D&D 5E Would you let your player choose their magic items they get?

[Eltab]

Strike a balance.
If a PC wants something very specific, they are going to have to persuade a crafter to make it for them.
If a PC wants some legendary item from lore and legend, it is time for a quest.
If a PC wants a magic item so he can actually harm specific monsters (like fighting Werewolves require Silvered weapons), put something appropriate in an upcoming horde.
If a group of PCs between them have all the skill and tool proficiencies to make their own magic items, let them. Rarity determined by their Tier level, perhaps.

 

[Umbran]

Do you mean choose what shows up during the campaign? That's ridiculous. Players don't get to pick that.

In a game where "character build" matters, it is a bit short of ridiculous.

3e is really the best example here, but the point holds for other editions of the game. 3e had a built-in assumption that the characters would have a certain load-out of magic items, and it was expected that those items would actually help them in fights. But, destruction of items was also not infrequent. So, if you happen to have taken feats investing in a given weapon, for example, and none of that kind of weapon show up in game, your character may be hamstrung.

Asking, "Hey, GM, could we get a longsword in here at some point? You destroyed my last one, and now I can't support my party very well because you keep using monsters that are only vulnerable to magic weapons," seems a reasonable request.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Choosing what will be inside when they open a treasure chest? No way. I'll let them research building plans for desired items, track the probable location of wanted objects with History/Religion checks, and other similar actions, though.

 

[Umbran]

I’d go with a 4e wishlist approach. Let me know what items you most want, and I’ll probably place some of them in the adventure for you.

Yeah. This is supposed to be a cooperative endeavor. The 4e wishlist approach gives the GM some idea of the direction the player wants to go in. It isn't a promise, it isn't binding, but it is helpful in knowing what the player wants to see.

I'm playing in a 5e game. My gnomish artificer has had one of his two infused items tied up as a Bag of Holding for the entire campaign. Half of one of my character signature abilities is tied up as a narrative convenience for everyone, including the GM. There's only so long I should do that - at some point, if he wants the convenience, the GM maybe ought to support it, yeah?

 

[Umbran]

Strike a balance.
...
If a group of PCs between them have all the skill and tool proficiencies to make their own magic items, let them.

So, I have seen several GM say that, and say that they allow it. But then, they turn around and make all plots time sensitive, so that if the players stop and take weeks to go off on quests for recipes, and more quests for ingredients, and then take even more time in crafting, well, the BBEG stomps all over the place, killing people and making advancements far beyond the making of a single magic item the PCs can achieve in the same time.

So, to folks who say that, you actually have to put your money where your mouth is, and not just nominally allow it, but not actually penalize the players for doing it.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

So, I have seen several GM say that, and say that they allow it. But then, they turn around and make all plots time sensitive, so that if the players stop and take weeks to go off on quests for recipes, and more quests for ingredients, and then take even more time in crafting, well, the BBEG stomps all over the place, killing people and making advancements far beyond the making of a single magic item the PCs can achieve in the same time.

So, to folks who say that, you actually have to put your money where your mouth is, and not just nominally allow it, but not actually penalize the players for doing it.

So there shouldn't be an opportunity cost associated with things? The players shouldn't be forced to choose between ease of accomplishing a goal or a more complete... completion of that goal?

 

[jgsugden]

As a DM, I talk to players to know what they want and try to consider that as I tweak my campaign design, but for the most part I leave it up to the PCs to find the things they want with in character actions.

There is a book in my campaign worlds that I created 35 years ago - which you can tell was created by a kid due to the name - Librum Magicum. It basically contains the Monsters, Magic Items and Spells in the PHB, Monster Manual and DMG. It is a basic textbook used to teach magic to any learned spellcaster. It isn't a spellbook or anything like that - but it describes all of these things in ways the PCs would understand.

PCs, in character, can look for the magic items found in these tomes. There are legends about these items. The uncommon items may not have legend about them, but there are a few copies of many of these floating around. Basically - you can find it, or can find someone that will make it, if it is in this book.

Howerver, 2/3 of the magic items the players find in my game are not in the DMG. They're homebrew and unique, providing something unusual and distinctive. Hopefully, memorable. There are also a lot of merchants across my campaign world that sell magic items. While some items from the DMG appear in some of these shops, the shops always also have a selection of my unique magic items.

