Sounds like you just don't want to put in the work. Even when somebody else made a price guide, you're like "Eh, I dunno. Gotta compare it to past D&D." Then.... why don't you just take the prices from past D&D then and call it a day?
I have looked for outside pricing for 5e and I did look over the Sane guide. However, that being said, I was surprised at the huge differences in prices they had for items compared to where the item would fall within the 5e Rarity range. The disparity was so great that it led to me not trusting the document. Which means now I'd have to do more work to go and validate the prices listed in them to see if I agree with it or not. The whole point is that this should have been done by Wizards. I shouldn't have to go find an outside price guide, or go through all of the magic items myself to price them accordingly. Can I do it? Yes. Do I have the time to do it? Technically yes, but as my time is valuable and already has several items competing for it, doing price calculations that should have already been done does not rate high on the priority list.
I understand the Wizard fanboy responses. But remember that this is their actual job. This is what they get paid for. Thus, when they fail to do something they should have, they should be held accountable for it. I'm the consumer here. I bought their product and now I've found something lacking about it. It isn't my job to fix it. Its theirs.
Bummer being a GM and having to work for your players. I think I would just make it up as I go, every market is different. Prices would vary between a little village apothecary and a big city alchemical guild. Might also have price variances according to location - Probably have fewer potions of fire resistance in the arctic while cold resistance might be cheap.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
They've straight up said why items don't have prices in 5e. They even gave you a price range guide. In Ghosts of Saltmarsh, they even included someone who would go and find certain magic items FOR the party. They're basing it off their design for this edition. Magic item prices probably are as high on the "customer wants" list as say player options and adventure books.
I get what you are saying. Personally, I had such a problem with the Magic Item rules in 5e that I ditched them entirely for 3.x based rules. I still have Thayvan Magical Wal-Marts in their Enclaves and at least one major magic item auction house in large cities. I ditched Attunement entirely because I failed to see it's importance. So when I saw the "prices" for magical items, I had to laugh. Because I am an old hand at DMing figuring out how much things should cost in my game was easy, but since 5e is supposed to be accessible it does seem that WoTC is making it hard on the newbie DMs. From my perspective 5e is low magic, not middle and DEFINITELY not high magic and as such the newbie DM gets very little support in how structure magical economies and how magic interacts with mundane life.
I ditched Attunement entirely because I failed to see it's importance.
Attunement is important because 1) it puts a natural limit on how many crazy effects a player can have going at any given moment from magic items, which is good for both balance and keeping the game moving quickly, 2) it stops magic items like wands from being passed around the party in the middle of combat and 3) solves the problem of min/maxers wanting to hunt down a magic item for every body slot.
If you wanna have magical Wal-Marts, that's cool, some players really like that kind of thing. I'd advice against ditching attunement though, especially if that's how you want to run things.
I'm the consumer here. I bought their product and now I've found something lacking about it. It isn't my job to fix it. Its theirs.
I'm a consumer as well. I like how they did it. "Fixing" it to match your expectations/desires messes with it matching my exceptions/desires, I really like having a price range instead of a fixed price as I can then give an item a price within the range that I want without "breaking the rules."
In short, just because it doesn't do/have what you want doesn't make it broken and/or lazy. Just... it doesn't have what you want.
I ditched Attunement entirely because I failed to see it's importance.
Attunement is important because 1) it puts a natural limit on how many crazy effects a player can have going at any given moment from magic items, which is good for both balance and keeping the game moving quickly, 2) it stops magic items like wands from being passed around the party in the middle of combat and 3) solves the problem of min/maxers wanting to hunt down a magic item for every body slot.
If you wanna have magical Wal-Marts, that's cool, some players really like that kind of thing. I'd advice against ditching attunement though, especially if that's how you want to run things.
Before I get pounced on for this, I absolutely understand that 5e is DIFFERENT than prior editions. I do not like the way 5e handles magic items. Full Stop. My game, and I have more than enough confidence and skill to tinker with it however I desire. That said "crazy effects" were not an issue in prior edition games that I ran, if the crazy effect came from a magic item. I am totally fine with a Sword of Sharpness, Chain Mail of Acid Resistance, Cloak of Protection, Ring of Protection, Ring of Elemental Command (Earth), Belt of Stone Giant Strength or more on a single PC. That PC is likely to be a Tier 3 Bad@$$ and handling potent enemies. Wands and other things we best handled as "Spell Completion" items and usable only by Spell Casters with the spell on their spell lists and Rogues using Use Magic Device skill.
