Items with the same name, different books, different stats

[NunoM]

Is there a particular guideline for items with exactly the same name, published in different books, but with completely different stats/abilities? Is only the last one valid? Can they coexist?

I mean... I understand that some items are reprinted with basically the same purpose but with limitations (i.e. nerfs). In this case i'm talking about completely different mechanics altogether.

Example: "Boots of Sidestepping"
The version of these boots in "Dungeonscape" (p.40) is sweet! You get to do a 5ft step whenever you need to roll for a REF save against a spell or effect - no action needed. If you get out of the area with that move, you don't have to roll the save.

The version in MIC (p. 78) is... i wouldn't say "bad", but it isn't good for it's price (6k). You can do a 5ft. step as a swift action 3/day, even if you already exhausted your move for the round. "Anklets of Translocation" are far superior IMO, and for a fraction of the price (1.4k)!

Even the fluff, describing the item itself, has nothing in common between both books (asides from the fact that it's a pair of boots).

"Dungeonscape" and MIC were printed a month apart, so i'm guessing (hoping) the writters just came up with the same name for different items... 

[kitep]

I think RAW you have to go with the last entry.  More likely though, one author was unaware that there was already an item with that name, and it's just a coincidence and both should be allowed.

[snakeman830]

At lest in this case, it's quite likely that the two items were written up without knowing the other was going to be printed.  There just wasn't time for an update of the first printing.  I would also allow both.

However, you should be using the most recent printing, otherwise.

[Nunkuruji]

At lest in this case, it's quite likely that the two items were written up without knowing the other was going to be printed.  There just wasn't time for an update of the first printing.  I would also allow both.

However, you should be using the most recent printing, otherwise.

That's how I handle it. There are a variety of spells that fall under this as well.

[NunoM]

At lest in this case, it's quite likely that the two items were written up without knowing the other was going to be printed.  There just wasn't time for an update of the first printing.  I would also allow both.

However, you should be using the most recent printing, otherwise.

That's how I handle it. There are a variety of spells that fall under this as well.

For the sake of argument in my gaming group, could you share a couple of examples of this? Thank you...

[Prime32]

Bracers of the Blinding Strike (aka "those bracers Drizzt had that made his arms fast") have different stats between MoF (102k, armor +6, Improved Initiative, your weapons become speed weapons) and MIC (5k, +2 initiative, 3/day as a swift action make an extra attack as if hasted, part of an item set).

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Torc of Power Preservation in XPH + SRD
... but is massively nerfed in the MIC.

Rational, or any rationale?
This was the only biggie after the CPsi nerfy non-sense.

[NunoM]

Bracers of the Blinding Strike (aka "those bracers Drizzt had that made his arms fast") have different stats between MoF (102k, armor +6, Improved Initiative, your weapons become speed weapons) and MIC (5k, +2 initiative, 3/day as a swift action make an extra attack as if hasted, part of an item set).

Erm... for me (and most likely, my gaming group), that's a nerfed item... It gives roughly the same bonuses (initiative and a haste-like effect), and with the rules for adding Common Item Effects to item, from MIC, those bracers become pretty close to the ones built by Drizzt (and possibly cheaper).

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Not to belabor the point, but CPsi
was clearly the Jump The Shark
moment for "paid-for" errata.

Since it only affected psionics, and
everybody knows psi is borkt ... 
... nobody else outside of C.O.
it gave any attention.

Given some of the other kooky
rulings that were made, I think
old C.O. figured it could handle the
waffle zone surrounding this issue.

[Nunkuruji]

At lest in this case, it's quite likely that the two items were written up without knowing the other was going to be printed.  There just wasn't time for an update of the first printing.  I would also allow both.

However, you should be using the most recent printing, otherwise.

That's how I handle it. There are a variety of spells that fall under this as well.

For the sake of argument in my gaming group, could you share a couple of examples of this? Thank you...

Master's Touch was the one I was last discussing with one of my players

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=010918785989085430250:jd6tjgonwfu&q=master%27s%20touch&oq=master%27s%20touch&gs_l=partner.3...1419.2848.0.3130.14.12.0.1.1.0.153.822.8j4.12.0.gsnos%2Cn%3D13...0.1371j177139j14..1ac.1.25.partner..9.5.335._xI2ImMfdjc#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=master%27s%20touch&gsc.page=1