Magic items and balance

[DevP]

Was anyone able to possibly use that Falchion and Light Shield? Was it a case where he thought "this is awesome" but it didn't end up fitting precisely for someone's build?

 

[the Jester]

The only items that 4e assumes you'll "need" are things that give enhancement bonuses to your attacks and defenses, everything else is just butter.

That said, if you don't have any of those things by about 4th or 5th level, you'll start to feel it.

 

[Aulirophile]

Was anyone able to possibly use that Falchion and Light Shield? Was it a case where he thought "this is awesome" but it didn't end up fitting precisely for someone's build?

They could hypothetically be equipped in the sense that a couple of the classes being played had the proficiency, if that is what you mean. Just need to find a 1her to accompany the light shield I guess, if the fighter wanted to switch from using a 2her. Giving up the advantage of his class path and some other things. For a light shield.

The Falchion would have been +1 to hit for less, average, damage. I'd say "and a crit die" but he would've been giving up a high crit weapon, which is more damage then the Falchion's crit die. Also would've had to retrain if he stuck with it.... you can see where this is going, just a huge hassle.

The DMG2 has an "inherent bonus" system for low-magic worlds. We could probably get away with this but, as has been pointed out, it is not just the stats but the properties of magic items that make them really useful. And frankly I think magic items are fun. Maybe I'll send that randomizer to him and see if I can talk him into just unchecking all the weapon/armor categories we would never, ever use.

He obviously hasn't read or doesn't "get" the DMG section on treasure, because he has been under-rewarding us consistently. For level 2 we're supposed to be doing a pre-written module, maybe that'll be better.

 

[SkidAce]

For level 2 we're supposed to be doing a pre-written module, maybe that'll be better.[/quote

...edited, nevermind.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Well... There are various ways around non-appropriate loot. Obviously Transfer Enchantment helps quite a bit. The DM might also consider allowing a bit of trading. Normally you have to sell something for 20% of face value, but I don't really see any reason why a DM shouldn't now and then offer to have an NPC exchange a more useful item of the same level for one the party doesn't want. Maybe some small cost can be assessed for that instead of an 80% value hit.

Aside from all of that the party may simply want to consider taking whatever feats may be required to use an especially good item that isn't currently all that usable. This isn't always possible, but there are cases where it does make sense. Remember, you can always retrain said feat later on if you find a better item or whatever. Often its well worth it to adjust your build a bit to exploit a really nice item. It may even turn out you find an interesting new way to build your character that nobody had thought of.

Another consideration is just the general composition of the party. Obviously few 5 character parties are going to be able to use every item that comes down the pike, but a party that has a bit more diversity may end up with stronger items.

 

[Mengu]

Initially one of our DM's had the same problem. He was essentially giving us one or two items per level, which meant by level 3, we were way under the recommended limit. But at low levels, this is hardly an issue. Everything you fight is meant for lower level characters anyway, and the difference a +1 item plays is not fealt very heartily. At level 4, perhaps after some prodding from us, he decided to open the flood gates a bit and equipped us up to where we should be. Now at level 6, I'd say we are doing fine.

While ignoring the treasure guidelines completely is not a good idea (a level 18 paladin fighting in mundane plate armor would be pretty terrible), it's possible to fix a mistake like this at low levels without too much impact on the game. So tell your DM, point out the DMG bits, point out the math, and maybe point out this thread, and things can get squared away.

In my game, I sometimes (intentionally) starve the players for a level, and over give the next level (depending on the levels of creatures I intend for them to fight), using treasure as kind of a knob on the dial for my encounter designs. Some levels I just give defense items, some levels I just give offense items, sometimes I'll insert an item a character is in dire need of.

The DMG guidelines are at least the median that should be used when rewarding treasure (or one of the "low treasure campaign" guidelines can be followed of course).

 

[DarkLord Of DForce]

Sure wish our DM's would listen to you guys and/or read this thread. I've brought these suggestion up to them, and what I get consistently back is that the DM Guide is exactly and precisely just that - a guide, and they don't have to follow it. They feel that combat is some what broken in 4e as well.

One DM even challenged me to to find one place in 4e that says that without magic items players won't function correctly.

Dunno...

 

[Doctor Proctor]

One DM even challenged me to to find one place in 4e that says that without magic items players won't function correctly.

Dunno...

Tell them to check out the "A Reward Based Game" sidebar in the alternative rewards section of the DMG2 (p 138).

Without magic items, the PC's attacks, defenses, and damage lag behind. You can solve this problem by giving the PC's flat bonuses as they advance in level.

While the following doesn't explicitly say "if you don't hand out items, players will suck and later die", it does point out that these bonuses are necessary. It goes on to explain how if you don't want magic items you would need to hand out the equivalent of enhancement bonuses to the players as a flat, stackable bonus, at certain appropriate levels. Levels which, mind you, coincide with when you should be getting these things as magic items.

Furthermore, it then goes on to talk about using alternative rewards to replace the actual item powers with some form of alternative reward system.

Basically, it's a section detailing how even if you're reducing the number of magic items, you need to compensate with something else. If they won't listen after that, I would seriously consider leaving...you don't have a whole lot of chance for a long term campaign here. Sure, right now you're only down +1 or +2, but what about when it's +3 or +4? Late Heroic/Early Paragon would be almost impossible...or it would just be made up of easy, under leveled encounters so as not to cause a TPK, but they don't sound like the type to do that.

 

[DevP]

DarkForce: I wanted to add that the tone of your post is worrisome. If you guys are quoting page numbers at each other, that doesn't sound like a cooperative relationship. You want a consensus vision for a game, not to merely challenge the DM by referencing the book. I believe that you should be amenable to rolling with the DM's preferred vision for the game, provided that the rules drifting you do keeps the game fun. (The low-magic-item from the DMG2 would be one solution; another is just being aware of the power gap and the DM properly picking slightly easier encounters by level.)

 

[DevP]

I mean, there is a correct game balance point to be made (and DoctorProctor's reference here is on point), but also:

"the DM Guide is exactly and precisely just that - a guide"

This is - arguably - correct. The player's handbook is also to animportant extent just a handbook, and not the law of the land.