Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Abandoning attunement and scaling back concentration
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="werecorpse" data-source="post: 7815693" data-attributes="member: 55491"><p>I’ve played D&D since 1e though skipped 4e and played 3e/pathfinder during that era and have played 5e close to RAW since it came out. Two of the rules which are supposedly in place to keep a lid on characters getting too powerful are the magic item attunement limit and concentration mechanic. I plan to get rid of attunement and rework most of the phb concentration spells to enable upcasting the spell to cast it without concentration and here is my thinking on both.</p><p></p><p>Bear in mind this is obviously a discussion about homebrew rules so I am not considering adventurers league, nor am I calling the current rules dumb they have to work for a wide range of tables including open play games I’m talking about changing them in my games which are long term games/campaigns that run with for years and across all levels.</p><p></p><p>Attunement is meant to act to control the amount of magic items a character can have but whether they are attunable or not is largely irrelevant to the impact the magic items will have in the game. +3 plate doesn’t require attunement, boots of levitation do (and using them requires concentration btw). In practice the attunement limit is only relevant if the GM gives out sufficient magic items that it comes into effect (if they don’t it is irrelevant) at which point it’s effect is to stop the players from getting to use some of the magic items they have found unless they aren’t using others they have found. I largely believe the obligation to balance items given out is on the GM- this is how it worked from1e-3e and still should be the case. Also getting to use the treasure and the magic items you find in the game is one of the fun parts of the game. Thus imo the attunement limit in a practical sense works more as a limit on fun than other stuff. My high level character with his belt of dwarvenkind, pearl of power and staff of healing isn’t that interested in the cool wand of web - it’s not overpowered for sure but I’m not going to waste an Attunement slot on it, maybe I can trade it for a third wand of magic missiles they don’t require attunement? </p><p></p><p>As for concentration; in the game of Bushido They limited spell stacking by saying that certain spells couldn’t be active on the same person at the same time ie no stoneskin and resist elements. This wasn’t a bad way to limit spell stacking. In 5e they’ve gone the other way by saying that your limit is based in the number of casters you have. Like attunement I see this as not a big deal at low level but at higher level begins to suck the fun out of the game. The fighter needs stoneskin because we are fighting giants so the Mage can’t fly or be invisible or cast a wall spell ok I guess I’ll just cantrip or lightning bolt each round. Having played earlier editions I’m aware of the problem where the caster starts each combat with 7+ spells up. This meant that the difference between the characters who had a minute to prepare and when they didn’t was vast making balancing encounters very difficult. Ie In 1e - 3e If the party is ready to fight the 4 chimera and their fire giant beastmaster it’s a tough fight, if not they will get smashed. This is less so in 5e because you can’t overprepare. However in 5e characters have very few high level spell slots, and not an over abundance of low level ones they already have a massive limitation built in. So what I have done is go through the phb and for most concentration spells I’ve allowed a caster to rid themselves of the concentration requirement by upcasting the spell 1-2 levels. So web cast as a 3rd level spell doesn’t need concentration, same with blur cast as a 4th level spell, greater invisibility when cast as a 6th level spell. I’ve kept concentration as unremoveable for some spells (spirit guardians for example it lasts a long time otherwise ).</p><p></p><p>With both of these I acknowledge they empower players a bit more but I’m not worried about game balance issues - it’s a home campaign and I can handle that side of it.</p><p></p><p>I hunted around a bit to see how others have dealt with these issues but couldn’t find much so I’m posting this to see what others have done and what they think.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="werecorpse, post: 7815693, member: 55491"] I’ve played D&D since 1e though skipped 4e and played 3e/pathfinder during that era and have played 5e close to RAW since it came out. Two of the rules which are supposedly in place to keep a lid on characters getting too powerful are the magic item attunement limit and concentration mechanic. I plan to get rid of attunement and rework most of the phb concentration spells to enable upcasting the spell to cast it without concentration and here is my thinking on both. Bear in mind this is obviously a discussion about homebrew rules so I am not considering adventurers league, nor am I calling the current rules dumb they have to work for a wide range of tables including open play games I’m talking about changing them in my games which are long term games/campaigns that run with for years and across all levels. Attunement is meant to act to control the amount of magic items a character can have but whether they are attunable or not is largely irrelevant to the impact the magic items will have in the game. +3 plate doesn’t require attunement, boots of levitation do (and using them requires concentration btw). In practice the attunement limit is only relevant if the GM gives out sufficient magic items that it comes into effect (if they don’t it is irrelevant) at which point it’s effect is to stop the players from getting to use some of the magic items they have found unless they aren’t using others they have found. I largely believe the obligation to balance items given out is on the GM- this is how it worked from1e-3e and still should be the case. Also getting to use the treasure and the magic items you find in the game is one of the fun parts of the game. Thus imo the attunement limit in a practical sense works more as a limit on fun than other stuff. My high level character with his belt of dwarvenkind, pearl of power and staff of healing isn’t that interested in the cool wand of web - it’s not overpowered for sure but I’m not going to waste an Attunement slot on it, maybe I can trade it for a third wand of magic missiles they don’t require attunement? As for concentration; in the game of Bushido They limited spell stacking by saying that certain spells couldn’t be active on the same person at the same time ie no stoneskin and resist elements. This wasn’t a bad way to limit spell stacking. In 5e they’ve gone the other way by saying that your limit is based in the number of casters you have. Like attunement I see this as not a big deal at low level but at higher level begins to suck the fun out of the game. The fighter needs stoneskin because we are fighting giants so the Mage can’t fly or be invisible or cast a wall spell ok I guess I’ll just cantrip or lightning bolt each round. Having played earlier editions I’m aware of the problem where the caster starts each combat with 7+ spells up. This meant that the difference between the characters who had a minute to prepare and when they didn’t was vast making balancing encounters very difficult. Ie In 1e - 3e If the party is ready to fight the 4 chimera and their fire giant beastmaster it’s a tough fight, if not they will get smashed. This is less so in 5e because you can’t overprepare. However in 5e characters have very few high level spell slots, and not an over abundance of low level ones they already have a massive limitation built in. So what I have done is go through the phb and for most concentration spells I’ve allowed a caster to rid themselves of the concentration requirement by upcasting the spell 1-2 levels. So web cast as a 3rd level spell doesn’t need concentration, same with blur cast as a 4th level spell, greater invisibility when cast as a 6th level spell. I’ve kept concentration as unremoveable for some spells (spirit guardians for example it lasts a long time otherwise ). With both of these I acknowledge they empower players a bit more but I’m not worried about game balance issues - it’s a home campaign and I can handle that side of it. I hunted around a bit to see how others have dealt with these issues but couldn’t find much so I’m posting this to see what others have done and what they think. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Abandoning attunement and scaling back concentration
Top