Magical items

[komi]

Basic, Expert, Companion, Masters -- usually terminated with an I for Immortals.

"Old-style D&D"

Ah! I started with AD&D 1st Edition, but I guess I missed the whole alternate D&D branch during the same time period. Thanks!

 

[Spatula]

Are there any errors in terms of features 4E has? Or is it just the "3E lacks" part you object to?

Well, he said the playtester NDA was being lifted, which was either a mistake or all the other playtesters were struck dumb that same weekend. There's no way to say how accurate the 4e claims are since other playtesters aren't allowed to talk and WOTC has been so tight-lipped. There is an awful lot of... hyperbole there, though.

And as far as I know, the only magic items assumed by the 4E mechanics are +weapon, +armor, and +resistance (cloak). Even that much can be stripped out of the game in a matter of minutes, or so saith Mearls. There is no longer "wealth by level," or if there is, it's not a major balance mechanic.

That does not follow at all. From what we know, the encounter balance expects PCs to have a +x weapon, +y armor, etc. at level N. That could just as easily be expressed as: PCs of level N need (the sum of the costs of those items) gold, which is to say, the wealth-by-level guidelines are still there. They are, however, much more specific and thus more useful. (3e threw all items into the same pot, regardless of their combat usefulness, or regardless of whether it was spent on a few big item or many little ones, which results large variances that the encounter balance cannot account for) It is a major balance mechanic - it's a big part of why the encounter "math" should actually work. The other big part would be the monster design, but the monsters only work as opposition to the PCs, so it's important to know what kind of numbers the PCs have in relation to the monsters, which comes back to... expected treasure by level.

Anyway, I've only run or been in one 3e campaign that tried to stick to the wealth guidelines. One of the party members had the Vow of Poverty, which supposedly is balanced vs those wealth levels, so I felt I should try to maintain it. And I failed - by 19th level, the PCs were about 100,000gp behind, I think, maybe more. The thing is, it didn't really make the party noticeably weak or anything, so obviously there's a LOT of wiggle room in the 3e wealth guidelines - a fine example of the large variances mentioned above, and why the 4e guidelines are an improvement.

 

[Harshax]

If the magic items ability is based off from the level of the character using it (which I believe it is), it takes away the need to have magic shops, etc. That magic +1 sword you found at 3rd level (Because swords go up by 1 every 3 character levels I believe) will do you fine at 18th level (being a +6 in your hands at that level!!). Then finding a magic item is truly magical. You have found the Magic Sword of King Ugner, who used it all his life. You have not found generic +1 sword to be bartered off for that +3 generic sword. You may only find that one sword in your lifetime, but it is useful all your life! Also, if you 'unlock' abilities in the magic item as levels progress, it would be cool (again, I believe this is the way some items will work). Hey, I found the wand of ArchMage Fenton. I didn't find that +1 wand which is useful in the early part of my career. I could use it the whole time!! It has VALUE. As a valuable item, I am not going to sell it. It never out lives it's usefulness.

That system in an of itself would bring back the mysticism of magic items, and it keeps them simple. It also gives reason why people VALUE them. If you had one, you do not want to sell it! You do not need to sell it.

Thats my 3.5 cents worth.

I've played this way, and I think it rocks! Couple this with the 4E paradigm of moving away from encounters in 10'x10' rooms, and the resultant random hoard, and I think you've got some great game potential there.

If 4E adopts this model, I will be *very* happy!

 

[Stoat]

I suspect that 4E will do away with "wealth by level" and replace it with "equipment by level." In other words, a 5th level PC isn't assumed to have X thousand GP worth of stuff, he's just assumed to have a weapon +X, a suit of armor +y, a cloak +z and 2-4 other "level appropriate" miscellaneous items.

Similar to the Magic Item Compendium's rules for equipping higher-level characters.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Where did all those items come from? Who left them in the dungeons?

They spawn there. After a predetermined time after one adventuring party comes through and collects them they respawn for the next adventuring party.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Because by the RAW if you have the right feats, the spells, the gold and the xps, you can make any magic item, even if the GM say that, for example, only the dwarves of the firetop mountains know how to make Firebrand weapons.

Just FYI, Rule 0 is a written rule.

 

[Revinor]

Just FYI, Rule 0 is a written rule.

And because of that we can argue that 3e has spaceships, too much sex, detailed rules for pie cooking and green oozes spawning little lantern archons.

Look up "System does matter" on Forge. Every system has something like Rule 0, but system still does matter. And RAW means Rules as Written, not Rules as Written and Modified by Applying Meta Rules.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

And because of that we can argue that 3e has spaceships, too much sex, detailed rules for pie cooking and green oozes spawning little lantern archons.

Look up "System does matter" on Forge. Every system has something like Rule 0, but system still does matter. And RAW means Rules as Written, not Rules as Written and Modified by Applying Meta Rules.

I understand that system does matter. That's not really what I'm talking about.

My comment about Rule 0 was meant to illustrate two things:

1) that Rule 0 is (at least in 3.x) a written rule, therefore it is RAW.

Like all rules, it is open to interpretation (the most open), but it is still a rule in the rule book. I'd quote it, but I don't have my PHB or DMG in front of me.

2) Rule 0 supercedes all other rules.

If you do not want Fighters in your campaign, they're out. If you don't like the way Grapple works, rework it. And if you don't want anyone other than Fire Mountain dwarves making flaming and flaming burst weapons, then that's the way it is. My point being, (as some others have said) one should not conflate system rules with campaign settings. Everyone is going to have different interpretations of certain rules. To use the example form this thread:

1. Some looked at the Wealth by Level table in the DMG and (correctly so) said "This is how much wealth a PC should have at this level."

2. Others looked at the Wealth by Level table in the DMG and (correctly so) said "This is how much power a PC should have at this level."

3. Some looked at Magic Item prices and said (correctly so) "This is a percentage of wealth dependent on the PC's level."

4. Others looked at Magic Item prices and said (correctly so) "This is percentage of power dependent on the PC's level."

Depending on your interpretation, one might be led to a certain logic about the campaign world. In 1 and 3, one might interpret that to say "magic items are a commodity which can be bought and sold in shops etc. 2 and 4 might not come to that conclusion.

There are some references to buying/selling magic items in the DMG, but I never felt required to play that way, nor did I feel the system would break down if I did not play that way.