Legends & Lore: Magic Items in D&D Next

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I can't believe they stole soulbound items from WoW!!1!

Just kidding.  Seriously, though, this makes for good hearing.  I can already see my first house rule on the subject: limit one attunement per character (to make them more special).

The metagame is not the game.

I was real hoping they were going to ditch the +X for magic items. 

Attunement seems interesting, but couple with weapons/armor getting +X it seems like its just going to limit the number of interesting items to one per character since a +X weapon and a +X armor is going to feel pretty mandatory even if the math doesn't require it. 

Big Model: Creative Agenda
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? join the Old Guard of 4th Edition
Reality Refracted: Social Contracts

My blog of random stuff 

Dreaming the Impossible Dream
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl

"It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the publick to be the most anxious for its welfare." - Edmund Burke
Girdle of Giant Strength. Wow...and +3 weapon choices. And Gauntlets of Ogre Power.

Good thing magic items aren't necessary and math is bounded. That way, a 10 Str Fighter with a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength and a +3 attuned weapon can adventure with a 16 Str Human with a +1 weapon.

Really, what's a +8 to hit/damage edge really worth?
Yeah, the attunement thing sorta caught me off guard.  But dang there is going to be a gear war.  Freaking parties killing each other for a Spellguard Shield!

Huxxah!

"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey

Girdle of Giant Strength. Wow...and +3 weapon choices. And Gauntlets of Ogre Power.

Good thing magic items aren't necessary and math is bounded. That way, a 10 Str Fighter with a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength and a +3 attuned weapon can adventure with a 16 Str Human with a +1 weapon.

Really, what's a +8 to hit/damage edge really worth?


Yes, because the rest of the party will be okay with that and the other fighter won't insist on swapping weapons. It's a self-correcting problem.

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

Girdle of Giant Strength. Wow...and +3 weapon choices. And Gauntlets of Ogre Power.

Good thing magic items aren't necessary and math is bounded. That way, a 10 Str Fighter with a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength and a +3 attuned weapon can adventure with a 16 Str Human with a +1 weapon.

Really, what's a +8 to hit/damage edge really worth?



Don't worry, they updated the monsters document but the monsters are all still +2 or so to attack, so they can't hit you anyway on anything but a 20 if you care about your defenses. (And if you really care about defenses they're rolling that d20 with disadvantage and you've still got parry available.)
I can't believe they stole soulbound items from WoW!!1!

Just kidding.  Seriously, though, this makes for good hearing.  I can already see my first house rule on the subject: limit one attunement per character (to make them more special).


There's a rule already there. 3 per character (or 1+Cha mod per character with a testable rule). Nice limit. No more Christmas trees.

It's a good solution to the "swapable" item problem, where the party passes around a ring so they all get the resting benefit. 

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

Oh yay, I get to pick through another packet...Smile

Edit: Also what level are the magic items in the article?

Some of them seem to be low level and almost useless, and others seem to be really powerful...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Girdle of Giant Strength. Wow...and +3 weapon choices. And Gauntlets of Ogre Power.

Good thing magic items aren't necessary and math is bounded. That way, a 10 Str Fighter with a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength and a +3 attuned weapon can adventure with a 16 Str Human with a +1 weapon.

Really, what's a +8 to hit/damage edge really worth?


Yes, because the rest of the party will be okay with that and the other fighter won't insist on swapping weapons. It's a self-correcting problem.



No, it isn't. One of the points that R&D has been making is that the math is bounded and that magic items are not essential to function. The ability to add a +7 to hit/damage(at a minimum) via 2 magic items is crazy good - almost better than any option in 4e. The problem isn't that the one fighter will want to swap - the problem is that every single character who does any kind of physical attacks will want one, even if they get free class options to not need Strength to make attacks. 

If I'm a halfling Rogue with a 20 Dex, I shouldn't want a Str-based belt to up my to-hit chance/damage. But having a 23 Str is a +1 to hit/damage in a world where there aren't supposed to be a lot of bonuses to hit. And now, having sacrificed Str as a good little Rogue, it even hands out a +7 to Str-based Saving throws where the Fighter has no equivalent way to get a +7 to Dex-based Saving Throws.

