D&D 5E Wandering "Monsters": Magic Items

[the Jester]

Would it be fair to say that, in this sort of play, the idea of balancing encounters/effectiveness over "the adventure" doesn't really come into play, because in a certain sense there isn't such a thing as "the adventure" until the players actually play the game?

More or less. Although there might be definite "adventures" that the pcs can choose- rescue the princess, etc.- there is no preset, predetermined one.

The sandbox approach you both describe allows the players (via their PCs) to choose what they take on, and therefore to make their own allowances for whether or not they have items. The GM doesn't need to compensate. Do you worry that this sort of approach can produce balance issues with asymmetric resource suites, though? In classic D&D play like that described by Gygax in his PHB I think it obviously did cause balance issues, but that was part of the point: fighters were meant to be easier to play at low levels, and MUs were meant to somewhat overshadow them at high levels. Can D&Dnext be played this way?

I don't see why not.

I've written and re-written my reply here about four times, and I think I've finally realized that I'm not sure what you mean here. I assume you're talking about the difference between a wizard running out of spells and a fighter running out of stabs when you talk about 'asymmetric resource suites', right? What balance issues would you expect to crop up? Sorry if I'm being obtuse, please clarify!

 

[GX.Sigma]

I don't recall if all the short knives from the wight barrows were magical or just well-crafted.

One of them did harm the Witch-King, who could not be damaged by normal weapons.

 

[pemerton]

I'd say Frodo's mithril chain wasn't magical, just well made. The equivalent of masterwork.

In D&Dnext terms I think it is elven chain, a very rare magic item - because Frodo is able to wear it even without being proficient in it.[/QUOTE]

 

[pemerton]

Double post deleted.

 

[pemerton]

I've written and re-written my reply here about four times, and I think I've finally realized that I'm not sure what you mean here. I assume you're talking about the difference between a wizard running out of spells and a fighter running out of stabs when you talk about 'asymmetric resource suites', right?

Yes.

What balance issues would you expect to crop up? Sorry if I'm being obtuse, please clarify!

Not obtuse at all.

The balance issues I see are all the standard ones that are notorious topics of debate - 15 minute adventuring days which lets caster's nova, fighters needing the clerics to take healing spells to keep their hit points up but the clerics nova-ing instead leaving the fighters languishing, etc, etc.

It's not my plan to try and derail the thread into a debate around whether or not people experience those issues - I think it's clear that many do, it seems also that many don't. I'm more trying to get a sense of what WotC is thinking about in terms of developing the GM side of resources for handling these issues around pacing, recovery etc.

For instance: original 4e doesn't need any advice to deal with this particular issue, because all players regardless of class are on basically the same resource recovery cycle. All you need to worry about is that if the PCs rest after every encounter then they'll have lots of dailies and practically unlimited surges, and so you might want to amp up your encounter strength a bit.

Essentials, by creating markedly asymmetric resource suites (no martial dailies), opens up the issue but (as best I recall from reading the Rules Compendium and the Essentials DM book) gives no advice on how to handle it as a GM.

13th Age has Essentials-style resources but (unlike default 4e) puts the rationing of rests on the GM rather than the player side, and so enforces balance of effectiveness that way. [MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION] has often talked about using the "adventure" as the unit of play in terms which I have interpreted along similar lines.

Anyway, this thread has got me thinking about how those different sorts of approaches to handling - or not worrying about - balance, and encounter/adventure budgets, etc, interact with magic item rules, and whether or not magic items are "built into the maths". Upthread, for instance, I suggested that if the game advices the GM to alter encounter/adventure budgets, and thereby ration resource recovery, to allow for them then they have, in effect, been built in.

In a sandbox style of play in which the players choose their opponents and ration their resource recovery, though, they won't be built in in the same way - but then I'm wondering whether that opens up other issues because of asymmetric recovery across different classes. And I'm wondering what advice/commentary WotC will give in relation to this. (And part of why I mentioned the Gygax PHB is that D&D has, in the past, deliberately embraced a lack of balance arising from asymmetric recovery across different classes. So when I'm talking about advice/commentary, I'm not just talking about "techniques to achieve balance".)

I don't think the above is very coherent, sorry. But it's where I've got to in trying to think through this idea about what is or isn't built into "the maths" of the game.

 

[howandwhy99]

How many magic items should player characters wield as they make their way through their adventuring careers?

