Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemesis Destiny" data-source="post: 5698105" data-attributes="member: 98255">I'm all about adding more flavourful items to the game and removing the assumption that is bred by the christmas tree effect. 4e still has it - it's lessened, but still there. Inherent Bonuses reduces it further, and if you get creative, allows for flavourful items that don't care about what level they or their wielder are. That said, it would be nice if there were no math required, either inherent bonuses already baked in and invisible to the players, or simply not required at all.I agree with some of Monte's points, but others have me worried about the direction things may be headed in with him in charge of R&D. I like that he would see the game rebalanced to assume no magic, but I get worried when he says that he then wants to use big plusses as a reward for taking on big challenges. That re-introduces all kinds of pitfalls and balance issues that 4e finally ironed out. Especially for the DM.Like it or not, a reward for overcoming a challenge is still going to be an expectation in this game, especially if it still makes you "better." And characters becoming better from their items only means that his system has not done what he intended it to do - balance the game for no magic.And that poll is pure fail. Binary thinking is decisive but not very representative. While I answered that I thought items should be a reward, I don't agree with the way he worded it in the article, but it was the closer of the two choices to my way of thinking. I picked it for that reason, and because the alternative is just worse, but I don't want it to be taken as a full endorsement of his idea, because as he wrote it, it's just as flawed as his poll.</blockquote>

Verification