Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 20, 2015 15:19:20	A while ago, I worked out the math for the DMG 5e page 133 random treasure tables - they described a campaign that used those tables in a particular way as being 'typical'. That information is here, but summarized: Most PCs get one good random permanent magic item per 4 levels and one good consumable item per level. There is no assumption of specific bonuses, such as to-hit, damage, AC, or saves. So a 10th level PC probably has 2-3 good permanent magic items. And 20/4 = 5. If that sounds exceptionally low compared to your PC, here's the reason why: Pretend for a moment that the average party is 5 players in AL. Say it takes approximately 50 mods to level all the way through 20th. Well, 50/5 = 10, not 5. True, you might not find the particular magic item or a given mod might not have any magic items, but... In other words, it wouldn't be surprising to find that an average PC has twice the expected magic items of a typical campaign. While there might be some outliers with less than say 5 magic items at 10th level, there are therefore likely some outliers with more than 5. This is also further complicated by Fai Chen's Faire - in the DMG treasure tables, they're completely random and some of them aren't really that great. Fai Chen's allows for specific number boosting items which is a good way to bend the math of 5e. i.e. Adventurer's League is well on its way to being a very high magic 5e campaign, not a low magic campaign. ------- How to fix? I'm not sure. But it is dangerous to throw a magic item into every adventure where a table of 5 has a good expectation of finding it(let alone tables of 3 or 4) with the current rules - the outcome to higher level mods from the 11-16 range will tend to swing wildly on that basis.
#2 Ranstrum Jul 20, 2015 20:20:38	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
#3 Coredump00 Jul 20, 2015 21:30:42	My 8th level Paladin has 2 magic items.  thinking of tonight's table of 8-9th level.... I had 2 items, the Fighter had 1 I know of.... the one cleric had 2 Iknow of, and the other cleric.... It think 1.  We also found one.  Now, they may have more items I don't know about... but then they probably aren't that big of a deal.  Heck one of my Paladin items is a headband of intellect.   Saying that the 'average' at 10th level is 5 magic items does not match my experience at all...
#4 abanathie Jul 20, 2015 22:15:31	I've seen people with five at level 8, and I've seen people with 1 at level 8.  I had zero at level 8 and now have two at level 10.  It depends on the campaign type too.  Players with more items seem to come from the hardback campaigns.  Most of the pure Expedition players tend to have fewer items from what I noticed; however, I haven't been keeping a running tally.
#5 Sorsohka Jul 21, 2015 5:36:42	your assumption consider that most item you find in AL module are usefull.   BUT: -  a module that give out a splint mail+1 is like a empty module, ince a splint mail+1 give the same bonus as a mundane full plate. a module that give a rod of the pact keeper, if there is no warlock in the group then the module didn't give any good item, and most module give useless stupid item that are not worth or that can be use only by very limited characters pool, so many item will be left behind (or someone will pick it up to trade it at a later time IF they find someone to trade it with. - Fai chen trading fair, only a minority of player will be able to use it. among allt he DnD player how many will go to a convention with Fai chen trading post? Then Fai chen got limited among of item to trade, so again not everyone going at the convention will be able to benefit from Fai Chen   Then even if you have 10 items, you can only attune to 3 at a time, so if among those 10 items you got 5 require attunement, that means 2 of your item are useless Then some item like wand and staff, might break if you use the last charge and roll a 1. I know most player simply never use that last charge, but on your journey to level 20, you will probably be fored to use that last charge one or twice of face a TPK   Then in Adventure League, between the player who join the table, got the item and never came back, those player who take the item then start a new character, those player who tok an item and stop playing etc... many item are disapearing and will never be seen again.   Finally because of the  rule saying that the more magical item (including the broken item) you own; the less chance you have to get the next good item that will drop (even if your the only wizard, the fighter can still take that wizard only staff) make a many table think twice before taking an item "just for trade" and might well leave the item being to be lost for ever.   So between the attunement limitation, all the useless bad item within AL modules, broken permanent item and item lost forever (with player who top playing, who retire character and item left behind) I would not worry about 5e becoming a 3rd edition magic item flood where your player was fully decked out by level 3
#6 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 6:05:17	Coredump00 wrote:
#7 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 6:21:49	Sorsohka wrote:
