Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 7947896" data-attributes="member: 1210">Then don't hand out the items you perceive as powerful or problematic.I don't think anyone is saying that Alice's playstyle preferences are badwrongfun. Just that they aren't as problematic as you seem to think. Look, here's a solution for Alice- simply don't give out a ton of magic items. You really don't need to. Or make magic items suitable for the power curve she wants. It's not that hard. But having, 4e-style, six different items that do almost exactly the same thing with tiny numeric or usage variations is a waste of space. There's no need. If she doesn't want magic items, she doesn't have to hand them out. If she does, she can. If she doesn't like the ones in the DMG, she can make her own. It's not that hard to do. It's something DMs have been doing for around 50 years now. I really don't see the problem here. Heck, if she wants a constant influx of items, she can do that. If she wants them to all be minor, she can do that. If she wants her wands to run out of charges, there's a sidebar for that in the DMG. I don't see what the problem is here at all. Is it a desire for more items that do less? Simply import them wholesale from 4e, then. In many cases you don't even have to convert them- they'll work as is. If I am understanding you correctly here, you seem to be saying, &quot;The problem with an option presented for people like Andy is that it's not well-suited to people not like Andy.&quot; Well, yeah. That's because it's for people like Andy, who want certain 3e-style elements in their game. It's hitting its target. It's like if someone who isn't into tactical combat starts complaining about the facing options in the DMG- you're not using them, they aren't suitable for your playstyle, don't use them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="the Jester, post: 7947896, member: 1210"] Then don't hand out the items you perceive as powerful or problematic. I don't think anyone is saying that Alice's playstyle preferences are badwrongfun. Just that they aren't as problematic as you seem to think. Look, here's a solution for Alice- simply don't give out a ton of magic items. You really don't need to. Or make magic items suitable for the power curve she wants. It's not that hard. But having, 4e-style, six different items that do almost exactly the same thing with tiny numeric or usage variations is a waste of space. There's no need. If she doesn't want magic items, she doesn't have to hand them out. If she does, she can. If she doesn't like the ones in the DMG, she can make her own. It's not that hard to do. It's something DMs have been doing for around 50 years now. I really don't see the problem here. Heck, if she wants a constant influx of items, she can do that. If she wants them to all be minor, she can do that. If she wants her wands to run out of charges, there's a sidebar for that in the DMG. I don't see what the problem is here at all. Is it a desire for more items that do less? Simply import them wholesale from 4e, then. In many cases you don't even have to convert them- they'll work as is. If I am understanding you correctly here, you seem to be saying, "The problem with an option presented for people like Andy is that it's not well-suited to people not like Andy." Well, yeah. That's because it's for people like Andy, who want certain 3e-style elements in their game. It's hitting its target. It's like if someone who isn't into tactical combat starts complaining about the facing options in the DMG- you're not using them, they aren't suitable for your playstyle, don't use them. [/QUOTE]

Verification