Dear Wizards, I no longer have a clue what you're doing

[aco175]

Have not realy got into essentials all the way yet but like most of what I have seen. I was also hoping for a cool magic book this year to help me make cool rare items, but alas?

 

[The Little Raven]

Consider for example that Ogre Gauntlets are apparently rare and give a +2 bonus to damage for a daily power. While an uncommon like Iron Armbands gives a +2 damage bonus all the time. This is plainly ridiculous, why would anyone feel that the gauntlets were a "character defining" item? Why would any player want it to begin with? But the real problem is there is an entire lack of rares and commons. It can be very hard finding suitable common and rare items for different slots, considering there is a huge lack of both kinds of items.

I agree, this would absolutely ridiculous... if the Ogres of Gauntlet Power were Rare (they're not... they're Uncommon), if they only granted a +2 bonus to damage as a daily (they don't... they grant a +5 bonus), if they lacked a property (they have a property: +1 to Athletics/Strength checks) and if they were equal or higher level than the Iron Armbands (they aren't, they're 1 level lower).

 

[Aegeri]

I agree, this would absolutely ridiculous... if the Ogres of Gauntlet Power were Rare (they're not... they're Uncommon)

You are incorrect, they are rare. Page 265 of the Dungeon Masters Book.

if they only granted a +2 bonus to damage as a daily (they don't... they grant a +5 bonus)

That is also actually wrong. See page 265 of the Dungeon Masters Guide. It's a +2 bonus to melee damage rolls until the end of the encounter.

if they lacked a property (they have a property: +1 to Athletics/Strength checks) and if they were equal or higher level than the Iron Armbands (they aren't, they're 1 level lower).

This doesn't make them a good rare item whatsoever.

May I ask where you're getting the stats for the Ogre Gauntlets from? Because they are a level 5 rare (hands slot) item in the Dungeon Masters Book on page 265. They are not an uncommon item with a +5 bonus to damage daily as you describe. Noting that this is a free action for one attack, while the DMBs rare version is +2 damage for an entire encounter.

In fact I have just realized you are indeed confused and are looking at the wrong item. You are looking at the original item in the PHB. The item I am talking about is the RARE Gauntlets in the Dungeon Masters Book. I am still completely correct on my assessment, but you did make me briefly worried.

And yes, for a rare item they really are that terrible.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

And yes, for a rare item they really are that terrible.

Maybe it's because when combined with the Girdle of Giant Strength and a big magic hammer... oh, wait, sorry. Wrong edition.

 

[Aegeri]

It appears that the Gauntlets of Ogre Power rare in the DMB is so bad it isn't even listed in the compendium. Hilarious.

 

[The Little Raven]

You are incorrect, they are rare. Page 265 of the Dungeon Masters Book.

According to Wizards, the D&D Compendium is the latest source for any game element. It lists the Gauntlets as a Level 5 Uncommon item with a Daily power that adds a +5 power bonus to an attack.

However, it appears the Compendium does not have the DM's Kit data included, but does have the other Essentials items in it (Bracers of Mighty Striking reference Essentials 1 as a source).

 

[The Little Raven]

It appears that the Gauntlets of Ogre Power rare in the DMB is so bad it isn't even listed in the compendium. Hilarious.

Nothing from the DM's Kit is in there, it seems. The Staff of the Magi is missing, and the Holy Avenger is marked as Uncommon when I remember it being one of the only Rares in the game upon the DM's Kit's release.

 

[Aegeri]

According to Wizards, the D&D Compendium is the latest source for any game element

Given how poor their recent efforts with DDI are, do you really believe that? I wouldn't trust the compendium as far as I could throw it at the moment. In addition to this they have been really all over the place with the compendium. Some monster vault creatures have simply replaced the older version, while others are added in pretty much alongside the original MM versions. This is why I commented on the MV creatures feeling like "errata" - especially if you look at how the compendium handled inserting them.

Either way, if you have the book you should go and have a look at the items in it. The Ogre Gauntlet "rare" in the DMB is everything that is wrong with the item rarity system and its intentions as "Character defining" items.

Edit: For those following who are confused. The item Raven is referring to is published in the original PHB. It gives a +1 to athletics skill checks and strength checks as a property, is a level 5 uncommon (IIRC now) and has a daily power as a free action to add +5 damage onto a damage roll you make.

The rare gauntlets were published in the essentials DM's kit book. They have the same property, the sole thing that makes them "rare" compared with the original gauntlets uncommon is they get a +2 bonus to damage until the end of the encounter.

 

[Raith5]

Given how poor their recent efforts with DDI are, do you really believe that? I wouldn't trust the compendium as far as I could throw it at the moment. In addition to this they have been really all over the place with the compendium. Some monster vault creatures have simply replaced the older version, while others are added in pretty much alongside the original MM versions. This is why I commented on the MV creatures feeling like "errata" - especially if you look at how the compendium handled inserting them.

Either way, if you have the book you should go and have a look at the items in it. The Ogre Gauntlet "rare" in the DMB is everything that is wrong with the item rarity system and its intentions as "Character defining" items.

Edit: For those following who are confused. The item Raven is referring to is published in the original PHB. It gives a +1 to athletics skill checks and strength checks as a property, is a level 5 uncommon (IIRC now) and has a daily power as a free action to add +5 damage onto a damage roll you make.

The rare gauntlets were published in the essentials DM's kit book. They have the same property, the sole thing that makes them "rare" compared with the original gauntlets uncommon is they get a +2 bonus to damage until the end of the encounter.

Sadly this story kinda sums up where 4ed is at

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I don't know Aegeri, I get your frustration level. OTOH there's another end to this telescope (yes, a very old reference but this crowd will easily get it...).

My monster builder works fine (maybe luckily my DDI ran out 2 days before the last update, so I don't know what went on with the last update there). Same with offline CB, it is still working fine. Even with the last offline CB update it was going fine.

As for Dragon and Dungeon, I've found there are a pretty decent number of articles that I can get something out of. At least I read them and get ideas or just some entertainment. I'd pay for DDI for the Compendium and CB alone. They are both incredible time savers and I got DDI before MB even existed (but it is certainly way useful and I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with it online).

I have 25 really nice 4e books, all of which I'm happy with. Some are better than others, but they are all well written and most of the material is very usable and sensible. The game system itself is the same as ever and as good as the day I bought into it. Essentials is fine. I have only really looked at it enough to know what it is about and I doubt anyone will suddenly want an Essentials character tomorrow, but if they do great. Even if I had some philosophical problems with it I can just ignore it and if players want it, well good for them they can play whatever they want as long as it is balanced and works, which Essentials does.

So basically I figure I have the key tools from WotC that I need to just keep on playing for as long as it holds my fancy to play 4e. It could be 10 years and if the company closed its doors tomorrow it would be sad, but I'd have no problem just going on playing. I can still play 2e and TSR is cold in its grave. Heck, I can still buy every 2e book ever printed for cheap money if I wanted to. I'm pretty certain that will be true for 4e probably as long as I want to keep gaming.

Overall whatever this tempest in a teacup is over what WotC is doing with 4e it seems quite remote and barely important to me. I'll probably keep paying for DDI for as long as it has some usable tools and I hope and expect they will get better, but I don't really NEED DDI to play and I don't even really need WotC to play. 4e makes me happy, WotC's troubles and foibles are far off remote things. Interesting to read about but not important to my actual gaming.