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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5189481" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm not even sure how to respond to a claim like that, since it seems to have totally ignored the evidence I presented and went on to assert a completely unsupported contrary claim.  Since you present no evidence to refute and ignored the evidence I presented without attempting to refute it, all I can say is you are just wrong.  3e and 1e are totally different in their handling of magic items.First of all, your first sentence in that is contridicted by everything else you say in that section.  On the one hand you want to claim that there are rules for handling issues that were once handled solely by DM fiat, but then all your supporting evidence is that it still should be handled by DM fiat.Secondly, do you realize how lame a defence, "Well, you are the DM, change things.", actually is?  That's not a defence at all.  That's an admission.As for your litany recounting your bad DMing experiences, that sounds more like an admission than a defense as well.  While its not the fault of the system per se, the fact that these things take an inexperienced DM by surprise is IMO a fault of, if not the system per se, then the guidelines provided to the DM.  It's incredible to me that you would talk about how all of this can be handled easily by departing from the guidelines on one hand, and not note the irony of how easily the game breaks in the hands of anyone but the most experienced GM's when you do.  You also seem to fail to totally miss the irony of telling me how this doesn't matter because there are more powerful game breaking effects available soon thereafter.  I mean a ring of invisibility isn't undercosted because you could make a pixie PC instead?  Seriously???  How can I argue against logic like that?</blockquote>

Verification