Magic Item Rarity

539 posts / 0 new
Last post
For those of us who haven't seen the article yet, it's here:

www.wizards.com/DND/Article.aspx?x=dnd/d...

Mike Mearls explains the new Magic Item Rarity rules more in depth than I've seen before (and hey look, it's from an official source, not some random poster's theory). Personally I love it, and one of the things I didn't like about 4E out of the gate as a DM was Magic Items in the Player's Handbook, the Create Magic ritual and the sense of entitlement the current generation of DnD player's seemed to exhibit because of both.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I really don't give a ****. So feel free to argue amongst yourselves about the changes.

(If you sense a level of aggression in this post, it's because I'm dog tired of all the complaining, but am willing to forge "once more into the breach" on behalf of changes that I personally believe make the game better . . . for me.)

So we now have official word that Uncommon is uncraftable.  Queue all the posters previously defending the system by insisting "only rare will be uncraftable, WotC wouldn't make uncommon uncraftable" coming in and saying "I knew they'd make uncommon uncraftable all along, and this system is great!"

Personally, I think this is a bad idea, and a step backwards.  The original daily item limit placed a hard rules-enforced limit on spamming items to preserve balance.  The new rule just says "If they spam items it's the DM's fault for giving out the wrong ones".  Rare items make this even worse... balance used to be in the realm of the designers and authors, but now it's being entirely put on the DM's shoulders, so that the designers have free reign to create overpowered and imbalanced items without having to worry about later errata-ing them when they're found to be too powerful.  All this new system does is make it so that when one person says "This item is broken", another person can say "Well then don't give it to your players" and have the rules back them on it, since players can no longer decide what to craft or buy on their own.

This is a bad idea.  The only thing this accomplishes is making the DM responsible for maintaining the balance of broken items instead of the designers and errata.  If people were honestly concered that new players were too dumb/new to figure out daily item uses, or at-will powers, then there should be a much bigger concern that new DM's will be unable to figure out the intricacies of game balance with little to guide them.  The only problem that's being "fixed" if you really read the article, is that the designers have a hard time balancing items and now they don't have to.  This is a fix for them and their errata, not really a fix for DM's.
As a (mostly) DM, I *liked* magic items being in the PHB and the Enchant Magic Item ritual, and I didn't (and still don't) put any stock in entitlement rants.

My experience with "you must go out and collect rare reagents" systems, from Basic/1E days onward, is that they fall flat on their face as a game element, since they effectively demand that whatever other story threads are being followed be tossed out while the PCs go off to do another round of reagent-grinding.

It might work in a game where you expect to see no more than one or two magic items EVER and creating an item is thus actually main-plot-worthy, but no version of D&D has ever approached that degree of scarcity.

So, this is a 'solution' that I'll happily ignore.
As a (mostly) DM, I *liked* magic items being in the PHB and the Enchant Magic Item ritual, and I didn't (and still don't) put any stock in entitlement rants. My experience with "you must go out and collect rare reagents" systems, from Basic/1E days onward, is that they fall flat on their face as a game element, since they effectively demand that whatever other story threads are being followed be tossed out while the PCs go off to do another round of reagent-grinding. It might work in a game where you expect to see no more than one or two magic items EVER and creating an item is thus actually main-plot-worthy, but no version of D&D has ever approached that degree of scarcity. So, this is a 'solution' that I'll happily ignore.



Agreed.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
As a (mostly) DM, I *liked* magic items being in the PHB and the Enchant Magic Item ritual, and I didn't (and still don't) put any stock in entitlement rants. My experience with "you must go out and collect rare reagents" systems, from Basic/1E days onward, is that they fall flat on their face as a game element, since they effectively demand that whatever other story threads are being followed be tossed out while the PCs go off to do another round of reagent-grinding. It might work in a game where you expect to see no more than one or two magic items EVER and creating an item is thus actually main-plot-worthy, but no version of D&D has ever approached that degree of scarcity. So, this is a 'solution' that I'll happily ignore.



