D&D 5E (2024) Indirectly Buffing Rogues, Rangers, Monks Via Magic Items?

[Horwath]

Hence curated lists. I dont hand out much in the way of vicious weapons (they're "the best").

I actually like Vicious weapons the best.
With following bounded accuracy design goal, they work better than +X items

Hence the following house ruled items.

Magic weapons:

Common: +1 damage
Uncommon: +1d6 damage
Rare: +2d6 damage
Very rare: +3d6 damage
Legendary: +4d6 damage

Magic armor: damage reduction from all attacks.

Common: DR 1
Uncommon: DR 3
Rare: DR 6
Very rare: DR 9
Legendary: DR 12

As for casters "implements"
they gain damage/healing bonus to one roll of the spell per spell level(cantrips are level 1 spells for this)

IE: for 3rd level spell
it would be
Common: +3 damage/healing
Uncommon: +3d6 damage/healing
Rare: +6d6 damage/healing
Very rare: +9d6 damage/healing
Legendary: +12d6 damage/healing

for 9th level spell it would be:
Common: +9 damage/healing
Uncommon: +9d6 damage/healing
Rare: +18d6 damage/healing
Very rare: +27d6 damage/healing
Legendary: +36d6 damage/healing

As for save bonuses from items, they are also removed.
now they give save proficiencies chosen after a short rest with using the item.

Uncommon: 1 save proficiency
Rare: 2 saves proficiency
Very rare: 3 saves proficiency
Legendary: 4 saves proficiency

 

[Seramus]

Without them tgey still better than most spell casters at levels that matter.

Magic items are a great way to help martials with the exploration and social pillars. It's true that anyone can use utility items, but martials get so happy when they can contribute outside of combat.

 

[tetrasodium]

Player Wish List. Encourage your players to keep a wish list of magic items they hope their characters will find in the course of the campaign. If you want to award a magic item but don’t have a specific magic item in mind, you can pick an item of the appropriate rarity from your players’ wish list.

I tried that so many times for so many years with 5e & frankly wotc themselves poisoned that well so badly that players who started with 5e don't even know how to make a reasonably plausible list (I've seen holey avenger sword of wishes & similar wayyy too often from level 1 players).

Worse still is that 5e magic items don't have enough fine toothed granularity for me as a GM to actually consider anything like a list because the whole thing is designed around an absurd one & done "it's magic" so the list starts with something like "magic greatsword/longbow/etc" then simply ends unless I as GM start editing monsters to counter the designed in no magic items poison where it then ceases to be a list or factor of design like past editions where churn was a thing & it becomes "I just wanna play d&d, how about you just give me what I need to keep up with your unknowable homebrew man" with none of the proactive desire to seek it out that was previously present.


With that said, I think bob worldbuilder kinda revealed the core root cause of the whole problem wotc refuses to address in his

Spoiler: recent video

Wotc doesn't seem to design for or look at a concept like a campaign unfolding as an ongoing sandbox where players have agency to traverse the world with a series of first person present tense choices. Instead it's probably looked at more of place where players can invoke some form of "flavor is free" cosmetic skin like the tcoe personalizing spells blurb in a series of self contained quick time event-like battles like cosmetic skins. Under that sort of QTE style play it's hard to consider the impact of actual play foundational cracks growing from the default skills, DCs, extensibility of reciprocity, risk, resting, Nova Loops, magic items & all the other systems that start to break down the further gameplay walks away from one where the GM simply invalidates those problems by effectively teleporting between self contained events while taking the heat for such overt railroading.

 

[ECMO3]

Functionally irrelevant.

At its core, 5e is a neotrad game based around demonstration of character concept, not player skill. If a player isn't able to demonstrate their character concept effectively, as a GM, you give them a bit of an assist.

I'm the most skilled "operator" of the 5e rules at my tables by a decent margin. But since I understand the 5e social contract, I have no problem with other players getting targeted boosts that I don't need. The only time I ever take magic items is when my character build is literally the only character that would benefit from it.

I think most players would not like this. Also in my experience less skilled players recognize they are less skilled and don't have a problem with it. I play in a long time Wednesday game with 3 players who are experts and optimizers and 2 players who are not. In the current campaign we are 18th level and there is no question that the 3 "experts" are WAY more powerful than the two that are not and the players that are not experts readily admit this.

On the other hand a lot of players have problems with favoritism and DM bias, and it regularly makes the list of bad DM behaviors.

If you are up front and address this in session 0 and tell players openly that you will be biased based on how well they play, I think it is fine. If you just decide to do it in play, I don't think it is though.

 

[ECMO3]

e that all of the popular theory crafters don't use magic items. It disadvantages the weapon users and over-values spell casters. A sorcerer isn't getting a +3 Wand of the Warmage*, but a Ranger can have a +3 bow or a Monk can have +3 hand wraps. It also favors big two-handed weapons over two-weapon combatants. A Ranger with two +3 weapons is going to get more out of it than a Barbarian with a +3 greatsword.

Edit: *Actually, they can. I don't know why I didn't think is scaled. Still, it is typic

A weapon user is not typically getting a Staff of Power either though.

 

[ECMO3]

Basically if you pick a "weak" class youre getting your ites dropped a bit earlier and theyre a bit better.

Thoughts?

My thoughts - Toxic DMing, unless you socialize this in session 0 and get players to explicitly agree to it ahead of time.

 

[Silam]

Another aspect to consider is creating scenarios where items are completely or partially unavailable. Some examples:

1. Ambush at night during a long rest. The party member who is on guard duty is fully equipped, but everyone else is unarmored. Players can pick up their weapons and can have some (but maybe not all) other wondrous items already equipped. You can sleep comfortably while wearing a ring, but not boots. If the players insist on sleeping in their magic boots and armor, give them exhaustion levels or fewer HDs recovered after the long rest, but orherwise let them get their per day abilities back.
2. Taken prisoner, wake up naked in a prison cell. Classic. Let’s see how the Wizard does without their spellbook. And the other casters without their component pouches, holy symbols, etc.
3. Guests at a royal banquet. Weapons and armors checked at the door, or left in the room three floors up from the ballroom (the familiar too, BTW). Wondrous items might be appropriate, but only if they’re classy. Characters might attune to other items entirely, to make up for not having their main items available, which will hopefully be useful, but certainly less powerful if somehow a fight breaks out. Other protected buildings could likewise require checking weapons and/or bags at the door.
4. Antimagic field. That avenging sword is now a very well crafted piece of inert metal. Deal with it.

There should hopefully be occasions for a Monk to shine when gear is not forthcoming, or a chance for a character with Tavern Brawler to use improvised weapons, etc. Likewise, some scenarios could favor spellcasters, or skill users, or martials, at the expense of the others.

Balance is not to have every type of character shine equally all the time. Balance is to have sufficiently diverse scenarios that everybody gets their 15 minutes of fame every once in a while.