Voting for Rarity?

[Majoru Oakheart]

I'm still in 100% agreement with the IDEA of adding item rarity to the game. I hate making up house rules because I always get pushback from my players. If I told them all that I was restricting them from buying 90% of the items in the game simply because I don't think they should be able to buy most magic items, I'd have them complaining and suggesting I step aside so someone else can DM.

The way it works now is that I can make a couple of small changes if I need to one item's rarity or another while still having the default be uncommon. It means I won't end up with characters showing up who have broken combinations of magic items.

However, I've been unimpressed with the rare items so far. I expected that they'd use Rare items to introduce items of an entirely new power level more akin to the most powerful magic items from 1e/2e/3e. But so far, all the rare items are maybe 10% more powerful than the rest of the items.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Basically everything that has a daily should be uncommon, with specific items that don't cause significant issues removed from that. There's a lot of "deal a bit of extra damage 1/day" items that aren't likely to be a cost-effective way to win combats for instance.

As for what's rare? Probably the best way to do it would be to draw up a long menu of powers that are at-will and properties and some stupidly good dailies (stuff like "1/day: don't die when you would otherwise die") and then just make rares by tacking one onto an existing item. Similarly, if you feel the need to make a new rare, make the rare then provide a stripped down uncommon/common version of it missing whatever makes it rare.

As for the holy avenger: I think it's big problem is that it's a level 25+ item. If it were the same thing (with lowered +'s and possibly a smaller die type at low levels for the bonus damage) but available from level 6 onwards, then I doubt there would be complaints.

 

[BobTheNob]

To me its alot of huh?

Last week, rather than give out items, I gave the players a bucket load of residuam and an enchanter, cause I was getting so sick of tralling the massively bloated treasure lists. From one night, three people managed to pick an item each...it was pathetic, and it was all because there were so many items, that everyone in our group has reached the point of bafflement.

I am going back to controlling not only what is placed in each adventure, but also what is available in shops. Even to the point of not using the items as given, but coming up with all new ones.

The whole rarity system is nice, but I wont be using it : too little too late.

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

The best answer is meta: go to the WotC charop forums.

Any item that shows there as a "must have" is automatically rare.

Any heroic-level item that doesn't have any powers and hasn't become rare due to the previous rule is common.

Really! It is perfectly understandable that no one in WotC wants to go through the entire list of magic items in D&D4e and classify them by rarity, so take advantage of the work already done by the forums guys

 

[Ahrimon]

The best answer is meta: go to the WotC charop forums.

Any item that shows there as a "must have" is automatically rare.

Any heroic-level item that doesn't have any powers and hasn't become rare due to the previous rule is common.

Really! It is perfectly understandable that no one in WotC wants to go through the entire list of magic items in D&D4e and classify them by rarity, so take advantage of the work already done by the forums guys

Not a bad idea

 

[Mengu]

The best answer is meta: go to the WotC charop forums.

Any item that shows there as a "must have" is automatically rare.

Any heroic-level item that doesn't have any powers and hasn't become rare due to the previous rule is common.

Really! It is perfectly understandable that no one in WotC wants to go through the entire list of magic items in D&D4e and classify them by rarity, so take advantage of the work already done by the forums guys

I feel the opposite. Any item that shows as a recommended or must have is automatically common. We see people running around with these items all the time. Bracers of Archery, Iron Armbands, Staff of Ruin, Dwarven Armor, Gauntlets of Blood, Strikebacks, etc. all seem to be the bread and butter items. Characters who have access to these items are the basis around monster design.

Once these items are made common, the system needs to take this as the baseline when constructing uncommon and rare items. No uncommon or rare bracer should be worse than Iron Armbands. No uncommon or rare staff should be worse than Staff of Ruin.

I know this isn't constructive, but I think the flaw lies with the existing 8,000+ items. The items just need an overhaul to make more sense.

