" you are misunderstanding the point of the note in the DMG"
And you are misunderstanding what it means that life is too short to play with crappy DMs.
That you immediately bin "hand out magic weapons" as indistinguishable from a "monty haul" dm is clarifying
Monty Haul is a style of playing and is not necessarily bad or good. It depends on your tastes.
The DMG has a list of recommended magic item numbers by level. +X or even magic weapons are never explicitly recommended and are explicitly not required. Explicitly, magic weapons are extra. If everyone has a +X weapon by level 4, that is not necessarily "Monty Haul", but it is very suspect. Every single recommended Uncommon item was a +1 weapon or focus and there were zero shields, utility items, or other magic items. This is odd, but not Monty Haul. Alternatively, each member received +X items in addition to an assortment of defensive and utility items. This is likely Monty Haul. If the group particularly excels at scouring locations and finding every magic item in an adventure, you may see an overabundance of magic items. It just depends. There are powerful Uncommon items that are not +X items, like a Broom of Flying, that could be handed out instead of a +X item and sometimes they will be more impactful.
If a player refuses to be happy unless they have a +X weapon by a certain level, they might be a problem player. If a DM refuses to hand out +X weapons or magic items, that is certainly in their purview and does not break any of the math of the game, but if it doesn't match the expectations of the players, that could be a different problem. Players and DMs should discuss expectations in Session 0 and speak up if expectations change or if they are out of alignment. Generally, that communication is driven by the DM, but it is really everyone's responsibility to communicate and respect the decisions of the table they play at.
I have no issue with you wanting a +1 weapon by level 4. I don't think it's wrong of you to want one. I disagree that not having one breaks any math of the game and the DMG explicitly says they are optional. Not getting one from your DM does not make them a "crappy DM".
I love magic items. Even though I have never done so since the Artificer class was introduced in 3.5, I am disappointed that they can no longer use a Holy Avenger and a Hat of Many Spells. I like making up magic items. I had a player with a wagon that was larger on the inside back in 3.5. It was her workshop and home. She would pull into towns and sell fruit preserves out of it. I am a little saddened by the general reduction of magic items in 5e compared to 3.5. However, because Magic Items are optional, they can also be fun without reducing your effectiveness in a given encounter below what is expected for your level.
"If a player refuses to be happy unless they have a +X weapon by a certain level, they might be a problem"
Thats your opinion. Thats not raw. But youre wrapping your opinion as being the "point" of the dmg so you can argue with anyone with a differeny opinion. Like my opinion that life is too short to play with crappy dm's.
"If a player refuses to be happy unless they have a +X weapon by a certain level, they might be a problem"
Thats your opinion. Thats not raw. But youre wrapping your opinion as being the "point" of the dmg so you can argue with anyone with a differeny opinion. Like my opinion that life is too short to play with crappy dm's.
No, RAW is that Magic Items are completely optional and encounters are balanced with the assumption that from level 1-20, you have none.
RAW is that DMs never have to worry about awarding magic items just so the characters can keep up with the campaign’s threats.
RAW is that magic items are not necessary.
You can claim that a DM that operates within those guidelines is "crappy" all you want, but a DM playing by the printed rules is the most trivial of complaints. I said that a player not being happy because they can't get a +1 weapon could be a problem because that might represent a player that doesn't respect the agreements set forth by the players and DM. However, this could also represent that the expectations were never discussed, and the player's play style does not match the table's. That is why I also said that expectations should be discussed during session 0.
"I said that a player not being happy because they can't get a +1 weapon could be a problem because that might represent a player that doesn't respect the agreements set forth"
"I said that a player not being happy because they can't get a +1 weapon could be a problem because that might represent a player that doesn't respect the agreements set forth"
Again, your opinion.
Not so much. It's not RAW and we don't need to focus on it, but that is indeed what I said and why. Now, we have covered that the rules do in fact state that Magic Items are optional and that the DMG does state encounters are balanced around not having them. These are explicit statements in the DMG. We have covered that DMG has a recommendation for allocation of Magic Items. We have covered that the DMG does not have a recommendation that any number of these are or are not magic weapons.
We have not covered it, but the DMG also suggests Magic Item wish lists for the players as a place to potentially draw magic item awards from. Additionally, the DMG suggests overstocking adventures with the assumption that not all magic items will be found. None of that actually guarantees a magic weapon.
Do you actually have a printed rule that contradicts this or mathematical evidence that suggests that contradicts any of the DMG's statements?
"Do you actually have a printed rule that contradicts this or mathematical evidence that suggests that contradicts any of the DMG's statements?"
Like i said, i clearly stated something as being my opinion, and you cant let someome have a difference of opinion, and as i also said before, you express something is your personal opinion about things and insist it is written im the rules that way.
Demanding i provide a "printed ruled" to back up my opinion, or conttadict your opinion, is just more of what you keep doing over and over.
"Do you actually have a printed rule that contradicts this or mathematical evidence that suggests that contradicts any of the DMG's statements?"
Like i said, i clearly stated something as being my opinion, and you cant let someome have a difference of opinion, and as i also said before, you express something is your personal opinion about things and insist it is written im the rules that way.