Attunement is a Giant's Club used to kill a problem I never saw in the game.
Concentration on the other hand is something introduced I approve of. I have introduced a Feat that allows an additional Concentration slot available at level 11+. But other than that option, I like that ruling.
Wands and other things we best handled as "Spell Completion" items and usable only by Spell Casters with the spell on their spell lists and Rogues using Use Magic Device skill.
That's cool and all for spells but won't stop magic weapons from being passed around at low levels when there aren't enough to go around, and it doesn't do anything for magic items that produce non-spell magical effects.
Concentration on the other hand is something introduced I approve of.
That's pretty weird since attunement is to magic items as concentration is to spells. They both limit how many effects you can have going on, so why is one pointless but the other useful to you?
I am not getting your point on the first quote. I don't see a problem with the Cleric picking up the Shield +3 Fire Resistance from the fallen Paladin and using it as she either continues to fight the dreaded Balor or casts healing magic on her downed companion.*
Simple answer: Because I liked the "Slot" limitations in prior editions. One Head Slot, 2 Rings, One Armor, One Cloak/Coat, 1 Boot, 1 Glove etc.
Concentration spells to me just prevent the Enlarged, Flying, Invisible, Polymorphed (Giant Ape Form Natch!) Wizard from peppering the enemy with Lightning Bolts.
*As a totally off topic remark, the Death, Dying, and Magical Healing interactions in Pathfinder 2e are SOOOO much better than 5e! No longer is it best practice to just keep raising the front line to 1 HP as often as possible. The new Wounded condition makes that a VERY bad idea for protracted combats.
I am not getting your point on the first quote. I don't see a problem with the Cleric picking up the Shield +3 Fire Resistance from the fallen Paladin and using it as she either continues to fight the dreaded Balor or casts healing magic on her downed companion.*
I don't either, but I do have a problem with people passing around a sword of wounding to inflict wounds faster, or a vorpal sword to try to force a 20 sooner, or a periapt of wound closure so they all get the benefits during a short rest. You get the idea.
Concentration spells to me just prevent the Enlarged, Flying, Invisible, Polymorphed (Giant Ape Form Natch!) Wizard from peppering the enemy with Lightning Bolts.
What makes it ok for the other PC to be a "Tier 3 Bad@$$ and handling potent enemies" but not the wizard? And without attunement, what's stopping the wizard from grabbing Wings of Flying, a Cloak of Displacement and a bunch of items that boost saving throws and damage resistances from Magic Wal-Mart and peppering the enemy with Lightning Bolts that way? Letting characters stack a bunch of buffs from magic items isn't any different from spellcasters stacking buffs from spells.
(Also, they wouldn't be able to cast spells while polymorphed and being enlarged doesn't contribute anything either.)
*As a totally off topic remark, the Death, Dying, and Magical Healing interactions in Pathfinder 2e are SOOOO much better than 5e! No longer is it best practice to just keep raising the front line to 1 HP as often as possible. The new Wounded condition makes that a VERY bad idea for protracted combats.
That's not a best practice in 5e. Losing turns from being unconscious and forcing other party members to burn either an action or a bonus action spell (which in turn limits their action) is not worth squeezing a few more HP out of healing spells. Neither is being 3 hits away from death at all times.
Either way the DMG already has an optional rule for injuries that can be used at 0 HP if you want to discourage that kind of thing.
"I don't either, but I do have a problem with people passing around a sword of wounding to inflict wounds faster, or a vorpal sword to try to force a 20 sooner, or a periapt of wound closure so they all get the benefits during a short rest. You get the idea."
But they can't do that in 5e because Attunement prevents the Cleric from gaining any benefit from that shield. On the topic of weapons, making certain as a DM that either A. Everyone has magic weapons helps. B. I said I disliked the entire magic item system in 5e. So, I use magical items from prior editions, 3.5 to be precise. A lot of those wordings do not interact with Short/Long Rest mechanics at all and thus are controllable at the table. C. My players tend to be of the "this magic item is mine." sorts, they are fine if another PC uses it short term, like in the Cleric and Paladin scenario situation, but they are loathe to consider them communal property. Except Potions, they toss potions around.
"What makes it ok for the other PC to be a "Tier 3 Bad@$$ and handling potent enemies" but not the wizard? And without attunement, what's stopping the wizard from grabbing Wings of Flying, a Cloak of Displacement and a bunch of items that boost saving throws and damage resistances from Magic Wal-Mart and peppering the enemy with Lightning Bolts that way? Letting characters stack a bunch of buffs from magic items isn't any different from spellcasters stacking buffs from spells.
