Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Illithidbix" data-source="post: 6800252" data-attributes="member: 12283">A tangent from the "Highest AC thread" where I pointed out that I personally think it's a little odd that the "basic" +3 Weapon (very rare), +3 Armour (legendary) and +3 Shield (very rare) don't require attunement; despite being very rare or legendary and less powerful but many (dare I say "most") characterful weapons/shield/armours do require attunement.Read more: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?475208-Highest-Possible-5E-AC/page3#ixzz3xI2HQZEW" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?475208-Highest-Possible-5E-AC/page3#ixzz3xI2HQZEW</a>(<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?475208-Highest-Possible-5E-AC/page3" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?475208-Highest-Possible-5E-AC/page3</a>)I very much agree.One thing I really liked is in the playtest they went out of their way to encourage you to make every item kinda special.They introduced the creator, History, minor property and minor quirk tables and they had little bits like this in the bag of holding descriptionNow the 5E DMG does have a brief mention of special features and kept the tables from the playtest (on page 142-143); but it is somewhat de-emphasised, and that little gem about the bag of holding didn't make the cut. - I suspect because the magic item descriptions already take up 65 pages before they get onto sentient items and artifacts. I believe they were aspiring to provide 5E versions of all the magic items in the 1E and 2E DMGs.Personally I would have preferred few items and more flavour, but then I run and play in relatively low powered games so most of the items are kinda irrelevant to me anyhow.(And I still think that +2 magic armour/shields/weapons should require attunement!)</blockquote>

Verification