some questions on gaming (identification, wands)

There are rules about identifying potions and such with alchemy or spellcraft or something, IIRC, but I'm not seeing the whole "If I've already got one..." line. I mean, if you have a +3 longsword and find another +3 longsword do you really think that means you should know what it is (i.e., that it's not holy too, for instance)? I can kinda see the argument for a cloak of elvenkind or something, but only because its effects are so obvious, and that holds just so long as you know cloaks of elvenkind exist, regardless of whether you own one or not. Certainly finding a vile of blue liquid doesn't mean you know it's a healing potion rather than some other blue daught. If a sword you find bursts into flame the first time an enemy draws near, that's a good hint, but the mere fact that it maybe swings the same way as the one you already own isn't much of a clue. Asking the right questions of a real live DM might get you enough info to guess pretty surely what something is, but you usually won't be sure. These distinctions are just too fine to be made in a video game, however. Already owning an item of a given type really shouldn't help all that much.

 

)
ok, agreed, there is some logic
it's just a bit unusual for me after bg
so, as i understood, they just changed the idea of the identifying - earlier it was like "the experienced man, who saw thousands of swords, look at your sword and says what it can do" (and so with time u become that experienced man by yourself), and now they mean "no matter how good u're looking at it, without spell u just can't get to know what magic it contains, and the spell itself should use some amount of gold" (so there are no experienced men in that things)
so now we can argue only on which concept is more natural, but let it be that way, ok )

 

No objections here, but that's a topic better-suited to a D&D board than a ToEE board.

My only comment is that it's partly a DM-decision, because it's really up to the gamers themselves how they want to present magic. There's a long section somewhere in the DMG about deciding whether or not you want magic items to be flashy or subtle in appearance. Even if you make swords glow, though, it'll be hard to tell without using it whether it's a +2 or +3, for instance. On the other hand, a travelled bard or knowledgeable wizard might know certain markings that always adorn a holy avenger. I don't think there's an easy way to make a rule about this, which is why they probably erred on the side of requiring magic. This is because not giving characters a specific skill for the identification of items allows for the players and DMs to examine the items in question in other ways. If they own a flame tongue with a distinctive look and they find another sword that looks the same way, they can safely guess it's another flame tongue. If they find a cloak that blends into the woods the way their elven cloak does, again, they can bet on it. This allows for identification and, just as importantly, for getting it wrong.

But again, while I think this is the better way to go, it's not perfect, nor does it translate well to a video game format.

 

So a +5 bow would weigh -2 pounds? That's swell!

 

Wow! I never knew this. It is cool that the magic of the weave is helpful in making our usual burden lighter LOL