D&D 3E/3.5 Using 3E Magic Items in 5E?

[Xeviat]

Hi everyone. Partially because I'm running a 3E game converted to 5E, and partially because my group is very familiar with 3E, I'm tempted to try porting the 3E magic items onto 5E. But, like always, I'm concerned about what this will do to the game.

One thing I liked about 3E magic items is their piecemeal approach. I could design whatever I could think of. I could take spells and make them permanent and BAM, new magic item. The book gave me a value for this item and made me feel like they were fair against others of similar cost. Cool.

5E items feel infrequent. Yes, that means they're special, but it also means players don't get as much treasure. "You found 500 gold" means something different in a world where 2305 gold will buy you a +1 sword.

So, what would adding these items to the game do? I can wholeheartedly believe myself when I say that I think the game math isn't assuming magic to hit bonuses (the monster design guidelines in the DMG have ACs that go up about at 4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 17, or the same time they generally will see Attack increases). It does seem to assume some sort of AC bonus (as monster attack grows about at these levels as well as 12, 16, and 19); I suspect this is because this is how the Monk grows and because magic items to boost AC are more plentiful.

Thus, if going from unassumed magic items to assumed magic items, one might want to scale up monster AC and to hit to compensate.

But here comes an interesting thought: what if you took player magic gear (mainly weapons and armor) into account in determining the difficulty of combats. From casual tests, player characters run through the CR calculator end up with something like a CR 2/3rds their level. Give or take. It depends on how much they're holding back for a long day. I feel like it's more level divided by two, plus 1 per tier (5, 11, 17, 20) ...

Either way, +2 to hit and AC is +1 to CR based on the DMG calculator. If level is about double CR, then +1 to hit and AC is +1 level. That probably would work for a quick assessment; of course, you'll gauge what they can handle as you play. What this means is you could assume that a group in full +5 weapons and armor, at 15th level, could maybe be treated like a 20th level Party. That could prevent one from needing to adjust all monster stats (you can still Gear NPCs with some magic items and boost their CR).

Now, I wouldn't quite want to use 3E items without taking a look at them. Just tossing attunement on them would probably limit the Christmas tree effect (in 3E, I had a table I made for optimal magic item purchasing with weapons, armor, natural armor, deflection AC, save bonuses, and stat ups ...).

I know I just through a lot out there. It's late. I can't sleep. So I think about D&D. What do you think?

 

[Fanaelialae]

I think it's feasible, but I would adjust the scale of 3e items ported to 5e, rather than trying to recalculate PC level. In other words, a +1 or +2 weapon becomes a +1 in 5e, a +3 or +4 becomes a +2, and a +5 becomes a +3. Similarly +1 equivalents would need to be scaled back; a flaming, frosting, shocking, thundering, corrosive longsword might become a flaming, frosting, shocking longsword in 5e (because that's the same as converting a +5 weapon to a +3 weapon).

Obviously you're welcome to do it however you like, but my gut tells me that +1 attack and AC is not equal to a full level of power. It might make balance a bit wonky, IMO.

 

[Li Shenron]

Hi everyone. Partially because I'm running a 3E game converted to 5E, and partially because my group is very familiar with 3E, I'm tempted to try porting the 3E magic items onto 5E. But, like always, I'm concerned about what this will do to the game.

One thing I liked about 3E magic items is their piecemeal approach. I could design whatever I could think of. I could take spells and make them permanent and BAM, new magic item. The book gave me a value for this item and made me feel like they were fair against others of similar cost. Cool.

5E items feel infrequent. Yes, that means they're special, but it also means players don't get as much treasure. "You found 500 gold" means something different in a world where 2305 gold will buy you a +1 sword.

So, what would adding these items to the game do? I can wholeheartedly believe myself when I say that I think the game math isn't assuming magic to hit bonuses (the monster design guidelines in the DMG have ACs that go up about at 4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 17, or the same time they generally will see Attack increases). It does seem to assume some sort of AC bonus (as monster attack grows about at these levels as well as 12, 16, and 19); I suspect this is because this is how the Monk grows and because magic items to boost AC are more plentiful.

Thus, if going from unassumed magic items to assumed magic items, one might want to scale up monster AC and to hit to compensate.

But here comes an interesting thought: what if you took player magic gear (mainly weapons and armor) into account in determining the difficulty of combats. From casual tests, player characters run through the CR calculator end up with something like a CR 2/3rds their level. Give or take. It depends on how much they're holding back for a long day. I feel like it's more level divided by two, plus 1 per tier (5, 11, 17, 20) ...

Either way, +2 to hit and AC is +1 to CR based on the DMG calculator. If level is about double CR, then +1 to hit and AC is +1 level. That probably would work for a quick assessment; of course, you'll gauge what they can handle as you play. What this means is you could assume that a group in full +5 weapons and armor, at 15th level, could maybe be treated like a 20th level Party. That could prevent one from needing to adjust all monster stats (you can still Gear NPCs with some magic items and boost their CR).

