D&D 4E Is 4E doing it for you?

[Spatula]

But if the system isn't reorienting itself to take those bonuses into account, then you don't specifically "need" them right? They just make you a bit cooler?

Hm? No, they make you objectively better (in a fight). More survivable. Less likely to be hit. Less likely to be inflicted with negative status conditions. If you're in a combat-heavy game (which is all 4e games, according to the haters ), these items would be pretty essential. Which is directly against the previously stated design intent for items... from the very first supplement.

 

[Mercule]

And btw, exception based design is going to suck, especially when things start to get bloated. It will get irritating.

So, you don't like any edition of D&D, then? 3e is also exception-based, to the point of "more or less exception based" being a rather moot discussion.

 

[Scribble]

Hm? No, they make you objectively better (in a fight). More survivable. Less likely to be hit. Less likely to be inflicted with negative status conditions. If you're in a combat-heavy game (which is all 4e games, according to the haters ), these items would be pretty essential. Which is directly against the previously stated design intent for items... from the very first supplement.

Well that's not exactly what I meant. You might "want" those things a lot, and they will indeed make you better, but the system doesn't require you to have them for you to function.

 

[Spatula]

Well that's not exactly what I meant. You might "want" those things a lot, and they will indeed make you better, but the system doesn't require you to have them for you to function.

3e didn't require you have all of the "big 6" items, either, although it depends on where in its development cycle you take your sample from. Power creep led to a feedback loop where WotC's output tried to keep up with the min/maxers.

Three items in and of themselves aren't going to break the game, but they're a bad sign. Passive, universal untyped bonuses are pure power creep and IMO bad design (at the very least, they should be item or enhancement bonuses so that they won't stack with similar items coming down the pike). I full heartedly agree with the original 4e design intent WRT magic items, and am a bit irked to see it thrown aside right out of the gate.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Also a random bonus is kind of boring when other stuff lets you do fun things...

Yup. That's why I've gotten rid of all the "random bonus" items and only use fun stuff. There are no +1 longswords, just flameswords and dragonbanes. I figure if it's magical it must be cool.

 

[The Little Raven]

I full heartedly agree with the original 4e design intent WRT magic items, and am a bit irked to see it thrown aside right out of the gate.

I hope that was just a mistake, and they should be "item" bonuses.

Also, in the Figurines of Wondrous Power, I saw something a bit alarming. When you have conjured a creature, you must spend a minor action to direct it to perform an action (whether standard, move, or minor). It is also limited to the normal amount of actions (one standard, one move, one minor). So, if you want it to move and attack, you spend two minor actions (one for move, one for attack). However, if it is a mount, it acts as if you have Mounted Combat and if you are riding it, you can direct it as a free action, which means that it gets it's full set of actions at the same time you do... in addition to the Mounted Combat bonus.

So, if it's just a conjured creature, you get a total of 3 actions divided between the two of you. However, if it's a mount, you each get all 3 of your actions (total of 6 actions) as well as the Mounted Combat bonus. That just strikes me as wrong.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Three items in and of themselves aren't going to break the game, but they're a bad sign. Passive, universal untyped bonuses are pure power creep and IMO bad design

Yup. That's why I don't allow them. It's best just to nip that in the bud.

(at the very least, they should be item or enhancement bonuses so that they won't stack with similar items coming down the pike).

The best solution of all (IMHO) is just to give PCs a +1 enhancement bonus to attacks and defense every 5 levels and ignore item benefits entirely. That way the only item aspects left of the ones that really make 'em different from each other - flame, brutal, etc.

I full heartedly agree with the original 4e design intent WRT magic items, and am a bit irked to see it thrown aside right out of the gate.

I think it's more healthy (and a lot less stressful) just to assume people will screw up and plan around that. Hence my house rules above.

 

[Scribble]

So, if it's just a conjured creature, you get a total of 3 actions divided between the two of you. However, if it's a mount, you each get all 3 of your actions (total of 6 actions) as well as the Mounted Combat bonus. That just strikes me as wrong.

I don't think it's intended that way. Mounted combat doesn't give you and the mount extra actions. The player only gets the normal allotment of actions to use between his character and his character's mount.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I hope that was just a mistake, and they should be "item" bonuses.

Also, in the Figurines of Wondrous Power, I saw something a bit alarming. When you have conjured a creature, you must spend a minor action to direct it to perform an action (whether standard, move, or minor). It is also limited to the normal amount of actions (one standard, one move, one minor). So, if you want it to move and attack, you spend two minor actions (one for move, one for attack). However, if it is a mount, it acts as if you have Mounted Combat and if you are riding it, you can direct it as a free action, which means that it gets it's full set of actions at the same time you do... in addition to the Mounted Combat bonus.

So, if it's just a conjured creature, you get a total of 3 actions divided between the two of you. However, if it's a mount, you each get all 3 of your actions (total of 6 actions) as well as the Mounted Combat bonus. That just strikes me as wrong.

Not to mention that you could also control a second creature at the cost of your actions. (Unless you can only have one figurine of wondrous power).

 

[Irda Ranger]

So, if it's just a conjured creature, you get a total of 3 actions divided between the two of you. However, if it's a mount, you each get all 3 of your actions (total of 6 actions) as well as the Mounted Combat bonus. That just strikes me as wrong.

Don't mounts reduce the amount of XP you get though?