Confirmed: Magic items and summoned monster stats in PHB

[Mallus]

All story telling, including the mythic kind, relies heavily on detail.

But not all storytelling relies on the same kind of details. Or the same level. What constitutes significant detail varies. I'm not sure I can say this using simpler language.

 

[Celebrim]

So here's a question.

How many people think potions of cure X wounds should've been in the equipment section in ALL previous editions of D&D.

I tend to lean towards, YES, especially given the price disparity between the potions and plate mail

I tend to lean towards, "No.", and think that the price disparity completely misses the point.

And this despite the fact that potions at least, are fairly openly available in my campaigns. But that's my decision, and not something I want to impose on other DMs.

In fact, I've alot of problems with the existing game economics of which the price lists are the most obvious examples. Ideally, even the plate mail needs some qualifications attached. However, that's a whole other topic.

I will say that if you must include non-mundane items in the price list, it would be far better to have a separate section titled - 'Suggested Goods - High Magic Level Areas' - that listed a few such items with the caveat that these goods may be rare and one needs to consult the DM to see if these goods are in fact available in the area where the campaign is beginning. If feel the same way about things like Full Plate, for that matter. It's imposing a setting on you which might not be relevant if your setting resembles Merovigian France or bronze age Greece.

 

[Cadfan]

I would say that running out of ammo is a consequence of a high fire rate, and that part of choosing to play a character with a higher firing rate is knowing that you burn through ammo faster.

You missed the point. "Running out of ammo" is NOT a consequence of playing a high fire rate character. Nobody runs out of ammo, ever, unless their DM is being more stingy with magical gear than the rulebook presumes.* And if he's doing that, you just end up with other, worse consequences.

The consequence of playing a character with a high fire rate is being forced to do abstruse, kinda stupid gear management involving bags of holding. This whole "running out of ammo" thing is sort of a red herring. Running out of ammo SHOULD be a problem, but in 3e past early levels it is not, thanks to Efficient Quivers (capacity: 60 arrows, cost 1,800 gp) and Bags of Holding (capacity: 83 quivers of 20 arrows, or 1660 arrows, cost 2,500 gp, +83 gp for the arrows). Even a level 16 archer using Rapid Shot and Haste only fires 6 arrows per round, giving him 10 rounds of combat with an Efficient Quiver, and 276 rounds with the small bag of holding.

Counting things, like arrows, is ONLY a good idea if it has a meaningful effect in game. And how meaningful that effect needs to be depends on how much of a hassle it is to count. Counting arrows creates two effects. You have to buy new arrows, and you have to make sure not to run out. The problem is that you WON'T run out if you take sensible, obvious, rules-determined precautions. And the cost of buying new arrows for a medium level adventurer is so small that its simply not justifiable. The hassle of counting arrows is relatively high, unfortunately. The trivially small cost and low likelihood of running out makes this just an annoyance.

This is why I reached my compromise with my DM. I counted arrows in my quiver, and ignored arrows in my bag. This left me with the possibility (never happened) of running out of arrows mid fight, and let me avoid doing all kinds of bookkeeping to account for what was usually, quite literally, under 5 gold pieces.

*From levels 1 to 5, a ranger plays a lot like the scout did in terms of ammunition conservation. You get a much more realistic feel in that band, where using up ammunition is a meaningful choice. So for these levels, the environment of the game provides a rewarding ammunition-counting experience.

 

[Greg K]

So here's a question.

How many people think potions of cure X wounds should've been in the equipment section in ALL previous editions of D&D.

I tend to lean towards, YES, especially given the price disparity between the potions and plate mail

I lean no, but then I also wish things like spiked chains, halfling riding dogs, and most of the alchemical equipment were in a seperate book as well

 

[Voss]

Bold type is mine for emphasis.



We have the winner. The new talking point for the anti-4e crowd is: 4e edition is not an RPG, it's a tactical game.

I'm calling D&D is too much like pinochle for the next line of attack.

EDIT: A good role-player will role-play in whatever edition. Someone interested only in tactics and combat will not role-play in any edition. The divide has been with us from the beginning. Any argument that the new edition will be less of an RPG just because it provides good rules for tactics is simplistic at best.

True. You can roleplay to almost anything, independent of the rule set. However, a good RPG supports, well, RPG play. 4e, based on the designer comments, doesn't seem to support roleplaying that well- its incidental, and there are a lot of signposts littering the game rules that that explicitly don't engage the characters. Like monsters auto-dying at 0, yet a goblin can sit by a dying PC stabbing repeatedly with a dagger to no effect whatsoever. Or 'magical but sometimes not really magical but still slightly so' power effects that have no real explanation. Paladin smites create the blue shield on a friendly, inspirational words knit broken legs- in other words, effects give you a mechanical bonus because they do, and thats all you ever need worry about.

When you get down to it, the impression I get of 4e, as presented, is that every time combat breaks out, its time to stop roleplaying and push the minis about. And combat is being presented as 90+% of the game. Hence, 'D&D Heroquest'.

 

[AllisterH]

I will say that if you must include non-mundane items in the price list, it would be far better to have a separate section titled - 'Suggested Goods - High Magic Level Areas' - that listed a few such items with the caveat that these goods may be rare and one needs to consult the DM to see if these goods are in fact available in the area where the campaign is beginning. If feel the same way about things like Full Plate, for that matter. It's imposing a setting on you which might not be relevant if your setting resembles Merovigian France or bronze age Greece.

The thing about Full-plate is that it has been a standard piece of equipment since 1E, yet even the supposedly rare "cure X wounds" potion costs a hell of a lot less. Sure, in Athas and a Greek setting, one could argue quite rightedly that plate mail et al just doesn't exist but looking at the history of D&D campaign settings? Only Darksun would it not be valid.

