Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 8179695" data-attributes="member: 58416">I'm aware 3E had stuff like that.Personally, I don't see +2.5 damage (under specified circumstances) as particularly unruly. Sure, for some characters, some items will still be better or worse. I would take a system in which there are reasons for and against particular items over one in which a small handful (or one category of items) is most often better than other items.I'm also aware of the problems with 3E. At the same time, I also see games built around increasing options rather than increasing numbers. To some extent, 4th Edition tried (I think) to do this. As levels were gained, characters became more complex in what they could attempt and what they could do during an encounter. While, yes, 4th also had a numbers treadmill, I think it also made an attempt to reduce the range of results within a bubble of certain levels. Though, sadly, 4th also built monsters with HP bloat. I believe it is possible to approach that differently.I play games in which armor becomes soak. I would be okay with that, but I think that would be moving outside of what is normally seen as being D&D. That's getting away from the topic though.My general view is that I would prefer that the game -and magic items in particular- be built around more-interesting effects more often than being built around more math.</blockquote>