D&D 5E Magic Items Found vs Wants

[The Green Hermit]

I had my players give me a wish list of 10 items for each character, since we are hoping to play all the way to level 20. When it makes sense, I add one of the wish items to a pile of loot -- keeping track of who got the last granted wish, so it isn't just one player lucking out. Otherwise, I go with what the published adventure states or randomly roll on the DMG loot tables.

 

[Coroc]

How do people deal with magic items? I lean a bit more towards old school. You use what you find.

Others lean more towards custom items towards what the players want.

The second approach leans heavily towards 3E and 4E.

I also tend to avoid putting in things like magical hand crossbows. I'll put them in if an adventure has them.

I'll also use random magic items on occasion. At level 9 thePCs have a rod of lordly might due to this via killing a adult blue dragon.

So how does this work in practice? I don't tend to worry to much on the rarity of an item. That rod of lordly might is far less disruptive than a +2 hand crossbow.

A lot of rogues use rapiers. I'm doing an Egyptian themed game, probably not a lot of rapiers in this sort of game.

Now some are thinking Zards a bastard he's screwing the rogue player over. Mr Rogue however is wielding a +1 keen shortsword (3.5), and a custom dagger of venom where they can add poison as a bonus action a'la thief quick hands ability. They also found some poison sellers where he managed to buy a dose of purple worm venom, wyvern poison and as much serpent poison he could afford.

The fighter/warlock is using the rod of lordly might. He is Duelist style sword and board. It's high on the powercurve sure but less than say a +1 or 2 great weapon married with the feat. Said character has +1 full plate as well which grants resistance and advantage to dragon breath. Most if the time it's just +1 armor. They all have Dragonlances as well which are just dragon Slayer Lance's and spears.

The final item I'll use as an example is the monks spear. It's a +1 shocking spear that 1/long rest can fire a lightning bolt. The spear and rogues shortsword turned up fairly early in the campaign.

So to powerful IDK but the abilities I put on equipment aren't on the best items in the game. The Rogue is dealing damage similar to a rapier anyway just deals magic damage and crits on 19-20.

In older editions with more ways to deal with magic items I might be more inclined to hand out better equipment.

They are most often handtailored by me, with one or maximum two players in mind who can use them.
If I do want a player to get an item but do not want another one to get it then the intended player finds it and it is basically "bound on pickup".

I have my reasons for that, e.g. for some clothie with low hp and low dex I might be fine with him finding a ring of protection +1, whereas I do not want the tank with AC 20 to have it.
My players tried to object first, but they saw my system had more advantages for balance and making everyone happy in the end. The only times I let them make the decision is if an item is useful to two players.
Sometimes they can get what they wish for e.g. one quest reward was either a +1 armor of any type or a +1 weapon of any type for each of the martial classes, and in the latest adventure the reward was a bar of metal which would transform
into a tremendous weapon (was a big reward, a residue from a mighty ritual in which a god had a hand together with the will and the soul of two great wizards). Which type he weapon would be was by players choice, so two of the martial classes had to decide who would get it and what type.

 

[Coroc]

Hmm... I didn't realize the all the non-armor +AC things require attunement. If your GM is generous with stuff (and one of ours is), I can see that becoming a bit of an issue. But still an extra +1 on your AC seems like such a huge issue to you guys? So your AC goes from 18 to 19, most decently challenging enemies are still going to hit better than half of the time. I suppose it makes the mooks that do have to roll high to hit seem even less dangerous. But is that really a major concern?

I can see why you think the hand crossbow is a better weapon if-and-only-if the PC take those 2 feats. But those two feats made it powerful. A +1 to hit and damage just doesn't seem like it really adds all that much. The PC was probably already hitting most of the time. Now one out of every 10-15 shots he will hit when he would have missed. And he will do 1 more point of damage when he does hit (2 on a crit).

+1 is always manageable somehow, the problems often start with +2 or +3 magic boon to some armor item. In short: Everything producing an AC of 21 or better has some issues

Of course mobs with +7 or +9 for the attack will still hit quite frequently, the prob is that critters who just have +3 or +4 just cannot harm the PC anymore. And it also affects spell attacks that target AC.

Imagine the following: a sword and board fighter has AC 20 from plate and shield. Some mob with +10 attack, which is huge, now hits him about 50% of the time. Now make his armor and shield +3 each for AC 26. The same mob (which falls under the heavy (melee-)hitter category already now needs a 16+ to hit which effectively halves its chances.
Every mob with a +6 to hit or less now needs a crit to even hit at all. All the good balance coming from bound accuracy which makes 5e so refreshing is gone now.
So you get the situation that a tank who shall soak up damage now gets almost no hits at all. His comrades which might have more manageable AC soak it up instead.

