D&D 5E Wandering "Monsters": Magic Items

[GX.Sigma]

Noticed that did ya? I'm running it now. Don't get me wrong, I like it but let's face it...the plot is not appropriate for 1st-3rd lvl PCs...in our game the party openly betrayed the guild, sided with Ravengard and directly participated in killing guild members and even searching Rilsa's shop....so the guild is out to kill them. I used 9 fingers as the stats for an assassin (and added a con save vs 12 or DIE poison)...even though they were weakened after some other fights with no chance for a rest they still handily beat her (two characters had to make their saves and did)...its almost embarassing that the most powerful denizens of the fabled Baldur's Gate can't take on a party of 4 2nd lvl PCs...what the heck would stop a moderate lvl party of PCs (say 8th or so) from simply taking over the whole city? As har as my gam goes I will restat the npcs to be at least 8th level. Heck, duke adrian was a only a 3rd level fighter...

And then in the next one, Icewind Dale (which was described by 10th-15th level Drizzt as a daily struggle for survival, where he almost dies several times just from the local wildlife) was also a 1st-3rd level adventure location. At this rate, the upcoming Tiamat campaign will end with the ruler of the first layer of Hell being defeated by 5th-level "heroes."

 

[the Jester]

Sure. But why articially forbid the purchase of magical gear? It is a magical setting where castles and magic swords both exist. Why can one be purchased and not the other? If an NPC can hire the party to find a particular magic item for him, why can't the PC's hire an NPC to produce, procure, steal something for them? It just seems like an artitrary thing to me that ought not be an assumption in the rules.

It seems to me to be equally arbitrary to assume that the world is full of high-level npcs capable of crafting or stealing the exact item you want and magic shops that stock such an item. There's nothing wrong with that, don't get me wrong; but I think the last two editions have made clear that the assumption doesn't work for everyone. Certainly, I absolutely despise the notion, both as a player and as a dm, that it's easier to go buy a magic item than to go bring one in from the dungeon (or the body of your foe, or... whatever, where you adventure for it).

See, a lot of this issue comes down to the question, "How common is magic in your world?" If the answer is not very, but there are magic shops all over... well, the problem is pretty much self-evident there, isn't it?

Besides, who's "forbidding" the purchase of magical gear? (Unless you mean in specific campaigns.) The buying and selling of magic items has gone on pretty much forever in campaigns where it's part of the setting. Those guys didn't seem to have a problem with it back in 1e and 2e; those games still existed and still had magic shops (as witnessed by the testimony of several ENWorlders in discussions like this). But look at 3e and 4e, with their baked-in magic item assumptions, and you'll find a strong pressure on dms to ensure that their groups have "adequate" equipment for their level. You have to, in order to keep up. Suddenly it's far less tenable to run a no-magic-shop, low-treasure kind of game.

And as for why someone might want such a low-treasure, no-magic-shop game: for the same reason that some people want ultra-high-treasure, Monty Haul style games. Tastes differ. And that's okay; there is no "one true way" to run a game. Personally, if the pcs are in a town where it's established that the high-level wizard is 5th level, I have a hard time justifying having every magic item available "just because". This, again, is a matter of playstyle; for me, the campaign setting exists not solely as a backdrop for the convenience of the pcs, but as a thing with its own identity and integrity, regardless of whether any games are going on in it at the time. The setting is coherent; there simply aren't tons of high-level npc caster types in every town. That's just not how it is, regardless of whether the pcs would find it convenient.

 

[pemerton]

The game's a toolkit and can handle groups with those factors (granted, there are problems with mixing radically opposing factors in the game group) with GM involvement and care.

<snip>

If they are experienced and well-equipped, dial up the danger.

Directly accounting for them just sticks the PC on the treadmill.

I guess I don't really see the difference - beyond the rhetorical - between "involvement and care . . . [to] dial up the danger" and "stick[ing] the PC on the treadmill."
[MENTION=1210]the Jester[/MENTION], [MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION], both your replies seemed to suggest that you envisage the players having a degree of control over the encounters their PCs face - am I reading you correctly?

higher level characters in 4e, certainly, and from my experience 3e as well, can handle escalating encounter challenges as they level. 1st level 4e characters can handle Level+2 encounters, but by epic tier, they can usually handle Level+6 encounters. I wonder if 4e characters actually need magic items at all!

My 4e game uses magic items but no expertise feats. The PCs are 24th, and in the last session ended up in combat with a 22nd solo, a 23rd solo, a 24th solo and a 23rd elite (overall 30th level encounter). Stripping out of the magic item bonuses would have made hitting very hard!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

My 4e game uses magic items but no expertise feats. The PCs are 24th, and in the last session ended up in combat with a 22nd solo, a 23rd solo, a 24th solo and a 23rd elite (overall 30th level encounter). Stripping out of the magic item bonuses would have made hitting very hard!

wow that sounds epic... I wonder though, at level 24 the expect weapon/implement arraignment should be some at +5 and some at +6 is it possible that with -5 to -6 they would have problems... but if they all had only say +3 items (a difference of -2- -3 how big of a deal that would be?)