(Also, they wouldn't be able to cast spells while polymorphed and being enlarged doesn't contribute anything either.)"
Actually, I am fine with the Wizard having 20 magical items too. Slinging spells, while loaded for bear, and maintaining her one (or two with my feat) concentration spell. The limiting factor is me. I get to decide what items that the players obtain. Perhaps they find a wand of Lightning bolts. Since it is a charged item in 3.5 rules once the 4 Charges I decree it contains are spent that wand is kaput. If I don't want them to have the Sword +3 of Shocking Burst ever then the item is either cursed *potently* or never shows up at all and thus looted into some PCs inventory.
I think the issue is that 5e is inherently a magic poor game. Magic items are not deemed as a requirement at any level. I disagree in my games and run one that is magic rich and use rules and situations that support that view.
"I don't either, but I do have a problem with people passing around a sword of wounding to inflict wounds faster, or a vorpal sword to try to force a 20 sooner, or a periapt of wound closure so they all get the benefits during a short rest. You get the idea."
But they can't do that in 5e because Attunement prevents the Cleric from gaining any benefit from that shield.
That is the point. I agree that if we were to put this in a "real-life" scenario, you should be able to pick up the magic shield and gain its benefits. This has occurred in many stories to great dramatic effect. But as a game, you have to follow the mechanic to its logical conclusion. Mechanically, if you allow the reasonable circumstance of instant attunement by picking up a fallen ally's shield, then you have to accept the unreasonable circumstance of allowing every character to pass around the Vorpal Sword, taking turns hoping for a natural 20, and have a very food chance of insta-killing any enemy not immune to the Vorpal Sword's effects within two rounds.
Try house-ruling an instant attunement or temporary attunement mechanic. I am currently brainstorming the following feature.
Dynamic Attunement
As an action, you may attempt to temporarily attune to an item in your possession without having to take a short rest. Roll a d20 and add your Proficiency Bonus. On a result of 20 or higher, you become attuned to the item for a number of rounds equal to your Proficiency Bonus, and you lose attunement if the item leaves your possession. This does not count against the total number of items you can be attuned to at once. You cannot use this feature again until you finish a short or long rest.
So, something to add to the magic item discussion is that, unlike previous editions, 5th magic items are still optional. With bounded accuracy you typically always sit around 50-70% chance (hit and to be hit). Heck even a level 1 fighter by raw has a chance to hit a dragon (ac 23), slim but still a chance.
In 3.5 magic items were assumed. Character wealth wasn't an optional rule (most people forget this). If you go and build 4 lvl 10 PCs in 3.5 (not using like a methodical build just decent for what they want) and make a difficult encounter you'll start noticing the math doesn't add up. Your casters won't have good Spell Pen for the encounter, your to hit will be a lower chance, your being hit will be easier. This is because the system assumed you had the big six. (incidentally this is why people assumed vop was broken cuz those big 6 were built into progression and not needing to buy/sell).
That's why magic items are different in 5e. They aren't apart of the math anymore. They provide an edge. A small edge typically. And if you want to ensure everyone has better to hit and better ac opportunity in items it let's you bend encounters more. Set that vampire up against "low level" players - only really possible because they now all have another +2 or whatever. But in the end, it's optional and you never need to design encounters because of the PCs either class or item stocks, simply cuz of bounded accuracy. Simply beautiful system as I'd say.
So, something to add to the magic item discussion is that, unlike previous editions, 5th magic items are still optional. With bounded accuracy you typically always sit around 50-70% chance (hit and to be hit). Heck even a level 1 fighter by raw has a chance to hit a dragon (ac 23), slim but still a chance.
In 3.5 magic items were assumed. Character wealth wasn't an optional rule (most people forget this). If you go and build 4 lvl 10 PCs in 3.5 (not using like a methodical build just decent for what they want) and make a difficult encounter you'll start noticing the math doesn't add up. Your casters won't have good Spell Pen for the encounter, your to hit will be a lower chance, your being hit will be easier. This is because the system assumed you had the big six. (incidentally this is why people assumed vop was broken cuz those big 6 were built into progression and not needing to buy/sell).
That's why magic items are different in 5e. They aren't apart of the math anymore. They provide an edge. A small edge typically. And if you want to ensure everyone has better to hit and better ac opportunity in items it let's you bend encounters more. Set that vampire up against "low level" players - only really possible because they now all have another +2 or whatever. But in the end, it's optional and you never need to design encounters because of the PCs either class or item stocks, simply cuz of bounded accuracy. Simply beautiful system as I'd say.
