Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dave2008" data-source="post: 8179428" data-attributes="member: 83242">I simply tried to explain why I find 5e easier to design magic items for than 4e (and by extension 3e).  I certainly didn't try to shift the goal posts.  That was the goal I was going for the whole time (explaining why I prefer 0 magic item assumption), where you trying to shoot for something else.It is also possible I've just done a piss-poor job of explaining.I did not question if feats where optional. I was questioning whether or not their inclusion actually made 0 difference from math standpoint.  I personally don't know, but I have seen some say feats (or some feats) give you a numbers advantage.  But I also said that was relevant to a discussion about magic items so I am not sure why your bringing it up.Another misunderstanding.  I just meant they cannot select a +2 ASI. The can improve their attributes with feats that provide a +1 benefit and since we allow all UA feats, we have quite a few that do that. Regardless that is independent of having the space to design magic items, IMO.As I pointed out, our characters are not necessarily behind the + curve. Some, if not all, have maxed primary stats.  But to be honest, I don't think that really maters.  You don't have to mechanical superiority for 5e to work wonderfully.Also, because I don't have to assume magic weapons, when I make, or give, a magic weapon - it doesn't need to have a +1, 2, or 3 at all.  I think I mentioned our group currently maxes out at +1 items (may have been in a different thread), so it is not like I am filling the supposed "behind the curve" gap with magic items. What I do with magic items is give them interesting properties, not ever escalating numbers. That is possible because the math of 5e doesn't assume I have to have a +3 weapon at lvl 15 (our current level).Do I think we play 5e differently.  Yes.  So in that respect I guess you could say we are playing differently, I just wouldn't go so far as to say: "two entirely different things," but that is just semantics really.The tesla analogy is horrible, I am not even going to try to engage with it further and I shouldn't have the first time.  My apologies for continue down that line of explanation.Sure, but their is a psychology of needing to fill a requirement in 3/4e that 5e free me personally from. And as I mentioned above, because I don't have to give a +3 weapon at level 15 in 5e, I can instead design a sword that is only +1, or no bonus to hit, and give it other interesting properties.Again, I didn't play 3.5e, but it was somewhat similar in 4e. IIRC.  I've never given out enough magic items for it to be an issue though.  Same with attunement in 5e.One of the best things about 5e, IMO, is that since there is 0 assumption of magic items.  Then I don't need to hand them out, but when I do it is special. That really isn't possible in a system like 3/4e where you have to have magic items to keep with the monsters.Listen, I've acknowledge that your viewpoint is correct from your perspective, I wish you could step back and acknowledge my viewpoint too. But maybe that is to much to ask of an internet web forum. There isn't one correct answer.For an example: Here is a sword one of our lvl 15 fighters has;<table style='width: 100%'><tr><th>Whispering Sword</th></tr><tr><td>Weapon (longsword), requires attunement</td></tr><tr><td>The whispering sword communicates with you telepathically, telling you when enemies are near, when to strike, and when to defend.</td></tr><tr><td>You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls made with this sword, Additionally, when you hit a target with this sword you deal an extra die of damage of the weapon's type. While wielding this sword you cannot be surprised. While wielding this sword you can use a reaction to add your proficiency modifier to your AC against one attack that would hit you.</td></tr></table>This was made early on.  Now I would probably have remove the +1 benefit.  It simply isn't needed, IMO.</blockquote>

Verification