D&D General 5e, the least magic item impacted edition?

[Bolares]

It’s one of my least favorite parts of 4e too. Though, I think 5e may have swung a bit further than I would have preferred in the opposite direction - it’s all well and good to say I can give out as much or as little treasure as I want, but a little advice on how my choice of how much treasure to award will impact the game would still be appreciated. I think Xanathar’s guide did eventually give us that, but that information really should have been in the DMG in my opinion.

Xanathar is the best DM guide in 5e

 

[Charlaquin]

"Should have" isn't entirely accurate. It's more like, "could have." The game itself doesn't expect any magic items to be present and is designed to run smoothly with none at all. However, since people love magic items, the default is to use items and the DMG table will generate about that many magic items if you use it.

Even with that, you still have to be careful. Not all major items are in the same league. If the group has the wrong 8, it can still make things very hard for the DM.

Yeah, good point. I meant “should” as in that’s what the guidelines say is typical, not as in that’s what the combat math expects them to have.

 

[Bolares]

Yep. A weapon that sharpens itself and cleans away blood and dirt, so it's always shiny and new is a fun one.

Nothing beats the billowing cape. NOTHING!

 

[Maxperson]

Nothing beats the billowing cape. NOTHING!

I'm pretty sure that one imparts advantage on charisma checks when used.

 

[toucanbuzz]

I was going through many of the older adventures from various editions, and it seems that 5e has a significantly lower amount of magical items in the published adventures than previous editions....Does 3e, known for its Christmas tree magic item lists, have more magic items per adventure than AD&D, or is TSR era D&D the king of magical loot?

By design.

In OD&D and AD&D, adventures were crafted around 6-8 characters, it was not uncommon to equip underlings to boost those party numbers, and characters who died restarted at level 1, but could catch up in the unique XP system fairly quickly if they could stay alive...which would be due to having magical items handed down to them. Because of that, a well-geared 1st level fighter could hang with a 6th level party. Magic items and weapons were commonly found at level 1. Bounded accuracy and balanced class design were not part of the conversation. Finally, magic items could be broken and destroyed, and if a DM wanted to ensure no players returned to his or her table, see Mordenkainen's Disjunction.

3rd Edition: the "Christmas tree" effect where numerical magic items to boost stats became a necessity. Wealth by level replaced hoards of gold with hoards of "plus" items that would be sold towards the next tier of stat-boosting items. Easily my least-favorite time of magical items.

4th: skipped

5E: because of bounded accuracy and power imbued within the classes, magical items are less necessary. Because of the math, stat boosting items have more impact than before. There was/is a push to make each and every magical item you put into the game special so players don't yawn, toss it onto the heap of +1 swords, and so on.

I do recall a thread years ago about adventure design and the expectation not all encounters would be had, so if one were to scour the entirety of a prefab adventure, there would tend to be more magic than written into the DMG/Xanathar's expectations.

Summary: the TSR era handed out magical items like candy at 1st level and never stopped. Without attunement, the only thing stopping you was the 2-ring limit.

 

[ad_hoc]

I love that 5e doesn't assume magic items.

I play published adventures and have players make treasure board rolls in appropriate places to see if they get anything.

The relative scarcity means that every item is special.

A +1 shortsword for example is a special unique item when there aren't any others.

I disagree that martial characters need magic weapons unless the campaign is filled with fiends or such.

If all characters are assumed to bypass resistance why bother having it?

 

[toucanbuzz]

I love that 5e doesn't assume magic items...If all characters are assumed to bypass resistance why bother having it?

If gamers love their magical weapons, then it's fairly easy for the DM to scale up foes by going back to old-school ideas, e.g. replacing resistance to weapons with immunity to non-magical attacks, for stronger foes resistance to weapons of +1 enchantment, and so on. It all works out as the table/DM wants it to work out, but if I'm running published adventures, they're not scaled that way.

 

[Maxperson]

Summary: the TSR era handed out magical items like candy at 1st level and never stopped. Without attunement, the only thing stopping you was the 2-ring limit.

Most of the low level monster treasure types didn't have magic items on them or it was hard to roll one on it. It wasn't until 5th level or so that monsters started hitting the the treasure types that had a decent percent chance of magic items.

 

[Maxperson]

If gamers love their magical weapons, then it's fairly easy for the DM to scale up foes by going back to old-school ideas, e.g. replacing resistance to weapons with immunity to non-magical attacks, for stronger foes resistance to weapons of +1 enchantment, and so on. It all works out as the table/DM wants it to work out, but if I'm running published adventures, they're not scaled that way.

I thought about that, but it was a bit too complex for me to want to figure out, so I went with magic weapons that don't have a plus can't hurt creatures that are resistant or immune, but magic items that do have a plus can. Simpler and accomplishes the same goal.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Nothing beats the billowing cape. NOTHING!

The Baby Groot that's currently living in my Pot of Awakening would like a word