Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 9211553" data-attributes="member: 20564">I hear and commiserate what you are saying.5e does have a more robust magic item distribution, it's just hidden by the tables.  It gets broken down in Xanathar's on page 135, but that is all distilled from the magic item charts.  If you hard line followed the DMG treasure charts and never just made it up or put in what seemed appropriate, it was correct.  That's why Xanathar's chart si so useful - it distills the results of the many rolls on those charts down to expectations, and having numbers their can shoot for matches a wider swath of DMs.The +X grind of 3.x and 4e, that was implicitly then explicitly part of character advancement math, isn't in 5e.  You can get away with not a single +X item the entire game and the character is not falling behind expected math.  (It is assuming that, for example, weapon users eventually have magic weapons without pluses to get through Resistance.)  A humble +1 sword is a boon above expectations even at 20th level.Designer math is around 6-7 encounters per long rest, with 2 short rests splitting it into thirds. With as many days above 7 encounters as below 7 encounters. It's the wrong expectation, no one regularly does that not even the published adventures.  But without it several things break down.  The attrition expectations of the CR system (be it HP, spell slots, uses per day for features, consumable/charged items, or whatever).  The balance between the at-will classes like the rogue and the long-rest-recovery classes like casters and hybrids like the paladin and barbarian.  Plus then the short-rest-recovery classes.Next campaign I'm planning on a variation* of the Gritty Recovery rules (short rest = 8 hours, long rest = 7 days) to try to make how I run the game (few encounters per day) and what the designers expect to match up better.  That might be a boon for you having more solid rules.But the CR system has the same limitations that 3ed, 3.5 and 4e has - it doesn't measure party synergy, build optimization, degree of tactical play, or particular strengths/weaknesses of the party vs. types of foes.  (Oh look, flyers vs. a party with only 1 ranged character.)  5e has a lousy CR system, but it's not any weaker than any of them since WotC became the steward of the game.Combat has been streamlined with less options - but for what you said you want for having so many groups that seems like a positive, even if it wasn't your expectation.As an aside about marketing expectations, my memories was that WotC was trying to reunite the player base, and have the feel of classic D&D.  The marketing expectations I had were that they would be backing away from much of the 4e changes, and that "classic" D&D, which is more than just 3.x, would be the order of the day.They definitely let you down in terms of published modules for high level play.  Between not doing modules, only hardcover campaigns/adventure paths, and then focusing on the levels that they expected the most consumer interest, I mean that they expected most play to happen, we have plenty starting at 1st and going up to low double digits.  10, 11, maybe breaking into the teens but likely not.  It seems that there is a small, dedicated set of tables that want high level play, and it hasn't been deemed large enough to get more than just a light dusting of product, like Mad Mage.(*variation on Gritty Recovery: spells of 8 hours or more last until next time you recover spells instead, stolen from BG3 but it keeps spells like Mage Armor from becoming a trap.  magic items recharge on new and full moon to keep them in line.  wonderful and safe accommodations like Elrond's can cut down time needed for long rest.)</blockquote>

Verification