D&D 5E Magic Item design?

[keterys]

Fwiw, I'd highly encourage people to houserule charged magic items to some system that is less gameable.

Or accept that they're just effectively a few extra slots of magic every day for the rest of the campaign.

Example: Instead of recharging automatically every night, let the PCs choose when it recharges, but every time (regardless of whether it's at 0 or not), roll the d20 checking for a 1. That way you might want to use up charges on it until it's out or close to out, then risk recharging it. Feels like a more dnd-y use pattern, though it might convince some people to never use charged items.

 

[fireinthedust]

I'd go with "Final Charge" on the wands of magic missile: Each day they can cast 1d6 charges (or 1d20 spell levels). they also have a final charge, and you can use it, but it destroys the wand automatically.

However: I like my casters to have their wands, though, as a prop. Gandalf has a staff, Potter has a wand, whatever. I want one that can turn any spell into an electricity effect, for example, or into a frost or fire effect. Or one that lets them change the energy type of a spell from one to another, so i can cast Thunderball instead of Fireball, that sort of thing. I don't mind the charges, but I want my caster to have their handy-dandy item. Heck, remember Willow? The wand of the fey queen. Good times.

 

[Agamon]

Another method: The wand doesn't recharge on a long rest, it recharges on a short or long rest, but not until it runs out of charges.

 

[drjones]

You can just use a wand as an arcane focus in the PHB, which fits with the HP style wands. The mechanic is not super interesting (only really serves to remove material component requirements, which is less fun imo than having a variety of components) but I don't think boosting save DCs or magic attacks seems like a good idea because it's just another +1 item and the math for spells increasing in power is already very good.

I could see a wand or ring of spell storing, allowing you to power it up by spending spell slots during down time that could be used in a pinch. Not a lot, because that would allow super-nova casting after any down time but it would be a nice backup that can't be recharged every long rest.

 

[Quartz]

Have there been any guidelines for item creation? I've long thought that item crafting was under-used in 3E days.

 

[Tigerlil]

I hope for a separation between +x and magical effects.
I found It annoying in 3rd and fourth that all weapons were +hit/dam and THEN something else. A fire sword that is not better at hitting would be fine and not break any bounded accuracy. Similarly it would make +X weapons more special if THAT is their magic effect, not just a foundation stone for more funky magic effects.

The sunsword from earlier would still be an amazing sword without it being +1, there's no real need for that extra added magical bonus. I guess it's pretty easy to houserule of course, but as a player I will need to influence any DM I play with to think like that beforehand

 

[Astrosicebear]

The sunsword from earlier would still be an amazing sword without it being +1, there's no real need for that extra added magical bonus. I guess it's pretty easy to houserule of course, but as a player I will need to influence any DM I play with to think like that beforehand

I agree. But from what I've seen, most magical arms/armor carries a minimum of a +1 bonus... I would assume because it is magical after all. But until the DMG we wont know if just special abilities are possible without a base bonus.

 

[fireinthedust]

Agree on not needing the +x bonus. While it was used in older editions, I think we can get along without it. Keep the math simple and add variety at the same time.

I think one could use +X for a "keen" sword, but then you could just say "you have advantage when..." and have the same sort of thing. Luck, Keen, Sharpness... +X or you could give them Advantage, +damage, +damage die, +die size for a weapon of that type... Lots of alternatives to +x.