Community

Jul 2, 2012 -- 3:54AM, Orzel wrote:

Sounds a lot like "Magic items are not tied into the math of your character nor do you need them. But if you are playing a level 10+ character in a non-low magic game and you lack a magic item, your DM is probably a jerk and you should slap him or her in the back of the head."

But what will this do to crafting (My home game is literally run by magic item craft guilds). Crafting this type of powerful magic items will be weird or impossible now. Generic +X and icy/flamin'/frost items might be the highest PC can craft if some part of items come from charts.

Have a good look at Craft Wondrous Item. This is where most of the magic is heading. Its also where hero crafters can really customize and personalize their creations, with non-combat quirks.
 

I'm pretty happy with Mike's article. Flattening the numbers and having a lot of interesting +0 magic weapons and armour is a good start.

I'd like to see all the lesser properties kept under control too. Items that give a bonus in an uncommon situation, or have a power that activates rarely, are useless. Worse than that they get fogotten.

Jul 1, 2012 -- 10:23PM, Reyemile wrote:

So, basically, the characters are strictly better when they have magic items, but there are no hard-coded guidelines for who gets magic items. Congratulations: you've just handed GMs a tool to play favorites, and hard-coded imbalance into the system.

If this is a problem for you then you need to have a talk with your DM and group because this is a personal issue not a system issue. 

We as DMs have had this power since day 1. The real issue is the way these things forced DM's to give out stuff lest the players suffer without them. I have guys with a few different characters for pathfinder and if you look at their equipment they all look pretty much the same.  A bunch of junk with the same buffs on them just the actual numbers are different.

D&SD is bigger than this, better even. I like to be stingy with stuff I like to control the items being used and sold.

I don't like it when the players start digging through the magic items section of the DMG for the stuff they want so they can buy them.  

I think that truly magical objects are unique in some ways. Unless some swordsmith went nuts mass producing +1 swords ( they actually do this from time to time ) each item created should reflect it's creator in some way. 

I'm glad to hear that the developers are going to put the magic back into the game and not cheapen it by making it just another modifier for your character to kill something with. 

For me, and I don't think I'm unique in this opinion, 5e is looking to be a very interesting game.

Because with bounded accuracy I don't need a plus item, I as DM can use other optional houserules.  I'm a little leary of the pluses on weapons so I might just say those pluses apply to damage but not to hit.   That would be an easy fix.  Bounded accuracy gives you that ability to houserule without having to change the whole game.

Unlike some of you,  I think bounded accuracy is a great game concept that is going to be really attractive in so many ways.

 

Mike Mearl's column makes me very happy about where they are headed with magic items.

The only reservation I have is magic items going up to +3. Seems to me that +1 to hit or AC should be sufficient with bounded accuracy. I don't want a magic item to so greatly determine hit or miss. Magic can provide all sorts of other defensive and offensive capabilities that more magic plusses just aren't needed. Let any improvement in hitting or dodging at higher levels be down to the character, not the equipment!

Other than that, I approve of where magic items are going in 5e.