In the end, if a player really wants to have a DMG magic item, they can start looking for one. It may be hard to get, or it may take them a while to find where one is located... but they're all out there and are researchable by the PC in character within the game. However, when I know what PCs are looking to find, it is not uncommon for them to happen across a homebrew magic item that fills their need with a twist.

Similarly, PCs can always select spells from the PHB, but I encourage players to make up their own spells when they advance as a wizard. Priests can add spells to their repertoire by finding them and praying. Other classes can also add to their spell list by finding, or taking the effort to create, new spells.

 

[Umbran]

So there shouldn't be an opportunity cost associated with things?

There is an unfortunate tendency on the internet to rephrase what people say as a question, but the question is stated in absolutes, when the original was not, making the question a strawman. That is happening here. Nothing about what I said suggests I think there should be NO opportunity costs.

It would be more accurate to say that, in the area of item creation, I think lots of GMs don't actually balance the opportunity costs well.

The players shouldn't be forced to choose between ease of accomplishing a goal or a more complete... completion of that goal?

Sometimes, sure. But there's also what I have seen to be a fairly common issue making the opportunity cost so high that it really isn't an option.

Player: "Wow, the Duke's forces are really, really tough - those demons that need magic weapons to hit are kickin' our butts. Maybe I need a magic weapon."
GM: "Well, I'm not going to give you one, but you have the skills in the party to make one."
Player: "Cool!"
GM: "Of course, in the time it takes you to do that, the Duke will have taken over the kingdom, and hunted the party down with even more of those demons...."

Or, the slight variation, where the GM doesn't tell the player that last bit, taking it as a matter of "player skill" to know when the GM is offering a trap option.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

There is an unfortunate tendency on the internet to rephrase what people say as a question, but the question is stated in absolutes, when the original was not, making the question a strawman. That is happening here. Nothing about what I said suggests I think there should be NO opportunity costs.

It would be more accurate to say that, in the area of item creation, I think lots of GMs don't actually balance the opportunity costs well.

I'm sorry (well, kinda) but just like words have meaning, the lack of words also has meaning. That and I just like to play devil's advocate, might be because of personality problems on my part.

Sometimes, sure. But there's also what I have seen to be a fairly common issue making the opportunity cost so high that it really isn't an option.

Player: "Wow, the Duke's forces are really, really tough - those demons that need magic weapons to hit are kickin' our butts. Maybe I need a magic weapon."
GM: "Well, I'm not going to give you one, but you have the skills in the party to make one."
Player: "Cool!"
GM: "Of course, in the time it takes you to do that, the Duke will have taken over the kingdom, and hunted the party down with even more of those demons...."

Or, the slight variation, where the GM doesn't tell the player that last bit, taking it as a matter of "player skill" to know when the GM is offering a trap option.

I would say then that the magic item idea is a bust and they have to go for a different track, using the other pillars of play. Maybe they have to go ask some order of priests or something for their ideas and use the socialization pillar. Maybe a character has to multiclass into Cleric or Paladin in order to get some of that holy power to give them that extra kick. (although this might be taking away from the players agency a bit, prolly just throw this one out there as an option that helps, but won't solve it). Or maybe the DM is just a jackwagon, who knows.

 

[Blue]

All of the above, none of the above? I chose "I don't know" as a proxy for "Other (explain below)".

In earlier editions where magic item progression was part of the character advancement math I've solicited lists of suggestions.

I've let people start with ancestral/hereditary items that would level up with them, but they didn't know what they did. Nor did I usually, I figured that out as more became apparent.

In some campaigns, I tailor many items to the players. So they will get things they can use. Or at the least do things like pick an armor/weapon type to be a preferred one.

In other campaigns I roll everything randomly. What, no one wants a +2 Club? Okay. A lot more organic. And amusingly for melee weapons it does give STR some more options than DEX, which is a welcome shift in the balance of power however small.

If they want to spend time and money either tracking down items or tracking down how to make them, that's fun. I'm for that, but it's not usually only one of quick, easy, or cheap.

If I'm starting a game at high level I will often allow picking some items by rarity, with some veto power going on.

So it's sorta yes, and sorta no, and a whole lot of look-over-there.