Carrying Capacity (but not strength) items

Moderators: Active Admins, Forum Moderators, Active DMs, Contributors, Suggestion Moderators

Post Reply
Luingar
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2022 5:49 am

Carrying Capacity (but not strength) items

Post by Luingar »

In pathfinder there are a pair of items that I think would fit well into arelith's world and lore, and provide additional solutions to the eternal challenge of all adventurers: inventory management.

These items are the muleback cords, and heavyload belt. The effects of these items is, simplified, to triple the carrying Capacity of the wearer in a way that stacks with the counterpart item. In pathfinder, to triple your carrying Capacity is about +8 strength, which gives us an idea of the power level involved.

The most interesting thing about the items is the choices it forces players to make, as in pathfinder , magical items abilities are tied to slot, which means by choosing to wear a heavyload belt, you are choosing not to have any physical enhancements from your gear. By choosing muleback cords you are refusing the cloak of resistance, alongside all the other powerful alternatives such as the cloak of flying.

I have assembled for your enjoyment an array of objects that increase the carrying Capacity of the wearer, alongside the suggested increase amount and type.

Heavyload Belt: +2 str for the purposes of carrying Capacity, +1 str, and runed. The basic item, with minimal opportunity cost.

Muleback Cords: instead of a cloak, as in pathfinder, i think these should use the body slot, preventing use of other types of armor. In exchange, they grant the largest bonus, fully tripling your carrying capacity (or granting a large flat reduction.

Movable Rod: Mainland item, grants a significant bonus to str. Simple proficiency, and Can be duel weirded, but does no damage, and has arcane spell failure to boot.

Ring of the Encumbered: Budget bead of gravity. Flat weight reduction, easier to craft. Maybe have a greater version that replicates orb, or amulet, but still, you can only have two rings on, so the benefits are limited. Easily swapped, and the lowest bonuses, but rings are fun.

Porter's Boots: +1 end, +2 str for the purposes of carrying Capacity, tracking you is 10 points easier.

Caravaneers Harness(or muleback cords, i guess) : Cloak slot, grants freedom of movement effect, but prevents running. If overencumbered, spawns a cart behind you that follows you closely, Neutral and unhostile to all, but if destroyed, you will drop items unto the ground, heaviest first, until you are no longer encumbered, and the harness must be repaired.

User avatar
Sincra
Project Lead
Project Lead
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:48 pm

Re: Carrying Capacity (but not strength) items

Post by Sincra »

We cannot dynamically adjust the carry capacity of individuals so the multiplication factor is rather moot.

Best I can do is make items that are negative weights.

This does not mean the list is impossible, for example, programmatically your Heavyload belt where it adds what is an effective +2 to the strength but only for carry load.
Since the increments of strength are defined in a 2da we can:

  • Get the strength values row
  • Get the strength value -1 row
  • Subtract the lesser value from the greater

This tells us a value of how much negative weight we should apply to that belt on equip.

The issue then there becomes we are only defining it temporarily, which means the item is enchantable due to effectively being a blank belt.
Thus need to add false value to it, this only works on the current live dweomercraft.
The future system does not care about item value so much as the value of item properties, which means we would need to make a new item property to represent increased value of points.

All this is to say, we'll need something that makes these items more complex and costly for enchanting if they're to be equippable.

The ideas are fine though, I think adding more magic items for utility or changing how something works is a good approach to magical settings and is very much something I will work on.

I am moving this to approved so I may find it easier, but every item inside this list above needs internal discussion and approval from Kalopsia to progress beyond conceptual.

Irongron wrote:I've literally never used -guard on anyone.
Post Reply