I wanted to agree with this too.  Despite the fact that all the previous versions of D&D talked about the "go out on a quest and get the reagents" thing for magic items, it always worked terribly in practive any time I've seen it tried.  Especially as I've gotten older and I don't have time to play D&D for hundreds of hours.  Most people I know play once a week for a few hours, and that time is best spent playing your actual campaign and trying to follow the most interesting points of the story.  Taking a random side adventure to go find magic acorns for your wand +2 can waste an entire session or two (or three) if you make it an actual quest, when we hardly have time to just follow the main plot line.  That kind of thing works great in a video game where you are playing by yourself and you can do the sidequest in a half hour... it doesn't work so well in a social game where you need to schedule a bunch of people getting together and every "side quest" takes several hours.
Looks good to me. Especially the no arbitrary daily limit on magic items. Although, I have a feeling that WotC is going to release some deck of cards, similar to the power cards, but each one describes a unique and powerful rare item with accompaning art...
-I got ran over my a squirrel the other day. -I'm going to steal my own idea. -My fruits of labor are not fruits... *sniff* they're vegetables. *sobs*
The only problem that's being "fixed" if you really read the article, is that the designers have a hard time balancing items and now they don't have to.  This is a fix for them and their errata, not really a fix for DM's.


Heh.  That was my impression too.

EDIT: I'm presuming that the "No daily item use limit" rule will become a part of the errata - it kind of has to to keep the game uniform. /EDIT

I find myself completely apathetic at this point, though.  At the point of "Y'know what?  You do whatever you want.  I'm not buying it.  I'm not using it.  I'll check out what changes to slap into the errata, and see if I like those.  But at this point, I think I'm going to implement my original 4th Edition plan early, and call it quits with new products.  I'll collect what's already come out.  I'll use the hell out of it.  And I'll have a self-contained game that I like.  If I, or players, see something 'new' that comes out that we like, we'll just be treating it like we do any other house rules."

So really, it's back to how we treated "official" products in 3.5.  Groovy.
Feedback Disclaimer
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us. No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC). (And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft) A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)
Yup...I'm with 'Frito.

I didn't really care for 3rd all that much.  Bought the core, and very little else.  Bought 3.5 because it seemed it would "fix" the problems I had.  While it made some progress in toning down flagrant abuse, it did nothing to change the design paradigm that I discovered was the root of my dislike of the system.  3.X was a bunch of supplements with poor design and little appeal.

Essentials seems the same.  I've seen that song and dance before, and I'm not buying.  I reserve the right to be blown away by post-Essentials products, but I'm not counting on it.

As I said a few days ago: "Plan for the worst, and hope for the best".
Essentials zigged, when I wanted to continue zagging. Roll dice, not cars.
So, I get to have a Flaming Burst Flame-Tongue Longsword again? Hmm. As usual, I'm ambivalent about Essentials rules til I actually have them in print in my hands, but I will say that it the Uncommon 50% sale value thing is an improvement, looks like they're finally doing something about the (really rather limiting) character expected wealth.
A Beginners Primer to CharOp. Archmage's Ascension - The Wizard's Handbook. Let the Hammer Fall: Dwarf Warpriest/Tactical Warpriest/Indomitable Champion, a Defending Leader. Requiem for Dissent: Cleric/Fighter/Paragon of Victory Melee Leader Ko te manu e kai i te miro, nona te ngahere. Ko te manu e kai i te matauranga e, nano te ao katoa. It's the proliferation of people who think the rules are more important than what the rules are meant to accomplish. - Dedekine
Well, we use 50% resale value in the current system anyway, so that is not an issue for us.

I suspect this new system will work the best in my planned dark sun game(s), where I would limit magic item enchanting anyway. It is not really needed, as I could have done the limiting myself just as easily, but it does not hurt either.

What I don't want is for it to affect character builder in any way. If it causes limitations on what I could equip on a given character, then I am against it. Otherwise it makes absolutely no difference.
Taking a random side adventure to go find magic acorns for your wand +2 can waste an entire session or two (or three) if you make it an actual quest, when we hardly have time to just follow the main plot line.  That kind of thing works great in a video game where you are playing by yourself and you can do the sidequest in a half hour... it doesn't work so well in a social game where you need to schedule a bunch of people getting together and every "side quest" takes several hours.

