Classy Quests, Part 3/4
We’ve talked about loot distribution a time or two before, so what do you say we take the opportunity to discuss magic item selection instead? Let’s shall.
Whether you’re the adventuring Christmas tree of 3.X D&D, strung with every conceivable belt, ring, and magical ornament, or an Exlated 2e solar exalt with one really big daiklave, there’s a lot of pressure to select the perfect item for your build. It’s easy to get into a mindset where you absolutely, positively must have that +2 rapier of rapid sneezing. You wind up approaching your GM like a junkie in need of a fix, shaking and nervously thumbing through your inventory: Look man, if I can’t buy one or find one, my whole sneezomancer build is basically useless. You’ve got to help me!
For my money, I prefer the kind of game where your character can make characterful choices rather than correct ones. Systems like the old World of Darkness with its minor but flavorful items, 5e D&D‘s bounded accuracy and attunement system, and some of the optional rules in Pathfinder 1e are all steps in this direction. Even there, however, recovering power gamers like myself tend to scrounge for mechanical advantage at the expense of other considerations. What other considerations? Just take a look at Succubus. She does indeed look fabulous.
When I think of magic items off the top of my head, I imagine Jack Sparrow’s compass, Harry Potter’s marauder’s map, or the luggage from Discworld. It’s the weird and the idiosyncratic that stick out in my memory more than the powerful and effective. A succubus won’t get as much use out of wizard gear, but that uncommon combo provides a frisson of intrigue that your standard Charisma-boosting hat can’t match.
Still, I know that there are some gamers that hate to surrender power for the sake flavor. That’s why I appreciate combinations of the two. Magic item quirks can bridge the divide, turning your pirate’s uninteresting +1 cutlass into a prim +1 cutlass. And it’s just good fun imagining a black-hearted sea dog swearing like a dubbed-for-TV version of Pulp Fiction.
Question of the day then. Have you ever taken an item that didn’t fit your build just because you liked it? Was it worth the trade-off? Let’s hear all about your weirdest wondrous whatevers down in the comments!
ARE YOU THE KIND OF DRAGON THAT HOARDS ART? Then you’ll want to check out the “Epic Hero” reward level on our Handbook of Heroes Patreon. Like the proper fire-breathing tyrant you are, you’ll get to demand a monthly offerings suited to your tastes! Submit a request, and you’ll have a personalized original art card to add to your hoard. Trust us. This is the sort of one-of-a-kind treasure suitable to a wyrm of your magnificence.
Not “taken” exactly, as it was powerful when I found it… back in level two, we slew a wizard, levelled up, and found his treasure hoard. Among it was several magic items, including a cloak of resistance +1. Since this was one of my first D&D games, we were using lego, so I found a blue cape and stuck it on.
The thing I was a cleric, meaning that resistance bonuses were easy to come by and didn’t stack with one another. I had a cantrip that applied the exact same effects, and my first level spells could were far superior to the cloak. And yet, I loved the way that the cloak looked on my minifigure, the way that it felt silky and smooth both in game and in real life, and the way the I could dramatically pose with it flapping in the wind.
So from level 2 through to twenty, I kept that cloak. When I was captured by assassins, I was less annoyed about my capture and more that they had taken my magic gear. And when dispel magic and surprise attacks took away those first-level spells and cantrips, my cloak rewarded me, as so often has helped me succeed on a roll by one.
Take care of your magic items. If you love them the way I loved my cloak, they will love you back. I know it to be true, for it’s happened to me.
I’ve often wondered whether a WoW-style transmog system would work well in tabeltop. It could go a long way towards letting players design the look of their characters, and it could work especially well with tables that use Lego.
I personally really dislike the idea that with sufficient gp a character can just buy any magic item listed in a rulebook, I think because it takes away the surprise of getting an interesting magical item, and also because it tends to lead people not to pick interesting items. There’s just something about an item that gives a +1 somewhere but no flavour or content that bores me to tears.
In my current Rise of the Runelords campaign we’ve just hit the 4-5k gp mark, so our Gethlain Witch will be buying a headband of +2 int, and our Hobgoblin Kineticist will be buying a belt of bythegodsdoyoureallyneedevenmoreconstitution. All my character wanted in-character was a wagon to call his own, so our GM agreed to give me a selection of a handful magical items that I’ll stumble across in town to pick from. I’m really grateful that he’s prepared to do that for me when everyone else will just be shopping from the rulebook.
He also gave us a cape of fiery vanishing in a treasure horde last session, which for my money is more interesting that anything I would have picked if I sat down with the rules and tried to be optimal.
