Identifying Magic Items

[Alan Shutko]

I liked it because it was one more example of the way things changed as you gained levels. It wasn't Just Bigger Numbers.

When you start out, getting things identified is cost prohibitive, and you need any edge you get RIGHTNOW so you experiment. Later on, you can afford to wait so you use Identify. Eventually, you've achieved such wealth that you just don't need to worry about this any more.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I never enjoyed having to identify magic items, at all. Especially when identify took hours to cast and cost 100 gp, it felt like a senseless tax just to use the magic item I had been rewarded. IMO, the only magic items that shouldn't self-identify are those special artifacts and such that the DM wants to make a story out of.

 

[Khaalis]

I think there should be something in the rules about identifying magic items, but I think it should be a laundry list of options. Include a basic rule for Identifying as follows:
* Experimentation (more a description of how to go about DMing this interaction)
* A skill check
* A spell
* A ritual

This then lets the DM have options to choose from for their game. Especially since they are removing magic items as an assumption of progression. It will again be possible to have a game where a Flaming Sword is a legendary treasure, not something bought at the Magi-Mart, if that is the kind of game you want to run.

 

[Mr. Wilson]

I'm ok with having options, but if the default assumes experimentation it'll be one of the first things I house rule away.

I only have a set amount of game time, I don't want to spend 10 minutes of it (or longer) answering yes/no to questions as players figure out what the magic item I just gave them actually does.

If some people like that, good on you and I hope that's an option presented, but I'd rather get to the stuff my players and I actually like to do in game, rather than what we view as tedious busy work.

 

[Starfox]

Spending game time to identify magic items works when they are rare. If you find one or more items every game session, you'd be spending all your time identifying and no time actually adventuring after a while. But they say magic items will no longer be mandatory in 5E, which could leave room for this kind of play.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I want to see the Detect magic spell made into a trained in arcana roll, and give school and basics...

I would love to see Identfy as a rituel that cost 100x (silver gold what ever the norm is) worth of components to cast and it requares an arcana roll to see how much you get. Wizards can cast it for free once per hour rest, and once per 8 hour rest (if that leak was real about rests)

 

[Khaalis]

Spending game time to identify magic items works when they are rare. If you find one or more items every game session, you'd be spending all your time identifying and no time actually adventuring after a while. But they say magic items will no longer be mandatory in 5E, which could leave room for this kind of play.

Correct. This is exactly why I say the core needs to include all of the possible options right off the bat. The options should each be linked to the "Rarity Meter" you set for magic items in the game.

* Experimentation <=> Magic items are rare to very rare. They are so uncommon that there is no 'easy' way to test such items, unless it is a famous item in which case research of legends, stories, etc. is the best option.

* Ritual <=> Magic items are rare to highly uncommon. They are uncommon enough that only a long and involved ritual has been created to deal with identifying their properties.

* Spell <=> Magic items are highly uncommon to uncommon. Identifying them is primarily the role of those with a full understanding of arcane magic, utilizing their ability to manipulate magical energy to form a spell to identify an items properties.

* Skill <=> Magic items are uncommon but common enough that anyone with basic training in the understanding of the arcane (such as a Spellcraft / Arcana type skill) can use their knowledge to identify an items properties.

* Awareness <=> Magic items are so common (or magic works in such a way) that simply handling an item for a few minutes allows the properties of the item to be ascertained.

That covers 5 ways to identify and/or 5 levels of rarity for magic items. This should fit just about every game style out there and it would take up maybe 1/2 to 1 page of space. The "assumed" Core could be that items are incredibly rare (so a +X Flametongue would actually seem like finding Excalibur) and then you could immediately choose any number of other options you may want to allow for your game. For instance you could always allow Experimentation if that's what a PC wants to do, but the campaign could also support Spell & Skill options too. Or you could just replace Experimentation with Ritual or Awareness.

To me, this seems like a pretty simple and clean way to handle this topic and just about every flavor of how people may want to handle it.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

I had a houserule in 3rd - a skill I stole from Rolemaster.

Attunement - it was class skill for spellcasters.

DC depended on level of magic item and list of abilities.

Make the role - you get a basic idea of what it could do (offensive, defense, movement, illusions etc)
Make the role by 5 - know 1 ability
Make the role by 10 - know 2nd ability.

You could only role again after a nights rest - and then the base DC would get you the next step up (another ability)

Cursed items and such would be the last thing known. You had to have the item in place to attune (like 1st).

Worked for our group.

Led to some fun Roleplaying not unlike 1st ed - player just makes the attunement roll on a magic sword "It's offesive magic"
"That's a surprise what else"
"I'll tell you tomorrow"

Thence to experimentation.

 

[Mercule]

Reading through this thread, I realized that one of the biggest reasons I like the idea of experimentation is because I like the idea of including the occasional cursed item in treasure, and I don't like a routine procedure to make that go away. At the same time, I don't like the idea of screwing the players by fiat.

Simple example: The PCs find a -1 sword. There should be a non-zero chance they take it and use it. So, it masquerades as a +1 sword. Does that mean that the 4e fiat identification doesn't work at all? Is there a backup if the PCs are paranoid (or have contextual reason to suspect the sword)? Personally, I'd be okay with the lying fiat and an accurate, if expensive, identify spell -- maybe with a caster level check. That gets me out of saying "Note which room you got that arrow from," and lets me just roll a rough check that they pulled the one back-biter out when they reach for a +1 arrow.

The other reason I like having an uncertain identification process is because I've had fun experiences with "holy carp" moments and special powers and/or intelligent weapons. That +1 sword may burst into +3 flames if drawn against a vampire. It could also be able to fly you to safety when you fall through the drawbridge at Castle Ravenloft. Maybe that's where the caster level check comes into play, again. Checking for intelligence may also be the realm of an analyze dweomer spell.

 

[Mattachine]

Wanting cursed items is separate from identifying magic items. Part of the curse is that it seems like something else.

If you want a surprise flaming sword, then there shouldn't be any means of identifying it . . . because then the surprise goes away.

Also, if the PCs have access to remove curse, then that becomes part of the identification SOP (it did in my 1e games).