D&D 5E Magic items in D&D Next: Remove them as PC dependant?

[Ultimatecalibur]

I really don't like it when people say that good items are only for high levels. I think of +X bonuses as a quality indicator.

The difference between a +0 mace and a +3 mace is the difference between a knotty wooden club and a flanged steel mace.

 

[Gundark]

I really really hope they get away from the dependency on magic items in D&D Next. I hated wish lists, I hated it when I just happened to find that piece of gear that I wanted because my build called for it. I used to base my PC's on gear that I found. I had an elven wizard that found a really nice bow, I changed him around and started taking archery type feats, took a few levels in fighter and took on the Arcane Archer PrC all because I found a bow.

I think it would bring the mystery back to magic items instead of an assumed commodity that is used to "build" your characters.

They said in the D&D XP seminars that magic items where not going to be part of the base math. I have "contacts" that say that so far this is so.

 

[BobTheNob]

Well judging from the pole...I see overwhelming votes for not having dependance, and I'm totally for that.

I like magic items to be the icing on the cake. They give flavor and color, but if they aren't there, the cake is still a cake. I want players to be delighted to receive them, to get that giddy little thrill, but I don't want players to be behind the ball because they don't have them(yet).

Edit : this is both from a play perspective and from a dm. I don't want the players feeling underpowered due to lack of gear and I don't want, as dm, to constantly be stressing and putting in checks and measure to ensure they are not.

 

[avin]

No brainer poll.

 

[Recidivism]

Here's the thing though. You have 2 choices:

1) Magic is not needed by PCs - In this case magic items must be fairly trivial since the rules clearly won't be factoring them in. Any powerful item will cause issues. No combat type bonuses, no major powers, etc. This is like 4e with inherent bonuses but more extreme.

2) Magic is needed by PCs - You can now have (and really must have) powerful items and all that goes with it. Any PC not having the requisite expected items is gimped.

I don't really agree with your premises here. I see nothing that dictates that lack of need for magic items necessitates they be weak -- Frankly, I feel like removing a dependency on ever-increasing +items frees up game design space for every magic item to be more powerful & unique. It's specifically the idea that every magic item has to fit into a valuation of +item and is a defined part of character progression that leads to watered down magic items.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This is easy to fix if magic items don't, as their primary function, give a "+" to hit or to defense. I would love to see items which grant static bonuses made the top items in the game. For instance, swords that give a minor initiative bonus would be a good low level item, a sword that bursts into flame be a mid-level item, and a +1 sword be a high level item. A +1 flaming sword would be an epic item.

Such a system would go well with the flatter power curve that 5e is purportedly trying for.

It isn't easy to 'fix' though, lol. If items are significant, then they will be significant because they have powerful effects of some kind. Otherwise they are insignificant. If they have powerful effects then the game must assume some degree or other of magic item use. Once it does that they are effectively required because not having them makes the characters weaker in some significant way. Likewise if items are insignificant, then it doesn't matter of course, you can assume whatever availability you want, it won't really matter much.

You can make items HIGHLY situational and thus basically plot devices of course. Then they can be powerful but they are also assumed (but only for specific situations). That could be a perfectly fun situation. OTOH it breaks heavily from D&D tradition.

 

[Tallifer]

I voted "No" in this poll, and I wish I had 99 more accounts on enworld so I could vote "no" 100 times.

In most of the iconic fantasy novels - Lord of the Rings, Conan, A Song of Ice & Fire, etc - the characters are not dripping with dozens of magic items and carrying around golf bags full of different weapons. "Samwise, it's the wererats, get out my silver weapon" - "Samwise, it's the balrog, get out my +3 good-aligned cold iron sword" - "Samwise, it's a pit fiend, get out my silver good-aligned battleaxe" - "Sam, it's an efreet, get out my frost-brand sword"

I would like to see that. <grins> Samwise was a manservant after all. "Master, would you care to use the Wand of Web, the Bow of Slaying or the Vorpal Hedgetrimmer?" "Bring me the Fiery Spatula. Chop, chop and there's a good fellow." That must be why Wayne Reynolds's characters are always weighed down with crap.

 

[Tallifer]

No brainer poll.

And quite useless since this thread shows that everyone has a quite different idea of what too much magic means.

 

[FireLance]

You know, a lot of people are throwing around the word "dependence", but it kind of misses the point. No PC in any edition of D&D has ever been "dependant" on magic items. At most, the power and abilities of the magic items might influence the power and type of monsters the PC should fight.

If you don't have a magic weapon in 1e, you should avoid fights with creatures that can only be harmed by magic weapons, and your DM shouldn't put you in a situation where you have to kill one.

In 3e and 4e, it simply means that you have to fight less powerful monsters than the system assumes you are capable of. Instead of CR 15 or level 15 monsters, you might be taking on CR 13 or level 13 monsters instead.

When I hear talk about the 5e system taking magic items out of the math, to me, it simply suggests that magic items will just add to your effective character level instead of the lack of appropriate magic items effectively subtracting from it (as in 3e and 4e). So, a level 13 party with no magic items would be able to take on a level 13 challenge. If they have powerful items, they might be able to take on a level 15 challenge instead. To me, it makes about as much difference as THAC0 vs BAB, or saving throws vs static non-AC defences: it's a difference of presentation, not substance.

 

[Stormonu]

I'd like to see the +X quality be a mundane, masterwork-like quality of an item - You could have a +5 sword, but it's not magical in the slightest.

I'm also of the camp that magic should be flavorful, rare and not intrinsic to the math of character development.

And no more assumed magic shops. It's silly to assume in a world where the standard weekly wage is 1 sp that in any given backwater town you can buy or pawn a 10,000 gp item on the spur of the moment.