Confirmed: Magic items and summoned monster stats in PHB

[Cadfan]

I would enjoy tracking ammunition if the game didn't make tracking ammunition stupidly painful.

A level 6 archer is probably throwing out 3 arrows per round once his allies cast Haste, which at that level they probably will. His quiver holds 20 arrows. That's about 7 rounds he can fight before he's empty. Once he's empty, he can salvage arrows. To do so he has to know how many arrows he fired missed, because he can salvage half of those. But of course that only works if there are no environmental conditions that make this impossible, which means he has to ask the DM. So after each fight he has to replenish what arrows he can, and then take a sizable amount of arrows from one of his many backup quivers. Eventually, at higher levels, he will stuff 300 or 400 quivers into a bag of holding, and forget about counting ammunition comletely.

This is dumb. If archers were balanced so that they fired ONE arrow per round, counting ammunition would be cool.

 

[kennew142]

I would enjoy tracking ammunition if the game didn't make tracking ammunition stupidly painful.

A level 6 archer is probably throwing out 3 arrows per round once his allies cast Haste, which at that level they probably will. His quiver holds 20 arrows. That's about 7 rounds he can fight before he's empty. Once he's empty, he can salvage arrows. To do so he has to know how many arrows he fired missed, because he can salvage half of those. But of course that only works if there are no environmental conditions that make this impossible, which means he has to ask the DM. So after each fight he has to replenish what arrows he can, and then take a sizable amount of arrows from one of his many backup quivers. Eventually, at higher levels, he will stuff 300 or 400 quivers into a bag of holding, and forget about counting ammunition comletely.

This is dumb. If archers were balanced so that they fired ONE arrow per round, counting ammunition would be cool.

The archer in our group really enjoys keeping us all informed of how many arrows he's used in each combat. It's a point of pride for him. I've noticed similar tendencies among other archer fans. The great quantity of arrows is part of the appeal of the class for them.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

As someone unfamiliar with AE, that really doesn't answer my question.

I feel that as a DM, I am well within my right to say, "You want to take Maximize Spell feat? Sorry, you have to go talk to the Cabal of the Scorched Mountain to learn the secrets of dragging all the destructive potential from your spells."

Anything, and I mean anything can be made special.

You know, I love this and I hate it.

On the one hand, it makes the world more interactive and deep. On the other hand, my players end up traipsing across the known world if they want to accomplish the basic tasks involved in levelling up their characters. On the way, they encounter challenges, and gain XP, and so by the time the wizard learns Maximize Spell, he's ready for another feat, and so is the fighter, and the rogue, and the cleric. They never get the opportunity to go on adventures that aren't directly related to training, because they're always trying to meet the fluff requirements for their class abilities. It's fine for entry requirements for a PrC to turn something into a short side-quest, like "to join our ranks, you must go rout out this den of bandits". But when you turn half of everything into that sort of quest, it starts to get old. Then "anything can be made special" turns into "everything is so goddamn special that it's starting to get boring."

Sometimes you just want to write down "Maximize Spell" and get on with saving the world.

 

[Nytmare]

You know, I love this and I hate it.

Yeah, but you don't have to do something like that for every bit and piece of the character, and there's no reason you have to wait till after you should have access to something to start fulfilling possible story-esque requirements for it. Not everyone plans out their characters ahead of time, but there are some decisions that they know they're going to make in advance, and you can turn them into special things.

As an example, players in my group tend to have their characters start sucking up to and interacting with their PRC groups long before they're technically elligible for the class. It avoids the last minute hand waving and 5 minute cliff notes version of things you have to come up with if you don't want to derail the group on an single character's quest of discovery.

 

[Orius]

Players shouldn't be equipping their PCs with magic items; DMs should be equipping the PCs with magic items.

I have no problem keeping powerful magic items descriptions away from players. Basic stuff like +1 swords makes less difference. Also scrolls (if they're still around) don't need to be kept hidden from players, since they duplicate spell effects. The same goes for potions, assuming they work about the same the did in 3e. Wands in 3e also fall into that category, but I think they're changing yet again in 4e.

Players shouldn't need the Monster Manual to adjudicate shapechanging or summoning effects; DMs should adjudicate all effects of any kind whatsoever.

Yes, because the potential for widely varying and unpredictable PC abilties by DM fiat is really desirable in the game.

Players shouldn't need to look into the MM during a game, but they should have some idea of how a spell or class ability is going to work. Consistancy in different games is also useful.

 

[Orius]

Yes, well, in a game with an emphasis on DM judgement calls, a DM will take player needs and convenience into consideration and choose particular treasures. Maybe neat items with hidden magical properties that aren't revealed until a dramatic moment. In a game where PCs can pick and choose, they all get the "Big Six." That was a HUGE reason for the "Big Six" being as prevalent as they were in 3E -- the assumption that PCs could generally get the specific items they wanted.

