James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
I didn't say it needs to be attached to sneak attack, but I was replying to complaints about sneak attack and elemental weapons stacking, and making an item that always goes to the Rogue.
D&D (2024) Rogue's Been in an Awkward Place, And This Survey Might Be Our Last Chance to Let WotC Know.
- Thread starter Soulknife_Infiltrator
- Start date
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Now, as to "why do we need magic items attached to sneak attack"- this ties into the greater question of "why do we need magic items in the first place"- and for the vast majority of items, we really don't need them. Most magic items are like spice or frosting. They can make the resulting meal more visually pleasing or better tasting. Or if used wrongly, can have the opposite effect.
The only magic items I feel are necessary are ones that shore up weaknesses a given class may have. Things like access to being able to deal with unseen foes, harm enemies resistant to your attacks, improved mobility options, making your more survivable, better able to handle higher level challenges, and so on. Your group might not need a particular item, based on it's composition and how well the characters complement one another- but they exist in case that need exists.
Mostly, magic items are fun.
Following that preamble, "why should a magic item enchance or replicate a class ability?". Here are some reasons, you can take or leave them. Honestly, I don't really understand why this is a conversation- D&D has, over the decades, had magic items that can do any sort of fantastic thing, simply because someone thought it would be fun to have a magic hat that lets you change your class (Hat of Difference), armor that works in wild shape (Wild Armor, Wildling Claps), or even replicate the powers of other classes (Cloaks and Boots of Elvenkind granting up to 99% Move Silently and Hide in Shadows when these were exclusively Thief and Ranger abilities).
But if you need reasons why you might want this sort of magic item to exist, 'ere we go.
1- a class is absent from a game. If you have no Barbarians, a magic item that lets you Rage once per day allows you to experience another class fantasy, and might shore up a weak point of your character.
Example: Gloves of Missile Snaring basically let you mimic the Monk's Deflect Missiles ability. Also Wands and Staves that can allow you to cast spells you don't have access to.
2- it offers extra support for a class. The previous example of an extra use of Rage can be very welcome by a Barbarian character. Handwraps or Rings that allow Monks or Druids to replicate the benefits of magic weapons for their unarmed strikes/natural weapon attacks, a Belt that increases the effect of Second Wind, an item that improves the abilities of your Familiar or Animal Companion, or any other thing you can think of- if the item interacts with your class abilities in some way, then it enhances your class fantasy.
Example: The Rod of the Pact-Keeper makes you better at using your Warlock magic.
3- World-building and immersion. If magic items can be created, why wouldn't you create magic items that can enhance class or even race abilities (one could see The One Ring as enhancing the natural stealthiness of Hobbits), or even grant them to allies, who lack these abilities! The reasons why and how such things are created can lead to more engaging stories and a more immersive world.
Example: The Girdle of Dwarvenkind, which gives you some of the abilities of a Dwarf.
4- as a limitation. A sword that does 2d6 fire damage is a clear upgrade to anything that isn't immune to fire. It's 2d6 every time it hits, every combat. But a sword that inflicts 2d6 Sneak Attack damage only triggers if you have advantage or you have an ally within 5' of the target. That runs the risk of not coming up every single turn, and forces you to adjust your tactics if you want to use it. This makes it potentially less powerful and more interesting.
Example: well none in 5e that I'm aware of. Certainly there are items that have limitations, like a Dragonslayer weapon only does it's bonus damage to Dragons, and a Vicious weapon only works if you score a natural 20. This is just another potential way you could achieve such an effect.
The only magic items I feel are necessary are ones that shore up weaknesses a given class may have. Things like access to being able to deal with unseen foes, harm enemies resistant to your attacks, improved mobility options, making your more survivable, better able to handle higher level challenges, and so on. Your group might not need a particular item, based on it's composition and how well the characters complement one another- but they exist in case that need exists.
Mostly, magic items are fun.
Following that preamble, "why should a magic item enchance or replicate a class ability?". Here are some reasons, you can take or leave them. Honestly, I don't really understand why this is a conversation- D&D has, over the decades, had magic items that can do any sort of fantastic thing, simply because someone thought it would be fun to have a magic hat that lets you change your class (Hat of Difference), armor that works in wild shape (Wild Armor, Wildling Claps), or even replicate the powers of other classes (Cloaks and Boots of Elvenkind granting up to 99% Move Silently and Hide in Shadows when these were exclusively Thief and Ranger abilities).