Whenever a GM can insert an item organically into the game rather than treating it like a shopping expedition, I’m down. Whichever GM was running the Doctor Strange movie was spot-on. Who didn’t want to make friends with that cape?
Hell yes, I would have that cape in a campaign any day of the week.
It’s weird seeing Succubus with actual clothes on, she does look fabulous though!
Generally, if there’s a magic item I need for my build, I’ll approach the GM with a good ic and ooc reason and be like “hey, if you could make this happen, it’d be great”. For example, I’m playing a Shadowdancer in one of my games, while the party Arcanist doesn’t have Darkvision. So the GM agreed that it’d be best for us to find a pair of Goggles of Night eventually.
I generally like the organic and spontaneous approach to magic items, which works well in 5E imo. You don’t really need magic items to be effective, but they’re a nice bonus, or sometimes they lead to great roleplay moments! So the GM can typically just throw in whatever item seems fun and you don’t have to worry about your build not being supported.
In Pathfinder, however, you kinda have to buy proper magic items, even for basic encounters of your level. Obviously a +x weapon, a +x cloak of resistance, a +x headband/belt and a +x ring of protection is a mandatory collection. And there are some builds that depend on certain magic items of course, so you can’t really ignore those either. I think the way to deal with this is to just accept that it’s the way it goes in Golarion – adventurers exist, and they have certain needs. It’s not unreasonable that you would go to a magic item crafter and find a fully detailed catalog of “basic adventuring wondrous items”. You probably see people walking around with those all the time, at least in wealthy settlements.
That’s what I was addressing with the “optional rules in Pathfinder 1e” that I mentioned in the blog:
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/unchained-rules/automatic-bonus-progression/
Yeah, I’ve seen that system and I’m not a fan – the idea is cool, but in practice it doesn’t really change anything for most campaigns. In fact, it even screws some players over.
The reason for that is because, what it essentially does, is take money away from the player characters and use it to give them what they were expected to buy with it. Not only that, but it gives it to them in a predetermined order, essentially taking away the agency of the players. Not only that, but it gives them things that they might not even need, but still takes away the amount of gold they would have used to get it.
I don’t wanna go on a tangent about it, but my point is that, while it’s a great idea, the implementation is terrible and would hurt most of my characters’ effectiveness for pretty much no real gain at all.
Hell yeah! Let’s solve this problem!
Huh. I though we were on the same page here.
I agree with old Axel rather than new Axel. In my mind, the automatic progression fixes basic system math, freeing the player to worry about more interesting magic item properties than +X to thing. I see where you’re coming from in terms of “I want to choose when to ignore this expected progression,” but I think that’s a spot where the gains in customization are outweighed by the improvement to elegance. YMMV of course.
I dunno, to me it feels less “elegant solution” and more “quick patchwork to fix the obvious mistake in balance”.
In my opinion, and I am planning to implement this if I ever GM a Pathfinder game, those bonuses should be a seperate progression column along with Feats and Ability Score increases.
Like, have a list of bonuses like the ones in that system, but instead of putting them on a rigid table, let players pick what they want instead of shoving the “right answer” to their face. That way, I don’t have to essentially lose out on progression because my character doesn’t wear armor, or doesn’t use a weapon. Or I can go ahead and prioritize Physical Prowess instead of Mental Prowess, because my character doesn’t really get much use out of mental stats.
Considering the vast, vast amounts of character options that Pathfinder offers, this system really feels… out of place. Sure, it solved a “problem” – you don’t need to buy the same 5 items on every character. But at the same time, it hurt the system’s (imo) main appeal; the freedom of customization. You no longer get to make decisions based on those items – you just “get” them, the system makes the decisions for you.
Imagine if, instead of the current feat system, the game made feat decisions for you. “On levels 3 and 5, you get Power Attack and Spell Focus”. Like, what? That would absolutely not be acceptable, so why is the item version okay?
I’m Ok with the patch to power attack:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/7tsuk5/the_elephant_in_the_room_feat_taxes_in_pathfinder/
That is something we can both agree on :p
Real talk though? Of course those optional rules are a patch. The ideal is to bake it all into the system. I think that’s what’s happening with Starfinder (which replaces power attack with a standardized damage progression) and 2e (which cuts down on adventuring Christmas tree syndrome via…what’s the new crap called. Resonance?).
Yup, it’s good that they exist, don’t get me wrong – I’ve recommended the ABP system to some groups before. But I feel it’s so obvious how it could have been designed better, so it kinda pains me.
