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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wrightdjohn" data-source="post: 4357041" data-attributes="member: 43519">Thanks for responsesI'm not trying to antagonize.   But even James Wyatt admitted in his article that the people at Wizards were divided over this issue.   There are two camps out there.   Why write the rules to deliberately annoy one camp which in my opinion is the larger camp.Let me make a few things clear though...1.  I am not a low magic or stingy DM.  In fact for 4th I'll probably follow the DM guidelines.2.  I am not unresponsive to the desires of my players for a magic item.   3.  I am aware that the 4e game is far more balanced.  But can you assume any game is perfect.   Based on prior experience (1st, 2nd, 3rd, editions)... I would say it would be insanity to assume perfection on the part of the designers.Here are the things I consider when thinking about a magic item...1.  Is it unbalancing.. too good for its level... etc...  I agree that in 4e this should be a very rare issue.   It was commonplace though in all the other editions so I am not willing to say it will never occur.   Especially as more books are published.2.  There are in game campaign reasons for not wanting some magic items to get in a characters hands at a particular time.   Here are a few hastily scratched together examples..    a.  An item provides some special power that will nullify the fun of an adventure that the group is about to embark on...   so you  either cancel the adventure and thats weeks entertainment when a particular item gets created or bought?  or you delay when the player can get the item.   Using my optional rules... I'd say... yes you can get the recipe for the item but it will take 30 days to get here from the far off city of bla bla via caravan.   The adventure won't wait though so what do you want to do.   Either choice is ok.   b.  In a particular campaign world there may be special reasons for some items to not be available.  Perhaps in your world you don't allow that type of magic.   In previous editions teleport and scrying were vastly reduced in power (much like they are in 4e in fact funny that).   This is pure flavor I agree but it does come up.3. My goal as DM is to make the game fun for the group.   Sometimes it is more fun to quest for an item and fight some horrible monster to achieve it than to casually drop some gold for the item.    Nothing is prized more than that which is earned via in game challenges.   Obviously the challenges are fun but there is still that feeling of accomplishment.   4. I've found that allowing the exchange of magic items and gold freely also has the unintended consequence of making gold useless for anything not a magic item.   One of the great joys my players find in my world is using their gold for building castles, temples, etc...  Attracting followers and equipping them etc...   All this was taken for granted and discussed at length in the 1st Edition players handbook.   I guess due to my age I didn't find anything wrong with playing this way and neither did my players.   Most of my players that also DM use the same philosophy when handing out magic items and allowing their creation.   How much or how little occasionally varies some more and some less.   They agree though that that is a DMs job.   So perhaps I've "brainwashed" them to my philosophy but they seem to enjoy playing that way and carry it on to their own campaigns.My critique of James Wyatts approach was that they chose one side in this debate and pushed that on readers of the players handbook.   Why not just give several options and leave it a little more open ended.   Also I think that not knowing the details of every magic item coming and going was a great thing back when I first started playing.  The sense of unknown and mystery was a great joy.   Thats all been thrown overboard now with the items in the players handbook.</blockquote>

Verification