Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Stoat" data-source="post: 3922236" data-attributes="member: 16786">A potential benefit:Assigning &quot;levels&quot; to magic items makes it easier in theory to divorce game balance from game economics.&nbsp; I might want to DM a game where the players have magic items, but magic items are not generally for sale.&nbsp; The 3E method of using gold piece value as the only indication of item power obscures the baseline set by the designers.&nbsp; When did Monte Cook expect a fighter to get a +3 weapon?&nbsp; What about a Ring of the Ram?&nbsp; When will throwing those items into the game conflict with the assumptions used by the designers in creating monsters and assigning CR's?&nbsp; In 3E, you can kinda look at the NPC tables in the DMG, or you can look at the wealth by level tables and sorta guesstimate, or you can wait until the PH II is released in 2007 and check those tables.In 4E, if all goes according to what we're told is the plan, the base assumptions are more visible.&nbsp; Mearls thinks that 9th level characters should have +2 lightning swords, and (one hopes) the monsters are designed around that assumption.&nbsp; This ought to make it easier for me to determine how closely my game is adhering to the base assumptions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Stoat, post: 3922236, member: 16786"] A potential benefit: Assigning "levels" to magic items makes it easier in theory to divorce game balance from game economics. I might want to DM a game where the players have magic items, but magic items are not generally for sale. The 3E method of using gold piece value as the only indication of item power obscures the baseline set by the designers. When did Monte Cook expect a fighter to get a +3 weapon? What about a Ring of the Ram? When will throwing those items into the game conflict with the assumptions used by the designers in creating monsters and assigning CR's? In 3E, you can kinda look at the NPC tables in the DMG, or you can look at the wealth by level tables and sorta guesstimate, or you can wait until the PH II is released in 2007 and check those tables. In 4E, if all goes according to what we're told is the plan, the base assumptions are more visible. Mearls thinks that 9th level characters should have +2 lightning swords, and (one hopes) the monsters are designed around that assumption. This ought to make it easier for me to determine how closely my game is adhering to the base assumptions. [/QUOTE]

Verification