Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
Two days early.
hmmm? I sense a joke I missed here...
Two days early.
hmmm? I sense a joke I missed here...
How does it seem to be too much? What complaints are your players making regarding how much magical stuff their characters have?I seem to be giving out too much magic to the party.
Can you elaborate on the problem? If it is that the players are feeling they have to make hard choices between attuning to this item or that, that is a large part of why the attunement rule exists in the first place - so that there is actually a choice being made, rather than every item the party finds being an automatic boost to the party's capabilities.The problem is starting to be with attuned items and only having 3.
I just stumbled upon this thread, and I deem it worth of *resurrection*!!!!
It certainly is useful to have some kind of generic "expected items" amount as a GM if we decide to place items and not roll them...
The existence of such items is a bit baffling, but it possible that at the time the item was made scale mail was the best armor available? Of course, such an item could be easily "spruced up". If I rolled that as a GM, I would perhaps make it of a useful material (say, bone so the druid can wear it), or have a useful minor power.
The idea that magic items aren't taken into account by game mechanics ought to be a false one - there's no assumption that you will have a specific magic item, but a 20th level PC ought to have 5 useful magic items according to what R&D considers a typical campaign.
Statistically, sure.
But then you play a character in a game where the DM rolls low on every table and you wind up with that one +1 sword for the party at level 20 because that's how chance works.
5e's assumptions say: this isn't a problem. Magic items are always extra sauce.
If you instead assume 5 items per PC over 20 levels, then clearly this IS a problem, and needs to be "fixed."