R&D really needs to either hire a mathematician who understands game balance or allow the mathematician some say. This is a mistake that both 3e and 4e recognized as being a problem in actual games, which is why both of them made different fixes to prevent it - 3e had it add to the base stat, 4e removed them entirely.
I can't believe they stole soulbound items from WoW!!1!

Just kidding.  Seriously, though, this makes for good hearing.  I can already see my first house rule on the subject: limit one attunement per character (to make them more special).


There's a rule already there. 3 per character (or 1+Cha mod per character with a testable rule). Nice limit. No more Christmas trees.

It's a good solution to the "swapable" item problem, where the party passes around a ring so they all get the resting benefit. 



No, Christmas trees are still allowed. You're only allowed to attune so many items. You can still use as many non-attuned items as you like. And most items don't grant a benefit for attunement.
Edit: Also what level are the magic items in the article?

Some of them seem to be low level and almost useless, and others seem to be really powerful...

I don't think that magic items have levels.  They exist, and having one is better than not having one.  A +1 sword is as useful to a level 3 character as it would be to a level 13 character.

The metagame is not the game.

They didn't fix the worthless Rage mechanic of monsters which is akin to taking a -8 on damage to gain a +5 on damage...

I like bruiser, but it should have been done like this:

Bruiser : If the 's melee attack misses by 5 or less, the target of the attack takes damage.

Also they encrypted the PDFs again so copy and pasting gives you garbled characters...

Keen Senses is broke like the Rogue's Skill Mastery. The Minotaur can't get below 18 on a check to detect a hidden creature.

The Minotaur's rage is almost useful. It would be quicker just to give them +2 to damage without all the disadvantage and +10 to obfuscate the math.

Relentless makes Orcs actually different than other humanoid monsters.

Unfortunately there isn't anything that really differentiates the Orc and the Orog except the bag of hit points meme.

The Troll's Regeneration is long and confusing. It needs to be a single sentence.

The Wight creates zombies? What?

Multiattack needs to be nerfed, its way to powerful. Probably something along the lines of making their attacks at +0 instead of whatever they normally have.

Zombie fortitude potentially makes them unstoppable. It needs to have a cumulative modifier on each roll...

More to come in appropriate threads...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I don't think that magic items have levels.  They exist, and having one is better than not having one.  A +1 sword is as useful to a level 3 character as it would be to a level 13 character.


Exactly.  Not every character is going to find an artifact sword, artifact belt, and so on in a campaign.  Not every Paladin is going to be bestowed a Holy Avenger.  Not every Fighter is getting a Belt of Storm Giant Strength.  More likely, your Fighters might end up with Gauntlets of Ogre Power, and a +1 weapon.  He might even luck out and find a belt of Hill Giant Strength.

It's really up to the DM to make sure the numbers don't bloat too much.

I'm concerned about the belts of giant strength, though, especially on the upper end.  I know I don't have to give them out, but they are a cool idea.  And an artifact would be cool to give to a character just because it's an artifact.  Still, a 29 Strength means you're pretty much just rolling to avoid a 1, and what's the fun in that?

I'd rather have the belt give a bonus to carrying capacity, strength saving throws and Strength checks (pretty much everything BUT attack and damage), and have attack and damage bonuses a function of weapons.  Giving someone a +9 strength bonus on attacks (which is then added to with weapon enhancements, class bonuses, and so on) just seems to go against the very purpose of the Bounded Accuracy system, even as an artifact.
@lokiare, they didn't do much with the monsters. Expect alot more revision.

Also, disavantage doesn't stack. So if the fighter is going to block the orc anyways, might as well swing hard.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

The flavor of the items is great and i like the philosophy behind magic items in D&D Next. I am not so much for attunement though and prefer this limit to be handled by the DMs instead. 

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Wow, math seems to not be within anyone invovled's skill set.  Sure the baseline might assume no magic items, but then many of the items presented will skew the power curve beyond any sense of balance . . . let alone more than one item.
@lokiare, they didn't do much with the monsters. Expect alot more revision. Also, disavantage doesn't stack. So if the fighter is going to block the orc anyways, might as well swing hard.