 

[Mistwell]

I was explaining to one of my players today that the new system is lower-magic than the prior two versions of D&D, and I said it was "Closer to Lord of the Rings" than the prior D&D games he was used to.

He then asked "Do you think the members of the Fellowship really had much in the way of magic items?"

So I figured I'd count them up, to compare the 5e baseline to the LOTR one.

Here are the ones that come to mind, from the barrow-downs (not shown in the movie), from Galadriel's Gifts, or from inheritance (Sting, Anduril, etc.).

Frodo had mithril chainmail armor, a magic sword from the barrow-downs but it broke and was replaced by another one, Sting. He also has elven cloak, a phial of magic light (Light of Eärendil), and and magic ring (the One).

Sam has the hithlain rope (which moved on command and knotted itself and could ensnare evil creatures), an elven cloak, a box of earth (Earth from Galadriel's Orchard and a Mallorn Seed), and a barrow-downs magic short sword.

Aragorn has a magic sword (Andúril), and Elven Scabbard (A magical scabbard, any sword sheathed in this scabbard will never break), Elessar the Elfstone ("the light of the Sun within it and those who looked through it saw everything that was aged and withered as young once more."), and an elven cloak.

Merry and Pippin each have unnamed magic short-swords from the barrow downs ("red in colour, will not rust if kept in their sheaths, with flowing characters of Númenor, a work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor") and elven cloaks.

Legolas has the Bow of the Galadhrim, and an elven cloak.

Gimli has an elven cloak, and strands of Galadriel's hair thought to be magical.

Boromir died before the session where the DM handed out the magic items. He did have the Horn of Gondor (which broke), and I think he got some sort of gold belt from Galadriel, no idea if it was magic.

Gandalf is an NPC in my opinion, but he has a magic sword and staff at least, probably a lot more.

What did I miss, or get wrong? And, given these numbers, how would that equate to levels for these PCs in 5e?

 

[dd.stevenson]

What did I miss, or get wrong? And, given these numbers, how would that equate to levels for these PCs in 5e?

Boromir also had the horn which was unique, if not truly magical. And Gandalf carried the elven ring of fire (one of the three) although I agree that he's an npc.

If we're equating levels for PCs in 5e, then it would probably be fair to assume that the non-hobbit members of the fellowship carried powerful weapons forged in their homeland. Gimili, for example, was surely armed with the best Erebor-made ax that kin of the Thorin & Co. could acquire. (In fact, I think that's actually called out in passing in two towers when Gimili is armed from the treasury in Rohan.)

I think it was @Neonchameleon who said that the non-hobbits are best viewed as a separate party escorting the hobbits, and I would have to agree with that.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, Boromir also had a sword like Aaragorn's but with less lineage.

 

[the Jester]

[MENTION=1210]the Jester[/MENTION], [MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION], both your replies seemed to suggest that you envisage the players having a degree of control over the encounters their PCs face - am I reading you correctly?

Speaking for myself, yes, at least potentially. Of course, if they just blunder into everything, they're ceding this ability; but- for example- if the 1st level party hears about the Tower of Woe and then bothers to ask around and hear the local tales about it, they can find out that there is something in the tower that casts great balls of flame and turns men to stone. They have a few clues as to the difficulty involved.

Another element here is that the players have control over their pcs' actions, and I don't 'cheat' that by using (f'rexample) the cool monster that they missed in their last dungeon as their next wilderness encounter; that cool monster has a lair, and without a reason to emerge, it may be the new lord of the (otherwise mostly cleaned-out) dungeon.

(And then, perhaps, a later group of pcs will encounter the new dungeon setup, with the cool monster- or maybe not. But there tend to be returns to cool dungeons in my campaign eventually.)

Something else I do is have certain monsters be known as the top dog in their area; maybe there is known to be a dragon in the mountains, or a beholder dwells in the swamps along Lake Yucky. But whatever the top of the food chain is, there are probably legends and rumors about it, letting pcs who are up for the challenge seek it out.

A final note: this style of play really only works with a DM who isn't reluctant to kill pcs off. Otherwise, "choosing the difficulty of an encounter" is meaningless, or at least mostly so.

 

[Dausuul]

@the Jester, @Dausuul, both your replies seemed to suggest that you envisage the players having a degree of control over the encounters their PCs face - am I reading you correctly?

Correct. If the PCs listen at a door and hear orc voices on the other side, they have their choice of what to do. They can kick in the door, lob a fireball, and charge in swinging. They can try to lure the orcs out into a trap. They can disguise themselves as orcs and try to bluff their way through. They can go to that other wall where they heard water flowing behind it, break a hole, and flood the orcs out. Or they can just turn around and walk away. Each of these options requires a different amount of combat prowess and tactical savvy.

