The Magic Items that WotC cannot publish

[Hjorimir]

They are building a game to promote dependence on thier electronic nipple.

I lub the nipple! MORE NIPPLE!

 

[UniversalMonster]

They are building a game to promote dependence on thier electronic nipple.
.

Insulting and wrong.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Insulting and wrong.

Neither.

I lub the nipple too, I just want to be able to get different flavors of milk from it.

It has already been expressed before that if something isn't in the C.builder then it just can't compete with content that is. Why would that be?

 

[Engilbrand]

And hot.

 

[keterys]

So, seriously - I do items _completely_ different for my home games and I'm quite happy with how that works out. But for LFR I'm actually annoyed at how powerful and game changing the items already are (as a player or DM) - I'd rather they toned the baseline more, and only let DMs who really knew what was going on mess around.

 

[Rel]

I just wish to go on the record as being pro-nipple in all its wonderful forms.

 

[Scribble]

It has already been expressed before that if something isn't in the C.builder then it just can't compete with content that is. Why would that be?

In my opinion if it's not in the C Builder in order to be "worth it" to me, it needs to be something thats a one off kind of deal, or so outside the normal rules it doesn't matter that the C Builder doesn't have it... (Because I'm probably not using it anyway.)

These items I think would exist as the former idea. They don't need to be in the CB because they're more like one shots.

 

[fuzzlewump]

The revenue stream from a large subscriber base looks pretty sweet so I can't blame them from a business standpoint.

Can you blame them from some other standpoint?

I think the online tools are the best things to happen to the time it takes for DM preparation and character building. That said, I really want the the character builder to be more customizable and the adventure tools to have an optional toggle patch for MM1 style elites and solos.

 

[Windjammer]

For instance, let's consider an epic destiny, Avatar of Death.

-snip-

I'm just saying, there is a paucity of compelling magic in this game. Saying that you can't have cool things because it would unbalance the game is a weak excuse.

Well, and here you are, the first person ever I give XP on Enworld. Amazing post. No polemics, all example and argumentation. I tip my hat.

Well, that's the thing, really. The statement they cannot publish them is... bogus. In the extreme. They darned well could publish them - put a big honkin' warning label on them saying, "These are dangerous to your game's balance, DMs may introduce these into their games at their own discretion".

I was going to write a response to this, but then saw that you answered yourself here:

This would violate their "all things are core" philosophy.

I'd like to spell that out for everyone: Any item they publish has to be LFR legit. And any item they publish has to go onto DDI. As a consequence, they can't publish a magic item which doesn't make it over to the DDI and is LFR legit. One problem on DDI, and certainly for LFR, is that there is no such thing as putting a header there saying "DM, use at your own discretion". LFR, by its nature, takes that power out of the hands of their DMs, and the DDI interface respects that. We all remember the headache they went through when hybrid classes first showed up on Dragon.

What that means for us DMs who've got no vested interested in LFR - well, Peter spelled it out for us. It means bland items. By the way, there are a TON of cool magic items in Adventurer's Vault 2 in terms of flavour. Just up the mechanics and make them a bit more.... wild, and I think you've still got a good resource. But yes, shame in official 4E the mechanics can't match the item description. That's what RangerWickett NAILED.

 

[Marshall]

The real problem isn't that some magic items will be more powerful than others. The real problem is the level/pricing/bonus assumptions. (For those few who aren't familiar with 4e's magic items, they're tiered in a 5-level cycle. Level 1, 6, 11, etc. are the simple +X items, and item abilities beyond that +X are effectively worth between 1 and 4 additional "levels", so right now there's no such thing as, say, a +1 item at level 6.)

No.
The real problem is that they have so badly screwed up the values of the intervening levels that they have no meaning anymore. When you have several occurrences of items with exactly the same bonus, property and power yet having 'levels' differing by up to 4 you've lost the design space to further expand the system.

If the ability to add 1/2 of the items enhancement bonus to damage a second time to all powers with an elemental keyword is a +4 level ability, but the ability to add the entire bonus a second time to all powers regardless of keyword is a +3 ability you have Zero design space available to design an ability to add the entire bonus a second time to fire keyword powers.

So, for items like that necklace, you don't need to make a new kind of DM-only item (we have artifacts for that). Just open up the design space so that a weapon/armor/amulet ability can be worth 5 or more additional levels. I mean, if I have a +1 amulet that costs as much as a level 10 item, it can have a major effect and still remain balanced enough for players to buy or create it.

The only problem I can see with that necklace in the current design mix is that its a necklace doing an implement job. In that case, He's right, there isn't and shouldn't be design space available for it.

I don't think the situation is anywhere near as dire as the blogger presented. The design space is there; it just needs to be used.

-O

Its there all right. But before they put this new book out they have to go back and fix all the ones that came before. That's why they "can't" publish it.

Even tho its the perfect idea for a Dragon article and a CB update.