|
3 years ago ::
Dec 14, 2009 - 10:06AM
#361
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2005
|
I had suggested that they should allow someone with a +x weapon to convert it to a generic +x magic weapon, a +x armor to a +x magic armor, and/or +x neck slot with a +x amulet of protection. That way, you can convert item types (ie, leather to cloth armor) if the new type you want isn't a valid type for the enchantment you had. It also puts you in a position to pay for an item upgrade from +x magic to +x whatever without having to sell the old item at 20%.
Both ideas sounds fine to me in principle (assuming we need/want a generic rule at all), but the question is why you would it be limited to erratas? Sounds overly complicated imo.
Maybe I want to exchange an item even if it isn't affected by errata?
Gomez
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 14, 2009 - 10:11AM
#362
|
- Senior Volunteer Community Lead
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
Maybe I want to exchange an item even if it isn't affected by errata?
Different people have different thresholds on what they accept. Some people don't want any changes allowed. Others are fine with any level of change.
Personally, I'll admit, I'm a total carebear* and I'd be fine if we let anyone at any time convert their +X of Foo into a generic +X. I'm actually surprised you can't do that as part of the enchant magic item ritual.
But, in terms of allowability, I'm more firmly in favor of ensuring that those impacted by errata have a method to adapt and repair, and less worried about people unaffected by errata. One is an exterior event, the other is whim. If we can do both? Sure, good with me. I'm pretty sure I've got a couple of retired weapons - +2 vicious and all that - that I'd cheerfully change into +2 distance javelins 
* As a DM, I actually have a simple formula. Given two choices, in which is the table having more fun? That choice wins. Usually, that means being pretty permissive around this kind of thing.
Keith Richmond
Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 15, 2009 - 10:48AM
#363
|
Date Joined:
Nov 23, 2003
|
So has anyone heard anything definite on if any Paragon Paths are being errated?
Battle Engineer got hit with the nerfbat today.
"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 15, 2009 - 10:50AM
#364
|
Date Joined:
May 29, 2004
|
So has anyone heard anything definite on if any Paragon Paths are being errated?
Battle Engineer got hit with the nerfbat today.
As a player with a 15th level Battle Engineer, I'd say we got hit with the balance bat. The first time I looked at Fleeting Dweomer, I thought it was absurd as an encounter power.
John du Bois
Living Forgotten Realms Writing Director, Netheril story area
Follow me on The Twitter: @JohnduBois
Follow my presence on The Intertubes: johncdubois.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 15, 2009 - 11:28AM
#365
|
Date Joined:
Nov 23, 2003
|
As a player with a 15th level Battle Engineer, I'd say we got hit with the balance bat.
I stand by my comments in the other thread (Fleeting Dweomer... Overpowered? Meant to be?") (which can be summarized as "Pitfighter? Son of Mercy? Moon Stalker? Class features hidden as powers has also been done in several places before...")
At any rate, that change is signficant enough that some may no longer want to play their paragon level character, and is thus relevant to this thread.
"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 15, 2009 - 12:18PM
#366
|
Date Joined:
Oct 20, 2008
|
Another errata update, and still no word on how to handle stuff that massively changed? (I'm looking at the new Healer's Sash which is essentially a new item that serves a completely different intent) I'm a little surprised, given that WotC/RPGA was responsive to Veteran's Armor. Not sure why they're hiding their head in the sand now. Given ChrisT's laid-back casual approach to rules he created (see [1] and [2]), I'm begining to think his silence is essentially "don't tell me, I won't ask" on people making swaps.
|
|
|
