New equipment list

jasper

Rotten DM
I think the equipment list should be updated to include Greater Potion of Healing. Also I think Spelljammer should have its own equipment list. What should be added to the list and deleted?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
I'd like to see mechanically dfistinct equpment lists for darksun FR & eberron from the start rather than an equipment lit for FR & "your the gm you fix it" after the baseline is set too high in one area or another. Cantrip wands & eternal wands rather than just innate too
 

I'd like to see mechanically dfistinct equpment lists for darksun FR & eberron from the start rather than an equipment lit for FR & "your the gm you fix it" after the baseline is set too high in one area or another. Cantrip wands & eternal wands rather than just innate too
Yeah I like to see some setting diversity in the new books from the get go. As I've said quite a few times the core books dont have be the traditional 3 cores at 300+ pages. They could do shorter books at a lower price point. Equipment from specific settings for instance. Same with races, classes and backgrounds. Who knows what it would look like, but I think there is a lot of things they could do to restructure the format of the core books. OTOH, I'd also be happy if they expanded the size of the 3 cores and sold them at a higher price point where needed. If they are unwilling to break from tradition here Im going to question if Im even interested in this next edition.
 

Ath-kethin

Elder Thing
I'm another one who would remove the existing healing potion from the general store list, so I'm not really on board with adding more magic items to it.

I'd also be interested in seeing LESS specificity in weapons. I miss the old Normal Sword - whatever the aesthetic design, a culture's primary blade weapon did 1d8 damage. It's how we originally got the longsword and scimitar, which were mechanically pretty much identical until the WorC days began.

But following from there, I'd like to see a return to weapon mastery as well, so a character could develop specific skills and maneuvers with a given weapon, which might appease those who want more differences in design. After all, in the real world you can do things with an axe you can't do with a sword, and vice versa.
 


In my games having greater healing potions on the list would make sense but our campaigns tend to have easily available low level magical items. I can see why others might not want that.

I would have an ordinary items/equipment list and a separate one with a heading like "Variant Rule: Common Magic Items". That variant list would have your healing potions, the stuff from Xanathar's, and a few setting specific things like the wands from Eberron. Include the setting they originate from as a hook and easy way for a DM to say you can use the list but nothing from DS, Spelljammer, etc. Setting books could then build off this list and remove anything from other settings.
 


Azzy

KMF DM
I’d like t he equipment list to be modular.

Playing a medieval-esque sword and sorcery? That’s what the base equipment list is there for. Playing a Forgotten Realms-like high-fantasy setting? These items are also available. Play an Eberron-type magiteck setting. This third list got you covered.
Ideally, such lists should be in the relevant setting books, though.
 

Bill Zebub

“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
Honestly rather than have prices for any magic items (potions, scrolls, magic items, spellcasting) in the PHB, I'd rather see a section in the DMG with guidance on how to price (and make available) such things, for both buying and selling. The players should never be able to point to text and say, "Actually, that's supposed to be worth X."
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Ideally, such lists should be in the relevant setting books, though.
That runs into problems with such lists needing to have room carved into the system from the start either by default or with built in levers that the entire system is built around respecting though. Simply changing the name ms of wildly inappropriately powered equipment does not accomplish anything of value & risks just destabilizing the game
.
 

Azzy

KMF DM
That runs into problems with such lists needing to have room carved into the system from the start either by default or with built in levers that the entire system is built around respecting though. Simply changing the name ms of wildly inappropriately powered equipment does not accomplish anything of value & risks just destabilizing the game
.
Why on earth would there be wildly inappropriately powered equipment? And why would their location in a setting book be any different than if they were in the PHB? This seems like a non-sequiter.
 

That runs into problems with such lists needing to have room carved into the system from the start either by default or with built in levers that the entire system is built around respecting though. Simply changing the name ms of wildly inappropriately powered equipment does not accomplish anything of value & risks just destabilizing the game
.
Really tough to understand the point you're trying to make here...
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Why on earth would there be wildly inappropriately powered equipment? And why would their location in a setting book be any different than if they were in the PHB? This seems like a non-sequiter.
Because the game math is built entirely around a different standard than one that fits the themes tropes & power levels of a given setting without leaving room for a setting book to provide an appropriate equipment list. As to your non-sequitur claim, how would you expect a setting book to provide equipment lists to fit their themes tropes & power levels in any way other than pointless name swaps if the system is not built to provide the mathematical room needed to differentiate such a list to give them a different feel at the table?
 