I'm pleased the article doesn't make distinctions between DMs who distribute treasure across the game map, those who fulfill player lists, those who simply have players choose their own out of books, and those who don't use any method.

Another topic, while not mentioned specifically, is Division of Treasure by the players. This is a game unto itself. The article doesn't speak to who gets what magic item and I think that's good. It only asks how many a group of 4 should relatively receive over 20 levels. Maybe this is curved, but 20 levels seems far too high to me already. Plus a lot of things are taken, lost, never discerned as magical, or discovered in the first place.

--If you really want an authentic 1e AD&D experience, assume a party of 8 for the 1e distribution and run a party of 5-6.




EDIT:
D&D isn't balanced according to Encounter or Adventure. It's balanced by Level. An Adventure Module may include multiple levels within it, but those levels need to be rebalanced to the measures used by each particular campaign. Locations, monsters, treasure, all rewards and difficulties.

 

[ccooke]

Yes.

Not obtuse at all.

The balance issues I see are all the standard ones that are notorious topics of debate - 15 minute adventuring days which lets caster's nova, fighters needing the clerics to take healing spells to keep their hit points up but the clerics nova-ing instead leaving the fighters languishing, etc, etc.

It's not my plan to try and derail the thread into a debate around whether or not people experience those issues - I think it's clear that many do, it seems also that many don't. I'm more trying to get a sense of what WotC is thinking about in terms of developing the GM side of resources for handling these issues around pacing, recovery etc.

For instance: original 4e doesn't need any advice to deal with this particular issue, because all players regardless of class are on basically the same resource recovery cycle. All you need to worry about is that if the PCs rest after every encounter then they'll have lots of dailies and practically unlimited surges, and so you might want to amp up your encounter strength a bit.

Essentials, by creating markedly asymmetric resource suites (no martial dailies), opens up the issue but (as best I recall from reading the Rules Compendium and the Essentials DM book) gives no advice on how to handle it as a GM.

13th Age has Essentials-style resources but (unlike default 4e) puts the rationing of rests on the GM rather than the player side, and so enforces balance of effectiveness that way. [MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION] has often talked about using the "adventure" as the unit of play in terms which I have interpreted along similar lines.

Anyway, this thread has got me thinking about how those different sorts of approaches to handling - or not worrying about - balance, and encounter/adventure budgets, etc, interact with magic item rules, and whether or not magic items are "built into the maths". Upthread, for instance, I suggested that if the game advices the GM to alter encounter/adventure budgets, and thereby ration resource recovery, to allow for them then they have, in effect, been built in.

In a sandbox style of play in which the players choose their opponents and ration their resource recovery, though, they won't be built in in the same way - but then I'm wondering whether that opens up other issues because of asymmetric recovery across different classes. And I'm wondering what advice/commentary WotC will give in relation to this. (And part of why I mentioned the Gygax PHB is that D&D has, in the past, deliberately embraced a lack of balance arising from asymmetric recovery across different classes. So when I'm talking about advice/commentary, I'm not just talking about "techniques to achieve balance".)

I don't think the above is very coherent, sorry. But it's where I've got to in trying to think through this idea about what is or isn't built into "the maths" of the game.

I think that when the party has full control over what they face in a true sandbox design, then they are also taking resposibility for the balance of their resource usage away from the GM.

That doesn't mean the GM has no responsibilities towards them, of course, but it does limit them to (effectively) making sure the players are able to make good decisions. In situations like this, I see my job as making sure there is enough information in the world for the players to make informed decisions and, in cases where the players are being sensible and looking for them, ways to escape from situations that are going bad.

To me, it seems that if the players are taking the responsibility to decide exactly what they face away ftom the GM, then my turning that around and managing the adventure challenge for them would be a betrayal of their trust in the world I've built.

 

[Sadras]

I'm more trying to get a sense of what WotC is thinking about in terms of developing the GM side of resources for handling these issues around pacing, recovery etc.
...(snip)...
In a sandbox style of play in which the players choose their opponents and ration their resource recovery, though, they won't be built in in the same way - but then I'm wondering whether that opens up other issues because of asymmetric recovery across different classes. And I'm wondering what advice/commentary WotC will give in relation to this. (And part of why I mentioned the Gygax PHB is that D&D has, in the past, deliberately embraced a lack of balance arising from asymmetric recovery across different classes. So when I'm talking about advice/commentary, I'm not just talking about "techniques to achieve balance".)