Resonance is also a good idea on paper – I’ve heard of bunch of practical problems people have with it, but I’ve not looked at magic items in 2E myself.
I don’t know what Wizard: Necromancer is on aboot, I’m pretty sure that bustier goes great with her “Build”.
Or did you mean mechanical build?
The entendres have doubled!
Sad to see Archmage dead before he even got to make a proper appearance in the comic. However, I believe that one of his power would have a clone hidden away… on the moon!
And also one in the sun, and floating through space, and in his backyard, and in that dungeon over there. And one inside a secret compartment of each cloning tube. You can never be too careful, you know.
Archmage is only “dead” until Necromancer figures out what she wants to do with his corpse.
That is not dead which can serve as a coat rack.
Speaking of coat racks, was the Archmage evil? if not, well, Succubus is in a nasty surprise when that robe gives her three negative levels for wearing an alignment-restricted magic item! Though this one doesn’t seem to be colored in the traditional white/good, gray/neutral, black/evil shades… Is purple the chaotic variant?
Got it in one. 😀
The lawful variant is a navy blue three piece suit.
It should be noted that in some settings (particularly Dragonlance) neutral is red, not grey
Looks to me like he’s just charmed, and negative-leveled
Judging by the number of lipstick marks, that’s a lot of negative levels….
Yeah, but his eyes are hearts, not “X”s
The archmage class requires you to be at least level 12 though
Nice dressing gown, Archmage has the same taste than Hugh Hefner.
I have a really bad hoarding problem, in-game at least, like many Skyrim players, i just grab everything that is not bolted to the floor, and any house i call of my own is full to the ceiling of trophies. Seriously my characters live in a museum, once in a Pathfinder game, one member of the Pathfinder society, interpreted by our GM, was impressed with our group having a good chance to compite against that group in terms of collected magical items and artifacts from various parts of Golarion, and then try to steal them. In any case that third time we blow-up the PS up to Aucturn is a story for another time. In many games tabletop or PC, which by the way is over the top of a table, I collect everything, in Skyrim my Lakeview Manor has more dwemer artifacts than Cancelmo’s museum, the same in many games, once after defeating a… guy who… i don’t know … Did he do evil things? Doesn’t matter the case is he was defeated, we were victorious, what i do, i go grab his sword, sword my wizard didn’t needed. Why? I just liked his description, the DM warned me: “It’s just a steel sword, doesn’t have any special characteristic, it’s not a plot relevant “muffin”, it’s even something market profitable”, all i heard was “Blah, steel sword, blah, “muffin”, blah, market capitalism, blah, you can have it”. And so my wizard obtained a new shiny sword to his collection of “Things i killed and steal”… er i mean the collection of “Recovered artifacts”. And that ladies and gentlemen is just me, my friends have more stories, we are kinda a murder of crows who steal shinny things from the dead hands of mostly evil guys. It’s great to be an adventurer 🙂
I always liked the iconic Occultist for doing what I already do in games: https://paizo.com/image/content/PathfinderRPG/PZO1132-Mavaro.jpg
Eating too much potato chips and drinking beer?
Zing!
I kept a cursed item just because it had my personal emblem on it. Fortunately, it was a touch-activated item, so I was able to keep it wrapped up until I wanted to throw it at someone.
What was the curse?
I had a No Moon Lunar Exalted who took artifacts from every enemy the group defeated, even if no one else wanted them. Her reasons were two-fold. The first was that you never leave an armed enemy behind you. The second was that every artifact we took from the Realm weakened it, even if she couldn’t use it.
So I ended up with a minor armory full of artifact weapons that I didn’t use, since I believed that I should fight with what Mother Luna gave me. It started amusing the GM after a while, since at one point I had a green jade hand axe, a red jade daiklaive, and a green jade powerbow all attuned and was using my hands. He even let me add a +3 to Intimidate actions because I was wearing all these weapons. XD
Good GMing right there. I always appreciate it when the characterful choices get their own mechanical reward. It’s the “respectful nod” of GMing: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/not-bad-obama-face
When I first started reading I thought for a moment the subject today was going to be about how magic item lists are typically terribly lacking in appropriate variety. Such as 5e having way too many magic swords and 0 magic crossbows of any kind.
To my deep sadness, I am rarely in games where magic items are awarded with any frequency that allows the GM to do anything other than give each character appropriate items or ones that could possibly not be appropriate for absolutely anybody. For example my Firbolg Samurai in my CoS game has a Cape of the Mountebank… but that’s an item that works for anyone.
