Magic Item Daily Power rule change and Elixir

[Majoru Oakheart]

Oh, so that was not just a list of items in PHB but the list of common items in the entire 4e line? Damn! They made so many materials into "DMs only". Sigh.

Well, the point of the rule change was to give a way for DMs to actually reward players with magic items again. Unfortunately, 4e was written so that almost any item you could give out as treasure would be worse than whatever the PCs already had.

We were told at the presentation by WOTC where they announced this change in rules that they wanted Uncommon items to be universally better than Common items so that any item you decided to hand out would likely be an upgrade over what they had. I also got a distinct undercurrent of "And all of the super powerful builds thrown around on the Char Op boards require a specific combination of 3 or 4 items to function correctly. We want to give DMs back the power in their own games and give them the choice of whether they want to allow those combos."

I, for one, am really happy about this change. My game was already approaching the point where I'd have to give my players a week to make up new characters because they weren't happy unless they had enough time to look through every magic item in the game for their three choices.

Edit: Or maybe not. We haven't yet see the new rule for starting from higher level. I hope they don't make it so complex ..... and also strongly hope that they are not forgetting that many people start new game or campaign from higher level.

I'm actually suspecting that there will be NO new rule for starting at higher levels. The DM Kit is out, so in the Rules Compendium. Neither of them have rules for starting at higher levels. Since neither of these have a new rule, the old one still applies. 3 magic items and a bunch of cash.

The designers have said that the beauty of this new rule is that it allows each DM to decide on their own preferences regarding magic items. The default rule is that Uncommon items are only given out by the DM, but a DM who liked the way it used to be can simply say "There are no difference between Uncommon and Common items in my game".

I have a feeling that's why they are leaving the rule the same. You get to pick 3 magic items when you start at higher level. By default, they all have to be common and you can only buy common items. But a DM could change that in their own games.

 

[Shin Okada]

Well, frankly speaking, if that is the WotC's way to go. It is quite opposite to my taste. And to the tastes of my players. Many of the players likes to customize their PCs, including their gears, and IMHO that was one of the great strength of 3.Xe and after D&D.

Also, I have another concern. In 4.0e, other than creating magic items, there is almost no way to make PCs to re-prepare or change tactics.

Unlike older editions, spellcasters don't have long list of spells from which they can choose that day's spells.

On the other hand, magic item creation was relatively easy in 4e, as a ritual take only 1 hour.

We met a bunch of trolls in P1 module and found that no PC in the party has at-will acid or fire powers. So we retreated, create some +1 flaming weapons (relatively cheap enough for a paragon party) and some Elixir of Dragon Breath. Another time, we found that we definitely need some way to commit aerial combats. So we made some Elixir of Flying.

Now, it seems that all of those magic items useful for "re-prepare for rematch" is removed from the hands of PCs.

Should players now stop trying to solve problems by themselves and instead just hope the DM or the Module, AKA Deus-Ex-Machina gives them appropriate magic item? Now there is no room for players to use their own brain to change the tide of battle?

 

[Shin Okada]

I have a feeling that's why they are leaving the rule the same. You get to pick 3 magic items when you start at higher level. By default, they all have to be common and you can only buy common items. But a DM could change that in their own games.

By the way, when starting at higher level, PCs don't "buy" 3 items (level -1, his level, level +1). PCs just "choose" those 3 items and spends the "gold pieces equal to the value of one magic item of your level – 1" for buying items and such.

Doesn't that mean those 3 items can be uncommon or rare, by the rule?

 

[Lord Ernie]

Well, frankly speaking, if that is the WotC's way to go. It is quite opposite to my taste. And to the tastes of my players. Many of the players likes to customize their PCs, including their gears, and IMHO that was one of the great strength of 3.Xe and after D&D.

Also, I have another concern. In 4.0e, other than creating magic items, there is almost no way to make PCs to re-prepare or change tactics.

Unlike older editions, spellcasters don't have long list of spells from which they can choose that day's spells.

On the other hand, magic item creation was relatively easy in 4e, as a ritual take only 1 hour.

We met a bunch of trolls in P1 module and found that no PC in the party has at-will acid or fire powers. So we retreated, create some +1 flaming weapons (relatively cheap enough for a paragon party) and some Elixir of Dragon Breath. Another time, we found that we definitely need some way to commit aerial combats. So we made some Elixir of Flying.

Now, it seems that all of those magic items useful for "re-prepare for rematch" is removed from the hands of PCs.

Should players now stop trying to solve problems by themselves and instead just hope the DM or the Module, AKA Deus-Ex-Machina gives them appropriate magic item? Now there is no room for players to use their own brain to change the tide of battle?

