New article Design and Development Article on Magic Item Slots

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Kinda, I guess.

0 Rings: level 1-30
1 Ring: level 11-30
2 Rings: level 21-30

Or maybe some NPCs could be like some real-world people and wear *gasp* non-magical rings. Would serve meta-gamers right.

DM: The revolting priest of Yeenoghu stands proud before you bedecked in shining plate, a symbol of his foul god upon his shield, a flowing black cloak and a pair of onyx rings. He...
Player: He's 21st level! At least! We're only 9th level man, this isn't fair!
DM: (laughing internally) Roll for initiative!

 

[TwoSix]

I don't get the "ring at 10th level thing." How is a Ring of Warmth unsuitable for a low level character? What STOPS him from slipping it on his finger aside from the DM not introducing rings into his campaign? Or do rings have an inherent sense of how many XP their users possess and don't work until they meet the required skill level?

1) No Ring of Warmth, presumably. Makes more sense to be a cloak, right? Or, better yet, a parka.

2) I'm assuming that the ring doesn't jump off your finger. More than likely, it simply doesn't activate for a heroic character.

3) Reading between the lines, I think the jump from 10th to 11th level is a BIG DEAL. You shouldn't be making the move from heroic to paragon without some big splashy end to your current adventure, some magical transformation ritual, blessing from the gods, etc. Also, paragon paths don't start till 11th level...do they have an inherent sense of their practitioner's skill? Why don't they start when the character is ready for them? If that metagame aspect doesn't bother you, why do rings?

 

[Spinachcat]

9 magic items at 11th level = Christmas Tree
That's not even counting the potions / scrolls / other expendables. This is NO fewer items than I see in 3.X games.

Personally, I like 1 magic item per 3 levels, so an 11th level character would have 4 items. I hand out magic items like candy in my games, but I prefer non-rechargable expendables that the heroes burn through and a few cool core items they value highly.

I HATE the "no rings" crap. Why not have Heroic / Paragon / Epic tiered items so the wee ring you find at 4th level suddenly reveals new powers when you hit 11th.

Don't get me started on the Ioun Stones.

 

[pemerton]

What I find amusing, is that they say the 'christmas tree' is a bad thing and characters will be 'less dependent on magic items'.

They've done that. The relevant sort of dependence was "dependence, for mathematical viability at a given level, on a plethora of items". Now it is dependence upon 3, mutually independent, items. As others have noted, the task of taking out these items is mathematically trivial.

What I'd really like to know at this point is whether the assumptions of +X implements, +Y armor and +Z cloak/necklace are also worked into the math for NPCs or if this is an instance of PCs and NPCs working on different formulas.

No doubt every freakin' NPC in space will be laden down with similar items.

There's actually a lot of reason to think this won't be the case, and that NPCs will be handled very differently from PCs: see post #223 above.

@pemerton- thanks for detailed explanation. I appreciate that.

No worries.

It seems really off that an orc with a +2 axe would be exactly the same as an orc without a +2 axe.

Exactly the same as an Orc of the same level. It can always go the other way as well: an NPC picks up a +2 axe and therefore becomes a higher-level opponent.

There's a level of risk vs. reward there that isn't really satisfying. Since the PCs are going to end up with the axe afterwards, I'd much rather they took the extra risks of the level 7 brute having a +12/+12 with the axe bonuses, to prove they are worthy of it in some fashion.

I think I see what you're saying here: loot in effect becomes an alternative to XP, in that in some cases it is the loot that is the reward for a more challenging encounter. My sense of the logic of the 4e system here is that the PCs get the same XP whether or not there is loot at the end of the fight (because the challenge was of the same degree of difficulty) and that the rewarding of loot will not (as you suggest) be regulated as an alternative to XP, but rather will be capped in a different fashion: no weapons better than +X for characters of level Y (see post #216 above).

As I said in that earlier post, we're still waiting to learn what techniques will be used to achieve this capping. It may just be GM loot placement, but given what they've done with rings I suspect there will be some other device used also.

What I'm hoping is that the DMG has their expectations explicit on these things. Like a chart of "By this level, we expect magic items of this much power" so it'd be pretty easy for me to just have the handful of magic items they'll get upgrade themselves at the appropriate times.

