General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Me, if I were to take the numerical bonuses off of items and put them on characters, I'd probably put them at 3/8, 13/18 & 23/28, to spread the boosts out a bit. I might do that on my next campaign, even.
The character builder will get in the way of that, because the power attack cards will assume that your magical items will have a +x on them. The workaround would be to not assign your weapon to the weapon slot, but then you wouldn't have the information on how the power and the weapon work together.
The character builder will get in the way of that, because the power attack cards will assume that your magical items will have a +x on them. The workaround would be to not assign your weapon to the weapon slot, but then you wouldn't have the information on how the power and the weapon work together.
Nah, in the CB, the easiest workaround is simply to assign each character an appropriate + weapon at each required level (with the understanding among the players that that plus isn't actually attached to the weapon per se, but actually inherent to the characters).
They still won't find +X weapons in the world, but for purposes of making the CB work right (until such time as houserule plugins can be used), pseudo-plus weapons can be used as a shorthand.
__________________ The Evil DM's Motto:
"I don't kill characters. A dead character can't suffer any more...."
While I think some magic items are indeed a bit too weak to be worth taking up a slot, I think that one of the best things 4e did was to get rid of stat boosts, so I for one am very glad the Gauntlets of Ogre Power and similar items DO NOT grant a stat boost.
It is especially frustrating if your DM hands out a +3 sword when you have a +1 sword with a daily power. That pretty much means you stick the +1 cool sword into your pack and use the +3 sword most of the time, even though you'd rather use the cooler sword.
It adds nothing to the game but a bookkeeping annoyance.
But wait. You've spent this whole time playing the game with the bookkeeping annoyance of having to keep track of the +1 from the Sword of Coolness. And you haven't quit yet. So I don't think you've have that much of a problem keeping track of the +3.
If this is really your preference, then I say sell the +3 sword (and don't screw over the player with the "1/5 rule"), then spend the money on upgrading your Sword of Coolness +1 to it's +2 version. Then take the remaining money and buy some potions, magic whetstones, or combine with other people's money to get them an upgrade. The guidelines in the Adventurer's Vault book actually give specifics on upgrades, but it's pretty easy to figure out how it should work.
So far from obviating skill at sneaking, invisibility actually makes it more often relevant. "Ssh! I'm being vewwy sneaky!" doesn't matter when one is in plain sight of Wascawwy Wabbit. Being invisible is only slightly more useful if one is making a racket ... but potentially very helpful if one can be stealthy to boot.
I wonder: why does the ring not permit sustaining the effect as does the wizard spell?
I was nonplussed by the feeble qualitative difference made by the 4E boots of spider climbing, finding the effect of wavestrider boots more satisfying.
It isn't, that's the problem. It is just adding +1 for the sake of adding +1, not because it adds anything to how cool the character is. A fiery blade, a keen blade, a blade that teleports people into another dimension are all a lot cooler than "I can hit slightly more often for slightly more damage". It is especially frustrating if your DM hands out a +3 sword when you have a +1 sword with a daily power. That pretty much means you stick the +1 cool sword into your pack and use the +3 sword most of the time, even though you'd rather use the cooler sword.
It adds nothing to the game but a bookkeeping annoyance.
It's not much of a bookkeeping annoyance. And if the daily is actually cool, why would you drop the +1 w/daily in favor of the +3? That's mainly because 4e has a conceptual flaw with respect to magic weapons. They based too much tightly controlled math around it. Now you virtually need the bonus to keep up with the monster's attacks and defenses (not to mention the extra crit damage). The magic bonus to hit should be a freebie not counterbalanced in the monster's defenses. They should make the difference between a typical (level appropriate) fight and an eaiser fight, not between a too-hard fight and a typical fight.
So if they included +x weapons as a sacred cow, they got foolish and mutated the cow into a real problem like some kind of mad scientist.
__________________ Bill D
"There's a fine line between a superpower and a chronic medical condition."
- Doctor Impossible
So far from obviating skill at sneaking, invisibility actually makes it more often relevant. "Ssh! I'm being vewwy sneaky!" doesn't matter when one is in plain sight of Wascawwy Wabbit. Being invisible is only slightly more useful if one is making a racket ... but potentially very helpful if one can be stealthy to boot.
In most earlier edition games I played, who got the ring of invisibility? Usually the thief/rogue. Why? He was the one being stealthy anyway, now he would be able to get by with only 1 die roll for moving silently rather than 2 for moving silently AND hiding in shadows.
