"Weenie List" of Ubiquitous & Popular Magic Items

[ConcreteBuddha]

According to the Fly spell description, flying is considered normal movement for those who it is cast upon.

Time for House Rule #18,976....

 

[Azlan]

Azlan, something you said makes your opinion suspect to me, and it has nothing to do with your magic item critiques.

Had you read Monte's later posts on his own message boards, you would know that this has no grounding in truth. He admits that the design staff of WotC is not what he had in mind, but instead freelance and small-publishing designers he has known who write for games that they don't even play.

You guys are so eager to get me on some technicality, so that you can disqualify my entire viewpoint. Now you're saying my motives or my agenda are suspicious? Well, not to make Monte Cook's rant the focus of, or the reason for, my post here (because it surely is not!), but following is a quote, verbatim, from the webpage that I provided the link to, written by Monte Cook himself...

"You would most likely be surprised how common this is. In the corner of the game industry that is d20, I need two hands to count all the game professionals I know who are working on products but do not play the game regularly. I can think of at least a few who -- I'm fairly certain -- have never played a session of 3rd Edition D&D.

"Why, there are a surprisingly large number of people just down the street from me at Wizards of the Coast who -- aside from the occasional mandated in-house playtest -- never play the game. And these Wizards people are, as I type this, working on D&D and d20 products."

Okay, now, someone isn't being truthful here! Either it's you, Henry... or it was Monte... or it was someone impersonating Monte.

According to Anthony Valterra, Business Mgr. for WotC, in a post in the General Forums, EVERYBODY in R&D, and almost everybody but the freakin' accountants, play a weekly or monthly game.

So you say. (Or so Anthony Valterra, Business Mgr. for WotC, says.) And yet Monte wrote what he wrote -- and it's still available on his webpage, for all to read! That he later tried to modify or rectify what he wrote (as you related it, Henry) only makes me think that something's fishy... although I'm not quite sure where the smell is coming from...

You won't score points here by slamming the makers of the game.

Or by slamming the game itself. Yes, I know that now.

 

[Mistwell]

Okay, I will dip my foot in these piranha-infested waters...

Azlan-bashing: These boards are unfriendly, to say the least, to newcomers (or relative newcomers). People should feel free to state their opinions about D&D (including the authors of D&D 3e, who are public figures in this context) without being personally attacked, and it shouldn't require a hazing ritual to qualify for posting game opinions on these boards free of ad hominem attacks. Newcomers will make mistakes. Mistakes, if they are material, should be pointed out. But it should not be personal.
I say to Azlan: Keep on posting, fight the good fight (even though I disagree with your opinion, I think it is worth hearing it).

Hong-bashing: Hong is one of the funniest people on these boards. I say this having been a target of his several times. Nevertheless, I often find his posts to be some of the best ones around, and an important reality-check for those of us (including myself) who often take this GAME too seriously.
I say to Hong: thanks for all the great posts, please keep them coming (not that you care that you have my thanks).

Haversack vs. Gloves: I really think these two items have a different purpose in mind.

The Haversack: I believe this is primarily a defensive item, not an offensive one. First, it is only 8 cubic feet in capacity for it's main chamber. This means it will not properly hold your reach weapons (e.g. Lances, Guisarme, Longspear, Ranseur, etc..), or anything more than 8 feet in length. Second, as others have already said, I believe you can pull an item out of it as a free action, but items that would otherwise require a move-equivalent action ("MEA") to ready (like a weapon) will still require that MEA (though you can do this while moving). Third, I think it is a fair interpretation to say that the Haversack has the same sharp-item limitation as a bag of holding, since it is made of tanned leather, and references the bag of holding by saying it is "...like a bag of holding". Now of course the word "like" means it is not identical, but I would argue the differences are pointed out in the text (holding capacity is different, weight is different, and special summoning of items to the top of the bag function). Therefore, while you could use the Haversack for summoning blunt-weapons, I think the primary use of the Haversack is to function as a kind of parachute. You're in trouble, so you "pull the ripcord" and retreat while summoning the healing potion out of your haversack (or the potion of invisibility, the scroll of teleportation, etc..). It's also quite handy for reducing your weight, and summoning-up material components.