Sure sidequests work poorly, most of the time, but a DM that treats such quests as purely sideline to the main story is missing a useful opportunity.  Instead such regents can be used as "bait" to aid in setting up an adventure hook.  Let the heroes know in advance that the evil wizard has a store of such regents or that the dragon's entrails can serve such a function.
Is magic item rarity going to affect pre-essentials magic items? Is magic item rarity going to affect all items in the CB or will we have a choice not to use item rarity in the CB? I don't have DDI and won't see anything until my buddy comes over with a print out, so I'm kinda screwed on info. The way item dailies work in essentials has me a bit worried over what will happen to all the pre-essentials items.

As a DM, I love the 4e method of magic items, because "I" do not have to find items for each of my players and it frees my time up to focus on other things. When "I" hand out specific magical items, it's always an extra bonus to the parcel rewards. It's also nice because my players get to shop on their own. Something I allowed them to do since 2e, but was always a houserule/homebrew. Now with the CB and it's near complete hatred of houserules, this simply isn't a reasonable alternative as using the CB makes making characters fun. Otherwise, many of us 4e gamers would get sick and tired of writing out most of the crap in the game. Just, too much writing.

As a Player, I completely love the 4e method of magic items, because I no longer get garbage I cannot use, level after level after level. I actually can tailor make my character every step of the way if I want to, from level 1 to 30. I can decide what powers, feats and items I want and actually end up with the exact character "I" want instead of the character my DM wants me to have.

Player rewards should actually be focused on what the players would most enjoy and not a side effect of what the DM would enjoy. The DM can still reward specific items on top of the standard rewards and have entire adventures secretly built around gathering components to construct that awesome artifact.

And saying not to update the CB isn't a reasonable solution anymore than saying wotc shouldn't release essentials or errata.
Long Live Dragonlance and the Nexus! I still want an athasian nightmare beast and a warforged dragon mini! "Look, Meat, I'll tear your face off, rip your throat out and eat what's left-because that's what I do to food like you." ~Thrikreen Intimidation Tactic.
My Custom 4th edition Content (New Content:2)
* My Personal 4e Darksun Material found below: Updated Weapon Options. (critical impact, repair, salvage) http://www.4shared.com/document/bMZK2PNy/Updated_Optional_Darksun_Weapo.html 4th edition Athasian Sloth v1.2 (includes three monster write ups and a new disease) http://www.4shared.com/document/lj561SRh/4th_edition_Athasian_Sloth_v10.html 4th edition Athasian Flailer v1.0 http://www.4shared.com/document/JGi9PqSe/4th_edition__Athasian_Flailer_.html
Initial Thought: Less pressure on balance for WotC, more prep-time needed by DM's.  This does not seem like a win.

4e Compatability Issues:

Artificers... lol!  Any class feature or power that interacts with a character's daily item power usage is now worthless (thought the ability to recharge an item's daily power got MUCH more powerful, brokenly so in some cases.)  This class will now need severe errata.

4e adventures: modules printed with a list of parcels will need to be revised, either by WotC or by the DM.  The latter is, I suspect, what we'll have to deal with... see 'Initial Thought"

Likely more.

The prep time issue seems to be the biggest concern for me, and this has been a running concern about essentials.  A DM now has to balance an adventure between classes with and without daily powers (to few encounters makes the daily classes far more powerful than the at-will/encounter classes, while too many and the opposite becomes true) and will now have to deal with a more complicated parcel system as well (and dealing with loot has ALWAYS been a bear for me anyway.)  I know WotC won't lose any sleep over people prefering to buy their modules over making their own adventures, but making it harder for DM's to do their job is very, very bad for the game.  I can't stress enough how reliant their business model is on DM's wanting to DM, they should be paying more attention to that fact.
Initial Thought: Less pressure on balance for WotC, more prep-time needed by DM's.  This does not seem like a win.

4e Compatability Issues:

Artificers... lol!  Any class feature or power that interacts with a character's daily item power usage is now worthless (thought the ability to recharge an item's daily power got MUCH more powerful, brokenly so in some cases.)  This class will now need severe errata.



Didn't even catch that myself.  Double D'oh!

The prep time issue seems to be the biggest concern for me, and this has been a running concern about essentials.  A DM now has to balance an adventure between classes with and without daily powers (to few encounters makes the daily classes far more powerful than the at-will/encounter classes, while too many and the opposite becomes true) and will now have to deal with a more complicated parcel system as well (and dealing with loot has ALWAYS been a bear for me anyway.)  I know WotC won't lose any sleep over people prefering to buy their modules over making their own adventures, but making it harder for DM's to do their job is very, very bad for the game.  I can't stress enough how reliant their business model is on DM's wanting to DM, they should be paying more attention to that fact.



