Magic Items

[Mataxes]

While I can (sort of) understand the confusion with the sometimes broad use of the term "Key Knowledge," in this case each rank of an item is a Key Knowledge. Even if there isn't a specific Test Knowledge and Research Knowledge for that rank.

Deeds: Successfully learning the first Key Knowledge provides information on whether there are deeds associated wth the item. As indicated on page 222 of the ED4 Player's Guide, the specifics about the deed(s) are part of the Key Knowledge at the rank where the deed is required.

Example: A sword has a deed at Rank 5. When the Rank 1 Key Knowledge is learned, you learn the sword requires a deed at some point in its progression. When you learn the Rank 5 Key Knowledge, you learn that rank is the one requiring a deed, and the specifics of the deed should be learned and completed as part of the "Research" process.

Powers: There isn't any guidance about this in either the PG or GMG. There was in ED1, but I'm not sure where it got pulled. ED3 maybe? Since I used their chapter as a template for ED4? Whatever. Point being...

The way I've always handled it (and this is informed by ED1), is that when the character learns the Test Knowledge ("Question") they learn the general type of effect at that rank. When they learn the Research Knowledge ("Answer") they learn the specific effect. (The specific reference to this is on page 272 of the ED1 book under Learning Magical Effects.)

[The Undying]

The way I've always handled it (and this is informed by ED1), is that when the character learns the Test Knowledge ("Question") they learn the general type of effect at that rank. When they learn the Research Knowledge ("Answer") they learn the specific effect. (The specific reference to this is on page 272 of the ED1 book under Learning Magical Effects.)

So, for later ranks, do you provide any indication of what effects there are?

My interpretation of your comment would be kind of along these lines:

RANK 1:
- TK = "Name?"
- RK = "Sword of Stabbination"
- Effect: +1 Attack
- Commentary: You know the RK, so the effect is fully revealed.
Rank 2:
- TK = <none>
- RK = N/A
- Effect: +1 Damage
- Commentary: Lack of TK determined by IH test, no RK to determine, so effect is fully revealed.
Rank 3:
- TK = "Who made?"
- RK = <dunno yet>
- Effect: Some kind of on-damage ability
- Commentary: TK determined by IH test, RK not yet known, general effect is provided.
Rank 4:
- TK = ???
- RK = ???
- Effect: ???
- Commentary: IH has not yet been performed to this rank (don't even know if there IS a TK yet), so no information about effect is provided.

Does that sound about how you do things?

If so, how do you tackle the risk that a player gets part-way through investment in the item, only to find that the higher tiers are not things they really want? Maybe provide some kind of general, nebulous description of what the IH-testing Adept thinks the final overall effects are?

[Mataxes]

Let me add an addendum to my prior post.

Part of my... surprise... is that in over 20 years of playing the game and talking with a wide variety of people who have played the game, I haven't ever encountered the "skip empty ranks" interpretation.

This is as after significant involvement in the online ED1 community, playtesting/consulting for ED2, work on the Classic Compendia and (to a lesser extent) ED3, and now ED4.

So... coming across something new like that is a bit surprising, and I had to take a few steps back, go back to original sources, track changes from edition to edition, that sort of thing.

I can't say it's technically invalid because... well... language is what it is. It's never explicitly stated (even in ED1) whether "Key Knowledge" -- as it is used in the Item History talent and other places where it talks about weaving threads to items -- only means actual Test and Research Knowledges, or whether 'empty' ranks count.

There are two primary things that lead me to the "every rank" school of thought. First, both Item History and (the now defunct) Weapon History included a line that says: "The rank of Item (Weapon) History is also the maximum thread rank of any Key Knowledge that can be learned from the item." Second, as I mentioned in my previous post, an item's powers are part of the Key Knowledge learned with the appropriate History talent. Since there are powers at every rank, this is the "Key Knowledge" learned.

That said, even the first point there isn't really explicit. I mean, all that does is set a limit. Rank 2 Item History would, in that case, mean you couldn't learn any knowledge above the item's second rank, but doesn't really say you couldn't learn the second knowledge if it happens to be at rank 3.

The "linguistic drift" in rules over the years, as I've worked with lots of people, are the result of this shared understanding of the ruling. We all agreed on the interpretation (as far as I recall, anyhow), and while there have been questions about thread items, this particular interpretation hasn't (again, to my recollection) ever come up before.

I am perfectly willing to agree that, based on the wording, either interpretation is "linguistically valid." The intent is what I have presented here, as far as the "rank by rank" version. If you want to go the other route, feel free. I don't think it breaks anything. I mean, you learn the "questions" faster. Okay. That's just one piece of the puzzle.

You still need to learn the answer, and have the Thread Weaving rank and Legend Points to take advantage of that.

So... do with that what you will.

