D&D 5E Will items Break 5E?

[Reynard]

I didn't say they needed "plus weapons", I said they need a magic weapon period to deal damage to creatures with non-magical resistances. I am aware that magic weapons in 5e dont always provide a plus bonus, but fighters still need a magic weapon to be effective.

Fair enough but that's not what the chain of posts I was replying to said.

 

[Art Waring]

Fair enough but that's not what the chain of posts I was replying to said.

Fair enough, I was trying to get back on topic.

 

[LordEntrails]

I haven't found items that break 5E. But I have found some that reduce the fun and/or reduce DM options. In brief;

• Truesight - items that provide this too much take away a lot of options. Such as; illusions, invisibility, fog, etc.
• Horn of Valhalla, Bag of Tricks, etc - decrease player fun if used in combat (too many turns on one player, removes importance of PCs), but can be fun in story telling parts.
• weapon of warning removes most ability to surprise the party and may be annoying to some DMs

Some other item comments:

• +X is not a big deal, but doesn't add much fun.
• teleportation (helm) is really not a big deal, only allows travel to places recently' gone to and not new places, and can easily be controlled by DM effects.
• Flying, changes how many encounters can be approached or engaged. DMs need to be aware of these impacts, but should be expected by tier 3.

To me, most magic does not break the game, but it causes a "escalation war". Where the more magic the party has, the stronger NPCs need to be. i.e. when PCs start doing 100 points of damage, NPCs need hundreds and hundred (or thousands) of HP to be challenging.

 

[Maxperson]

Yep, they really are, but why did they require fighters to have them to be effective against monsters with NM resistance?

The resistance is part of the challenge of those creatures. If fighters have the magic weapon, they tear through those creatures like there's no tomorrow. They aren't required at all.

 

[Art Waring]

The resistance is part of the challenge of those creatures. If fighters have the magic weapon, they tear through those creatures like there's no tomorrow. They aren't required at all.

And yet, spellcasters automatically ignore NM resistance, allowing them to "tear through" resistant creatures right out of the box at level 1.

Why can't fighters do that too??

 

[Mort]

And yet, spellcasters automatically ignore NM resistance, allowing them to "tear through" resistant creatures right out of the box at level 1.

Why can't fighters do that too??

As levels increase, spellcasters have their own problems.

More and more monsters have more and more resistances, magic resistance and legendary resistance. A DM can just as easily make a spellcaster have extreme difficulty affecting foes as a martial.

Now, most casters have (significantly) more options/versatility than most martials and can somewhat compensate, but "the difficulty affecting monsters with their schtick" issue is not a problem unique to martials.

The key is for DMs to be aware of the issues and make sure PCs have available options.

 

[Reynard]

The key is for DMs to be aware of the issues and make sure PCs have available options.

I don't think so. The GM isn't obligated to make sure the PCs have just the right spells or magic items. Sometimes life throws trolls at you and all you have is ray of frost.

 

[Mort]

I don't think so. The GM isn't obligated to make sure the PCs have just the right spells or magic items. Sometimes life throws trolls at you and all you have is ray of frost.

Having options available doesn't mean having the exact tool for the job or the perfect anything.

It means, for the most part, the DM shouldn't be throwing stuff at the party that they can't, at the very least, flee from.

It also means the DM shouldn't be throwing stuff at the party that one PC or set of PCs (say the casters) ALWAYS seems to do better against/handle.

 

[Art Waring]

A DM can just as easily make a spellcaster have extreme difficulty affecting foes as a martial.

Then you are placing the Onus on GM's directly to compensate for the fact that spellcasters are already more powerful than fighters, because out of the box, unfortunately, they don't provide "making things extremely difficult" for spellcasters as an option, forcing you to houserule. And most tables aren't going to do that.

The key is for DMs to be aware of the issues and make sure PCs have available options.

Not all GM's are aware of the issues and they certainly aren't given the tools in the books. Most GM's run games with the assumption that magic items aren't needed, so fighters never get the chance to feel like they are contributing to combat.

