D&D (2024) DM's no longer getting crits on PC's

[Bill Zebub]

As a side note, in general caster-specific magic items require attunement, but +N weapons/armor do not. So fighters have that going for them. Which ish nishe.

 

[CleverNickName]

Neither here nor there, but the flat numerical bonuses (longsword +1, shield +1, etc.) aren't even magic items in my campaign. They're just very well-made items, or they're made from rare metals. They don't detect as magical, they don't bypass resistance, etc. Characters can buy those right off the shelf, or commission them to be made by a professional...they'll pay a premium for them, too.

I thought about doing something similar for the spellcasters (such as the rod of the pact keeper +1, or the wand of the war mage +1) but in the end, I decided against it. Those items require attunement, and I didn't want to have to rebalance it.

 

[James Gasik]

Ummm….why not?

Well this is just my experience, but often you find out what you're fighting and where about .2 seconds before you're asked to roll for initiative. I know in some groups scouting is a thing that's done, but my experience, again, has always been that trying to skulk around and gain advance recon usually just results in someone finding themselves in a solo encounter that they have to try and survive long enough for the party to catch up.

It's been a consistent problem when I play for so long, that I rarely even bother to become proficient in Stealth- there's almost always some enemy or circumstance that trivializes the effort, or the DM is one of those "roll every 5 feet" types.

I will admit that in 5e, most of my experience has been with either home games that have 1-3 larger encounters per session, with the big one being this epic battle, or in AL, where the adventure itself dictates when and where you get a rest. But again, the idea of "scouting ahead" has never really worked out for me.

Even when I've suggested using spells or familiars to scout, the DM usually nitpicks the capabilities of whatever is being used to the point that the information gathered is next to useless. And even in those rare instances where I do get actionable intel, there's always a surprise.

It's like those heist shows where there's a foolproof plan that goes all to hell in about five seconds, except I'm not allowed to insert a "previously, however, we anticipated this and set up a game changer". This ties into why I'm always trying to give my players as much information as I can, because it's really tiresome to have to figure out things blind.

Now, if you're in a game where you can short rest pretty much whenever, and the DM is perfectly fine with some advance recon, perhaps this tactic works. But it just hasn't for me, so I'm pretty dubious about it's efficacy.

 

[James Gasik]

In my own games, I base the attunement limit not on a totally arbitrary number, but on proficiency bonus. But it doesn't come up often, because I've changed how attunement works.

In the 5e remake of Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, there's a cursed axe that grants 5 bonus hit points if you attune to it. The idea struck me as pretty cool, so in my games, items only require attunement if they unlock extra abilities, but they are always useful in their base form.

So a sword might be +1, but then add elemental damage if you attune to it.

If the item has no extra powers, I don't really see the point of forcing someone to attune to it. This has the extra benefit of players being able to swap items around- not that they do, lol, but they could.

 

[Lanefan]

There's nothing I hate more than Ye Olde Magic Shoppe, and official price lists convey the impression that such shops should exist.

If one reads them that way, sure.

But if one wants to use the listed values as an integral part of treasury division, in that the value of the items you claim counts as part of your share, then having price lists is kind of essential. And I for one would never do it any other way, having learned the hard way - and more than once - that other methods simply don't work out fairly in the long run.

Even if the reality is that the game rains magic items, the idea that they are bought and sold like groceries repels me.

One does not lead directly to the other.

That said, the game raining magic items will inevitably lead to there being some trade in those items. Realistically, how can it not?

The moment your party has an item you can't use and-or don't want - an item, however, that someone else can use and-or does want - then boom, that item is going to have value to the person who can use it and will probably be sold or traded for some representation of that value.

Flip side: the moment you learn of someone else having an unwanted or un-useful item which your PC can use, what's stopping your PC from throwing some money at the item's owner in hopes of buying it?

Do these things enough times with enough items and a "price list" will eventually develop organically. A published price list just saves playing through all this by assuming those values have already long since been determined in the setting.

 

[Reynard]

If one reads them that way, sure.

But if one wants to use the listed values as an integral part of treasury division, in that the value of the items you claim counts as part of your share, then having price lists is kind of essential. And I for one would never do it any other way, having learned the hard way - and more than once - that other methods simply don't work out fairly in the long run.

One does not lead directly to the other.

That said, the game raining magic items will inevitably lead to there being some trade in those items. Realistically, how can it not?

The moment your party has an item you can't use and-or don't want - an item, however, that someone else can use and-or does want - then boom, that item is going to have value to the person who can use it and will probably be sold or traded for some representation of that value.

Flip side: the moment you learn of someone else having an unwanted or un-useful item which your PC can use, what's stopping your PC from throwing some money at the item's owner in hopes of buying it?

Do these things enough times with enough items and a "price list" will eventually develop organically. A published price list just saves playing through all this by assuming those values have already long since been determined in the setting.

It would help if D&D "economics" made any sense at all. Then you could tell how much money someone might pay for a thing. Like, if the Duke wants a goblet that is everful of his favorite wine, how much should that thing cost? Well, it depends on how much money the Duke has, whether these goblets are mass produced versus there being ONE such goblet, and how much effort it takes to get ones hands on said goblet. But without functional economics, there's no reasonable place to start. If we knew how much money the Duke's subjects netted him in taxes, and how much money he paid for his army, that would be something. Hell if the price of a horse and a suit of armor made sense compared to the price of a bushel of grain and a barel of wine from three provinces over, we could have some idea. But because D&D has, over the years, abandoned anything even smelling like the hated "simulationism" we can't, because gold is just another metagame component that doesn't have any real correlation with the fiction world the PCs exist in because that world is just Hollywood sets anyway.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It would help if D&D "economics" made any sense at all. Then you could tell how much money someone might pay for a thing. Like, if the Duke wants a goblet that is everful of his favorite wine, how much should that thing cost? Well, it depends on how much money the Duke has, whether these goblets are mass produced versus there being ONE such goblet, and how much effort it takes to get ones hands on said goblet. But without functional economics, there's no reasonable place to start. If we knew how much money the Duke's subjects netted him in taxes, and how much money he paid for his army, that would be something. Hell if the price of a horse and a suit of armor made sense compared to the price of a bushel of grain and a barel of wine from three provinces over, we could have some idea. But because D&D has, over the years, abandoned anything even smelling like the hated "simulationism" we can't, because gold is just another metagame component that doesn't have any real correlation with the fiction world the PCs exist in because that world is just Hollywood sets anyway.

Quoted for truth. One of the things I love about Autarch's Adventurer Conqueror King System is how much research and effort has gone into making a realistic economy. Most games, as you say, just hand-wave everything and force DMs who care about economic consistency to do all the work themselves.

It's frustrating for me, but I suspect you and I are outside the mainstream on this, and most people just don't care.

 

[Bill Zebub]

But if one wants to use the listed values as an integral part of treasury division,

Terrible idea. Things are worth what people (players) are willing to pay. Let the players decide how much they value an item. “I really want that Vorpal Sword…I’ll give up 10k gold of treasure to get it.” “I’ll give up 15k”. “Ok, you can have it.”

 

[Reynard]

Terrible idea. Things are worth what people (players) are willing to pay. Let the players decide how much they value an item. “I really want that Vorpal Sword…I’ll give up 10k gold of treasure to get it.” “I’ll give up 15k”. “Ok, you can have it.”

What happens if the players aren't the only ones that want the item?

 

[Bill Zebub]

What happens if the players aren't the only ones that want the item?

Great plot hook.