Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 4926759" data-attributes="member: 3424">It appears that making subtle points is not my strength. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> Let me try that again.1. Obviously, every item that provides a unique benefit would be &quot;the best&quot; at providing that benefit. Even items that provide related benefits should each be &quot;the best&quot; at providing their specific type of benefit, or have some other mitigating factor, e.g. a hypothetical wand of ruin that provides a item bonus to damage rolls to all implement attacks vs. a force wand that provides an item bonus to damage rolls to all implement attacks with the force keyword and also allows the user to cast magic missile once per encounter.2. Being &quot;the best&quot; in its chosen area of benefit is thus not the problem. It is only a problem when the benefit provided far outweighs (or is perceived to far outweigh) the other potential, competing benefits. For example, if there were bracers that provided a constant +1 to melee attack rolls, or resistance 2 to melee attacks, I doubt that iron armbands of power would be so popular (assuming, of course, that we aren't over-valuing damage in the first place - I'm not entirely convinced of that yet).3. However, if there is a problem property, making the property generic is going to increase the problem, not reduce it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 4926759, member: 3424"] It appears that making subtle points is not my strength. :p Let me try that again. 1. Obviously, every item that provides a unique benefit would be "the best" at providing that benefit. Even items that provide related benefits should each be "the best" at providing their specific type of benefit, or have some other mitigating factor, e.g. a hypothetical [I]wand of ruin[/I] that provides a item bonus to damage rolls to all implement attacks vs. a [I]force wand[/I] that provides an item bonus to damage rolls to all implement attacks with the force keyword and also allows the user to cast [I]magic missile[/I] once per encounter. 2. Being "the best" in its chosen area of benefit is thus not the problem. It is only a problem when the benefit provided far outweighs (or is perceived to far outweigh) the other potential, competing benefits. For example, if there were bracers that provided a constant +1 to melee attack rolls, or resistance 2 to melee attacks, I doubt that [I]iron armbands of power[/I] would be so popular (assuming, of course, that we aren't over-valuing damage in the first place - I'm not entirely convinced of that yet). 3. However, if there is a problem property, making the property generic is going to increase the problem, not reduce it. [/QUOTE]

Verification