 

[Mort]

Then you are placing the Onus on GM's directly to compensate for the fact that spellcasters are already more powerful than fighters, because out of the box, unfortunately, they don't provide "making things extremely difficult" for spellcasters as an option, forcing you to houserule. And most tables aren't going to do that.

I don't follow. The standard rules can easily make things difficult for spellcasters by giving monsters resistances, immunities, legendary resistances etc.

A spellcaster can be completely shut down as or more easily than a martial on this front.

I'm not going to argue that spellcasters, as a whole, don't have vastly more options than martials. But you absolutely don't have to houserule to challenge them.

Not all GM's are aware of the issues and they certainly aren't given the tools in the books. Most GM's run games with the assumption that magic items aren't needed, so fighters never get the chance to feel like they are contributing to combat.

The organization of the books (which is what leads to the apparent lack of tools) is abysmal, yes - it's one of the supposed main things being "addressed" for 2024 (we'll see how well).

But I think it's pure hyperbole to claim martials don't contribute in combat, or even contribute less. Much as it's thrown about a lot as an issue, I haven't seen it be a problem in 5e (3e yes, absolutely, but not 5e).

 

[Reynard]

But I think it's pure hyperbole to claim martials don't contribute in combat, or even contribute less. Much as it's thrown about a lot as an issue, I haven't seen it be a problem in 5e (3e yes, absolutely, but not 5e).

I'd say that if martial aren't doing most of the damage, your casters are not doing their real jobs and actually making things harder.

 

[Maxperson]

And yet, spellcasters automatically ignore NM resistance, allowing them to "tear through" resistant creatures right out of the box at level 1.

Why can't fighters do that too??

Casters automatically ignore resistances to fire, acid, electricity, thunder, etc? When did that happen?

 

[Art Waring]

Much as it's thrown about a lot as an issue, I haven't seen it be a problem in 5e (3e yes, absolutely, but not 5e).

Its possible that we simply run very different games, with players with varying playstyles. Its cool man.

 

[Art Waring]

Casters automatically ignore resistances to fire, acid, electricity, thunder, etc? When did that happen?

NM Resistance means non-magical resistances, not elemental resistances.

 

[Maxperson]

NM Resistance means non-magical resistances, not elemental resistances.

Yeah, but I don't compare apples to oranges. I compare apples to apples. Elemental resistance is to casters what weapon resistance is to martials.

 

[Art Waring]

Yeah, but I don't compare apples to oranges. I compare apples to apples. Elemental resistance is to casters what weapon resistance is to martials.

Look, you're free to interpret it however you want.

 

[Maxperson]

Look, you're free to interpret it however you want.

Cool. I'll continue to compare apples to apples then.

 

[Art Waring]

Cool. I'll continue to compare apples to apples then.

Its cool. Honestly, I like to have productive conversations about evolving the game further, when it gets into muddied waters I simply don't have the time. I wish I did, but I'm too busy writing on my projects full time.

 

[Maxperson]

Its cool. Honestly, I like to have productive conversations about evolving the game further, when it gets into muddied waters I simply don't have the time. I wish I did, but I'm too busy writing on my projects full time.

I like productive conversations as well, which is why I object to spellcasters at 1st level being compared to martial weapon resistances. First, you don't encounter things resistant to weapons at 1st level. I went through the MM from A to D. One CR 3 creature had some weapon resistances, two CR 4 and one CR 5. The rest were higher than that. I did see a number of much lower(into the fraction CRs) that had energy resistances(pretty much all demons and devils). Second, the creature are balanced with these resistances in mind, so comparing magic to weapons is not appropriate. Third, most creatures with weapon resistances also have energy resistances, and there's nothing in martial land that is similar to magic resistance which provides those creatures with advantage on saves vs. magic.

The appropriate comparisons are casters and things with magic resistance and/or energy resistance vs. martials and things with physical damage resistances.

 

[Art Waring]

The appropriate comparisons are casters and things with magic resistance and/or energy resistance vs. martials and things with physical damage resistances.

Sure in an ideal world, but unless you have a standard rate of comparison for games, and how many GM's run games RAW, its very hard to get a clear consensus on what fits for different playstyles.