D&D 5E Traps for DMs to Avoid

[pming]

Hiya!

We just put our 5e campaign on hold to play some sci-fi...Shatterzone, actually; something we've never played. And so far the only thing I (we, really) have found to be a serious potential for "game breaker" is when I actually said "Yeah, sure. Lets use Feats this campaign". Initially the 5e Feats looked to be mostly "wider range, less add'ey"...but as we've played we're quickly seeing them as being a bit too powerful for us. But, time will tell, so we're sticking to them for now.

Magic item and spell wise...I'm finding that items that more or less duplicate a spell, but that ignore the spells "balancing factors" (like saves, concentration or to-hit rolls, for example) are waaaay up on the list of things to keep and eye out for. I'm all for having an item 'duplicate' a spell...but I want all the drawbacks to that spell as well. If you want something that lets you "Fly, but without needing to concentrate"...then I want some other drawback. For example, "Cloak of Flying: The wearer can Fly up to 3 times per day, for up to 1 hour each time, at a rate of 60'. The wearer must firmly grasp the edges of the cloak in his hands. The cloak then becomes something akin to a modern-day "wing suit". Letting go of either edge stops the flight". That would be a-ok in my game as the drawback is you don't get to use your hands while flying.

So, as long as a spell or item doesn't simply allow the "breaking of a rule", and instead it "enhances or changes...without outright ignoring/breaking...something". I'd much rather have an item that lets a character cast Cantrips as if he was a 1st level Wizard, than have an item that lets a 1st level wizard cast all Cantrips without needing to make an attack roll...for example.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[SirAntoine]

I haven't run 5th Edition as DM yet, but from experience I know you can encounter problems like this in any edition. The best advice is encourage the DM to feel free to tack back previous rulings he or she makes, including previous house rules, and make new rules and house rules as they feel like it. You have to find the right balance for yourself as a DM, and for your players. This is accomplished over time, like you are honing the edge of a blade.

A few areas of the game might create new problems, unique to 5th edition, so I thought I should address them:

- Wizards now have d6 hit dice.
- Each bonus or penalty makes a bigger difference because of bounded accuracy. Veteran DM's may think they can just wing the new edition without experience or carefully studying the rules, but they need to know them and avoid just assigning the bonuses or giving magic items out from previous editions.
- Characters continue to roll for new hit points past 9th level.
- The constitution bonus to hit points applies equally for all characters, so wizards can even get +3 or +4 per die.
- The spells have changed, and letting players recharge their abilities can be too easily abused. The rules don't think about what it means to not have to memorize spells or sleep.
- The monsters have huge HP's, making them difficult to take down one on one or quickly.
- AC doesn't max-out at -10 anymore.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Because it is called out in the rules (and is very overpowered), it's a trap. Some DMs might think it is ok to allow it precisely because it is allowed and even encouraged in the rules.

How do you figure it's overpowered? The PC is sacrificing one of his three possible attunement "slots" for a magic item that accomplishes nothing. (Once you have a Belt of Giant Strength, ze Gauntlets do nossink!) That's hefty price to pay, even for a really cool weapon.

 

[Kaychsea]

- Wizards now have d6 hit dice.
- Each bonus or penalty makes a bigger difference because of bounded accuracy. Veteran DM's may think they can just wing the new edition without experience or carefully studying the rules, but they need to know them and avoid just assigning the bonuses or giving magic items out from previous editions. - This has always been true in every game, let alone version of D&D
- Characters continue to roll for new hit points past 9th level. - not new for over a decade.
- The constitution bonus to hit points applies equally for all characters, so wizards can even get +3 or +4 per die. - Not new
- The spells have changed, and letting players recharge their abilities can be too easily abused. The rules don't think about what it means to not have to memorize spells or sleep. - Not true, though many DMs might
- The monsters have huge HP's, making them difficult to take down one on one or quickly. - one the the memes of 5e "HP is the new AC"
- AC doesn't max-out at -10 anymore. - not new for over a decade

From the above I assume you are coming to the party from 2e?

 

[SirAntoine]

From the above I assume you are coming to the party from 2e?

Yes. And you could really wing the game going between Classic D&D, 1st Edition, and 2nd Edition. By wing I mean run your adventure as written for the other system without making any conversions. The rules were almost the same for the most part, the only really big exception being in Classic D&D elves and other races besides human were classes like fighter or cleric. Each system had magic items going up to +5 or +6, basically the same spells, and the monsters were all usable in all editions without needing to change them. The first monsters I fought as a player in Classic D&D were demons from 1st Edition. 2nd Edition kind of blew up the fiends, giving them crazy powers, but you could just ignore them if you ran your adventure for 1st Edition players. The hit dice was the same, and you could trust this mechanic itself to judge if a monster would be too powerful most of the time. There were still conversion rules to go between the systems, but the differences were very small by comparison.

 

[Pickles JG]

A few areas of the game might create new problems, unique to 5th edition, so I thought I should address them:

- Wizards now have d6 hit dice.
- Each bonus or penalty makes a bigger difference because of bounded accuracy. Veteran DM's may think they can just wing the new edition without experience or carefully studying the rules, but they need to know them and avoid just assigning the bonuses or giving magic items out from previous editions.
- Characters continue to roll for new hit points past 9th level.
- The constitution bonus to hit points applies equally for all characters, so wizards can even get +3 or +4 per die.
- The spells have changed, and letting players recharge their abilities can be too easily abused. The rules don't think about what it means to not have to memorize spells or sleep.
- The monsters have huge HP's, making them difficult to take down one on one or quickly.
- AC doesn't max-out at -10 anymore.

