Community

Allowing a player to regain a slot potentially allows them to gain a more powerful item than they currently have. For example, if they took a 3rd level item at 2nd level, but are now 5th, they can potentially use the slot recovered to get a 9th level item (or higher, if they are willing to not use it for a level). Another player who does not have to do this because their items didn't get changed, does -not- get this choice. Therefore the player with the item that got changed is in potentially a much better place. That's not fair to those who don't have to change their characters' items, especially since it is possible that with new books coming out, better choices might have come around since and -everyone- would like to replace an item to get them.

I like the idea of trading an item for an item of equal or lower level. This preserves the power level of the item/character and does not allow for trading "up". But it still is allowing a trade for some and not for others.

Second, if the item isn't illegal now, for example Bloodclaw, Leather Armor on a Leather Armor Proficient Avenger, etc ... why allow a trade-in at all? There are mechanisms to allow changes, re-training, selling of items, buying of news ones, etc. Sure, the item has changed, but let's face it, this is going to happen again and again and again. There's a perfectly reasonable set of rules within the current framework that allow PCs to change and move on. Let's use it.

Finally, I have to agree with something someone else said. Allowing trade-ins like this, no matter how it ends up being done, can be seen as a "benefit", while those players who are not taking the ... let's just call them "cheesy" and leave it at that ... cheesy items are not getting the chance to swap items in and out. Let's keep in mind that fair is fair ... but for all players, not just those with powers and items affected by rules changes.

There is a bit of a fairness issue with bought items as well. If you allow it to be sold at a full-value those players who are considering to sell it anyway because they have outgrown the item get a benefit out of it (although due to gold scaling not much).

In regards to bundles, what do you do with people who upgraded the item?

I really fear this is going to become a damned if you, damned if you don't type of things... Anyway, keep the suggestions and opinions comming.

Nov 18, 2009 -- 8:16AM, Madfox11 wrote:

There is a bit of a fairness issue with bought items as well. If you allow it to be sold at a full-value those players who are considering to sell it anyway because they have outgrown the item get a benefit out of it (although due to gold scaling not much).

In regards to bundles, what do you do with people who upgraded the item?

I really fear this is going to become a damned if you, damned if you don't type of things... Anyway, keep the suggestions and opinions comming.

Upgraded bundles ... the trading in for equal or lower option still allows them to get a similar power item. So there's no loss there. Some will argue, "but I could have used it to buy X if I had known." Except you never do know. Things can change due to updates, new books, or new rulings.

Nov 17, 2009 -- 3:31PM, Crodocile wrote:

Transfer Enchantment will do it for about 200gp.  My double sword rogue is also in need of major changes now. Rapier, bastard sword, or spiked chain... I have no idea.  Plus I need to re-convert my miniature. After he hits the next level, I think I'm just going to set him aside until Martial Power 2 comes out, in case there's a class feature worth swapping out for, because he's in need of a major overhaul.

Can people with nerfed bloodclaws sell them for full value like people with nerfed veteran's armor did?

It can be a lot less than 200gp actually.  According to the CCG:
"If a non-player character (NPC) is available and has the resources (determined by the DM and/or the adventure) to cast a ritual for the group or an individual within the group, the group (or that individual character) pays the cost of the ritual casting. This cost is equal to the component cost plus 20%."

I believe Transfer Enchantment costs 25gp, so that plus 20% is 30gp to move an enchantment from one weapon to another or one armor to another.  This of course assumes that an NPC is available to cast it, but I know that as a DM I personally will make sure that such an NPC is available in cases where characters have been impacted by rules changes, such as some Avengers wanting to migrate their enchanted leather armor to enchanted cloth. 

Some ideas:

1. Strictly Illegal Features, Feats, Powers
Here, it seems the player should correct the choice for free. Simply choose another available option. An example would be Reaper's Strike on a race other than Shadar Kai.

2. Not Illegal but Changed and Retrainable, Feats, Powers
The player must abide by the choice, using the Retrain option as normal when they next level. Because leveling takes place so quickly in LFR, this is probably fine for most cases. At worst you have 3 adventures in a non-ideal state.

3. Not Illegal but Changed and Not Retrainable, Such as Class Features
Similar to previous cases (Martial Power and Battlerager, the PC should gain the ability to change for free. Should this count as using their once per PC ability to change a feature?

4. Magic Item, Purchased
Every PC should know if a magic item was a bundle or purchase, since that is part of the tracking forms. For purchased items, they should be able to get the cash back. However, arguably there is an effect where the item probably gave some utility and they would be selling it at 20% in some time, or paying to upgrade. Thus, they gain a benefit. Arguably, it may be fair to allow cash back, but perhaps something like 100%-10% for each adventure played since the purchase, up to a minimum of 20% back. It depends on how math heavy we want to be. A flat 75% seems fair to me, though it probably seems less fair to the person that bought an item last mod.

5. Magic Item, Bundle Pick
Every PC should know if a magic item was a bundle or purchase, since that is part of the tracking forms. So, for bundle picks, here the player wins if they just free up a slot. Awarding that would probably encourage taking really broken items, such as Veteran's Armor, for a huge benefit pre and post the likely nerf. So, what might be fair is to allow the bundle to be freed if it was within 4 adventures on the log sheet. If the item was picked more than 4 adventures ago, then the slot is filled, but you gain a one-time benefit of selling the item at 50%. This helps alleviate the pain and seems fair to me. Edit: Thinking further, you could also allow a one-time weapon type change for magic item bundles. If the affected magic item was a weapon and that weapon was changed, you can gain a one-time free swap of the magic item to a different allowed weapon. Same thing for armor, as was just pointed out.

Thoughts? Stuff I missed?