Uncommon Items 5 or More Levels Lower Than You...

[Kinneus]

... are treated as Common items. What do people think of this as a house rule to fix item rarity?

I'm trying to build a new Druid in case my current character dies. My current character is level 18, which means this Druid will start at least level 18. The problem is that my Druid really, really wants a pair of Claw Gloves, and I realized that, under RAW, there is literally no way for him to obtain them short of DM fiat or by giving up his level 17, 18 or 19 item. Treasure parcels don't make a habit of giving players items fourteen levels lower than them, after all.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I don't think a house rule is warranted, just a quick conversation with the DM...

there are cases where I would dissapprove of certain groups/sets of items even 5 levels lower than the PCs...

Besides, every Predatory Druid needs Claw Gloves!

 

[Kinneus]

Obviously, I'm not expecting my DM to create a house rule on my behalf. I was just explaining the process that lead me to see this new quirk in the rarity rules. It makes no sense that a level 5 Druid has a reasonable chance of finding Clawed Gloves, but a level 18 Druid (one of the most powerful Druids to have ever lived in the history of the world ever) will never be able to find one or even buy one, even if sitting on a mountain of platinum.

This is a house rule I'm considering for future campaigns where I'm the DM.

 

[S'mon]

As DM I would normally allow a player to be able to find the rare & precious components to create an Uncommon item if they put a bit of effort in, or else buy it for well over the list price.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Why never find one?

A - the 18th level druid doesn't just materialize

B - why can't the dm throw in lower level items in a treasure packet

?

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

 

[Kinneus]

As DM I would normally allow a player to be able to find the rare & precious components to create an Uncommon item if they put a bit of effort in, or else buy it for well over the list price.

Why never find one?

A - the 18th level druid doesn't just materialize

B - why can't the dm throw in lower level items in a treasure packet

?

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

You guys both seem to be saying, "It's not a problem. DM fiat!" but I think it is a problem when the only solution is DM fiat. The campaign I'm trying to insert my Druid into is run by a very by-the-books DM. The rules say high-level starting characters can only buy common items with their starting cash, and he's sticking to that. It's also an official adventure path (Scales of War), which leaves very little room or time for "search for exotic components" side-quests.

What's the point of magic item rarity if DMs are just going to judge every item on a case-by-case basis anyway? I'm trying to create a single, hard, fast houserule for my entire campaign, instead of house-ruling a bunch of individual items. I also wanted to remove the silliness of an Epic level 30 Druid who can't for the life of him find a level 4 item.

Would allowing players to buy and create items five levels beneath them break the game? I don't think so; it wasn't that long ago when characters could create items of their level, right in the middle of a dungeon crawl if they so chose (and had the resources to pull it off). I'd like to hear some opinions on the proposed house rule, though, because maybe there is something I'm missing.

The point about item sets is a good one, although frankly, I've yet to see a player use all the items in an item set or even put them all on a wishlist. Usually players can get better benefits by picking one or two items out of a set and then cherry-picking the rest. Maybe there'd have to be an addendum to the rule; the first two items in a set can be treated as common if they're five levels or lower than your level, but the rest thereafter are uncommon (possibly even rare?)

 

[S'mon]

DM "fiat" is DM "judgement" and is a good thing - always, but in this case, because most uncommon lower-level items are fine to allow creation, but some have Daily powers which auto-scale with level, and without the old Daily use cap the PC can create a bunch of them and gain an undue advantage.

It's also a good thing because having a PC quest for the components to craft an item, or the item itself, makes a good side-trek.

Your position seems to be that you dislike the notion the DM can say "no" to an item you would like to have, hence your objection to "DM fiat". I disagree strongly with this position, you certainly have no entitlement to any particular item.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

And my position is that even a by the book dm should allow claw gloves.

The rarity rules were added for good reason, some items are just plain better. IMC I have removed weapons that deal a base D12 after a dual weilding viscious war axe build...

Also, are you not talking about a hr for your game, not the scales of war game?

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

 

[Kinneus]

Also, are you not talking about a hr for your game, not the scales of war game?

Yes, I'm talking about a house rule for my game, not the Scales of War game. I'm not the DM in the Scales of War game, and it's pretty unreasonable of me to expect the DM to implement house rules just for me. I'm just trying to find a 'fire-and-forget' rules fix for my own campaign, so I don't have to make a decision about each individual uncommon item my players want to buy/create.

Your position seems to be that you dislike the notion the DM can say "no" to an item you would like to have, hence your objection to "DM fiat". I disagree strongly with this position, you certainly have no entitlement to any particular item.

That's really not fair, and that's really not my position at all. I'm trying to fix the magic item rarity system, a system that the creators themselves have admitted isn't really working due to a (rather ironic) rarity of common items. They suggest just ruling individually which 'uncommon' items should be common, but like I've said before, the idea of making a ruling on each and every uncommon item my players want strikes me as tedious. I'm also sure I'll eventually make something common I should've kept uncommon, or keep something uncommon that really should be common. I'm looking for a flat rule for my game. This was at no point about feeling entitled to items. This house rule will never ever get my Druid claw gloves; as I said before, I was just sharing how I came to notice this quirk in the magic item rarity system.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Fair enough.

I have always vetted the pc's magic items...and still do even for 'common' ones. The couple minutes double checking allows me to be better prepared to set opportunities in for the items use, or to limit its use..as appropriate.

I have seen both sides of the 'wtf, when did you get that item? I never would have allowed it' as well as lugging an item around for an entire campaign and never using it....
Not so much claw gloves, but niche wonderous items.


Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk