D&D 5E Level 1 Magic Item To Powerful?

[ninjayeti]

Will it wreck the game balance? Probably not. The bigger issues I see are:

1) The PC who gets it is going to be much more powerful than the other characters. Some groups are fine with power imbalances, but other groups are going to be annoyed if one character outshines the others in every fight.

2) Every other magic item that the PCs find in the campaign is going to be a letdown. "Really? All we find is the +2 plate armor and staff of fire - that's it?"

If you are cool with these possibilities then go ahead.

 

[MechaPilot]

Well there is the Sword of Speed in the DMG which is an extra attack.

Turns out they found it in C&C a few levels earlier than planned (planned level 5/6, found level 2). THe C&C one seems to have no limit on the cleave ability (usable multiple times) in a system where most things have around half the hit points of 5E.

I haven't seen the sword of speed yet: work and school and CPA exam prep have forced me to suspend my biweekly game until I pass the CPA exam, so I haven't been perusing all the magic items. I'll have to check out what rarity they give that magic item.

I thought, based on some of the early posts about bonus actions, that the original didn't require an action for the additional attacks. Not requiring any kind of action would be massively overpowered at early levels where you could potentially wade into contact with three or four enemies and cut them all down on your first turn. If that happened at a table I was running, and those foes made up the bulk of that encounter, I wouldn't award any XP for that encounter. XP is supposed to be for overcoming challenges (combat or otherwise), not for owning powerful magic items.

 

[Zardnaar]

I haven't seen the sword of speed yet: work and school and CPA exam prep have forced me to suspend my biweekly game until I pass the CPA exam, so I haven't been perusing all the magic items. I'll have to check out what rarity they give that magic item.

I thought, based on some of the early posts about bonus actions, that the original didn't require an action for the additional attacks. Not requiring any kind of action would be massively overpowered at early levels where you could potentially wade into contact with three or four enemies and cut them all down on your first turn. If that happened at a table I was running, and those foes made up the bulk of that encounter, I wouldn't award any XP for that encounter. XP is supposed to be for overcoming challenges (combat or otherwise), not for owning powerful magic items.

The original post was a direct copy and paste from Castles and Crusades. Said sword exists in an environment where things like this exist.

+2 (+5) HOLY AVENGER: This +2 iron sword becomes a +5 holy sword in the hands of a paladin. It deals double damage against all targets of evil alignment. It provides a spell resistance of 5 + the paladin’s level to the wielder and anyone immediately adjacent to her. It also enables the wielder to use dispel magic (once per round as a normal action) at the class level of the paladin. It inflicts 2d20 points of damage to any evil aligned creature that attempts to wield it.

 

[CapnZapp]

I have put this weapon in a level 1 adventure. Odds are the PC will not find it but you never know.

+3 SYLVAN WEAPON: This +3 weapon, when used outdoors in a woodland climate, inflicts an additional 1d6 of damage on a hit. If a target is struck to 0 hit points by a single strike, the wielder of the weapon gains an attack as a bonus action on another single target within melee range of the weapon’s wielder.

How would you reword this for 5E? Its from Castles and Crusades and I might require that it requires attunement by a Druid or Ranger otherwise it functions as a +1 sword. Druid melee damage sucks anyway so I am not to worried if one of them gets this and I will likely make the blade a short sword or scimitar (probably scimitar).

If the stats are from a game where magical bonuses go from +1 to +5, the first thing to establish is that the weapon's bonus is "medium".

Medium in 5E is +2, not +3.

Then, since the weapon has other abilities, it would be perfectly reasonable to tone down the plus bonus, since there are other effects. Unlike, say, D&D 3.0, there's only one main "layer" of magical pluses: a weapon is either magical or not; a weapon either cuts through monster magic resistance or they don't.

Even a +1 weapon that does a bonus d6 damage sometimes would be a highly desirable item that can easily be the basis for legends, stories and adventures.

One final piece of mechanical advice: don't make the free attack when you down a foe a bonus action. (Obviously, a "bonus attack" in Castles & Crusades might mean something entirely different than the highly definied "bonus action" in 5E; I'm going merely by how similar the terms sound)

This shafts two weapon fighters. It shafts users with the GWM feat. It shafts rangers who need that bonus action to shift their Hunter's Mark.

I suggest you make it a free additional attack, so everybody can get the same bonus out of it.

Instead of rangers, one of your intended user, not being able to use its defining feature, since they're among the most likely character to use TWF and/or Hunter's Mark.

Also, making it a free immediate attack is in the spirit of the original's "within melee range of the weapon’s wielder". If you make it use the character's bonus action, nothing stops him from moving into range of a new foe first. I mean, you could state this can't happen, but making an exception to this general rule is not worth it in my opinion. If you instead say "you get a free attack to use immediately without moving against a target within reach" that's much less of an anomaly in the 5E framework.

