D&D 5E L&L for 5/12

[zoroaster100]

I think how many magic items you can have is way too important to be tied to Charisma or any stat, since from the early days trying to get the coveted magic items were too central to the goals of adventuring for many players. I think a flat number is much better than tying it to a stat which would lead to varying numbers for each character.

 

[Klaus]

Three attuneable magic items could be an allusion to http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfThree

Now we just need Unity of Rings and Center of All and we're all set!

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

I might experiment with tying the number of attunement slots to proficiency bonus (2 at 1st level up to 6 at 20th), but three sounds about the right number for what they are trying to do.

 

[ThirdWizard]

1. the cap on attuned items was equal to your charisma modifier (min 1). This removes the arbitrary cap of three and ties attunement to the character's "force of personality". It's a smart solution once the mechanic has been introduced.

This would mean that a STR 8/CHA 20 fighter with gauntlets of ogre power would be much better than a STR 20/CHA 8 fighter is now. The low STR fighter would be able to use the gauntlets plus 4 more magic items, whereas the 20 STR fighter would only get 1 item total. I'd give up 1 point of STR for that!

If you don't like extreme examples, just say STR 14/CHA 20 instead. The magic items you can use far and away makes up for the low STR.

In fact, just about everyone would shoot for the 20 CHA. It would be that good.

 

[Plaguescarred]

I am against the limit of attuned magic items since the beginning though, i prefer to have DM manage this (if desired) and keep the system rules out of this...

Take 4E for exemple, core rules had no limit on rare magic items, but LFR did impose one. I'd like a similar approach taken for their organized play if limit it should have and not have it in the core rules.

 

[Li Shenron]

Presumably it's for groups that choose to not use attunement at all. Remove attunement, use Identify, and you're back to earlier-edition methodology which some groups prefer. And if you're a group that loves the attunement mechanics and hates the Identify bypass... then you don't put Identify in your game so it's never an issue.

I'm not sure... In a group who doesn't use attunement, the PCs learn everything with a short rest, so it's actually this group that has no need for identify.

 

[Obryn]

This would mean that a STR 8/CHA 20 fighter with gauntlets of ogre power would be much better than a STR 20/CHA 8 fighter is now. The low STR fighter would be able to use the gauntlets plus 4 more magic items, whereas the 20 STR fighter would only get 1 item total. I'd give up 1 point of STR for that!

If you don't like extreme examples, just say STR 14/CHA 20 instead. The magic items you can use far and away makes up for the low STR.

In fact, just about everyone would shoot for the 20 CHA. It would be that good.

Or, you're beholden to strong magic items from your DM. Because you're not buying any at magic mart, I'd be worried about that character being less useful rather than more.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Or, you're beholden to strong magic items from your DM. Because you're not buying any at magic mart, I'd be worried about that character being less useful rather than more.

Generally, in my experience at least, players know what kind of game they're getting into before they start playing. I don't think you'd be going in blind, and if it was likely that you'd have gauntlets of ogre power, it wouldn't be a leap to go with a 14 STR / 20 CHA to lower "waste." Even without the gauntlets, if you know you'll be getting a fair amount of magic items, the benefit of CHA goes up dramatically from a game without many. In such a game, I would strongly consider making CHA my highest stat. Magic items are one of the more powerful character customization methods, and beyond straight up power, they're interesting to have access to and well designed items give more options during play. It seems like too much to shoulder onto the Charisma stat.

 

[MarkB]

The limit of 3 attuned items does seem restrictive, but only for the long term - characters aren't going to to immediately find four potentially-attunable magic items within their first few levels.

Rather than tying the number of attunements to an ability score, I'd tie it to character level, adding an additional attunement 'slot' at 6th, 11th and 16th level, so that by the time you're in the upper levels you can have up to six items attuned at once.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I think it's important to keep in mind that, along with the magic items, the attunement rules will most likely be in the DMG, and totally under the DM's control. As in the playtest, I'm sure the 3-item attunement limit will just be a default choice that is presented along with other options. Of course, the DM always has the option to simply ignore attunement altogether.