Now, I wouldn't quite want to use 3E items without taking a look at them. Just tossing attunement on them would probably limit the Christmas tree effect (in 3E, I had a table I made for optimal magic item purchasing with weapons, armor, natural armor, deflection AC, save bonuses, and stat ups ...).

I know I just through a lot out there. It's late. I can't sleep. So I think about D&D. What do you think?

I think bounded accuracy and attunement are concepts quite integral to 5e, so I am going to assume you want to preserve those.


Then your starting points can be these two simple "rules" for yourself:

- avoid generic "+n" bonuses on your magic items, at least those which boost attacks, AC, ST, ability/skill checks

- as a safety precaution, add attunement to every permanent item


As a secondary step, you might want to consider how 5e character abilities balance across the at-will/short-rest/long-rest schema. 3e didn't have short rests, so when converting a 3e magic item into a 5e magic item, you can (optionally) adjust their number of usage. For example, an item that can be used multiple times per day (but not at-will) could be simplified into working once per short rest.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Another thing to consider iirc, is that 3e valued AC bonus lower than attack bonus (which made sense because your AC had to scale in 3.x or you'd be toast at higher levels), whereas 5e does the opposite (makes sense for bounded accuracy).

 

[ccs]

If your worried about the +s to hit? Just don't assign any of those to the weapons you include. You can still have the Sword of XYZ - it just doesn't have any +s to-hit.

 

[Kalshane]

Based on the existing magical items, I did the following when converting my existing Pathfinder game over to 5E:

Any weapon that does additional energy damage should not also have a bonus to hit and damage (and should generally only do a single type).

+1, +2= +1 in 5E
+3, +4= +2 in 5E
+5= +3 in 5E

Items that have multiple uses per day should have their abilities changed to per short rest or be given charges (with a certain number of charges being recovered at dusk or dawn, depending on what is thematically appropriate for the item.)

Any item that recharges on a rest (short or long) should require attunement. Any item that recharges on a daily basis may or may not require it.

Any item that grants a permanent boost to attack, damage or AC (that is not a weapon or armor) or boosts ability scores should require attunement.

Outside of rare circumstances, items that boost ability scores should set the score to 19 (or whatever) rather than granting a set bonus to that score.

Anything that grants the equivalent of a class or racial ability or boosts an exisiting class or racial ability should probably require attunement.

Any 3.x PC/NPC that is statted up as having a Cloak of Resistance or Ring of Protection of +2 or less should simply have that item deleted. Anyone with an item of +3 or higher should get a Cloak or Ring of Protection (but only one or the other).

In general, when converting an item, try to find a 5E item that is close and use that as a guideline.

 

[Xeviat]

I may downscale the bonuses, but I'm not so married to bounded accuracy to think another +2 could ruin it. Player attack bonus scales generally from +5 to +11 without magic, and +14 isn't too different from +16. I don't care about 20th level heroes fighting CR 1/4th Orcs.

Artifacts in 5th go up to +4, and artifacts in 3E were generally +4 and +5.

I'm also not a fan of the "set to 19" stat items. I much prefer 3E's stat bonuses. 5E has belts of giant strength that go up to 22 anyway, doesn't it?

I'm thinking of tying attunement to proficiency bonus and making weapons and armor require attunement, but I'm not sure about that.

I'm going to do some comparisons to see if +1 Attack and AC works out similar to +1 level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kalshane]

I may downscale the bonuses, but I'm not so married to bounded accuracy to think another +2 could ruin it. Player attack bonus scales generally from +5 to +11 without magic, and +14 isn't too different from +16. I don't care about 20th level heroes fighting CR 1/4th Orcs.

Artifacts in 5th go up to +4, and artifacts in 3E were generally +4 and +5.

I'm also not a fan of the "set to 19" stat items. I much prefer 3E's stat bonuses. 5E has belts of giant strength that go up to 22 anyway, doesn't it?

I'm thinking of tying attunement to proficiency bonus and making weapons and armor require attunement, but I'm not sure about that.

I'm going to do some comparisons to see if +1 Attack and AC works out similar to +1 level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, monster AC tends to top out around 23, so the difference between +14 and +16 is hitting on a 9 vs a 7 vs. the most powerful foes they're likely to face.

Ultimately it's your game and you can do whatever you like, I was just pointing out what I found brought 3.x/PF items to be fairly comparable to those in the 5E DMG.

 

[transtemporal]

I say just take everything as is, including bonuses. You might need to tweak a few things for stuff that no longer exists in 5e but hey. Honestly, I wouldn't even bother recalculating encounters to account for the new loot unless you're super married to the difficulties in the book.

 

[werecorpse]

I think the bonus to hit is the biggest thing, so change all the + to hit and damage of magic items to just + to damage.

IMO the most game changing items in 5e are AC items so remove all the bonuses to AC.

I also dislike the set stat items like gauntlets of ogre power, change them back to an enhancement bonus but with a max (ie +2 up to 19 max) - or better yet make them more interesting