D&D 5E Thoughts Regarding the Number of Attuned Items

[famousringo]

Another reason that extra magic items might be good to keep around is for spare/replacement gear. If magical items are fairly commonplace then that means that more are being made all the time. Adventurers tend be hard on equipment and items get lost or destroyed all the time. Having a few safely stowed somewhere isn't a bad idea.

Stockpiling is one thing you could do.

I'd be tempted to trade surplus magic. Give a magic item to a henchman in exchange for henching services, give it to the captain of the guard in exchange for future legal leniency, donate it to a temple for future healing, barter with the mage's guild for teleportation and research materials, curry favour with the local nobility.

Magic items are portrayed as nearly priceless now, so I imagine the services they might be exchanged for are quite considerable.

 

[CapnZapp]

It's simple really:

If your campaign hands out significantly more magic items than what the DMG expects, then, yes, there's a case to be made for upping the limit somehow.

 

[CapnZapp]

I would still make that a decision with a cost. Perhaps you can choose between attuning 3 great items or, say, a single great item and three less great ones (for a total of 4 attuned items)

 

[CapnZapp]

I would strongly recommend against coupling attunement slots to any given ability.

At the very least you need a "minimum of three" clause, so that while your wizard or sorcerer gets five, the fighter still gets three.

 

[keterys]

I suspect you could make an interesting case for splitting items into minor and major attunements. Then either give out a set number of each, or count majors as 2 or 3, and increase the number of attunements available.

That's probably more detail than they were looking for on the item system, but it would help counterbalance certain items. Like, you want a belt of 29 str? 3 attunement slots. You want the ability to spider climb or web occasionally? 1 slot is fine.

 

[CapnZapp]

The rule of three assumes characters have only one or two attunement items of top power (for their level). As for the rest, there's a quickly diminishing power curve since those items were found several levels ago.

And thus the rule of three isn't meant to be as severe as you might think it is:

When you gain a new shiny item of great power (relative to your level) and already have three attunement items, chances are one of those is a relatively weak item now (even if it was very desirable when you got it).

Thus, the rule isn't meant to force you to give up anything truly significant. All it does is ask you to ditch your fourth most powerful item.

And, if your campaign is anything like the expected one, this 4th item is supposed to be something relatively meh for your current level, since you acquired it on the previous tier of play.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I could get more into unlimited atunement if all magic items had personalities that had their own needs and goals beyond being simple possessions.

 

[keterys]

I could get more into unlimited atunement if all magic items had personalities that had their own needs and goals beyond being simple possessions.

13th Age can get like that I've got one game where treasure distribution is primarily done by who is happy with the quirks of an item, rather than its mechanical benefit.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Sounds like the guy is being a jerk. He doesn't need all the magic items.

Beyond that - have you looked at numenera? A big part of the game is one-off magic items (termed cyphers) and everyone has a limit on how many they can be carrying without detrimental side effects.

In D&D, you would do something along the lines of:
roll a d20 and add the number of extra items you have attuned.

Results from 1-20 have effects ranging from trivial (you smell a funny smell, your hair stands on end at random times) to annoying (you sleep badly and get reduced benefits, one of the items stops working when you try to use it, an item develops a permanent detrimental property) to dangerous (you contract an illness that worsens the longer you have the items on you)

Results above 20 start becoming much nastier (all of the items cease working temporarily, all the items are destroyed, the characters stats are permanently reduced, several of the items detonate, damaging everyone nearby, items transform into cursed versions) all the way up to utterly fatal (a sphere of annihilation manifests inside the character for a moment, instantly annihilating the character and everything they are carrying)

A lot of the stages have "if this has already happened, go up to the next similar result", meaning that the longer you do it for, the worse the effects are.

 

[Coredump]

I suspect you could make an interesting case for splitting items into minor and major attunements. Then either give out a set number of each, or count majors as 2 or 3, and increase the number of attunements available.

The way I see it they already did that.
You can have 3 major attunements, and an unlimited number of minor attunements....