D&D 5E Should magic items stay out of the next PHB?

[billd91]

Exactly how much can fit in a bag of holding? How many people can fit on the carpet of flying or the folding boat? What does a belt of giant strength do? Obviously a +1 flametongue sword has something to do with fire, but what exactly are the mechanics (especially pre-3.x when the effects of that kind of thing were largely standardized)? And I grabbed the DM's copy of the DMG when I was playing 2e (because I was a broke college student and didn't have my own), or in 3.x brought my own copy. Of what was supposed to be a DM's book, but I had a copy anyway even though I never ran a game in person (in other annoying multi-book stuff, stats for summoned animals and common riding animals -- yup, in the monster manual, which players are even less likely to have than the DMG).

It's less a question of keeping the information away from the players as making it clear that magic items and their approval and distribution is part of the DM's sphere and responsibility. If you want the PCs to have regular access to the text describing their magic items, stick it on a note card. Works great.

Magic items are essential unless WotC wants to radically depart from prior norms for D&D or wants broken math. And only the barest handful of them are campaign-specific.

Actually, they're all campaign-specific in a way. There are very few campaigns that will actively incorporate all of the magic items in the core rules. There will, most likely, be a few handfuls of items. Including all of that, in addition to all the spells that PCs have more regular access to, strikes me as unnecessary bloat for the player book.

 

[steeldragons]

Magic items go in the DMG. End of story.

Lan-"though some fluff about legendary items for the PHB is a fine idea"-efan

And again, I find my post written for me. Thanks Lanefan.

Also agree with the part in your name about the fluff (seen posted by RangerWickett).

Next discussion, anyone?
--SD

 

[Lanefan]

Overgenalizing for effect. Also 4e-style monster (and NPC) stat blocks generally don't break out the effect of items they carry individually; they're part of the monster's abilities. So you don't need to know a magic sword's stats when a monster or NPC has it; it's only when it moves into a player's hands that you do.

We-ell, actually yes I do; for example if the foe manages to get itself disarmed somehow and pulls out a mundane backup weapon I kinda need to know how much difference this makes to its battle stats. Also, if it's a +2 Flametongue in the PCs' hands it's a +2 Flametongue in the enemy's hands as well, so why not just tell me that in the first place so I don't have to spend time figuring it out for myself?

Exactly how much can fit in a bag of holding? How many people can fit on the carpet of flying or the folding boat? What does a belt of giant strength do? Obviously a +1 flametongue sword has something to do with fire, but what exactly are the mechanics (especially pre-3.x when the effects of that kind of thing were largely standardized)?

Isn't this what field testing is supposed to be for?

If the players "know" all the mechanics ahead of time by reading the PH they lose out, in a way: if the PH write-up says a Flying Carpet carries two people the players will never think to try and put three on it, even if the DM has decided this particular Carpet is the Arabian Nights equivalent of a wide-body 747 and has a payload of 6 people... By the same token, they'll feel ripped off if they find a Carpet that only carries one.

As for a Bag of Holding, are parties no longer allowed to overstuff it in ignorance of its capacity and thus risk losing all the contents?

Lan-"getting everything on a silver platter gets stale in a hurry"-efan

 

[eamon]

Magic items should stay in the PHB. That is, some of them: those that are fairly common and standard.

I'd not expect mystical weapons of great power in the PHB. But rules for an everburning torch or a potion of healing I do expect in the PHB.

Of course, if it's more practical (due to page-count or whatever) to stick even those in a seperate book, that's fine with me too.

I don't think all magic items necessarily need to be rare and awe-inspiring. They can also just be expensive (but well-known) tools - what's wrong with that?

Imagine a magic item loan-shark. Plot hook here we come ...

 

[Minigiant]

[MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]

You can really hide book based information from players. Some will by the MM and DMG. Some will know the book standard of certain items and automatically jump to the belief that the recently identified item is book standard, many times without thinking or noticing it. Hiding them away in the DMG wont stop them from knowing. This is why I don't DM published settings.

