[Proposal] Item Exchange

[stonegod]

It's not a power creep because everyone has the same options.

A more fair comparison of power creep is whether folks will be more powerful (unbalancing so) with the option than without (i.e., before and after this is accepted), not whether those in a system where this is the norm are more powerful than each other because of it. You've already addressed some of this with the opportunity cost discussion previously.

 

[ryryguy]

Think of it as PC to PC trading.

In L4W (but not here as far as I can recall) folks have suggested allowing PC to PC trading several times, but that's something that has the clear potential to distort the game economy. So others have suggested allowing some form of off-camera item swapping similar to what you're proposing here as a middle ground.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to want to have some way for a player to mitigate a "mistake" item obtained based on an imperfect understanding of the rules, or an item that no longer fits if the player wants to change the direction of his build using existing retraining options. That's not "player entitlement" run amok.

In a RL game I would in fact likely handwave away an item swap to cover a case like this.

As has been pointed out though, the original proposal was perhaps a bit too unrestricted, and would have allowed players to swap out-of-date, "retired" items for something useful. That would indeed have the potential to lead to power creep. So more restrictions are definitely in order.

One restriction already suggested, to limit swaps to between same-slot items, seems like a good start. Another possibility would be to disallow swaps for items that are say 3, 4, or 5 levels or more lower than the PC's level. If you have an item that much lower level that is a "mistake", you should just be able to replace it with a new parcel naturally. i.e., replace that +1 Challenge Dagger with a +2 or +3 Whatever Dagger. Items that much lower level should just be sold or disenchanted. Swapping items like those seems like where the main potential for abuse lies.

 

[Vertexx69]

ok guys go back to post #1 and see if the proposed option is more to your liking now.

 

[ScorpiusRisk]

Well I wish we weren't restricting this to an item within a few levels of your current level, but I understand your wish to compromise. I just find it unfortunate that this proposal is being toned down to such a high degree.


That being said I think the language should be slightly clarified. I think the final paragraph should read.

"If you are currently on an adventure, The DM will make the call as to whether or not the character is in a suitable location where such a trade could happen."

That way people who are just sitting in the tower Shard can make full use of Sharn's streets without having to wait till they're signed onto something else.

 

[KarinsDad]

I just find it unfortunate that this proposal is being toned down to such a high degree.

I would find it more unfortunate that the PC who has now acquired a +3 Flesh Seeker Longsword would be able to trade his +2 Magic Longsword that he had since 4th level for Iron Armbands of Power at 7th or 8th level. No matter how one slices this, this is minor power creep.

 

[Velmont]

Valahad is almost level 7. At this point, his vanilla holy symbol+1 is of decreasing use for him, especially if he gets a better holy symbol as his next reward(hint hint). Why not get a restful bedroll or some alchemical item instead? Y'know something he'd actually might use.

That exemple is the one I wouldn't agree with. That's is the kind of item that should be sell at 20% of their value. It is how D&D have planned the thing.

But now, assume you have a Pacifist Healer with a Chainmail of Sacrifice, then suddenly, the rules change and his Healer's Lore class ability doesn't affect anymore his healing power and half his power just got a nerf. Now, he want a Healer's Chainmail to offset that nerf.

Or let's say you have a Cloak of Distortion +1 for your archer and suddenly, the cloak is nerf and it doesn't do the job anymore and a Cloak of Walking Wounded would now be most useful to compensate the protection you lost.

That would be two exemple I like the idea of this proposal. In both case, I think Kalidrev add-on is a good one: The item traded must be in the same slot. And that rule would be great in a few cases:

1) A new item get out and fit so well my concept
2) I've been nerf and I want to compensate that
3) My item have been nerf and is now mostly useless to me
4) I just did an overhaul and an item is no more useful to my character.

And with the only once per tier, I think any abuse would be prevented.

 

[EvolutionKB]

My vote still YES to this with the revision. My example with Valahad was a bad one I'll admit that. 3rd shift will do that to ya.

 

[stonegod]

In general, errata's items have been handled the same way errata'd powers have been: You are free to change them.

The new one still allows swapping of items for different slots (the Iron Armbands issue). Its fairly constrained but its still there. This, however, will limit the amount of "breakage" in that sense. And once per tier is still a very large opportunity cost.

Interested to see what the other judges have to say.

 

[KarinsDad]

Well, if are rules for the proposal are:

1) It must be an item that fits the same slot.
2) The item must be the same level or lower.
3) The player can do this once per tier.

then it really doesn't matter too much why the player wants to make the trade.

This sounds reasonable. The reason why the player doesn't like his item doesn't matter too much. The item could have gotten nerfed, the item might not fit the PC anymore, the new item might be cooler.


But being able to swap out items very single level and from different slots? Yeah, that's a bit much. That's item recycling.


I was vaguely aware that "modified items" (i.e. nerfed items) can be swapped was being done, but does someone have a link to the rules on that? I couldn't find them in the wiki.

 

[Vertexx69]

How about if the the item you are bartering is at your level (a 6th lvl item when you hit 6th level), can be any slot but otherwise has to be the same slot? Here's my situation: I have a throwing shield (lvl 6 arm slot) but am switching to a 2 handed weapon. As the option stands (if approved) I could trade it for iron armbands of power (also lvl 6 arm slot) which I don't want to do. I would rather trade it for a giant riding lizard (lvl 6) or even a horned helmet (lvl6) for my lvl 6 retraining. In 3 lvls I threw the shield a grand total of 3 times. It was a bad purchase at character creation, back when I was unfamiliar with the system. Like summoning armor has far less effect since 4ED uses fewer "random" encounters like when character's are taking an extended rest (aka sleeping), when a character would benefit most from it.

So here's what it would look like:

Bartering - Use retraining at lvl up to exchange a piece of gear.
1) Equal or lesser value
2) Once per tier
3) If item is of same lvl as player, can be traded for item of any slot.
3a) If item is of different lvl than player, it must be for item of same slot.