So what are peoples thoughts on using Tinker Tools to modify existing items?
Example: Tink The Rock Gnome loves her crossbow but hates having to reload it every time she shoots something. In order to speed up her ability to shoot things she constructs an autoloader and attaches it to her crossbow. This removes the loading property and gives her crossbow reload (5 shots) instead. Later she expands the hopper for her autoloader to increase its capacity, moving from reload (5 shots) to reload (10 shots).
Thoughts?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GM of The Bonus Role - We are playing a 5E game set in my homebrew world of Audra check us out Sunday's at 10 AM CST and follow us at the following social media links. https://www.twitch.tv/thebonusrole @BonusRole
I think it's a good idea. I also like the idea of failures, so maybe with it being able to auto-load there is also a mechanic where it can jam, causing you to have to unjam/reload your next turn, maybe only on Nat 1's. If you roll a nat 1, the crossbow jams, so your shot that turn fails, and your next turn has to be taken to unjam/reload (allowing you to reload to 5 shots again).
Mhmm, with any mechanical device there is a chance of failure. But what ability check would it be? To use a set of Thieves Tools is a dexterity check with your proficiency if you are so proficient. So should Tink "tinkering" be a dex check? or something like an intellect check? Or perhaps first one to design the modification, and then another to apply it? I mean some of the tool/ability interactions are obvious, dexterity for thieves tools, strength for smiths tools so on and so forth.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GM of The Bonus Role - We are playing a 5E game set in my homebrew world of Audra check us out Sunday's at 10 AM CST and follow us at the following social media links. https://www.twitch.tv/thebonusrole @BonusRole
With the chance of failure, i would just go with the hit die for simplicity. When they roll to hit, if they roll a nat 1, that is the jam. It's a static 5% chance (modifiers don't matter, it's a nat 1 on an attack roll).
However if you wanted to tie it to something, I think the way tools work is they aren't actually tied to a stat like INT or DEX, if you are proficient with a tool, you just add your proficiency bonus. I could be wrong on that, but that's how I interpret it. Also if you tie it to something, then you're setting a DC too I would assume, which I think would basically guarantee a higher than 5% chance of failure, which on someone's main attack can be pretty rough, though I understand it.
I love tools in general and I think this is a great use of tinkering tools. In the current campaign I'm running tinkering is all over the place. First, I interpret the rules the same as Mehetmet regarding ability scores and tools. The only specific rule for using an ability score with a tool is the thieves tools, so in that case specific overrides general. Otherwise, it's really up to the DM.
I understand the jamming mechanic, however I could see this being pretty damaging to a character. A 5% chance of essentially losing a turn is rough, especially if they are a class that gains extra attacks. This is one of the reasons I dislike the fumbles on a 1 houserule because it punishes players who rely on making more than one attack per round. If you're dead set on including it, then I agree with Mehetment that it should only be on a natural 1.
At that point, you could have the player make a DEX check with proficiency bonus to see if she can fix it on the spot or if she needs to burn an action or bonus action to fix the jam. A DC of 15 means that at level 1 she has about a 55% chance of fixing the jam on the spot (assuming +3 to DEX and +2 proficiency) and a 20% chance at level 17 (+5 DEX, +6 proficiency). I tend to be a bit generous as a DM, so personally I would set the DC between 10-12 so that she would eventually be so skilled that she could fix a jam automatically.
Now if you're open to nixing the jamming feature, I would suggest looking at what Tink gains from the reload property. If we break it down, she gets the first benefit of the Crossbow Expert feat, that is ignoring the loading property. Rather than tack on a failure chance, I would suggest having a gold cost attached to the upgrades Tink makes. This could be a downtime activity that Tink likes to do when she's between adventures. You could tie the clip size to her proficiency bonus to add some crunch to the flavor of her constantly fiddling with her stuff.
In my current campaign we reskinned crossbows to be "spike slingers" (sort of like fancy, old cowboyish type single round guns). One of the upgrades I gave the player who came up with this idea was an attachment to his slinger that allows him to add magic to his shots. He has a three round clip that he can fill with whatever mix of shots that he wants and he can choose to use one each time he takes a shot. I use spells as the basis for the different types of shots and price them out accordingly. Full disclosure, I got the idea form the weapon capsules in 3.5.
Speaking of which, the old 3.5 books have tons of ideas for modifying things including some suggested pricing to get you started. There's wand chambers, mechanical burglars, instrument modification like a blade on a guitar, and all kinds of crazy things if you go through the books. Books like the Arms & Equipment Guide, Song and Silence, Complete Scoundrel, Complete Adventurer, Dungeonscape, are good places to start.
Had a game a few days ago. Tink's player (Tink is the character's nickname her full name is Tinkgar'no'don't Deeperuption) found out that the DMG has rules for explosives and is so trying to think of a way to integrate them into her crossbow. At this point, I may just pull up my old copy of Weapons of Legacy and do a rough conversion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GM of The Bonus Role - We are playing a 5E game set in my homebrew world of Audra check us out Sunday's at 10 AM CST and follow us at the following social media links. https://www.twitch.tv/thebonusrole @BonusRole
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So what are peoples thoughts on using Tinker Tools to modify existing items?
