New article Design and Development Article on Magic Item Slots

[Abstraction]

Right there with you.

I'm curious if a hat of disguise will exist in 4E and how it'll change. (Will it even be a head slot item?) My gnome has just "acquired" one, and it's pretty darn useful for a tricky little guy ...

The good news, the hat of disguise is in. The bad news, the gnome is out. I picture you playing a spot of empty space, which is wearing a hat.

 

[The Little Raven]

Yeah, but waiting until 11th level to use a ring?
Thats just... so...

It's no different than having to wait until level 15 or so get a vorpal weapon, except that they're being more direct with expected item-usage at particular levels, instead of leaving it up to the vagaries of "can you afford to buy it?"

 

[Sir Brennen]

Yeah, but waiting until 11th level to use a ring?
Thats just... so...

UnFun.

Why? What do you think these rings do that makes them qualified for lower level characters? Seems to me they've got all the bases covered between all the other slots and wondrous items. What will rings do that other items can't and must be available at heroic levels? What is the basis of your assertation that having them at lower level will make them more fun?

Why is the assumption "the design team made rings unavailable until 11th level... just because"? Given how hard they've worked to make races and monsters and cosmology work both mechanically and story-wise, why assume this restriction is made arbitrarily?

I for one would love it if 4E rings were now all on the scale of Rings of Elemental Command or Three Wishes, and therefore geared towards higher level play. I want them to be something special, not just another slot that can have the same bonuses or abilities I could have on some other item anyway. Just take your +10 Jumping bonus and stick it up your boot.

 

[Stalker0]

To me, there is ONE huge advantage to doing the primary and secondary items...NPCs.

Right now in 3.5, in order for an npc to compete with pcs, you have to equip them with magic items. Which the party then immediately grabs upon the killing of the npcs. Meaning you now have stronger pcs, and therefore need stronger npcs with more loot.

That's a fine way to play, but certainly not the only desired way.

If magic items have become less needed, I can have fewer on my npcs. Meaning I can save treasure for big hordes as opposed to a bunch of corpse looting.

 

[Rechan]

IAs I said, no edition of D&D has ever handled "two magic items tops" style without house rules or DM fiat. Re-read the classic modules if you want proof. You are more then welcomed to continue to run D&D in that fashion, but shouting about how "this doesn't reduce the X-mas tree" isn't fair, they never said they were removing magical item acquisition from the game, they just said certain items for all characters all the time are no longer manditory.

As someone who has never played anything before 3e, I don't care what earlier editions do.

The "I have a small cart full of magical items" is IMHO stupid and breaks my suspension of disbelief.

When you play a 3e module and nearly every NPC you fight has at least a +1 weapon, even the guards, it breaks my suspension of disbelief. It takes the wonder away from magic. It reminds me of the tale of adventurers paying for things with +1 swords because they had collected so many.

And I don't give one spit if it was handled that way by EGG or by Mike Mearls.

No where in fantasy literature does the hero open up his walk in closet and pick between his twelve magical weapons, eight magical cloaks, three different sets of armor, and five different pairs of magical shoes so he can pick the best one for the job.

I'm sorry, but arguing that D&D characters should get all those magical doodads is like arguing that baseball should have more innings.

 

[Rechan]

I'm not convinced that "It's a playtest character = more magic than normal".

1) If you're testing something, why would you test giving more items than expected? That's not exactly testing the system.

2) They're playing a campaign, not throwing items at the PCs and just having fight after fight after fight. It looks like a campaign. A campaign that was just converted to 4e. It strikes me as playtest only in the sense of "4e isn't out yet so we're just going to use the rules for this campaign".

 

[tombowings]

As someone who has never played anything before 3e, I don't care what earlier editions do.

The "I have a small cart full of magical items" is IMHO stupid and breaks my suspension of disbelief.

When you play a 3e module and nearly every NPC you fight has at least a +1 weapon, even the guards, it breaks my suspension of disbelief. It takes the wonder away from magic. It reminds me of the tale of adventurers paying for things with +1 swords because they had collected so many.

And I don't give one spit if it was handled that way by EGG or by Mike Mearls.

