D&D 5E (2014) Wandering "Monsters": Magic Items

[Blackbrrd]

I thought it was a very good article. Now, I might be too stupid, dense and/or unimaginative but I like having guidelines to fall upon, but heck I've only been DMing for 20 years so what do I know...

Warder

Nothing like a game system which spells out the creators assumptions. Quite a bit better than the game systems that just assumes you are a mind reader...

What I really like about the article is that they have dialed waaaay back on magic item assumptions for 5e. 3e and 4e was quite a bit over the top for my taste, especially when DM-ing 4e.. In the 4e campaign I am running now, I am using the inherent bonuses optional rule and giving out magic items like in a "normal" 5e campaign. Around 3 magic items per character at around level 10.

@Mistwell thanks for your post, you saved me several paragraphs of snarkyness. Can't xp you though, it seems I have got to spread some around first.

 

[Ichneumon]

So in a low, mid or high-magic campaign, the baseline will be each character getting a permanent magic item about every two, three or four+ levels respectively. Sounds fair. When I put aside my seething outrage that they're suggesting actual numbers to me, I can appreciate being given sensible defaults for controlling the 'feel' of my game, magic-wise. It's also apparent that the much lower numbers compared to a typical 3e or 4e campaign, thanks to the removal of the requirement to continuously 'trade up' key items, means more items stay in the PCs hands, and fewer go to anonymous 'item buyers' after the adventure. During my 3e and 4e games, sessions would routinely end with a magic-item fire sale thanks to all the unwanted loot. I'll be glad to see that reined in.

 

[Uller]

One of the things that is a bit of a paradigm shift from previous editions that keeps coming up around magic items is that magic items are not something you can buy/sell. I assume this is really only in regard to permanent items. But this is strange to me. Assuming a typical D&D campaign setting where magic is a reasonably common thing and while it might be rare for an individual to be able to produce permanent magic items, certainly the history of the setting is long, magic items are very valuable and rarely destroyed and the people who make magic items that are useful for fighting horrible monsters are probably rarely the same people who use them for such purposes (or at least that is my operating assumption). So while I agree there isn't some vast magic industrial workshops producing +1 longswords for the local magic box store, what is the mechanism by which items get distributed from magic item producers to magic item users? If not a market (or some other mechanism that is reasonably modeled in game by the exchange of treasure for items) then what is it and what is the use for mundane treasure to an adventurer if not to upgrade gear? What do PCs do with items they find not very useful?

In my own campaigns I've always been upfront with the "rules" for finances and treasure with a few guidelines I provide to my players:

1) Adventurers do not spend all of their time actually adventuring. A typical "adventure" or set of related adventures might cover 2-3 levels and then there is down time that could be a matter of a few weeks at low level to multiple years at high levels (the assumption is there are more opportunities to save the village than to save the world/universe/multiverse)

2) During this downtime the adventurers earn some sort of living with an income that roughly matches their lifestyle.

3) This leaves the treasure they have acquired from adventuring to be used for such things as buying better gear, commissioning the creating of a special magic item, influencing the world in various ways, etc.

While I don't have magic shops that are the equivalent of our world's sporting good stores for the purchase of any and all magic items listed in the various source books, I am generally fairly liberal about allowing PCs to buy/sell/trade magic items during this time. The assumption is that PCs didn't go to a local store...they did some research, made some contacts, bartered, whatever. I just don't want to waste table time for a PC to sell his +2 battle axe that isn't all that useful to him for a low price and buy a +2 longsword with the proceeds (plus a sizable chunk of gold) for a higher price if that is what the player wants for his character.

I like this method because as a DM I want magic items I place in the game to either have a specific reason for being there or make sense (in the game world). I also want non-magical treasure to seem like an actual reward that the players find useful and I don't really want them to have to use it in ways outside of adventuring and/or influencing the game world. I don't think offering a reward of 1000gp for completing some quest means much of the players don't feel like they can do something cool with it and the most cool thing they can do is get that magic item they've been saving up for.

Anyway...that's just me. I don't really need rules and guidelines or rules for this but I imagine newer players find them useful.

 

[tomBitonti]

Does the math REALLY assume NO magic items? And if so, what does adding magic items do to the math?

This is where the discussion gets all wonky for me.

Having, or not having, any of the following makes a difference as to the power level of players, and makes a difference as to what types of encounters as possible:

*) Magic items which provide numerical boosts.
*) Items providing healing.
*) Wondrous items of various sorts.

Instead of generic stuff that no-one would disagree with, and which are of little use, I'd much rather see specific examples that clearly demonstrate how play changes with different magic item distributions.

