D&D (2024) 2024 needs to end 2014's passive aggressive efforts to remove magic items & other elements from d&d

[tetrasodium]

none of the ones listed will be fixed by 2024, the playtests should have made that abundantly clear by now, that would require a level of redesign that the compatibility mantra does not permit

Nice to have you confirm that everyone who said wotc was being unreasonable in their "compatibility mantra" was right from the start. Otherwise I'm not sure your point unless it's just an effort to stop discussion

 

[CapnZapp]

I think the reason why we prioritize the pricing differently is because we put a different weight on all of the entirely unreasonable areas where the GM needs to work in order to fix the results of players actually being able to get their hands on magic items.

[magic item prices] wouldn't matter if 2024 doesn't also fix all the ways that PCs having them dumps problems on the GM to maintain "always a boon" design

I can only quote myself:

If we discuss in general, I honestly don't think WotC is interested in providing much more detailed advice to DMs wanting to use magic items.

I don't defend that stance and I'm not saying it's right. I think WotC are perfectly content having the cake while also eating it; meaning in this instance they don't want to issue specific advice because a) that is a lot of work b) that opens them up to criticism and c) it can cause the customer base's perception of the game to move towards the "too complex for me" position.

By this I mean that asking the question whether we're putting different weights on the GM work or not loses sight of the greater reason I'm prioritizing pricing higher than you.

It is because I don't think any GM advice/help is coming, at least none of the caliber you appear to hold out hope for.

WotC just isn't interested to risk piercing the myth "magic items are just a boon that you may or may not hand out, no problems either way".

What they can do, however, without having to face up to any of this, is to solve the entire "gold worthless" thing, by bringing back reasonable magic item prices, so those DMs that want to feature magic item shoppes can do so right out the gate.

The crucial difference being that they can still maintain the façade that running the game is equally easy no matter your level of monty haul, and it implication: if you're experiencing trouble after choosing to give or not give out magic items it's your own fault, not WotC's.

 

[CapnZapp]

Nice to have you confirm that everyone who said wotc was being unreasonable in their "compatibility mantra" was right from the start.

I fully expect the 2024 edition to basically shuffle around a load of details while not fixing any systemic issues with the edition. After an intoxicating launch many will come to the sobering realization 5E2024 is mostly annoyingly incompatible with your existing stuff; which of course WotC has the solution for: just repurchase all your stuff again, now updated to 2024 standards. Yes, technically you can make do with the 2014 PHB, but I am positive WotC have made sure that means losing out on enough bennies that a financially acceptably tiny minority will actually do so.

For a truly "fixed" 5E, I would await 7E.

 

[mamba]

Nice to have you confirm that everyone who said wotc was being unreasonable in their "compatibility mantra" was right from the start. Otherwise I'm not sure your point unless it's just an effort to stop discussion

you can discuss whatever, but arguing against the ship having sailed, like you did, is just wishful thinking

 

[tetrasodium]

I can only quote myself:



By this I mean that asking the question whether we're putting different weights on the GM work or not loses sight of the greater reason I'm prioritizing pricing higher than you.

It is because I don't think any GM advice/help is coming, at least none of the caliber you appear to hold out hope for.

WotC just isn't interested to risk piercing the myth "magic items are just a boon that you may or may not hand out, no problems either way".

What they can do, however, without having to face up to any of this, is to solve the entire "gold worthless" thing, by bringing back reasonable magic item prices, so those DMs that want to feature magic item shoppes can do so right out the gate.

The crucial difference being that they can still maintain the façade that running the game is equally easy no matter your level of monty haul, and it implication: if you're experiencing trouble after choosing to give or not give out magic items it's your own fault, not WotC's.

You are being a bit overly optimistic there . Wotc knows that magic item design baked into 2014 5e is a trap that goes bad places for newer GMs... So much so that they have not even been willing to add a "magic items" section to the character sheet after nine years. I think that there is just about zero chance of them reworking magic item pricing in the way that you want. /nobody there should be unaware of how doing so would make it immediately clear that they invited GM's to rush out into a pit of quicksand filled with spikes like lucy with the football. The GM controls 100% of the gold & valuables that go into the system with race/class/feat not really able to adjust that to make it easier to replace the useless DMG/XgE pricing with campaign relevant values

I fully expect the 2024 edition to basically shuffle around a load of details while not fixing any systemic issues with the edition. After an intoxicating launch many will come to the sobering realization 5E2024 is mostly annoyingly incompatible with your existing stuff; which of course WotC has the solution for: just repurchase all your stuff again, now updated to 2024 standards. Yes, technically you can make do with the 2014 PHB, but I am positive WotC have made sure that means losing out on enough bennies that a financially acceptably tiny minority will actually do so.

On that we 100% agree

For a truly "fixed" 5E, I would await 7E.

but I don't think we will need to wait that long for one or two sufficiently developed purpose built alternatives that are better & good enough in enough ways that it won't matter what the design goals of an eventual "7e" are. For now I'd like to see 2024 d&d improve enough systemic issues to make a difference.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

You are being a bit overly optimistic there . Wotc knows that magic item design baked into 2014 5e is a trap that goes bad places for newer GMs...

