How come BBEG coming out never have magic weapons or items?

dave2008 · Aug 30, 2018

Saelorn said:
In fourth edition, the monster level was an accurate reflection of its overall power, as well as its expected performance against individual PCs.

I loved 4e, but that is not entirely true. It was a good attempt, probably the best so far, but it was not completely accurate, especially as you got to higher levels and fought solos. The monster difficulty, especially damage, did not scale with level (there were some great blogs about this - heck I posted about it a bunch on the old WotC forums).

As you got higher and higher level in 4e, monsters got relatively weaker and weaker, so their level was not an accurate reflection of their power at all. It was better than 5e in some respects, but also not in others.

Oofta · Aug 30, 2018

Saelorn said:
In fourth edition, the monster level was an accurate reflection of its overall power, as well as its expected performance against individual PCs.

All I can say is you didn't play with the group I DMed. As @dave2008 mentions it needed some work particularly at higher levels.

Staccat0 · Aug 30, 2018

At a certain point the DM will have to make a creative decision and play the game. “What is in the bad guy’s pocket?” Is as good a place to start as any.

Tequila Sunrise said:
Wow, 5e is a radical departure from D&D tradition. And it has fragile balance, indeed!

Is there any kind of guidance on how to rebalance the game when using optional stuff?

Honestly? I think it’s assumed that by the time DMs have learned enough to care they have also learned enough to effectively ignore balance. I’m just finally getting the confidence to just put the stuff in a room that should be in the room and trust the players to size up the challenge and make a decision on their own if it is too tough or not.

Charlaquin · Aug 30, 2018

Tequila Sunrise said:
That's very strange indeed. This is something that the DMG spells out explicitly?

Not in so many words, no. I think it says something about magic item distribution is completely up to you as the DM, and that magic items are meant as rewards that make the players noticeably stronger. Probably. I don’t know, the 5e DMG is a hot mess.

Tequila Sunrise said:
Without any guidance, it's an ignorant risk and thus a false flexibility of the game. I mean okay, compensating for +x boosters is simple enough, if tedious -- just add x to monster attacks and defenses. But feats, multiclassing, and miscellaneous items is not something I'd want to have to compensate for just to play a good ol' fashioned D&D game.

Good news, you don’t have to compensate for Feats, multiclassing, or magic items that don’t give flat statistical bonuses. They are (theoretically) balanced due to the way they interact with ability score increases. They are optional not because they’re more powerful than the baseline, but because they’re more complex than the baseline. You should also be aware that the more options are available to players, the greater the potential gap between the power of players with different levels of system mastery. That gap is not going to break your game. It’s just not. But there are a few first order optimal strategies that may put players who are aware of them at a slight advantage compared to players who are not. This is a very different issue than the +x magic item math issue.

Tequila Sunrise said:
If I allow feats and flaming swords, is there a simple compensation like beefing up monster HP? If I allow multiclassing and this or that miscellaneous item, am I going to need more complex and energy-intensive fixes like dropping odd resistances or immunities into monster stat blocks? Etc..

You shouldn’t need to do a thing to compensate for Feats or +0 flaming swords. The game is designed to account for their existence out of the box. If you give a PC a +1 flaming sword, that PC will hit 5% more often than the game expects them to. This isn’t necessarily something you need to do anything about. A PC with a +1 weapon should hit 5% more often, that’s the point of the +1. If you give out a lot of such items, you could end up in a situation where the encounter building guidelines no longer work, because the CR guidelines are meant to tell you how to challenge characters at baseline, and your party is above the baseline. But if you’re the one who has been handing these items out, you should have a pretty good idea how much above that baseline they are. Build slightly more difficult encounters to compensate.

Tequila Sunrise said:
(Yes, you say these concerns are exaggerated, but several posters have dropped pretty dire warnings in response to the OP before I joined the thread. So if I'm to be prepared for a worst-case scenario, I have to assume the dire warnings are true.)

I don’t know what to tell you, man. According to the people who made D&D 5e, the CR math is balanced against a party with no magic items, Feats are balanced against Ability Score Increases, and multiclassing is balanced against single-classed characters. Based on my own experience, this is more or less accurate. You believe whatever you want to believe.

pming · Aug 30, 2018

Hiya!

Tequila Sunrise said:
That's very strange indeed. This is something that the DMG spells out explicitly?

Without any guidance, it's an ignorant risk and thus a false flexibility of the game.

First, no. The DMG doesn't "spell it out explicitly". It shouldn't have to. People, especially DM's, are expected to use their grey matter and experience to make the game their own. I mean, if someone is handed 4d6, a piece of paper, and a pencil, and then told to take his three friends and come up with a dice-game that can be played around a campfire...they will. A game will be created. It will suck. Then it will suck less. Then it will be ok. Then it might even be fun. Then it could get to be ridiculously fun. Should those people have just immediately said "Nope. Can't do it. Without explicit instructions of what to do or not to do, it's impossible"? Well, same thing here. "Here's the core rules. Play it. Change things you don't like. Add things you want and remove things you dislike".