On the flip side of that, as a GM I tend to give out a combination of appropriate, good for anyone, and just strange items.
As an example here is a magic item I recently gave to my players in my 5e game.
-Amber Bangle of the Slippery Fish-
A thick amber bangle with a tiny fish inside. If you look at it for a bit you notice the fish moves through the bangle very slowly.
While underwater you have advantage on grappling checks and checks to escape bindings and entanglements. This includes saving throws against spells like Entangle, Ensnaring Strike, Evard’s Black Tentacles, and other similar spells and effects.
While wearing the bangle you are convinced you can speak with fish. Only after trying to do so do you realize you cannot. Ten minutes later you resume believing you can speak with fish.
That’s tradition, apparently! According to this book I’m reading…
https://www.amazon.com/Playing-at-World-Jon-Peterson/dp/0615642047
…the magic swords in 0e were practically a class feature for fighters.
Love that magic item quirk. Faux Aquaman is pretty amusing.
In the game with my Whip-TWF character (I’ve gone on length in the past about the volume of attacks in the comments section of the “named attack” comic), my fighter stumbled upon a fountain of a silvery-sheen liquid in a temple to the Wolf Lord in the Beastlands. The rest of the party was nervous about interacting with it because we had none that could Identify it. So I did what any clever person would do and scooped up some in my waterskin, but as soon as my hand touched it I was sucked into the fountain and given a choice from three rewards.
I chose the only one I could really use on my character, which was a +4 Prismatic-Burst Brilliant-Energy Silver Rapier, which was effectively an epic weapon on a non-epic character. Because it was so much stronger than my whips, I often used it in my off-hand because I could get a bunch of extra attacks on my main hand while using whips while taking advantage of the rapier and its effects.
Sure, I didn’t get all the attack bonuses and damage bonuses to my rapier that I got with my Whips, but the +4 bonus really helped bridge that gap.
I also carried a +1 Baatorian Green Steel Curse-Spewing Longsword that worked well as an additional “alternate weapon” when I needed that potential for a good penalty on my opponent.
Neither worked well with my very focused build but they had their uses.
I think that’s a healthy attitude for a player with a focused build. You aren’t going to rework your character to make a magic item work, but you aren’t going to throw it in the backpack and forget about it either.
On tabletop, you can even turn non-optimized items that fit your flair into a mechanical advantage. Take the rather well-known fighter who picked up a nice staff and some cantrips, some long robes and from then on pretended to be a wizard so his enemies would rush him in melee to get an edge, only to be cut down upon reaching him: Gandalf.
Now I’ll admit that is a meme, but Gandalf isn’t seen casting all that much magic, at least not in the scale we are used to from High Magic Fantasy settings of other franchises. Balrog, Minas Tirith, Morannon, all are fought with sword, not sorcery. His robes and elderly countenance however imply a certain frailty, something his obvious preference and skill in melee combat do not confirm.
Thus, an untypical attire may even come to your advantage. Who’s going to charge the guy wielding heavy armor and a glaive in melee combat rather than the guy with robes and no weapons?
How are enemies to know that the man in robes hides enchanted chainmail underneath and can conjure a greatsword to his hand with a thought? How are they to expect the glaive-wielder is actually not trained in its use, but its material makes it an excellent spell focus? By the time they have piled on the Eldritch Knight and realize their mistake, the robe’s protection from fire and his own wards have him stand as the sole survivor of a fireball that wiped out the conveniently clustered goons around him.
I often wore armor I found fashionable rather than necessarily convenient in DDO. I didn’t play the very highest difficulty levels anyways, and even my experimental builds were typically fairly solid, so I didn’t have that much trouble anyways and I would say it was definitely worth the trade-off.
This is an important point. The trade-off is worth it when you’re sticking to a relative power level. If you’re too far ahead of the rest of the table in terms of power, maybe it’s time to do the characterful thing rather than the power play. If you’re lagging behind, maybe it’s time to prioritize power. So long as you’re sticking close to a baseline competency, I think you’ve got room to play in either direction.
God i always hated that about Pathfinder. Pc are like Walking Christmas Trees of Magic Items in there worse. They really need a lot of those Stat Boosting Items or they will fall behind big Time. It’s even worse with the builds Urgh. If you build a bit wrong, you Chatacter could be absolutly useless at higher Lvls.
5e is much better there, and Magic Items feel More Special. Thats how it should be! It shouldn’t be Axe of +x. No! It should be the Magic Ax of the Troll King, one of a Kind, wich your Fighter wrestled out of the Hands of his prievious owner.
