The thing is that although there are tools do that (with inherent bonuses), it seems to me that acquiring lots of magic items is pretty core to D&D. And if you have lots of magic items, they had better be uncomplicated, always-on items because otherwise you'll forget what they do.
Essentials: Magic Item Rarity Explained, it's actually good!
- Thread starter Rex Blunder
- Start date
The thing is that although there are tools do that (with inherent bonuses), it seems to me that acquiring lots of magic items is pretty core to D&D. And if you have lots of magic items, they had better be uncomplicated, always-on items because otherwise you'll forget what they do.
keterys
First Post
Hence, the common items that provide basic bonuses and no activated abilities at all.
I don't see why you can't have all kinds of uncommon rods of wonder and decanters of endless water now, though. Well, maybe rare for that rod of wonder, depending on what you make it do. There's a big difference between 'showers of flowers' and 'open the ground up underneath someone' or 'turn them into a newt'
I don't see why you can't have all kinds of uncommon rods of wonder and decanters of endless water now, though. Well, maybe rare for that rod of wonder, depending on what you make it do. There's a big difference between 'showers of flowers' and 'open the ground up underneath someone' or 'turn them into a newt'
Scribble
First Post
Once long ago I was playing a halfling cleric named Roofus Thistleknot wearing chain mail... He fell into a river and almost drowned... Towards the end of the session I suddenly remembered Roofus was wearing a ring of water walking.
Everyone laughed at me.
eamon
Explorer
But some of those plain +X items aren't must have. I suppose you could argue that must-have items are a kind of item-tax, but items that aren't must-have hardly can be described that way...
And even must-have items can be part of the reward system - I mean, levelling is also a "must have"; required items are just yet another means for the DM to control those rewards.
In any case, for optional +X items (certainly things like +3 to thievery checks or perhaps even limited item bonuses to damage - something weaker than the iron armbands) there's a real element of variation - a character might have some such bonuses but not others; or he might forgo many of those basic items and focus on other benefits (e.g. read another language instead, or gain a situational bonus that's larger).
Having the option of simple items is good.
We've had one or two polls on getting rid of +x items before. Generally, the majority of people polled generally support keeping them. So handing out lots of "boring" magic items still seems to be the preferred way.
I think the inherent bonuses combined with the rare magic items is a good way to model handing out only a few character defining items. You can hand out 3 or 4 rare items (over the course of 30 levels) that make you a better combat character, and generally hand out consumables and interesting and quirky minor magical items the rest of the time. That way of doing treasure should still work.
I think the inherent bonuses combined with the rare magic items is a good way to model handing out only a few character defining items. You can hand out 3 or 4 rare items (over the course of 30 levels) that make you a better combat character, and generally hand out consumables and interesting and quirky minor magical items the rest of the time. That way of doing treasure should still work.
Mengu said:
This change seems like a useful addition to the game, but the details will be important-
i.e. exactly which magic items are assigned to each category.
Rather than simply assigning entire books worth of items to one category, the designers need to consider each item separately to decide which category it should be assigned based on the design goals for this rule change.
You bet! Of the many overpowered magic items the party in the 3.5 game I played in from levels 1-17 acquired (and there was a lot; the GM loves his items), the most campaign defining was the "stone cutting sword" we picked up for a song at 3rd level. We -destroyed- encounters, or even entire adventures with that sword -- using it to mine out dungeons and colapse it on foes, bypass encounters by digging through walls or dig tunnels under castles or fortresses--I think we were still using it at 13th level (and only stopped because it got destroyed or sacrificed a bit after then, I think).
But you know what? It was fun! As powerful as such an item can be, it also defines the campaign and encourages creativity in the players, making them feel -really- heroic (not to mention distinishing it from any other campaign with those characters). That's the kind of stuff a rare item -should- do.
I've been on board with this since before 4e came out. But I guess they wanted to tie some properties to the + of the weapon such as crit dice, and kept the +'s. Those enhancement bonuses should just be baked into the system ala inherent bonuses.
As DM, I don't want to constantly worry about giving weapon upgrades, armor upgrades, neck upgrades, etc. I end up hand waving half the stuff anyway. One morning you wake up and suddenly all your neck items went from +1 to +2. The faerie mother visited you. Whatever. It's not interesting to find upgrades. It's interesting to find new stuff.
Instead of party finding 4-5 items per level, that number could easily be reduced to 2-3, making things a lot more interesting. In 5 levels, of the 25 items the party finds (counting cash as item), 15 of them are neck, armor, and weapon upgrades anyway.
Oh and bake the item bonus to damage into the system while you're at it. Don't need the arm slot or staff slot (or goblin totem or radiant weapon or what have you) taken up for that.
With this method you also happen to win on equality since everyone gets their bonuses at the same time.
For my next campaign, I'm definitely using inherent bonuses of some sort. But I kind of wish core rules more inherently supported that system. Critical dice, bonuses tied to enhancement bonuses, etc. can still pose problems that need to be hand waved. I'll likely just equip the characters with the bonus I want them to have in CB, rather than using the inherent bonus.
knightofround
First Post
They should make all magic items tiered imo.
Common version of a magic item would be a static bonus or property.
Uncommon version would be common+ an addition bonus/property, or an encounter power
Rare version would be common+uncommon+ a third bonus/property/encounter, one of which could be at-will power.
Artifacts would essentially be 2x rare. Makes it easy to create your own artifact by melding two existing items.
This would also save space in item design, as you wouldn't have to design a bajillion separate items with different properties and powers. You'd just start with one very good item, and pare it down.
The key point is to make it so you can get the "cool" abilities without sacrificing necessary static bonuses.
Common version of a magic item would be a static bonus or property.
Uncommon version would be common+ an addition bonus/property, or an encounter power
Rare version would be common+uncommon+ a third bonus/property/encounter, one of which could be at-will power.
Artifacts would essentially be 2x rare. Makes it easy to create your own artifact by melding two existing items.
This would also save space in item design, as you wouldn't have to design a bajillion separate items with different properties and powers. You'd just start with one very good item, and pare it down.
The key point is to make it so you can get the "cool" abilities without sacrificing necessary static bonuses.
To make life easy on me I've had a simple house rule for this. Every level up each PC gets 1 magic item of new level + 1 (if you are going from 1 -> 2 it would be a L3 item or less - L2 + 1). As I'm almost to Epic (currently level 18 PCs) I'm somewhat regretting this and look forward to the changes they've added. I would definitely go Inherent + Rares only in a new game.