That was one of the main appeals of 4e for me (the other being the shift away from simulationism towards narrativism).  4e made DMing fun, and not in the least bit a chore.  I stepped away from 3.X because of the time investment required and how unfun it made the game.  On the plus side, I saved a lot of money.  So "Yay Essentials!" for easing the strain on my wallet.  I'll buy DLC for my PS3 games instead.  Rock Band 3 is coming out soon...
Essentials zigged, when I wanted to continue zagging. Roll dice, not cars.
Rares remind me of this blog entry.


Looking forward to hearing how the WotC police will break down your door and what they will do if you continue to use the current method of distribution and daily limit rule.
Absolutely just as much fail as I was expecting. Hurray fail!

Is magic item rarity going to affect pre-essentials magic items? Is magic item rarity going to affect all items in the CB or will we have a choice not to use item rarity in the CB? I don't have DDI and won't see anything until my buddy comes over with a print out, so I'm kinda screwed on info. The way item dailies work in essentials has me a bit worried over what will happen to all the pre-essentials items.



All existing magic items will be given rarities. I personally expect the next errata to make my high speed connection cry at this point.
Wow, this is great.

Now maybe we can get some items that are really worth a damn (like the old Veterans Armour) again.

Essentials is just getting better and better.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
i didnt think id see an essentials preview i liked less than the warpriest but here we have it
Yup, Artificers are now broken - yay for more errata?

The prep time issue seems to be the biggest concern for me, and this has been a running concern about essentials.  A DM now has to balance an adventure between classes with and without daily powers (to few encounters makes the daily classes far more powerful than the at-will/encounter classes, while too many and the opposite becomes true) and will now have to deal with a more complicated parcel system as well (and dealing with loot has ALWAYS been a bear for me anyway.)  I know WotC won't lose any sleep over people prefering to buy their modules over making their own adventures, but making it harder for DM's to do their job is very, very bad for the game.  I can't stress enough how reliant their business model is on DM's wanting to DM, they should be paying more attention to that fact.


That was one of the main appeals of 4e for me (the other being the shift away from simulationism towards narrativism).  4e made DMing fun, and not in the least bit a chore.  I stepped away from 3.X because of the time investment required and how unfun it made the game.


4e is the first edition of D&D I've been willing to DM (I barely even played previous editions due to a strong dislike of many of its subsystems). It was designed around making DMing not a chore, and that made it simple to craft a narrative with its mechanics. But given the now-evident significant change in design philosophy, where they appear to have decided that "world flavor" is more important than things like "game balance"... well... adding "fix game balance" to the DM's job description is not a step in a positive direction, IMO. I guess this is how they intend to cut down on the need for them to release errata - "It's the DM's job now."

“If the computer or the game designer is having more fun than the player, you have made a terrible mistake.” -Sid Meier
just a quick note

the limit on daily uses was necessary because since you could craft any item you could also craft 20 copies of a daily power item and rotate between them encounter to encounter

since now you cannot make multiple copies of encounter/daily/at-will item this rule is not necessary anymore

the "go collect rare items" is an option to the DM that want to let make/buy the uncommon/rare items with optional rules and still keep control of what is reachable by players

de facto

the change is very minor and quite interesting (since you can have back staple items like the staff of wizardry if you really want it)
 
IMAGE(http://badge.facebook.com/badge/1105914135.325.1281987627.png)
I must say I'm going to like this magic item rarity system. Of course there are some problems with existing class rules as mentioned in the previous posts, but the idea king of appeal to me and I'm eager to see the magic items chart distribution.
 
A little guidance to distribute items to players is always welcome. I often found myself comparing magic items when preparing adventures and trying to sort them out according to their powers so that all players are balanced in the possession of magic items. Now I'll have these rarity charts to use, it will be faster.

The rare items will make perfect themes for adventures and add another roleplaying flavor to the game. As a DM I'll use the that way anyway. They won't be items my players will find in a "common" treasure but the discovery of such items will become an adventure by itself (much like artifact finding, though probably shorter).