I'm sorry, but no where in fantasy literature does the hero open up his walk in closet and pick between his twelve magical weapons, eight magical cloaks, three different sets of armor, and eight different pairs of magical shoes so he can pick the best one for the job.

I'm sorry, but arguing that D&D characters need all those magical doodads is like arguing that baseball needs 9 innings.

I agree with the above. It may be a bit harsh, but some of us aren't attached to tradition.

 

[Thundershield]

Rings are special. They are endless, without beginning or end. And their shape, a bound circle, allows them to contain magic far beyond any simple spell embedded in your common "magic" sword or item made of cloth. Where any other item or weapon would warped and destroyed by the restless force that is magic, the magics within a ring swirl silently, falling back upon themselves ... contained. Although less than an artifact, they are more than anything else you will encounter (other than perhaps the legendary Stones of Ioun).

Sauron knew this. It is no coincidence that he chose the form of the Ring when making his weapon. Nothing else would have contained his terrible power, or serve his terrible purpose.

But Rings cannot be worn lightly. Not just any soul has the wherewithal to withstand them; to command them. Only souls that have been tested, and proved themselves victorious again and again, have a hope of commanding the magic of a Ring. It is not a question of magical power, or command over vast sums of magical lore, but of personal strength. That resilient strength that can only be learned in overcoming adversity; in surviving the crucible. That strength that so few possess.

A few foolish men wear magical Rings that they inherited from their greater forefathers. They can not summon forth its power, and if they live even a year it is at the Ring's forebearance. They would do well to put the Ring in a safe place, where no can harm themselves attempting what should not be attempted.

Rings are true power given form. Only those with an even greater power inside them have a chance of commanding them.

And if you ever meet a man who commands the might of two Rings simultaneously, tread carefully, for you stand in the presence of greatness; such greatness as legends are made of.

Sold and bought! Splendid way of presenting this new icon of power. DMG writers, if you see this, adapt it for the book, will ya?

The scaling down of the number of magic item slots does seem good and reasonable. There's still a good amount of ways to give your character a nifty trinket or a curious doodat, while the low-brow brute can still brag about his +4 Greatsword of Kickass, if he wants, and the plate-polishing knight can admire himself in the reflection of his +2 Dwarven Full Plate Armor.

They've cut down the information overload and removed the "required" gimmicks, leaving it up to the players and DM what the characters should boast, and while they recommend that a 9th-level character should have +2 stuff in his "primary slots", it is merely a baseline. If you want a low-magic campaign, do that. High-magic or Monty Haul - well, feel free.

Indeed, as some already pointed out, they have fewer magic items in their current 3.5 campaign. Well, what keeps them from having fewer in their 4E campaign too? And since all the ability score boosting magic items are gone, the lack of these items will be even less glaring when comparing the characters to what the rest of the game was designed for.

No, it seems like a good and well-planned change.

 

[Rechan]

If magic items have become less needed, I can have fewer on my npcs. Meaning I can save treasure for big hordes as opposed to a bunch of corpse looting.

Also, you can give your NPCs a secondary item, rather than a primary, to give them an option or two without really being forced to drop a +x on them just to compete.

 

[Hussar]

I'm sorry, but arguing that D&D characters need all those magical doodads is like arguing that baseball needs 9 innings.

I'm not sure that means what you think it means.

Rechan, take a look at high level 3e modules. You will find them literally SWIMMING in magic items. Not as badly as 1e modules, true, but, certainly not exactly magic light.

I actually happen to have Dungeon 141 in front of me, so, let's look at Vlindarian's Vault - for levels 13th to 20th.

1st NPC has +1 mace, amulet of natural armor +4, ring of mind shielding, ring of protection +3, winged boots.

We have 10 kobold skeletons, each armed with a 5hd fireball bead from a necklace of missiles.

Next NPC has +5 keen longsword, +5 leather armor, belt of giant strength +6, amulet of natural armor +2

Note, that's what I spot on a 30 second skim through the module and does not include any actual treasure.

High level NPC's and bad guys are wandering around with scads of magic items. Always have and always, likely, will.

Complaining that D&D doesn't simulate your favourite fantasy novel is a well trodden path. You're right, it doesn't resemble it in the least. But, that's because we're playing a game and not writing a novel.