Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 4926993" data-attributes="member: 12731">I believe we are discussing different things, but I could be wrong.I want treasure more than one party member wants to have; encouraging the party to "fight" over the choicest bits; but at the same time opening up the tactical dimension of "what benefits our group the most".For instance, if you get the bracers, I can have the gloves. But on the other hand, if you take the gloves, Bob can use the bracers and I can have the Circlet. Which configuration 1) benefits me personally the most and 2) benefits the group as a whole the most.As you probably have figured out by now, I don't do wish lists.When I hand out a Longsword, chances are even the Rogue and the Barbarian are interested. They might not use Longswords, but they can at least transfer the enhancement across (per AV1 guidelines) to a Dagger or Greataxe.You see my point? Goodies for Warlocks and Shamans in particular feel awfully specific - whatever they like, chances are nobody else won't. Like in "at all" - they probably won't be able to use it in any way whatsoever!This is what I don't like. If, say, 50% of all arcane implement enhancements could be put on all arcane implements (or at least both rods and staffs), the "interoperability" and thus "friendly competition" between arcane classes would increase significantly.And if the same went for divine and primal enhancements, it would vastly increase the chance the two "devout" characters in the group (perhaps a Cleric and a Druid?) could benefit from one and the same item.I don't care for how 4E makes many items so very very specific, almost to the point where only a single class, a single build of that class, and a subset of that build with a certain set of stats can use the item.As I remember 3E, items were generally much more universal. Sure, the Greatsword mattered little to the party Wizard, but still. I'm sure there were specific class-based items in 3E too, but my gut feeling is they weren't as numerous as in 4E. It's ridiculous how you sometimes feel the only way you can hand out a single item everybody will want to have is by handing out a neck item!As for implements; they are a 4E invention. Unfortunately, the implementation has shown to serve to set the non-martial classes apart. Not only is this a hidden advantage for the weapon users out there, it makes it decidedly harder to build awesome treasure hoards as the DM. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /></blockquote>

Verification