Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kalendraf" data-source="post: 1581069" data-attributes="member: 3433">If this were true, then everyone would buy and have virtually identical equipment each level.  Humans don't behave that way, and I doubt other races do either.For a better modern day example, consider something like Consumer Reports or the trade magazine of your choice that does a careful study of products and finally determines what are the best and worst buys.  If all people acted as you suggest, then the only product that would ever sell any copies at all would be the recommended best buy.  That doesn't happen.  Quite often, the worst items actually sell quite well for a variety of reasons.  Often people think it's a good deal even though it may not be.  Perhaps the buyer liked the brand (equivalent to craftsmen in a fantasy world) or perhaps they had a similar item in the past and just want a newer one.  It's also possible they simply have different tastes or aesthetic values.Variety is the key here.  Some folks would rather have that big TV, others just want a better sound system, and still others will hang onto their old equipment until it quits working.  Adventurers will likely have similar purchasing habits but instead they'd be favoring weapons vs. armor vs. wondrous items.Something else to consider is that magic may be mysterious...likely as mysterious as technology is to some modern day folks such as those who can't set their VCR's.  Another example - Is it better to have more ram vs. a faster cpu vs. a bigger hard drive vs. the newest video card in your computer?  The same kind of confusion could easily exist in a fantasy world with characters pondering if its better to buy that cloak or those gloves or those boots or that amulet, etc.I was not trying to insult you.  Rather I'm trying to point out that this type of thinking is essentially power-gaming.  Of course, thinking like a power-gamer and being one are not the same thing, and I'm not accusing you of being one. However, your comments imply a certain play style that leans in that direction.  FYI, I see power-gamers as being just another breed of gamer, neither good nor bad.  In fact, we owe a lot of thanks to power-gamers since they are often the ones who find the loopholes in game rules and uncover the balance issues that need to be fixed.  However, I do personally prefer for my players to not min/max the game to death, and I am quite thankful that the ones I DM for don't do that.If you think that "playing a character by the game AS WRITTEN" means you have to min/max your item purchases to obtain maximum effectiveness per gold spent, then go ahead do that.  As long as you, your DM and other players are enjoying yourselves, that's really what counts.  Just don't expect every other player or DM to behave that way.We tried that, but they were still too powerful with that long of a duration.  Every 2nd level spell slot was a buff spell on the spellcasters wound up being used for buff spells.  That is a clear sign that they are too good compared to the other 2nd level spells.  When we dropped them down to 1 min/level, they started being mixed with other 2nd level spells like they should be.  Hence, the evidence from my campaigns suggests the current 1 min/level is the balanced duration for the buff spells.</blockquote>

Verification