Yeah, in some corner cases it might be worth using, but the majority of the time short of the higher level monsters who get a +8 or better on damage, its less than worthless, its actually detrimental...Smile

The articles hints that they did a lot with monsters and they like what they did, but short of fixing some xp values (I haven't calculated them out yet, so that's a guess) I'm not seeing much worth looking at with monsters especially since they didn't fix many glaring errors that would be 5 minute workday fixes...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Girdle of Giant Strength. Wow...and +3 weapon choices. And Gauntlets of Ogre Power.

Good thing magic items aren't necessary and math is bounded. That way, a 10 Str Fighter with a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength and a +3 attuned weapon can adventure with a 16 Str Human with a +1 weapon.

Really, what's a +8 to hit/damage edge really worth?


Yes, because the rest of the party will be okay with that and the other fighter won't insist on swapping weapons. It's a self-correcting problem.



No, it isn't. One of the points that R&D has been making is that the math is bounded and that magic items are not essential to function. The ability to add a +7 to hit/damage(at a minimum) via 2 magic items is crazy good - almost better than any option in 4e. The problem isn't that the one fighter will want to swap - the problem is that every single character who does any kind of physical attacks will want one, even if they get free class options to not need Strength to make attacks. 

If I'm a halfling Rogue with a 20 Dex, I shouldn't want a Str-based belt to up my to-hit chance/damage. But having a 23 Str is a +1 to hit/damage in a world where there aren't supposed to be a lot of bonuses to hit. And now, having sacrificed Str as a good little Rogue, it even hands out a +7 to Str-based Saving throws where the Fighter has no equivalent way to get a +7 to Dex-based Saving Throws.

R&D really needs to either hire a mathematician who understands game balance or allow the mathematician some say. This is a mistake that both 3e and 4e recognized as being a problem in actual games, which is why both of them made different fixes to prevent it - 3e had it add to the base stat, 4e removed them entirely.


There aren't a lot of bonuses to hit, but there should be some.
Said items are a rarity which the DM has to choose to add to their game and might define that character. Suddenly, they're the dude with the strength of an ogre. That should be cool and mean something beyond an extra point of damage or some utility power that lets them lift objects once a day. It's meant to be this rare item you don't see until 5th level, possibly a third of the way through a campaign. It's meant to be special.

You can play without them, the game doesnt assume you have them. Which means with magic items the game becomes easier. The PCs can face more challenging threats. Fight monsters normally beyond their level. That's a fine balancing factor. 

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

The flavor of the items is great and i like the philosophy behind magic items in D&D Next. I am not so much for attunement though and prefer this limit to be handled by the DMs instead. 



I like attunement but it needs a slider bar where the DM can pick 1, 3, 5 on it, so it is customized for the campaign.

The magic items powers seem all over the place. I can see a bunch of nice items and a bunch of near useless items...Smile

I do like the idea of giving special effects instead of mechanical bonuses. They also need a nice long description for each item. Something like the Baldur's Gate I & II, and Ice Wind Dale I&II PC games did on their items...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Wow, math seems to not be within anyone's involved skill set.  Sure the baseline might assume no magic items, but then many of the items presented will skew the power curve beyond any sense of balance . . . let alone more than one item.



Yeah, its almost like they are compensating for Advantage's/Disadvantage's breaking of bounded accuracy (+25% hit chance and a subsequent +25% damage bonus because of it).

So now with the right combination of items you can get +40% attack and because of that +40% DPR...

They just need to drop the +'s off the weapons, or make a set of weapon that is only +'s and then all other items are no +'s, but have powers...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Girdle of Giant Strength. Wow...and +3 weapon choices. And Gauntlets of Ogre Power.

Good thing magic items aren't necessary and math is bounded. That way, a 10 Str Fighter with a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength and a +3 attuned weapon can adventure with a 16 Str Human with a +1 weapon.

Really, what's a +8 to hit/damage edge really worth?


Yes, because the rest of the party will be okay with that and the other fighter won't insist on swapping weapons. It's a self-correcting problem.



