D&D 5E Guidelines for magic items for high level characters?

[Quickleaf]

It's not so much that I love them; more than in a high level 1 shot it seems like a critical balancing question.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

My experience so far echoes Jester David's (though I haven't played or DMed above 11th level). The game works fine & combats are roughly balanced without magic items entirely.

It's actually when you put a bunch of optional rules (feats & multiclassing) and magic items in the hands of savvy players where the combat balance is more likely to get off kilter. That's actually one of the #1 comments from DMs on ENWorld: the combat encounter budget guidelines producing less-than-challenging combats for their parties...and in pretty much all those cases the culprits seem to be feats, multiclassing, and magic items.

For your purposes of a one-shot, I'd recommend using the Adventuring Day guidelines in the DMG p. 84.

 

[Fanaelialae]

This is what really confuses me about CR in 5e. Do the CR's assume NO magic items? If so then your comment makes sense.

In terms of roleplay / backstory: ordinarily, yes... but this is purely intended as a system / tactical experience. We have a regular game at lower levels for our RP fun.






Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

That's correct. According to the designers, magic items were not factored into CR calculations. The game can be played without any magic items whatsoever (though for certain party configurations, you may need to watch out for damage immunity if they lack magic weapons). Giving PCs magic items effectively makes the game easier than the baseline.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

...though for certain party configurations, you may need to watch out for damage immunity if they lack magic weapons...

To expand on that point: Or at least provide the party the means to have damage of types other than bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing available in those instances, whether it is by carrying acid vials, alchemist's fire, and holy water, or environmental means to defeat the weapon-immune creatures they encounter.

 

[Fanaelialae]

To expand on that point: Or at least provide the party the means to have damage of types other than bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing available in those instances, whether it is by carrying acid vials, alchemist's fire, and holy water, or environmental means to defeat the weapon-immune creatures they encounter.

What I did, in one instance, was allow the players to wrap their bludgeoning weapons in rags soaked in holy water. (The players came up with this plan, I simply allowed it.) The weapons didn't deal any extra damage but instead were able to penetrate the DR of a ghost, for a short time (1 minute). The rogue bought a water proof quiver and was able to effectively do the same by soaking his arrows in holy water (I ruled, however, that he couldn't do it far ahead of time because after a minute the water would become befouled from outside contact and lose its properties). I'd probably allow the same sort of thing with alchemist's fire and acid (Thoros of Myr, anyone?), although doing so would ruin most weapons.

 

[CapnZapp]

My experience so far echoes Jester David's (though I haven't played or DMed above 11th level). The game works fine & combats are roughly balanced without magic items entirely.

It's actually when you put a bunch of optional rules (feats & multiclassing) and magic items in the hands of savvy players where the combat balance is more likely to get off kilter. That's actually one of the #1 comments from DMs on ENWorld: the combat encounter budget guidelines producing less-than-challenging combats for their parties...and in pretty much all those cases the culprits seem to be feats, multiclassing, and magic items.

Of course, plenty of D&D gamers are "savvy" and like enabling all the crunch in the game.

That the game cannot challenge players that like the building complexity that feats, multiclassing and magic items provide is perhaps the biggest problem with 5e.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Of course, plenty of D&D gamers are "savvy" and like enabling all the crunch in the game.

That the game cannot challenge players that like the building complexity that feats, multiclassing and magic items provide is perhaps the biggest problem with 5e.

It's not that the game cannot challenge players like that. It's that if you allow all of the optional rules that make the game easier, it requires a "savvy" DM to maintain the same degree of challenge. Adding more/tougher monsters to an encounter is one way, but IMO the better way is to use combinations of monsters/terrain that have synergy. One (extremely cruel and heartless) example would be a mind flayer or two with several intellect devourers. The mind flayers use mind blast to stun (and therefore incapacitate) their opponents and then the IDs just steal their bodies. That example borders on being unfair, admittedly, but it showcases how using monster synergistically can bring about a level of challenge that neither monster would possess on its own.

 

[CapnZapp]

It's not that the game cannot challenge players like that. It's that if you allow all of the optional rules that make the game easier, it requires a "savvy" DM to maintain the same degree of challenge.