But, the 5e system might as well just call itself a Swords and Sandals/Tales of the Hyborian Age level magic poor game. Even the increasing magic availability rules in the DMG do not account for a truly magic rich world. 5e is great in a lot of ways, but it can get a bit well boring with bounded accuracy, limited skill levels, and more.
5e's magic item deficit bothers the hell out of me because on the one hand, the system assumes that magical items are unbelievably rare, cannot ever be created/crafted, and are only ever found as random loot on miserable loot tables that almost guarantee your party will never find anything they actually want when adventuring. This is commensurate with a very low-magic setting where such Artifacts of Arcane Power would be rare and dangerous simply to own, as others would track you down and kill you simply to take your magical artifact of Power.
Now, pivot to the character classes...wherein magic explodes from their noses. Every single character class save the barbarian either is or can easily become a spellcaster (and even barbarians gain some ritual magic in a few of their paths), and they have virtually no limit save slots on what and when they can cast. Many species have spellcasting woven into their DNA; magic is as much a part of their being as their livers are. Take any given D&D party-of-five, and at least four of them are likely to have spellcasting at their disposal.
DOES. NOT. COMPUTE.
Either your setting is low magic, magic items are super difficult to find and you never get anything you can use, and everybody is a sword-swinger with no magical skill to speak of, or your party is stuffed to the brim with people who can cast as easily as they can eat a burrito and magic items should be pricey, but otherwise reasonably straightforward to acquire because the spellcasters of the world are numerous and also have had hundreds of years to study the explosion of magic that is a typical D&D world.
You cannot have both, 5e's insistence that magic items are "optional, and no DM should ever feel like handing them out" is horse manure, and you can do bounded accuracy without telling players that all the phat lewtz are gone forever because 5e wants you to screech in primal triumph for twenty minutes after spending eight months searching for a basic +1 spear that someone in your party can actually use.
It's one of the biggest brain caltrops in the system for me and I absolutely see where someone could feel their teeth grinding at the absolutely lame and nonsensical item pricing/tiering in 5e. I know better than to think they'll fix it because more than any other edition of the game, 5e says "you're the DM, you do it," which is fine.
But it means your bad terrible shitty assumption that magic items make for bad gameplay is getting flushed from the get-go, Wizards. Players in my games find magical gear. They can acquire magical gear for money if they collect enough money. They can trade magical gear they find for magical gear they want. if they have the skills, the stuff, and the time, they can try to make their own magical gear. Because a PC that casts Magic Missile reflexively when they fart due to the sheer stupefying amount of magic they wield is a PC that should by all bloody rights be able to figure out how to shove Magic Missile in a stick and hand it to someone moderately less talented for emergencies.
5e's magic item deficit bothers the hell out of me because on the one hand, the system assumes that magical items are unbelievably rare, cannot ever be created/crafted, and are only ever found as random loot on miserable loot tables that almost guarantee your party will never find anything they actually want when adventuring.
You do know both the DMG and Xanathar's Guide to Everything have rules for crafting and selling magic items, right?
Take any given D&D party-of-five, and at least four of them are likely to have spellcasting at their disposal.
DOES. NOT. COMPUTE.
The reason should be obvious: adventurers are also extremely rare. They're only common from the point of view of a player because that's the only kind of character you ever get to make, but there aren't a ton of parties-of-five running around every town.
Making magic items rare makes them special when you find them in much the same way the players can feel like they're special within the game world. Picking items out of a list isn't quite the same.
That's not to say one approach is better than the other, but defaulting to rare items is easier. If the game's math depends on everyone having at least X magic items, it's harder for a DM to try to run a low magic game.
I do know the DMG and Xanathar's Guide has rules for the creation and exchange of magic items. They're really bad rules, but they're there.
Adventurers may be rare but humanoids with enough power to go adventuring are decidedly less so. See the number of CR5 and up humanoid base stat blocks; they don't have class levels, but anything that powerful is more than competent to make a living the same way adventurers do, if with less room for growth. To say nothing of the new sidekick system; there are now official rules for training adventure-capable NPCs. While adventurers are the best/brightest/strongest, they're by no means the only competent individuals in any given setting if you want your setting to be functional.
The dysfunctional dichotomy between 5e expecting your PC party to have access to outrageous oodles of magic screeching from their every pore and 5e also expecting magical items to turn up once or twice every five or ten player levels, with a level 20 party expected to perhaps have one magic item per character if they're fortunate, is absolutely bugnuts and unkosher. 5e should oughta make up its bloody mind.