So how could potions be rare, yet have a price point orders of magnitude smaller? I mean, even in earlier editions, I remember that getting a potion of cure X from the local witchdoctor/shaman/herbologist NEVER cost anywhere near as much as plate mail.

Hell, in fact, they're were actually MORE places you could pick up cure X potions than get plate mail fixed/bought in those old adventures so really, how rare could such potions really be?

 

[Hella_Tellah]

Paladin smites create the blue shield on a friendly, inspirational words knit broken legs- in other words, effects give you a mechanical bonus because they do, and thats all you ever need worry about.

You've chosen to interpret those abilities so simplistically, but there's no reason the rest of us have to. You have chosen to interpret the Warlord's ability to boost healing as words knitting bone, but it needn't represent that at all. Inspirational words don't knit broken bones because HP doesn't represent broken bones, it represents the courage to press on, which may be adversely affected by injuries. A good commander can push his soldiers beyond physical pain, beyond fear, to achieve amazing feats, and the Warlord's "healing" represents that.

The Paladin smites a goblin, which confers upon an ally a bonus to AC. You may interpret that as a garish and game-ish blue shield, but I'll be thinking of it as an intangible blessing conferred upon the ally as a result of the Paladin's prayer. If her deity confers that blessing on the apostate Rogue, the Rogue may not even believe the god had anything to do with his newly increased agility. "Divine powers," he says, "Are nothing but holy baloney. I dodged the highwayman's throwing axe."

If you're a Battlestar Galactica fan, think of the blessings conferred upon Gaius Baltar as a result of his faith in the Cylon god. He succeeds, often spectacularly, against overwhelming odds, and yet even he is unsure of the existence of his patron deity.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Since the poster who objected to my "attitude" seems to have moved on, I'll pop back in.

So how could potions be rare, yet have a price point orders of magnitude smaller? I mean, even in earlier editions, I remember that getting a potion of cure X from the local witchdoctor/shaman/herbologist NEVER cost anywhere near as much as plate mail.

Hell, in fact, they're were actually MORE places you could pick up cure X potions than get plate mail fixed/bought in those old adventures so really, how rare could such potions really be?

My earlier editions were BECMI and 2E. Both of which started off explicitly saying there were no magic shops. BECMI had no prices for magic items until the Companion Set, which talked about private sales in limited cases IF the DM deemed something to be available (rather than shops in which anything was presumed to be for sale). IIRC the minimum price for potions was about 1,000 gp -- more than plate mail. 2E had no magic items prices at all.

I will say that if you must include non-mundane items in the price list, it would be far better to have a separate section titled - 'Suggested Goods - High Magic Level Areas' - that listed a few such items with the caveat that these goods may be rare and one needs to consult the DM to see if these goods are in fact available in the area where the campaign is beginning.

Indeed. This was one of my biggest gripes about 3E: the move away from language such as "ask your DM to see what may be available." The way the system was written, it took away a good deal of DM discretion. Taking number-crunching away from the DM isn't a bad thing, but reducing the emphasis on DM'ing skills is.

Anybody recall the thread about dinosaurs as animal companions? One point of view is "It's there in the PH, so players should expect that it's allowed." Whereas I, coming from earlier editions, will always read "Check with your DM about what animal companions are permissible" whether or not it is there in the text.

On magic items:
The text at the beginning of the thread suggested to me that magic items of all levels were included in the PH so that players could choose which items their PCs would have. That optimization aspect was my least favorite thing about 3E. Treating magic items as mundane was also annoying, and crafting items was way too easy. Inclusion in the PH also creates an assumption that all listed items exist. Yes, item creation feats do that too, whereas "Ask your DM what items your Magic-User can create" does not. Of course it makes sense for players to have the information they need to use the items, but what I don't like is the optimization aspect and the idea that players basically know the full spectrum of magic items that can exist in the world. I agree that there is some need for balance, because 3E casters are presumed to have free reign to choose from all the PHB spells; so there I'd also gravitate to the mentality of earlier editions in limiting access to spells.

Specifically as to potions and scrolls, I doubt they'll be prevalent in 4E; they're expendable resources that you can use to nova your way through tough encounters and then have to go back and replenish. I thought 4E was opposed to that idea.

Summoning and wildshape:
My problem was specifically with the choice of the word "adjudicate." Words matter, and that one was extremely poorly chosen. The DM is responsible for adjudication, not the players. If there is a question as to what a summoned creature will do in a given situation, final authority rests with the DM. If there is doubt as to what abilities you gain in wildshape, or what spells affect you, final authority rests with the DM. If the DM wants to say that certain creatures do not exist in his world and so are not available for summoning or polymorph (no war trolls!), that is his perogative. That's adjudication.

 

[Caliban]

We're hopefully past that part of the thread - but just a reminder not to bicker, folks. If you start addressing one person's attitude, it's probably time to step away from the thread for a bit.

It's a good thing you intervened when you did. Who knows what those troublemakers would have done?

 

[Raven Crowking]

But not all storytelling relies on the same kind of details. Or the same level. What constitutes significant detail varies. I'm not sure I can say this using simpler language.

Sure. But I think we need to recognize what a "significant detail" is, and hence (by extension) an insignificant detail, no?

I would venture to say that a detail in a story is significant in that, were it not there, the story would be materially changed. For example, if you have limited rations, then you have the possibility of starvation. Not tracking rations changes the story. If you have limited rations, but can magically create food, then that might use up one of your daily spell slots. Not tracking rations changes the story. If you are an archer, and you run out of arrows, you have to change tactics. That changes the story. The colour of your bow, generally, does not.

RC