PDA

View Full Version : Limit on daily powers (from items)



AxeD
2011-04-12, 08:53 PM
I was discussing magical items with daily powers with my DM and he mentioned that there is a limit on how many daily powers (from items) can be used a day. Something along the lines of only 1 daily power (from an item) for heroic PCs, 2 for paragons and 3 for epic.

Is this true? I can't remember reading it anywhere. Also, does that effect Encounter Powers (from items)?

Sinon
2011-04-12, 09:01 PM
Yes, it is true. Sort of.

You can use another daily after earning a milestone.

Even when you can use more than one daily, from your tier or after a milestone, you can still only use an item's power once per extended rest.

Encounter powers can be used once per encounter, like your class powers.

See page 226 of your PHB.

AxeD
2011-04-12, 09:05 PM
Cheers. That clears things up.

MeeposFire
2011-04-12, 09:50 PM
There has been an update to daily item powers recently. The limit to daily item powers in a day has been removed.

Check here for details

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drfe/20100824

It is at the bottom.

by the way daily item powers are still only usable 1/day but you can use as many different items as you want in a day once each.

Sinon
2011-04-12, 10:17 PM
Interesting. Hadn't seen that.

They said the idea behind the original plan was to keep players from stockpiling items.

The new rule says fewer items will be available, and encourages selling off old ones.

Regardless of whether or not the restriction is needed (whole other question) is the new version working, in your experience?

MeeposFire
2011-04-12, 10:34 PM
So far no problems. Then again I have never received nor bought large numbers of the same item with a daily power even before the rules change.

Also realize that most daily item powers are so weak that they were worth little before. Most daily item powers are still not worth it on their own merits though now at least it won't prevent you from using the few good ones. So items with bad item powers might see some use now.

DMs have always and still are in charge of items. It is just more obvious in the more recent rules. Even using the old parcel system a DM could restrict the items available by RAW.

Reluctance
2011-04-13, 02:03 AM
The devs have been moving away from the rarity system. Without that, you get right back to the point where PCs can mass-enchant low-level items with useful daily properties.

As to the character item daily limit, it's one of those rules that was put in place to avoid shenanigans. It prevents item swapping for powers, and tamps down on novas a bit if your players only anticipate one encounter that day. If your players tend to play as intended (I.E: no carrying around backpacks of spare items, not novaing and retreating at the first sign of hostiles), you won't see too much change if you ignore the character limit and allow milestones to recharge an item daily instead.

Kurald Galain
2011-04-13, 03:49 AM
They said the idea behind the original plan was to keep players from stockpiling items.
Correct. And it didn't work.


The new rule says fewer items will be available, and encourages selling off old ones.
Not exactly. The new rule says random items will be available, and still encourages keeping all your old things around, especially if they have powers.

A serious design oversight in 4E is that it is very much a good idea to carry around several dozen low-level items for their powers. The designers have assumed (and stated) that any item more than five levels below you is not going to be useful any more, but this is clearly not the case. Then again, most players won't take advantage of this issue, and most DMs won't let them, so it's not that big a deal.

gurban
2011-04-13, 04:15 AM
At first, the rule was 1 daily item per milestone, now it is a free for all. I recently started a group out at level four, and they picked their own gear. Obviously, they picked items with powerful daily powers, which is fine and understandable. I think I am going to limit power uses to 1 per encounter. Make them think more strategically with them. Now, their strategy is to attack anything they can find, and when they do, drop all their daily item powers. They tend to waste them as well. Often there will be a soldier or brute who is dazed, slowed, prone and taking 10 psychic ongoing, basically just because they can.

Bagelz
2011-04-13, 11:29 AM
The explaination going along with that "rules change" is that players will only be able to stockpile common items, and therefore will only have a few daily powers to choose from.

Since almost all items were given an uncommon tag when this rule changed, it was assumed that you are only using the common items listed in the essentials as available for purchase, and the dm would control which other items were handed out.

In my experience this is not the case, especially if you have a player who can enchant items, and therefore the rule is still needed.

That being said, in my game I have items that are exempt from your total, such as figurines of wondrous power (mounts that fit in your pocket).

MeeposFire
2011-04-13, 11:35 AM
I think you exaggerate the power of the daily item powers must of which are not powerful at all. Most of the powerful powers were encounter powers which were not affected by the previous rules. When this rule changed happened char op literally did not care much about it (they cared about limiting items but the idea of using the new daily power rules with the old parcel system barely registered).

Doug Lampert
2011-04-13, 11:46 AM
DMs have always and still are in charge of items. It is just more obvious in the more recent rules. Even using the old parcel system a DM could restrict the items available by RAW.

Oh? Enchant magic item doesn't exist in your PHB? What printing do you have? Because in my PHB there's a ritual that lets any wizard of level 5 or more who wants to make any item of up to his level if he can get some arcane components, and there's another one that lets him convert items to components.

The only way to STOP your epic characters from being able to craft nearly unlimited low level items is to not give them ANY LOOT AT ALL.

It's only controllable by the DM by "rocks fall".

MeeposFire
2011-04-13, 11:55 AM
Like everything in the game it is controlled by what the DM allows in the game. That has always been true. The newer rules were created because they felt the need to make it more clear.

So yes even in 4e there are times where the answer is "sorry the DM says no". Of course that is a game specific question not a general game question so this only comes up if a particular DM thinks having ten of a specific item is a problem.

Sipex
2011-04-13, 12:00 PM
Awesome, I always felt like this rule was stupid but wanted to avoid homebrewing my games too much.

Kurald Galain
2011-04-13, 01:03 PM
The explaination going along with that "rules change" is that players will only be able to stockpile common items, and therefore will only have a few daily powers to choose from.
Ironically, even though there are only a couple dozen common items in the first place, there is still a low-level common with an abusable daily power.


Oh? Enchant magic item doesn't exist in your PHB? What printing do you have? Because in my PHB there's a ritual that lets any wizard of level 5 or more who wants to make any item of up to his level
It's pretty clear that 4E was designed on the principle that PCs should always be able to get every item they desire. The developers of 4.4 have worked from a different principle, hence the random treasure tables and rarity rules. Whether either principle is successful depends heavily on the DM involved, but at least in LFR both have proven to be easily abusable.

Sinon
2011-04-13, 04:26 PM
Correct. And it didn't work.Yeah, I still saw some stockpiling, but it had little influence - it doesn't matter how many items are in your toolkit if you only open it once.


Not exactly. The new rule says random items will be available, and still encourages keeping all your old things around, especially if they have powers.I'm just following the link Meepos posted, but it doesn't use the word, or the idea of randomness at all.

It says: DMs hand out one rare item per character per tier; I'll never find one for sale; and the players cannot make these things. (Or at least, not without some monumental pain-in-the-ass side quest.)

By making these items sell at 100% of value, as opposed to the 20% for more common items, they seem to be trying to encourage you to sell. (Iím not saying it works.)


A serious design oversight in 4E is that it is very much a good idea to carry around several dozen low-level items for their powers. The designers have assumed (and stated) that any item more than five levels below you is not going to be useful any more, but this is clearly not the case. Then again, most players won't take advantage of this issue, and most DMs won't let them, so it's not that big a deal.I thought the original rule worked fine. Sure, carry a dozen low-level items if you want. You can still only use one daily.

Now, it seems to encourage you to, by hook or by crook, stockpile, since you can use them all you like.

It think this new rule sucks for DMs as well.
You can have/make/buy this level appropriate item, but this other item of the same level is off limits.

Kurald Galain
2011-04-13, 04:51 PM
I'm just following the link Meepos posted, but it doesn't use the word, or the idea of randomness at all.
Well, the old system is treasure bundles. The new system is rolling, where it's something like 1-7: gold, 8-14: common item, 15-19: uncommon item, 20: rare item. It's explained in the DM kit; I think you roll for item level, too. The upshot is that you are no longer guaranteed an even distribution of items.



