D&D General Belts of Giant Strength?

[NotAYakk]

If you want to re-design the other stat-boost items you just need to pick alternative riders.

Headband of Intellect can be +2 intelligence (max 21) and the wearer gains proficiency (or expertise if already proficient) in Arcana, History, Nature, and Religion.

Pearl of Wisdom +2 (max 21) and the wearer gains advantage of Wisdom saving throws.

Cloak of Charisma +2 (max 21) and the wearer gains advantage on Charisma based skill checks.

Gloves of Dexterity +2 (max 21) and the wearer gains proficiency (or expertise) in Sleight of Hand.

Amulet of Health +2 Constitution (max 21) and the wearer gains advantage on Constitution and death saving throws. When spending hit dice to regain hp regain an additional 2 hit points.

Just spit-balling, but you get the idea.

So, I don't like the Item of Stat pattern; because it is "pure" and aimed at +X to stat, it removes a lot of possible flavour and inspiration for minor abilities.

Like, a "Sword of doing more damage" vs a "flametongue" vs a "Sword of Red Dragon's Wrath".

The primary purpose of all of them is more damage; but as you go right in that list you get more fluff in the item's identity. That extra identity makes adding flavourful features easier. And I find that makes for better itemization than "narrowly focused on optimizing one problem" items.

A Third Eye that grants +Wisdom, a Ioun's Library Link (+Int), Quickling-Skin Gloves (+Dex), or Troll-Heart Amulet (+Con).

Secondary effects (beyond the primary stat boost) now fall out a bit more naturally.

 

[Pauln6]

So, I don't like the Item of Stat pattern; because it is "pure" and aimed at +X to stat, it removes a lot of possible flavour and inspiration for minor abilities.

Like, a "Sword of doing more damage" vs a "flametongue" vs a "Sword of Red Dragon's Wrath".

The primary purpose of all of them is more damage; but as you go right in that list you get more fluff in the item's identity. That extra identity makes adding flavourful features easier. And I find that makes for better itemization than "narrowly focused on optimizing one problem" items.

A Third Eye that grants +Wisdom, a Ioun's Library Link (+Int), Quickling-Skin Gloves (+Dex), or Troll-Heart Amulet (+Con).

Secondary effects (beyond the primary stat boost) now fall out a bit more naturally.

Your mileage may vary. A lot of players love stat boost items. If all a girdle of giant strength does is boost your carrying capacity, you might not engage players as much with an iconic magic item.

 

[NotAYakk]

Your mileage may vary. A lot of players love stat boost items. If all a girdle of giant strength does is boost your carrying capacity, you might not engage players as much with an iconic magic item.

I mean, yes, stat boosting items are mechanically super strong? As are accuracy/AC boosting items.

Did you see my MIGHT die based girdle of giants strengths above? They boosted carrying capacity, increased damage per hit, improved strength checks and saves, and had other giant thematic effects.

They don't boost accuracy (as that is honestly the most powerful part of stats) to keep them from being an insanely dominant item.

Having giant thematic effects improve the flavour from my perspective. "Belt of I'm Stronger" which is what BOGS is now is a powerful boring item. A BOGS that lets you throw boulders, even if it is mostly a ribbon, makes them a more interesting item.

With attunement in 5e extra mechanical wiz bangs from items can be limited; you can have at most 3 attuned items, so modest mechanical complexity from items cannot grow without bounds.

Distinguishing "what players want" from "what they should get" is also important. Players, optimization wise, want boring mechanically strong items; but optimization from the DM's perspective is a somewhat solved problem, as the DM can just increase encounter difficulty. The hard part from the DM's perspective is differences in optimization between PCs, or (in extremis) the game going pear-shaped as optimization takes the game out of its sweet spot.

From my perspective as a DM, what I want to give players is items they'll remember and like. Once you've added +X to something on your character sheet, the item may as well be gone. Now, remembering what items you have is a challenge for players, so designing them to be memorable and not niche also helps. The MIGHT die is intended to both be automatic and a nudge to memory.

 

[Pauln6]

I mean, yes, stat boosting items are mechanically super strong? As are accuracy/AC boosting items.