__________________ Bill D
"There's a fine line between a superpower and a chronic medical condition."
- Doctor Impossible
I could go on... but in their effort to make magic items not matter too much, it feels to me like WotC made items not matter at all.
I agree. I like 4e a lot, but magic items are pretty much a dull bunch. I can't say they don't matter at all, and some are rather cool (like the Horn of Summons, i just handed that out in our last adventure). For what it's worth, i've been adding my own magic items into 4e to supplement stuff in the PHB and AV. Ideally though, i hope that AV2 shakes it up and tries to "break" the rules as a magic item should, rather than adhering strictly to the combat condition tree and replicating all the crap that class powers do already.
For me, it's adding items that have cool non-combat effects. For instance, you could have a ring that turns you invisible, but it fades before you attack -- so no combat advantage. A revised gauntlets of ogre power might not help in combat, but allow you to lift vast weights when you draw on their power. That sort of thing.
I really like quirky, odd objects. Designing them is one of the fun parts of being a DM.
My favorite kind of items too.
The +X items, in my opinion, are lame powergaming excuses (hyperbole FTW!).
I love to get unusual out of combat magic items.
__________________ And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
Yeah, but I take solace in the fact that it is a 23rd-level item.
__________________
It only surprised me up until around 1977, ... I had thought we were going to have a considerable audience of gamers and science fiction and fantasy fans. I thought easily with those we'd have 50,000 or more [buyers], but when people began to write me [with questions] about what fantasy books to read, and I saw the wide range of both younger and older people who were attracted to the game, I understood that it was reaching a deeper chord, something deep within us. E. Gary Gygax (July 27, 1938 March 4, 2008)
But wait. You've spent this whole time playing the game with the bookkeeping annoyance of having to keep track of the +1 from the Sword of Coolness. And you haven't quit yet. So I don't think you've have that much of a problem keeping track of the +3.
If this is really your preference, then I say sell the +3 sword (and don't screw over the player with the "1/5 rule"), then spend the money on upgrading your Sword of Coolness +1 to it's +2 version. Then take the remaining money and buy some potions, magic whetstones, or combine with other people's money to get them an upgrade. The guidelines in the Adventurer's Vault book actually give specifics on upgrades, but it's pretty easy to figure out how it should work.
Heck, Adventurer's Vault even has a ritual to transfer an enchantment from one item to another, which means you can use that +3 sword to upgrade your +1 w/power to a +3 w/power.
__________________ The Evil DM's Motto:
"I don't kill characters. A dead character can't suffer any more...."
Here's a quick and dirty example of what I'd like to see:
Sword of the Icy Field (Level 6)
Property: Gain resist 5 cold.
Proeprty: Gain Ice Walk.
Power (At-Will): As a move action, freeze all non-magical, non-animated liquid in a close burst 2. Anyone in the liquid are pushed back 2 squares. The frozen liquid can be walked on, but is treated as challenging terrain (wielder of Sword is immune).
Power (Encounter): Attack: Level+2 vs. Reflex; Anyone in the liquid when the At-Will power is used are immobilized (save ends) instead.
Power (Daily): Standard action. Create an ice wall 5 with 8 until end of your next turn. Wall has 40 HP, vulnerability fire 5. Wielder is treated as having Phasing with regards to the created wall. Sustain minor: wall persists.
Shield of the Abating Flame (Level 11)
Property: Resist fire 10.
Property: All enemies that use the Fire keyword are treated as marked by the Shield's wielder.
Power (Encounter): Immediate reaction, when missed by a melee attack. Target takes 1d8+con fire damage.
Power (Daily): Immediate reaction, when hit by an attack that deals fire damage. Gain hit points equal to half the damage dealt by the attack, before applying the shield's fire resistance.
Power (Daily): Minor action. The wielder of the shield may transfer any benefit of this shield's abilities to any non-combatant ally he is carrying/holding hands with.
I like ur magic items...
Seriously though, this is how magic items should have been. Your examples almost seem like Artifacts and that is not a bad thing. Perhaps we need a book or Artifacts from WotC rather than another Adventurers Vault...
__________________ Pablo El Vagabundo
"Mercy!? You want MERCY? I'M CHAOTIC NEUTRAL!!!"
Magic items haven't been "magic" since 2e IMO. Most of the Flavour has been missing since, a failing of the last two editions.
Everything is modularized enchantment wise so just about any enchantment can go on anything. I miss the flavor of the unique items, the handaxes of hurling, the shortsword of quickness, etc.