By making these items sell at 100% of value, as opposed to the 20% for more common items, they seem to be trying to encourage you to sell.
The problem is that rare items are not, as a rule, better than uncommon items. So yeah, the usual reaction to spotting a rare is selling it to buy other items instead.
WOTC originally stated that items with a property would be common and items with a power should be uncommon. Players immediately pointed out that almost universally, items with a property are better than items with a power. So I'd say that whoever thought up the rarity system isn't familiar enough with 4E to be a designer. This is probably why other designers have recently suggested to avoid the entire rarity system.



I thought the original rule worked fine. Sure, carry a dozen low-level items if you want. You can still only use one daily.
Ah, but you also get an extra "use" per tier. So at epic, you start the day with three uses, and get one more per milestone, and that means that you can pick your favorite item daily and use it every encounter. Also, if an item is usable once per encounter, you can stockpile it to use its effect every round.
Anyway, my point is that the limit on item dailies is a klunky rule, and that it was only needed because one of the design assumptions (that lower-level items wouldn't be useful to a higher-level character) turned out to be incorrect. It did work better than the (equally klunky) rarity rule.

Sinon
2011-04-13, 05:37 PM
Well, the old system is treasure bundles. The new system is rolling, where it's something like 1-7: gold, 8-14: common item, 15-19: uncommon item, 20: rare item. It's explained in the DM kit; I think you roll for item level, too. The upshot is that you are no longer guaranteed an even distribution of items.Is this kit part of the essentials stuff? Megh.

I find it hard to reconcile randomness with restrictions like one rare item per tier. Probability isnít like that.

Random treasure generation has been part of D&D since the beginning. And, at least in my experience, itís been largely ignored since the beginning as well. Replacing one mechanic with another you know will be ignored is a bit shady.


The problem is that rare items are not, as a rule, better than uncommon items. So yeah, the usual reaction to spotting a rare is selling it to buy other items instead.
WOTC originally stated that items with a property would be common and items with a power should be uncommon. Players immediately pointed out that almost universally, items with a property are better than items with a power. So I'd say that whoever thought up the rarity system isn't familiar enough with 4E to be a designer. This is probably why other designers have recently suggested to avoid the entire rarity system.No argument there.


Ah, but you also get an extra "use" per tier. So at epic, you start the day with three uses, and get one more per milestone, and that means that you can pick your favorite item daily and use it every encounter. Also, if an item is usable once per encounter, you can stockpile it to use its effect every round.If you can afford that many versions of that many of the same item of a power level that matters.

If you can, it would strike me that the problem is with the pricing/level of the item in question. The appropriate solution might be to look at the item, or to look at the rules for milestones and extra item uses at high levels.

But their answer was no, letís take something unbalanced and if a set of stilts called item rarity will make it more stable.

Kurald Galain
2011-04-13, 06:17 PM
Is this kit part of the essentials stuff? Megh.
Yep.


I find it hard to reconcile randomness with restrictions like one rare item per tier. Probability isnít like that.
Wouldn't be the first time that a game designer failed basic math :smallbiggrin:

I just looked it up. For a five-man party winning a level-1 encounter, roll 1d20. On an 11+, there is loot; on a 13+, this loot includes a magical item. Roll 1d20: odd is common, even is uncommon, 20 is rare. Roll 1d4+1 for level of the item. Incidentally, note that no rares exist in print for most levels below 15.
I believe that on average this will work out to the distribution of the 4.0 parcel system, however the standard deviation is pretty big.


If you can afford that many versions of that many of the same item of a power level that matters.
That's a good point. But since prices and monetary rewards go up exponentially as you level up (x5 every five levels) you are pretty much guaranteed to be able to buy everything you like as long as it's five levels below you. A simple example is the Staff of the War Mage, a level-3 item from the PHB1 that triples the area of effect for many daily powers.
On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of games play in the heroic tier, where this issue really doesn't apply yet.

Doug Lampert
2011-04-13, 06:44 PM
I just looked it up. For a five-man party winning a level-1 encounter, roll 1d20. On an 11+, there is loot; on a 13+, this loot includes a magical item. Roll 1d20: odd is common, even is uncommon, 20 is rare. Roll 1d4+1 for level of the item. Incidentally, note that no rares exist in print for most levels below 15.
I believe that on average this will work out to the distribution of the 4.0 parcel system, however the standard deviation is pretty big.

