D&D 5E (2014) L&L for 5/12

[Rydac]

a new one up to discuss

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140512

 

[Texicles]

I like the whole system really. I was always intrigued by the way 13th Age handled magical items (though I've yet to get to play with that system), and this seems quite similar. Not only is it a departure from the "magic mail-order catalog" of recent editions, but beyond making merely making magical items less common, it actually makes them interesting.

Personally, I would work it so that casting identify could tell you the mundane drawbacks, like making the user smell irresistible to owlbears (as food or as a mate, a consensus has yet to be reached), but I'd prefer that items' embedded story hooks and plot twists remain obscured until the appropriate moment.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

With attunement I wonder if cursed items and intelligent items will be brought up more.

While I always felt the ego points, and magic item struggling to control the PC were too complicated that most DMs never bothered with it, I wonder if this subsystem might make those things easier to bother with.

 

[HobbitFan]

Sounds interesting. I'm unsure about a few things:

1. What about campaigns where magical bonding stuff like attunement doesn't make sense?
2. I'm a little confused as to what the identify spell does now. It sounds like its lost alot of its reason for being.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

I don't know what to make of this article. At first it sounded like attunement would be similar to Earthdawn's threaded items, but it seems to be more about risks to be taken - which is changed into knowledge with the use of an Identify spell. So after identification it's just a decision whether to use/attune to the item or not.

Furthermore, I'm not a fan of mechanical advantages countered by roleplaying disadvantages, which seem to be at the core of the system.

What about removing/breaking an attunement? Is it possible? Do you need a spell cat on you?

This approach may shine in campaign with very few magical items at all. Add drawbacks to each of these items and make it a real decision for the player: you have a possibly non-recurring chance to get a powerful item, but there's a price. Are you prepared to pay it?

 

[Falling Icicle]

Sounds interesting. I'm unsure about a few things:

1. What about campaigns where magical bonding stuff like attunement doesn't make sense?

Easy. As the DM, simply decide that you're not going to use the attunement rules in your campaign.

2. I'm a little confused as to what the identify spell does now. It sounds like its lost alot of its reason for being.

Its only real purpose is to tell if an item has a specific attunement drawback (i.e. is a cursed item). That, and I suppose it's quicker than spending a short rest (1 hour) handling the item to figure out what it does. Admittedly, I would probably prefer if the identify spell didn't even exist, but since it has been made pretty much unnecessary, I'm not really bothered by it. At least there isn't a 100gp "tax" just to find out what your hard-earned items do anymore!

 

[howandwhy99]

I'm glad they are looking to add mystery and a sense of wonder to D&D magic items, but I can't believe this is the way to go.

First, they've removed game mechanics from the so-called interesting features of magic items and called them "story" features instead. Why have them in the game then, if they are irrelevant to playing the game?

Second, Trial & Error was originally in the D&D Playtest. Removing it comes from not supplying rules for magic item designs. Actually playing around with magic items (any item) is the classic means of learning in D&D and made divination spells of such things balanceable and valuable because they magically revealed secrets to players. The rules now are tantamount of the effects of magic spells of the past. I'm sorry, but that last sentence is one of the broken records about contemporary design. "Just tell them how it works" is the opposite of instilling mystery and wonder that act of discovery which makes D&D magical.

EDIT:
Almost forgott, Attunement sounds like a nice magic item feature which is easily house ruled. I'm guessing it's to control how many magic items character can use at once without slot rules.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Furthermore, I'm not a fan of mechanical advantages countered by roleplaying disadvantages, which seem to be at the core of the system.

The default assumption is that most magic items don't have attunement drawbacks unless the DM specifically goes out of his way to add them in. So it isn't really about balancing magic items, it's about making them more interesting. After all, magic items are supposed to be an advantage.

What about removing/breaking an attunement? Is it possible? Do you need a spell cat on you?

Good question. I imagine it depends on the item. Some items might have a powerful curse that makes it difficult to get rid of them. For most items, it's probably just a conscious choice on the character's part.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I like the identification change. It was lame that every group of PCs needed access to this one specific spell, and that the adventure could screech to a halt if they didn't (I have a similar problem with read magic as it was presented in the public playtest). The only criticism I have with the "study it for an hour and learn what it does" solution is that there seem to be no negative consequences. Like if you put on a suit of armor and learn that it's cursed. Like if you learn the wand of fireballs' command word when it's pointing in the wrong direction. How do you even learn the command word without activating the item, anyway?

Also, it still seems weird that attunement is limited to 3. It just seems like such an arbitrary number. If magic items are supposed to be unique and rare, why not make it 1?

 

[Philousk]

I have the most difficulty with understanding the attunement of magical objects is its limitation in number. Why be limited to three objects, but not four or two? I mean some more powerful magical objects than others should further monopolize more life essence, imho. For example, a dragon orb should count for two or more to compare a climbing ring.


I think that Wotc should review the mechanics of life essence quantification that a magic object is supposed to grab when the character attune with him. Perhaps this should be measured with the constitution or perhaps the charisma or wisdom ; I'm undecided about it...On the other hand, specifically, what should be done to attune with an object? should only touch it or should we proceed to a more sophisticated ritual?