D&D 5E Magic Ammunition

AverageCitizen · Jun 2, 2015

When my group and I were younger, we shied away from consumables of any kind, simply because we found them distasteful. Something about them running out just bothered me. These days, I can't tell you why. Back then we even hated Eberron's action points because they replenished upon leveling up, as though somehow that was not an inevitability. So, I used to think like Saelorn, but now I can't remember why. Part of being a bad-ass action hero is having a wealth of consumables and burning through them to defeat superior forces.

But +1 arrows are super-boring unless you are a math nerd. Give'em fire.

The Crimson Binome · Jun 2, 2015

delericho said:
This is incorrect. Unless your campaign lasts for an infinite length of time, the number of attacks you make will most certainly be finite. Even in a campaign that's been running since 1974 it's unlikely there is any single character who has made more than 100k attack rolls.

It asymptotes out to infinity as you keep playing the game. A +1 arrow is exactly as good as a +1 bow if you only get one attempt to make an attack before the campaign ends, and its value decreases from there.

delericho said:
This is also incorrect. It makes a difference if your attack or any subsequent one takes the creature down to exactly zero hit points.

Hence why I used the words I did; "you" is a collective noun in this case, referring to the party.

delericho · Jun 2, 2015

Saelorn said:
It asymptotes out to infinity as you keep playing the game. A +1 arrow is exactly as good as a +1 bow if you only get one attempt to make an attack before the campaign ends, and its value decreases from there.

Yes, but the number of attacks in an average campaign is nowhere near infinity.

5e appears to be designed assuming a campaign will last about a year, assuming one session per week. So, 52 sessions. Further, it's a reasonable assumption that the party Fighter will use his +1 weapon for about a quarter of that - he'll go some time before he gets a magic weapon, and then will upgrade beyond a certain point. So, 13 sessions. If we assume 20 attacks on average per session, then, that gives 260 attacks with that +1 weapon - and in 13 cases that +1 will be the difference between a hit and a miss.

1/260 is a rather different proposition to 1/infinity!

(And, of course, because those +1 arrows are limited use, the DM is more likely to award them fairly liberally, and introduce them rather earlier than that +1 permanent weapon - one of the beauties of limited-use items is that their potential to be game breaking is much reduced.)

They're certainly not a great treasure. But you're significantly understating their value.

The Crimson Binome · Jun 2, 2015

delericho said:
Yes, but the number of attacks in an average campaign is nowhere near infinity.

And how would a character take that into consideration, without meta-gaming it? I guess every adventurer assumes that they'll stop adventuring at some point, but how do you then pinpoint the one attack in your lifetime that is worth throwing away a month of wages for a skilled laborer?

If your regular arrows aren't doing anything, because the monster is immune to non-magical weapons, then you might decide to use one. Or, I suppose if you happen to find a lot of magical arrows and you can't sell them for anything, then there might come a point where it becomes practical.

delericho · Jun 2, 2015

Saelorn said:
And how would a character take that into consideration, without meta-gaming it?

It's absurd to think the character could possibly be aware that either the +1 sword or the +1 arrow gives exactly a 5% better chance to hit. It's not even something you could conceivably measure - combat has too many variables, very few of which could be controlled for.

The Crimson Binome · Jun 2, 2015

delericho said:
It's absurd to think the character could possibly be aware that either the +1 sword or the +1 arrow gives exactly a 5% better chance to hit. It's not even something you could conceivably measure - combat has too many variables, very few of which could be controlled for.

And yet, empirical evidence would back up those results over time.

The characters may not know that it's exactly 5%, but they know of the in-game reality which corresponds to that shift. They know that a magic sword won't turn an incompetent goofball into a fearsome warrior, but it will turn a good fighter into a slightly better one. They might notice that it's roughly the same difference as you might find between a novice swordsman (proficiency bonus of +2) and a seasoned veteran (proficiency bonus of +3), but even that might be hard to pin down since the seasoned veteran is likely to have also built up some muscle during that time (Strength +2).

As for a magic bow, however... target archery is a very simple task to model, and one of the easiest tests which the characters can perform in-game, and the same archer over the course of many shots will score ~5% more shots to the center of the target.

delericho · Jun 2, 2015

Saelorn said:
And yet, empirical evidence would back up those results over time.

The characters may not know that it's exactly 5%, but they know of the in-game reality which corresponds to that shift. They know that a magic sword won't turn an incompetent goofball into a fearsome warrior, but it will turn a good fighter into a slightly better one.

Exactly. They'll know a magic sword makes them "a bit" better. But that's it - and they certainly couldn't tell when the sword +1 was the difference between a hit and a miss, or how often that was. Heck, since in the 5e hit points model wounds aren't meaningfully visible above 50% of maximum, they probably couldn't even tell the difference between a "hit" above that threshold and a miss.

As for a magic bow, however... target archery is a very simple task to model, and one of the easiest tests which the characters can perform in-game, and the same archer over the course of many shots will score ~5% more shots to the center of the target.

The d20 attack roll is a spectacularly poor way to model target archery - it's far too swingy.

SkidAce · Jun 2, 2015

I toyed with magical weapons giving a proficiency bonus (and special abilities etc, many tools in the box.)

This means a 1st level warrior who finds a +5 prof sword...does turn into a fearsome warrior....but the already high level swordsman might only get a + 1 out of the deal...

Just an idea...rough edges....

The Grassy Gnoll · Jun 2, 2015

How about a Hank the Ranger magic bow that creates it's own +1 ammo out if magic but needs to recharge after every, say, 20 shots? And until recharged it's effectively a cudgel+1.

hbarsquared · Jun 2, 2015

I think it might actually be worthwhile to look at it from the player's in-the-moment perspective. Not the DM, not the character.

When would you, the player, choose a +1 arrow of a certain value (I don't recall, 250gp?) over a normal arrow? In which situation would you find it worthwhile to consume a magic item for a positive-not-guaranteed result? When would you actively decide to use your +1 arrow?

D&D 5E Magic Ammunition

AverageCitizen

Explorer

The Crimson Binome

Hero

delericho

Legend

The Crimson Binome

Hero

delericho

Legend

The Crimson Binome

Hero

delericho

Legend

SkidAce

Legend

The Grassy Gnoll

Explorer

hbarsquared

Quantum Chronomancer

Similar Threads