What item daily rules do people use?

MwaO said:

And you shouldn't do something like give a player who wants a sword an axe, simply because they'll likely just sell it or disenchant it or enchant it into sword form.

Click to expand...

(giving out the cool stuff hinted and wished for by players is a means to an end yes but it also received mechanical support by allowing enchanting of all the magic items, not some super small subset of them and having the disenchant progressively smaller amounts of return)

Also I was using the language proffered by @AbdulAlhazred so i blame him.

MwaO said:

And you find that out again then rather than 5 levels later — so you can then realize,'Hey that guy is going to do a lot more damage than that guy. Maybe I need to do something about it...'

Click to expand...

Handy when there is a measure of cooperation in how the story is going forward... I think it goes way beyond wish lists and it always has.

I have been encouraging players to think about and share character goals for a very long time.

I am surprised along with their changing the rules for items in 4th they didnt go further and remove the ability to transfer an echantment. ( Mearles looks like he did in 5th - Axecalibur for the win.)

Garthanos said:

(giving out the cool stuff hinted and wished for by players is a means to an end yes but it also received mechanical support by allowing enchanting of all the magic items, not some super small subset of them and having the disenchant progressively smaller amounts of return)

Also I was using the language proffered by @AbdulAlhazred so i blame him.

Click to expand...

I can take credit...

Anyway, I thought it was an improvement. In the first place nothing REALLY stated that players were given the power to simply acquire any old item whatsoever, or that GMs HAD to allow for enchantment of any arbitrary item (in any case, if you strictly follow the treasure guidelines PCs have a very restricted budget for enchanting stuff they want, UNLESS it is quite a bit below level, which is the flaw with the system).

There are MANY items in AV1 and PHB1 which, when possessed in multiples even as level-5 items, are abusive. Its true, the daily item use rate mitigated a lot of that, but it was only put in place BECAUSE of that, IMHO. What it REALLY does is make all but the most potent daily effects useless. Players horde their daily use slots like crazy, even when it would make good sense to burn one on a fairly limited effect. Thus ALL shields, most misc items, etc. are effectively just trash. Nobody ever burned a slot on them.

You can say what you like about rarity, but it fixed both of those problems, and that was a HUGE improvement! I can hardly state how big a QoL improvement it was for item designers. Its not a flawless system, and the fact that it even more strongly indicates that GMs have the ultimate word on which items can get made is not a huge positive thing. It is a thing which, for decent GMs, is a negligible cost, since they will only wield it against clods wanting to pull cheap exploits. I don't feel like it created a lot of problems in any practical sense.

I think that 4e item/enchantment rules are still not ideal and could be improved even more, but that starts to drift far outside what this thread is about since it means rewriting core elements of the game in ways that I've already discussed in my own threads.

AbdulAlhazred said:

I can take credit...

Anyway, I thought it was an improvement. In the first place nothing REALLY stated that players were given the power to simply acquire any old item whatsoever, or that GMs HAD to allow for enchantment of any arbitrary item (in any case, if you strictly follow the treasure guidelines PCs have a very restricted budget for enchanting stuff they want, UNLESS it is quite a bit below level, which is the flaw with the system).

There are MANY items in AV1 and PHB1 which, when possessed in multiples even as level-5 items, are abusive. Its true, the daily item use rate mitigated a lot of that, but it was only put in place BECAUSE of that, IMHO.

Click to expand...

How about the philosophy that heros should be awesome because of themselves not their toys? i think that is why daily limits centered more around the hero make sense.

Think of it this way - My hero has 1 to 4 dailies of personal power AND they limited item dailies to be 1 to 3 dailies.

Your personal game took the powers items and personal power provide and melded them into boons which is rather huzzah but they are juggling where the awesome comes from and you don't have to.

Garthanos said:

I am surprised along with their changing the rules for items in 4th they didnt go further and remove the ability to transfer an echantment. ( Mearles looks like he did in 5th - Axecalibur for the win.)

Click to expand...

He did. There are no rituals in 4eE so there is no way to transfer anything...

AbdulAlhazred said:

Anyway, I thought it was an improvement. In the first place nothing REALLY stated that players were given the power to simply acquire any old item whatsoever, or that GMs HAD to allow for enchantment of any arbitrary item (in any case, if you strictly follow the treasure guidelines PCs have a very restricted budget for enchanting stuff they want, UNLESS it is quite a bit below level, which is the flaw with the system).

There are MANY items in AV1 and PHB1 which, when possessed in multiples even as level-5 items, are abusive. Its true, the daily item use rate mitigated a lot of that, but it was only put in place BECAUSE of that, IMHO. What it REALLY does is make all but the most potent daily effects useless. Players horde their daily use slots like crazy, even when it would make good sense to burn one on a fairly limited effect. Thus ALL shields, most misc items, etc. are effectively just trash. Nobody ever burned a slot on them.

Click to expand...

Even after the rarity change, all those items are still trash. Bad dailies are bad dailies. Noone ever used a flaming sword for the daily +1d10 per tier...
Shields and arm slot items in general were even more garbage than normal due to having to compete with IAoP and BoA and never matching up. The only item that came close got nerfed into oblivion...
I never saw item dailies hoarded because there was never anything worth spending them on...most of the time it was "I forgot I had that, could have used it two rounds ago."

You can say what you like about rarity, but it fixed both of those problems, and that was a HUGE improvement! I can hardly state how big a QoL improvement it was for item designers. Its not a flawless system, and the fact that it even more strongly indicates that GMs have the ultimate word on which items can get made is not a huge positive thing. It is a thing which, for decent GMs, is a negligible cost, since they will only wield it against clods wanting to pull cheap exploits. I don't feel like it created a lot of problems in any practical sense.

I think that 4e item/enchantment rules are still not ideal and could be improved even more, but that starts to drift far outside what this thread is about since it means rewriting core elements of the game in ways that I've already discussed in my own threads.

Click to expand...

Nope. Rarity, in toto, could have been replaced by a single rule that said multiple copies of any non-ammo or consumable item dont function more than once a day.
...or , ya know, fix the exponential wealth curve that makes item 5+ levels lower than current essentially free.

Marshall said:

He did. There are no rituals in 4eE so there is no way to transfer anything...

Click to expand...

Ah good point he struck at the core of it.

Marshall said:

...or , ya know, fix the exponential wealth curve that makes item 5+ levels lower than current essentially free.

Click to expand...

Starts squinting at D&D through ages of time... trying to remember a solid economic system... brain starts overheating.

AbdulAlhazred said:

I can take credit...

Click to expand...

blame definitely blame.