The dysfunctional dichotomy between 5e expecting your PC party to have access to outrageous oodles of magic screeching from their every pore and 5e also expecting magical items to turn up once or twice every five or ten player levels, with a level 20 party expected to perhaps have one magic item per character if they're fortunate, is absolutely bugnuts and unkosher. 5e should oughta make up its bloody mind.
Magic items turning up once or twice every five or ten levels is a completely off-the-chart assumption. If you take any adventure published for fifth edition, common and uncommon magic items are found quite often.
Besides, fifth edition doesn't remotely limit your setting to a low-magic one. The only thing that it does is telling you that the challenge rating of monsters does not take into account magic items on the party side. If your setting is a high-magic one, you just adjust the encounters based on the party's magic items.
The dysfunctional dichotomy between 5e expecting your PC party to have access to outrageous oodles of magic screeching from their every pore and 5e also expecting magical items to turn up once or twice every five or ten player levels, with a level 20 party expected to perhaps have one magic item per character if they're fortunate, is absolutely bugnuts and unkosher. 5e should oughta make up its bloody mind.
Magic items turning up once or twice every five or ten levels is a completely off-the-chart assumption. If you take any adventure published for fifth edition, common and uncommon magic items are found quite often.
Besides, fifth edition doesn't remotely limit your setting to a low-magic one. The only thing that it does is telling you that the challenge rating of monsters does not take into account magic items on the party side. If your setting is a high-magic one, you just adjust the encounters based on the party's magic items.
Very much agree with Filcat here. The campaign I'm in is high magic, since level 15 we each have around 2 Legendary items, 3 Very Rare items, 5 Rare items, and upwards of 8-10 uncommon. We get the magic items we want: some have been random most are just us saying what we want and the DM giving us it in a story-related way, some, even very rare, are just bought outright, so we get the items we want to make the builds we most want and that would be interesting. We have also had boons from demigods. We're now Level 17 (just turned).
And yet our combat encounters can be brutal and we often barely survive, there's even been a couple of deaths and the need to get resurrections. Some encounters just are too much and we had to escape to learn and try a different approach later.
But why the difficulty for so much magic pouring out our arses and so many powerful magic items? Simple answer: our DM just adjusts the encounters like the DMG advises. Funny that.
High magic, low magic, lots of magic items or none it makes no difference. The difficulty of the game is still decided by the DM.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sounds like you just don't want to put in the work. Even when somebody else made a price guide, you're like "Eh, I dunno. Gotta compare it to past D&D." Then.... why don't you just take the prices from past D&D then and call it a day?
I have looked for outside pricing for 5e and I did look over the Sane guide. However, that being said, I was surprised at the huge differences in prices they had for items compared to where the item would fall within the 5e Rarity range. The disparity was so great that it led to me not trusting the document. Which means now I'd have to do more work to go and validate the prices listed in them to see if I agree with it or not. The whole point is that this should have been done by Wizards. I shouldn't have to go find an outside price guide, or go through all of the magic items myself to price them accordingly. Can I do it? Yes. Do I have the time to do it? Technically yes, but as my time is valuable and already has several items competing for it, doing price calculations that should have already been done does not rate high on the priority list.
I understand the Wizard fanboy responses. But remember that this is their actual job. This is what they get paid for. Thus, when they fail to do something they should have, they should be held accountable for it. I'm the consumer here. I bought their product and now I've found something lacking about it. It isn't my job to fix it. Its theirs.
Bummer being a GM and having to work for your players. I think I would just make it up as I go, every market is different. Prices would vary between a little village apothecary and a big city alchemical guild. Might also have price variances according to location - Probably have fewer potions of fire resistance in the arctic while cold resistance might be cheap.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
They've straight up said why items don't have prices in 5e. They even gave you a price range guide. In Ghosts of Saltmarsh, they even included someone who would go and find certain magic items FOR the party. They're basing it off their design for this edition. Magic item prices probably are as high on the "customer wants" list as say player options and adventure books.
I get what you are saying. Personally, I had such a problem with the Magic Item rules in 5e that I ditched them entirely for 3.x based rules. I still have Thayvan Magical Wal-Marts in their Enclaves and at least one major magic item auction house in large cities. I ditched Attunement entirely because I failed to see it's importance. So when I saw the "prices" for magical items, I had to laugh. Because I am an old hand at DMing figuring out how much things should cost in my game was easy, but since 5e is supposed to be accessible it does seem that WoTC is making it hard on the newbie DMs. From my perspective 5e is low magic, not middle and DEFINITELY not high magic and as such the newbie DM gets very little support in how structure magical economies and how magic interacts with mundane life.
