Essentials: Magic Item Rarity Explained, it's actually good!

[Falstaff]

I dislike the idea of buying/selling magic items at all. That shouldn't even be an option. You want a magic item? Go adventuring.

 

[DonAdam]

I'm really excited about these rules. I always liked having fewer but more special magic items (except for a setting like Eberron, which is also cool) so here's how I envision using the rarities:

-Inherent bonus rules in effect.
-No common items exist except expendables.
-Uncommon expendables can be made (they're not that great in 4e anyway).
-Permanent uncommon items can be made, but only if one has the "recipe." Like knowing a spell in earlier editions, these recipes will be valuable commodities.
-Making rare items requires both a recipe and quest-specific materials.

 

[Storminator]

Clearly, the sales price is based on game play, and not world modeling. I'm good with that. If you get 1 rare item per tier - a "character defining item" - and your DM goofs and gives you something you don't want, you get full value for it. If he gives you an uncommon item you don't want, it's not critical an error, but it's still significant, so you get half. Common items come and go, so take the loss and buy your favorite one.

While I love a great economics debate, it's misplaced here.

PS

 

[Storminator]

I don't see much talk about this, but to me, it seems like Common items are going to be the most powerful ones. Currently it's the items with static properties that are the most attractive to players, like Iron Armbands, Staff of Ruin, Vanguard Weapon, Horned Helmet, Battle Harness, Dragon Shards, etc. I'm guessing there are details they haven't shared with us yet.

I'm thinking unlimited daily powers will make powered items much more attractive. I know my dwarf has a magic axe that I've used once in 5 levels. Now I'll use it every day...

PS

 

[abyssaldeath]

Awsome...just perfect.

I hope this will end all of the arguements about these new rules.

Ha hahahahahahahahahahaha. This is the internet. Right now there are probably people arguing about whether the sky is blue or azure.



In all seriousness, I wonder how this will effect creating a new character at higher levels.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I don't see much talk about this, but to me, it seems like Common items are going to be the most powerful ones. Currently it's the items with static properties that are the most attractive to players, like Iron Armbands, Staff of Ruin, Vanguard Weapon, Horned Helmet, Battle Harness, Dragon Shards, etc. I'm guessing there are details they haven't shared with us yet.

Anybody know how they are going to quickly classify 8000+ items as circle, diamond, or star?

So? The purpose of the rule is explicitly to remove the issue of PCs making or buying dozens of low level items that happen to have some amazingly useful power that when available in large quantities breaks the game. That and the practice of having a bunch of slightly below level items to choose from your golf bag, which may not be broken but does offend many people's sensibilities.

Mike never mentioned any goal of making players pick a greater diversity of items. We don't know exactly what items fall into what categories. Mechanically there's nothing wrong with a Staff of Ruin or IAoP being common items, there's no mechanical game issue with PCs having multiples of them. They MAY make said items uncommon for fluff reasons so the DM can avoid having every fighter using IAoP, but we don't know.

REALLY the main point of all this is that from the designer's standpoint they were boxed into a very small space of viable item design with the old system. Many fine items were nerfed simply due to abuse at high levels. With the new system those types of items can simply be uncommon and the problem goes away. If they're really strong items then they can be rare, which will tend to keep PCs from ending up decked out in large numbers of really potent items. This will let them give us a lot more fun items and deal with the complaint that items are too bland.

So the rule is really aimed at designers more than players and DMs. My guess is you won't really see a huge amount of difference as a player. The DM is probably going to give you access to that uncommon item that really makes your build after all. He might now make you work more for it, but my guess is it won't be a big deal in most games. The rare items won't really change much, except now they can appear in books vs being DM specials.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I've merged the two threads into one.

 

[Aenghus]

I can see benefits to the new system.

I wonder if it is also supposed to make players more accepting of getting one of the large number of lacklustre magic items now detailed, now they can't automatically buy exactly what they want (obviously they couldn't in a lot of existing campaigns, but they could in many others, and some of the latter will change to the new rules).

Some character concepts require or at least greatly benefit from particular magic items which now may no longer be available without referee buy-in to the concept. While this includes optimised builds like lasting frost and frost weapons, it includes concepts requiring a hat of disguise as well.

And has others have said, items with static bonuses can mechanically be the most powerful, all in all. I wonder if items with situational static bonuses will be classed as common or uncommon, given that they are generally less powerful than the unconditional items. There could be some unintuitive consequences hidden in this change.

 

[Mengu]

So the rule is really aimed at designers more than players and DMs. My guess is you won't really see a huge amount of difference as a player. The DM is probably going to give you access to that uncommon item that really makes your build after all. He might now make you work more for it, but my guess is it won't be a big deal in most games. The rare items won't really change much, except now they can appear in books vs being DM specials.

Ya, I agree with that. I was mainly thinking "powerful" is in the eye of the beholder. I think an item that gives +X to initiative is more powerful than an item that gives ongoing 5 once per day. But with the new definitions the former may be common, while the latter uncommon. So rarity is not necessarily going to be a gauge for what's more powerful.

And I certainly don't mind items such as Iron Armbands or Staff of Ruin being around, as they fix some damage issues. I half wish they didn't eat up slots, and a level based damage increase system was in place. That said, I can see many common items being "higher priority" for a PC than uncommon items. Perhaps this is a good thing as they will be able to get those items more easily.

 

[Prism]

That said, I can see many common items being "higher priority" for a PC than uncommon items. Perhaps this is a good thing as they will be able to get those items more easily.

I think it is a good thing to be honest. It allows those players who would typically focus on creating static bonus items mainly for the power level to still do so, while allowing those who aren't so bothered about raw damage output and prefer more interesting power driven items to feel less limited about use per day.