Did you see my MIGHT die based girdle of giants strengths above? They boosted carrying capacity, increased damage per hit, improved strength checks and saves, and had other giant thematic effects.

They don't boost accuracy (as that is honestly the most powerful part of stats) to keep them from being an insanely dominant item.

Having giant thematic effects improve the flavour from my perspective. "Belt of I'm Stronger" which is what BOGS is now is a powerful boring item. A BOGS that lets you throw boulders, even if it is mostly a ribbon, makes them a more interesting item.

With attunement in 5e extra mechanical wiz bangs from items can be limited; you can have at most 3 attuned items, so modest mechanical complexity from items cannot grow without bounds.

Distinguishing "what players want" from "what they should get" is also important. Players, optimization wise, want boring mechanically strong items; but optimization from the DM's perspective is a somewhat solved problem, as the DM can just increase encounter difficulty. The hard part from the DM's perspective is differences in optimization between PCs, or (in extremis) the game going pear-shaped as optimization takes the game out of its sweet spot.

From my perspective as a DM, what I want to give players is items they'll remember and like. Once you've added +X to something on your character sheet, the item may as well be gone. Now, remembering what items you have is a challenge for players, so designing them to be memorable and not niche also helps. The MIGHT die is intended to both be automatic and a nudge to memory.

Yes, coin a phrase from A5E, you could grant an expertise die on melee damage and boost the die up the ranks 1d4 ogres up to 1d12 Storm without affecting attack rolls but that isn't qualitatively that different to +4 to strength.

Maybe charges per day for certain feats of strength is better.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Anyway thoughts on belts and similar ability boosting items?

Not a fan. Strength-based characters are already overshadowed enough without there being an entire range of items that allow other characters to just leapfrog ahead of them in something that they have had to invest in heavily.

 

[Minigiant]

One thing I also did is create a set of magic items that are tied to weight class.

In honor of Summer Slam:

Champions Belt​

Wondrous Item, varies (requires attunement)​

While wearing this belt, your Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution scores changes to the scores granted by the belt. The item has no effect on you if your score without the belt is equal to or greater than the belt’s score.

You can attune to the belt by defeating the previous attuned unless the previous attuned has willfully abdicated attunement or died within the last 100 days.

Six varieties of this belt exist, corresponding with and having rarity according to the six championships.

Belt	Strength	Dexterity	Constitution	Rarity
World Heavyweight Championship	27	19	17	Only 1
World Middleweight Championship	23	23	17	Only 1
World Lightweight Championship	19	27	17	Only 1
Inner Planar Championship Belt	25	25	19	Only 1
Outer Planar Championship	25	25	19	Only 1
Real World Champion Belt	21	21	27	Only 1

 

[TwoSix]

Gauntlets of Ogre Strength are fine. The items that set a non-Con stat to 19 are only really useful to some MAD concepts, since anyone who wants it as a primary stat is going to be prioritize ASIs to get to 20. (And if someone has an interesting concept that will accept a 19 in their main stat in order to get higher secondary stats and more feats, sounds like a win to me.)

The Belts of Strength higher than 20 suck, though, and I don't use them in my games. Stats higher than 20 are generally going to be the result of quest rewards and custom items.

 

[Zardnaar]

Not a fan. Strength-based characters are already overshadowed enough without there being an entire range of items that allow other characters to just leapfrog ahead of them in something that they have had to invest in heavily.

Its a strength based build that got them.

Non strength generally can't use them well. They lack multiple attacks or class abilities.

May depend on how many items DM hands out. Im assuming 5.5 DMG guidelines.

 

[Pauln6]

I believe in 1e, only fighters, rangers, and paladins - all of whom were likely to already have strength 16+ - could use the belts.

 

[jmartkdr2]

A more direct anti-cheese optional rule would be adding a strength requirement to the belts, so characters who dumped strength can’t use them. IE a belt of hill giant strength might require a (raw, unadjusted) strength of 17, whereas a belt of storm giant strength would require a strength of 20 (after ASIs but no other modifications).