Attunement is important because 1) it puts a natural limit on how many crazy effects a player can have going at any given moment from magic items, which is good for both balance and keeping the game moving quickly, 2) it stops magic items like wands from being passed around the party in the middle of combat and 3) solves the problem of min/maxers wanting to hunt down a magic item for every body slot.
If you wanna have magical Wal-Marts, that's cool, some players really like that kind of thing. I'd advice against ditching attunement though, especially if that's how you want to run things.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I'm a consumer as well. I like how they did it. "Fixing" it to match your expectations/desires messes with it matching my exceptions/desires, I really like having a price range instead of a fixed price as I can then give an item a price within the range that I want without "breaking the rules."
In short, just because it doesn't do/have what you want doesn't make it broken and/or lazy. Just... it doesn't have what you want.
--Everything I do is a work of Art.
Art the Rat Bastard DM
Before I get pounced on for this, I absolutely understand that 5e is DIFFERENT than prior editions. I do not like the way 5e handles magic items. Full Stop. My game, and I have more than enough confidence and skill to tinker with it however I desire. That said "crazy effects" were not an issue in prior edition games that I ran, if the crazy effect came from a magic item. I am totally fine with a Sword of Sharpness, Chain Mail of Acid Resistance, Cloak of Protection, Ring of Protection, Ring of Elemental Command (Earth), Belt of Stone Giant Strength or more on a single PC. That PC is likely to be a Tier 3 Bad@$$ and handling potent enemies. Wands and other things we best handled as "Spell Completion" items and usable only by Spell Casters with the spell on their spell lists and Rogues using Use Magic Device skill.
Attunement is a Giant's Club used to kill a problem I never saw in the game.
Concentration on the other hand is something introduced I approve of. I have introduced a Feat that allows an additional Concentration slot available at level 11+. But other than that option, I like that ruling.
That's cool and all for spells but won't stop magic weapons from being passed around at low levels when there aren't enough to go around, and it doesn't do anything for magic items that produce non-spell magical effects.
That's pretty weird since attunement is to magic items as concentration is to spells. They both limit how many effects you can have going on, so why is one pointless but the other useful to you?
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I am not getting your point on the first quote. I don't see a problem with the Cleric picking up the Shield +3 Fire Resistance from the fallen Paladin and using it as she either continues to fight the dreaded Balor or casts healing magic on her downed companion.*
Simple answer: Because I liked the "Slot" limitations in prior editions. One Head Slot, 2 Rings, One Armor, One Cloak/Coat, 1 Boot, 1 Glove etc.
Concentration spells to me just prevent the Enlarged, Flying, Invisible, Polymorphed (Giant Ape Form Natch!) Wizard from peppering the enemy with Lightning Bolts.
*As a totally off topic remark, the Death, Dying, and Magical Healing interactions in Pathfinder 2e are SOOOO much better than 5e! No longer is it best practice to just keep raising the front line to 1 HP as often as possible. The new Wounded condition makes that a VERY bad idea for protracted combats.
I don't either, but I do have a problem with people passing around a sword of wounding to inflict wounds faster, or a vorpal sword to try to force a 20 sooner, or a periapt of wound closure so they all get the benefits during a short rest. You get the idea.
What makes it ok for the other PC to be a "Tier 3 Bad@$$ and handling potent enemies" but not the wizard? And without attunement, what's stopping the wizard from grabbing Wings of Flying, a Cloak of Displacement and a bunch of items that boost saving throws and damage resistances from Magic Wal-Mart and peppering the enemy with Lightning Bolts that way? Letting characters stack a bunch of buffs from magic items isn't any different from spellcasters stacking buffs from spells.
(Also, they wouldn't be able to cast spells while polymorphed and being enlarged doesn't contribute anything either.)
That's not a best practice in 5e. Losing turns from being unconscious and forcing other party members to burn either an action or a bonus action spell (which in turn limits their action) is not worth squeezing a few more HP out of healing spells. Neither is being 3 hits away from death at all times.
Either way the DMG already has an optional rule for injuries that can be used at 0 HP if you want to discourage that kind of thing.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
"I don't either, but I do have a problem with people passing around a sword of wounding to inflict wounds faster, or a vorpal sword to try to force a 20 sooner, or a periapt of wound closure so they all get the benefits during a short rest. You get the idea."