That sounds like a description of 3E or 4E.

In 5E I've found that this isn't telling the whole truth.

In 3E or 4E, sure, my players would have made short work of "standard" encounters, and you wanted and needed to spice things up on occasion.

But in 5E savvy players with feats and items absolutely destroy encounters. It's not just a matter of upping the challenge; it's often so bad you could throw out the encounter and completey replace it with something completely different in a whole other league of difficulty.

5E monsters are helpless in the face of a sharp party. They have substandard ability scores, skill bonuses and saving throws. They don't have elementary tricks and tools to survive the most trivial of tactics. They have nothing to counter the myriad of special abilities given to player characters.

5E gives out more goodies to PCs than ever before: just things like Bless, Bardic Inspiration and Battlemaster superiority dice give players unprecedented control over when and where monsters aren't allowed to succeed, and when and where PCs will succeed at their actions. And this doesn't even begin to talk about feats like Lucky and Great Weapon Mastery. Or even significant bonuses like Inspirational Leader or Alert, bonuses players frankly don't need because they'll succeed anyway.

At the same time, 5E simplified monsters to the point where they threw out the baby with the bathwater - most monsters are reduced to big bags of hit points with little recourse than to rush up to the heroes to try to kill them in melee. But negating this is trivial in D&D, and monsters all too often lack means of overcoming battlefield and movement control.

The overall effect is clear and distinct: 5E is by far the "easiest" edition in a long while (at least since 2000).

It is at this stage adventures are built on the expectation that play groups does not use feats, items or multiclassing, and that they somehow keep adventuring for up to 8 encounters a day (despite humongously generous resting rules and spells such as Rope Trick and Leomund's Hut)

The end result is catastrophically easy challenges in published products.

 

[abirdcall]

That's actually one of the #1 comments from DMs on ENWorld: the combat encounter budget guidelines producing less-than-challenging combats for their parties...and in pretty much all those cases the culprits seem to be feats, multiclassing, and magic items.

I would add combined with rolling for stats.

Feats allow you to keep adding power past a cap of 20 on your main stat. If you use point buy then you must choose between the feat or your stat. This adds a little bit of power but not as much as not having to choose at all because your stats are so high.

And of course, high stats by themselves mean more powerful characters.

And then we have the tables who only do 1 combat per long rest and have parties filled with Paladins and Wizards and such. This is also the source of a lot of the 'fighter is so underpowered' threads.

 

[Quickleaf]

I would add combined with rolling for stats.

Feats allow you to keep adding power past a cap of 20 on your main stat. If you use point buy then you must choose between the feat or your stat. This adds a little bit of power but not as much as not having to choose at all because your stats are so high.

Actually, feats don't let you exceed the cap of 20. All feats use language along the lines of: Increase your Intelligence score by 1, to a maximum of 20.

So really rolling for stats at most is going to give a character a +1 bonus over other PCs a little bit earlier. I wouldn't consider that game breaking.

And then we have the tables who only do 1 combat per long rest and have parties filled with Paladins and Wizards and such. This is also the source of a lot of the 'fighter is so underpowered' threads.

Yes, that's why I often recommend DMs:

1. Pay attention to p. 84 in the DMG about the Adventuring Day assumptions.
2. Require sanctuary (not just sleep) to gain a long rest...to address pacing issues of "1 combat per long rest overland travel" scenarios.

The question of the fighter is an entirely different topic that I'll not derail this thread with.

 

[abirdcall]

Actually, feats don't let you exceed the cap of 20. All feats use language along the lines of: Increase your Intelligence score by 1, to a maximum of 20.

So really rolling for stats at most is going to give a character a +1 bonus over other PCs a little bit earlier. I wouldn't consider that game breaking.

I didn't say they allow you to boost your stat over 20.

If you are wielding a 2-handed weapon and you want to get better with that weapon and already have a strength of 20 what are you going to do with your ASI?

If feats are in the game then you can take Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master, increasing your power.

If feats are not in the game then you are forced to boost a secondary stat.

If you are using point buy then feats are a trade off. If you are rolling for stats then feats allow you to keep piliing on power in excess of the cap of 20.