I agree artifacts are finally as good as they shoud be, lovely treatment for once(every other edition buggered this up).
I would like to see magic items divorced from combat bonuses someday, and while I can do it now I'd like it to be inherent in the system. "Accuracy" could become a generic enchantment giving the effect of a +1, just like anything else; give it an encounter power that lets you reroll an attack or damage roll with an at-will or encounter attack power=done.
yeah I like Rechan's Items, and the idea of having the PHB and AV Iems as a more common genre of Items that can be obtained fairly easily, and making special items (not as powerful as artifacts) with a variety of cool effects which can be unlocked or whatever as rewards for awesome quests (in the DM's hands). Noted. Another arrow in the quiver. Cheers.
Also PCat's idea of adding non-combat effects is a nice one i'll put up my own sleeve as well. Cheers again.
As for the OP's complaint about Guantlets of Ogre Power, why don't you just change the name of the Iron Arm Bands. That's +2 DMG on your melee attacks... the equivalent of a flat +4 bump to STR, only it's not applied to accuracy. Sounds like that's what you're looking for, only the name is different (not a hard problem to solve).
As 4e grows compexity is being added to the game, and in a way that doesn't put things out of balance so far. I'm sure WOTC is aware of the complaint of blandness of Magic Items. Maybe this will slowly develop over time as well, in one of the aforementioned directions. Time will tell. In the meantime, some people have given some great suggestions on how to spice things up yourself. Don't argue over maths...Let your imagination be your playground.
__________________ 'I am a predator...the predator improves the race...I kill but not out of hate.' Frank Herbert: Emperor God of Dune
Add one to the list of those who dislike +X items. I simply don't like them, and as some of you, I'd rather have my char be powerful, not his gear.
I have never really understood the need to make such a distinction, IMO.
Unless you routinely run into situations where your party will find themselves stripped of their gear and forced to rely solely on their innate abilities, I am not sure why it matters where their abilities come from. +1 to hit and damage is still a bonus, it works the same manner (lets you hit your foe more easily and deal more damage) regardless of whether it came from having a high str, a +1 weapon, a feat or a class feature.
Relying on gear doesn't mean your character is any less powerful. It just means that he is not quite strong enough to stand toe to toe with equal-lv challenges without them. But then realize that this is not a very meaningful comparison, since those monsters were designed and balanced based on the assumption that players would be appropriately equipped for their lv to begin with. The concept of lv is a metagame concept after all.
I have never really understood the need to make such a distinction, IMO.
Unless you routinely run into situations where your party will find themselves stripped of their gear and forced to rely solely on their innate abilities, I am not sure why it matters where their abilities come from. +1 to hit and damage is still a bonus, it works the same manner (lets you hit your foe more easily and deal more damage) regardless of whether it came from having a high str, a +1 weapon, a feat or a class feature.
Relying on gear doesn't mean your character is any less powerful. It just means that he is not quite strong enough to stand toe to toe with equal-lv challenges without them. But then realize that this is not a very meaningful comparison, since those monsters were designed and balanced based on the assumption that players would be appropriately equipped for their lv to begin with. The concept of lv is a metagame concept after all.
It may very well be purely psychological. How would you feel if you knew that, if you lost your Glasses of Intelligence +6, you'd be an idiot, instead of the amazing scientific you are?
Edit: And that's a 'generic' you, not aimed at Runestar or anyone in particular.
While I think some magic items are indeed a bit too weak to be worth taking up a slot, I think that one of the best things 4e did was to get rid of stat boosts, so I for one am very glad the Gauntlets of Ogre Power and similar items DO NOT grant a stat boost.
Me too. They shouldn't add to any stat. They should do what they are supposed to do- give the wearer the strehgth of an ogre while worn. If your character is already that strong or stronger then they provide no benefit. Seems simple to me. Why did they ever have to get saddled with a boring +X to strength?
It may very well be purely psychological. How would you feel if you knew that, if you lost your Glasses of Intelligence +6, you'd be an idiot, instead of the amazing scientific you are?
Edit: And that's a 'generic' you, not aimed at Runestar or anyone in particular.
How is that any different from not having the option to take the glasses of int at all, thus staying an "idiot"? You weren't stupid to begin with, the glasses simply make you smarter than you were (and as a wizard, you would likely start out with a high int score and max it out every chance you get).
You don't want your PC to be a drooling idiot, then don't dump int to begin with. Don't start off with a 6 int, rely on a headband of int to get back up to average int, then complain that stat buffers are a crutch because you are not as smart without it.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
