D&D 5E Attunement

[jgsugden]

...
In short, it's okay to not use the book solution and instead venture out on a forum to ask for other solutions, hoping fellow gamers will still help out, and not just point out they're not doing it by the book...

Regards,
Zapp

Sure. And it is valid to recommend people try it as written for a while. Nobody ever said it was a sin to try to find something new - it just isn't what I'd recommend.

 

[Chocolategravy]

By comparison, if I have three Strength Ioun stones - now I have +6 to my strength which is a bigger impact.

They cap at 20 to the stat, so it's unlikely you'd use more than 1 on a stat you care about and being very rare means you're not getting enough in a party to waste multiple ones on a tertiary stat.

 

[KarinsDad]

Sure. And it is valid to recommend people try it as written for a while. Nobody ever said it was a sin to try to find something new - it just isn't what I'd recommend.

Actually, for someone asking for different ways on how to change it, recommending that they don't change it is mostly a waste of typing.

Also, I've been playing the game since it came out, so it has been over 10 months of playing as written. I feel that I do understand the game system to some extent. You are aware, are you not, that LMoP has something like 10 non-consumable magic items in it for a party of 4 or 5 PCs that basically just make it to level 5. Since none of those items are acquired at level 1, It's the potential of 3 items found per level after that or well over 50 items by level 20 if one were to continue in that vein (my group of 7 gets about 4 non-consumable magic items per level, so a little higher). What they write in the adventures does not necessarily match what they write in the DMG.

 

[Hussar]

To be fair though, wasn't LMoP written before the DMG came out?

 

[CapnZapp]

What they write in the adventures does not necessarily match what they write in the DMG.

This, of course, is the basic question to answer first.

Have you guys seen a corresponding breakdown of the Tiamat and Elemental Evil campaigns?

I realize that this is useless for people making their home game. IF they treat the DMG as the Holy Bible where not a word can be changed.

But in practice, I feel most players either run published adventures or make up their own (with no, little or medium, but not slavish, regard for the DMG).

So what the Tiamat and EE books tells us is kind of important. Do they come even close to the DMG guidelines?

 

[clearstream]

So do you mean by "it can be a partial answer to change out those items" that the PCs (i.e. players) should do this, or the DM?

The attunement issue being discussed here really has nothing to do with attunement items that have little utility. That is a side discussion. The attunement issue is that of modifying the house rules to allow for more attunement items for more magic heavy campaigns.

DM should do it IMO. But great reminder about your OP! I had engaged with the digression because somewhere along the line it appeared that your motive for rules-smithing was uneven handling rather than a simple desire to allow more magic items. If the latter then simply raising the cap seems fair. There's that table on page 38 of equipment versus campaign magic level - maybe add an attunements scale to that?

3 fits the table's definition of Standard, but feels potentially Low Magic compared to earlier editions. But one could easily envision Low Magic being 2 and High Magic being 4 (even though it looks like 3 would still support High Magic given the relative percentages of items needing attunement across rarities). Or go 1/3/5 to make the campaign magic level even more impactful. I don't think one needs to offer a wider range than that because not all items need attunement.

 

[jgsugden]

Actually, for someone asking for different ways on how to change it, recommending that they don't change it is mostly a waste of typing.

I disagree. Some people ask questions about how to change things without realizing the full ramifications of doing so. Providing more information about the impacts of the change is not a waste for those people... and it isn't all about those people anyways. We speak on forums as a community. Later, people with similar questions often find threads on topics that concern them. That is why discussion on a discussion forum is encouraged and it is not beneficial to dismiss the opinions of others as a waste of typing when their views do not match one persons. Even if one poster does not find use for some suggestion, others in the discussion group may.

Also, I've been playing the game since it came out, so it has been over 10 months of playing as written. I feel that I do understand the game system to some extent.

Given how often you post, you're clearly quite devoted to the game. However, my suggestion was to try for a year... and we're not there. Even if you have played in the testing groups and played for more than a year, this is an area where more time might be warranted (see below).

Regardless, if you decide advice is not for you, the polite things to do are to either move on without comment or to further the conversation - by seeing if there is any merit in the suggestion that you might benefit from with a bit of tweaking.

