I am running a campaign (Homebrew) and had the idea of adding in a magic system like Skyrim's. If you don't know, you can destroy items with magic properties and re-apply it on a different item at the cost of a soul gem. My change would be adding in gems of different values for different rarities. (this can be done on more than one other items)(one item can have multiple enchantments but for every subsequent one it is 1.5 times the cost eg. a cloak with 3 enchantments would have a x2.0 modifier for the next enchantment)
Common: 500gp
Uncommon: 1,500gp
Rare: 4,000
Very Rare: 8,500gp
Legendary: 10,000gp
Wonderous: +500gp to the value needed
I am thankful for any feedback, changes or fixes for my system
First off I must say the title of this thread is misleading. It should say "Skyrim Enchanting System" not magic, which implies spellcasting more than enchanting.
Second, I believe many folks consider Skyrim's Enchanting System to be broken, even in Skyrim. It allows too much power to be accumulated too quickly. And you could abuse the heck out of it in D&D by making +1 or +2 items and selling them with little challenge, once you figure out the soul gem deal.
However, I like the approach to Enchanting they have as a concept.
It is a skill that you have to develop. But you would need to be pretty high level to be good enough to Enchant something in D&D.
In the AD&D days, the idea behind enchanting started with having an exquisite weapon crafted. If the die roll was high enough, then the weapon or item was able to hold an enchantment. Next the item had to be purified, blessed, cleansed or some such ritual to prepare it for Enchanting. Next a group of wizards or clerics had to perform a ritual to "open" the item to enchanting before the main character went through the ritual of bestowing the enchantment on the item. The DM could declare what the result was or he could roll dice. Mostly the suspense was whether you got a +1 or +2 bonus, but the DM could manage that any way they wished.
None of the old system talked about Soul Gems. Soul Gems are an interesting concept for powering an item, but I found in Skyrim they were a mechanic that encouraged good characters to murder "monsters" because they contained a Great Soul or something like that. I didn't have a problem with using my bow to hunt deer and pick up minor soul or whatever the lowest type was. But I found myself in one campaign stopping what I was doing because I could murder a couple giants for their souls and their toes, and then resuming what I was doing. It would have made more sense if I could have captured dragon souls in another type of gem and used them for Enchanting instead of shouts.
TL:DR - Use the best parts of Skyrim Enchanting to homebrew your own approach to enchanting. Try not to make it OP.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
I like the idea of letting players shift enchantments from one item to another, but I don't like for them to keeping adding them on. For example, most all the cool weapons are swords, but I don't think it would be game breaking for a battle axe to be a flame tongue instead of it only ever being a long sword. But, once they make that axe into a flame tongue, they can't also add the dwarven thrower property to it. Only allow one enchantment per weapon, I guess is what I would say.
Keep in mind, there are only three attunement slots for a reason, if you allow multiple properties on one item, you are basically giving them additional slots.
As for the mechanics of how to do it, that's going to be up to you to make it as easy or difficult as you like, just like it would be with crafting a magic item from scratch.
I like the idea of letting players shift enchantments from one item to another, but I don't like for them to keeping adding them on. For example, most all the cool weapons are swords, but I don't think it would be game breaking for a battle axe to be a flame tongue instead of it only ever being a long sword. But, once they make that axe into a flame tongue, they can't also add the dwarven thrower property to it. Only allow one enchantment per weapon, I guess is what I would say.
Keep in mind, there are only three attunement slots for a reason, if you allow multiple properties on one item, you are basically giving them additional slots.
As for the mechanics of how to do it, that's going to be up to you to make it as easy or difficult as you like, just like it would be with crafting a magic item from scratch.
I think the problem here is the question about multiple properties on one item. That causes an attunement balancing issue. However, if it's just moving single enchantments across items- say, taking a +1 Longsword and melting the enchantment down to make a +1 Greatsword- I don't think that's a problem (though I will say that if you are just trying to change, say, a cloak to a necklace, just do it when giving loot as a DM if you want). But, most importantly, I think kitchen-sink items cause gameplay problems- not so much for the balance, since having three effects from one source is not that different from having three effects from three sources. However, it can make an item way too important to the campaign or to your players instead of making diverse loot. I remember that I got a spectacular item from a DM in a campaign I played in. It was basically a +1 hand crossbow that could also be used as a grappling hook and had a few other crowd control abilities. The problems with the item, although it had great fluff, were pretty varied. Let me just quickly bullet point them:
Inconsistent range across abilities. The crossbow shots had one range, the grappling hook had one range, and the ability to grab and pull (or go towards enemies) had a different range. These different ranges meant that the weapon was, while very effective, a major pain to keep track of in combat with range because of the different ranges that could be used.
Inconsistent attack/DC modifiers. The attack roll was just a normal attack roll with a +1 bonus. The grappling hook was a non-combat check that could be used for movement (and for some reason the DM fluffed it as a teleport, for some reason). The crowd control options were a set of DC that was tied to an ability score modifier and varied by ability.
Flavor/mechanic disconnect. This was more of the DM's fault for describing the item poorly, but certain features were described as having adamantine, but it did not have the properties of an adamantine item. While this isn't a major issue, this sort of disconnect was common with other weapon abilities as well- some of the crowd control abilities were described as impaling enemies, but the DM didn't intend it to do damage which made it a bit... strange.