I'm not too sure about item rarity myself, but what's to stop you from saying "In my game, you can create uncommon items"? Hell, I know DM fiat is something to be regarded with caution when it comes to rules, but how about "In my game, you can create uncommon items if I allow it"?

Nothing stops you from houseruling things you don't like, after all. The only major problem this creates is that it's hard to know what's what between games run by different DM's, but that's always been the case where houserules are concerned.

By the way, when starting at higher level, PCs don't "buy" 3 items (level -1, his level, level +1). PCs just "choose" those 3 items and spends the "gold pieces equal to the value of one magic item of your level – 1" for buying items and such.

Doesn't that mean those 3 items can be uncommon or rare, by the rule?

"By the rule" doesn't work, because item rarity isn't take into account with those rules. Unless they rewrite those rules, there's not really a RAW anymore when it comes to creating higher-level characters. Consulting the DM might become the default.

And I don't mind that at all. 3 magic items from around your level (+1, equal, -1) and gold for one item of level -1 seems a bit minimalistic and limiting for my tastes. It's not that your character won't come out balanced; there's just no opportunity to take anything 'fun' (i.e. outside of the 'necessary 3', meaning weapon, armor, neck slot) with that approach, and it screws over dual-wielders rather unfairly.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Well, frankly speaking, if that is the WotC's way to go. It is quite opposite to my taste. And to the tastes of my players. Many of the players likes to customize their PCs, including their gears, and IMHO that was one of the great strength of 3.Xe and after D&D.

I've said this in other threads but the problem is that choice/customization is a double edged sword.

For each person who uses a large amount of customization to play a Fighter/Cleric who likes to use a Spear to trip people, you'll get another person who creates a Warlock/Wizard/Fighter who bought magic items that let him teleport 1 square as a minor action, increase all teleports by a square, divide all teleports into 2 separate teleports of half the distance, and to take a paragon path which lets them do 10 cold points of damage each time they teleport away from an enemy, then take a feat that increases the damage you do with cold attacks by 5(in case you are keeping track at home, that's 90 points of damage with no roll required each round).

The second build is nerfed(down to a somewhat reasonable level) if you can't get any 1 of the 3 magic items.

The key is that any given Class Feature/Feat/Magic Item can be perfectly balanced by itself, but give anyone completely free reign to combine them in any way they want and you'll get some rough edges. Therefore, the ONLY way to limit this is to avoid giving free reign by putting restrictions on things like multiclassing and item choice.

Also, I have another concern. In 4.0e, other than creating magic items, there is almost no way to make PCs to re-prepare or change tactics.

This is normally a good thing, at least from a DM point of view. Easily predictable player abilities allow you to run a game without the players having free reign.

On the other hand, magic item creation was relatively easy in 4e, as a ritual take only 1 hour.

I'm just surprised anyone used this ritual. No one in any game I've ever been in has used it. It's just not needed.

We met a bunch of trolls in P1 module and found that no PC in the party has at-will acid or fire powers. So we retreated, create some +1 flaming weapons (relatively cheap enough for a paragon party) and some Elixir of Dragon Breath.

I guess. Our DMs just always allowed us to light a torch on fire and kill the trolls that were on the ground. Never needed to create magic items to stop them.

Another time, we found that we definitely need some way to commit aerial combats. So we made some Elixir of Flying.

In an entirely melee party, this is one of the few times in 4e that you NEED a magic item. Even then, as a DM, I consider it kind of unfair to pull this combat against a group unprepared for it, since it IS so frustrating if you can't fly or use ranged weapons.

Should players now stop trying to solve problems by themselves and instead just hope the DM or the Module, AKA Deus-Ex-Machina gives them appropriate magic item? Now there is no room for players to use their own brain to change the tide of battle?

Ideally, you never encounter any problems that you can't solve using the resources you have. Because a DM can't expect the players to have the resources to solve every problem.

When I write an adventure, I pretty much go into the writing process saying "Alright, I have no idea what type of characters my players are going to create when going through this, they might all be Fighters for all I know. They might not have a way of flying. So, I'm going to give them a way to bring the dragon down if they think of it."

I want players to use their brains, but unlike some other DMs I don't consider "I use a spell/ritual which can solve any problem to solve the problem" as using one's brain. It doesn't take much brain power to say "I need to fly, I'll cast fly" or "I need to fly, I'll use a ritual to create an item that lets me fly".

Instead, I'd prefer my players to come up with real ideas...like "The dragon flies, but I bet if we grab one of it's eggs and run down that corridor, it'll follow us and there isn't enough room for it to fly down there" or "I'll do something to make it so angry it won't think clearly and will come down to fight me in hand to hand" or "I climb the wall and then jump on to its back".