Hiding them away does remove the expectations of receiving certain magic items. Players will feel the need to use whatever is in the PHB. Same with DMs and the DMG.

Whatever the player needs to know in order to create, advance, and roleplay their PC has to be in the PHB. So if potions are integral to PC survival (and I hope not) then full potion rules need do be in the PHB.

 

[howandwhy99]

What do you think of removing all Equipment & Hiring out from the PHB? That could then be a campaign setting unique list for starting characters. A handout from the DM. Removing spells from the PHB could be next. A simple list of those available to choose from, maybe some descriptions, and players could have an easier time of it.

I like the idea of not having a PHB where players game the system before play. Buying equipment, selecting spells, etc. for the situation at hand? That's part of playing the game IMO. Making more than a few choices during character generation means these are liable to stop being about the realm of the game the players wants to focus on and start being about comparing abilities for builds and min/maxing.

Min/Maxing to me use to mean raising and lowering Ability Scores for the race & class chosen, to get the most power for the least cost from what was rolled. That's gaming the system too.

 

[Doug McCrae]

It depends on the point of magic items. In about half the D&D games I've played, going back to 2e, we treated the magic items in the DMG much like the list of powers in character building games such as Champions or Vampire.

Most of our 2e games started higher than 1st level. Part of player creativity was giving one's PC a lot of wacky magic items at char gen time. That's how I came up with the 'deto mace' - a morning star that shoots its spiked heads and they exploded as fireballs! Pretty cool, eh?

The last time we played 3e, again we treated the magic items as part of the character build. As PCs levelled up, their gear became progressively more magical according to the wealth-by-level guidelines.

This approach means that the DM doesn't need to worry about what magic items to give out, they're part of the players' realm.

Another consideration is that throughout D&D's history, all the way back to OD&D, magic item creation has been an important function of high level casters such as magic-users and clerics. If a character can create magic items then he must know about their properties. So just as high level spells are in the PHB, the same should hold true for magic items.

Artefacts would be an exception to the above.

However the alternate approach is perfectly valid. This sees magic items, like monsters, and the dungeon map and key, as part of the DM's purview. Part of the world the PCs, and players, explore and learn about in the course of the game. This exploration (of the DM's mind!) is a big part of the point of play.

 

[Doug McCrae]

It's less a question of keeping the information away from the players as making it clear that magic items and their approval and distribution is part of the DM's sphere and responsibility.

Does this mean that placing class, spell/power, and feat information in the PHB makes it clear that these are outwith the DM's sphere and responsibility?

 

[dkyle]

I don't really get why, in a game where magic is mundane and predictable, there's this expectation that all magic items should be special. Why are items held to such a different standard than spells?

I'd rather have basic magic items that are just part of a higher level character getting better at their job. Make them purchasable in most major cities, or easily craftable. I like gear-based advancement. I think it makes more sense than XP-based advancement.

Then, have unique items that are special. They don't have to be Artifacts, with all that baggage (I've never much liked Artifacts), but they'd do some cool things that basic magic items don't, and be expected to have a history to them.

 

[billd91]

Does this mean that placing class, spell/power, and feat information in the PHB makes it clear that these are outwith the DM's sphere and responsibility?

Consider the process involved in character creation. Choosing professions, skills, spells, feats, powers, starting equipment - all are choices made from the perspective of a character and belong in a player-focused book. Of course, the DM is a player too.

None of this, nor the placing of magic items (and prestige classes, traps, world-building, other treasure placements, etc) in the DM's sphere, indicate there's no overlap. Rather, I would say they indicate primary responsibility. Players are primarily responsible for the choices they make in building their characters, though DMs should be able to disallow some choices based on the game world availability and game management issues and otherwise provide input. DMs are responsible for determining which magic items are appropriate for the campaign, though players should have input on which items they may want to research and find or create.