Now what I'm not trying to say here is that you can't have complicated items. But you need to make sure that they "make sense". I also think that there is some significant issue with magic item distribution that can come up with this structure- especially if you can use gold to just amplify items. There's also some significant issues with rarity- combining a cloak of protection, a luck stone, and a cloak of elvenkind would be three uncommon items, but combined they give +2 to saves, +1 to all ability checks, +1 to AC, and advantage on stealth with disadvantage on enemy checks to see you. All three of those normally require attunement, but if you combine them, they become one item- so unless you track attunement per effect, you're going to immediate break your game if you have any powergamers in your group.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi,
I am running a campaign (Homebrew) and had the idea of adding in a magic system like Skyrim's. If you don't know, you can destroy items with magic properties and re-apply it on a different item at the cost of a soul gem. My change would be adding in gems of different values for different rarities. (this can be done on more than one other items)(one item can have multiple enchantments but for every subsequent one it is 1.5 times the cost eg. a cloak with 3 enchantments would have a x2.0 modifier for the next enchantment)
Common: 500gp
Uncommon: 1,500gp
Rare: 4,000
Very Rare: 8,500gp
Legendary: 10,000gp
Wonderous: +500gp to the value needed
I am thankful for any feedback, changes or fixes for my system
First off I must say the title of this thread is misleading. It should say "Skyrim Enchanting System" not magic, which implies spellcasting more than enchanting.
Second, I believe many folks consider Skyrim's Enchanting System to be broken, even in Skyrim. It allows too much power to be accumulated too quickly. And you could abuse the heck out of it in D&D by making +1 or +2 items and selling them with little challenge, once you figure out the soul gem deal.
However, I like the approach to Enchanting they have as a concept.
It is a skill that you have to develop. But you would need to be pretty high level to be good enough to Enchant something in D&D.
In the AD&D days, the idea behind enchanting started with having an exquisite weapon crafted. If the die roll was high enough, then the weapon or item was able to hold an enchantment. Next the item had to be purified, blessed, cleansed or some such ritual to prepare it for Enchanting. Next a group of wizards or clerics had to perform a ritual to "open" the item to enchanting before the main character went through the ritual of bestowing the enchantment on the item. The DM could declare what the result was or he could roll dice. Mostly the suspense was whether you got a +1 or +2 bonus, but the DM could manage that any way they wished.
None of the old system talked about Soul Gems. Soul Gems are an interesting concept for powering an item, but I found in Skyrim they were a mechanic that encouraged good characters to murder "monsters" because they contained a Great Soul or something like that. I didn't have a problem with using my bow to hunt deer and pick up minor soul or whatever the lowest type was. But I found myself in one campaign stopping what I was doing because I could murder a couple giants for their souls and their toes, and then resuming what I was doing. It would have made more sense if I could have captured dragon souls in another type of gem and used them for Enchanting instead of shouts.
TL:DR - Use the best parts of Skyrim Enchanting to homebrew your own approach to enchanting. Try not to make it OP.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
I like the idea of letting players shift enchantments from one item to another, but I don't like for them to keeping adding them on. For example, most all the cool weapons are swords, but I don't think it would be game breaking for a battle axe to be a flame tongue instead of it only ever being a long sword. But, once they make that axe into a flame tongue, they can't also add the dwarven thrower property to it. Only allow one enchantment per weapon, I guess is what I would say.
Keep in mind, there are only three attunement slots for a reason, if you allow multiple properties on one item, you are basically giving them additional slots.
As for the mechanics of how to do it, that's going to be up to you to make it as easy or difficult as you like, just like it would be with crafting a magic item from scratch.
I like the idea of letting players shift enchantments from one item to another, but I don't like for them to keeping adding them on. For example, most all the cool weapons are swords, but I don't think it would be game breaking for a battle axe to be a flame tongue instead of it only ever being a long sword. But, once they make that axe into a flame tongue, they can't also add the dwarven thrower property to it. Only allow one enchantment per weapon, I guess is what I would say.
Keep in mind, there are only three attunement slots for a reason, if you allow multiple properties on one item, you are basically giving them additional slots.
As for the mechanics of how to do it, that's going to be up to you to make it as easy or difficult as you like, just like it would be with crafting a magic item from scratch.
I think the problem here is the question about multiple properties on one item. That causes an attunement balancing issue. However, if it's just moving single enchantments across items- say, taking a +1 Longsword and melting the enchantment down to make a +1 Greatsword- I don't think that's a problem (though I will say that if you are just trying to change, say, a cloak to a necklace, just do it when giving loot as a DM if you want). But, most importantly, I think kitchen-sink items cause gameplay problems- not so much for the balance, since having three effects from one source is not that different from having three effects from three sources. However, it can make an item way too important to the campaign or to your players instead of making diverse loot. I remember that I got a spectacular item from a DM in a campaign I played in. It was basically a +1 hand crossbow that could also be used as a grappling hook and had a few other crowd control abilities. The problems with the item, although it had great fluff, were pretty varied. Let me just quickly bullet point them:
Now what I'm not trying to say here is that you can't have complicated items. But you need to make sure that they "make sense". I also think that there is some significant issue with magic item distribution that can come up with this structure- especially if you can use gold to just amplify items. There's also some significant issues with rarity- combining a cloak of protection, a luck stone, and a cloak of elvenkind would be three uncommon items, but combined they give +2 to saves, +1 to all ability checks, +1 to AC, and advantage on stealth with disadvantage on enemy checks to see you. All three of those normally require attunement, but if you combine them, they become one item- so unless you track attunement per effect, you're going to immediate break your game if you have any powergamers in your group.