D&D 5E Magic item attunement, like-dislike?

[Sunseeker]

I like the 3 item limit, cuts down on everyone wanting to shove a magic item in their eyeballs, people were practically magic than man!

I also like it because it gives a fixed cooldown that I find reasonable between discovery of an item and knowledge of what that item does and how it works.

 

[CapnZapp]

There's a tendency to think the rule to be bad just because it doesn't work for you.

When it could that your campaign simply isn't following the expected default.

So: if you hand out roughly twice as many magic items (with Attunement), then consider doubling the limit.

Simple.

That does not mean the rule isn't working. For the default parameters set by the DMG.

The fact is simply that you are probably handing out more magic items than the DMG assumes. That's why you feel the limit of three to be strangely restrictive. Not because the rule is bad.

 

[Bayonet]

I like it. I like permanent magic items being relatively scarce and valuable, and I like the idea that these items require some sacrifice on the part of the user.

 

[Saeviomagy]

My only complaint would be that they don't go far enough. I'd much rather see people having to decide between having a static modifier and something cool than backfilling empty slots with items of +x.

Mind you, the answer might be "don't hand out items of +x, because they're boring".

 

[Amatiel]

I like the attunement idea. Limits the magic insanity OP effect. Although I found only 3 items a tad limiting. I housefuled that in my campaigns to 5 items.

 

[NotActuallyTim]

I think it works well for its' purpose. Primarily, anti-christmas tree defenses.

 

[Shasarak]

I do not see any good use for attunement limits at all so just dont use it.

 

[Psikerlord#]

My only complaint would be that they don't go far enough. I'd much rather see people having to decide between having a static modifier and something cool than backfilling empty slots with items of +x.

Mind you, the answer might be "don't hand out items of +x, because they're boring".

Yeah I think +x items should be entirely removed from the game. Just keep the interesting stuff. If players want a +x boost, take a stat increase

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Yeah I think +x items should be entirely removed from the game.

They effectively have been removed, since the game math doesn't expect them and the DM isn't forced to include them.

Asking for an option you don't want to use, and aren't forced to use, to be removed from the book is treating your opinion like it deserves more weight than how ever many people actually want those items in the book still.

Me, I like them... but then, I also make them interesting rather than choose to not do that. I haven't even had to go outside of what's presented in the DMG to keep them interesting thus far (the tables on pages 142 and 143 are surprisingly helpful).

 

[n00b f00]

I like the rule, some items maybe warrant attunement that don't have it, and vice versa. If I wanted to increase it, I'd tie it to proficiency bonus.