D&D 5E Scared Cow: magic Weapon & Armor plusses

[Blue]

Are plusses to hit/damage or AC from magical weapons and armor a sacred cow that would feel off if it wasn't there?

We had started a game at 5th and were allowed an uncommon magic item each, and every single person who used a weapon regularly picked a +1 weapon. And really, the number of rolls that these will add to eclipses any other +1 you'll get.

(Yes, there are other good items - in a previous campaign that did the same thing I ended up with a flying item that gave me lots of uniqueness and flexibility, but those seem to be the exception.)

What if magic weapons only carried something nifty and the fact that they were magic to overcome resistance? This one has a +2 crit range, this one sheds light and does +d6 fire damage, this one fights for the wielder so acts as if you have a 17 STR when wielding it no matter what it really is.

With bounded accuracy I don't think this is the killer that it would be in some earlier editions, though it may make the "get a 20" in your attack ability something that has a higher priority.

This would be a moderate nerf to magic weapons and armor, mostly because of how prevalent the rolls are. Would that (further) upset the balance between weapon-users and spell casters?

Would you play in a game knowing that magic weapons were being changed like this? Would it impact your class selection if you did?

 

[Satyrn]

I started dropping the pluses on magic weapons in 3rd edition and it was fine. The something nifty is so much more fun - and a player doesn't feel like they're missing out on that +1 if no one ever gets one.

We really truly don't need them in 5e.

But then, I also homebrewed every magic item I gave out just using the DMG stuff as inspiration. Like, I made weapons based of the 3e Book of Nine Swords that gave the use of a maneuver or two and a stance.

Or, in the flametongue thread going on here, I suggested granting the wielder a cantrip and giving charges like a wand to augment it.

Have fun with magic items! is what I'm saying

 

[uzirath]

Would you play in a game knowing that magic weapons were being changed like this? Would it impact your class selection if you did?

I'd love to play in a game like that! I generally enjoy games where the GM takes the time to customize things. Any halfway competent GM can manage the game balance impact. Original magic items make the world more interesting and provide great roleplaying hooks.

Not sure if it would affect class selection. Maybe a slightly increased inclination to play a melee class. But I assume you'd have nifty unique items for the casters too, so probably a wash.



Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[Satyrn]

Oh yeah, your last question. it has never affected my players class selection as far as I can tell.

I really don't see how it would, either.

 

[Ath'kethin]

I think there is nothing in D&D so dull as "a +1 sword." Nothing.

Perhaps there is the Blade of Kar-Nimuth, known for its sharp edge, which grants a +1 to hit and damage. But a "+1 sword, full stop" is just dull.

Like a couple others have commented, I by and large dropped magical bonuses to hit and damage years ago. If a weapon has that capability, it is a legend (such as the Blade of Kar-Nimuth), and it is as famous as Excalibur. But then, I tend to approach most all magic items this way; there is only one cloak of invisibility in my campaign world, for example, and it has its own legends and stories about it.

 

[Yunru]

I ripped it out of enchantments and stuck it into it's own system.
You can get a common sword, which is +0/+0; a refined sword, which is +1/+1; an elegant sword, which is a +2/+2; or a masterworks sword, which is a +3/+3.
Likewise with armour.

I also have Pugilist weapons (that count as unarmed strikes), so I don't have to worry about the Monk either.

 

[jgsugden]

5e starts to get it right. Leave the plus weapons in the game, but introduce more interesting weapons with no plus that players will want as much... or more. They just did not take it far enough as there are not enough weapons in the game.

 

[Blue]

I think there is nothing in D&D so dull as "a +1 sword." Nothing.

I'm with you. A friend put it very succinctly years ago - he hated "math bonuses". Things that were just some numeric bonus that was always active and just got worked in. Nothing exciting, nothing with new options - but they were usually rather effective so people took them at the cost of more flavorful options.

 

[LapBandit]

I really dislike any martial equipment being nerfed in a world with Fireball. Why not add the features you're describing to the existing +1 sword?

 

[Ed Laprade]

I notice that everyone is talking about swords. It'd feel a little weird without any, but I could certainly live without them. But armor? That's trickier. There are just fewer things that you can do with armor than you can with weapons, as far as I can tell. Still, a good DM ought to be able to pull it off.