Enchanted Items Patch - Important, holy crap!

[Lanodantheon]

Someone breaks the game and the Lead Designer fixes it in less than an hour?

....I LOVE YOU GUYS......

[void]

Hope nobody missed me. Been out for a week due to surgery, good times. Still recovering, but I found I'm finally lucid enough to try to catch up.

Honestly, I think people are also overlooking something simple: If someone has a tendency to show up to fights using the magical equivalent of a tacnuke, they're going to get NOTICED. Any enchanted item must be carried in order to be used, and will be trivial to notice/find by even half-assed practitioners.

People will come after you for your gizmo, either to have it themselves, to keep you from having it, or to keep someone ELSE from taking it from you. And since you're a one-trick pony, it won't be hard for someone of sufficient determination to do so.

The story will quickly become about the item, keeping your control over it, and surviving the attempts to keep it. This can be both used as a way to justify the item (perhaps everyone enjoys the edge of the seat 'omg, the fight came to us again, how will we hold onto the mystic amulet of pwnz0r this time' action), or as a way to get the powergamer to get sick of "I've LOST my wadget AGAIN?!" and think up a more clever approach.

Not to mention a weapon of that strength is probably going to get aimed at a mortal at some point, and we already have a huge stack of tools for dealing with THAT through story.. ;)

I might not want something like this in my game, either, but I think trying to scramble to 'patch' the 'hole' is kind of understating the capacity of the game to self-correct without more fiddly rules. :)

As an exercise in curiosity for everyone, if you were going to design a 9 refresh offensive item of power, what would it look like?

[luminos]

As an exercise in curiosity for everyone, if you were going to design a 9 refresh offensive item of power, what would it look like?

This is without putting to much thought into it.  I can probably come up something a lot more munchkinly if I take my time to think up stuff.  I'd give it the All Creatures are Equal Before God trapping of the Swords of the Cross, which I estimate is about -3 (I'm assuming that the other -2 comes from it being holy, and increasing weapon skill).  Then I'd let it give its user Mythic Strength.  I'd make the item a large axe or warhammer (it is what it is) to make it worth weapon:2 or 3, and to let it be something that I could justify getting the Devastating Blows bonus for Mythic Strength.  That gives me 7 points spent after taking into account the item discount, so I still have two left.  Might as well give it the True Aim trapping from the Swords of the Cross as well.  This is where I'd try to pull a fast one on the GM, and let it give me Supernatural Sense.  What is that I hear?  You don't think that Supernatural Sense sounds all that bad, especially compared to the other abilities I loaded it with?  You haven't even seen the beauty of this move yet.  You see, I'd define the "sense" as being supernaturally drawn towards the item, and always having at least a vague idea of where it is at.  Lets see you try to take it away from me now, GM!

[void]

Knowing where it is and being able to lay your hands on it are two rather different things.

[luminos]

Knowing where it is and being able to lay your hands on it are two rather different things.

That's very true.  I can see a GM saying "Do you by any chance have the Aquatic power", "Nope", "Oh, what a shame, your hammer just happens to get lost at the bottom of Lake Michigan."

[SaintAndSinner]

Anyone with an Uber-weapon may as well take it as an Aspect also. That way they may rake in the FATE points when these things happen.

[Wyrdrune]

Knowing where it is and being able to lay your hands on it are two rather different things.

it would be kinda funny to let a player design "the spear of lugh" or "thor's hammer" and let them find out that it is stashed away in some far away nevernever stronghold... you could build a campaign around it...

[void]

Now you guys are getting it. :D

[luminos]

Item of Power: Sword-Chucks
It is what it is:  It is sword-chucks, which makes it a weapon: 4 right off the bat
Indestructible:  Double indestructible if placed inside an armoire of invincibility
Glorious Chainsaw Method: Let your swords become like things unto chainsaws
But, where would you grip it?:  Use your belief in the awesomeness of the sword-chucks to deal mental stress equal to your conviction to all sentient beings at the start of every scene


It still needs a few powers to get up to -9 refresh cost, but its a start.

[iago]

People will come after you for your gizmo, either to have it themselves, to keep you from having it, or to keep someone ELSE from taking it from you. And since you're a one-trick pony, it won't be hard for someone of sufficient determination to do so.