The Gloves: The gloves are primarily an offensive item, though it could also have defensive purposes. While the Haversack just contains items, the Gloves actually shrink the item and place it in stasis, right there in the palm of your hand. The only limitation for the item is that it not weigh more than 20 pounds (no space limitation). This means you can place any large item or weapon in it, even reach weapons, and even sharp pointy objects. Additionally, because the item appears in-hand, and requires no pulling-action or adjustment in position to place it between you and your opponent, I would argue the weapon comes already readied when activated, requiring no MEA to ready it. Defensively, this would also work for a shield. And, arguably, because the item is in "stasis", you could even put a light (20 pounds or less) animal / living creature in the gloves, and they would not require food, water, oxygen, sleep, and other things to survive. (In fact, that presents an interesting adventure idea. I think a tiny fairy just got trapped in the next glove of storing my players find.) And finally, as people already mentioned, this item is very good for actions that require stealth and secrecy. If you are infiltrating a hostile place, generally the guards will search your backpack for weapons. However, searching your gloves? Unlikely.

All right, I'm pulling my toes out of the water now, and summoning a shield from my Gloves of Storing to help defend myself against the expected attack of opportunity on its way...

 

[hong]

Hong-bashing: Hong is one of the funniest people on these boards. I say this having been a target of his several times. Nevertheless, I often find his posts to be some of the best ones around, and an important reality-check for those of us (including myself) who often take this GAME too seriously.
I say to Hong: thanks for all the great posts, please keep them coming (not that you care that you have my thanks).

Praise is always welcome, especially if accompanied by gifts of money, alcohol and/or gaming products.

I actually don't think I've targeted you at all, though. Perhaps you might have been collateral damage on some occasions, in which case, d'oh! Must aim better.

 

[Azlan]

Hong-bashing: Hong is one of the funniest people on these boards. I say this having been a target of his several times. Nevertheless, I often find his posts to be some of the best ones around, and an important reality-check for those of us (including myself) who often take this GAME too seriously.
I say to Hong: thanks for all the great posts, please keep them coming (not that you care that you have my thanks).

This is the last straw. You're the third person I've seen in the past week who's said, in effect, "You're hilarious, hong! Keep up the good work!" Well, any board that tolerates and even encourages someone like hong is a board I want no part of. So what if he's witty and amusing? He's also a self-serving and mean-spirited mischief-maker who is not nearly as interested in 3E D&D as he is in making fun of people, giving them grief and derailing their posts.

Here's where I first encountered hong, just last week...

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12581

This was on someone else's post. I had just given sincere and genuine feedback on someone's comments, when hong came out of nowhere and personally attacked me, without provocation or explanation. When I asked him why, he didn't bother to answer.

But what he did do is follow me to each of my own posts so that he could continue to antagonize and derail me. That's when I decided to follow the link to his website and find out who in the hell this guy was.

According to the information I found on his website, hong harasses people and makes mischief all across the Internet -- and then puts a collection of "Hong's Greatest Hits" on his webpage!

I personally know three other people who have had negative things to say about this board, due to the way they got personally attacked and raked over the coals by the peanut gallery here (many of whom are long-time members and have posts numbering in the thousands). I have not seen these three other people around here for a while now. I wonder if they've given up on it in disgust, as I'm about to?

Myself, I took a break from this board because I found the incessant jeering and slamming sophomoric and counterproductive. I thought I'd come back and see if the environment had changed... but, nope, it's only gotten worse. In fact, now there seems to be a core group of trolls, hecklers, and rules-lawyers entrenched here, with their own cheering section. (Because the cheerers find them "funny".) Even one of the moderators here seem to be involved in these shenanigans, if only indirectly.

I've read the list of 'Net alignments. While I realize this list is tongue-in-cheek (and, hey, it is amusing), I also know that these alignments -- particularly the "evil" ones -- are based on very real and ugly troublemakers who spend a great deal of time lurking and hanging out on these Internet message boards. And any board that tolerates and even encourages those who are clearly of the "evil" 'Net alignments is a board that I (and a lot of other people, evidently) don't want to participate in.

Feh. I'm just glad I didn't waste $25 to become a Community Member.

 

[Mistwell]

You think rules-lawyers are an evil thing? How do you think all the sage answers, faqs, and other clarifications eventually came about? How do you think the rules themselves improve over the years with new additions? Do you think D&D 3e was just a spotneous thing? That fuzzy, subjective, spirit-of-the-rules type thinking actually is more effective at refining the rules than rules-lawyering?