Tangent: I realize this argument makes you ponder, if items like Iron Armbands are what we're expected to have an use, then why isn't this expectation simply built into the system? Well, I believe it should be. Making actual magic items a bit more special. The current thrill of finding a magic +2 weapon is typically a sigh of relief that you can now hit monsters like you should be able to. It's a right, not a privilege. I would prefer magic items to become a privilege not a right. I would like to see some magic items properties that are character defining (such as rushing cleats, frost/flaming weapons, hungry spears, etc) become character traits, under control of a character. For instance, instead of relying on a DM to give my tiefling rogue a flaming weapon, I'd like to be able to simply pick up a trait that sheaths my weapon in flame. This way, the character build can be divorced from magic items and put in the hands of the players, and the DM only has to worry about items as privileges instead of items as rights. This of course means more than an overhaul of just the magic item system.

 

[keterys]

Part of me would be happy to just nuke all the old items and start over, actually leveraging the rarity system in a serious fashion.

 

[DracoSuave]

LOL[MENTION=82555]the[/MENTION] idea that item rarity will actually affect rarity of those items in the game.

All it means is that players have to -earn- them rather than simply make them. That's it.

It's not like they'll suddenly become rare drops that are determined by random rolls, only showing up if your players get lucky.

Feh.

 

[eamon]

I feel the opposite. Any item that shows as a recommended or must have is automatically common. We see people running around with these items all the time. Bracers of Archery, Iron Armbands, Staff of Ruin, Dwarven Armor, Gauntlets of Blood, Strikebacks, etc. all seem to be the bread and butter items. Characters who have access to these items are the basis around monster design.

I agree. Additionally, I think it's a fundamentally poor choice to require the DM to understand in depth his player's characters and which of a thousands of items they might appreciate. In other words, the magic item rarity system simply cannot work well without excessive DM effort for basic combat items.

Of course, it works excellently for exceptional items, but these should be slot-free and/or player-flexible. There's nothing more disappointing that a seemingly cool "rare" item which turns out to be useless and sold at the first opportunity because of some charsheet interaction that makes an existing plain, seemingly less powerful item more attractive.

The new rules do have one step in the right direction, however: daily item powers are always useful (and actually make sense now too). Previously, handing out an item with a daily power was generally unhandy since PC's can easily collect many more of these than they can use; particularly if the power was a flavorful out-of-combat power. Now a DM can hand out an item (s)he thinks is neat, and as long as it's not a weapon, implement, armor, or obviously character-build specific there's a decent chance someone can use it.

I know this isn't constructive, but I think the flaw lies with the existing 8,000+ items. The items just need an overhaul to make more sense.

If WotC want to give the DM more control over items, they should design fewer character-build specific items and more situation-specific items, not require the DM to wade through thousands of boring (to him) items that have no campaign link and are only useful if he understands the mechanical interaction with the PC just right.

Tangent: I realize this argument makes you ponder, if items like Iron Armbands are what we're expected to have an use, then why isn't this expectation simply built into the system? Well, I believe it should be. Making actual magic items a bit more special. The current thrill of finding a magic +2 weapon is typically a sigh of relief that you can now hit monsters like you should be able to. It's a right, not a privilege. I would prefer magic items to become a privilege not a right. I would like to see some magic items properties that are character defining (such as rushing cleats, frost/flaming weapons, hungry spears, etc) become character traits, under control of a character. For instance, instead of relying on a DM to give my tiefling rogue a flaming weapon, I'd like to be able to simply pick up a trait that sheaths my weapon in flame. This way, the character build can be divorced from magic items and put in the hands of the players, and the DM only has to worry about items as privileges instead of items as rights. This of course means more than an overhaul of just the magic item system.

I wish I could give you XP for that, but it seems I need to spread it around some more first...

 

[Solvarn]

Rarity

Good idea, poor implementation.

The de-emphasis on magic items in 4E wasn't a bug, it was a feature. You can't just play a shell game and call the same items rare and give them the same feeling magic items had in previous editions.

I think they were on the right track with the rare item idea. I think one rare item per tier. This rare item will probably combine the powers from two items in that slot into one item. My rare holy avenger might be a combination of a Crusader's Weapon and a standard Holy Avenger, for example. I'll adjust on my end as necessary.