Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 4104632" data-attributes="member: 17077">I should have known someone would post with this "witty" retort. You know exactly what I meant.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f621.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":mad:" title="Mad    :mad:"  data-smilie="4"data-shortname=":mad:" /> If this was so "clear", why did previous editions (and countless other games) seperate the two? Wearing an amulet with a cloak is a commonly depicted thing in fantasy. Wearing several rings is not. Yes, a cloak is fastened on the shoulders or around the neck, but cloaks are there to cover one's back. Rings hang down from the neck and are actually over the chest. I understand their desire to cut down on the christmas tree thing, but this is taking it too far, IMO. Oh wait, I forgot, this is the same edition that doesn't even let someone use a ring until 11th level, and then only one.  :\ Despite all the things as I like about 4e, I fear I'm going to have to implement alot of house rules before I can tolerate it.Har har. Having a separate "slot" for cloaks and amulets goes back loooooong before WoW.That's not an excuse. That's a problem they created. It's circular reasoning to say "hey let's have cloaks and amulets do the same thing in this edition" and then conclude that "since they do the same thing, you shouldn't be able to use both at the same time." The solution to this is obvious. Don't have cloaks and amulets do the same thing!</blockquote>

Verification