They're doing one better than that. Every item will have a level, which indicates what level of character it is appropriate for.

The goal is not to "make rules which everyone has a easy time to houserule" but making "rules which don't need to be houseruled". And in this regard the ring issue simply fails.

Given that we don't know what rings do, and we don't know how the game handles the transition between tiers either at the metagame or ingame level, I think it's too early to judge this.

 

[Voss]

They've done that. The relevant sort of dependence was "dependence, for mathematical viability at a given level, on a plethora of items". Now it is dependence upon 3, mutually independent, items. As others have noted, the task of taking out these items is mathematically trivial.

The problem, however, is all the secondary items. Bracers with offensive and defensive effects, gloves with attack effects, belts with strength boosting, the 'few' potions and whatnot that affect combat.

All that will add up to quite a bit, even if they don't give numerical bonuses. (And actually, will be harder to balance because they don't). In combination, they could quite easily take appropriate level encounters and move them from challenging to cakewalk.

Exactly the same as an Orc of the same level. It can always go the other way as well: an NPC picks up a +2 axe and therefore becomes a higher-level opponent.

Urk. That makes even less sense. Picking up or putting down an axe changes his level and hit points, and whatever else? Attacking an NPC in the shower actually changes his level?

I think I see what you're saying here: loot in effect becomes an alternative to XP, in that in some cases it is the loot that is the reward for a more challenging encounter.

Actually, no, not really. Its more that I think that if the PCs are going to earn an item, the best way of showing they are worthy of it is to face it. (Barring one-use consumables, of course. But thats its own issue, since stockpiling potions helps really break the game). I think, if they are getting the +2 axe from the orc, the orc should get the actual bonus from the axe. So, if the party is fighting two 7th level orcs (and whatever else to make it an appropriate encounter) the two orcs should be whatever is appropriate for 7th level orcs, and the one using the +2 axe should have the bonuses that a +2 axe gives. Without... weird metagame side effects that increase the orcs level in some weird way.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I actually like the idea of wondrous items in the shape of rings... it was always difficult to explain my characters, why a wondrous item can not have the shape of a ring, bu an amulet , cloak, etc...

just for those not liking magical items, and high fantasy... play a different game or just realize, that most monsters, for which player characters are balanced are also high fantasy, and notice, that now NSCs and PCs without magical items have the same chances to hit each other as NSCs an PCs with them.

This thread could easily be locked, because it is very repetitive.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I think I will chime in on the necessity or lack thereof of the secondary items...

I don't think the idea behind secondary magical items is that they somehow do not increase character power. After all, having something is always better than having nothing unless the something is completely useless. A character who has secondary magical items will be stronger than a character without secondary magical items. However, the important thing is how the former will be stronger, not whether he is.

I imagine that a lot of secondary magic items will provide situational benefits, compared to the "always useful" benefits of the primary magic items and the old 3E "Big Six". Powers like water-breathing, flight, or darkvision are all situational benefits. Darkvision is useless in daylight, but great underground. Flight is useless in a cave, but great in open areas. Water-breathing is useless on land, but invaluable in a flooded cavern. These kinds of abilities are certainly useful in certain situations (or even many situations), but they are not the kind of abilities you need for every fight in the game, no matter what, like attack bonuses or AC. Items like this are among the most fun of the magic items, but were cast aside by the "Big Six" of 3E. One of the great advantages of the new system is that it encourages using such items, rather than discouraging them by providing obviously better alternatives.

Anyways, the thing about items with situational benefits is that they are the kinds of things that they are never completely necessary. If you need to fly, you can find a pegasus, hire a dragon to carry you, or even find an airship. If you need to breathe underwater, there may be magic rituals to let you do so temporarily or you can just choose a race which has that ability. Darkvision can be replaced with a mundane torch or lantern. Finding an alternative to a secondary magic item is incredibly easy compared to adjusting the math to make up for a lack of primary magic items (which is not all that hard itself in 4E).

Because of this, while a single PC who does not have secondary magic items may be weaker than his ally who does have secondary magic items, a group of PCs who do not have secondary magic items can still get through a campaign just as well as a group of PCs who do have secondary magic items, simply because there are so many alternative solutions to the kind of challenges that can be overcome by those kind of items. Secondary magic items really are optional for campaigns.

