|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 4:02AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2006
|
Just let the DM fix it is not a cop out if this is an area that is intended specifically for the DM to adjust. This is such an area.
The DM is supposed to be in charge of handing out magic items in his or her game, among many other things. What the DM shouldn't have to worry about is whether or not every item he gives out is going to break the game because WotC did a poor job balancing the items that they published in their book. Making sure that the various options in the game are balanced and work well together is WotC's job, not the DM's. Our job as playtesters is to help WotC get it right.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 4:42AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
Maybe there should be a message written in big caps:
VERY RARE OR BETTER ITEMS WARP THE GAME MATH IN UNEXPECTED WAYS. USE WITH CAUTION.
Then make all the problematic items very rare, legendary, or artifact.
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!
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 6:12AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Just let the DM fix it is not a cop out if this is an area that is intended specifically for the DM to adjust. This is such an area.
If the stuff being presented was the final published work, I'd be inclined to agree. It's not a finished product though; the purpose of the playtest feedback is to identify areas that could be adjusted before the DM needs to add their layer of adjustments on the outside of it. What you're saying about the section being open to DM adjustment from the outset is a valid point that should inform our feedback; perfect balance is not the objective. But there is a balance to be reached here, even if it's intended to be tweaked. I still submit that in the context of a playtest an assumption that the DM will fix it is probably counterproductive.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 6:26AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2002
|
Gaurdian is far more broadly applicable than any other Minor properties, it's obviously of a higher order. It's like putting fireball as a first level spell next to burning hands.
As for the ethereal full plate, it seems like you're a victim of poor choices in descriptive text. While one would imagine that such light armor would offer benefits along those lines the only ability provided by the armor is the ethereal state. Despite it's description it has the same states as normal plate armor.
It is the problem with the difference between fluff(y cotton) text and mechanical text. Armor that is as light as cotton must have a mechanical benefit in weight. That the benefit isn't listed opens up the possibility that other benefits are also not listed.
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author) Handbooks
Show
Builds
Show
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 7:17AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
The Wizard doesn't describe the reason it cannot cast spells while wearring armor, simply that it cannot. If it was due to weight you'd have a point but we don't know. Could also be due to that armor limit gesturing too much. Regardless, I'd say the armor must specifucally say it allow spellcasting to do so. (ex. elven chain)
A mechanical benefit of having a Plate Mail that weight as much as cotton would mean it probably weight nothing and doesn't add to your emcumbrance. But i agree it should say it in the armor's effect.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 7:43AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Gaurdian is far more broadly applicable than any other Minor properties, it's obviously of a higher order. It's like putting fireball as a first level spell next to burning hands.
As for the ethereal full plate, it seems like you're a victim of poor choices in descriptive text. While one would imagine that such light armor would offer benefits along those lines the only ability provided by the armor is the ethereal state. Despite it's description it has the same states as normal plate armor.
It is the problem with the difference between fluff(y cotton) text and mechanical text. Armor that is as light as cotton must have a mechanical benefit in weight. That the benefit isn't listed opens up the possibility that other benefits are also not listed.
I don't see the big deal. By reading, it's clear that it has a weight benefit. If the benefit is clear, you don't NEED it to be in a stat block. If it's not clear, then you as the DM make a ruling for your game and are done with it. Not everything that is a benefit needs to be listed in some block of text somewhere separate.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 8:02AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Not everything that is a benefit needs to be listed in some block of text somewhere separate.
maybe not but it makes things a whole lot easier.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 8:04AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Not everything that is a benefit needs to be listed in some block of text somewhere separate.
maybe not but it makes things a whole lot easier.
It also makes it feel more sterile. I like the mixed feel of 1e-3e. The sterile 4e text blocks just really turned me off.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 8:08AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Not everything that is a benefit needs to be listed in some block of text somewhere separate.
maybe not but it makes things a whole lot easier.
It also makes it feel more sterile. I like the mixed feel of 1e-3e. The sterile 4e text blocks just really turned me off.
To be honest, I'll live with a well organised book if it means it's slightly more sterile. There are other elements you can bring into the book to make it feel more fanciful that don't cause confusion. DM/player friction is often created by discrepencies between stat blocks and text. I'd avoid it like the plague.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 8:09AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Feb 10, 2007
|
No pc should think that the DM can't handle such a simple task.
And what about new/inexperienced DMs?
They can do what others have done, learn from their mistakes.
Besides there is a lot to be said about following the guidelines and recommendations printed in the books you bought. Not reading and understanding the rules isn't an excuse.
Besides a +3 sword that happens to lop off somebody's head occasionally isnt the same as a weapon with an always on +5 to hit and damage, that lops off a head on a 19 or 20. You can't tell me that 6d8 on a crit is any worse than a mage with several fireballs or any other attack that does extra dice.
I really think that attunement as it is presented here is a little too easy to abuse. With some serious tweaking I could see this being a nice rule.
|
|
|