Initial Thought: Less pressure on balance for WotC, more prep-time needed by DM's.  This does not seem like a win

How do you know they haven't included simple tables of common/uncommon/rare items? Like I'm not seeing how this adds significantly to my game time at all over what the current system is like anyway. Like simple tables will make this distinctly easy for me to use.

Of course I will be right with you in being completely unimpressed if they DON'T have said tables and charts, which should make this trivially easy to implement.
I have to say I like this idea of item rarity and also the abolition of daily item uses. More responsibility for the DM in terms of not giving out too many daily items, true enough, but the DM has always been responsible for ultimate campaign balance anyways. I'm also looking forward to seeing the random treasure rules too, though - so perhaps I'm in the minority! But I say bring it on!! Smile
just a quick note

the limit on daily uses was necessary because since you could craft any item you could also craft 20 copies of a daily power item and rotate between them encounter to encounter

 


no, they could just say no more than one item of the same type per person and solved it without changing everything


heres what i dont like


so i can buy common items and these will be the ones we see the most. a +2 to skills? so its about as magic as being from the mountains? looks like those new skill dcs on the new dm screen will be changed AGAIN. i can already smell the 'my group can see evey trap ever made' threads. so to fix magic you have to screw up skills? makes a LOT of sense

its also a fun thought to know i will get one powerful magic item....every ten levelsYell. makes me feel soooo much better to know i can sell for full price. without being able to find anything at the stores or make myself i guess ill buy a +2 to streetwise and 10,000 climbers kits please Yell.

'maybe you will like your item at paragon better, just use that for another 8 levels, it defines your character'

of course despite portending to be a preview it doesnt fully answer the biggest question anyone had in the first place. can we freaking make uncommon items to get around these awful rules?

"Like rare items, uncommon items must be found. They are seldomly up for sale and few people know how to craft them." are we the few people? or must we find them? why wouldnt you answer that in this article when its the number one question players have asked?

"A little less than half of the items you find on adventures are uncommon." so just less magic and more bonuses to skills? what an adventure. i can barely wait

it helps explain the new feats they are talking about, they are replacements for defensive magic items apparantly. no there is no belt of vim you have to take a feat

dude from masterplan if u are reading please leave the parcel system in


ps i guess new published adventures read like this, you have finished infiltrating the orc stronghold, somehow you survived. as a reward you get a +2 to insight. Pc's insight "this sucks"
Sounds like an interesting system... I'm kinda looking forward to the final version of Essentials, to see what I can scrounge from it Smile
Epic Dungeon Master

Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen!

Your Kingdom awaits!
Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
Items with properties can not be abused by buying or crafting multiple copies. Items with properties are generally the items players need to make certain builds work, and are the ones for which players feel the most entitlement. Making them common allows players to get their entitlement fix without being able to abuse the system. If you want your iron armbands of power, you can buy or create them with no problem.

Items with daily powers are not only exploitable through obtaining multiple copies, they are also the ones that are most often looked over and seen as weak. Making them uncommon negates the abuse potential, while removing the daily item power limit and increasing their sell cost makes them look more attractive to players.

Rare items are a bit more powerful than other items at the same level. However, you only get one per tier; and due to leveling, you will probably only be wearing one at any given time. If artifacts work, then I fail to see how this would not. These items will also have rich histories that ground them firmly in the game world and add prestige to the characters who wield them.

Does this make the DM's job any harder? I doubt it. Since common items will now be the purview of the player, the DM will no longer have to worry about those. Since money won't be spent on buying or crafting uncommon items, players will be free to spend their gold on acquiring the common items they wish to use for their character. And any uncommon or rare items they outgrow or don't want to use can be sold for more money than normal so that common items will be easier to buy than before. DMs will decide what uncommon and rare items are handed out, and are free to use the parcel system or one of the new variant item distribution methods (such as random generation) in doing so.

The way it looks to me, this is going to allow players to get the items they want the most without a hassle from DMs who are worried about item abuse, lessen the workload of DMs and allow them to feel more in control of their campaign, and give magic items that feel of wonder and excitement that has been missing for a long time now. That's my knee-jerk reaction anyway.
Without seeing the list I cannot comment.

But as I don't use wish lists anyway, this seems to be a non-issue for me.
To see my campaign world visit http://dnd.chrisnye.net My music -> www.myspace.com/Incarna My music videos -> www.youtube.com/Auticusx
To all those posters who do not like the new system, did you not read the 2nd paragraph of the article?