I don't think the above is very coherent, sorry. But it's where I've got to in trying to think through this idea about what is or isn't built into "the maths" of the game.

Well, WoTC has built wizard spell recovery within the class so as to limit the 15-minute days and this should not be discounted. Furthermore the ritual mechanic adopted from 4e assists greatly in this regard. Magical items are definitely not necessary but certainly improve on this, but I do not believe that was WoTC primary or even secondary goal with magic items, although I could certainly be wrong here, but I have not experienced it.

Then you have the damage dealing cantrip Ray of Frost and we have had plenty of threads on that issue (please no more), so the Wizard is always useful.

Finally limited AC and the Bounded Accuracy influence certainly help during encounters, I also feel some of the monsters are perhaps slightly weaker (and I'm not speaking in regards to the lack of proficiency bonus), so PCs generally can push through a lot further than they usually could in sandbox adventures.

I'm currently running a blend of The Temple of Elemental Evil /Elwyn's Sanctuary adventure using Next and from the sessions we have had I can safely say, for me, the design team has done tremendously well to break the 15 minute work days, and if one prefers the old style of play, one can simply limit what has been allowed above. It caters for both camps I believe.

EDIT: Almost forgot, then there is 5e's Surge equivalent, the HD mechanic and that certainly ensures that clerics are not just heal-bots and that fighter can push on after 1-2 encounters.

 

[Sage Genesis]

I don't have huge problems with the article but I do have a few footnotes or nitpicks.

First, as others pointed out as well, the amount of magic items is only part of the issue. The power of the items is another. Given that they introduced a common/rare/etc. system right in the core of Next, it seems strange that they wouldn't make use of it.

Second, the amount of magic items you have in 4e is rather overstated in the article. You don't typically use every single gold piece to buy items, for example. And 4e does have a system to make characters of higher level than 1 (just like 3e) and those guidelines give you three items, plus enough petty cash to get some potions, a few minor items, stuff like that. In fact, if you use those guidelines to make a level 20 character you'll probably end up with 6 permanent items, give or take. Which is about the same amount as what Next is going for. This is because people tend to forget that 4e might give you more items, it also replaces more. The vast majority of items you get in 4e are simply upgrades of existing items, the same thing with a higher plus. In Next that doesn't exist and you can keep items for your entire career.

Third, I'm amused that the original DMG, which waggled its finger so much at Monty Haul games, ends up giving far more treasure than you'd expect.

Fourth, the Wish spell can currently make any item of rare quality or less. If you've got a boring winter month or two to laze about (and why not, it's not like the world needs saving every other day like some parody slapstick comedy) then you can comfortably outfit the entire party and your henchmen in basic +1 gear. I wonder if the rules and guidelines have that in mind? Or maybe Wish will get nerfed?

 

[howandwhy99]

What did I miss, or get wrong? And, given these numbers, how would that equate to levels for these PCs in 5e?

What you have in Fellowship of the Ring is a mixed level group running average on treasure for a high level group.

If D&D Next is 20 levels, then Aragorn begins in the mid to high teens. He is one of the most accomplished and storied warriors of the North.

Boromir is powerful in court due to his lineage, but is clearly a low to mid teens fighter. He has fought and led battles much of his life.

Legolas and Gimli are also warriors. They probably start around 8 to 10, are known in their homelands, and have powerful equipment. Each are straight fighters, but specialize in different fighting styles. They too have been playing this campaign for quite some time.

Gandalf is a high level wizard, one of only a handful in the setting, and an NPC. This isn't his first campaign. His adventuring started 1000s of years ago. He's an allied, good-aligned quasi-deity and an associate to everyone. He begins with strong ties to Aragorn and Frodo.

Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin all start at 0-level. They gain training during breaks while travelling to become fighters. By the start of book 3 they each have maybe 2-3 levels. Their lack of ability is compensated for by the rest of the party distributing magic items to them to increase their power based upon the difficulty of the threats the others believe they all must face together. This gifting keeps happening throughout the books until they are out of allied lands.

Strangely, what might be happening is 4 players with their high level PCs are each playing a newbie hobbit PC too and running them at the same time as the game requires. It would be interesting to figure out which pairs up with which. Of course, the party splits up after not too long. One dies. And two of the low level PCs go way, way out of bounds for what they can handle. All the time carrying a cursed major artifact, which they fear to use.