 

[Slander]

There is no such thing as "optional" when it comes to personal power. Those that strive to maximize their character's personal power will be the norm, the standard against which all others compare, and that means that players that fail to fill their character's slots with all of these items--and, at that, the best attainable--shall be penalized for failing to meet this de facto standard of performance.

But what "standard"? Unless there is an array of items for the 6/8 non-math slots that every PC needs to have (which the designers have said they are trying to avoid), every character is likely to have an array of different items doing different things. There is no "de facto standard of performance" ... can't be unless all players are picking up the same items. The ability for a PC to do "something better sometimes" isn't really much of a standard.

Look at the example items from his character, Dessin. Assuming WotC did things right, then the other characters in Dessin's party likely have items that do completely different things. So, are other members in Dessin's party penalized because they can't walk on water like Dessin can? Shouldn't be unless the meta-setting is Waterworld. If Dessin's other party members aren't penalized for not having Wavestrider boots, how can a character with no magical boots be penalized?

Bottom line, the lack of a situational bonus is not a penalty, whether it's lacking one situational bonus or six.

Edit: Alright, TwinBahamut said it much better.

 

[Remathilis]

I think I will chime in on the necessity or lack thereof of the secondary items...

I don't think the idea behind secondary magical items is that they somehow do not increase character power. After all, having something is always better than having nothing unless the something is completely useless. A character who has secondary magical items will be stronger than a character without secondary magical items. However, the important thing is how the former will be stronger, not whether he is.

I imagine that a lot of secondary magic items will provide situational benefits, compared to the "always useful" benefits of the primary magic items and the old 3E "Big Six". Powers like water-breathing, flight, or darkvision are all situational benefits. Darkvision is useless in daylight, but great underground. Flight is useless in a cave, but great in open areas. Water-breathing is useless on land, but invaluable in a flooded cavern. These kinds of abilities are certainly useful in certain situations (or even many situations), but they are not the kind of abilities you need for every fight in the game, no matter what, like attack bonuses or AC. Items like this are among the most fun of the magic items, but were cast aside by the "Big Six" of 3E. One of the great advantages of the new system is that it encourages using such items, rather than discouraging them by providing obviously better alternatives.

Anyways, the thing about items with situational benefits is that they are the kinds of things that they are never completely necessary. If you need to fly, you can find a pegasus, hire a dragon to carry you, or even find an airship. If you need to breathe underwater, there may be magic rituals to let you do so temporarily or you can just choose a race which has that ability. Darkvision is similar. Finding an alternative to a secondary magic item is incredibly easy compared to adjusting the math to make up for a lack of primary magic items (which is not all that hard itself in 4E).

Because of this, while a single PC who does not have secondary magic items may be weaker than his ally who does have secondary magic items, a group of PCs who do not have secondary magic items can still get through a campaign just as well as a group of PCs who do have secondary magic items, simply because there are so many alternative solutions to the kind of challenges that can be overcome by those kind of items. Secondary magic items really are optional for campaigns.

QFT

Also, many of those secondary items will more than likely have charges that renew each day, meaning they are "temporary" effects. For example:

Bracers of Quick Strike: 1/day one extra melee attack.
Gloves of Fortunate Striking: 3/day, re-roll a "to hit" roll.
Belt of Giant Strength: 3/day +2 to hit and damage (and str-related checks) for 1 round.
Boots of Haste: up to 10 rounds of +6 squares to movement.

Unlike weapons, armor, or cloak/amulets and rings, these effects work for limited durations or limited times per day. Thus, they boost your power level, but not as dramatically as a +2 thundering warhammer or a cloak of survival would.

 

[Rokes]

Would you test a car at 5mph ?

They do all the time, usually in the form of an impact tests, to make sure none of the fascia or exterior lighting is hurt at those speeds.

Of course they do high-speed testing on the car as well, but low speed is equally important.

or an airplane at umm whatever minimum velocity to remain airborne is ?

God I'd hope they do this (in a wind tunnel that is). The engineer's will calculate the minimum velocity required, but I'd sure as heck hope they test it...

edit: removed snarkiness