That's 8 items per 20 encounters (or 4 per level), which is about right, if the cash loot comes out right they're good on number and level of items.

But the update also claims you should get roughly 1 rare item per character per tier or 1/8th of all items (which they state in the update). The rule you quote gives 1 rare item per 20 encounters, so only 40% of what's needed.

I agree that properties are often the best items, but property items are seriously limited by slots, there's no danger that someone will wear 5 pairs of boots of striding and get +5 to movement. There needs to be SOMETHING limiting stacking good daily or encounter powers and since most powers last only one round slots won't do it.

The rarity system, IF IMPLEMENTED, strikes me as a fine method, far better than the limits on daily powers. If implemented it would mean that the really useful, neccessary items the characters can make or buy freely, the oddball but occasionally useful ones would depend on luck.

Unfortunately the implementation sucks/is non-existent, something like 6 months after they released it a Magic Ki Focus (obviously common) is STILL listed as uncommon because they aren't even TRYING to get the pre-existing items correctly classified.

On the opposite side, the compendium lists something like 11 items pre-dating the rarity system with the note: Property: Unique; this item cannot be purchased or created with the Enchant Magic Item ritual.

Every one of these items is UNCOMMON! WtF! If explicitely unique and not makeable by enchant magic item back before rarity is only uncommon then what is the frequency of rare items? Entirely nonexistent (well, based on the rules suport we've gotten that may be the case).

Sinon
2011-04-13, 07:46 PM
A simple example is the Staff of the War Mage, a level-3 item from the PHB1 that triples the area of effect for many daily powers.

I never actually saw anyone in 3.5 actually carry around a bag of rats. I doubt Iíll see anyone in 4.x carry around a bag of staves.

And, this example perfectly illustrates my point. Their fix exacerbates the potential problem when it is the wording of the power that makes the abuse possible. You can end it there.

If they made the rule explicitly say* that you have to use the staff as your implement in the attack in order to apply the benefits of the daily power to that attack, your epic characters arenít going to waste their time. (Theyíd have to face epic foes with a +1 implement instead of with a +4, 5 or 6. Let Ďem.)

*Instead of common sense


But the update also claims you should get roughly 1 rare item per character per tier or 1/8th of all items (which they state in the update). The rule you quote gives 1 rare item per 20 encounters, so only 40% of what's needed.
<snip>
The rarity system, IF IMPLEMENTED, strikes me as a fine method, far better than the limits on daily powers.
Iím finding it hard to reconcile these two statements. If I canít use their math to give my characters the right items, then I have to basically make up my own.

Which is fine, but it isnít implementing their system.

If I were limited to uses by tier and by milestone, the old way, DMs merely have to watch out for an occasional bag of rats I mean staves.

If players want to burn their 3-5 dailies on third-level items, even the same one they bought five of, while the rest of us use ours on level-appropriate items, canít really see it as a huge issue.

MeeposFire
2011-04-13, 10:58 PM
Oddly many people have found that the common items and uncommons are far better than the rares. Why? The daily item powers are so underwhelming that things like constant bonuses from items like the iron armbands of power are far superior. Daily item powers are rarely as big of a deal as it would sound.

Kurald Galain
2011-04-14, 01:38 AM
I never actually saw anyone in 3.5 actually carry around a bag of rats. I doubt Iíll see anyone in 4.x carry around a bag of staves.
Indeed, most players don't take advantage of this, most DMs won't let them anyway, and most games play in heroic where the issue doesn't apply yet. The main place where it's a problem is LFR. Predictably, this is a big turn-off against playing or DM'ing paragon level LFR.
Ironically, 4E does have an explicit rule against Bag Of Rats tricks.



And, this example perfectly illustrates my point. Their fix exacerbates the potential problem when it is the wording of the power that makes the abuse possible.
Agreed.