But if you need reasons why you might want this sort of magic item to exist, 'ere we go.
1- a class is absent from a game. If you have no Barbarians, a magic item that lets you Rage once per day allows you to experience another class fantasy, and might shore up a weak point of your character.
Example: Gloves of Missile Snaring basically let you mimic the Monk's Deflect Missiles ability. Also Wands and Staves that can allow you to cast spells you don't have access to.
2- it offers extra support for a class. The previous example of an extra use of Rage can be very welcome by a Barbarian character. Handwraps or Rings that allow Monks or Druids to replicate the benefits of magic weapons for their unarmed strikes/natural weapon attacks, a Belt that increases the effect of Second Wind, an item that improves the abilities of your Familiar or Animal Companion, or any other thing you can think of- if the item interacts with your class abilities in some way, then it enhances your class fantasy.
Example: The Rod of the Pact-Keeper makes you better at using your Warlock magic.
3- World-building and immersion. If magic items can be created, why wouldn't you create magic items that can enhance class or even race abilities (one could see The One Ring as enhancing the natural stealthiness of Hobbits), or even grant them to allies, who lack these abilities! The reasons why and how such things are created can lead to more engaging stories and a more immersive world.
Example: The Girdle of Dwarvenkind, which gives you some of the abilities of a Dwarf.
4- as a limitation. A sword that does 2d6 fire damage is a clear upgrade to anything that isn't immune to fire. It's 2d6 every time it hits, every combat. But a sword that inflicts 2d6 Sneak Attack damage only triggers if you have advantage or you have an ally within 5' of the target. That runs the risk of not coming up every single turn, and forces you to adjust your tactics if you want to use it. This makes it potentially less powerful and more interesting.
Example: well none in 5e that I'm aware of. Certainly there are items that have limitations, like a Dragonslayer weapon only does it's bonus damage to Dragons, and a Vicious weapon only works if you score a natural 20. This is just another potential way you could achieve such an effect.
Vikingkingq
Adventurer
And this sort of stuff is important for balance/scaling/class fantasy issues, too. If the DMG is chocka with magic weapons, but almost nothing for Unarmed Strikes, that disadvantages Monks relative to other martials, and forces Monk players into the unfun choice of either falling behind mechanically or not using their class abilities and living out their class fantasy.
This is why they're bringing in a bunch of magic items that work with Unarmed/Unarmored, both in order to balance the classes and to improve the play experience for players of those classes.
I would also add that magic items that enhance class features act as incentives/signposts for playing into that class or playing that in a certain way. A sword or dagger that adds Sneak Attack damage further encourages Rogues to maximize their Sneak Attack opportunities. Likewise, a magic item that increases spell DCs makes spellcasters more likely to cast save spells versus attack spells, and vice versa for a magic item that increases your spell attack but not your DCs.
Not quite.... that is only one of the reasons I noted.
You can see one of the others in the spoiler that was part of the post you quoted earlier in 247 when you asked if a particular item fixed the problem.that other reason was to force the rest of the group to basically stfu and just automatically give it to the party rogue if it shows up. Since a scenario like a con game or AL game pretty much cuts the gm's control over the treasure in an adventure that is not a "well a gm should" issue
Contrary to your claim About it fixing stacking though, it doesn't and I linked to a way of getting+elemental dice* when I linked to several +elemental dice items earlier but didn't include spells and similar that could stack. Even if stacking were the only less than positive impact there is the fact that I asked for the positive reasons for such an item to exist rather than how particular problems are best avoided, so I'm still looking for reasons why these kinds of items need to or deserve to other than the most glaring and obvious negative reasons for their existence.
* those gauntlets from DiA.
Doesn't the shore up weaknesses but kinda clash with all of the ones that 5e removed from sneak attack? What niche does s dagger that deals an extra 2d6 sneak attack damage fill that is not filled by a dagger that deals an extra 2d6 poison fire or whatever?
mellored
Legend
Well then sure.
There's a difference between
"this replicates sneak attack", which is fine.
"this requires sneak attack", which is bad.
