Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 5115465" data-attributes="member: 3400">The reason they deck out with the 6 is because they can and they offer a lot of bang for the buck. Everyone wanted the big items in 1e/2e too, but it wasn't a strategy anyone could rationally depend on since the DM was in control of magic item distribution. 3e's magic item creation rules made it a rational game playing strategy. And since they are useful in many situations and are relatively cheap single-purpose items, it's far better to get rid of quirky multifunction items in favor of upgrading the big 6. The only real answer to the big 6 (which 4e has a version of as well with respect to armor, weapons/implements, and NAD boosters just as bad as 1e-3e did), is for the DM to control the distribution of magic items or bonuses and set that expectation among the players.Personally, I really don't mind a proliferation of minor bonus items as long as they aren't crowding out the more interesting and flavorful magics. I wouldn't mind seeing all low-bonus items made even cheaper than they are. Think of them as lucky charms that people might have that actually provide a bit of benefit. The effect on game balance is minimal. In fact, I'm sorely tempted to increase the number and sorts of these things for my PF campaign, allowing more to be off slot as well, and just make it harder to obtain the more powerful versions. I'm also tempted to make more of the items multi-function as well (back to rings and cloaks of protection that improve both AC and saves rather than breaking out the two bonuses).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="billd91, post: 5115465, member: 3400"] The reason they deck out with the 6 is because [b]they can[/b] and they offer a lot of bang for the buck. Everyone wanted the big items in 1e/2e too, but it wasn't a strategy anyone could rationally depend on since the DM was in control of magic item distribution. 3e's magic item creation rules made it a rational game playing strategy. And since they are useful in many situations and are relatively cheap single-purpose items, it's far better to get rid of quirky multifunction items in favor of upgrading the big 6. The only real answer to the big 6 (which 4e has a version of as well with respect to armor, weapons/implements, and NAD boosters just as bad as 1e-3e did), is for the DM to control the distribution of magic items or bonuses and set that expectation among the players. Personally, I really don't mind a proliferation of minor bonus items as long as they aren't crowding out the more interesting and flavorful magics. I wouldn't mind seeing all low-bonus items made even cheaper than they are. Think of them as lucky charms that people might have that actually provide a bit of benefit. The effect on game balance is minimal. In fact, I'm sorely tempted to increase the number and sorts of these things for my PF campaign, allowing more to be off slot as well, and just make it harder to obtain the more powerful versions. I'm also tempted to make more of the items multi-function as well (back to rings and cloaks of protection that improve both AC and saves rather than breaking out the two bonuses). [/QUOTE]

Verification