If they made the rule explicitly say* that you have to use the staff as your implement in the attack
The thing is, many items do explicitly say so (e.g. Symbol of Battle in PHB1), and many other items do not (the aforementioned War Mage Staff). One could infer from this that the latter group of items is actually intended to be used in the off-hand.


If players want to burn their 3-5 dailies on third-level items, even the same one they bought five of, while the rest of us use ours on level-appropriate items, canít really see it as a huge issue.
High level items do not, as a rule, have better powers than low level items.

darkdragoon
2011-04-14, 07:46 AM
I think you exaggerate the power of the daily item powers must of which are not powerful at all.

Freeing up usage makes a lot of those items more useful if not actually more powerful though.

Plus really, stuff like Veteran's Armor got hit because of concern that someone might carry multiples (and remember, that ate Action Points in addition to item dailies)

The main issue I see is with expendable stuff. You've got damage typing, power recovery, skill bonuses, rerolls etc. all in fairly cheap packages.

Doug Lampert
2011-04-14, 09:48 AM
Iím finding it hard to reconcile these two statements. If I canít use their math to give my characters the right items, then I have to basically make up my own.

Which is fine, but it isnít implementing their system.
The failure of implementation, WHICH I DISCUSS, is the lack of actually making enough rare items and the fact that MANY items that BLATANTLY should not be uncommon are still listed as uncommon 6 months after the errata with the new rule came out.

The new rule in the errata that I'm claiming isn't implemented says nothing about the using die roles to determine treasure type rather than packets. I don't really CARE about a rolling rule I never saw till this thread. The new rule is the one in the errata which GIVES THE FREQUENCIES I WAS COMPARING WITH.

And that rule is the one I'm complaining isn't implemented since it also tells us what items should be common and rare, and there are DOZENS of blatant and obvious mistakes in which items are what frequency, and six months in they haven't fixed this; and their rule REQUIRES that there be a substantial number of heroic tier rare items, and the rules don't include many/any such items.

They haven't implemented the rule. And that has nothing to do with whether you use treasure packets or not, errata is supposed to be the rules for all games, and the errata on magic item frequency is unusable because the magic items more or less all say "uncommon" for frequency regardless of what they should be.

Kurald Galain
2011-04-14, 10:17 AM
Plus really, stuff like Veteran's Armor got hit because of concern that someone might carry multiples (and remember, that ate Action Points in addition to item dailies)
No, Veteran's Armor got hit because practically everybody in LFR was using it, and many people were carrying multiples. In its first year, LFR was the big stress test for 4E, or at least its heroic tier.


The main issue I see is with expendable stuff. You've got damage typing, power recovery, skill bonuses, rerolls etc. all in fairly cheap packages.
That, too. There are some people who will use a whetstone every single combat, because they're so cheap. Ironically, several consumables were first errata'ed to count as a magic item daily, but this errata was rendered nonfunctional since you now get infinite magic item dailies anyway.

(edit) once again, this doesn't really concern home games because any capable DM will just veto it; but it is a continuing issue in LFR.

Sinon
2011-04-14, 04:32 PM
The failure of implementation, WHICH I DISCUSS, is the lack of actually making enough rare items and the fact that MANY items that BLATANTLY should not be uncommon are still listed as uncommon 6 months after the errata with the new rule came out.I'm sorry I guess I saw a DIFFERENCE between IMPLEMENTING the rule, in the SENSE of putting the RULE into action and limiting the number of rare ITEMS CHARACTERS get, and the PROCESS of DECIDING which ITEMS are rare and WHY. Something I assumed should be done properly prior TO implementing THE rule.

I figured you could IMPLEMENT the rule, and IT WOULD STINK for a VARIETY of REASONS including those you MENTIONED and as such, this IMPLEMENTATION would not have been a FINE IDEA.

APPARENTLY we were using the word IMPLEMENT differently. I stand CORRECTED.

Kurald Galain
2011-04-14, 06:02 PM
I LIKE capital LETTERS because they are AWESOME, and also THEY remind me OF chocolate ice CREAM. Have a nice DAY.
CHOCOLATE!