[The Undying]

There are two primary things that lead me to the "every rank" school of thought. First, both Item History and (the now defunct) Weapon History included a line that says: "The rank of Item (Weapon) History is also the maximum thread rank of any Key Knowledge that can be learned from the item." Second, as I mentioned in my previous post, an item's powers are part of the Key Knowledge learned with the appropriate History talent. Since there are powers at every rank, this is the "Key Knowledge" learned.

See, I've been playing since ED3, and this is the first I ever heard of the idea that a rank's effect is part of it's Key Knowledge. I can't point to anything in either version's extensive write ups on Key Knowledges that would even hint at this. In fact, this statement is found in the ED4 Player's Guide on pg 221: "each rank provides a unique power and is tied to a Key Knowledge that the character must know to unlock that power." This, to me, is a fairly clear statement that they are tied together, not that one contains the other. This is further reinforced a few paragraphs later with "Each of a magical item’s Key Knowledges has two distinct elements: the general type of information the Key Knowledge represents, called the Test Knowledge, and the specific details of that information, called the Research Knowledge." No mention of rank effects being part of the Key Knowledge.

So, I understand what you're saying, maybe this was much more clearly communicated in earlier (or the earliest) versions and, in an effort to maybe streamline the text for word count and complexity, some of the stickier phrases were removed "because everybody knows what we're talking about." That's kind of the comic book industry's problem up until arguably last decade: it was very incestuous, making comics for existing fans, rather than making comics for new fans, and the industry as a whole was dying as a result (this is not my opinion, it was heavily discussed, the huge success of movies definitely helped turn this around). Looking at the ED4 material, which is what NEW players would have, this line of thought isn't just not clearly communicated, it arguably isn't communicated at all.

Anyways, my personal opinion, I like the system you describe: it adds a layer of discovery and whimsy to Thread Items because you aren't thrown every single detail from the get-go and because there's a little more work and time involved getting to the final stages. I don't think it would adversely affect most tables - if at least one player has IH, they can do it in the evenings (although that eats the character's down time, which could suck), but groups where no one has picked up IH can suffer pretty heavily. Still, I REALLY like the discovery and exploration elements of ED, so that's kind of where this perspective comes from. As long as there's some what of communicating a target for the players, though: don't want someone investing blindly into an item that looks cool at the low end and then veers into whackadoo town "who would ever want this" at the top end...

[Mataxes]

Giving an overview of its powers at Rank 1 would be fine. (e.g., "This sword's damage increases, and it allows the wielder to attack more quickly" for one that provides Initiative and Damage bonuses.) But the specifics of what come at each rank are still, I think, best left for discovery as the game progresses.

While I understand the fear of a player "wasting" LP on an item only to find that higher ranks don't do what they want... communication is key. Talk to the player, find out what they're interested in/looking for and provide an item that does that -- whether you take it directly from a book, tweak an item to better suit, or build one from scratch.

This communication should continue as the campaign develops -- there's nothing preventing you from changing a higher-rank power that hasn't been woven yet. Or even, if things really aren't working, retconning an item to fix problems. As long as you're (generally) following the guidelines presented, the group is happy, and you're having fun? More power to you. I have neither the time nor inclination to police your game.

[The Undying]

I have neither the time nor inclination to police your game.

Aww, come on, you can join our crew. First beer is on me! I doubt you're in Tokyo, though ...

I know, it all comes down to "play the game that feels right to you," and that's definitely the way it should be. We're all going to make the changes that make sense. I just always like knowing what the intent is, in case I'm missing something. The method you've described in this thread is definitely more attractive to me than what I (and it sounds like others) took away as RAW, so it's always nice getting the designers' (and other players') perspectives.

Thanks for carving out the time for the input.

[Telarus]

Good advice. I can't remember where I picked this up, one of the mailing lists or the old EDPT.org forum maybe, but as a GM I've alwys been under the impression that ranks without Key Knowledges are an opportunity to directly weave the current event of your campaign into the item's backstory. The advice was make this KK super easy to get if you don't want it to turn into an adventure of it's own, but to fill in the "missing" ranks with story hooks that you already had in mind for the campaign.

[PiXeL01]

Aww, come on, you can join our crew. First beer is on me! I doubt you're in Tokyo, though ...

I would gladly come and "police" your game but the distance even from Osaka makes it a little complicated.

About wording: Being a new player to the setting I sometimes struggle with the wording, and not just with Item History. When I read the book the first time I especially found the magic section confusing. Whether it's because of the above mentioned "the readers will know what we are talking about" writing style I cannot say.

But it is nice to see the community is alive and helpful and the writers themselves are more than willing to clarify issues.

[The Undying]

Are you Japanese, Pixel, or a fellow expat? My in-country game group is Americans, Brazilians, British, & Ukranian. I'm hoping to introduce them to ED shortly (between D&D5 & SLA). Too bad you aren't closer (although our group head count is pretty high right now as it is lol).

[PiXeL01]

Oh no, I'm Danish, so an Expat like yourself. I have been the one getting people on the Shadowrun 5 and now Earthdawn wagon down here. My group seem more into the latter than the former at least for now.