No, it isn't. One of the points that R&D has been making is that the math is bounded and that magic items are not essential to function. The ability to add a +7 to hit/damage(at a minimum) via 2 magic items is crazy good - almost better than any option in 4e. The problem isn't that the one fighter will want to swap - the problem is that every single character who does any kind of physical attacks will want one, even if they get free class options to not need Strength to make attacks. 

If I'm a halfling Rogue with a 20 Dex, I shouldn't want a Str-based belt to up my to-hit chance/damage. But having a 23 Str is a +1 to hit/damage in a world where there aren't supposed to be a lot of bonuses to hit. And now, having sacrificed Str as a good little Rogue, it even hands out a +7 to Str-based Saving throws where the Fighter has no equivalent way to get a +7 to Dex-based Saving Throws.

R&D really needs to either hire a mathematician who understands game balance or allow the mathematician some say. This is a mistake that both 3e and 4e recognized as being a problem in actual games, which is why both of them made different fixes to prevent it - 3e had it add to the base stat, 4e removed them entirely.


There aren't a lot of bonuses to hit, but there should be some.
Said items are a rarity which the DM has to choose to add to their game and might define that character. Suddenly, they're the dude with the strength of an ogre. That should be cool and mean something beyond an extra point of damage or some utility power that lets them lift objects once a day. It's meant to be this rare item you don't see until 5th level, possibly a third of the way through a campaign. It's meant to be special.



Then it needs to be special in a way that when one character gets it, everyone else has an item of similar power and usefulness that doesn't make everyone want to have that one item. It shouldn't diminish the choices of someone who spent all his resources to naturally get the strength of an ogre and who now feels like an idiot because the 8 Str Rogue is now just as strong as he is.
 
and so we going back to, this character is cool because the DM gave him X, Y & Z, instead of this character is cool because he is cool...more step backwards...
Then it needs to be special in a way that when one character gets it, everyone else has an item of similar power and usefulness that doesn't make everyone want to have that one item. It shouldn't diminish the choices of someone who spent all his resources to naturally get the strength of an ogre and who now feels like an idiot because the 8 Str Rogue is now just as strong as he is.


There is. 

It's called the Dungeon Master

You know, the living, breathing being that is running the game and handing out items and capable of independant thought and reasoning. Who can decided to hand out comparable items or other balancing factors. 

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

this is all just my opinion, but i really expected a lot better. i absolutely hate item rarity so much; i cannot believe they used it again. i also loathe the notion of using encounter difficulty to place items.

attunement is awful. was that in 3e or something? i hate it being tied to charisma.

also how can he say this

'Magic items—aside from simple items like potions—should make everyone at the table sit up and take notice.'

and then show this piece of crap as an example?

'Fimbric, the crap blade

Effect: Fimbric is a +1 longsword.

If commanded to find precious raw mineral ore, the blade makes a sound like ringing steel if such ore is within 100 feet.


The wielder gains the benefit of the feather fall spell up to three times per day. If the wielder falls from a height of 10 feet or more without commanding the sword to suppress this effect, the sword automatically activates the spell.


Fimbric will put you to sleep and upset you when you see that the next item the party finds is cool, but you got Fimbric.'


thats 5es version of a common item i guess. oh the wonder! oh the table takes notice alright. they take notice that fimbric sucks.


i also just have to kind of laugh a bit at quotes like this:


"Even more importantly, we can afford to design more items that give flavorful benefits or interesting uses, comfortable in knowing that the DM isn't keeping the characters from hitting their expected power level. The characters don't need to march through a proscribed arsenal to keep up with monsters and NPCs."


thats true, they dont have to keep up at all. give a reasonably well-built pc a +2 item and they can hit every monster in the game with ease. you took it from one extreme and swung it back to another. this is where you have to take it back to the old days and just go ahead and immediately houserule every pc sight unseen: your items from your other games dont transfer to my table. its unfortunate, but as a +2 item can completely throw the balance just completely out of whack, it is necessary. 


also they are talking out of both sides of their mouth, bc if that was true, then they wouldnt give suggested pc levels for items. what the hell IS this table, if not 'their expected power level'?


