What if we removed the half-level bonus to everything?

[Saeviomagy]

I don't expect them to be fully equipped in +1 items at all. By the time they have fill up those slots they -have to be- filling them with +2 items, simply because they -no longer get- +1 slots by the time 10 of the 15 slots of a party are filled.

You said "1) You get +1 magic items with properties at level 1, not level 6." In response to a post that posited replacing magic item bonuses with a flat 1/5.

I don't know where you get your math from.

A miscalculation. The average is 1.58 ( (14 * 2 + 10)/24 = 1.5833...).

That's assuming you're not using those higher level magic slots for weapons for the party, and never do so until the end of the game. The second you start using those slots for weapons the power curve jumps up signifigantly.

So... you're saying that the current system produces a very high amount of variability, based primarily on the DMs whim? Isn't that an argument FOR changing it?

Remember, you get +2 items starting -AT LEVEL 2-. By the time you hit level 6, you can be fully decked out in +2 items and have slots to spare for other trinkets.

OR you can have the more common spread of some items above and below +2.

The fact that decking yourself out in a full array of +2 items is
1) The most effective tactic
2) Requires players to spend playtime shopping
3) Really boring

is a failing of the current system that would be eliminated by simply getting rid of all those boring static bonuses and replacing them with an automatic and reasonably paced +x.x/level

Instead of just stating that the numbers are wrong, and trying to prove that the entire idea is invalid based on those wrong numbers, how about you do something productive? What numbers do you think would give the result desired (ie - we end up with the same numbers that an party would assuming they get a random allocation of treasure and their shopping follows the same model when filling any unfilled slots)?

 

[Squire James]

I feel that kind of adjustment forces the sense of character advancement in the campaign to be through the story, since the game mechanics will not provide as much help in that category. If you're going to do that, you almost might as well pick a level and declare that nobody gains XP (minimal character sheet updating, right?). A good DM can pull that off and perhaps even dish out an excellent campaign, but I could see other campaigns like this get boring quick.

 

[DracoSuave]

You said "1) You get +1 magic items with properties at level 1, not level 6." In response to a post that posited replacing magic item bonuses with a flat 1/5.

A miscalculation. The average is 1.58 ( (14 * 2 + 10)/24 = 1.5833...).

So... you're saying that the current system produces a very high amount of variability, based primarily on the DMs whim? Isn't that an argument FOR changing it?

If you have 15 slot items (five man party, three slots a piece) by the end of level 5 given you by the DM (which is the guideline for how he hands out items, read the DMG) then the minimum average -possible- is 1.33. It cannot be lower than that, because you cannot have more than 10 +1 items handed out the standard way. The other 5, therefore, -have- to come from the +2 items.

This is, of course, assuming that your DM only hands you 5 +2 items and no more than that. If he hands you 14 +2 items then the math changes to this:

(14 X 2 + 1) / 15 = 1.93.

On top of that, if you think PCs aren't going to use their funds to buy decent gear... you're out of your mind.

OR you can have the more common spread of some items above and below +2.

The fact that decking yourself out in a full array of +2 items is
1) The most effective tactic
2) Requires players to spend playtime shopping
3) Really boring

Giving your party the items they want/need in treasures is the guideline set. Give them what they want, and let them enjoy their toys. That might not be exciting to you. But it is exciting to the players.

"But what if the player -likes- random stuff?"

Then they want random stuff, and you give them that. This isn't hard to understand.

is a failing of the current system that would be eliminated by simply getting rid of all those boring static bonuses and replacing them with an automatic and reasonably paced +x.x/level

Yet, players seem to have fun when they get larger numbers and do more damage.

Instead of just stating that the numbers are wrong, and trying to prove that the entire idea is invalid based on those wrong numbers, how about you do something productive? What numbers do you think would give the result desired (ie - we end up with the same numbers that an party would assuming they get a random allocation of treasure and their shopping follows the same model when filling any unfilled slots)?

Because I'm taking up a contrary position. It's your job to defend and advance your position, not mine. I'm stating what I believe to be flaws in your position. It's your job to defend them, not mine. What is productive, from my standpoint, does not have to be what is productive from yours. In some cases, the presented idea is counter productive to the stated goal.

Removing the level bonus, for example, will not make magic items less important, but more important. Evidence of this is shown by how third edition handled AC.

Presenting flaws and problems before they occur -is- productive. Handwaving them and ignoring them is not.

 

[Saeviomagy]

If you have 15 slot items (five man party, three slots a piece) by the end of level 5 given you by the DM (which is the guideline for how he hands out items, read the DMG) then the minimum average -possible- is 1.33. It cannot be lower than that, because you cannot have more than 10 +1 items handed out the standard way. The other 5, therefore, -have- to come from the +2 items.

This is, of course, assuming that your DM only hands you 5 +2 items and no more than that. If he hands you 14 +2 items then the math changes to this:

(14 X 2 + 1) / 15 = 1.93.

On top of that, if you think PCs aren't going to use their funds to buy decent gear... you're out of your mind.

They'll definately use their funds to buy something. Whether that something is more +x bonuses is another matter entirely.

Giving your party the items they want/need in treasures is the guideline set. Give them what they want, and let them enjoy their toys. That might not be exciting to you. But it is exciting to the players.

"But what if the player -likes- random stuff?"

Then they want random stuff, and you give them that. This isn't hard to understand.

And then what happens to play balance? You're decrying the proposed system because the numbers are off by a point or two at specific levels, but whitewashing the fact that the basic system copes perfectly with the numbers being off by a point or two when the players desire random stuff...

Yet, players seem to have fun when they get larger numbers and do more damage.

It's been my experience that noone remembers the +1 sword, whereas everyone remembers their flaming sword. And not for the +1 bonus to hit and damage that it had.

Because I'm taking up a contrary position. It's your job to defend and advance your position, not mine. I'm stating what I believe to be flaws in your position. It's your job to defend them, not mine. What is productive, from my standpoint, does not have to be what is productive from yours. In some cases, the presented idea is counter productive to the stated goal.

Removing the level bonus, for example, will not make magic items less important, but more important. Evidence of this is shown by how third edition handled AC.

Only if you retain the magic item defense bonuses, which is exactly what I'm getting rid of here.

Presenting flaws and problems before they occur -is- productive. Handwaving them and ignoring them is not.

No: presenting flaws and problems and not positing possible solutions is being obstructive.

 

[Gadget]

Interesting Idea...

This could turn out to be sort of an E6 for 4E. While I like to feel my character is improving and making progress, I always thought the default I-am-a-god-among-ants superhero you became at high levels was more of an odd quirk than a desired feature. Sure you're bigger and badder than most anyone around, but you still put your pants on one leg at a time. I don't see how it would be boring, you're still getting stat boosts, feats and more and/or better powers by leveling up (In addition to hit points). So you are measurably improving, it just takes out the 'artificial' improvement.

Perhaps you could give a mild bonus at each tier to help differentiate. Maybe, starting at paragon, persons trained in wearing armor get an extra + 2 AC in armor, which raises to + 4 at epic tier. That may eliminate the need for war plate -> god plate etc. Or one could, say spend an action point to get +X to a skill roll at paragon, and +Y at epic. That way you could occasionally do great things, but you don't have this always on bonus.

I'll have to think about it.

Edit: The possible downside, as mentioned above, is that it may increase the importance of gear to a character above the core system. That is something I don't really want to re-introduce, even if it is mathmatically the same as the Core. When the only way to increase your AC is to raise a stat or get more magical bling, you're going to go after the bling. It the splats aren't careful with magic items and stacking bonuses, it would be 3E all over again.