New article Design and Development Article on Magic Item Slots

[Zimri]

SWSE and Iron Heroes managed without magical items being necessary.


I've explained this all ready, with regards to the Christmas Tree effect.

They said we would be less dependant on multiple stat/ac raising gear and we are. we have gone from :
head
face
amulet
cloak
armor
shield
bracers
gauntlets
gloves
legs
feet
any number of tatoo's/piercings

that could have a mathematical effect on stats, ac, attack/defence down to 3
3 that you can at your will handwave away by saying "at heroic you add blah, at paragon you add blah, at epic you add blah"

3 lines to give you what you want while allowing those that want more customization to be able to do so.

But since I seem to be missing exactly what it is you are saying you want perhaps should you want me to understand more completely try framing it again as I am to shortsighted to pick it up from your prior postings. Honestly what I am reading is " I don't want my players/characters to need to have multiple items to be able to take on level appropriate encounters" and I see nothing that says they do NEED to, leastwise not as bad as in 3e.

 

[The Human Target]

I'm pretty pro-4E so far, but yeah this does sound good to me.

Plus items are still needed, and filling all your characters slots (tee hee) is still going to be a regular occurrence it looks like.

And you know why Frodo could use the One Ring even though he was a Heroic Tier character?

Because Frodo is a fictitious character in a book series that predates DnD and at the end of the day is only superficially similar.

I can't believe that comment was even in there.

 

[Voss]

It states that monsters will be built to function against PCs of equivalent level, and they do not use PC rules (which include magic items... and we noted in the critical hits article that monsters aren't getting bonuses to crit from magic items). Making monsters (and thus NPCs, since it's been stated that NPCs and monsters will use the same rules) require magic items to balance out wouldn't work with things like gryphons and dragons (who aren't wielding +3 flaming longswords), so all monsters will be balanced to function without the need for PC tools (classes, items, etc), but that doesn't prevent you from adding them yourself.

Thats quite a string of logic. So we're back to good old days when NPCs keep their powerful magical treasure safely in chests, so they aren't damaged when the PCs kill them? Even if they're perfectly capable of using the items to defend themselves and not die? Neat.

Man, what was that old D&D based board game called? 'Dungeon!'
http://cgi.ebay.com/DUNGEON-FANTASY...oryZ2531QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Awesome. I kill the orc chief. Lets turn over his treasure card!

 

[Rechan]

I understand you want to be able to open your books, start up a "no magic item" game and not have to do any legwork yourself, but that's a point in which you and I (and the designers) differ.

No, no, no no no no no no.

I do not want to play no magic or "We're 15th level and between the six of us, Bill has a +1 sword and I have a cloak of elvenkind."

That I loathe as much as "I have a small wagon full of magical gear."

 

[Zimri]

Thats quite a string of logic. So we're back to good old days when NPCs keep their powerful magical treasure safely in chests, so they aren't damaged when the PCs kill them? Even if they're perfectly capable of using the items to defend themselves and not die? Neat.

Man, what was that old D&D based board game called? 'Dungeon!'
http://cgi.ebay.com/DUNGEON-FANTASY...oryZ2531QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Awesome. I kill the orc chief. Lets turn over his treasure card!

please show me the article that says an NPC in heroic paragon or epic tiers automatically has a treasure horde ? Monsters (and hence npcs and thus encounters) are being built to not necessarily need them to be effective at the level they are being designed for. Sure High Lord Lukas Bannerman the adversarial corrupt lawmaker COULD have a +3 flaming longsword, OR he could have minions, a well guarded throne room, and oh yeah traps to raise the encounter level to the parties level rather than said longsword and a +2 ring of protection. And the fact that he doesn't have the magical items means they aren't there to loot, not that they are in the display case in the foyer.

 

[The Little Raven]

Thats quite a string of logic. So we're back to good old days when NPCs keep their powerful magical treasure safely in chests, so they aren't damaged when the PCs kill them? Even if they're perfectly capable of using the items to defend themselves and not die?