Apparently the Pathfinder guys feel the same. They give us those optional rules I mentioned in the blog as a way to mitigate “necessary item progression,” and then they did the resonance thing in 2e:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?5056-How-Pathfinder-2-s-Resonance-Reduces-Wand-Spamming-Comparisons-to-5E-Discussed
It’s an interesting (if controversial) compromise between “I like streamlined play” and “I like to customize my characters.”
I dislike the idea of “builds” and “optimised characters” (I may have mentioned this before), because to me they get in the way of what the game is about (for me), which is imagining oneself in another world.
I think there are two big reasons for it: first, CRPGs have trained people to try to “beat the game” and also to expect that fun can only be had with the greatest possible power. Second, parallel DM failures to make clear that the game isn’t about “beating the encounter” but about a shared narrative, and to make the story and world fun and rewarding rather than the enemy.
Remember, there are many reasons to play these games:
https://sites.google.com/site/amagigames/the-what-i-like-glossary
I tend to be all over the map with those terms, and have felt some of the same pleasure in feat selection as in building a well-tuned MtG deck. That said, I tend to agree that the game works best when players can forget about mechanics and concentrate on being in the moment. That tends to happen when you’re new to a system and don’t care about the rules and when you’re very experienced in a system and the rules are second nature. For me at least, it’s that middle part that’s tricky.
It’s also something that’s more of a problem when there’s a significant disparity in experience within the group. If everyone is playing casually as a fun diversion, it works. Presumably, if everyone is really into the rules, that works too. The problems arise when people at the same table are fundamentally playing different games.
It’s not only an RPG problem either, thinking back to your story of being given a powerful character so you could contribute while new and taking fun away from another player, I had the same thing years ago in archery, where I used to compete to international level. I was doing some practise head to head matches with someone of much lower level, and a coach decides it would be better to give them a boost by doubling whatever score they shoot. No problem, you think… until they then start telling everyone that they must be so good because they won, and people say he’s really good but what BS that is, etc. Not fun.
That terms glossary is really interesting. I’ve always hated “agon”. Even while competing internationally, for me it was about my ability to do the thing, and while other competitors might present barriers to doing the thing, that just meant I had to do the thing better. But then I’m mildly on “the spectrum” as it were, so I think that personal antagonism is something I’m just not well equipped to handle.
Expression, kenosis, kinesis, paida, and sociability. Those are probably my touchpoints for a “super fun” evening of gaming.
I’ll do you one better. It’s only a problem when people at the same table are unaware that they’re playing different games. It’s always possible to switch focus and bring yourself into alignment with the rest of the group. It may not be your default favorite way to play, but it beats hell out of pulling the campaign into multiple different directions.
Silly Succubus, you could have had an even snazzier outfit for only 200 gold pieces via a Bracer of Many Garments. Hang on, can’t she get any clothing she wants already via disguises?
I’m surprised Succubus can wear that robe as well – Archmage (bath)robes are usually alignment-locked and color-coded. In other words, the succubus is probably forced to endure a bunch of negative levels just for having it if it’s former user was non-evil. Unless miss Succubi ignores negative levels.
Further interestingly, that color of robe is rather snazzy – given archmage robes are usually the most boring shades of white (good), gray (neutral) or evil (black)! Does ‘pimp purple’ mean it’s a fit for a chaotic archmage?
Gave a GM fits with the Sleeves of many garments one time. I was a Rogue, and the number of times I did something, disappeared for a second, changed my clothing completely with something face obscuring and rolled Disguise was fun.
Is “quick change artist” a feat or a rogue talent? It feels like it should be….
Ha! Apparently it’s a magic item:
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/c-d/cloak-quick-change/
The problem I have with players making “characterful” choices is that it seems like if any magic items roll up, the “characterful” choice is to take it out of pure greed. Whether it’s the magic staff being filtched by the fighter because it’s mechanically stronger than his mundane longsword, or the wizard stealing that enchanted tower shield because he’s certain he could figure something out about its enchantments and used.
That’s why even if loot is tailor made for me I try and get consent by my other party members first. Call em out to make sure they don’t grumble about loot later. My wizard would love to gobble up all of the spell scrolls he can get, and in exchange actual weapons and armor should first go to everyone but me. Something i like to remind them when they moan about me getting that sweet +2 Dagger of Murder Kill since despite being the party wizard, I have no actual magical gear.
