MIC - Forehead palm

[Corsair]

General comment: Spells/Items/Feats only do what they say they do. None of them will ever, nor should they have to, say what they don't do. That would be stupid talk, and increase the page count of every single book forever with pages upon pages of useless repetitive text.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

A few more pages in there are some things I've liked so far, although the thought that's struck me really is just how crude a tool the +1/+2/+3 enhancment bonus thing is as a tool for differentiating subtly different powers. An ability like Deadly Precision is strictly inferior to another like corrosive or shocking, yet costs the same. Conversely the Consumptive property it only slighty better than flaming or shocking yet cost as much as both of them together. Which is better +1d8 negative energy or +2d6 fire and electricity? I think 3e would benefit from finer granularity in magic weapon pricing.

I hardly thing that the lack of granularity in magic weapon pricing is the MIC's fault though. That's something that is just built in to the 3.xE system.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Aus_Snow]

It looked very clear to me (I don't own the book though, btw) - it's all about the amount of time that there is sustained contact.

Also, it's actually pretty easy to add in your own granularity, for that extra crunchy flavour. Just go ahead and modify prices or whatever, to suit your best estimates.

Plenty of DMs do that kind of thing anyway, with various rules.

 

[Deset Gled]

It's the acidic property for armour and shields which causes damage to foes grappling you, and makes no mention whatsoever about whether or not the damage applies to a shield bash or armour spike attack.

...

However, the acid deals no damage to creatures or objects that remain in contact with it for less than a full round, such as when a creature makes a melee attack against you.

I'm not exactly a fan of the MIC, but dude, you just posted the exact text you were complaining didn't exist. A shield bash and armor spike attack are both melee attacks. This case is covered pretty explicitly.

The reason I don't like the MIC is that it simply doesn't fit into the campaign I currently play in. We play a game that is pretty close to core only, with only a handful of things from splats. The MIC is pretty much pure (and purposeful) power creep, and would really throw things off. You really need to think of the MIC (and a handful of other books) as material that will redefine power level, wealth levels, party roles, and game world economics. As long as you know that going into it and are prepared for the changes, I'm sure the MIC could be a useful book.

 

[FalcWP]

IYou really need to think of the MIC (and a handful of other books) as material that will redefine power level, wealth levels, party roles, and game world economics. As long as you know that going into it and are prepared for the changes, I'm sure the MIC could be a useful book.

This is certainly true, although it'd be completely possible for a DM to just add bits of the MIC in as treasure or as something for sale without opening up the whole book. If you do open the whole book, you need to expect a bit of a shift, with the multitude of x/day use items. But like I said - having stuff that provides something other than a flat +1 bonus has really been worth it for my group.

 

[Timeboxer]

As a general rule, enchanting something for armor purposes has no effect on its use as a weapon, and vice versa. So it doesn't affect shield bashing/armor spikes.

 

[moritheil]

It's just a poorly thought out entry for failing to mention the shield bash at the very least. What would that cost them, 12 words? This property does not apply to shield bash or armour spike attacks. Given that it's the very first entry in the books I think it sets a poor tone.

In general, armor enhancements do not function as weapon enhancements. Nothing says differently here, does it?

Specific items violate the pricing structures of the general properties.

Well, yes, they admitted as much. Some items are absurdly cheap.

 

[Pagan priest]

Actually it does work if you lean it up against a door. The exact text is:


So you could use it to burn your way through a door if you felt like it. I'll grant that a close reading of the text does seem to indicate that a shield bash wouldn't work as it's less than a full round of contact, presumably. But the actual text is hardly as clean as you guessed.

That could make sleeping in armor a bit of a problem...

 

[jeffh]

I'm not exactly a fan of the MIC, but dude, you just posted the exact text you were complaining didn't exist. A shield bash and armor spike attack are both melee attacks. This case is covered pretty explicitly.

The reason I don't like the MIC is that it simply doesn't fit into the campaign I currently play in. We play a game that is pretty close to core only, with only a handful of things from splats. The MIC is pretty much pure (and purposeful) power creep, and would really throw things off. You really need to think of the MIC (and a handful of other books) as material that will redefine power level, wealth levels, party roles, and game world economics. As long as you know that going into it and are prepared for the changes, I'm sure the MIC could be a useful book.

This. Especially the first sentence, in the context of this particular thread, but the more I think about the MIC in general the more my initial enthusiasm is replaced with considerations like those of the second paragraph.

 

[Corsair]

This. Especially the first sentence, in the context of this particular thread, but the more I think about the MIC in general the more my initial enthusiasm is replaced with considerations like those of the second paragraph.

So you liked games where players only ever wanted +X items and maybe a few wands and scrolls because everything else was horribly over priced? Maybe your group is different than mine, but no one in my group ever wanted anything in the DMG except for the +X items for their listed prices.