Thx!

TomB

 

[NewJeffCT]

the article is blocked at my work, but I think I get the general idea from the posts here. I've been playing D&D and primarily DMing since the late 1970s. Despite all of this experience, I sometimes find it useful to have things consolidated into an article so I can reference it. I'm not a big fan of Pathfinder (or 4e or 3.5e or 3e for that matter), but I picked up their Ultimate Campaign guide because it organized a lot of thoughts I had had over the years and put them down coherently. Sure, I knew a lot of that on my own, but it's nice to see it all consolidated into one book. (Plus, I love the tavern name and adventuring party name generators. )

So, the fact that this article spells things out is nice. Plus, it gives you an idea where the game is going - the default in Pathfinder, 3.5e and 4e is lots and lots of magic items. If you're a higher level PC and don't have nearly every "slot" filled with level appropriate magic items, you're behind the curve in terms of challenging monsters of your level/CR. If the default is fewer items, then you won't be expected to have that "Christmas Tree" effect in order to keep up with the Joneses or the Dragonses.

 

[Dungeoneer]

One of the things that is a bit of a paradigm shift from previous editions that keeps coming up around magic items is that magic items are not something you can buy/sell.

Well TBH this was kind of an unofficial rule for many 4e GMs.

In a game where magic items give players substantial bonuses, you have to make sure that the players don't get too many magic items.

In a game where gold can buy magic items, players will use gold to buy magic items.

Ergo you can't give players too much gold or they will buy tons of magic items and wreck the power curve.

Now nobody, not even stingy GMs, likes telling players they only found 200 gold coins in the dragon's hoard because that's all the magic item economy allows. So the solution is to make sure that giving the players gold won't wreck the power curve. In other words to make magic items something you can't buy, only acquire.

 

[Ace]

I thjought it was a solid article.My one thing I really hope 5e has rules that allow for a balanced little to no magic iem set up. 4e (in the DMG2 IIRC alternate rules ) hit it out of the park on those grounds and no reason 5e can'tdo as well.

 

[Remathilis]

I couldn't quite wrap my head around "We are making no assumptions about how many magic items a party will have. And here are our assumptions about how many magic items a party will have."

Does the math REALLY assume NO magic items? And if so, what does adding magic items do to the math?

Sure. The +3 bonus (max) from a magic sword is easy to counterbalance when ACs don't really scale past the 20's.

I'm not getting all the hatred. Its nothing revolutionary, but I think its nice to have a guideline for what a reasonable game should have. Hint: D&D has always involved Killing Things and TAKING THEIR STUFF. You need to know reasonably how much stuff to give, esp. newer or inexperienced DMs, or those who cut their teeth on a "toy-an-encounter" treasure of 3e or 4e.

Seems to me the only people outraged are the stingy DMs who think +1 daggers are 20th level treasure or the munchkin players who want a +9 sword of god-slaying...

 

[billd91]

I have no problem with the article either. It's absolutely true that D&D players (and DMs) start with some edition and the guidelines have to be written with them in mind. I'd appreciate more designer rationales in the rulebooks, even including comparisons with other editions, in sidebars if not incorporated within the main rules themselves.

Personally, I'm not particular worried about the magic items not being incorporated into math assumptions. 1e functioned just fine that way and I don't see why 5e wouldn't. Magic items should provide bonuses for the PC whether in hitting, doing damage, or having additional special abilities, not be required to keep up with Monster Jones next door.

 

[Mistwell]

This is where the discussion gets all wonky for me.

Having, or not having, any of the following makes a difference as to the power level of players, and makes a difference as to what types of encounters as possible:

*) Magic items which provide numerical boosts.

It's so far a max +1 to AC (at the moment no +1 shield is listed), and a max +1 to attack, and a max +1 to damage. I don't think a +1 in any of those categories is going to break anything. And, you're limited to 3 total attuned items.

*) Items providing healing.

Healing during a short rest already in theory can heal you to full. I don't think healing items, which begin as uncommon, will throw off the math.

*) Wondrous items of various sorts.

That would depend on the item, but unless it involves math directly, I doubt it would throw math off much. There isn't much math involved in a Bag of Holding, Crystal Ball, or Slippers of Spider Climbing. On the other hand, a Belt of Giant Strength, and some Ioun Stones, do change some math. The Belt in particular is the one item that obviously breaks bounded accuracy, I suspect they will deal with that issue. I know for a fact they're looking at the Ioun Stones, and stacking issues for AC in general.