There's a classic story from Cyberpunk days of old. The guy who builds an incredibly lethal, incredibly fast character -- minmaxer extraordinaire. So the first fight rolls around, he gets initiative, and he pops up from behind cover and goes to town -- wastes a couple opponents in the first shot.

Then the rest of them get to go, and, well, this here dude is the primary target. He, too, gets wasted -- in the first turn.

That's what I picture happening to the dude who shows up with all of his slots devoted to kicking ass.  One thinks he should also be putting some energy towards *covering* his own, too.

[Korwin]

What you describe isnt an MinMaxer.
He forgot to minimise His weaknesses...

[iago]

What you describe isnt an MinMaxer.
He forgot to minimise His weaknesses...

Someone cranking out a single "nuke anything" item out of *all* possible enchantment slots is certainly minmaxing *something*. "Min" doesn't mean minimize weaknesses necessarily.

[Sigma77]

Aye, what Fred said - with the example I used, the character was minimizing his spellcasting and versatility. That is, he doesn't have any Foci or other enchanted item slots to make him more adaptable to other situations. That said, he's certainly not blatantly open - he can still cast blocks, after all, though they may not be as effective as they could be.

[Korwin]

My group is one of the ones doing an online playtest, right? So, we're actively trying to break the game in every which way, poking things that look like they can be exploited, etc.. Recently, we think we found something in the enchanted item varient that can be...well, it's ugly, so I'll walk you through the example.

Ex.:
Submerged Power Level

Focused Practitioner
Channeling (Spirit) [-2]
Ritual (Crafting) [-2]
Refinement (Enchantment Slots) [-2] x5

Total Enchantment Slots: 28
Now, lets say this guy doesn't use any Foci - he turns it all into enchantment slots. The build process follows:

The Item in question lets out a concentrated blast of force. It can be anything large, as per the rules, like a staff, basketball, but in this case? I used a Shotgun. Said shotgun can't be used NORMALLY, but I thought it was appropriate for what I'm about to do.

Let's say the creator has a Superb Lore, but nothing else. So the base strength is 5.

One Slot to House the Item.
Two Slots to Give it Four Extra uses per session.
25 Slots to the Strength of the Item.

We suddenly have what's basically a Weapon: 30 that can be used 5 times a session, with more times by calling on but a single box of stress - which, honestly, with that much power? Kind of a good trade off. My question is, was anything here done wrong in the creation process that allowed this kind of silliness, or is in fact, legal?

So after the rules change, what would the build be...

Focused Practitioner
Channeling (Spirit) [-2]
Ritual (Crafting) [-2]
Refinement (Enchantment Slots) [-1] x7

16 Focus Item Slots, we use 5 of those for an Crafting Strenght Focus.
The remaining 11 we change into Magic Item Slots 22.

An Basic Item for this Char. has Strenght 10 (maximum) and one use.
So as Attack we use an pure Force 10 Attack and we add 3 Item Slots for 6 additional uses to get an 7 frequency Weapon.
For defense we use basically the same to get an Block 10 or Armor 5, 7 uses per encounter.
We uses 8 of the 22 Item Slots, 4 Slots for Potions. 10 free.
What about an Veil Item Strenght 8, duration 3 exchanges, frequency 3.
Another Veil Item but with Thaumaturgical duration (but stationary) Strenght 10, Frequency 1?
Still 7 Item Slots...

Not to shabby...
(just dont lose those Items...)

[void]

The more I think about the 'no more than twice the lore' rule, the more I don't like it. It's not THAT high a limit; take an enchanter with Great lore; +4 from specialization and focus items isn't that hard, and you've already eliminated the option of burning an item slot. I think focusing on the size of the item and the plot impact of "People will WANT this" are healthier than that hard cap.

Is there any chance it could be rephrased into a 'If a GM doesn't like it, they could cap it this way' instead of a default 'it's just how it is' note? I mean, I know it's always possible for the GM to say that's not how it is here, but I think that trying to head off the problem this way doesn't get at the root of the problem, and will just get people thinking in ways that are just as potentially problematic(see the post that popped up while I was composing this one) but harder to solve cleanly with simple plot tools.

Leave the low hanging fruit for this type of minmaxer. When someone reaches for it, their head is already at convenient baseball bat swinging level.