One of the consistent pieces of feedback we’ve received about the Dungeons & Dragons game concerns magic items. Many players and DMs have told us that while plenty of the items in the game are treasures worth risking a character’s life and limb for, the most powerful items felt a little flat. On the other hand, we’ve also seen in playtests that magic items can sometimes crowd out a character’s other options. Particularly at high levels, a character’s boots, armor, gloves, belt, weapon, and other gear add quite a few powers and abilities that might overshadow other character aspects.



I bolded some of the relevant words/phrases.  The change is based on feedback and playtests since 4e came out.  I personally do not have an opinion on the new system.   I don't really know if I will like it or not.  But I will try it out once Character Builder is updated to the new rules.

You have the free will to agree or disagree.
You have the ability to act freely on the above choice regardless of the consequences.


Items with daily powers are not only exploitable through obtaining multiple copies, they are also the ones that are most often looked over and seen as weak.



again, all you need to say is one item of one type per player or no multiple copies, you dont need to blow the whole thing up to make a rule that 99% of dms already followed

and if you are so into the dm controlling it and you dislike your so-called 'entitled' players, does it matter to you if they think the daily item is weak? not according to your logic. so which is it? do you care about what items you give players but...simultaneously do not? you confuse me



"Since money won't be spent on buying or crafting uncommon items, players will be free to spend their gold on acquiring the common items they wish to use for their character."


oh whee +2 to skills and all the ale i can drink

"The way it looks to me, this is going to allow players to get the items they want the most without a hassle from DMs who are worried about item abuse,"


actually its the exact opposite of the way it looks to you. the exact opposite. players cannot get the items they want, unless those items are common which they are telling you are weak items. a player cannot get the items they want out of phb, adv vault 1 or 2, or any other previously published items, as they are all uncommon, and hardly ever in stores (read:never). waiting to see if they can be made but not holding breath.

terrible terrible update, just make a one sentence rule for the abuse, thats it


another section of the phb down, how many more to go?

Eh, no dog in this fight. I let my players pick new items if they like when they level up, so I don't pay much attention to items. System seems workable and makes "fluff sense," so whatever.
I think its a good change, I like it. This way, the players will have to choose between some items instead of picking only the best ones.

Also it will make my job as DM easier, because now players can't simply create what they want as treasure.

And no "I wanne have my frostcheese" is not gonna do it as a defining point of any character (not that my players ever had this combo).
I have heard people say this that magic items shouldn't be in the player's handbook.  I really don't get this.

They make it seem like if the magic items where in the DM's guide the players would know nothing about magic items.  The player's don't look in the DM guide?

My god people get over it.  Players have been looking at magic items since the game has been out and having it in the DM's guide doesn't stop them.

As for raritey I don't know.  I am very uneasy about the essitenals but want to wait till they come out to truley judge it
its both sad and funny to me to see these wormy dms come out and say what every one of their players already knows, that they dont want the player to have options or to ever get what they want when it comes to magic items. were these same dms overrun with players making duplicate items? after all thats their excuse? no they were not, because their current attitude betrays the fact that they would never allow it in the first place


30 years later, the dms still havent changedUndecided

way to go


actually its the exact opposite of the way it looks to you. the exact opposite. players cannot get the items they want, unless those items are common which they are telling you are weak items. a player cannot get the items they want out of phb, adv vault 1 or 2, or any other previously published items, as they are all uncommon, and hardly ever in stores (read:never). waiting to see if they can be made but not holding breath.




Uncommon+ magic items are found in the ever present treasure parcels. Kill things, take their loot. If your DM likes to give out gold/residuum instead of items, then he can give out gold/residuum and now reagents for uncommon+ items.
"At a certain point, one simply has to accept that some folks will see what they want to see..." Dragon 387
again, all you need to say is one item of one type per player or no multiple copies, you dont need to blow the whole thing up to make a rule that 99% of dms already followed

Except this does nothing about the other problems with the magic item system. I'm sure dual-wielding rangers and fighters, dual-implement spell-casters and every character who wants magic rings might have a problem with your solutions.

and if you are so into the dm controlling it and you dislike your so-called 'entitled' players, does it matter to you if they think the daily item is weak? not according to your logic. so which is it? do you care about what items you give players but...simultaneously do not? you confuse me