Rod of the Pact-Keeper isn't good item, but it is a necessity. It's the only one that works with Eldritch Blast.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Um. Sneak Attack with a melee weapon isn't automatic. You still need advantage on the attack or to attack a foe with an ally adjacent to it.
For example, with the poison dagger, I could attack anyone I wished to. The Sneak Attack dagger is slightly more limited in it's application- I have to use the normal Rogue tactics to use it.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Items that are limited to a particular class totally exist. There's functionally no difference between "must be a Druid" and "must have Wild Shape" for an item.
So barring the (probably unlikely) event that Wild Shape gets handed off to a subclass, why is one of those bad and the other good?
Look, this is all hypothetical for me. I could care less if WotC adds things like this to the game or not. If i want it, and I'm the DM, I'll add it, just like how I'd happily ignore the existence of a WotC-made item I disagree with.
But when someone says "there is not need for this" or "this is a bad design", I feel that's fairly subjective. We've had items that require classes and class features in the past, there's still some in D&D today. An item that grants a class ability isn't really a big deal unless you're worried about niche protection or something, which I've never been too concerned about.
Along the same veins, something that enhances a class ability isn't a big deal either. Sure, maybe it's only useful to that class. Well, say you find a Staff of the Woodlands or a Holy Avenger. Guess what? It's really only useful to a Druid or a Paladin.
There is a notable exception here, curiously, it's a Rogue ability. Specifically, this ability of the Thief subclass.
By 13th level, you have learned enough about the workings of magic that you can improvise the use of items even when they are not intended for you. You ignore all class, race, and level requirements on the use of magic items.
So a Thief might take issue with an item that requires them to have Rage, meaning they couldn't use it and an actual Barbarian could. That's a pretty edge case, and not one that I'd really be concerned about.
Worst case scenario, if there were no Barbarians, making the item useless, I'd either A) allow the players to hand it over to an NPC Barbarian for a different reward, or B), just rule the Thief can use it anyways, if they were so inclined to do so.
mellored
Legend
Neither would be good.
Sure.
In the original D&D with 4 classes and a party of 4, then each class specific item had an extremely good chance of being useful.
There are now 13 classes. Assuming a party of 4. Then a class specific item is useless for 2/3 of the games.
I don't have any issues with granting class features.
A Talisman of Wild Shape is going to be useful in any party.
I don't see any benefit having Staff of the Woodlands be a Druid only thing.
Why not allow a Barbarian or Ranger to use it?
I don't think that anyone in this thread have suggested that the called for item replicates sneak attack before this shift of yours. In fact the original call was that rogues need something that improves the rogue's sneak attack. The thread itself even started off with a premise that rogues specifically need more power or whatever.
The must be x class items are mostly a legacy carried over from first & second edition when the game was extremely different. Those items were practically what later moved into PrCs/subclasses but got maintained for people to drool over like the idea of reaching level 20 outside of a oneshot. They are bad design now because those items tend to be OPbrokenAF but overlooked because they never really come up in play. All of them however unfairly paint the GM with an awkward aura inviting the party to wonder "is this favoritism" & that's another reason why class specific items are bad.
The +sneak attack dice thing is not in a realm that is so obviously OP & gamebreaking on their face that a gm could just giggle while shutting down an obviously unreasonable ask for such items like with the old class specific very rare/legendary items from first & second edition. That's a bad thing because these new items being called for are subject to many of the same problems as those legacy items without the "lolno you should know that's an unreasonable item to look for & we all know it".
Going beyond that is the Rod of the Pactkeeper that keeps coming up in strawgrasping. I think initially it was intended as an alternative for the attunement by "a spellcaster" required pearl of power★ that works more obviously with pact magic, but then it got improved with no regard for what it was trying to replicate so it was improved once when the spell slot it grants became one that scales with warlock level & gets recovered with a short rest rather than long.
The bad design didn't stop there for rod of the pact keeper though because someone decided that it should also embody the attunement by "a spellcaster" required wand of the warmage★. For some reason unlike the two items rolled into pactkeeper it was published in a generally single pc-specific warlock only single attunement slot rather than "a spellcaster" so the warlock could be guaranteed to get two different attunement items for a single attunement slot and still question if they should get it over "a spellcaster" if a better PWand of the warmage or a pearl of power shows up later.
★Which warlocks could already use.