I think that’s taking things too far.

 

[Yaarel]

Sure, if you can bother with having two (or more) different sets of stats you switch between.


Absolutely.

When I shot from the hip and suggested 10 attunement points (where a major attunement item now requires 3 of those points) my focus was squarely on a single set of stats - that the player makes a choice which items to attune to, and then sticks to that choice (for convenience or whatever reason).

You could even say you get 1 attunement point per character level, in order for an item that is overpowering at low level can be reasonably be attuned to together with other items by a high level character.

For instance, if one particularly powerful item cost, say, 7 attunement points that would mean

• that a level 1-6 character simply can't use that item
• a level 7-9 character can only attune to that item but almost nothing else
• a level 20 character can easily attune to both this item and perhaps two others no problem

I would rather refer to "level" as the base metric for anything relating to it and to advancement.

With magic items, it makes sense to refer to a tier, since the items are a bit more flexible, but certain magic concepts (like at will flight) feel more appropriate after reaching a particular tier (such as 9−12).

Say a character is level 11. This character is in the Master tier for levels 9−12.
• The character can only attune one magic item of tier 9−12.
• All other magic items must be of a lower tier.
• Any magic item of a higher tier is unattunable (unless a DM says otherwise because of artifacts and similar).

 

[Yaarel]

Heh, in the case of artifacts, you arent attuning the artifact − the artifact is attuning you.

 

[tetrasodium]

I would rather refer to "level" as the base metric for anything relating to it and to advancement.

With magic items, it makes sense to refer to a tier, since the items are a bit more flexible, but certain magic concepts (like at will flight) feel more appropriate after reaching a particular tier (such as 9−12).

Say a character is level 11. This character is in the Master tier for levels 9−12.
• The character can only attune one magic item of tier 9−12.
• All other magic items must be of a lower tier.
• Any magic item of a higher tier is unattunable (unless a DM says otherwise because of artifacts and similar).

Requiring a different number of "attunement points" for a differently tiered version of an item would be valuable for allowing upgrades that don't actually improve anything directly. With that a hypothetical tier1 +1 weapon could require four or five attunement points then have that drop to three or two with tier2 +1 weapon or tier3 +1 weapon when the value of a +1 weapon is much lower. That would have a few added advantages.

• Firstly players are incentivized to hold on to all of the [currently] "junk" magic items rather than selling them immediately or deciding that it's not worth the effort to even take them out of the adventure as often happens currently.
• Players are incentivized to regularly upgrade their magic items even if the upgrade itself is literally the same power mechanically (ie tier1 +1 greatsword->tier2 +1 greatsword ->tier3 +1 greatsword)because the individually or as a party now have a big chest of magic items they would like to use like magic armor or whatever
• Finally this means that a hypothetical +2 weapon or really nice item like gauntlets of ogre powerstrength=19/strength+4 raise questions like "who in the party can fit the attunement right now & who can do it if they stop using $otherItem someone else might want."

 

[Yaarel]

Requiring a different number of "attunement points" for a differently tiered version of an item would be valuable for allowing upgrades that don't actually improve anything directly. With that a hypothetical tier1 +1 weapon could require four or five attunement points then have that drop to three or two with tier2 +1 weapon or tier3 +1 weapon when the value of a +1 weapon is much lower. That would have a few added advantages.

• Firstly players are incentivized to hold on to all of the [currently] "junk" magic items rather than selling them immediately or deciding that it's not worth the effort to even take them out of the adventure as often happens currently.
• Players are incentivized to regularly upgrade their magic items even if the upgrade itself is literally the same power mechanically (ie tier1 +1 greatsword->tier2 +1 greatsword ->tier3 +1 greatsword)because the individually or as a party now have a big chest of magic items they would like to use like magic armor or whatever
• Finally this means that a hypothetical +2 weapon or really nice item like gauntlets of ogre powerstrength=19/strength+4 raise questions like "who in the party can fit the attunement right now & who can do it if they stop using $otherItem someone else might want."

I think attunement points can work too. Apparently Pathfinder does it this way.


That said, using 5e mechanics offers advantages, in addition to familiarity.

Using the Proficiency Bonus in various ways is popular.

The number of attunable magic items = Proficiency Bonus. The mechanic supplies numbers are about right for magic items. And a higher number of magic items at a higher tier feels appropriate. I like only allowing two attunable items during the Student tier 1−4. (The background tier at level 0 would only allow one magic item.) At the same time, having six magic items at the Legend tier 17−20 seems appropriate too.

To make the tier the ceiling for what is currently attunable, helps prevent magic items that turn out to be too powerful and gamebreaking. No magic items are attunable if from a higher than current tier.

Allowing only one magic item from a characters current tier, helps stabilize the expected math, and helps reduce unexpected combos.

Allowing the other magic items from the lower tiers than current, allows for powerful and diverse items, but stays safer for the game engine balance.