Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
Analysis of "Typical" Magic Item Distribution
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="FireLance" data-source="post: 6488388" data-attributes="member: 3424"><p>Responding out of order for better flow.</p><p></p><p>Because the random setbacks help generate a different experience each time you play and this helps to keep the game interesting.</p><p></p><p>I think you are conflating bounded accuracy with encounter guidelines that do not take magic items into account. Bounded accuracy is what gives a 1st-level PC a non-trivial chance of hitting the Tarrasque, and conversely, a CR 1/2 orc a non-trivial chance of hitting a 20th-level PC. The encounter guidelines are what tell you that the 1st-level PC is likely to get squished by the Tarrasque, and that you are going to need something like 60 orcs to present a moderate challenge to a party of four 20th-level PCs. </p><p></p><p>The fact that the encounter guidelines do not take magic items into account means that 5e tells you that those 60 orcs are a moderate challenge for a party of four 20th-level PCs regardless of whether they have no magic items, or whether they have 9 or 10 uncommon permanent items, 5 or 6 rare permanent items, 5 very rare permanent items and 4 legendary permanent items between them. </p><p></p><p>It seems to me that this is a rather odd position for an advocate of 5e to take because the implications of following the rules as written seem to me to be much worse for 5e than for 4e. As mentioned, since the encounter guidelines do not take magic items into account, every magic item that you give to the PCs will make all subsequent fights easier. And if you keep handing out magic items, as mentioned before, over time, the accumulation of magic items is going to make the recommended fights easier and easier, and unless you have players that aren't bored by easy fights, they are going to lose interest.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, it seems to me that the 4e system as written keeps things fresh and interesting for the players because the PCs get more powerful, the find new and better magic items, and the difficulty and challenge of the fights keep pace with what the PCs are capable of. </p><p></p><p>And for those of us who think that flexibility, adapatbility and ease of houseruling are key advantages in an RPG, I would just like to re-iterate the point that it is trivially easy to adapt the 4e encounter guidelines to re-create the 5e approach of ignoring magic items when determing what is an appropriate challenge for the PCs. The key failing of the 5e encounter guidelines, to me, is that they are not able to advise the DM on how to maintain the challenge level of his game (if he wants to) after he has started handing out magic items.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 6488388, member: 3424"] Responding out of order for better flow. Because the random setbacks help generate a different experience each time you play and this helps to keep the game interesting. I think you are conflating bounded accuracy with encounter guidelines that do not take magic items into account. Bounded accuracy is what gives a 1st-level PC a non-trivial chance of hitting the Tarrasque, and conversely, a CR 1/2 orc a non-trivial chance of hitting a 20th-level PC. The encounter guidelines are what tell you that the 1st-level PC is likely to get squished by the Tarrasque, and that you are going to need something like 60 orcs to present a moderate challenge to a party of four 20th-level PCs. The fact that the encounter guidelines do not take magic items into account means that 5e tells you that those 60 orcs are a moderate challenge for a party of four 20th-level PCs regardless of whether they have no magic items, or whether they have 9 or 10 uncommon permanent items, 5 or 6 rare permanent items, 5 very rare permanent items and 4 legendary permanent items between them. It seems to me that this is a rather odd position for an advocate of 5e to take because the implications of following the rules as written seem to me to be much worse for 5e than for 4e. As mentioned, since the encounter guidelines do not take magic items into account, every magic item that you give to the PCs will make all subsequent fights easier. And if you keep handing out magic items, as mentioned before, over time, the accumulation of magic items is going to make the recommended fights easier and easier, and unless you have players that aren't bored by easy fights, they are going to lose interest. On the other hand, it seems to me that the 4e system as written keeps things fresh and interesting for the players because the PCs get more powerful, the find new and better magic items, and the difficulty and challenge of the fights keep pace with what the PCs are capable of. And for those of us who think that flexibility, adapatbility and ease of houseruling are key advantages in an RPG, I would just like to re-iterate the point that it is trivially easy to adapt the 4e encounter guidelines to re-create the 5e approach of ignoring magic items when determing what is an appropriate challenge for the PCs. The key failing of the 5e encounter guidelines, to me, is that they are not able to advise the DM on how to maintain the challenge level of his game (if he wants to) after he has started handing out magic items. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Analysis of "Typical" Magic Item Distribution
Top