I don't DM 4th edition, but when I do

[Siberys]

*MAGIC* oxidized ferrous metal. You forgot that first bit, [MENTION=66434]ExploderWizard[/MENTION]

 

[Saracenus]

It's just that the old 4e rules tell me I'm a bad DM for doing that, and tell players I'm a bad DM for doing that.

4e doesn't care what kind of DM you are. 4e has an emphasis on game play that different from your expectations. If you want to play your game, then play your game (be it AD&D, 3e, BECMI, a retro-clone, etc.) or check out 4th Core which seems to be more in line with your conception of the game while still using 4e rules, tweaked for deadliness.

Bashing on an edition is so 2008, take a deep breath and start talking about what kind of game you want for 5e not what you hate about edition x, y, or z. Otherwise, you are perpetuating the needless acrimony that D&D Next is supposed to heal.

Now I am going to go back and have some fun, because D&D in all its multitudinous glory is a game, and games should be fun.

My two platinum pieces,

 

[Henry]

I play 4E, and even I don't like the whole "residuum" thing.

But to DD's point, there's nothing that would stop you in a convention game from running this "improved" rust monster or any other nasty surprise -- just as you would in any other instance, advertise up front that you are running a bit more of a hard-core old school game than usual, using the 4E rules. in 4E's case (and people don't believe me) its exception-based design means that such a creature would not be totally out of place. It's a matter of, like anything else, managing expectations from your audience.

 

[the Jester]

Anyways, what was wrong with the residium being found in the stomach of the rust monster? Thats perfectly logical!

It also makes the destructive capacity of a rust monster more like "what would you like to swap that magic sword for?"

 

[Siberys]

In the middle of a dungeon, possibly with time pressure, it could be "what would you like to swap that magic sword for after the important parts of this adventure?"

You can still screw over PCs. Now they just have a means to bounce back after you've had your way with them.

 

[Wormwood]

Last month in

Spoiler

Gardmore Abbey

a rust monster destroyed our 8th-level fighter's +2 greataxe (an uncommon level 10 item).

While it was nice to get the value of the item back, there was no way he could *replace* a weapon that powerful on his own. He'd either have to have our wizard enchant a lesser 7th-level item, wait *three* more level for the wizard to replace the axe, or hope he's lucky enough to find one in the next three levels of adventuring.

He made do with a +1 axe, by the way. Very unhappy.

 

[Deadboy]

It makes sense for something to be there. But what's at stake? Why negligible loss? If the dog eats my homework, I'm expecting to get it back as poop, not something I can remake into something equivalent to (or even equal to) my homework.

Not quite the right analogy. If you KILLED the dog that ate your homework and carved it open, you might find enough bits of soggy paper to at least copy back parts of what you wrote. At the very least you'd still have paper.

As a key component of the construction of magic items (along with the metal of the item itself), it makes sense for the rust monster's stomach to be full of residuum and rust.

 

[SKyOdin]

Is residium a new buzzword for oxidized ferrous metal?

Well, it is a magic weapon. The magic has to go somewhere, right? I mean, when a rust monster eats my +5 magic sword of legend, there are only two possible places for the stored up magical energy to go: either the it remains in the oxidized pile of scrap that is left of the sword, or it is released all at once and the rust monster spontaneously explodes like a spectacular firework. Or maybe is polymorphed into a gerbil. I guess that depends on what kind of legendary sword it was.

 

[MarkChevallier]

Well, it is a magic weapon. The magic has to go somewhere, right? I mean, when a rust monster eats my +5 magic sword of legend, there are only two possible places for the stored up magical energy to go: either the it remains in the oxidized pile of scrap that is left of the sword, or it is released all at once and the rust monster spontaneously explodes like a spectacular firework. Or maybe is polymorphed into a gerbil. I guess that depends on what kind of legendary sword it was.

(This following post is meant to be read in a jokey fashion, no offence intended!)

Ah yes, the universal Law of Conservation of Magic, first discovered by... wait a minute... there isn't a Wikipedia article on this - IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY EXIST!!!

The magic just goes. The rust monster, fine exemplar of the laws of entropy, just ruins it for everyone. That being the point of a rust monster. That you should fear it, not so much for its terrible ferocity, but rather for the fact that it can munch your bling.

I mean, based on what I'm hearing here (and I'm not sure this is correct, please let me know if not), is a rust monster not a million times more useful than a well stocked magical bazaar in 4E? Tired of that tiara of Disney Princess +3? Sell it for a crappy 2,000 gold, or feed it to your captured rust monster for residiuuuuuum to make a 10,000 gp He-Man Power Sword +2!

A rust monster. No home is complete without one.

 

[kitsune9]

I'm down with using rust monsters, save vs. die, and sundering those precious precious magic swords.