Azzy

KMF DM
Because the game math is built entirely around a different standard than one that fits the themes tropes & power levels of a given setting without leaving room for a setting book to provide an appropriate equipment list. As to your non-sequitur claim, how would you expect a setting book to provide equipment lists to fit their themes tropes & power levels in any way other than pointless name swaps if the system is not built to provide the mathematical room needed to differentiate such a list to give them a different feel at the table?
Why on earth would there be different power levels between settings? And why would it matter if it's in the PHB or a setting book?
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Why on earth would there be different power levels between settings? And why would it matter if it's in the PHB or a setting book?
"Why on earth" would you expect every setting to have the same baseline? Take the settings mentioned so far as an example
  • A: darksun or some other low magic sword & sorcery setting. Storebought gear is pretty minimal in value but the setting allows & expects players to have opportunities they can improve their gear over the campaign's course Things like at will cantrips & cradle to grave equipment& cantrips are ill fitting
  • B: Eberron/spelljammer/sigil/maybeGreyhawk. Wide magic & capitalism exist. Starting gear is acceptably good but it's expected players will have many chances to improve their gear over the campaign. Cradle to grave gear & cantrips are very ill fitting
  • C: 5e's FR: Magic items are "optional", mundane gear is so good that players are not even expected to find magic items at all but the rules still pretend that this equipment list is suitable for A&B
 

"Why on earth" would you expect every setting to have the same baseline? Take the settings mentioned so far as an example
  • A: darksun or some other low magic sword & sorcery setting. Storebought gear is pretty minimal in value but the setting allows & expects players to have opportunities they can improve their gear over the campaign's course Things like at will cantrips & cradle to grave equipment& cantrips are ill fitting
  • B: Eberron/spelljammer/sigil/maybeGreyhawk. Wide magic & capitalism exist. Starting gear is acceptably good but it's expected players will have many chances to improve their gear over the campaign. Cradle to grave gear & cantrips are very ill fitting
  • C: 5e's FR: Magic items are "optional", mundane gear is so good that players are not even expected to find magic items at all but the rules still pretend that this equipment list is suitable for A&B
It's really hard to follow what you are trying to say.
 

Azzy

KMF DM
"Why on earth" would you expect every setting to have the same baseline? Take the settings mentioned so far as an example
  • A: darksun or some other low magic sword & sorcery setting. Storebought gear is pretty minimal in value but the setting allows & expects players to have opportunities they can improve their gear over the campaign's course Things like at will cantrips & cradle to grave equipment& cantrips are ill fitting
  • B: Eberron/spelljammer/sigil/maybeGreyhawk. Wide magic & capitalism exist. Starting gear is acceptably good but it's expected players will have many chances to improve their gear over the campaign. Cradle to grave gear & cantrips are very ill fitting
  • C: 5e's FR: Magic items are "optional", mundane gear is so good that players are not even expected to find magic items at all but the rules still pretend that this equipment list is suitable for A&B
What has this to do with armor, weapons, and other mundane equipment that are setting-specific? And, again, how does the placement in the PHB or setting-specific supplements change anything other than location?
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
What has this to do with armor, weapons, and other mundane equipment that are setting-specific? And, again, how does the placement in the PHB or setting-specific supplements change anything other than location?
I believe the disconnect might stem from overlooking or ignoring the very explicit question in post 14 "How would you expect a setting book to provide equipment lists to fit their themes tropes & power levels in any way other than pointless name swaps if the system is not built to provide the mathematical room needed to differentiate such a list to give them a different feel at the table?" I can't provide you with the answers your repeated questions are seeking without insight into the disconnect.
 

Composer99

Adventurer
I might be misunderstanding @tetrasodium, but I see their point as being a stronger version of the below:
(1) Different campaign settings have different expectations as regards the power level and availability of equipment and magic items. That seems pretty obvious to me given the examples given of Eberron versus Dark Sun - both of which have pretty divergent expectations from each other and from the PHB baseline.
(2) The game system should be built from the outset to smoothly accommodate these differences.
(3) If you wait until you're developing the setting books to do this work, it's too late - the system will be inflexible and the adjustments creaky and ill-fitting.

Now, personally, I don't know that I'd want those changes to equipment lists in the PHB, but I do think the DMG should have more support on running games that line up with the different "flavours of fantasy" discussed therein. That includes how to change equipment lists to match:
  • "low fantasy" - swords & sorcery and pulp-style stuff
  • "medieval fantasy" - which is a bit lower-tech than the more early-modern PHB gear
  • "magitech" - Eberron and the like.

So some alternates should be in the DMG at the least, IMO, even if a more fulsome treatment of running games in those settings, including more equipment, might wait until setting-specific supplements are released.
 

The Weather Outside Is Frightful!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top