Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5455763" data-attributes="member: 82106">I totally disagree. There are many elements that are fine if they are restricted to one character or one use. The horn that pushes people around for instance, which was nerfed strictly because higher level PCs could equip the whole party with one each. The item itself was fine, IF used in the intended way, as a single fairly unique item that one character would have. Ironically the same item by the old rules was worthless as a one-off as the power was weak and almost never worth spending a character's daily use on. So it was both useless and broken at the same time. Rarity totally fixes this item with the removal of the daily use rule.No, the same constraints on design DO NOT need to apply. That's the whole point. See above for the poster child example. It is only one of MANY.Artifacts are fine. Of course there COULD be more of them, no argument, but the ones that exist are quite usable. I have created several of my own, it was easy and they have worked well so far. I'm considering using one of the DMG2 artifacts as well. I tend to like to make my own, but there are a few interesting new ones around that should be fun. Consumables actually are a sort of ticking time bomb. They've all been now made uncommon, and for a lot of them that is probably for the best. I'd easily allow PCs to make any of the ones that don't cause problems and often many of the others on a limited basis. It would be good if WotC did come in and reevaluate those items, make any needed errata, and carefully classify them. Maybe add some text explaining the best ways to deploy them in a game since they never really did that before. Something to tell DMs to make them possible to craft. Well, personally I don't really care if the pluses are attached to the item or the character really. At this point most of the people I'm running games for are good with enhancement being on items. The inherent bonus thing probably DOES make more sense, but I think a lot of people playing the game aren't that analytical. They like their plus items. You want to write the rules with one potential hypothetical bad DM in mind? Such a DM will find some way to stuff up his or her game. Making us use gimpy craptastic magic rules on that basis is not something I want. We're fixing a problem, not creating one. It is just an awful awkward kludge of a rule created to solve a problem that only existed because the whole "you can craft anything" was a bad idea. With that rule in place you simply cannot offer really interesting good items, unless you go all the way to labeling them artifacts. Personally I run for people that like to craft things and will craft things. They'll get plenty of scope to do that. This really SHOULD be harped on so that DMs are all well aware they should allow a decent amount of crafting. It is only when the players can make multiples of certain items or make certain highly desirable items that it gets problematic.There are ground rules for items. They now include the ability to make some that are actually really significant on a limited access basis, and to make ones that if available once a day are just nice and cool but when you can do the same thing 12 times a day are broken or unfun. Try making some items. You'll find that under the new system you have MUCH more freedom to do so.</blockquote>

Verification