Of course, some encounters can't be avoided, either because the encounter was deliberately placed by the DM in a "plot-critical" spot, or because the PCs were ambushed and have no way to escape. In these cases, the DM will probably calibrate them to the PCs' capabilities.

 

[pemerton]

[MENTION=1210]the Jester[/MENTION], [MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION], thanks for those replies.

Would it be fair to say that, in this sort of play, the idea of balancing encounters/effectiveness over "the adventure" doesn't really come into play, because in a certain sense there isn't such a thing as "the adventure" until the players actually play the game?

Where I'm going with this is that I see a contrast between the sort of play you are describing, and the approach found in (say) 13th Age but also hinted at from time-to-time in relation to D&Dnext. In 13th Age, for instance, the players don't have full control over "the adventure" - in particular, if they take a rest before dealing with the equivalent of 4 balanced encounters then the GM is entitled, and on my reading of the rules obliged, to impose a "campaign loss" of some sort. As well as a pacing device, this also balances the asymmetric resource suites of the different classes. A corollary of this approach, discussed in the 13th Age rulebook, is the factoring of items into "the maths".

The sandbox approach you both describe allows the players (via their PCs) to choose what they take on, and therefore to make their own allowances for whether or not they have items. The GM doesn't need to compensate. Do you worry that this sort of approach can produce balance issues with asymmetric resource suites, though? In classic D&D play like that described by Gygax in his PHB I think it obviously did cause balance issues, but that was part of the point: fighters were meant to be easier to play at low levels, and MUs were meant to somewhat overshadow them at high levels. Can D&Dnext be played this way?

 

[Jester David]

I was explaining to one of my players today that the new system is lower-magic than the prior two versions of D&D, and I said it was "Closer to Lord of the Rings" than the prior D&D games he was used to.

He then asked "Do you think the members of the Fellowship really had much in the way of magic items?"

So I figured I'd count them up, to compare the 5e baseline to the LOTR one.

Here are the ones that come to mind, from the barrow-downs (not shown in the movie), from Galadriel's Gifts, or from inheritance (Sting, Anduril, etc.).

Frodo had mithril chainmail armor, a magic sword from the barrow-downs but it broke and was replaced by another one, Sting. He also has elven cloak, a phial of magic light (Light of Eärendil), and and magic ring (the One).

Sam has the hithlain rope (which moved on command and knotted itself and could ensnare evil creatures), an elven cloak, a box of earth (Earth from Galadriel's Orchard and a Mallorn Seed), and a barrow-downs magic short sword.

Aragorn has a magic sword (Andúril), and Elven Scabbard (A magical scabbard, any sword sheathed in this scabbard will never break), Elessar the Elfstone ("the light of the Sun within it and those who looked through it saw everything that was aged and withered as young once more."), and an elven cloak.

Merry and Pippin each have unnamed magic short-swords from the barrow downs ("red in colour, will not rust if kept in their sheaths, with flowing characters of Númenor, a work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor") and elven cloaks.

Legolas has the Bow of the Galadhrim, and an elven cloak.

Gimli has an elven cloak, and strands of Galadriel's hair thought to be magical.

Boromir died before the session where the DM handed out the magic items. He did have the Horn of Gondor (which broke), and I think he got some sort of gold belt from Galadriel, no idea if it was magic.

Gandalf is an NPC in my opinion, but he has a magic sword and staff at least, probably a lot more.

What did I miss, or get wrong? And, given these numbers, how would that equate to levels for these PCs in 5e?

I'd say Frodo's mithril chain wasn't magical, just well made. The equivalent of masterwork.
I don't recall if all the short knives from the wight barrows were magical or just well-crafted.
Legolas also doesn't have the Bow of the Galadhrim but a Bow of the Galadhrim. They're the best bows in Middle Earth and reputed to be strung with elf-hair, but this could also equate with "masterwork" as easily as "magic".

Sam's box of earth was nice, but not a magical item just a rare and special tree.
Similarly, saying Galadriel's hair is magical is pushing it. It's special, being the hair of an immortal faerie creature, but magical... I'd say not.

You could argue the elven cloaks were no so much magical as made with unearthy skill of the elves. But "magic" isn't unfair, although the elves in the book do not echo that statement. Merry or Pippin (I forget which) comments that they're being given magic cloaks are I don't believe the elves echoed this.


LotR is a pretty good example of low magic though, because magic does exist but not everyone has magic and it seems to only find its way into the hands of the adventurers/ protagonists. And most of the magical items have a backstory or a name, such as Narsil, Glamdring, the Light of Eärendil, the One Ring, etc. They're not just random treasure but part of the world.

And it is 2-4 magic items at most per character. Which does seem pretty low to me given the average character in 4e will find 20-25 magic items and the average character in 3e will find 30-35.
In 4e, even if you handwave things and upgrade the big three items (neck, armour, and weapon) that still means 5-10 items per character. More if they take their 50,000 gold pieces and go shopping for low level but useful magic items to fill slots.