Example: Tink The Rock Gnome loves her crossbow but hates having to reload it every time she shoots something. In order to speed up her ability to shoot things she constructs an autoloader and attaches it to her crossbow. This removes the loading property and gives her crossbow reload (5 shots) instead. Later she expands the hopper for her autoloader to increase its capacity, moving from reload (5 shots) to reload (10 shots).
Thoughts?
GM of The Bonus Role - We are playing a 5E game set in my homebrew world of Audra check us out Sunday's at 10 AM CST and follow us at the following social media links.
https://www.twitch.tv/thebonusrole
@BonusRole
I think it's a good idea. I also like the idea of failures, so maybe with it being able to auto-load there is also a mechanic where it can jam, causing you to have to unjam/reload your next turn, maybe only on Nat 1's. If you roll a nat 1, the crossbow jams, so your shot that turn fails, and your next turn has to be taken to unjam/reload (allowing you to reload to 5 shots again).
How do you get a one-armed goblin out of a tree?
Wave!
Mhmm, with any mechanical device there is a chance of failure. But what ability check would it be? To use a set of Thieves Tools is a dexterity check with your proficiency if you are so proficient. So should Tink "tinkering" be a dex check? or something like an intellect check? Or perhaps first one to design the modification, and then another to apply it? I mean some of the tool/ability interactions are obvious, dexterity for thieves tools, strength for smiths tools so on and so forth.
GM of The Bonus Role - We are playing a 5E game set in my homebrew world of Audra check us out Sunday's at 10 AM CST and follow us at the following social media links.
https://www.twitch.tv/thebonusrole
@BonusRole
With the chance of failure, i would just go with the hit die for simplicity. When they roll to hit, if they roll a nat 1, that is the jam. It's a static 5% chance (modifiers don't matter, it's a nat 1 on an attack roll).
However if you wanted to tie it to something, I think the way tools work is they aren't actually tied to a stat like INT or DEX, if you are proficient with a tool, you just add your proficiency bonus. I could be wrong on that, but that's how I interpret it. Also if you tie it to something, then you're setting a DC too I would assume, which I think would basically guarantee a higher than 5% chance of failure, which on someone's main attack can be pretty rough, though I understand it.
How do you get a one-armed goblin out of a tree?
Wave!
I love tools in general and I think this is a great use of tinkering tools. In the current campaign I'm running tinkering is all over the place. First, I interpret the rules the same as Mehetmet regarding ability scores and tools. The only specific rule for using an ability score with a tool is the thieves tools, so in that case specific overrides general. Otherwise, it's really up to the DM.
I understand the jamming mechanic, however I could see this being pretty damaging to a character. A 5% chance of essentially losing a turn is rough, especially if they are a class that gains extra attacks. This is one of the reasons I dislike the fumbles on a 1 houserule because it punishes players who rely on making more than one attack per round. If you're dead set on including it, then I agree with Mehetment that it should only be on a natural 1.
At that point, you could have the player make a DEX check with proficiency bonus to see if she can fix it on the spot or if she needs to burn an action or bonus action to fix the jam. A DC of 15 means that at level 1 she has about a 55% chance of fixing the jam on the spot (assuming +3 to DEX and +2 proficiency) and a 20% chance at level 17 (+5 DEX, +6 proficiency). I tend to be a bit generous as a DM, so personally I would set the DC between 10-12 so that she would eventually be so skilled that she could fix a jam automatically.
Now if you're open to nixing the jamming feature, I would suggest looking at what Tink gains from the reload property. If we break it down, she gets the first benefit of the Crossbow Expert feat, that is ignoring the loading property. Rather than tack on a failure chance, I would suggest having a gold cost attached to the upgrades Tink makes. This could be a downtime activity that Tink likes to do when she's between adventures. You could tie the clip size to her proficiency bonus to add some crunch to the flavor of her constantly fiddling with her stuff.
In my current campaign we reskinned crossbows to be "spike slingers" (sort of like fancy, old cowboyish type single round guns). One of the upgrades I gave the player who came up with this idea was an attachment to his slinger that allows him to add magic to his shots. He has a three round clip that he can fill with whatever mix of shots that he wants and he can choose to use one each time he takes a shot. I use spells as the basis for the different types of shots and price them out accordingly. Full disclosure, I got the idea form the weapon capsules in 3.5.
Speaking of which, the old 3.5 books have tons of ideas for modifying things including some suggested pricing to get you started. There's wand chambers, mechanical burglars, instrument modification like a blade on a guitar, and all kinds of crazy things if you go through the books. Books like the Arms & Equipment Guide, Song and Silence, Complete Scoundrel, Complete Adventurer, Dungeonscape, are good places to start.
Had a game a few days ago. Tink's player (Tink is the character's nickname her full name is Tinkgar'no'don't Deeperuption) found out that the DMG has rules for explosives and is so trying to think of a way to integrate them into her crossbow. At this point, I may just pull up my old copy of Weapons of Legacy and do a rough conversion.
GM of The Bonus Role - We are playing a 5E game set in my homebrew world of Audra check us out Sunday's at 10 AM CST and follow us at the following social media links.
https://www.twitch.tv/thebonusrole
@BonusRole