You are aware, are you not, that LMoP has something like 10 non-consumable magic items in it for a party of 4 or 5 PCs that basically just make it to level 5. Since none of those items are acquired at level 1, It's the potential of 3 items found per level after that or well over 50 items by level 20 if one were to continue in that vein (my group of 7 gets about 4 non-consumable magic items per level, so a little higher). What they write in the adventures does not necessarily match what they write in the DMG.

That is a good point, but it is kind of self negating. That module violates the recommendations in the DMG significantly in many ways. There are multiple encounters in it that are intended to be fought, but are far beyond deadly. The number of items found either exceed the recommended distribution, or indicate that the number of items rolled up was extremely aberrantly high. There are a number of threads out there on how to bring the module back into recommended design guidelines that suggest removing items, modifying encounters (bye, bye bugbear), etc... If I recall correctly, you've commented on a few of them. It seems clear to many that the module was designed while the rules and guidelines were still taking shape. Accordingly, anything in it is not a good example ... of anything.

Regardless, your assumption on the rate of magic item acquisition is off by a bit. You prorate the rate of acquisition linearly. It is not designed to be a linear rate of acquisition. If you follow the tables and probability models, the PCs are actually likely to find items at a faster rate after level 5 and then it slows again as they enter the teen levels (but they are more significant). By the end of LMoP, the party should have found 4 to 6 items that are not consumed. Basically, if you follow the DMG guidelines and get fairly typical rolls, you'll end up with about one 'permanent' item per PC by the time they hit 5th, then you'll get up to about 3 to 4 by the time they go to 11th. From there the rate drops down and you find one more non-consumable item per PC every few levels. On average, you end up with 6 per PC at 20th. However, anything between 4 and 9 per PC is not that big of a deal when the attunement rules are used as you're not seeing PCs overpowered at higher levels with too many game changing items.

It should be noted that the primary levels where attunement is likely to matter are the highest levels. They put the rules into place, it seems, to help address issues from prior editions where the higher levels lose focus and control - resulting in people losing interest. Even those of us that have played a lot of 5th edition at this point have spent far more time playing at lower levels (generally), so we could still use some more experience at higher levels before we judge the rules meant primarily to impact those levels...

 

[KarinsDad]

To be fair though, wasn't LMoP written before the DMG came out?

True. On the other hand regardless of what is written in the DMG later on, LMoP might have been written by designers who playtested their product and came up with their own level of magic item acquisition that seemed to make sense (based on level of fun, the adventure designer's experiences gaming in the past, etc.).

 

[KarinsDad]

Regardless, your assumption on the rate of magic item acquisition is off by a bit. You prorate the rate of acquisition linearly. It is not designed to be a linear rate of acquisition. If you follow the tables and probability models, the PCs are actually likely to find items at a faster rate after level 5 and then it slows again as they enter the teen levels (but they are more significant).

But playing the game IS linear and people who "follow the DMG guidelines to the letter of the law" might not understand that. My friends come to my table every session. They expect there to be exciting things every single time they come. Some of that exploration, some fights, some roleplaying. But it should be fun, and a bit different, and a bit awesome every single time and there should be no artificial limits to any of that.

There is no "well, we only acquire a few items early on, then we tend to half fill out our quotas, then we find one once in a blue moon" after that at my table.

Every session could result in finding a non-consumable magic item (it doesn't happen that often, but it could).

Why?

Because it's cool.

It's fun.

I play the game for fun, not for some other game designer's idea of fun. My idea.

So, your suggestion of being a good magic item acquisition DM and following the DMG guideline is noted.

 

[Hussar]

True. On the other hand regardless of what is written in the DMG later on, LMoP might have been written by designers who playtested their product and came up with their own level of magic item acquisition that seemed to make sense (based on level of fun, the adventure designer's experiences gaming in the past, etc.).

That may be true, but, every edition has had a different level of magic items. 1e was chock a block with magic loot - it was built into the system. For example, a paladin was "limited" to 10 magic items, a hard limit that would actually strip you of your paladin hood if you took too many. The treasure tables rewarded multiple magic items depending on the treasure type.

3e was, IMO, a trend downwards away from that. I tended to see characters with a lot fewer magic items. A 7th level character was assumed to have about 16k worth of treasure, which meant two, three items typically - magic weapon, magic armour and probably some stat boost item. It wasn't until you got into significant levels that I started to see characters with a lot of items.

4e, IME, was even a further downward trend. Particularly if the group used inherent bonuses. You just didn't need any magic items. Our 15th level group had something like 3 items each.

5e is simply continuing the trend.