You're missing the point. The players get to have the items they feel entitled to, while the DMs get to control the items that can be abused. It's a win/win situation that breeds trust between the player and DM. The player doesn't feel like the DM is cheating him out of what he wants, and the DM doesn't have to worry that the player will intentionally abuse the system and his generosity.

oh whee +2 to skills and all the ale i can drink

Or, you know, iron armbands of power. It's just one of the single best and most used items in the game. Where did you get that all uncommon items are going to just boost skills and nothing else? It was an example.

actually its the exact opposite of the way it looks to you. the exact opposite. players cannot get the items they want, unless those items are common which they are telling you are weak items. a player cannot get the items they want out of phb, adv vault 1 or 2, or any other previously published items, as they are all uncommon, and hardly ever in stores (read:never). waiting to see if they can be made but not holding breath.

Every single thing about this paragraph makes me think you did not actually read the article.

terrible terrible update, just make a one sentence rule for the abuse, thats it

This is why you are not a game designer. You can't just assume a rule will work without testing it and thinking about all of the other problems that go along with it.

another section of the phb down, how many more to go?

A section that was made better. Awesome.

"The best part of this system lies in its flexibility. A Dungeon Master can easily shift the tone of a campaign by adjusting how rarity functions. In a high magic campaign, the characters can buy and sell any items. In a world where magic is rare and wondrous, the characters can’t buy anything, while the only items they uncover are rare ones. Even then, a character can expect to find only two or three such items over the course of an entire campaign."

Even more awesome. We get a default system that fixes the old problems, with flexibility and options that allow groups to use it however they want.


actually its the exact opposite of the way it looks to you. the exact opposite. players cannot get the items they want, unless those items are common which they are telling you are weak items. a player cannot get the items they want out of phb, adv vault 1 or 2, or any other previously published items, as they are all uncommon, and hardly ever in stores (read:never). waiting to see if they can be made but not holding breath.




Uncommon+ magic items are found in the ever present treasure parcels. Kill things, take their loot. If your DM likes to give out gold/residuum instead of items, then he can give out gold/residuum and now reagents for uncommon+ items.




ummm NO. it is not specified that uncommon items can be crafted by pcs, and it is suggested that they cannot (they must be found-read it....few can create...is that pcs or no? whatever the answer, this preview would have been the time to tell us so we dont have to speculate for a month). you could craft +2 skill trinkets. the parcel system is getting changed as well (again would have been a good time to reveal more about the random loot system but nothing) so the magic items you will get will most likely be common with the occaisional 10 level item that last a tier (heres hoping you love it) that defines your character (dms discretion of course, much to powerful for a pc to determine their pc). they SAY that uncommon items will be less than half of the items given out in the article, in other words less frequent, cut in half.

You said, players cannot get the items they want. I illustrate how they will. Now you say pcs cannot craft uncommon items. Make up your mind about what you're arguing.
"At a certain point, one simply has to accept that some folks will see what they want to see..." Dragon 387
so if i understand we have basic 2 tiers of items:

A) stuff you can make that is generally useful.
B) stuff you can't necessarily make but is awesome.

and a 3rd tier which is effectively:

C) powerful GM/plot-based items that don't follow the power curve.

shrug. my position is the same it was when i first heard of it: wait & see.
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules 4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers

"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
You said, players cannot get the items they want. I illustrate how they will. Now you say pcs cannot craft uncommon items. Make up your mind about what you're arguing.



will you just read the article


"Like rare items, uncommon items must be found. They are seldomly up for sale and few people know how to craft them."


is this clear as to whether or not you can or cannot make uncommon items?
D) Artifacts

worth noting for completeness.  
"At a certain point, one simply has to accept that some folks will see what they want to see..." Dragon 387

ps gazra loves it? BIG SUPRISE, you love every single part of essentials and never have even one slight criticism so honestly man, save the time and dont post, if a change to the game happens we know in advance that you love it, it doesnt matter what it is


Considering that you post your dislike of every new bit of information about Essentials, this last bit of your post could be just as easily be aimed at yourself. So how about we stick to the topic of DnD and relax on the personal attacks.  




would be a good point if it was true, as i have already said there are things i like, so find another argument that has a basis in reality