I think other than maybe a couple of monsters in the game who can't be killed except with a certain element and the ability to fight monsters who fly, no one in 4e should need a single magic item for anything.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Doesn't that mean those 3 items can be uncommon or rare, by the rule?

It might. It doesn't say. And I don't see WOTC clarifying any time soon. But the assumption in the rarity rules is that Uncommon items cannot be crafted or purchased...the implications of which is that by default the only way to acquire them is if the DM hands them out as treasure.

I think it's going to come down to your DM. Do they want the 3 magic item choices to come from the uncommon pool or not? The difference between common and uncommon items isn't huge, at any rate. The only thing to watch out for is that certain uncommon items used in combination are a little too powerful.

I know that in my home games I'll be only letting players take their items from the common pool so as to make sure they don't start with any broken combination and to give them something to look forward to when they find magic items.

I also know that Living Forgotten Realms looks like they are leaning this way as well(after they consulted with WOTC about their intentions with the new rules).

 

[Shin Okada]

I've said this in other threads but the problem is that choice/customization is a double edged sword.

For each person who uses a large amount of customization to play a Fighter/Cleric who likes to use a Spear to trip people, you'll get another person who creates a Warlock/Wizard/Fighter who bought magic items that let him teleport 1 square as a minor action, increase all teleports by a square, divide all teleports into 2 separate teleports of half the distance, and to take a paragon path which lets them do 10 cold points of damage each time they teleport away from an enemy, then take a feat that increases the damage you do with cold attacks by 5(in case you are keeping track at home, that's 90 points of damage with no roll required each round).

The second build is nerfed(down to a somewhat reasonable level) if you can't get any 1 of the 3 magic items.

The key is that any given Class Feature/Feat/Magic Item can be perfectly balanced by itself, but give anyone completely free reign to combine them in any way they want and you'll get some rough edges. Therefore, the ONLY way to limit this is to avoid giving free reign by putting restrictions on things like multiclassing and item choice.

While I understand when a PC is highly customizable, a games may have such problems in extreme. But for me, this rule change seems to be rather crude and also overdone counter-measure against that "problem". And, I am not sure if limiting the number of rare/uncommon items a PC gains will really solve those problems. In the end, PCs can "trade" magic items each other.

Also, I am not sure if that kind of game-balance was truly the intention of the current R&D team at all (or they thought deeply about this issue). You know, in WotC forum, there already is a long thread regarding "overpowered" uncommon items in a designer's article.

This is normally a good thing, at least from a DM point of view. Easily predictable player abilities allow you to run a game without the players having free reign.

This, strongly I oppose. I don't like "everything is within DM's prediction" games, both as a DM and a player. Especially for a campaign or sequel games. Try and error, or players find some solution to the problem which I (DM) didn't expect, is perfectly fine, or more, wonderful.

When I write an adventure, I pretty much go into the writing process saying "Alright, I have no idea what type of characters my players are going to create when going through this, they might all be Fighters for all I know. They might not have a way of flying. So, I'm going to give them a way to bring the dragon down if they think of it."

I want players to use their brains, but unlike some other DMs I don't consider "I use a spell/ritual which can solve any problem to solve the problem" as using one's brain. It doesn't take much brain power to say "I need to fly, I'll cast fly" or "I need to fly, I'll use a ritual to create an item that lets me fly".

Instead, I'd prefer my players to come up with real ideas...like "The dragon flies, but I bet if we grab one of it's eggs and run down that corridor, it'll follow us and there isn't enough room for it to fly down there" or "I'll do something to make it so angry it won't think clearly and will come down to fight me in hand to hand" or "I climb the wall and then jump on to its back".

I welcome both finding appropriate item/spell/ritual to solve the problem or using other method. But I think it is boring that PCs MUST rely on the ways prepared by the DM/Adventure.

I think other than maybe a couple of monsters in the game who can't be killed except with a certain element and the ability to fight monsters who fly, no one in 4e should need a single magic item for anything.

Monsters? Maybe. Maybe not. Environments and situations which challenges adventurers? Well, there are many. Maybe not something definitely needs something. But there are lot of things and situations the clever use of PCs' abilities make it easier.

 

[Incendax]

I'm just surprised anyone used this ritual. No one in any game I've ever been in has used it. It's just not needed.

My experience has been the opposite. In almost every game I have been in the DM hardly ever gives out magic items until it is fitting to the story or it is a very powerful artifact.

Almost everything we find are gems, coin pouches, residuum, ritual components, art objects, land deeds, antiques, ancient maps, and other interesting things. If we want magic items, we almost always have to use the ritual to make them.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

While I understand when a PC is highly customizable, a games may have such problems in extreme. But for me, this rule change seems to be rather crude and also overdone counter-measure against that "problem". And, I am not sure if limiting the number of rare/uncommon items a PC gains will really solve those problems. In the end, PCs can "trade" magic items each other.

