Would you therefore say that the Wizard is opt-in?
Depends on how one defines "wizard," really. I think having a core class whose schtick is using magic spells is default. Personally, I think memorization and preparation (ie: the academic archetype) is part of that default. I think Vancian spellcasting mechanics (slots) should probably be opt-in, even though they've been in more D&D games than they've been absent from. They might end up being average, but the "default" needs to be something that's easy for newbies to understand, and I don't think Vancian magic is. Slots are not an intuitive mechanic. 4e's wizard dailies as "X spells per day, chosen from your spellbook" is a much better one.
GreyICE said:
And it's really unquestionable that, in terms of determining encounter design relative to a party's strength, attunement > no attunement, yes?
I'd question this. There's no real attempt in the rules right now to use attunement as a balancing mechanism. I don't think it's any better as written than "pay attention to the magic items you give out" is. There's no promise that those three items are going to not be overwhelming when attuned, either individually or in combination.
GreyICE said:
P.S. you never hit on the other good part of attunement - that it effectively replaces magic item "slots" which feel very video game (even if they predate video games)
That's a great point. Attunement is a much more solid, grounded concept than slots were.
I don't think attunement is a bad idea per se. It's got a lot of good germs of ideas in there. I don't believe it should be an assumed part of magic item distribution, though.
Tony Vargas said:
Yet that's exactly the point critics of modern D&D make when they disparage the wealth-by-level attempts at making items a balanced or player-driven.
True. I think there's a subtlety that lies in there, though:
unpredictability of magic items is default. Part of the fun of magic items is finding out what they do, if they're safe, etc.
Keeping them as a DM opt-in means that this element is retained. The players don't know when or if they're ever going to get an item. If they do, they don't know if it might be cursed, or if it might disappear on the first moonless night of the month, or if it is intelligent and has a goal of its own, or what.
If magic items were assumed as the default, this element would be lost: every player would know they'd be entitled to X magic items, and a DM who didn't give them out would be stingy.
Tony Vargas said:
If 5e really wanted to take the 'best' of prior eds with regards to magic items, it'd have a fairly solid and balanced set of guidelines for the sort and number of magic items PCs should have at a given level, with players exercising some choice in what items are appropriate to their characters, as in modern D&D, but, the items would be powerful and potentially character-defining as they were in classic D&D. Thus, a non-caster who lacked the power and versatility of innate magic could expect to make up for it with an interesting/potent signature item chosen by the player to fit his concept.
It's not the power that makes pre-3e magic items interesting. It's the mystery.
And that's something that "balancing" them always takes away, because balance turns it from something you can add, to something you HAVE to add.
Honestly, try it some time, even if you're playing 4e. For my Thursday game, I just rolled up some Elyas Perfume. Adapted from 2e, I have it give a CHA of 18 to anyone who uses it until their next extended rest, and gave it 16 uses left, and put it in the hands of a shy halfling boy with a warty face. If the PC's engage in the optional quest (helping the halfling boy win over the object of his affections -- a pretty young noble's daughter), the halfling boy will give them this item out of thanks. I don't know if they'll even engage the quest or not, or how they'll accomplish it if they do, but I put that out there.
If they play matchmaker, the halfling boy will give them "a small, pinkish-yellow vial of clear liquid." And he'll be described as being "surrounded by the scent of fragant wood, which somehow makes you forget about the small trail of snot that seems to be in constant danger of falling into his mouth." They'll be able to figure out what the item does exactly after a short rest with it, if they do a short three-before-two skill challenge with it (if they fail, they'll never know what it does until they pay the GP for a ritual that tells them).
It doesn't matter to me as a DM if they do any of that. It's extra. It's not especially powerful if they get it. I don't especially care if they figure out what it does. I don't care if no one in the party wants it (it'll probably be useless to the Cha-monkeys in the party).
It's a lot more fun than filling out the wishlist. Which, for this group, I don't even bother to do. I basically tell them when they level up to kit out their characters and give themselves the standard GP, because I'd much rather spend my time on more interesting treasure like this perfume bottle. That's fun for me as a DM, even if they don't really get to see it.
But they usually do. Knowing a secret is there to be uncovered is irresistible to them. I usually include 3-4 items like this per character level (and sometimes a cursed item or two, too), and they're always interested at level-up if they got them all or not. It's a little videogamey, I guess -- kind of like collectibles -- but it's fun for me to plant the mystery and it's fun for them to figure it out. Even if they miss some, they're curious to hear where they were.
And balance can't factor into it. If these items were required and expected and part of the player's own option list, it wouldn't be as fun. They couldn't fail as often. They couldn't be as idiosyncratic. I couldn't throw them a cursed item. I couldn't do something like the time they stumbled on the
Sword of Arak that I had a mass murderer in town carry, and the party barbarian nearly succumbed to before the invoker destroyed it behind his back. That arose from randomness and the unknown and from something rather explicitly abusable (It severs limbs! It changes ability scores! It could NPC-ify a PC!). I could not have planned it. It would not have been fun if I had. I wouldn't be able to see the look of delight on my players' faces when I tell them, "I had no idea you'd even track that guy down."
That's the magic of D&D, after all: you never know what's going to happen when the players and the DM share the world.
If magic items are "balanced" and "default," the unexpected becomes the exception. With regards to magic items, the unexpected should be the rule. "Oh! A +1 Sword! Neat! I didn't expect that!" Not, "Oh. A +1 sword. About time, everyone else already had one."