Magic item rarity revision forthcoming?

[Mirtek]

An easy choice for essentials characters making only those types of attacks. Pretty useless for everyone else.

That's the point. Slayers and Thieves still get their IAoP and they even have to pay much less for them. Every slayer and thief will just bick up his BoMS, laugh and flip the bird to every fighter and rogue

 

[Nifft]

That's the point. Slayers and Thieves still get their IAoP and they even have to pay much less for them. Every slayer and thief will just bick up his BoMS, laugh and flip the bird to every fighter and rogue

A more cynical or paranoid poster might infer that there is designed to be a social stigma attached to NOT moving to Essentials.

Cheers, -- N

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Mirtek said it well already. The designers wanted to "tone down" the power of magic items, and they succeeded...only they were a little too good at their job.

The flaming weapon (at heroic tier) does an extra 5 damage and ongoing 5 once per day. It's flavorful, but it's not mechanically interesting, nor does that bonus damage much tempt anyone to prefer a flaming weapon to even the most basic upgrade.

If a flaming weapon's ongoing fire damage were an encounter power, for example, that might be a harder choice.

But the point is, most of the magic items out there right now are either specialized or not very special.

Of course, it *has* to be like this if you're going to let new PCs choose 3 magic items at creation. The items need to be fairly white-bread or else the power curve would be ridiculous. The new item rarity changes this though. Common items need to be white-bread, but uncommon ones don't. Unfortunately, they already are.

The result is, if you have an uncommon +1 flaming sword (lv 5) and find a common +2 sword (lv 6), you'll junk the uncommon item without giving it a second thought. I imagine the designers wish this weren't the case. I know I do, but at this point the problem is pretty deeply ingrained in the system.

Well, unless you are going to inject some story and lore based interest in items then ALL ITEMS, no matter what their properties are will simply be mechanical adjuncts to the character to be used or discarded as utility dictates. Try an experiment. Give a PC some ridiculously high utility item. They'll take to it all right, but it won't have special significance. It will just be a source of utility for the player to access. Now give said character a slightly better and equally OP item, they'll drop the first one in a heartbeat if the second one is better. You haven't added anything to anything, just bent the mechanics of the game.

This is why rare items are not much defined in the source books. No amount of listing them in books BRINGS THEM TO LIFE in the game. If you want to see how much more interesting that is give a PC a plain old +2 sword with a really cool backstory. Make acquiring it memorable, give it a name and a history, etc. Betcha that player won't let go of that sucker for anything.

Now, it is important to not punish players mechanically for having items with special themes and whatever, but that isn't at all hard to do. You can certainly make them high utility items, that makes sense. At the same time you can have those items upgrade and grow with the character so they don't become obsolete. Loads of ways to do this exist and AV1 amongst other places has several good suggested mechanics.

 

[Nifft]

No amount of listing them in books BRINGS THEM TO LIFE in the game. If you want to see how much more interesting that is give a PC a plain old +2 sword with a really cool backstory. Make acquiring it memorable, give it a name and a history, etc. Betcha that player won't let go of that sucker for anything.

Mmmm. I disagree about both of your points.

I suspect that many players would indeed drop that "interesting" +2 sword for a boring +3 sword.

Also, I believe that items can be made which are mechanically interesting, where the item's mechanics have an impact on the type of decisions the character is inclined to make.

- - -

WotC's big failing here was to ignore their own design decisions, and create a bunch of item which are just plain better than any other item of their same slot. I think they created items like the Iron Armbands of Power to "patch" their previous monster designs, but the problem with a patch like that is it only works if everyone uses IAoP, and then that item slot becomes very boring.

The correct solution would have been to fix monster stats and leave items as niche as they were.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Zaran]

I think their strategy is like putting out a fire with a leaky bucket. Yeah progress is made but you are leaving alot of eater on the ground. They won't update a thing until its printed again.

 

[Chzbro]

Well, unless you are going to inject some story and lore based interest in items then ALL ITEMS, no matter what their properties are will simply be mechanical adjuncts to the character to be used or discarded as utility dictates.

Actually, I totally agree with this, but that doesn't change the fact that the game is saturated with items that just aren't very good. You have to give me story reasons to want them, because the mechanical reasons (outside the basic +) are underwhelming.

And while your suggestions of adding story and lore to items are good, they don't address the fundamental problem. Let's say I have a Tiefling fighter built with feats designed to compliment my attacks with a +2 Flaming longsword. You, my DM, design an amazing series of quests that culminates in me defeating a bad guy and winning a +4 Frost longsword named Blueballs (which would appeal to me greatly). Still, I find myself looking at the feats I've taken that enhance fire accuracy and damage, looking at the amazing Blueballs, and saying, "Thanks, but..."

I realize it looks like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth here, but the issue is that if I build my character around a particular item, it's so good that I'll never want anything else; if I don't, very few things are good enough to make me care about them at all.

I don't dispute that there are ways for a DM to combat the problems, but it shouldn't be required. I do think the rarity system is a step in the right direction, but it also highlights how "meh" a lot of the uncommon items are.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Actually, I totally agree with this, but that doesn't change the fact that the game is saturated with items that just aren't very good. You have to give me story reasons to want them, because the mechanical reasons (outside the basic +) are underwhelming.

And while your suggestions of adding story and lore to items are good, they don't address the fundamental problem. Let's say I have a Tiefling fighter built with feats designed to compliment my attacks with a +2 Flaming longsword. You, my DM, design an amazing series of quests that culminates in me defeating a bad guy and winning a +4 Frost longsword named Blueballs (which would appeal to me greatly). Still, I find myself looking at the feats I've taken that enhance fire accuracy and damage, looking at the amazing Blueballs, and saying, "Thanks, but..."

I realize it looks like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth here, but the issue is that if I build my character around a particular item, it's so good that I'll never want anything else; if I don't, very few things are good enough to make me care about them at all.

I don't dispute that there are ways for a DM to combat the problems, but it shouldn't be required. I do think the rarity system is a step in the right direction, but it also highlights how "meh" a lot of the uncommon items are.

Which of course is exactly what the rarity system is about. You can have that one great item or couple of great items and they're rare. Uncommon items are the sort you often find, they do interesting and very useful things, but they aren't supposed to define your character. They shouldn't be awesome. Awesome is definitely for the rare items. The problem was they could not make these kinds of really special items without rarity. It is a big advance really. Putting the existing more limited items into uncommon is actually a bit of a game design decision. It is saying "these aren't the really prize stuff".

But in any case what does it matter if have the best possible item all the time? If people want story they should go for it. If the +2 flaming sword is important then keep it. Get the DM to buff it up to +3, etc. Maybe another PC has a frost sword, etc. The point is now not EVERYONE has IAoP.

 

[DevoutlyApathetic]

I think some of this stems from the fact that items can grant things that are available by no other source. If they really want to reduce the role that magic items play in determining a character's overall effectiveness they need to remove this limitation somehow. Either opening up these abilities to a resource linked to player choice or something more creative.

 

[Felon]

Except for every essentials melee striker who will be happily wearing his BoMS and laugh about his pre-essentials colleagues.

Banjo of Mighty Strumming?
Beret of Mime Skills?
Boots of Milk Shakes?

 

[Saeviomagy]

The point is now not EVERYONE has IAoP.

And everyone wishes they could trade the story-infused junk you've given them for a pair.

The solution to the IAoP problem is to effectively destroy them, not to leave them in the game and say that only some people are allowed to have them. Halving their bonus and only allowing them to apply on at-will attacks might be a good start.