D&D 5E (2014) Bounded Accuracy and Magic Item Scarcity

[Uchawi]

Without a reliable CR system, there is no hope for even attempting to balance magic. As a DM you are going to have to learn at you go, just like some of us did in 1E. That is the price you have to accept for retro design and anything goes.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Is there a link for that Balor thread? What exactly did the DM give the party to make a CR 19 beatable? Such as handing out vorpal weapons and defenders and +3 plate?

It has more to do with the fact that the Balor is pretty weak for a CR 19, since so much of its power calculation comes from its Death Burst.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I'll assume that's a question.

I would counter by going one step further - There is more to the game than character advancement. I would go so far as to suggest that blatant character progression can detract from the role-playing experience.

But on the other hand, an obvious path of advancement is an easy way to hook players and keep them coming back for more. I don't want to call that the WoW mindset, because it became apparent as soon as 3.0 came out and offered every class with new abilities at each level, but similar principles are involved. Indeed, one of the criticisms of certain games - Shadowrun, Rifts, etc - is that your characters never really progress past what they are at the start of the game. To that end, character advancement can be a useful method for getting players invested in their characters.

And you lose that when you no longer progress from a +1 sword to a +2 sword and then a +3 sword.

There is also more to character development than mechanical improvement. Being awarded land, building a stronghold, attracting followers, etc. These are all types of improvement connected to the character and his/her relationship with the game world instead of purely mechanics.

 

[Nebulous]

It has more to do with the fact that the Balor is pretty weak for a CR 19, since so much of its power calculation comes from its Death Burst.

Is that like in LotR when the whip miraculously grabs Gandalf's leg and pulls him down?

 

[TheCosmicKid]

And on that note, wondrous items are difficult to anticipate. Maybe you have a character who would really love that ring of invisibility, but that's just one item among the hundreds of magical items that exist in the world. You can't expect to find it. Whereas, in any previous edition, you really could expect to get the next +1 on your weapon. You practically knew that the day would come eventually, even if you never knew when it would happen.

I think that depends on the campaign style more than the game edition. My players can anticipate finding particular wondrous items, because by and large the way they find items is by going on quests specifically to track down those items. (Coincidentally, they're deep into a quest for an invisibility item right now, although it's a mask rather than a ring.) Quests for better weapons and armor work the same way.

 

[Li Shenron]

Interesting- how has that worked, in general, with your groups? It has been my experience that having story-based magic items for a single purpose in an adventure (say, "The Sword of Cranberry" that will work to defeat the great Thanksgiving Turkey...), but people hate it when you regularly give then take their items from them.

I relate that only because I am reminded of a DM I used to know back in the day who would run Monty Hall (or Haul) campaigns and shower the players with stuff (Why not have a Hand with the Eye of Vecna?), then realize they were way over-powered, and devise a way to destroy it all... it all burned up in a fireball, or was stolen by thieves, or ... fill in the blank. After a while, the players got really tired of that, because it removed the fun.

So while I like the idea conceptually on occasion, I'm not sure it's a good long-term fix.

You tell the players in advance.

No, you can't use accidents, theft or other sudden ideas to take the mcguffins away from the players, because players will feel disappointed if they have been building plans for those mcguffins, and they also might lose confidence in the DM who seems to change her mind regularly.

Let the players know before or when acquiring the mcguffin, that it won't be permanent and/or under their control, like with Frodo and the One Ring. You don't always have to reveal the details, you can keep them for later in the story (this is in-character stuff), but it's important you make the idea clear between the DM and the players (which is out-of-character stuff).

Removing the idea that a mcguffin is forever is not the only one, you definitely don't have to do this with all mcguffins, as a matter of fact you can use it as rarely if you want. The key point is that it should be tied to the story, so use the principle only if you have a good idea related to the story! Something like "the holy Avenger you've found will help you against the demon horde, but you will need to leave it nailed into the BBEG's heart to make sure it stays dead". When you don't have a good story idea, don't force it.

My other main idea is to remove or "jam" character's control of the mcguffin (since the start, not as an afterthought, and make it clear to the players!). For instance, instead of giving the PCs a standard Holy Avenger, make it a special one... make it intelligent, make it cursed, make it gradually diminishing, make it restricted to circumstances which are beyond characters' control. But once again, let the players know as soon as they find the item, or even before they do, even if their characters may realize it only gradually. Perhaps this staff of the magi is bound to where it was forged (location-restricted), or this robe of eyes gradually feeds on its wearer's sense of sight (cursed), or this rod of wonder works only when stars are aligned (circumstance-restricted), or this winged boots worn out with use and carry less and less (diminishing)...

 

[Li Shenron]

I think the bigger problem is that people view the only progression that matters is flat plus combat progression. That if an item doesn't have a "plus" it's not worth having. That's the sad part.

I think it should be made clear that 5e just doesn't work like that. Even your main proficiency bonus increases only four times in the course of 20 levels. It's not a game for people who want to see constant number inflation.

 

[Green1]

I think it should be made clear that 5e just doesn't work like that. Even your main proficiency bonus increases only four times in the course of 20 levels. It's not a game for people who want to see constant number inflation.

Nor should it be. Greg Street, designer of WoW once implied the constant inflating numbers and gear dependence of World of Warcraft was a design flaw looking back. With DnD, in 3.5 and 3.5 variants it got really crazy and unmanageable past level 30 to 40 or even 10 onward. You HAD to have stat increasing items just to stay competitive. 4e was a bit better, but still had issues. 5e gets it about right and has a very 2Eish/ 1Eish feel without having to have a notebook of house rules.

 

[aramis erak]

A +1 weapon is POTENT.

Then again, CR isn't everything. My home group* 6players APL=5 beat a beholder (CR13) in a relatively fair fight.

Yeah, the fighter got death rayed to death. They had the cash to raise him.

* 1/2E Druid 5 with Staff of Healing, amulet of Missile Deflection, and Ioun Stone; E Rogue-assassin 4; DB-Silver Fighter-Eldritch Knight 5 GWM HAM with +1 Sword, Ioun Stone of protection; Elf Monk 5 with slippers of Spider Climb and Ioun Stone of Protection, and a bag of tricks; Tiefling Warlock Book OldOnes 5; Halfling Rogue-Thief 5.

 

[Ahrimon]

See, to me, a flaming sword that does +1d6 fire damage and can do burning hands one per day is way more interesting than a +1 sword.

Focus on bonuses other than +hit/AC/saves and you can have a huge amount of various and unique items without messing with bounded accuracy.