Bayonet
First Post
Sounds like this guy's kind of a wiener. Tell him to stop that.
D&D 5E Thoughts Regarding the Number of Attuned Items
- Thread starter Raunalyn
- Start date
Sounds like this guy's kind of a wiener. Tell him to stop that.
redrick
First Post
If you're concerned about inconsistent requirements for which items need attunement and which don't, there's an easy fix. Make more items require attunement. 
Obviously, DMs are welcome to use whatever rules they want at their tables, and players are welcome to request whatever modifications they'd like, but the attunement rules are very much in keeping with the design intentions of 5e: either/or power gains. Just like you get a feat or an ability increase. At some point, a PC might have to choose between two different magic items because of attunement rules. That's one of the goals of the rule. (In addition to spreading the items around the group and putting some sort of damper on explosive PC power growth.)
Obviously, DMs are welcome to use whatever rules they want at their tables, and players are welcome to request whatever modifications they'd like, but the attunement rules are very much in keeping with the design intentions of 5e: either/or power gains. Just like you get a feat or an ability increase. At some point, a PC might have to choose between two different magic items because of attunement rules. That's one of the goals of the rule. (In addition to spreading the items around the group and putting some sort of damper on explosive PC power growth.)
ExploderWizard
Hero
The desire to fill every available slot with best item is a magic treatment that makes magic items just feel like regular gear as do magic shops all stocked up with this stuff. The 1E DMG hit this right on the head. That which is too easily obtained is often held in contempt. It is nearly impossible for magic items to be ubiquitous and still feel like actual treasure.
Also this.
Bacon Bits
Legend
It's up to the DM to provide resources to the players, and it's up to the players to best choose how to disburse those resources. If they choose poor disbursement -- like giving four attunement items to one player -- it's not up to you to change to rules to make it better.
I'd only consider increasing attunement if multiple players had hit the limit, and I'd probably resolve the issue by eliminating attunement requirements from some items (e.g., ring of feather falling, ring of jumping, et al) rather than increasing the number of items players can attune. I would probably say that the items simply must be worn during a short rest to begin functioning for that character -- virtual attunement -- instead of requiring true attunement.
See, there's two reasons for an item to be an attuned item:
Items in the first group should always be limited to 3 for attunement. The game isn't built around large amounts of +X to game stats abilities and layering additional defensive and offensive abilities, and lots of magic items do that.
Items in the latter group, however, just make it more difficult for players to pass around the party. You don't want the party to find a ring of jumping or gloves of climbing and swimming and let the players overcome an obstacle, throw the item to the next player, rinse, wash, repeat. Now they've turned one item into five items. That's a lot more powerful than the item is really intended to be. Now, they can do that if they feel they need to, but it will be time consuming. The classic items that have always been restricted like this are ring of sustenance and ring of regeneration. The latter probably fits in the first category, too, however. (An item can be in both categories, of course.)
I would say that a magical bow, a cloak of displacement, a magical short sword, and bracers of archery all fall into the first category.
If I were playing in a very high magic campaign and decided it was necessary, I'd probably change attunement limit to be equal to proficiency bonus. That's better when it's relevant so it does what's needed, and also easy to remember.
I'd only consider increasing attunement if multiple players had hit the limit, and I'd probably resolve the issue by eliminating attunement requirements from some items (e.g., ring of feather falling, ring of jumping, et al) rather than increasing the number of items players can attune. I would probably say that the items simply must be worn during a short rest to begin functioning for that character -- virtual attunement -- instead of requiring true attunement.
See, there's two reasons for an item to be an attuned item:
- Items that the designers think make a character powerful (typically just in combat, but possibly out of combat).
- Items that the designers don't want passed around the party.
Items in the first group should always be limited to 3 for attunement. The game isn't built around large amounts of +X to game stats abilities and layering additional defensive and offensive abilities, and lots of magic items do that.
Items in the latter group, however, just make it more difficult for players to pass around the party. You don't want the party to find a ring of jumping or gloves of climbing and swimming and let the players overcome an obstacle, throw the item to the next player, rinse, wash, repeat. Now they've turned one item into five items. That's a lot more powerful than the item is really intended to be. Now, they can do that if they feel they need to, but it will be time consuming. The classic items that have always been restricted like this are ring of sustenance and ring of regeneration. The latter probably fits in the first category, too, however. (An item can be in both categories, of course.)
I would say that a magical bow, a cloak of displacement, a magical short sword, and bracers of archery all fall into the first category.
If I were playing in a very high magic campaign and decided it was necessary, I'd probably change attunement limit to be equal to proficiency bonus. That's better when it's relevant so it does what's needed, and also easy to remember.
Last edited:
miniaturehoarder
First Post
1000 X THIS!
miniaturehoarder
First Post
No less than an epic boon should get another attunement slot.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
..........also, if this guy falls into a pit of acid and dies, or gets dragged away by crocodiles, or whatever, they're going to be missing a lot of magic....
ExploderWizard
Hero
Another reason that extra magic items might be good to keep around is for spare/replacement gear. If magical items are fairly commonplace then that means that more are being made all the time. Adventurers tend be hard on equipment and items get lost or destroyed all the time. Having a few safely stowed somewhere isn't a bad idea.
ExploderWizard
Hero
How so? In 1E the distribution of the magic items in the table favored magic arms & armor over wizard items. This was expressly for game balance reasons and was so stated in the 1E DMG.