 

[Flamestrike]

The original post was a direct copy and paste from Castles and Crusades. Said sword exists in an environment where things like this exist.

+2 (+5) HOLY AVENGER: This +2 iron sword becomes a +5 holy sword in the hands of a paladin. It deals double damage against all targets of evil alignment. It provides a spell resistance of 5 + the paladin’s level to the wielder and anyone immediately adjacent to her. It also enables the wielder to use dispel magic (once per round as a normal action) at the class level of the paladin. It inflicts 2d20 points of damage to any evil aligned creature that attempts to wield it.

Tone it down for 5E.

'This magical sword inficts an extra 1d8 radiant damage when used by a Paladin to divine smite'

 

[Zardnaar]

Tone it down for 5E.

'This magical sword inficts an extra 1d8 radiant damage when used by a Paladin to divine smite'

Holy avengers exist in 5E. A bit lame compared to their old glory. +3 weapon +2d10 radiant damage to undead and fiends.

 

[JonnyP71]

The original post was a direct copy and paste from Castles and Crusades. Said sword exists in an environment where things like this exist.

+2 (+5) HOLY AVENGER: This +2 iron sword becomes a +5 holy sword in the hands of a paladin. It deals double damage against all targets of evil alignment. It provides a spell resistance of 5 + the paladin’s level to the wielder and anyone immediately adjacent to her. It also enables the wielder to use dispel magic (once per round as a normal action) at the class level of the paladin. It inflicts 2d20 points of damage to any evil aligned creature that attempts to wield it.

Castles and Crusades is a very different game to 5E. The Siege Engine works differently to 5E's bounded accuracy.

You have numerous experience gamers telling you not to use this weapon, and only one so far being in favour (but including a caveat), but you're still trying to argue reasons for...

Go ahead, use it, but be sure to have a way of removing it from the party again if it causes trouble... and then you are likely to get trouble from the player whose character had it!


I wrote and DMed a game for levels 1 through 6 - there was a much more powerful weapon in it, but:
- it was impossible for the PCs to even touch it (it would not let them - it was sentient)
- it's destruction was the reason for the campaign - if the PCs could not find a way to get rid of it they would be annihilated themselves.
- the PCs did not find out that the sword was in effect the BBEG until the penultimate session of a 6 month campaign! They had seen it near the start of the campaign but were unable to get near it.


I would not EVER allow an item as powerful as the one you are suggesting to get into the hands of low level characters. Such items will exist, but they will have powerful Guardians, or be in the hands of high level NPCs, or in the depths of the most treacherous and deadly of Tombs.

 

[Zardnaar]

Castles and Crusades is a very different game to 5E. The Siege Engine works differently to 5E's bounded accuracy.

You have numerous experience gamers telling you not to use this weapon, and only one so far being in favour (but including a caveat), but you're still trying to argue reasons for...

Go ahead, use it, but be sure to have a way of removing it from the party again if it causes trouble... and then you are likely to get trouble from the player whose character had it!


I wrote and DMed a game for levels 1 through 6 - there was a much more powerful weapon in it, but:
- it was impossible for the PCs to even touch it (it would not let them - it was sentient)
- it's destruction was the reason for the campaign - if the PCs could not find a way to get rid of it they would be annihilated themselves.
- the PCs did not find out that the sword was in effect the BBEG until the penultimate session of a 6 month campaign! They had seen it near the start of the campaign but were unable to get near it.


I would not EVER allow an item as powerful as the one you are suggesting to get into the hands of low level characters. Such items will exist, but they will have powerful Guardians, or be in the hands of high level NPCs, or in the depths of the most treacherous and deadly of Tombs.

I think the weapon is fine tweaked for a 5E game. THe leave ability being a bonus action for example. Then its only about as powerful as several other weapons in the game (assuming its a short sowrd and not a great weapon).

 

[JonnyP71]

Holy avengers exist in 5E. A bit lame compared to their old glory. +3 weapon +2d10 radiant damage to undead and fiends.

... and advantage on all saving throws to all allies within 10 feet. That's great!

 

[Zardnaar]

... and advantage on all saving throws to all allies within 10 feet. That's great!

It is. The older abilty was an outright 50% magic resistance to magic though. Some spells do not have saves and being immune to magic half the time is still better than advantage on saves.

For whatever reason people and designers have got it into their head that more powerful magic items= higher level. Check fantasy and legends where newbs pull swords out of stones, or a Kai initiate retrieves the Sommerswerd(World of Lone Wolf). In d20 D&D that tends to break the game more as higher level PCs do not need the +3 or +5 weapons as much anyway and you can combo that stuff with feats etc. A +3 greatsword is more broken in 5E than a +3 dagger that can fire lightning bolts.

High level PCs should probably lose the items if anything.