Rarity   Character Level  Item Value
Common*   2+                   50–100 gp
Uncommon   3+                100–500 gp
Rare            5+                     500–2,000 gp
Very rare      7+                    2,000–5,000 gp
Legendary     9+                5,000–10,000 gp
Artifact        11+                    10,000+ gp


and if that was too nuanced for you,  they just flat out say it:


Character Level: The recommended level a character should be to find or use the magic item.


moving on, i am not impressed at all with the fluff of the items. i was expecting more from it, and more OF it, especially given they have great writers like bob schwalb on the team. these feel uninspired. im not getting that old school 'wow' feeling. id honestly rather they just copy the classic items line for line from the 1e dmg than this.


finally, i think this


'Whenever possible, we'll err on the side of taking the time to design new, unique items for adventures, rather than give out treasure that you could simply pluck from another source.'


is another bad idea imo, and if this philosophy stands, there will be item bloat, its guaranteed. one or two here or there is one thing, but saying that whenever possible you will make a unique item is messy and honestly a pain in the ass for dms


edit-it takes a lot to make someone who loves random tables as much as i do dislike them, but i am not feeling the item tables


in conclusion, i am very disappointed with this draft on magic items. i really wanted and expected them to go more old school with it. i wish they had stressed  story and flavor as the primary driver of item placement, but i would much rather stick with monsters with treasure types then start this new quasi-parcel system. at first glance, i think its hideous.


i will reread it and see if my mind changes but thats my opinion of 5e magic items. i hope that others agree on this and we can make them change it as soon as possible


RE: Monsters Traits

I like the Formless trait for Ooze, clean and simple. I also think Blood Frenzy depict well the voracious nature of Gnolls, and the new Bushwhacker fit Goblin well enought i think. I think its good that Mob Tactic now cap at +5 maximum. The Orc Relentless trait is pretty neat too. 

But my favorite trait is Bruiser. Its like Hammer Rhythmn but for monsters!

Oh and Zombie Fortitude is scary!  Now i want to run a Zombie appocalypse encounter :P

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

@frothsof
You think that feather fall, no action or spell required, is a bad item, for the fighter to have?

Obviously, we play in very different games.

The metagame is not the game.

Then it needs to be special in a way that when one character gets it, everyone else has an item of similar power and usefulness that doesn't make everyone want to have that one item. It shouldn't diminish the choices of someone who spent all his resources to naturally get the strength of an ogre and who now feels like an idiot because the 8 Str Rogue is now just as strong as he is.


There is. 

It's called the Dungeon Master

You know, the living, breathing being that is running the game and handing out items and capable of independant thought and reasoning. Who can decided to hand out comparable items or other balancing factors. 



Right. If the Dungeon Master wants to break the math of the game, that should be his choice. It is his game. If R&D wants to claim that bounded math is important to them, then they need to make it that items obey that bounded math. If the best swords in the whole world give a +3 to hit/damage and that's important to them, then there shouldn't be an always on item that gives a strictly better bonus than that. 

Yet there is...
Haven't got to read the packet yet, but judging from the article and the posts here, it seems like with so many other things in DDN, they've come really close to the mark, then missed it altogether.

I'll have to give the packet a read and see for sure though. 
@frothsof
You think that feather fall, no action or spell required, is a bad item, for the fighter to have?

Obviously, we play in very different games.



oh it could def be useful at times, but its just reaaaaly situational; you can go levels without falling.
I will need to take a good look at the items.  They are at least flavourful, which was my biggest gripe about 4e but they do seem to have forgotten all the reasons why 4e tried to reign in some of the more useful items.  It's nice to see Elven chain is back with a vengeance and they they have placed sensible limits on bracers of defence and rings of protection.

The strength ratings of the various giants bears no resemblance to the recent giant article and giving PCs such huge attack bonuses with no limitations is just bonkers.  Once again, if they halve the atack bonuses, they become more manageable but adding to damage, lifting, and hurling rocks would probably be enough for most players.  Limitations on the belt usage would be cool too - maybe making an endurance check with a penalty equal to your damage bonus to avoid being weakened if the belt is used for more rounds than your level?

Personally I don't think that any magical item should have more than +1 attack rolls but I don't have a problem if more powerful items increase damage and have special abilities.  I'm happy if +1 armour is the norm with +2 being very rare and +3 being artifact level.

