Healing Belt in MIC = broken?

[Herzog]

If something in the core rules is busted, go ahead and fix the core, don't have us shell out for splatbook band-aids.

Or, at the very least, accompany the splatbook band-aids with an appropriate list of 'fixes' for the core material (indicating new pricing for core items to indicate this is what the authors of the new material have in mind).

Now, we have either very low prices for MIC material (when compared to DMG), or very high prices for DMG material (when compared to MIC), regardless of which of the two is 'correct'.

 

[s-dub]

I think that the designers rethought healing item pricing due to the attractiveness of divine casters in 3.5 being much higher than in previous editions.

My thoughts are maybe the healing items in the DMG were priced so high so that people would not be able to afford to not have a cleric in the party.

With all of the abilities released in splatbooks and even in core clerics and druids are certainly not neglected in parties and so there is an incentive to play them even if magical healing items are cheap.

 

[Kask]

Having too many magic items "gives player characters undeserved advancement and empowers them to become virtual rulers of all they survey"...

It doesn't talk about XP bloat in the quote...

 

[Elethiomel]

It doesn't talk about XP bloat in the quote...

It implies XP bloat. It is after all in a rulebook where XP is awarded for the value of treasure found.

 

[Flatus Maximus]

Actually, XP wasn't the reason. The reason is given in the DMG.

Strike one!

It doesn't talk about XP bloat in the quote...

Strike two!

Swing battter, batter, swing!

 

[Sparafucile]

It doesn't talk about XP bloat in the quote...

While I appreacite the socratic method thing you have going on in your last few posts, I'd really like to understand your point of view. Would you like to give your interepretation of what the quote means to you, i.e. monty haul campaigns?

Perhaps you can compare that to a DM's adherence to table 5-1 on pg 135 of the 3.5 DMG (the one that gives "balanced" wealth by character level). Is adherance to this table in a 3.5 game considered "monty haul"? DId 1st edition EVER offer such an attempt at balance?

Furthermore, back to the OP's question, where does table 5-1 fit on the different scales of prices offered by items in the DMG vs. the MIC?

 

[Kask]

While I appreacite the socratic method thing you have going on in your last few posts, I'd really like to understand your point of view.

Actually, I'll dig out my DMG from storage and tackle it by posting the source and commenting. Will be better that way.

 

[Jhaelen]

Each to their own, but this type of approach really irks me. If something in the core rules is busted, go ahead and fix the core, don't have us shell out for splatbook band-aids...

However, as this discussion is exemplifying there are people out there that refuse to believe that a fix was in order. For them it is easier to argue 'I ban the MIC in my games' than to say 'I ban errata to the core books'.

 

[aboyd]

You say that like it's an objective truth -- "a fix was in order." What if someone likes the DMG system? What if they want a low-magic campaign where the only items available are those in the DMG, and only at the outratgeous prices that are listed? Is such a person "refusing to believe that a fix was in order" or is such a person "not liking the fix and having fun without it?"

 

[Jeff Wilder]

You say that like it's an objective truth -- "a fix was in order." What if someone likes the DMG system? What if they want a low-magic campaign where the only items available are those in the DMG, and only at the outratgeous prices that are listed? Is such a person "refusing to believe that a fix was in order" or is such a person "not liking the fix and having fun without it?"

First, let me say that I completely support your right to ban anything you want from your game.

Second, I prefer low-magic games myself, although Eberron has been a surprising (to me) exception.

Third, I think the pricing of some items in the MIC is crazy. As I said up-thread, I've not had an issues with belts of healing, but IMO there are a good number of items in the MIC that are too good for the cost.

That said, a game using DMG pricing isn't a low-magic game, and it's not "low-magic" that the MIC fixes (or purports to fix, whichever your perspective may be).

A game using the DMG is a normal-magic D&D game (which is to say, magic items are plentiful), but it's a normal-magic game dominated by stat-boosting items, save-boosting items, AC-boosting items, and so forth. (The Big Six.)

By contrast, a game using the MIC is a normal-magic D&D game with higher variety, because for 16,000 gp, you can purchase non-Big Six magic items with a utility in the ballpark of a +4 stat-boosting item (for instance).

I think, if you're going to play normal-magic D&D, that increased variety is definitely a good goal to have had in a supplement, even if the mark was missed in some cases.