No, your method of distribution of treasure is still however you choose. However, just because his treasure note states he has a +1 longsword to plunder doesn't mean that the +1 longsword is factored into his stat block, because it's completely unnecessary with the way the monster rules are being designed. When it's in the NPCs hands, it doesn't have to function like it does for PCs, because NPCs are built with different rules to be balanced without that stuff.

Of course, if you WANT to factor it in, that's your choice, but it's no longer the default standard.

 

[The Little Raven]

No, no, no no no no no no.

I do not want to play no magic or "We're 15th level and between the six of us, Bill has a +1 sword and I have a cloak of elvenkind."

That I loathe as much as "I have a small wagon full of magical gear."

Yeah, you lost me, so let me see if I can't clear this up.

What amount of items do you feel the game should be balanced for? You don't seem to like 3 primary and 6 (or 7, for the second ring slot) optional, but don't like the 8-11 requirement of 3.X.

 

[Voss]

No, your method of distribution of treasure is still however you choose. However, just because his treasure note states he has a +1 longsword to plunder doesn't mean that the +1 longsword is factored into his stat block, because it's completely unnecessary with the way the monster rules are being designed. When it's in the NPCs hands, it doesn't have to function like it does for PCs, because NPCs are built with different rules to be balanced without that stuff.

Of course, if you WANT to factor it in, that's your choice, but it's no longer the default standard.

So in addition to rings randomly not working if you aren't 11th level+, now magic items don't function outside of a PCs hands? Really, thats what you're telling me? Because that idea actually wins the 'Worst 4e Idea So Far' Award


@Zimri- OK, I'll bite. The primary items are actually worked into the math and pretty much required. Where are they coming from then, if the NPCs don't have them, and you can't loot them? Are they falling out of the ether, or are you really turning over a treasure card after the encounter is over? Really, I don't expect them from every encounter, but the rules do seem to expect each PC to have primary items that are at least roughly level appropriate for them. And since dungeoneering is an expected, normal thing in 4e, if you aren't tomb raiding for the magical loot, what are you looking for? I suppose every single item in the campaign *could* be a reward from the quest givers, but I suspect a decent number of players will expect to find magic items in the course of their adventures.

 

[Rechan]

Yeah, you lost me, so let me see if I can't clear this up.

What amount of items do you feel the game should be balanced for? You don't seem to like 3 primary and 6 (or 7, for the second ring slot) optional, but don't like the 8-11 requirement of 3.X.

I think that the game should be balanced for PCs having as many magical items as DMs choose, but requires none for the math to work.

To do that, I would say that all magical items should function as sundry effects, or multi-purpose items (possible of doing several effects thematically suitable), and thus no item provides a plus whatsoever.

Allow me to put it another way.

In 3e, you can have a situation like this:

1) A 15th level fighter with no magical items.

2) A 15th level fighter with a Cloak of the Bat, a Horn of Blasting, and a Ring of Elemental Control.

3) A 15th level Fighter with a +4 Sword, +4 Armor, and a +4 ring of Protection.

We can agree that both fighter 2 and fighter 3 are better than Fighter 1.

But the important thing here is the difference between fighter 1 and fighter 2. Fighter 2 is a better fighter simply because he has more options, and his options are more interesting. But in a slug-fest, fighter 1 and fighter 2 are no different. That can't be said for Fighter 1 vs fighter 3, or fighter 2 vs. fighter 3 for that matter; Fighter 3 wins purely by the numbers.

I'd prefer the system build towards Fighter 2 being the standard, not being balanced to assume Fighter 3 is the norm.

 

[Bishmon]

I don't buy that the various body slots are 'optional'. They are absolutely going to affect characters' power levels. Maybe not precisely the attack/damage/AC/saves harmony, but you don't think a carpet of flying is going to increase a character's power? Is there a player in the world who's going to go, "Hmmm, flying, that seems trivial and inconsequential. I'll leave this thing in the chest I found it in." Or that there's a rogue who's walking around with plain boots on thinking, "Slippers that let me walk on ceilings? Meh, I can't imagine how those would make me more powerful." Or a ranger thinking, "Bracers of the perfect shot? Nuts to those, I enjoy my less-than-perfect shots."

So this stuff about how only three or four items are 'necessary' is bogus, in my opinion.