temper, the way it fits in your hand, the durability, the sharpness of the edge, etc. Whether that's reflected by saying "this weapon is made of mithril" or "this weapon was forged by a master smith (//with level 90 in the weaponsmithing skill)" or "this weapon was made with specification x,y,z in mind" there should be some way to say this weapon is better than that one.

The thing is, a beginning fighter won't be as attuned to the differences, won't be able to see that one sword allows the tricks and maneuvers to be performed better.

I think many activities that sort of pattern applies... you learn on cheap tools and materials, because it doesn't make a difference, and as you learn, you grow more demanding in those tools and equipment, because you begin to realize that there really is a difference. (My personal hobby, photography, this is certainly true... you learn with cheap film and print on RC paper, and then graduate to higher quality films and fiber paper... when I was younger I had the same experience with soccer equipment. Maybe if you're the best in the world you can play better than the rest of us without the fancy equipment... but you'll be even better with it)

Anyway, that's what I was thinking when I came up with the idea above... *shrug*

[Dorganath]

This isn't fully hammered out yet (subject to balancing and such), but the intent is that a novice and an expert with the same weapon, regardless of quality/material/capability/etc., will have significantly different results.

[Gulnyr]

Originally Posted by ycleption

In a game setting, the thirst for better equipment is part of what drives players.
...

there should be some way to say this weapon is better than that one.

I agree. I don't think that every material has to be on par with every other. Copper, realistically, for example, is a terrible metal to use to make weapons in an age when iron and steel are available. Copper is just too soft. Copper would be great for wire and gizmos in Gnomish workshops, but would only be good in an arsenal as practice weaponry.

I was considering the concept from this thread of variation and as few cookie-cutter things as possible when I suggested having several different resources be roughly equal in capability though with different strengths. Why not extend the concept out from appearance to materials? That way, it wouldn't just be everyone going for one type of material for their top-end equipment. Top-end would be more a factor of the quality of craftsmanship than the material it was made from, as you suggested with the level 90 weaponsmith. The good stuff just wouldn't all be made of the same metal or wood or gemstone or whatever.

I think there may be as many examples of different materials resulting in better results as there are different materials resulting in similar results. Think about bows. Which is better, a yew bow in England or a composite bow on the Steppe? Would the English have done better if they had made their bows from horn and sinew and such? Would the Huns have been better off with bows made of a single piece of yew? Who knows? The point is each material makes an excellent bow. It's really just a coin toss which way to go, and either would work just fine. (Edit: the previous sentence is in reference to the choice of how to build the game, not which bow type to choose, heh.)

[stragen]

Originally Posted by Dorganath

This isn't fully hammered out yet (subject to balancing and such), but the intent is that a novice and an expert with the same weapon, regardless of quality/material/capability/etc., will have significantly different results.

I agree.

Skill should be more important then Equipment.


This is one aspect of D&D and NWN that I didn't like. With uber gear even a mediocre warrior could whip the worlds greatest swordsman.

[Eight-Bit]

An idea came to me the other day. I hit my head just before it happened, and I had been drinking for a whole while longer before that.

Regardless. I want to make a simple suggestion.

Consistency is something that can't really be said about the current level requirements. Furthermore the subject of the magnetic level-requirement voodoo that keeps a level six from having his Vorpal Sword of Slaying really just doesn't make sense in many aspects. I believe that any item should be able to be equipped any time, any where. Restrictions are something that we, as players, should really discuss and get into detail with. These are the systems that are going to define the MMO and how it is enjoyed. I believe in simplicity over anything else, and the use of simple and understandable math in calculations in videogames. A nine year old should be able to figure it out.

Because there will be a move to skills, and I am uncertain even if levels are a factor, I suggest (now at least. look more at the idea instead. not sure how levels work in the MMO) that all items be given a "skill value" based upon what the item is capable of. For example: The Sword of Sparks deals four electrical damage to an enemy upon a successful hit. Let's say that the four damage adds four ranks to the item's "skill value".

As I currently only have one skill rank in Swords, there is a 75% difference in item's "skill level" and my own. With the penalty applied the sword will only be able to deal one of the four possible damage. I'll explain a bit more below.