Yeah… The interaction between Succubus and Necromancer in today’s comic isn’t exactly ideal. It’s also not what I’m talking about when I say “characterful choices.” For discussion on loot distribution and “fiscal PVP,” see here:
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/fair-share
…and here:
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/detect_liar
What I’m getting at is in the blog is the decision to wear a suboptimal item for non-mechanical reasons. For example, “The +2 rapier is mechanically superior, but this one was gifted to me by my slain fencing master.”
I‘ve got a Handy Haversack full of non-magical gear just so I can have (almost) all the non magical gear in the handbook if I need it. Most of the (almost) got flushed down the river with the waggon I had. It was a sad day. But next opportunity I‘ll restock on bear traps and I‘ll find a way to use them /shakes fist at GM and co-players.
I sympathize on those bear traps. The problem with traps in general is that you’ve got to have a high degree of discipline as a party to make them work. Nobody can rush ahead and engage the enemy too soon, and that is a tall order for most adventurers.
Plus once you put them down they become entirely imperceptible to you, unless you’re a rogue
I don’t really consider equipment when planning a build since you never know what’ll turn up during play. I tend to pick gear according to the theme and style of my character. Yes, the Cackling Hag’s Blouse and Corset of Dire Witchcraft would be better items for my witch but he’s not the cackling type and would much rather wear a waistcoat than a corset. While I’ll happily pick a weaker item on the basis of style I take care not to do it to the extent that it becomes detrimental. Pathfinder is both a role playing game and roll playing game so I pay heed to both.
I like the idea of the automatic bonus progression since it frees thing up to focus on interesting flavourful items boring items that just add numbers. I suggested it to my group but they didn’t take to it.
What? A balanced approach? How dare you be so reasonable! 😛
If your group doesn’t like the automatic bonus progression, I suggest reminding them about the combining items rules:
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items#TOC-Adding-New-Abilities
That way you can have a cloak of resistance / cloak of the-something-more-interesting at the same time.
I think it was partly down to me using the r-word: rules. The word alone evokes an antipathetic response from a number of others in my group so they were saying no to the idea before I could explain it.
It’s not that they want to play without any rules, with no rules there’s no game, instead I believe their reaction is the result of “the rules” often only becoming explicit and thus noticed during points of friction, restriction and negativity. When player’s actions and desires are in accordance with the rules the rules are rendered invisible; they’re no longer “the rules” they’re “play”.
It often goes unappreciated that the rules facilitate fun and excitement by helping to build and release tension; as well as helping to maintain a sense of fairness, coherence and player agency. Some may brand me the rules lawyer of the group.
I’m right there with you. At their best a system’s rules can be expressive, intuitive, and offer depth of play.
However, there does come a point when “complex and burdensome” enter into the equation . And as you discovered, even within the same group that’s a moving target. If your group don’t care that the game assumes they’ll have +X weapons and a +Y cloak of resistance, why should they care about an automatic bonus progression? That’s just more stuff to remember!
As I think about this, I’m increasingly of the opinion that “optional rules” are ghettoized before they even hit play. For many players, the basics is all they need to know, and anything beyond that is needless complexity. That’s why some people are clamoring for a return to simplicity with 2e while others wonder why it was necessary at all: “Couldn’t we have just fixed things with a few new subsystems?”
“Wearing an item you don’t actually need” is one of the things followers of my favorite homebrew deity (a Goddess of Paradox) do. Her followers often wear items that have no mechanical benefit for them – usually something like improving a class ability they don’t have – and grinning whenever they manage to confuse someone by doing so.
Cheeky buggers! I think I know a monk that belongs to that order:
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/kid-up
I kinda did the opposite. I found something, and made it work by changing the build.
So, the short version of the encounter was that we stumbled on a nest of super-venomous spiders that were all huge and gross. Not like fantasy huge spider, but like real life huge spider. Like, Australia spiders. Well, our front liner was terrified of spiders. I, as a goblin, loved spiders. I caught one in a jar, fed it crickets until we leveled, and put a level in witch for the sole purpose of making it my familiar. It spent the next year living in my hat. I named it Bitey.
The levels in witch turned out really useful. I did things like talk to the soul of the city, learn to speak to birds and beasts, and used the ability to speak to bird and beast to make a spy network made up of cats and pigeons. So, all in all, the desire to have a kickass pet spider was more useful than the pet spider itself.
Goddamn I love that goblins are a core race in 2e. Who doesn’t love goblins?
Way to use your spider as a build-around as well. That’s the way you turn a character quirk into a big in-game deal.