But they can't do that in 5e because Attunement prevents the Cleric from gaining any benefit from that shield. On the topic of weapons, making certain as a DM that either A. Everyone has magic weapons helps. B. I said I disliked the entire magic item system in 5e. So, I use magical items from prior editions, 3.5 to be precise. A lot of those wordings do not interact with Short/Long Rest mechanics at all and thus are controllable at the table. C. My players tend to be of the "this magic item is mine." sorts, they are fine if another PC uses it short term, like in the Cleric and Paladin scenario situation, but they are loathe to consider them communal property. Except Potions, they toss potions around.
"What makes it ok for the other PC to be a "Tier 3 Bad@$$ and handling potent enemies" but not the wizard? And without attunement, what's stopping the wizard from grabbing Wings of Flying, a Cloak of Displacement and a bunch of items that boost saving throws and damage resistances from Magic Wal-Mart and peppering the enemy with Lightning Bolts that way? Letting characters stack a bunch of buffs from magic items isn't any different from spellcasters stacking buffs from spells.
(Also, they wouldn't be able to cast spells while polymorphed and being enlarged doesn't contribute anything either.)"
Actually, I am fine with the Wizard having 20 magical items too. Slinging spells, while loaded for bear, and maintaining her one (or two with my feat) concentration spell. The limiting factor is me. I get to decide what items that the players obtain. Perhaps they find a wand of Lightning bolts. Since it is a charged item in 3.5 rules once the 4 Charges I decree it contains are spent that wand is kaput. If I don't want them to have the Sword +3 of Shocking Burst ever then the item is either cursed *potently* or never shows up at all and thus looted into some PCs inventory.
I think the issue is that 5e is inherently a magic poor game. Magic items are not deemed as a requirement at any level. I disagree in my games and run one that is magic rich and use rules and situations that support that view.
That is the point. I agree that if we were to put this in a "real-life" scenario, you should be able to pick up the magic shield and gain its benefits. This has occurred in many stories to great dramatic effect. But as a game, you have to follow the mechanic to its logical conclusion. Mechanically, if you allow the reasonable circumstance of instant attunement by picking up a fallen ally's shield, then you have to accept the unreasonable circumstance of allowing every character to pass around the Vorpal Sword, taking turns hoping for a natural 20, and have a very food chance of insta-killing any enemy not immune to the Vorpal Sword's effects within two rounds.
Try house-ruling an instant attunement or temporary attunement mechanic. I am currently brainstorming the following feature.
So, something to add to the magic item discussion is that, unlike previous editions, 5th magic items are still optional. With bounded accuracy you typically always sit around 50-70% chance (hit and to be hit). Heck even a level 1 fighter by raw has a chance to hit a dragon (ac 23), slim but still a chance.
In 3.5 magic items were assumed. Character wealth wasn't an optional rule (most people forget this). If you go and build 4 lvl 10 PCs in 3.5 (not using like a methodical build just decent for what they want) and make a difficult encounter you'll start noticing the math doesn't add up. Your casters won't have good Spell Pen for the encounter, your to hit will be a lower chance, your being hit will be easier. This is because the system assumed you had the big six. (incidentally this is why people assumed vop was broken cuz those big 6 were built into progression and not needing to buy/sell).
That's why magic items are different in 5e. They aren't apart of the math anymore. They provide an edge. A small edge typically. And if you want to ensure everyone has better to hit and better ac opportunity in items it let's you bend encounters more. Set that vampire up against "low level" players - only really possible because they now all have another +2 or whatever. But in the end, it's optional and you never need to design encounters because of the PCs either class or item stocks, simply cuz of bounded accuracy. Simply beautiful system as I'd say.
But, the 5e system might as well just call itself a Swords and Sandals/Tales of the Hyborian Age level magic poor game. Even the increasing magic availability rules in the DMG do not account for a truly magic rich world. 5e is great in a lot of ways, but it can get a bit well boring with bounded accuracy, limited skill levels, and more.
5e's magic item deficit bothers the hell out of me because on the one hand, the system assumes that magical items are unbelievably rare, cannot ever be created/crafted, and are only ever found as random loot on miserable loot tables that almost guarantee your party will never find anything they actually want when adventuring. This is commensurate with a very low-magic setting where such Artifacts of Arcane Power would be rare and dangerous simply to own, as others would track you down and kill you simply to take your magical artifact of Power.
Now, pivot to the character classes...wherein magic explodes from their noses. Every single character class save the barbarian either is or can easily become a spellcaster (and even barbarians gain some ritual magic in a few of their paths), and they have virtually no limit save slots on what and when they can cast. Many species have spellcasting woven into their DNA; magic is as much a part of their being as their livers are. Take any given D&D party-of-five, and at least four of them are likely to have spellcasting at their disposal.