 

[Zardnaar]

+1 is always manageable somehow, the problems often start with +2 or +3 magic boon to some armor item. In short: Everything producing an AC of 21 or better has some issues

Of course mobs with +7 or +9 for the attack will still hit quite frequently, the prob is that critters who just have +3 or +4 just cannot harm the PC anymore. And it also affects spell attacks that target AC.

Imagine the following: a sword and board fighter has AC 20 from plate and shield. Some mob with +10 attack, which is huge, now hits him about 50% of the time. Now make his armor and shield +3 each for AC 26. The same mob (which falls under the heavy (melee-)hitter category already now needs a 16+ to hit which effectively halves its chances.
Every mob with a +6 to hit or less now needs a crit to even hit at all. All the good balance coming from bound accuracy which makes 5e so refreshing is gone now.
So you get the situation that a tank who shall soak up damage now gets almost no hits at all. His comrades which might have more manageable AC soak it up instead.

By the time you get +3 shield and armor a lot of stuff is going to hit more than +10.

At the same time anything with +4 to hit would be utter fodder. Around level 9 or ten you can almost ignore the lower CR stuff unless it has special attacks or combos with other stuff and can gain advantage or something.

AC for the players doesn't scale well IMHO. I regard a high AC in the early 20s.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I agree with the sentiment that very high AC dis-incentivizes the monsters to attack the tank. At least that's how I play it. If they keep attacking someone and just can't hit, then they'll probably start targeting someone squishier looking. If there are enough foes, hopefully the tank can still hold some of them off with maneuvering. And those who are constantly whiffing on the tank are probably going to switch tactics to grappling and disabling by some method that doesn't involve attack rolls. Intelligence permitting, of course.

 

[Zardnaar]

I agree with the sentiment that very high AC dis-incentivizes the monsters to attack the tank. At least that's how I play it. If they keep attacking someone and just can't hit, then they'll probably start targeting someone squishier looking. If there are enough foes, hopefully the tank can still hold some of them off with maneuvering. And those who are constantly whiffing on the tank are probably going to switch tactics to grappling and disabling by some method that doesn't involve attack rolls. Intelligence permitting, of course.

Tank with sentinel feat.

I had a sword and board paladin who liked casting shield of faith.

 

[Li Shenron]

How do people deal with magic items? I lean a bit more towards old school. You use what you find.

Same here.

I generally feature finding magic items from treasure (random or adventure-driven) first and foremost.

Secondarily I also allow the PC crafting magic items, although it hasn't happened yet in 5e. I do not like this to be a generally available option, so if the rules don't require specific abilities (as in 3e), I am going to still keep it under check for example keeping a tight control on material ingredients.

What I generally do not like is a-la carte magic item shops, so buying magic items is possible but works almost as a combination of finding+crafting, in the sense that you either find random magic items for purchase, or you commission their crafting to someone else. You just can't walk into the next village with a shopping list and buy what you want in no time.

 

[Zardnaar]

Same here.

I generally feature finding magic items from treasure (random or adventure-driven) first and foremost.

Secondarily I also allow the PC crafting magic items, although it hasn't happened yet in 5e. I do not like this to be a generally available option, so if the rules don't require specific abilities (as in 3e), I am going to still keep it under check for example keeping a tight control on material ingredients.

What I generally do not like is a-la carte magic item shops, so buying magic items is possible but works almost as a combination of finding+crafting, in the sense that you either find random magic items for purchase, or you commission their crafting to someone else. You just can't walk into the next village with a shopping list and buy what you want in no time.

I sometimes sell them but it's what's available not what you want.

 

[ccs]

As the DM:

• Plot specific items are intentionally placed.
• NPC/Monster gear is chosen to support their needs. My NPCs/monsters USE their items. If a player can make use of one of those items? Good for them. If it's not something on their Christmas list? Oh well.
• Non-plot items found as treasure (those not being directly used by the NPC/Monster atm) are rolled randomly or simply chosen by me because I think they'll add to the game. They represent things the NPC/monster found valuable. Once again, if the characters can use something? Good for them....
• If the characters want something specific? Well then, they'll have to make specific efforts to acquire it.

I do not intervene in how the party chooses to divide loot. That's for them to decide. Me? I've done my job by including the loot in the 1st place.

As a player:

• I tend to use what I find.
• If I want something specific? I will make specific efforts to acquire it.

 

[jmartkdr2]

A +3 whatever is less of a problem than the sharpshooter feat and no one has the gwm feat. He hits for 1d8+10 that's not that bad in the grand scheme of things when it's only two attacks and easily countered with range and flying stuff.

If someone did I probably wouldn't put the rod in. If I had say a dual wielder and gwm type a flametongue would turn up before a +1 great anything.

I also allow some 3pp stuff that buffs the other styles.

Ah, I see - you're commenting on your specific campaign, not the items in general.