Mordenkainens Magnificent Emporium saved by last minute adventurers?

[Balesir]

I don't think much of the whole "DM's will be control freaks" notion. I've played a lot of RPGs with a lot of GMs (though honestly I probably 'trained' a lot of those GMs) and I haven't really seen a whole lot of that issue. I've seen situations where the players and the DM needed to get their heads in the same space regarding what sort of game it was, but the answer to that wasn't to put all the responsibility on either one side of the table nor the other. Regardless of what the rules say both sides have to work out a way to get on the same page. While I can certainly imagine, and have heard plenty of stories about, DMs who can't manage that and try to just impose their way of doing things by fiat, I find that to be pretty rare in reality.

I agree with just about all of this. Both sides definitely need to be 'on the same page' and, in practice, the nature of the world setting is normally done by consensus. That being the case, I am very happy if the rules reflect that.

However, each side of the table has different dynamics driving their approach to the game. It CAN be helpful to have the DM be able to define the options the players will be exposed to. I don't think having the DM need to go through the entire item list and decide at the start what is and isn't going to show up as player resources is very practical. Sure, in theory you can go through CB and check checkboxes, but no DM is going to know ahead of time exactly what all that list needs to be.

If the DM has a clear and vivid concept for a game world, it can be useful for them to formulate it completely - but then they will, in practice, have to "sell" that vision to the players. The players always have the ultimate sanction of not playing; DMs have the final sanction of not running the game.

As a general "default", though - and for D&D specifically, as opposed to the full range of roleplaying games - I think the advice in the original 4E rules to "say yes" is a good one. Thus I generally start from the base assumption that all items are present and available unless there is a specific reason for them not to be. This makes 'going down the checklist' a realistic option, I find.

I find that the default limited accessibility policy is a good idea. It relieves the players of the temptation to meta-game so much. I find all the talk of 'doggie biscuits' and 'mother may I' to be hmmmm, I'm not sure what the proper adjective is. Lets just say I'm unimpressed with that. RPGs are a collaborative effort. Granted there are people who don't understand that, but whether or not items are a resource the players simply have control of or that the DM has control of isn't going to really change anything about that. If rarity can fix some issues with the mechanics of the game, which I believe it does, then it is a good idea.

Here is where I disagree. It's not that I think that the "mother may I" problem arises only with DMs who do not understand or accept that the game is collaborative. I agree that this is actually rare, in any case. But even without it, the necessity to refer every thought, decision and desire - be it rationally considered or simple whimsy - concerning gear for their character is an unnecessary, burdensome and onerous imposition on players.

When the play group comes to the table to actually play, the players bring a character - complete with their training, their 'characters' and their equipment. It therefore makes sense, to me, if the players are broadly in control of the item selection - within the rules of the game and the restrictions accepted by the play group for the particular campaign.

You can say 'players can police themselves' but my experience is they are always tempted to play the optimization meta-game, and I think it is largely a meta-game. The DM OTOH is generally not subject to the same temptations.

Here, possibly, is the nub of the disagreement. Provided that the meta-gaming is done during "downtime", rather than during actual play, I don't mind this at all. If it means that players come to the table with a character that they are proud of, that they are comfortable to venture into ersatz "danger" with and that they are happy to play, then I positively encourage it.

"Optimised" characters are very often weak in specific ways; either they are vulnerable to specific challenges, or they are weak at specific levels, or they are boring or limited to play. As a result, the players I play with are seldom tempted to pursue an extreme course of "optimisation". If they do pursue such a course, they may pay for it in a variety of ways; I have no problem with that.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Eh, see, I am not against optimization either. I think at least for me it is more fun when the game and what is going on in it are the main focus, but OTOH I can for instance have fun with a game focused on optimization. In that case I'd probably just say "yeah, craft whatever you want, have fun guys, that's what we're doing here". In truth I don't really say no anyhow. I say "oh, that will be an interesting thing for you to do, lets see...." which I suspect is generally what happens in a lot of games. In practice things work out quite well. I've found that players actually seem quite happy with the new system, but obviously nobody can speak for the whole world. I'd think moving the whole uncommon list to 'player craftable' should work pretty well for many people as well. Not actually sure why where we are now isn't basically the best of all worlds.

 

[Balesir]

I think what we have right now is fine provided that the tome we are ostensibly discussing in this thread does not add a multitude of "uncommon" items that are, as published, problematic if available for character purchase/crafting. If it does, then (a) the "default" game will be forced to be a "rarity" model, which will definitely be a problem for my group, and (b) if I am to use the new items at all, I will have to go through modifying them not to be problematic if available for character acquisition. This last is a job I consider that the designers of the game should be doing for me, in consideration of the money I pay for the product, and yet it is one that they have not completed satisfactorily with the items published so far, never mind with any newly published items.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think what we have right now is fine provided that the tome we are ostensibly discussing in this thread does not add a multitude of "uncommon" items that are, as published, problematic if available for character purchase/crafting. If it does, then (a) the "default" game will be forced to be a "rarity" model, which will definitely be a problem for my group, and (b) if I am to use the new items at all, I will have to go through modifying them not to be problematic if available for character acquisition. This last is a job I consider that the designers of the game should be doing for me, in consideration of the money I pay for the product, and yet it is one that they have not completed satisfactorily with the items published so far, never mind with any newly published items.

I was under the impression that you found all existing items to be fine for characters to create. Actually I think mostly they are as well, but only due to the fact that the devs had no other choice. In any case I am skeptical that you will not be disappointed. I think this new book will put rarity to full use and will be intended as a 'reboot' of the whole 4e magic item inventory.