Overall, a mixed bag but it looks rushed and I agree that they need someone to take a serious look at their maths.  The items will break their bounded syystem in a heartbeat and it doesn't take a simpleton with disadvantage on intelligence checks to recognise that...
Then it needs to be special in a way that when one character gets it, everyone else has an item of similar power and usefulness that doesn't make everyone want to have that one item. It shouldn't diminish the choices of someone who spent all his resources to naturally get the strength of an ogre and who now feels like an idiot because the 8 Str Rogue is now just as strong as he is.


There is. 

It's called the Dungeon Master

You know, the living, breathing being that is running the game and handing out items and capable of independant thought and reasoning. Who can decided to hand out comparable items or other balancing factors. 



Right. If the Dungeon Master wants to break the math of the game, that should be his choice. It is his game. If R&D wants to claim that bounded math is important to them, then they need to make it that items obey that bounded math. If the best swords in the whole world give a +3 to hit/damage and that's important to them, then there shouldn't be an always on item that gives a strictly better bonus than that. 

Yet there is...


Well there's the four options. 

1) Magic offers bonuses. And you're assumed to have magic. (Tried in 3e and 4e with mixed results.)
2) Magic offers bonuses. And you're not assumed to have magic. (The current 5e standard)
3) Magic does not offer bonuses. Either they're cosmetic or only useful out of combat. 
4) Magic does not exsit.

3) is a little "why bother" as magic doesn't do anything. And you can still have that by not awarding magic items excluding cosmetic or non-combat items. Likewise, you can also still have 4) by simply ignoring magical items. It's always easier to ignore content than have to make it up yourself. 

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

Well there's the four options. 

1) Magic offers bonuses. And you're assumed to have magic. (Tried in 3e and 4e with mixed results.)
2) Magic offers bonuses. And you're not assumed to have magic. (The current 5e standard)
3) Magic does not offer bonuses. Either they're cosmetic or only useful out of combat. 
4) Magic does not exsit.

3) is a little "why bother" as magic doesn't do anything. And you can still have that by not awarding magic items excluding cosmetic or non-combat items. Likewise, you can also still have 4) by simply ignoring magical items. It's always easier to ignore content than have to make it up yourself. 



2) is definitely my preference but your definitions are vague.  I don't want items to have LARGE at-will bonuses to attack rolls without side effects.  I do want them to have bonuses.
I do have some points to make about magic items: 
1.Let the DMs who want make magic items as rare or as common as they like. Present a core is fine, but maybe talk about variants. I would like to be able to use a lot of magic items without breaking the system. If the magic items are too strong, such a game may have problems.
2. Don’t forget the optional rules: buy and sell (commerce), Pc and NPC magic item creation, item curses and etc., and guidance about how to run a game with a lot of magic items. Somethings are already there, others, not. Just don’t forget them.
3. I didn’t liked the Ability Score item thing. In the way that it is, a wizard would be stronger than the fighter, and maybe the fighter, the one who should use the magic item, has no reason to do it. Just bonuses would work, perhaps within a boundary. Also, why the Gauntlets of Ogre Power automatically makes you stronger than the actual ogre? Or the Belt of Giant Strength makes you stronger than the actual giants that they represent (like Belt of Giant Strength of a Hill Giant gives you more strength than the actual Hill Giant)? I would like to, or change to bonuses, or they give you the same ability score as their counterpart (like Gauntlets of Ogre Power give you an 18 in Strength).
4. And I would like to +1 magic items to be common.


I have some friction points with D&D Next: cosmology, balance, multiclass and magic item (if I remember another I tell later). The three first ones are good: cosmology will be a choice, balance it seems that they are taking it seriously (this includes multiclass), but the magic item part it is not completely solved.
 

No item should ever give more than a +1 to-hit or to a defense, and it should be impossible to stack bonuses to-hit or to a defense in any way from multiple magic items, including indirectly via bonuses to a stat.

There.  Problem solved.  Follow that simple rule and people can now freely include or exclude magic items from their campaigns without having to figure out balance implications.

If a DM wants to give out more powerful items, let them houserule it.  Don't make the entire magic item system a minefield for DMs who don't want to micromanage it; put the burden on the DMs who want to muck around with balance.
I don't see the issues some state.