Welcome to the 21st century

 

[CapnZapp]

<giant snip>

So regardless of number needed to hit, an Oathbow normally does more damage than a +5 bow<snip>

But the important thing here is the DPR. A +5 Bow is nowhere near the DPR of an Oathbow.

But, now you're talking about two different things.

The Oathbow grants both advantage on the attack and lots of extra damage.

Of course the oathbow will do more damage than a +5 bow, but that's much more due to the extra damage than the advantage.

My impression is that the discussion was "which is better, a +5 weapon or an advantage weapon?"

The argument was then "advantage is more like +3.5" to which you replied "but this averages in scenarios that aren't likely to happen in practice", and so far so good.

But then you bring in the DPR of the Oathbow, which is much more than an "advantage bow".

Hope this helps

 

[KarinsDad]

But, now you're talking about two different things.

The Oathbow grants both advantage on the attack and lots of extra damage.

Of course the oathbow will do more damage than a +5 bow, but that's much more due to the extra damage than the advantage.

My impression is that the discussion was "which is better, a +5 weapon or an advantage weapon?"

The argument was then "advantage is more like +3.5" to which you replied "but this averages in scenarios that aren't likely to happen in practice", and so far so good.

But then you bring in the DPR of the Oathbow, which is much more than an "advantage bow".

Hope this helps

The original discussion was how powerful an Oathbow is. I mentioned that it was more powerful than a +5 bow (abet, one foe per day). He then focused solely on the Advantage is not as good as +5 to hit and listed an average of +3.5, but as illustrated, advantage for those numbers a player almost always needs on a die are generally +4.2 to +5.0, well above the +3.5 average. In addition, the DPR discussion illustrates why the Oathbow is better than a +5 weapon. The DPR is 50% more. The Oathbow is about equal to a +7 or +8 bow. Way above the normal +3 static weapon max.

So yes, I brought the discussion back to an Oathbow vs. a +5 weapon instead of just focusing on +5 vs. advantage which is what he did. The latter is mostly white noise in the discussion and is misleading. DPR is generally what determines how good one magic weapon is compared to another because DPR dictates how quickly foes go down.

 

[KarinsDad]

How do you figure it's overpowered? The PC is sacrificing one of his three possible attunement "slots" for a magic item that accomplishes nothing. (Once you have a Belt of Giant Strength, ze Gauntlets do nossink!) That's hefty price to pay, even for a really cool weapon.

While what you say is true, there is a bit more to it.

The limit of Strength is the game is 20 shy of a Belt of Giantkind. Which means that the first giant belt (Str 21) is only helpful for PCs with Str below 20 (for all intents and purposes). So, a giant belt allows Str based PCs to focus on feats instead of on Str boost.

So a typical scenario is that a PC gets the Gauntlets first. The player, having a Str of 19, might focus a bit on feats (or Con). Later on, the player gets the giant belt. That player never focuses on Str again and the gauntlets are given to some other PC. Even later on, the party finds the Hammer. Ok, now they have all three.

The Hammer adds +4 to Str, so:

Hill: 21 to 25
Stone: 23 to 27
Fire: 25 to 29
Cloud: 27 to 30
Storm: 29 to 30

The bonus to hit is now +1 for magic weapon (which takes care of damage resistance) and +7 to +10 for the combo. Total: +8 to +11.

If the PC had a +3 weapon and the belt, he would be +8 to +12.

At first glance, wow, the combo is not as good as a belt and a +3 weapon (which should be relatively rare anyway).

Well, the combo has two more things going for it. It has the minor kill giant feature, but it has the (approximately) 3 times a day of Stun in a 30 foot radius. 30 foot is a huge radius (very few spells in the game are that big) and stun is huge.

This feature alone allows the PCs to fight in 2 to 3 extra encounters per day. One PC has the ability to add at least 2 more encounters per day. The PCs have advantage against every stunned foe which means that any fight where this PC uses the stun ability, the PCs mop up the fight really quickly. This is HUGE. It's beyond huge.

Granted, it costs an extra attunement to have this feature, but who cares? You tend to have a melee type (typically fighter, paladin, ranger, cleric, or bard) who might not have focused on Strength every time, so s/he probably has multiple feats (or multiple boosts in stats like Con) who is able to just blow up encounters.

The stun feature does not work if the PC does not hit the foe with the ranged attack, but that will be extremely rare in 5E. The PC has +8 to +11 to hit without taking into account level (by the time a DM hands out this, it will be +12 to +17). He'll hit the vast majority of the time on that first hit and due to bounded accuracy of the Con stat, most creatures in the stun radius will fail their save most of the time as well. And of course, this doesn't take into account any spell/feat synergies that the players will come up with to make this combo even more uber.


Yes, it costs an extra attunement slot, but from what people keep saying here on the boards, magic items will be relatively rare anyway. Pros and Cons.

A Str 20 melee type with a +3 weapon might only use up one attunement slot, but he's only +8 to hit and damage. This guy is +8 to +11 but for two attunement slots, can just waste encounters. That's really really potent. And I would suspect that many DMs would throw giant encounters against this guy once in a while, so even more potent.

One side note: The user of the hammer does usually have to make the stun save as well because he has to get within 20 feet to not get disadvantage on the attack. Most groups would plan for that with Bless or some other way to minimize the issue.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

- Wizards now have d6 hit dice.

The wizards having D6 hit dice comes from Pathfinder.