Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Sessadore" data-source="post: 4011552" data-attributes="member: 57255">Someone has probably already said this, but I thought I'd say it anyway, just in case.  Unless they completely eliminated +x items of all kinds, they need to account for it in the math behind the game.  As long as there are +x items in the game, they can say that they're not necessary all that they want - players will still make a b-line for them because they make their characters more effective.  Simple as that.  If they design the system without taking into account their +x items, almost every character will be overpowered (even if only slightly) compared to the monsters they are expected to fight.  On the other hand, if they have them, design the system to account for them, but still say that they aren't essential, characters who believe that will be underpowered (again, even if only slightly).  Also, if you want more powerful character to wield/have access to more powerful items (+2 for 9th level, +4 for 18th, etc...) the gap between magic-ed up characters and those without becomes greater.  +2 isn't that big a deal - 10% difference.  However, while a +4 bonus might only be 10% of the 18th level characters total bonus, it equates to a 20% difference on the d20.  In effect, I'm saying that as long as there are +x items of any kind, you will need them to compete - if not with the monsters, then with the other players in your party.  That said, I also believe that +x swords and such are a definite D&Dism, and I don't want them to go away, so I see this as a solution which is as ideal as can be expected.  Again, forgive me if all of this has been said already - I had 20 minutes to read 11 pages of posts, so I skipped a few ;-)~LS</blockquote>

Verification