Demanding i provide a "printed ruled" to back up my opinion, or conttadict your opinion, is just more of what you keep doing over and over.
I am not demanding you give a printed rule. I am just clarifying whether you have one. I have given the printed rules. I have also hinted at my play style as a separate and distinct statement.
If you give your opinion as fact and misrepresent the printed text, I will challenge you on it. You are, of course, welcome to run your game how you like or seek games that match your play style. I do take issue with the blame and judgement towards others with a different play style. To adapt your words, life is too short for games you don't enjoy. I hope we can at least agree on that more neutral statement.
Monty Haul is a style of playing and is not necessarily bad or good. It depends on your tastes.
The DMG has a list of recommended magic item numbers by level. +X or even magic weapons are never explicitly recommended and are explicitly not required. Explicitly, magic weapons are extra. If everyone has a +X weapon by level 4, that is not necessarily "Monty Haul", but it is very suspect. Every single recommended Uncommon item was a +1 weapon or focus and there were zero shields, utility items, or other magic items. This is odd, but not Monty Haul. Alternatively, each member received +X items in addition to an assortment of defensive and utility items. This is likely Monty Haul. If the group particularly excels at scouring locations and finding every magic item in an adventure, you may see an overabundance of magic items. It just depends. There are powerful Uncommon items that are not +X items, like a Broom of Flying, that could be handed out instead of a +X item and sometimes they will be more impactful.
If a player refuses to be happy unless they have a +X weapon by a certain level, they might be a problem player. If a DM refuses to hand out +X weapons or magic items, that is certainly in their purview and does not break any of the math of the game, but if it doesn't match the expectations of the players, that could be a different problem. Players and DMs should discuss expectations in Session 0 and speak up if expectations change or if they are out of alignment. Generally, that communication is driven by the DM, but it is really everyone's responsibility to communicate and respect the decisions of the table they play at.
I have no issue with you wanting a +1 weapon by level 4. I don't think it's wrong of you to want one. I disagree that not having one breaks any math of the game and the DMG explicitly says they are optional. Not getting one from your DM does not make them a "crappy DM".
I love magic items. Even though I have never done so since the Artificer class was introduced in 3.5, I am disappointed that they can no longer use a Holy Avenger and a Hat of Many Spells. I like making up magic items. I had a player with a wagon that was larger on the inside back in 3.5. It was her workshop and home. She would pull into towns and sell fruit preserves out of it. I am a little saddened by the general reduction of magic items in 5e compared to 3.5. However, because Magic Items are optional, they can also be fun without reducing your effectiveness in a given encounter below what is expected for your level.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
"If a player refuses to be happy unless they have a +X weapon by a certain level, they might be a problem"
Thats your opinion. Thats not raw. But youre wrapping your opinion as being the "point" of the dmg so you can argue with anyone with a differeny opinion. Like my opinion that life is too short to play with crappy dm's.
No, RAW is that Magic Items are completely optional and encounters are balanced with the assumption that from level 1-20, you have none.
RAW is that DMs never have to worry about awarding magic items just so the characters can keep up with the campaign’s threats.
RAW is that magic items are not necessary.
You can claim that a DM that operates within those guidelines is "crappy" all you want, but a DM playing by the printed rules is the most trivial of complaints. I said that a player not being happy because they can't get a +1 weapon could be a problem because that might represent a player that doesn't respect the agreements set forth by the players and DM. However, this could also represent that the expectations were never discussed, and the player's play style does not match the table's. That is why I also said that expectations should be discussed during session 0.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
"I said that a player not being happy because they can't get a +1 weapon could be a problem because that might represent a player that doesn't respect the agreements set forth"
Again, your opinion.
Not so much. It's not RAW and we don't need to focus on it, but that is indeed what I said and why. Now, we have covered that the rules do in fact state that Magic Items are optional and that the DMG does state encounters are balanced around not having them. These are explicit statements in the DMG. We have covered that DMG has a recommendation for allocation of Magic Items. We have covered that the DMG does not have a recommendation that any number of these are or are not magic weapons.
We have not covered it, but the DMG also suggests Magic Item wish lists for the players as a place to potentially draw magic item awards from. Additionally, the DMG suggests overstocking adventures with the assumption that not all magic items will be found. None of that actually guarantees a magic weapon.
Do you actually have a printed rule that contradicts this or mathematical evidence that suggests that contradicts any of the DMG's statements?
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
"Do you actually have a printed rule that contradicts this or mathematical evidence that suggests that contradicts any of the DMG's statements?"
Like i said, i clearly stated something as being my opinion, and you cant let someome have a difference of opinion, and as i also said before, you express something is your personal opinion about things and insist it is written im the rules that way.
Demanding i provide a "printed ruled" to back up my opinion, or conttadict your opinion, is just more of what you keep doing over and over.
I am not demanding you give a printed rule. I am just clarifying whether you have one. I have given the printed rules. I have also hinted at my play style as a separate and distinct statement.
If you give your opinion as fact and misrepresent the printed text, I will challenge you on it. You are, of course, welcome to run your game how you like or seek games that match your play style. I do take issue with the blame and judgement towards others with a different play style. To adapt your words, life is too short for games you don't enjoy. I hope we can at least agree on that more neutral statement.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.