Second, RPG'ing isn't a "normal" game. RPG's, by default, are customizable to the individual group. And with them, the DM has a special role to play. He/She is the "designer of the game rules and ultimate authority on how they are applied". In Monopoly someone can point to a rule and say "You are wrong"...and there's not much anyone can do to dispute it. It can be changed, but EVERYONE has a veto. With RPG's and the DM...not so much. The DM can veto something...players can not. They can accept it, or walk away.

The point is that with DM'ing a campaign of 5e, the DM learns as he goes. He gets better. He learns tricks and techniques that fit his style and he learns to adapt the rules to tell the type of stories he favours. There is no magic bullet for "insta-fixing" anything. There just isn't. It's also impossible to include rules suggestions or guidelines for every little thing. Just search the net and you will see a myriad of DM advice pages, books, podcasts, video channels, blogs, etc. One DM will say "Never do X!", and another will say "Always do X!". Both DM's are correct. Both DM's have "balanced" their system, and both DM's guidelines on how to run a game using X are doing it right.

So, as you can see, it is impossible to lay down an absolute this/that/theotherthing with regards to "balancing" a campaign. You can fiddle with numbers all you want, but the bottom line is that your game will be different from another DM's game...even if you are both using the same exact rules and guidelines. Because with RPG's and DM'ing, personal taste, style and experience make a MUCH bigger impact on how good/balanced a game is than some formula that says "If you add + items, you have to do X, Y Z to counteract it".

No getting around it. You want to know how to balance your game? Keep DM'ing, take notes, and be consistent. You'll get there.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

DEFCON 1 · Aug 30, 2018

The way I see it... if Tequila doesn't want to play 5E because the instruction booklet isn't long enough... fine by me. Tequila can go play whatever game they want. No skin off my nose.

The Crimson Binome · Aug 30, 2018

Charlaquin said:
According to the people who made D&D 5e, the CR math is balanced against a party with no magic items, Feats are balanced against Ability Score Increases, and multiclassing is balanced against single-classed characters.

There is no way that could possibly be true. A feat may be nominally balanced against +2 Strength for a fighter, but Strength caps at 20 for everyone, due to balance reasons. A fighter with Strength 20 and a feat that's balanced against +2 Strength, is flat out more powerful than a fighter with Strength 20 and a +2 bonus in some other stat.

The only logical interpretation of their statement, if the designers actually said and believed it, is that they are really bad at estimating balance. A more cynical person might suggest that they were lying, and that they actually know feats are unbalanced.

Satyrn · Aug 30, 2018

Saelorn said:
There is no way that could possibly be true. A feat may be nominally balanced against +2 Strength for a fighter, but Strength caps at 20 for everyone, due to balance reasons. A fighter with Strength 20 and a feat that's balanced against +2 Strength, is flat out more powerful than a fighter with Strength 20 and a +2 bonus in some other stat.

The only logical interpretation of their statement, if the designers actually said and believed it, is that they are really bad at estimating balance. A more cynical person might suggest that they were lying, and that they actually know feats are unbalanced.

I really don't think they're going for anything more than a rough balance, because as I implied earlier, the very foundation of character creation results in wild imbalances and completely unpredictable levels of power.'

That they made rolling for ability scores the first step in the games shows they aren't aiming for any sort of fine, carefully crafted balance. (Or if they were, they failed hilariously with Step 1)

smbakeresq · Aug 30, 2018

Gwarok said:
So how come even guys like Grazzt seem to have non magical weapons? I get that all their attacks are effectively magic, but almost no weapon wielding monsters seem to be able to find even a +1 weapon to use? You think being Demon lords or even just a high ranking Marilith they could swing something like that.

It’s better than it used to be. Old adventures always had the weapon to beat the BBEG in the BBEG horde you would find after beating the BBEG!

Tequila Sunrise · Aug 30, 2018

ad_hoc said:
5e is a return to form. 3e and 4e were a radical deviation.

3e and 4e build magical items, part and parcel of the D&D experience, into the game's basic framework. One better than the other, and hey that's what progress is all about.

Oofta said:
Or you can just complain that the game isn't perfect because no game is.

I'll continue DMing fun quality games, thanks. I'll leave you to your hyperbole.

dave2008 said:
This seems like a wholly unwarranted rant. 5e is balanced, go play. I have a family, work 40+ hrs a week, I am adding an addition to my house, and have type to pick up 5e and play. It took our group 1 session to get going. It is not some doomsday edition you are making it out to be (nor is it some perfect edition either)

Good for you? Like I've said, playtesting a vaguely-written rpg is not what I want to do with my limited free time.

dave2008 said:
I loved 4e, but that is not entirely true. It was a good attempt, probably the best so far...

That's the relevant bit. 4e is the best-balanced D&D so far, and I as a customer want the best for my money. Balance isn’t the only concern of course, but it’s important.

pming said:
No getting around it. You want to know how to balance your game? Keep DM'ing, take notes, and be consistent. You'll get there.

I have, thanks.

The whole point of new editions, of paying a company for a game, is to gain the benefit of all that frustration and boredom that others had to go thru before getting to the fun. I can personalize my gaming without starting from square one. Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate the DIY experience, I just don't see the point in paying hard-earned money for it when I can do it for free by grabbing a free rpg or writing my own heartbreaker.

In any case, good gaming. This thread is getting too hyperbolic, ranty, and passive aggressive, so I'm off to more interesting corners.