I think they will absolutely assume right from the start that uncommon items are NOT being crafted and have no intention of making them suitable for that by default. Certainly rare items will not be intended to be crafted at all except by dint of some degree of adventuring at which point the creation of the item is effectively treasure.

OTOH my guess is that if you allow judicious crafting of uncommons that they will mostly be OK, you'll simply have to use a bit of judgment and maybe limit how often and how many higher level PCs can make.

And I would presume that common items will be much more various and interesting, so that players will have a fairly good set of options which will be good solid supporting items and things that can be your bread-n-butter item as long as your not needing something overly specific in that spot.

It is hard to say EXACTLY how that will pan out. I'd just say I'll be rather disappointed if the items aren't considerably more varied and interesting than they are now.

 

[Balesir]

I was under the impression that you found all existing items to be fine for characters to create. Actually I think mostly they are as well, but only due to the fact that the devs had no other choice.

Sorry, I was unclear. The "job" I was referring to was "modifying them (the magic items) not to be problematic if available for character acquisition". For the items published so far, where they have (inadvertently?) published items that were a problem, I think they have in some cases applied heavy-handed and inelegant "fixes" that, as you say, "nerf the items into irrelevance". That is what I mean by "haven't done the job satisfactorily".

In any case I am skeptical that you will not be disappointed. I think this new book will put rarity to full use and will be intended as a 'reboot' of the whole 4e magic item inventory.

I think they will absolutely assume right from the start that uncommon items are NOT being crafted and have no intention of making them suitable for that by default. Certainly rare items will not be intended to be crafted at all except by dint of some degree of adventuring at which point the creation of the item is effectively treasure.

If they make a good job on that basis it won't be so bad, actually. I would just call uncommon and rare items "minor artifacts". But if their idea of "uncommon" is the currently flagged list plus 'broken' items that are "OK because players can't make them", and the new book reflects that, well, it'll be useless to me.

OTOH my guess is that if you allow judicious crafting of uncommons that they will mostly be OK, you'll simply have to use a bit of judgment and maybe limit how often and how many higher level PCs can make.

You may well be right - although I would either come up with a good (as in actually elegant) houserule, modify each item such that it no longer a problem or simply disallow problem items in the campaigns I run, rather than apply some sort of ad hoc and arbitrary regime of fiat.

And I would presume that common items will be much more various and interesting, so that players will have a fairly good set of options which will be good solid supporting items and things that can be your bread-n-butter item as long as your not needing something overly specific in that spot.

I sincerely hope so, too. With enough creativity and imagination I think they could fill a book with this stuff alone.

It is hard to say EXACTLY how that will pan out. I'd just say I'll be rather disappointed if the items aren't considerably more varied and interesting than they are now.

I'm not very optimistic that you won't be disappointed, also, but, hey, we might yet both be pleasantly surprised!

 

[Zaran]

While this book might be good for the rarity system, I am hoping that it doesn't require the random parcel system that was put in the DM kit to work right. I think the random treasure system was the silliest thing to put back into the game. And if you think about it, it's going to eventually be the only system with it being in the evergreen DM's Kit.

I would like to see not only magic items in this book but other useful mundane items like we used to be able to buy in previous editions.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, I don't think you'd need random loot to make it work. I mean the random loot system is basically the same as the parcel system, except slightly randomized. You end up with the same amount of treasure and items with either system, and even the random system still requires the DM to select the items to give out. I don't see why either one won't work fine with rarity and any given arbitrary item list.

 

[Windjammer]

While this book might be good for the rarity system, I am hoping that it doesn't require the random parcel system that was put in the DM kit to work right. I think the random treasure system was the silliest thing to put back into the game. And if you think about it, it's going to eventually be the only system with it being in the evergreen DM's Kit.

I totally agree. Apart from the way too short write up of skill challenges, that was the DM kit's other major failing. (And the unforgivable thing of failing to explain how to build dungeons! The word 'dungeon' doesn't even appear in the DM book's index. I still can't believe they left out the most iconic DM activity in a book that's all about teaching you how to become a Dungeon Master!)

See, for the rarity system to work, you'd either need an extra software - requiring ongoing DDI subscripion (which I'm not a fan of) - or huge lists the like of which we got in Adventurer's Vault 1 and 2 (at the end of these books). Because, if you use the DM Kit version... you roll up things like "level 21 item, uncommon". And how do you take it from there? How do you locate all the level 21 items in the game? By having a handy list of these, that is. For all levels, sorted by item group AND rarity factor. The very type of thing which'd take up quite some page space in the upcoming item book.

I'm not sure I'd want it. It'd make the rarity system work at the table for the DM, but a) I'm unsure WotC is keen on putting these huge lists in the item books and b) I'm unsure the effort is worth the bother. I'd much rather have them keep the items un-categorized, treat them all as common, and then offer per level and item category a list of added goodies for uncommon/rare items. E.g., a level 5 shield if rare gets you one of [these 5 added effects]. More economical, and quicker to handle.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I just want to add, that a dungeon and monster and traps builder and items guide would be a good addition to the essentials line... a simple essential paperback book would suffice, or maybe even a boxed set...

with lots of list for magic items, mundane items and so on...

it would really help!

Actually it would be a book that would help a lot... and a definitive buy...

 

[SabreCat]

Yeah, I had a go at using the random treasure system, but it turned out pretty disappointing. You can roll a "treasure" with nothing in it, or get a run of several magic items of the same rarity and level (making it hard to find suitable ones to distribute among slots/PCs, especially if they're Common), or skew the wealth output wildly by rolling extreme results in the highest levels of the tier. I eventually went back to the parcel system, keeping only the extra flexibility of choosing four magic items of levels between N+1 and N+4 rather than four in strict sequence.