WotC: Souldn't Magic Items Be Classified By Function?

[Lanefan]

Except of course, it isn't obvious, you have slightly more clues than 3.x but not that many, oh, and a lot of players hate trying to figure out what magic items do.

Old, jaded players perhaps. For newer players, field-testing can be very entertaining...and very informative. And sure, you'd start by testing whether a given item does what it does, only better (e.g. boots of somehow-enhanced movement), but if those tests fail then you're on to something else.

Except of course that this is a play style dealio, which WotC can do jack about, they have to balance the game with rules, which is why they're putting in a lot of siloing rules.

It's a rules issue. They need only design item creation as something that takes long enough to do and requires enough non-adventuring skills (or a class?) to accomplish that no PC in their right mind would ever do it, and presto: problem solved.

Also, can someone please define the term "siloing"; I keep seeing it in here and have no idea what it means.

You're kidding right? Those are the silliest items I have ever seen, I have one player in particular who would literally break me in twain if I started putting in spoons of protection, gloves of night vision and telescopes of levitation in our game, in fact those are very good examples why thematic siloing of abilities is a Good Thing.

Sounds like the perfect reason *to* put such items in, to give some variety and lighten things up a bit.

I suspect your player would last but a very short time in my often-whimsical games.

Lanefan

 

[rkanodia]

Sounds like the perfect reason *to* put such items in, to give some variety and lighten things up a bit.

... and then, when they're finally used to using the telescope of levitation, you put in a scenario where the PCs would gain some benefit from using the telescope just as a telescope, but then every time they try to look through it, they start levitating, making it necessary to go through all kinds of hassles (hopefully involving lots of rope and magic) to keep it steady

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Also, can someone please define the term "siloing"; I keep seeing it in here and have no idea what it means.

I'll try.

Siloing implies that you have a limited amount of "things" you can do/have. You can choose from a list of effects. Similar effects share one silo. So you'll have to decide between something like Fireball or Lighning Bolt and Fly or Dimension Door. You can't forego Fly/Dimension Door in favor of an additional Lightning Bolt.

There are two main reasons for this concept (as far as I can see)
- Extreme Stacking: You can get only one ability that improves your abilities in a specific "silo". So you choose the one that suits your needs best (or is simply the best.)
- Avoid choices that make certain abilities unused. The first time this concept was named by the designers, the example was Fireball vs Phantom Steed. Most wizards given the choice would simply not prepare Phantom Steed, because Fireball was plain better in most situations. Sorcerors learning spells like this are even less likely. An interesting note was that even earlier D&D edition had a notion of this - first level magic-users/wizards were given 3 spells known, one defense, one offense, and one utility.

One might say that this removes "hard choices" (in regards to spell preperation at least) and makes for a simpler game - but what purpose do spells/abilites have that are not used?

In regards to spells, it is not clear yet how this will work. I've got the impression that the siloing will not be done via types of slots, but how you cast certain spells. Most combat-relevant spells will be typically wizard powers. "Utility" spells will mostly be rituals.

In regards to magical items, the given slots and their linked abilities are obviously for "siloing".

 

[small pumpkin man]

Old, jaded players perhaps. For newer players, field-testing can be very entertaining...and very informative. And sure, you'd start by testing whether a given item does what it does, only better (e.g. boots of somehow-enhanced movement), but if those tests fail then you're on to something else.

Yeah, I guess, I could be biased since I haven't enjoyed it since, well, I never really enjoyed it to be honest. They have several different types of focus for every slot, and there are going to be a lot of magic items, so I don't think it's going to be completely removed.

It's a rules issue. They need only design item creation as something that takes long enough to do and requires enough non-adventuring skills (or a class?) to accomplish that no PC in their right mind would ever do it, and presto: problem solved.

True, you could do that, you could remove item creation into something that's only in the hands of the GM, but we both know that's not the direction 4e is going, both in regard to magic items and, well, everything. This is because if you do it that way, you're essentially stopping people from playing an Eberron or Artesia style game, were you can just go get low level magic items from the local Cannith forge, or the local smith because that would break the game, that's the 2e style of just giving you a tool kit and enough rope to hang yourself with.

Seriously, it's just better if they're balanced and siloed in the first place, it may seem less open ended, but it does ultimately allow for a greater variety of play styles.

Also, can someone please define the term "siloing"; I keep seeing it in here and have no idea what it means.

Sure, it means instead of just having a pile of abilities (or magic items) to choose from, allowing you to mix and match, to separate different abilities into different "silos" to encourage (well, enforce) more well rounded characters.

For example, because saves, attack and AC are all directly tied to specific item, it dissuades you from, for example, buying armour and maxing it's AC, and then buying an amulet and maxing it's AC, and buying a defending weapon, and maxing your AC. You can still spend more on your AC than your other items, but it keeps them closer together.

The original explanation was (as mentioned) to do with Wizard spells, by siloing attack spells and utility spells, it means you can't/don't have to give up offensive power for more utility abilities and vice versa (although you could likely create a build which focused more on one than the other).

Sounds like the perfect reason *to* put such items in, to give some variety and lighten things up a bit.

Except lightening up a game with no silly things is easy, making something serious with silly things around is much harder. There's actually an old article on the Wizards site on why they don't put jokes in their games any more

I suspect your player would last but a very short time in my often-whimsical games.

He'd have fun, although he'd probably want to keep another game going, he likes silly, if everything's silly, he just has a low WSoD, and silly things in a non-silly context tend to break it pretty easily.

 

[howandwhy99]

IMO magic items are best classified alphabetically.

The AD&D slot system for wearing/carrying items has been overblown in terms of use. How high of level did PCs need to be before magic item placement regularly applied in AD&D? In the teens?