In order to use the item to it's full effect, your skill must be equal or greater to the "skill value". The percentage of difference between the skill level and the "skill value" of the item can be obtained by dividing the skill by the "skill value". A penalty of the percentage of difference in your skill required to use the item subtracted from the "skill value" of the item can be applied to prevent lower-level characters from tipping the scales against people who currently do not have super equipment. The difference that is made by having the good gear is much lower as they are low in skills.

From a standpoint of balance this makes the whole scenario easier to control. Expensive loot will tip the scales a lot less, and require less DM item tracking and inventory scans. Characters who do not fulfill the skill requirements will be able to equip and use the item, but only at a proportion of it's actual effects.

Good idea? Bad idea? Discuss!

(but only discuss the good things!)

[Skywatcher]

Not sure if durablility is being built into the game but you could use different materials to make weapons last longer rather than being more capable. Being made from a harder material means a blade would hold an edge longer. If weapon enhancements were done by adding magic items to the weapon then these magic items could possibly be recovered when a blade ceased funtioning so major investments in rare items didn't get lost when a blade failed. As far as level limits goes, I like the method of making the character possess skill to use various enhancements and even to apply various enhancements.

For example:

A fighter would require the skill for adamantium or mithril weapons to merely use that type of weapon. Then in order to add a +2 enhancement to it he would have to have skill in "enhancing" weapons. In order to add ice damage to the weapon he would have to have skill in "enchanting" weapons. The more enhanced or enchanted the weapon would be the higher skill he would have to have in the weapon type in general.

Better material weapons could also allow more or better enhancements. If durability was included then skill could be gained in mantaining weapons to make them last longer as well. Just some thoughts.

[Faldred]

@Eight-Bit

I was thinking along the same lines, though maybe less mathematical. I've done some d20-based homebrewing, and one of the items was a series of artifact swords that essentially grow in power with the wielder -- as its owner becomes more powerful, the weapon gives greater benefits.

A similar concept applied to equipment across the board could be an interesting break from the gear-dependency of the D&D system -- giving the UBER-SWORD OF DOOM! to a low-level character isn't as game breaking if he's only powerful enough to maybe get a small bonus to hit or to damage, though as he gains power (through whatever experience system is being used), he can unlock and access more of the sword's abilities -- allowing the owner some level of choice as to what to unlock when would lead to more variety.

A side benefit would be the RP value of allowing characters to hold onto cherished equipment longer, if it "grows" with them. The downside is the crafting economy issue -- this might lead to a hybrid system where the base item has a series of unlockable properties, but can also be enhanced by coatings/crystals/whatever, but those types of enhancements could likewise have their own power progression.

[Falonthas]

also gives the basis of a weapon or shield or armor passed down in a family

the blade or piece may have added benefits when one able to wield it a certain way,
but the young boy or girl can still wear or wield it from the day its given, though it wouldnt give the same benefits as when they are trained for twenty years in its use

[Eight-Bit]

Originally Posted by Faldred

@Eight-Bit

I was thinking along the same lines, though maybe less mathematical. I've done some d20-based homebrewing, and one of the items was a series of artifact swords that essentially grow in power with the wielder -- as its owner becomes more powerful, the weapon gives greater benefits.

A similar concept applied to equipment across the board could be an interesting break from the gear-dependency of the D&D system -- giving the UBER-SWORD OF DOOM! to a low-level character isn't as game breaking if he's only powerful enough to maybe get a small bonus to hit or to damage, though as he gains power (through whatever experience system is being used), he can unlock and access more of the sword's abilities -- allowing the owner some level of choice as to what to unlock when would lead to more variety.

A side benefit would be the RP value of allowing characters to hold onto cherished equipment longer, if it "grows" with them. The downside is the crafting economy issue -- this might lead to a hybrid system where the base item has a series of unlockable properties, but can also be enhanced by coatings/crystals/whatever, but those types of enhancements could likewise have their own power progression.

Yea, we're pretty much on the same level except you have a branching ability tree and mine is mathematical. (Kind of...) I like the simplicity of my idea, as it will remain consistent regardless of "level" and is focused entirely on skill. Both are good.