Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
This is why my version of 5e has more varied awards, so you can spread it around.Honestly, without magic items as treasure, the only meaningful rewards you can give out in 5E are all story-based.
This is why my version of 5e has more varied awards, so you can spread it around.Honestly, without magic items as treasure, the only meaningful rewards you can give out in 5E are all story-based.
Yeah 5E finally managed to make gold/money basically totally meaningless, because there's essentially nothing to spend it, and no overheads.Honestly, without magic items as treasure, the only meaningful rewards you can give out in 5E are all story-based.
How so? You can have a fully functional, diverse party in 4e (Fighter, Rogue, Warlord, Ranger, arguably a few of others can be trivially refluffed to be entirely nonmagical, e.g. Barbarian), where literally no player ever sees so much as a potion let alone a magic item, and no one ever casts a single spell of any kind, not even the opposition. That's essentially impossible in 5e, not least because you don't get enough daily healing from nonmagical sources to survive 5e.It works really well in 5e too. In fact, I would argue that 5e works better with low magic.
I'm not saying the the spectrum is a false spectrum in the "This isn't my D&D" argument.I don't see your point. Where was I arguing against the existence of magic items?
Yet another misunderstanding. 5e works better with low magic than 5e with high magic. I was not comparing it to 4e, but to itself.How so? You can have a fully functional, diverse party in 4e (Fighter, Rogue, Warlord, Ranger, arguably a few of others can be trivially refluffed to be entirely nonmagical, e.g. Barbarian), where literally no player ever sees so much as a potion let alone a magic item, and no one ever casts a single spell of any kind, not even the opposition. That's essentially impossible in 5e, not least because you don't get enough daily healing from nonmagical sources to survive 5e.
If 4e fully supports a literally zero-magic campaign, how can 5e work better with low magic?
I hear people say that and I am sure it is true in some sense, but it definitely doesn't need to be played that way. Gold is a precious commodity in our 5e game.Yeah 5E finally managed to make gold/money basically totally meaningless, because there's essentially nothing to spend it, and no overheads.
And yet a party of four fighters, a thief, a cleric, and one wizard was and is still a good party in OD&D. It's only the WotC versions of D&D that skew caster-heavy below 10th level.The rules have never supported that though - even back when there where only four classes, half of them where spellcasters.
Yeah 5E finally managed to make gold/money basically totally meaningless, because there's essentially nothing to spend it, and no overheads.
Yet another misunderstanding. 5e works better with low magic than 5e with high magic. I was not comparing it to 4e, but to itself.
Though in one sense I do think 5e is better at low magic than 4e.
It really hasn't been since WotC took over...It sounds like the vast majority of D&D isn't D&D to you.
Dark Sun is low-magic enough that people finding out you're a wizard could lead directly to your death at the hands of essentially a mob of peasants wielding crummy stone pitchforks. Clerics and druids are less unpopular but some of the stigma surely still attaches, especially given the reputation of the templars.Which settings do you consider not high magic worlds?