Azlan, you may disagree with rules-lawyers, but they have a useful place in this game, and on these boards.

 

[Azlan]

You think rules-lawyers are an evil thing?

Is that all you got out of my previous post... ?!

Agh. Somebody, please, pass me the hemlock...

 

[Jeremy]

I understood that you were hurt by other people's disagreement, personal opinions, and tone.

That you don't think much of the EN Board community.

And that you especially do not like hong's particular brand of humor.

Sorry it all hit you so wrong. (This is not to say that I agree that PC's should avoid the useful items on your "weenie" list, or that sneak attack is too powerful overall, just that I understand the risk you put out offering your opinion or thoughts on something only to find them ridiculed or at least shot down.)

((I happen to hate getting bashed by hong, but he's usually funny, and too often right. And hey, he keeps your view count up so you can get a broader spectrum of people replying... Usually, unless they find hong so funny they tangent off to his comments. Bad hijacking hong! ))

 

[WizarDru]

I personally know three other people who have had negative things to say about this board, due to the way they got personally attacked and raked over the coals by the peanut gallery here (many of whom are long-time members and have posts numbering in the thousands).

Myself, I took a break from this board because I found the incessant arguing and ridiculing sophomoric and counterproductive. I thought I'd come back and see if the environment had changed... but, nope, it's only gotten worse. In fact, now there seems to be a core group of trolls, hecklers, and rules-lawyers entrenched here, with their own cheering section. (Because the cheerers find them "funny".) Even one of the moderators here seem to be involved in these shenanigans, if only indirectly.

With respect, Azlan, you're either going to have to get used to it, or don't engage in a public forum. hong may be out of line, at times, but this is third or fourth time you've painted with a fairly broad brush, and then act suprised when folks take offense.

In the thread you linked to above, you refered to anyone who disagreed with you as 'elitists' and implied they were roleplaying zealots. Did that warrant hong's reply? I certainly don't think so. But I'm fairly sure that's what prompted it.

Here, anyone who posts regularly is apparently either a troll or counterproductive and sophmoric rules-lawyer, if I'm to take your obviously frustrated post above at face value. I might suggest that you probably should just lurk for a while and get a better feel for the dynamic here first, instead of just diving in. Most of the posters here are NOT trolling, you might find. In point of fact, I find this one of the best discussion forums that I've ever been to.

Many of the folks so far have taken as much issue with the tone of your posts as their content. The problem is that often, the topics you're broaching have already been discussed a great deal, sometimes to a standstill. Worse, when someone arrives with less experience than some of those who've argued, and then proceeds to explain that 3E is broken in the high-level game, although they dislike high-level games, and then make a few rules gaffes, it undercuts their argument.

A large problem is that you immediately arrive and say, essentially, 'min/maxers, powergamers and jerks' all buy these items in my game...this is a symptom of how broken 3E and especially magic items with 3E are'. Given your evowed dislike for higher-powered games, and magic items in general, this is not terribly suprising. But you need to understand that many gamers don't percieve the default magic item level in 3E as a problem...and that they're not all going to agree with you, regardless of how convincing your argument is.

If you feel that this is an unpleasant place to discuss D&D, wait'll you try the WOTC boards, RPG.NET or Nutkinland. People don't feel the need to sugarcoat their feelings for Eric's grandmother. They have some great discussions...but they can become an angry mob fast.

 

[Azlan]

I understood that you were hurt by other people's disagreement, personal opinions, and tone.

There were only two things that hurt me (deeply disappointed me, actually) about this board...

1. That my viewpoint would be totally disqualified because of one rule about creating magic items that I overlooked -- one that my original argument wasn't even hinged upon. (It is this kind of mindset that I stand against when I use the term "rules-lawyers".)

2. That someone like hong is able to come out of left field and start heckling me for no reason other than to poke fun, and that he continues to do so as he follows me around from post to post, and that he is not only tolerated but encouraged to do so. (I left this kind of junk behind when I graduated from grade school. Well, actually, it continued into high school -- but not much past that.)

The rest of the ridicule and shoot-downs I can take. Heck, some of it, I may even deserve or at least incite.