They can trade magic items with each other, but since the DM controls what magic items the PCs get, the DM can make sure he doesn't hand out any items that let the PCs fly if he doesn't want them doing that. Or he can keep certain powerful items out of his game by never giving them out.

Right now, as a DM I have no recourse when one of my players shows up with a build that does nearly 100 points of damage without rolling while the average of the rest of the group is 20 damage with a 50% chance of hitting. This has already happened in a game I play in. The DM was not happy with the situation at all because it made combat no fun for anyone. We had to ask the player to stop playing the character. He wasn't happy because the character was completely legal and he didn't think he should have to.

I'd like to be able to head this off in advance and simply make it not legal.

Also, I am not sure if that kind of game-balance was truly the intention of the current R&D team at all (or they thought deeply about this issue). You know, in WotC forum, there already is a long thread regarding "overpowered" uncommon items in a designer's article.

I'm fairly certain it was their intention. They pretty much said it to us directly when I was in the room with them at GenCon. They want DMs to get control of their games back from the players who had pretty much gained control. But I hadn't heard of that designer's article. I'd love a link if you have it. I want to know what was said.

This, strongly I oppose. I don't like "everything is within DM's prediction" games, both as a DM and a player. Especially for a campaign or sequel games. Try and error, or players find some solution to the problem which I (DM) didn't expect, is perfectly fine, or more, wonderful.

I don't mind allowing interesting ideas if the PCs come up with it. But I don't like being able to skip through interesting things I had planned because they cast one spell I didn't think of. This is the entire reason most of the non-combat spells were removed from 4e. Because they often took the control away from the DM.

As a rough example, there was a Living Greyhawk adventure back in 3.5e where the point was to get the unconscious King away from the people who were trying to take over the kingdom. Part of the fun of the adventure was that they needed to escape the city while they guards were looking for them and the King and wanted him and them dead.

In order to allow this adventure to happen, the author had to write a Anti-Magic Field around the King just to make sure the PCs couldn't use a single spell solution to what could be a fun role playing challenge. If it wasn't there, then the PCs could have simply cast a teleport spell and leave without any difficulty. Or they could have simply magically healed the King and they wouldn't need to run.

The adventure was much more fun(IMHO) when the PCs had to find material to disguise themselves and the king, had to come up with an explanation for the guards at the gate as to why they were dragging an unconscious guy around with them, and then had to survive the ambush on the road by enemies of the King.

Sometimes, not every answer to a problem is a fun answer.

I welcome both finding appropriate item/spell/ritual to solve the problem or using other method. But I think it is boring that PCs MUST rely on the ways prepared by the DM/Adventure.

It doesn't have to be prepared by the DM. I just hate magical solutions to problems because they are never creative. They should be the last resort rather than the first solution to a problem.

If I put a locked door in front of the PCs, I don't care if I hadn't considered them climbing to the second floor of a building and sneaking through the window, I'll allow it....If they can succeed in a couple of rolls to do so. At least it required a slightly inobvious solution to the problem. On the other hand "I cast a Knock spell" is about the most obvious solution to the problem there is. It requires no more effort than looking at your character sheet to see if you have that spell.

When magic IS used it should be special. It should be because you did something special to get that magic. Simply looking through a list of 1000 items for the one that solves your problem and saying "I craft that one" or "I buy that one" isn't special.

Monsters? Maybe. Maybe not. Environments and situations which challenges adventurers? Well, there are many. Maybe not something definitely needs something. But there are lot of things and situations the clever use of PCs' abilities make it easier.

Of course magic makes things easier. That's because it's magic and it can do anything. But just because magic makes something easier doesn't mean players have a right to that magic. There are many non-magical ways of solving problems. And there SHOULD be some things the PCs just can't do. Part of the reason I like 4e over 3e is because there actually ARE some things they can't do. In 3e, I could be pretty much assured that they'd have the magic to do whatever they wanted after about level 12. Often before that.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

My experience has been the opposite. In almost every game I have been in the DM hardly ever gives out magic items until it is fitting to the story or it is a very powerful artifact.

Well, using the default rules, this shouldn't happen. The DMG says you should hand out 1 magic item per PC per level every level.

You can simulate this by giving out tons of gold and gems and then require PCs craft anything. But it really just turns this ritual into a "convert gold to magic items you want" spell. If you follow the formula in the book, you actually have VERY little gold for rituals.

Our group that went from level 1 to level 19 before we stopped hesitated to cast rituals above 5th level because they took too much of our money. But we all had lots of magic items.