Mordenkainens Magnificent Emporium saved by last minute adventurers?

[IanB]

This months dragon is doing that it seems.

I think that's just a nostalgia reprint, not an updating to 4e, but I could be wrong.

 

[Aegeri]

I think that's just a nostalgia reprint, not an updating to 4e, but I could be wrong.

Yeah that's probably true, but even so the base rules can probably be used for ideas at least.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

The reason Bracers of Mighty Striking are bad as a common is twofold. First they are VASTLY more useful for Essentials martial builds than any other characters (modulo perhaps certain charge builds I suppose, but most of those sub in an at-will). Secondly they are absolutely going to be better than practically any other item in that slot. A must-have common item, why even bother to have other arm slot items? Half the point was to take the automatic picks out of the player's hands so that the DM at least COULD distribute something else instead (albeit it might not be quite as good, but it is still a better situation).

One would think that the more useful items would be much more commonly created. Or are people going to deliberately create items that aren't useful?

And the other arms items not being as good is really more of a problem with the other arms slot items.

Brad

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

It's not this, it's the fact the exact same item that benefits everyone else - Iron Armbands of Power - is uncommon. Given that essentials classes can spam out of turn attacks just as well with a warlord (or any other enabling based leader), opportunity attacks and get the most out of charging constantly it's a curious (and inconsistent) choice.

It was an unfair gift to the Essentials classes that run on MBAs since every one of them will have a set crafted for them if they have any wits at all.

I still think the fact that no other arms slot item will ever show up in the hands of those characters is the real downside though.

One would think that the more useful items would be much more commonly created. Or are people going to deliberately create items that aren't useful?

And the other arms items not being as good is really more of a problem with the other arms slot items.

Brad

No, it is a problem that one arms slot item is so much universally better. Nobody is ever going to balance all items against each other, and the one that is ALWAYS useful and provides a fairly valuable bonus will simply be the preferred choice 99% of the time. You can twiddle the values of different items as much as you want, it won't fix the problem. Take a more situational item, double or triple the effectiveness of its power or property, it will STILL not compete with the generic always available and always useful damage bonus.

As far as items being easier or harder to make, well, there's no objective reason to suppose that item crafting works that way in-game. Thus we're left with only a meta-game reason for it. That's OK, but all it does is explain why item X is not common. The fact that it isn't common is what fixes things because it takes the right to simply make the item and gives the DM some say.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It's not this, it's the fact the exact same item that benefits everyone else - Iron Armbands of Power - is uncommon. Given that essentials classes can spam out of turn attacks just as well with a warlord (or any other enabling based leader), opportunity attacks and get the most out of charging constantly it's a curious (and inconsistent) choice.

Yeah, I am aware of this problem, as i said before...

and I adressed this problem in an earlier post...

out of turn attacks are more often no base attacks (warlord and defender punishments not withstanding)
I guess the power level of a +2 bonus to damage is too big in general, as it is really a good damage boost. Change the numbers to a +1 bonus, and much more people will at least think about a more flavourful and situationally more powerful option...

A +2 bonus to damage on all attacks is really hard to resist... if you also can´t resist a +1 bonus, it is clearly your own problem...

On the other hand, making it uncommon does not break anything.

 

[Peraion Graufalke]

I honestly don´t know... but i know that certain spells from the complete mage handbook were considered rare... and some from the forgoten realms books...

i try to find out...

At least i could find a rarity for spell component aquisition in "spells and magic"... not exactly what we searched for, but at least a rarity system that was there...

I found it. Forgotten Realms Adventures had random spell lists for wizard spells with frequencies of Common, Uncommon, and Rare.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Hey, if you didn´t disable xp, you would get a lot of them from me now

It indeed was from forgotten realms... i knew it...

 

[Balesir]

It is nice that there are some items that the players should know about and be able to decide to make without much fuss. OTOH if a developer is going to put things in that list they'd better be VERY sure they got that right, and Bracers of Mighty Striking is already doing it wrong, so I'd have much rather they had just not put any magic items in a player book...

Bleh - let's us DMs patronise the players some more... The 'old' system wasn't broken (even though some of the individual elements in it were - but, as you note, that applies to the new system, too), so it didn't need fixing. Especially as it seems to be an excuse in some areas to be lazy about balance and good design on the pretext that "a good DM will handle it".

The old system had just the categories needed:

- stuff the players have control over (can make if they have the ritual, can buy, etc.) = "magic items".

- stuff the DM has control over = "artifacts".

Adding a couple of "levels" of "pseudo-artifacts" was just unneccessary, IMO.

IMHO I wouldn't even worry about balance amongst rares. Though I would classify plot devices are mostly artifacts there's no real reason why crazy items can't exist as rares, nobody is going to EXPECT to get them any more than they would have expected to get a Horn of Blasting or a Helm of Brilliance in 1e...

Which cannot all be done with just "artifacts", why??? All of these features are, as I see it, exactly what artifacts in 4E were meant to be.

Makes you wonder why iron armbands aren't the only arm item in existence, knowing that. If there's a limited amount of residuum in the economy (i.e. it can't be created, but must be recycled), why would any non-viable items be made, at all?

Sorry, but residuum can be made. Convert alchemical reagents into magic items (even if you only get access to common ones and not semi-artifacts, or whatever) and then reduce the items to residuum.

Sure, a few, but their price would skyrocket and if anything, the best items that have constant benefits, that can also be made cheaply, will be the most common. Rare items' power HAS to go up, or they are only rare by virtue of there being no demand for them, and thus the price would either drop or stay the same, whatever it's equilibrium is. The price could in

Ah, but "uncommon" items need the fabled ingredient, deeemmium, in order to make them, and are made by half-mad, half-sadistic primitive creatures that live in the valley of Deeemscrack and make whatever they think your character should have, not what they could actually use

More seriously, a far better "solution" to the "item issue" (if there is one) would be to rebalance the existing items to make them all (or at least mostly) viable choices. Unavoidable "must haves" might possibly be balanced by requiring specific rituals and ingredients to make; Enchant Item ritual does have the flaw that, like Polymorph Self in days of yore, it just keeps getting more and more useful as new items are published. The "rarity" system as proposed, however, by just bunging everything into the DM's hands, was/is just a cop-out. A system where the items remain in the players' hands, but require more effort (specific monster parts, specific rituals, specific craftsmen/helpers) for the more useful items might actually improve matters. It would, of course, require more design work...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I disagree with everything in the post above...

magic items should have never been on any wishlist or should have never been able to be made by PC´s without having rare materials or rare reciepes...

DM control over magic items is a very very useful tool to make the game fun. But as the system relies on those magic items, there is no harm in allowing PCs to create simple magical tools of their trade... so the rarity system indeed is a good one... (IMHO of course)

 

[eamon]

I disagree with everything in the post above...

magic items should have never been on any wishlist or should have never been able to be made by PC´s without having rare materials or rare reciepes...

DM control over magic items is a very very useful tool to make the game fun. But as the system relies on those magic items, there is no harm in allowing PCs to create simple magical tools of their trade... so the rarity system indeed is a good one... (IMHO of course)

What you're talking about isn't D&D - at least not usually. Every D&D PC for ages has been a walking christmas tree of magic items, and these items are often quite relevant. Now, you can try to remove this (e.g. using inherent bonuses), but it's going to have an impact. You seem to prefer the game without magic items (what you call magic items are essentially DM plot devices, i.e. artifacts).

But even if you do, I hope you can see that for those of us that don't prefer that, it'd be nice if they at least didn't mess up the items they do publish. In other words, the majority of the items should be common, and they should be balanced. That's not to say you can't play without items, but that if you play with them, they'll work.