Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 7594453" data-attributes="member: 23751">Did you somehow miss where I said that they include them because most people use magic items?I didn't say they don't have an impact.&nbsp; I said the game doesn't care about them, and it doesn't.&nbsp; The designers did not include magic items in the game math, because they don't assume that every DM will use them.For someone who yells Strawman so often, you should know what a Strawman is and not use one.&nbsp; You've falsely accused me of using Strawman several times where I did not attribute an argument to you, but merely disagreed with your premise and presented a counter argument, and now here you are falsely attributing a claim that magic items don't impact the game to me and then arguing against that false claim, which is a classic Strawman.If by betray, you mean taking gamers into consideration and making magic items awesome again for the first time since 2e, you are correct.&nbsp; Including magic items in the monster math was the betrayal.&nbsp; If magic items are assumed and accounted for, they are a worthless tax that you must have in order to just break even.&nbsp; They are no longer a magical item that provides the PC with a bonus.&nbsp; With the change back to magic items being unaccounted for, they have truly become magic items again and are wonderful to possess.&nbsp; The DM just needs to be careful not to overload the players with them or he will unbalance the game.Magic items were a crutch in 3e and 4e.&nbsp; They are no longer a crutch in 5e as you don't NEED them.&nbsp; Crutches are needed in order to get by, which is what happens when you include them in the game math.I understand very well.&nbsp; The confusion is entirely on your end.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 7594453, member: 23751"] Did you somehow miss where I said that they include them because most people use magic items? I didn't say they don't have an impact. I said the game doesn't care about them, and it doesn't. The designers did not include magic items in the game math, because they don't assume that every DM will use them. For someone who yells Strawman so often, you should know what a Strawman is and not use one. You've falsely accused me of using Strawman several times where I did not attribute an argument to you, but merely disagreed with your premise and presented a counter argument, and now here you are falsely attributing a claim that magic items don't impact the game to me and then arguing against that false claim, which is a classic Strawman. If by betray, you mean taking gamers into consideration and making magic items awesome again for the first time since 2e, you are correct. Including magic items in the monster math was the betrayal. If magic items are assumed and accounted for, they are a worthless tax that you must have in order to just break even. They are no longer a magical item that provides the PC with a bonus. With the change back to magic items being unaccounted for, they have truly become magic items again and are wonderful to possess. The DM just needs to be careful not to overload the players with them or he will unbalance the game. Magic items were a crutch in 3e and 4e. They are no longer a crutch in 5e as you don't NEED them. Crutches are needed in order to get by, which is what happens when you include them in the game math. I understand very well. The confusion is entirely on your end. [/QUOTE]

Verification