D&D 5E Magic Items in 5e... Lackluster?

[Joe Liker]

This for me encapsulates what I hated about 1e magic items & which has been carried into 5e that is GMs having more say in character development than that characters player.

You are confusing narrative and character development.

Narrative is what happens to the character.

Character development is how the character reacts to those events, by learning and growing, by becoming bitter and mean, by remaining static, etc.

The discovery of magic items is generally a part of the narrative, which is the purview of the DM.

If your DM allows the creation of magic items, it then becomes part of character development.

Since both options are available, you cannot say 5e is strictly one or the other. If you are playing with a DM who doesn't use options you like, either talk to him/her about it or find a new DM.

 

[Pickles JG]

The discovery of magic items is generally a part of the narrative, which is the purview of the DM.

If your DM allows the creation of magic items, it then becomes part of character development.

Since both options are available, you cannot say 5e is strictly one or the other. If you are playing with a DM who doesn't use options you like, either talk to him/her about it or find a new DM.

I meant development in a largely mechanical what funky stuff can my character do sense. As a 1e fighter this was overwhelmingly defined by the items you had found.

Crafting iems is an option we are repeatedly told, the default is get what the dm deigns to give you. And while I might like to change DMs I play Adventures league where I dont have the option and we are even more at the mercy of the missions rewards.

Of course twas ever thus though in LFR you could re spec weapons you found. My home group has 2 +1 weapons noone uses which I find endlesly amusing as the DM


I am being supe hard on 5e as there is plenty of mechanical customisation and for myself as a player I hope to find something fun rather than efficient.

I just hate the DM attitude of you have what magic items you are given and like it, even if ey are crap. I also dislike being put in the poistion of having to figure out what items to dole out to keep everyone happy. O roll randoly which is likely to srew someone.
Remember in1e everyone used longswords as 85% of magic swors were longswords.

 

[Sailor Moon]

This for me encapsulates what I hated about 1e magic items & which has been carried into 5e that is GMs having more say in character development than that characters player.

In 1e it was of course worse as fighters were mechanically pretty much just christmas trees festooned in magic items but its still there as shown here.

In 5th edition, magic items are not about character development. It was not designed like the last two editions.

Builds depending on magic items have left the building, well they were kicked out of the building.

 

[dragon_eater]

(fully agree in principle though - who in their right mind enchants chainmail?)

Characters with Heavy Armor Proficiency, Strength 13-14, and Dexterity 10-11. It is the best armor you can get for those characters. Maybe a caster Cleric could have those stats. They can even get Heavy Armor proficiency at 1st Level with the War Domain.

 

[KarinsDad]

You missed the point entirely.

Did I?

I am not saying that weapons in the DMG are not powerful.

The question is whether all weapons and armour require at least a +1. They don't.

Of course not. Not when weapons like an Oathbow often have bonuses to hit and damage higher than +3 weapons already.

Of course magic weapons are better than non-magical ones. I might be completely missing the point of your post but I just don't get it.

You made a list of totals of magic weapons with bonuses and without, without taking into account abilities which take the place of the static bonuses. This skews the meaning of your numbers. A PC with a Dancing Sword and a normal one typically (but not always) does more damage than a PC with a magical sword with a bonus. The bonus is built in by using a different mechanic.

The point stands: There are weapons and armour that don't have straight bonuses.

Yup. But you disregard why that is.

 

[Beleriphon]

Still, how jaded are we when a sword that's freakin' on fire isn't cool enough any more?

Jaded enough that its not a jade sword that shoots jade while being on jade fire that does +12d12 jade damage.

 

[Joe Liker]

I meant development in a largely mechanical what funky stuff can my character do sense. As a 1e fighter this was overwhelmingly defined by the items you had found.

One might reply that if a player wants to do "funky stuff" and not rely on the DM (or random chance) for the proper items, that player could always roll a wizard instead of a fighter. In fact, it could be argued that this is a major selling point for the wizard class.

 

[Schmoe]

Did I?



Of course not. Not when weapons like an Oathbow often have bonuses to hit and damage higher than +3 weapons already.



You made a list of totals of magic weapons with bonuses and without, without taking into account abilities which take the place of the static bonuses. This skews the meaning of your numbers. A PC with a Dancing Sword and a normal one typically (but not always) does more damage than a PC with a magical sword with a bonus. The bonus is built in by using a different mechanic.



Yup. But you disregard why that is.

The original post said that weapons with a regular + bonus are boring and uninspired. So when someone points out that there are a lot of weapons that don't have a bonus, your rebuttal is that they somehow don't count, because they are better? Are you going to say a flaming weapon doesn't count either, because it adds more damage than a +1? I'm not sure I'm following your logic.

 

[KarinsDad]

The original post said that weapons with a regular + bonus are boring and uninspired. So when someone points out that there are a lot of weapons that don't have a bonus, your rebuttal is that they somehow don't count, because they are better? Are you going to say a flaming weapon doesn't count either, because it adds more damage than a +1? I'm not sure I'm following your logic.

No special logic. Just stating that items that merely add a bonus to hit and damage with a different mechanic are no different than a static bonus item. From the PC's POV, an Oathbow is basically a +5 weapon against one foe. Other than more damage overall, it does what other bows do.

 

[Schmoe]

No special logic. Just stating that items that merely add a bonus to hit and damage with a different mechanic are no different than a static bonus item. From the PC's POV, an Oathbow is basically a +5 weapon against one foe. Other than more damage overall, it does what other bows do.

Except that your premise is patently not true. While an Oathbow is similar, because it increases the number of hits and the damage, the actual mechanics are very different. A +X item and an Oathbow will perform very differently in different situations. If you blur the distinctions to the extent you are proposing, you may as well just lump all damage increasing items into the same category and then complain that there's no variety.