D&D (2024) New equipment list

[Azzy]

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.

You're the one that brought up power disconnects in relation to my posts that had nothing to do with power levels, and I have been repeatedly questioning how you got there from here. There is no need for mundane equipment, specialized to different settings, to have different power levels—such a thing wasn't necessary in 2e and it's not necessary now. Now have you answered the question of how equipment sourcebook location can create a power disconnect.

 

[tetrasodium]

You're the one that brought up power disconnects in relation to my posts that had nothing to do with power levels, and I have been repeatedly questioning how you got there from here. There is no need for mundane equipment, specialized to different settings, to have different power levels—such a thing wasn't necessary in 2e and it's not necessary now. Now have you answered the question of how equipment sourcebook location can create a power disconnect.

2e did not need such lists because the system was made with tons of room to accommodate lethality mitigating powerful equipment by being dangerous. by comparison 5e PCs even at low levels are walking gods who don't need lethality mitigating equipment improvements by design. 3.x took that a step further by adding room for greater differentiation in the equipment lists through acp asf crit mod crit range damage type & so on. waiting till a setting book is made to start carving in room for the needed power shift that supports a setting as 5e did is too late to begin what should have been modular from the start.

There is absolutely a need for equipment lists to have different power levels for different settings because those settings carry with them different levels of availability & expectations of growth as part of their baseline themes & tropes.

 

[Azzy]

2e did not need such lists because the system was made with tons of room to accommodate lethality mitigating powerful equipment by being dangerous. by comparison 5e PCs even at low levels are walking gods who don't need lethality mitigating equipment improvements by design. 3.x took that a step further by adding room for greater differentiation in the equipment lists through acp asf crit mod crit range damage type & so on. waiting till a setting book is made to start carving in room for the needed power shift that supports a setting as 5e did is too late to begin what should have been modular from the start.

Look, if you think 5e isn't lethal enough for what you want to do, you'd be better served looking for optional rules to make it more lethal (which is a better ask for a prospective edition than trying to create "different power levels" for mundane equipment).

There is absolutely a need for equipment lists to have different power levels for different settings because those settings carry with them different levels of availability & expectations of growth as part of their baseline themes & tropes.

For you, perhaps, but not all of us need it. And mundane equipment is a weird place to put different power levels when elsewhere in the system is a more intuitive place.

And I'm sill flummoxed about how the location of such makes any difference (beyond seeming more intuitive to put setting-specific options in setting-specific sourcebooks).

 

[tetrasodium]

Look, if you think 5e isn't lethal enough for what you want to do, you'd be better served looking for optional rules to make it more lethal (which is a better ask for a prospective edition than trying to create "different power levels" for mundane equipment).

There's no reason for this hostility. I question if someone could have have any experience with 2e as well as 5e without being able to recognize that 2e was dramatically more lethal than 5e. 5e PC's are durable in ways that would look over the top even for an over the top 2e dmpc. There's no subjectivity in admitting that the comparative lack of lethality in 5e reduces the room for equipment to fill before shifting from PCs facing lethal risk to overpowered PCs

For you, perhaps, but not all of us need it. And mundane equipment is a weird place to put different power levels when elsewhere in the system is a more intuitive place.

And I'm sill flummoxed about how the location of such makes any difference (beyond seeming more intuitive to put setting-specific options in setting-specific sourcebooks).

I've asked you at least twice now how you expect a setting book to backport designspace for "modular" equipment lists into the core rules if the core rules do not include the lists or include room for them from the outset. What exactly do you figure a modular equipment list in a setting book would look like?

 

[Eyes of Nine]

What's happening here in this thread?

Just like every setting book has new spells/races/sub-classes/backgrounds/etc etc; there should also be a list of equipment specific to that setting. It's surprising there hasn't been such a thing before. Sounds like potentially a GREAT DMs guild product for someone else to make and me to buy

 

[Azzy]

There's no reason for this hostility. I question if someone could have have any experience with 2e as well as 5e without being able to recognize that 2e was dramatically more lethal than 5e. 5e PC's are durable in ways that would look over the top even for an over the top 2e dmpc. There's no subjectivity in admitting that the comparative lack of lethality in 5e reduces the room for equipment to fill before shifting from PCs facing lethal risk to overpowered PCs

No hostility, maybe exasperation. I said, if lethality is not enough for you for what you want for the particular setting not that 5e is as lethal as 2e.

Like I said, you're better served with an optional rule that increases lethality to your tastes than to try and make mundane equipment have different power levels (something that seems to me a bit backwards).

I've asked you at least twice now how you expect a setting book to backport designspace for "modular" equipment lists into the core rules if the core rules do not include the lists or include room for them from the outset.

Because mundane equipment shouldn't have different designspace for different settings.

What exactly do you figure a modular equipment list in a setting book would look like?

Like a normal equipment list. Nothing more.

 

[Azzy]

What's happening here in this thread?

Just like every setting book has new spells/races/sub-classes/backgrounds/etc etc; there should also be a list of equipment specific to that setting. It's surprising there hasn't been such a thing before. Sounds like potentially a GREAT DMs guild product for someone else to make and me to buy

Heck, I made one for Eberron.

 

[tetrasodium]

No hostility, maybe exasperation. I said, if lethality is not enough for you for what you want for the particular setting not that 5e is as lethal as 2e.

Like I said, you're better served with an optional rule that increases lethality to your tastes than to try and make mundane equipment have different power levels (something that seems to me a bit backwards).


Because mundane equipment shouldn't have different designspace for different settings.


Like a normal equipment list. Nothing more.

That's a mere name swap not a modular equipment list. If it's more than a name swap the. How does it differ if the design space & power levels are the same?

 

[Azzy]

That's a mere name swap not a modular equipment list.

So be it.

 

[SkidAce]

Because mundane equipment shouldn't have different designspace for different settings.

Wooden or bone weapons for ancient world settings?

Firearms for renaissance?

Gladitorial weapons for arena combat.

I see your point, all those could be in one big list, but I feel there is some design space for mundane equipment that would be nothing but filler in a standard campaign to be presented in a specific campaign setting book.