Not necessarily. There's plenty of DMs out there who take perverse pleasure in plunking down +1 obscure Gygaxian polearms or some such knowing damn well that the players won't really use them. And of course, there's nowhere for them to unload them either.

I agree that powerful magic items should not be bought and sold like commodities. I have less problems with players buying minor items like potions of healing/cure light wounds or low-level scrolls, +1 weapons, or minor magic trinkets, though only the larger cities have such item. The selection of minor magic items for sale is limited and somewhat random, so the PCs can't really shop for items, but they end up being impulse buys instead.

 

[Orius]

I really like the idea of legacy weapons.

So do I. It's one of 3e's more interesting ideas. I'd be happy if the DMG had some basic rules on legacy weapons/items, just like the sections that have always been there on intelligent weapons.

 

[pukunui]

But the process of story creation is occurring within a game, and that carries with it all those other notions of simulation and competition that make it more than just another story artform. If I'm not keeping track of ammo, then that part of the game which is about me solving problems with my wits suffers.

And in my opinion, even the story suffers. It's annoying to watch a movie where the protagonist draws a revolver and then fires off 12 shots in rapid succession. It's annoying to watch stories where the writer doesn't pay attention to what is going on in the universe of his story. It breaks faith with the audience. In an RPG, it breaks faith with all the other players, even the ones just interested in story, in as much as having limitless ammo makes it more of a game even than keeping track of the ammo does.

Neither my players nor I feel like our game is suffering because we don't bother with certain micromanagement aspects of the game. I don't totally ignore ammunition, weight limits, or rations but I tell my players that unless there's a good reason to pay attention to them (like if they're adventuring in a desert without much prospect of finding food), then they shouldn't bother. To my group, rations and that just make the game slow down and anything that makes the game slow down is deemed not fun. That's just how it works for my group.

Whereas, when I run a game, you have six seconds to come up with a plan of action or your character is assumed to do nothing but stand there feeling lost, confused, and perhaps paniced. It annoys some new players, but pretty soon they see the sense of it because not only do I not have to deal with problems like you discuss but I get a story in which the protagonists can feel lost, confused, and perhaps paniced.

I'd love to do this. I have threatened to do this. I have told my players that I am actually going to do it. But it never actually happens. 1) I generally forget to enforce it and 2) my players don't think it's fun. The be all and end all of playing any kind of game is to have fun. If you don't think it's fun, that doesn't make you wrong.

 

[Orius]

On the one hand, it makes the world more interactive and deep. On the other hand, my players end up traipsing across the known world if they want to accomplish the basic tasks involved in levelling up their characters. On the way, they encounter challenges, and gain XP, and so by the time the wizard learns Maximize Spell, he's ready for another feat, and so is the fighter, and the rogue, and the cleric. They never get the opportunity to go on adventures that aren't directly related to training, because they're always trying to meet the fluff requirements for their class abilities.

That's why lasat time I bother with training rules like that I tried to make sure it wasn't excessively restrictive. I had decided that there were certain types of feats that didn't require NPC training (like Skill Focus, I assumed the PC just basically practiced to get better). After that, I tried to make sure the feats in the PHB could be learned somewhere in the city that they were using as their home base, so they wouldn't have to traipse halfway around the world. However, feats from other sources would require some amount of travel, depending on the source where the feat was, and stuff like prerequisites.

Don't know if 4e will bother with training rules or not. In the old days they were pretty much a way to eat up a player's gp (since they couldn't buy magic items), but it just seems like an asinine vicious circle these days.

 

[D.Shaffer]

Considering the 'sense of wonder' involving magic items only lasts until they get 100 GPs for Identify, I dont really see any mystery lasting to long unless you're already into house rule territory. It's a speedbump at best. Beyond this, having magic items in the PHB makes sense for two good reasons.

One: Not everyone is going to be starting with level 1 characters. Whether it be someone new joining the campaign, or a character replacing a dead one (And remember, they've mentioned it's going to be close to impossible for characters below level 10 to get raised), they're going to need to be equiped with gear appropriate to their levels. Considering the fact that players tend to toss equipment that doesnt help them much, rather then store them like arcane obsessed packrats, it makes sense to me that, at the very least, the most common magic items are listed so they know what's appropriate for their level rather then them having a grabbag of assorted random magic items. This is especially true considering that we know the rules incorporate you having at least three magic items into the math.

Two: Players can CREATE magic items. This is the more important one, IMO. In a world where the characters can create the silly things, it doesnt make sense to me that they dont get to look at what they're creating, cant see the requirements to create them, and dont even have the the faintest idea of what's even possible to create without having to crack open a new book.

Your mileage may very, but that's how I see things.