DotF magic item questions

[Xarlen]

Kreynolds, it's been a while since I contributed to your Sig.

You Amuse The Kobolds.

Thank you. Thank you.

Edit: Or, if you prefer... Kobold Seal of Approval.

 

[reapersaurus]

Look.

A rule can't be changed in an email by the Sage.

By the current rules, Speed armor is ridiculously powerful.
WotC have put the onus on every single DM to deny it or nerf it in their campaigns.
As a player, I would feel fairly icky if I asked my DM for this, it's that overpowered and undercosted.

I believe it was Monte on his boards that he semi-officially bumped up the armor to +7.

 

[kreynolds]

A rule can't be changed in an email by the Sage.

But that's not in contention. It seemed to me that his ruling was perfectly reasonable. YMMV.

I believe it was Monte on his boards that he semi-officially bumped up the armor to +7.

And Monte is more "official" than the Sage? I don't understand where you're heading with this.

 

[Cheiromancer]

You have some real trust issues, you know that?

I can't think of a more diplomatic way of putting it.

 

[reapersaurus]

And Monte is more "official" than the Sage? I don't understand where you're heading with this.

Maybe you should have thought it thru more before posting then.

Monte is kind of one of the most important figures in generating 3E, and a fixture in the d20 community.
He posted his take on Speed Armor shortly after DotF came out, and has prominantly had it displayed on his web site (unless I'm mistaken).

The Sage just responded to your email question of him, and hasn't bothered to get it in Dragon, or the FAQ.

So which do you think should hold more unofficial 'sway'?
Because until it at least gets in a FAQ, there's no way a published rule can be changed world-over.

 

[Xarlen]

No amusement in my sig suggestion, Kreynolds?

 

[kreynolds]

Maybe you should have thought it thru more before posting then.

Careful. This has been civil thus far.

The Sage just responded to your email question of him, and hasn't bothered to get it in Dragon, or the FAQ.

I only have one thing to say to that. Apparently, it isn't a "frequently asked question" then.

So which do you think should hold more unofficial 'sway'?

Either one makes sense. Limiting it to 10 rounds per day is completely reasonable, which is why I don't have a problem with the clarification. By the same token, bumping up the enhancement cost to +6, +7, whatever, could solve the problem too, but that wasn't the clarification that I got. Actually, I don't have a problem with either one, but I don't see any reason why they can't both exhist.

You can determine the solution to this in one of two ways.

1) Look at the cost, balance the effect to the price (the Sage).
2) Look at the effect, balance the cost to the effect (Monte).

Either way works. The bottom line is that the Speed armor enhancement is ambigous. I'm not gonna get into a pissing contest about how the Sage "was not" or "was" official. It's a pointless discussion, one better served left to those that are severely hearing impaired.

 

[kreynolds]

No amusement in my sig suggestion, Kreynolds?

To be honest, I didn't get it. Although, it could be due to the fact that it's my bedtime.

 

[reapersaurus]

Either way works. The bottom line is that the Speed armor enhancement is ambigous. I'm not gonna get into a pissing contest about how the Sage "was not" or "was" official. It's a pointless discussion, one better served left to those that are severely hearing impaired.

You're correct, that it's pointless.
But if you think that an email to one person by the Sage ever made it "official", I'm surprised at you.

And I'd have to disagree about the Speed Armor enchantment being "ambiguous". It's quite clear from the text in DotF how it's published to be played.

And it's overpowered as written.

And it's up to the DM.... still... to say NO to the players.

Which NO DM I've ever met has a problem with doing.

Hell, mine go out of their way to say NO to me, even with published stuff.

 

[Pax]

You have some real trust issues, you know that?

Trust, schmust. Anyone could put Skip'sname after -anything-. Prove it's really his words.

On top of which, as I've said plenty of times before, and will repeat as often as needed: Unless it's in the book, or in the official errata, it is not an official rule. Period, no exceptions, end of line.