I also made the art to go with them.

Let me know what you think whether you like them or don't or see a possible abuse red flag. Thanks!

https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/4603212-arrow-of-beaming

https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/5482637-blood-for-blood-necklace

https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/5069311-robe-of-arcana-destinatus

https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/5484662-rope-of-returning

https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/4727130-totem-of-the-gloomstalker

All my homebrew items.

Arrow of beaming:

I would only change the name to indicate teleportational function. beaming makes it sound like it does more damage\

Blood for the blood necklace:

I would give this some charges. I would go by con modifier per long rest.

"You have a number of charges equal to your constitution modifier per long rest" that's how i would word it

Robe of arcana destinatus: 

This looks good. i would add in the base add ons. so before everything i would add 

"AC+2, Spell DC+1"

Rope of returning: 

This is fine as is, you could opt to se a command word such as "return" to start the return function but i have no changes to add

Totem of the gloomstalker: 

This looks good

Thank you for taking the time to look at these. I can see what you mean by beaming being misleading.

May I ask what the reasoning for the move to the CON modifier is for, not that I disagree, but I am just curious if you are tying it to that due to the nature of the item.

The Robe fixes are solid make it clear upfront.

Yeah, I kinda like a command word better.

The Totem of the Gloomstalker was one of my favorites to create. Thanks again!

One issue with the arrow of beaming is that archers very rarely want to be closer to their targets. I think this would primarily be used to target objects or particular squares and I might make it a little more clear how that would work. Right now it seems like you aim at an object, the DM gives it an AC, and you teleport there whether you hit or miss (which is fine, but you might as well skip the AC part). The other option might be to make it a thrown weapon enchantment, as characters using those often want to close to melee range.

I do think the blood necklace needs limited uses, just because it's kind of convention in 5e. I would guess CON was suggested because that's generally the stat associated with blood/life force.

As for the robe, I might word the AC differently. Something like "If you aren't wearing armor, your base Armor Class is 12 + your Dexterity modifier" to prevent people throwing it on over plate mail or something.

Others look good. I could see a whole line of "totem" items that gave limited use of monster abilities.

Thanks, Scatterbraind for the really awesome feedback. Just to clarify the arrow teleports the archer where it lands so if they miss the AC they teleport to a location to be determined by the DM.

Good callout on the Robes don't want those dang sneaky little hobbitssss players cheating the system.

Monster Totems...... It's gonna be huge. LOL

Quote from DamienSteinrich >>

 

May I ask what the reasoning for the move to the CON modifier is for, not that I disagree, but I am just curious if you are tying it to that due to the nature of the item.

 

 Mainly because that's unlimited crit hits with a spellcaster. All they need is good con and they don't have to worry to much about the repercussions. And trust me, you don't want the warlock criting every eldritch blast. make it somethin they need to think about if they want to do it

Good point thanks for pointing that out that would not be good. Lol

Quote from THEALMIGHTYDM1207 >>

Quote from DamienSteinrich >> 

May I ask what the reasoning for the move to the CON modifier is for, not that I disagree, but I am just curious if you are tying it to that due to the nature of the item.

 Mainly because that's unlimited crit hits with a spellcaster. All they need is good con and they don't have to worry to much about the repercussions. And trust me, you don't want the warlock criting every eldritch blast. make it somethin they need to think about if they want to do it

Eh, I don't think it's a broken as all that. A warlock pays 5hp to do another d10 of damage - roughly trading their own hp for the same amount from the enemy. Enemies have more hp than PCs, so this wouldn't go well in the long run. It would be best when used strategically to ensure a killshot or something.

A level 5 warlock has 48 hp. Sure they can afford a few shots, but beyond that... well they should probably want to save some hp for all the normal reasons you need hp. And recovering that hp back still takes limited resources, whether it's hit dice or spell slots. At any rate, this does not provide unlimited anything.

I think an explicit limit would primarily help even out the performance of this item in different groups. In some groups the spellcasters might rarely be threatened and long rests are frequent. This item would be much better in that game than in a game that had more emphasis on resource attrition and smarter enemies.

On the other hand, the option to increase risk to yourself for greater power is kind of the whole point of these types of items. It's a provocative choice for the player along the lines of cursed items and warlock pacts: power, at a cost. Thinking on it more, I think it's probably fine as is if this is what you're going for. I'd just allow it for use with cantrips as well as level 1 spells.