D&D 5E Is This Magic Item Overpowered for 5e?

[L R Ballard]

The Rod of Cancellation. Even then, I'm not sure it would be that bad of a thing, as long as you didn't have the things practically growing on trees.

I'm converting one of Ed Greenwood's old adventure modules for Classic Modules Today. I'll keep all the magic items that Greenwood included in the adventure. His adventure shows considerable restraint, limiting the number and power of magic items on even important NPCs.

CAUTION: This next statement is a potential spoiler.

Greenwood uses the Knights of Myth Drannor, but their complete stats do not appear in FRE1. Those stats are to be found in Hall of Heroes, which I used to stat out the Knights of Myth Drannor, the Simbul of Aglarond, and, to some extent, Elminster. The Hall of Heroes versions of the presumptive allied NPCS (Who knows? The PCs could side with the Zhentarim.) are comparatively geared up. But those magic armaments reinforce a plot point in FRE1 (FRE1 35), so I decided to let them keep their armaments.

I mean, who will dare to fight the Knights of Myth Drannor? It's not likely that the PCs will prevail and have all that magic fall into their hands.

I'll keep the rod in there, too. The PCs have a decent chance of prevailing against Fzoul Chembryl--unless they choose to join him--and I like the idea of 5e PCs getting a rod of cancellation, especially in a campaign in which magic is otherwise rare. As a previous poster pointed out, the rod could be used to make magic even rarer!

 

[Satyrn]

Thanks. I can see introducing the incense before an epic-level quest. Of course, FRE1 is not an epic-level quest. So, if the incense of meditation doesn't make the converted FRE1, what is a fitting substitute magic item to pair with the rod of cancellation?

I'm asking Satyrn this question, but anyone who's reading along, please feel free to recommend a substitute.

I'm not really sure I'd change the behaviour of one-use items in a conversion. That way I hew close to the original (an obvious goal I think) and since they're one use-items they're not likely have a long lasting effect on ghe campaign if indeed the item was overpowered.

I did like [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION]'s 5e-ish take on the dust, though, having it treat spells as though they were cast in a higher slot.

 

[L R Ballard]

With one charge, it doesn't seem particularly OP.

What if the rod is given multiple charges as in the rod of resurrection (DMG 5e, 197), for example, which has 5 charges? But a successfully expended charge merely suppresses the power of a magic item for a month rather than drain its power?

That's Satyrn's original suggestion:

Okay. Here's how I would probably end up using the item if I was presented with it in an adventure module: I'd change it up as I suggested, making it suppress magic rather than destroying it. But I'd also give it charges like a 5e wand.

But Satyrn's position still seems open to modification:

I'm not really sure I'd change the behaviour of one-use items in a conversion. That way I hew close to the original (an obvious goal I think) and since they're one use-items they're not likely have a long lasting effect on ghe campaign if indeed the item was overpowered.

The standard behavior of the 2e version of the rod of cancellation is to completely drain the item's power. Would changing the rod's effect on magic items and giving it charges constitute "a change [of] the behaviour of [a] one-use item . . . ."?

On to the incense of meditation, S'mon observes:

Seems overpowered to me. For 5e I suggest +1 to spell level, eg casts inflict wounds as 8th level slot when using 7th level slot.

And Satyrn offers:

I did like [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION]'s 5e-ish take on the dust, though, having it treat spells as though they were cast in a higher slot.

Thanks for clarifying S'mon's remarks: I did not draw the inference that the incense of meditation should grant +1 to the spell level rather than yield maximum results for the spell.

Is that the idea? Use the incense of meditation, and gain +1 spell level for any applicable spell effects?

 

[S'mon]

Thanks for clarifying S'mon's remarks: I did not draw the inference that the incense of meditation should grant +1 to the spell level rather than yield maximum results for the spell.

Is that the idea? Use the incense of meditation, and gain +1 spell level for any applicable spell effects?

Yes, that's what I said.

 

[L R Ballard]

Yes, that's what I said.

Awesome!

That suggestion sounds entirely reasonable.

 

[merwins]

I think the rod of cancellation presents a neat plot device and wonder why the 5e DMG omits it.

Generally speaking, the 5e system is all about second chances and latitude. Consequences in earlier editions of D&D tend to be definitive and merciless.

 

[Satyrn]

But Satyrn's position still seems open to modification

Indeed it is. I've been practicing the art of politics to get ready for my run for President. Tell me what you want to hear and I'll say it.


But seriously, I was actually looking the item two different ways: How I'd convert the item for my game, and how I'd convert it for a "faithful" conversion intended for sharing.

I don't think I've yet stated what I think you should do, but now I will.

S'mon's suggestion for the dust is excellent. It creates essentially the same effect as the original, and yet it's broader since some upcast spells affect more targets or have longer durations. It feels much more interesting that just more damage even though that is the primary effect. It's a neat use of leveraging 5e's rules to achieve the conversion.

That said, I think you ought to just convert both items to function as written: The rod is 1 use, magic gone, and tbe dust maximizes damage. The DMs using your conversion will know how to use the items in their own game.

But I also think you should use your own idea from earlier: Include a sidebar with a dust that work's as S'mon suggests (And offer varieties that increase the spell level by +2 or +3 too) , and a rod with charges that only suppresses magic (and varieties that do so for a month, a day, a minute).

Offer the conversion fathfully, but provide new related options!

 

[L R Ballard]

Generally speaking, the 5e system is all about second chances and latitude. Consequences in earlier editions of D&D tend to be definitive and merciless.

Indeed. The availability of spells like death ward and revivify underscores the author's point about second chances. Doing away with negative hit points and instead dropping a PC to 0--if I correctly apprehend the new death rules--make death not as inevitable as it would've been in earlier editions.

 

[TheNoremac42]

What happens when two rods of cancellation clash? Does the paradox spawn a Sphere of Annihilation?

 

[L R Ballard]

What happens when two rods of cancellation clash? Does the paradox spawn a Sphere of Annihilation?

Ask Acererak--if you dare!