Book provides item with massive bonus
Players are not assumed to have PCs who ever see such items.
DMs hand out item at their own whims with knowledge of how doing so will affect the game.

So no dumping states to have an item make up the difference as the DM is not assumed to ever give said item or anything similiar out.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

So... they're going with the model of good loot being largely impossible to buy, but mostly worthless when sold, huh?

"So, uh, we need another +3 Axe of Awesome, so our fighter can dual-wield them."
"Oh, you need to go on a quest to Giant's Mountain, and survive the red dragon's lair to find the one rumored to be in the hoard."
"This one must be worth a small fortune then!  We'll sell it and pay a wizard to make two +2 axes or something."
"Oh, I'll give you 35 gold and two chickens for it."
"Ted, I need you to take Paladin Steve outside for a few minutes."
@frothsof
You think that feather fall, no action or spell required, is a bad item, for the fighter to have?

Obviously, we play in very different games.



So you play in games where there are pit traps in every room, and chasms in every path? I wouldn't want to play in that game.

The problem with feather fall is that it is extremely situational. If comes up rarely if at all. You can go entire adventures without finding a use for it.

Same goes for the ore finding. Its even worse. When is the last time you had to find ore in an adventure? For me the answer is 'never'...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Then it needs to be special in a way that when one character gets it, everyone else has an item of similar power and usefulness that doesn't make everyone want to have that one item. It shouldn't diminish the choices of someone who spent all his resources to naturally get the strength of an ogre and who now feels like an idiot because the 8 Str Rogue is now just as strong as he is.


There is. 

It's called the Dungeon Master

You know, the living, breathing being that is running the game and handing out items and capable of independant thought and reasoning. Who can decided to hand out comparable items or other balancing factors. 



Right. If the Dungeon Master wants to break the math of the game, that should be his choice. It is his game. If R&D wants to claim that bounded math is important to them, then they need to make it that items obey that bounded math. If the best swords in the whole world give a +3 to hit/damage and that's important to them, then there shouldn't be an always on item that gives a strictly better bonus than that. 

Yet there is...



Don't worry, Magic Items will be RARE and PRECIOUS with so few that there's no market because no one has any.

Except all the monsters, an "average" encounter averages 1.31 magic items based on their random table. It averages this with the exact same distribution if you're at level 1 facing 2d6 orcs or at level 20 facing whatever monster they have at level 20.

I don't see the issues some state.

Book provides item with massive bonus
Players are not assumed to have PCs who ever see such items.
DMs hand out item at their own whims with knowledge of how doing so will affect the game.

So no dumping states to have an item make up the difference as the DM is not assumed to ever give said item or anything similiar out.



The problem is that NEW GMs will use the RANDOM tables provided which give a nice distribution under which a tough encounter should grant 2.28 items, including a 1% chance of an artifact.

The problem is that MODULE WRITERS and ADVENTURE WRITERS will assume that the default items are reasonable items to hand out, so if the GM doesn't have time to make his own adventures he'll be dealing with this crap.

The problem is that I PERSONALLY, when first running a new system, prefer to run it "out of the box" and not to houserule till AFTER I've tried it as the designers intended it to be played. Telling me that items are rare and then handing out bunches, telling me that accuracy is bounded and then handing out +7 or more to hit and damage, telling me that monsters are dangerous and then giving them pitiful little +4 or less to hit against high PC armor classes, all of that doesn't tell me "house-rule this" or "don't use those items", it tells me "the designers are incompetent and I should definitely run some other game".

But yeah, the GM can fix this broken mass of broken, the GM can fix anything after all. If the final product looks like this I'll fix it by running something else.
On the plus side I like the random flavor aspects...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
On the plus side I like the random flavor aspects...


Agreed. I found these to be interesting and exciting.

Just for fun I rolled characteristics for 3 items and could have come up with an entire compaign written around those items.

The Elemental(Fire)/Arcane/Hidden Message/Coveted item i randomly seemed reminiscent of The Ring of Power.
Other 2 were Elven/Prophecy/Illusion/Possesive ad Ancient Human/Symbol of Power/Traveler/Repellent.

The remainder of the PDF was disappointing.