DOES. NOT. COMPUTE.
Either your setting is low magic, magic items are super difficult to find and you never get anything you can use, and everybody is a sword-swinger with no magical skill to speak of, or your party is stuffed to the brim with people who can cast as easily as they can eat a burrito and magic items should be pricey, but otherwise reasonably straightforward to acquire because the spellcasters of the world are numerous and also have had hundreds of years to study the explosion of magic that is a typical D&D world.
You cannot have both, 5e's insistence that magic items are "optional, and no DM should ever feel like handing them out" is horse manure, and you can do bounded accuracy without telling players that all the phat lewtz are gone forever because 5e wants you to screech in primal triumph for twenty minutes after spending eight months searching for a basic +1 spear that someone in your party can actually use.
It's one of the biggest brain caltrops in the system for me and I absolutely see where someone could feel their teeth grinding at the absolutely lame and nonsensical item pricing/tiering in 5e. I know better than to think they'll fix it because more than any other edition of the game, 5e says "you're the DM, you do it," which is fine.
But it means your bad terrible shitty assumption that magic items make for bad gameplay is getting flushed from the get-go, Wizards. Players in my games find magical gear. They can acquire magical gear for money if they collect enough money. They can trade magical gear they find for magical gear they want. if they have the skills, the stuff, and the time, they can try to make their own magical gear. Because a PC that casts Magic Missile reflexively when they fart due to the sheer stupefying amount of magic they wield is a PC that should by all bloody rights be able to figure out how to shove Magic Missile in a stick and hand it to someone moderately less talented for emergencies.
ARGH.
Please do not contact or message me.
You do know both the DMG and Xanathar's Guide to Everything have rules for crafting and selling magic items, right?
The reason should be obvious: adventurers are also extremely rare. They're only common from the point of view of a player because that's the only kind of character you ever get to make, but there aren't a ton of parties-of-five running around every town.
Making magic items rare makes them special when you find them in much the same way the players can feel like they're special within the game world. Picking items out of a list isn't quite the same.
That's not to say one approach is better than the other, but defaulting to rare items is easier. If the game's math depends on everyone having at least X magic items, it's harder for a DM to try to run a low magic game.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I do know the DMG and Xanathar's Guide has rules for the creation and exchange of magic items. They're really bad rules, but they're there.
Adventurers may be rare but humanoids with enough power to go adventuring are decidedly less so. See the number of CR5 and up humanoid base stat blocks; they don't have class levels, but anything that powerful is more than competent to make a living the same way adventurers do, if with less room for growth. To say nothing of the new sidekick system; there are now official rules for training adventure-capable NPCs. While adventurers are the best/brightest/strongest, they're by no means the only competent individuals in any given setting if you want your setting to be functional.
The dysfunctional dichotomy between 5e expecting your PC party to have access to outrageous oodles of magic screeching from their every pore and 5e also expecting magical items to turn up once or twice every five or ten player levels, with a level 20 party expected to perhaps have one magic item per character if they're fortunate, is absolutely bugnuts and unkosher. 5e should oughta make up its bloody mind.
Please do not contact or message me.
Magic items turning up once or twice every five or ten levels is a completely off-the-chart assumption. If you take any adventure published for fifth edition, common and uncommon magic items are found quite often.
Besides, fifth edition doesn't remotely limit your setting to a low-magic one. The only thing that it does is telling you that the challenge rating of monsters does not take into account magic items on the party side. If your setting is a high-magic one, you just adjust the encounters based on the party's magic items.
Very much agree with Filcat here. The campaign I'm in is high magic, since level 15 we each have around 2 Legendary items, 3 Very Rare items, 5 Rare items, and upwards of 8-10 uncommon. We get the magic items we want: some have been random most are just us saying what we want and the DM giving us it in a story-related way, some, even very rare, are just bought outright, so we get the items we want to make the builds we most want and that would be interesting. We have also had boons from demigods. We're now Level 17 (just turned).
And yet our combat encounters can be brutal and we often barely survive, there's even been a couple of deaths and the need to get resurrections. Some encounters just are too much and we had to escape to learn and try a different approach later.
But why the difficulty for so much magic pouring out our arses and so many powerful magic items? Simple answer: our DM just adjusts the encounters like the DMG advises. Funny that.
High magic, low magic, lots of magic items or none it makes no difference. The difficulty of the game is still decided by the DM.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.