#8 Sorsohka Jul 21, 2015 6:41:56	Remember that Fai Chen FAir is not as a big deal as you make it sound like.   First you need a cert to use it. Many AL player do not have cert. remember only store who satiffy very precise condition can receive cert (and even then, sometime WotC skip a month or the package doesn't reach the store), The cert are in limited quantities, so the store might run out of certs, and from my understanding they cannot order a new batch of certs. So in order to get a cert you need to go play at the store, or at a convention sponsored by a store (or by WotC/baldman themself)   Then if you are part of the lucky few who did got a cert, you need to go to a convention where Fai Chen Trading post will be present. where I live we have 3 convention where we play DnD per years, but since our RC never come to them, so we'll never get access to Fai Chen Trading Post and very few people have the money and the time to go to the bigger convention (like Gen Con) so among the few people with cert, very few of them will have a chance to meet Fai Chen   Then within those very rare lucky one who do manage to meet with Fai Chen, Fai Chen got limited among of specific item. So ifhe ran out of the item I wanted or he doesn't have the item I want, then I don't have any item to take from him.   Then you got all those RPer, like Coredump who even if he would meet with Fai Chen wouldn't trade his headband of intellect on his paladin (an item that give him no mechanical advantage, but give him great RP fun) for usefull item like a magic weapon or a magic armor (an item that would give him a mechanical advantage, but that is less fun to RP).   So I do not believe that Fai Chen will have that much of an impact on the quality of item player are using. Item sniping (the fighter taking the wizard staff so he can trade it to his wizard who took the fighter weapon) will have a bigger impact then Fai Chen. All the player cherry picking there adventure path (my rogue will play in DDEX Y-X to get the goggle of night, then DDEX Y-Z to get teh cloak of elvenkind, then I'll go in the hardcover book and obtain the cool weapon, and that usefull wand etc...); all the plaer who cheat (the fighter took my wizard staff from me and I find that unfair, so I'll write on my log sheet that I took the staff and no one will know that it's a lie) will have a greater impact on the quality and number of magical item people have then FAi chen insignificant impact.   Then if you are so worried about the number and quality of magical item in the realm, you can show WotC/AL admin your support for a different item system (like the token system that is floating around) which would allow a better control ont he number and quality of magical item available to players.  Skerrit did say that they were working on changing the item system. The change are not in the 3rd season, so the sooner that we might be able to ee it would be maybe in 4th season but I wouldn't hold my breath on it. From my understanding the AL admin do read the post on the forum and they might listen to some. I know the token system got a lot of detractor who don't like it, but it does have a lot of player who do like it (and personally I believe that those saying they don't like it are simply afraid of change, since their argument are easily fixed and the token system can even improved what they are wishing in a item system)
#9 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 7:16:31	Actually - the majority of players who say they don't like the token system fall into two or three main groups.    Those who like the organic nature of items in AL, as it cuts down on cookie cutter characters who have the perfect gear.  Those who find the token system OP. Many examples of the token system floating around give out magic items at a significantly faster rate, in addition to cherry picking.  Those who believe that the token system will reward cheating more; that the proposed systems are easier to cheat than the current system; and that it resolves none of the issues it claims to. The only thing it resolves are people's desire to get specific items - yet it is toted as a solution to cheating (it isn't. I have poked holes in that claim several times already).
#10 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 7:34:15	Don't get me wrong. I am all for a revised magic item system. I am strongly against a token system however (for all of the above reasons). I am also against the 4e LFR magic item system.    I am waiting to hear an original idea that I do like. So far, the best ideas have been the simplest, but even these ideas have problems.    Characters can remove permanent items from their logsheet. These items then go back into the item pool for distribution. This has the issue of allowing players to dump items to have a good chance at the new shiny. Meanwhile - other characters that had fewer items feel cheated as they not only missed out on the recently dumped items but now have a higher chance of being skipped again. Sure they could take someone's discarded item, but it feels cheap by comparison (as they just dumped it with no regard).  ​Characters do not require certificates to trade items.  This encourages more cheating, not less - as it incentivizes forged logsheets.  Characters can remove broken/unusable items from their logsheet or from their MI total. Examples include an expended wingwear or balloon pack. This option is the most fair one suggested to date, as it removes peoples complaints around these trap items. This in turn would encourage their use rather than players treating them like the plague out of fear of being trapped with a temporary item and missing out on something truly permanent. This suggestion however, does not address any other issue people have with the magic item system. By all means, if you have a better suggestion other than the token system - I am all ears. Heck, if the idea is even passably good (even if I don't like it myself), I will pass it up the chain of command so that the admins and RCs see it.    IMHO, there are two possibilities for a "new" magic item system (as opposed to one that simply fixes the current system): We could either adapt the Need/Greed/Pass system from MMOs, and make changes necessary to make it work in a PnP game. This system could easily be combined with a variation on the Magic Item totals we have currently. We come up with something new that has not yet been suggested and hope the idea succeeds. The repeated defense of the Token System is starting to wear thin however - as it does nothing to address the issues of cheating (it makes cheating even more desirable), and does nothing to address item inequality in the system. The only thing it achieves, is grants players the ability to cherry pick the perfect item for their characters. I question the motives of those who defend the token system, as the only justification I see for defending such a flawed system - is Greed.
#11 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 7:24:15	Sorsohka wrote:
#12 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 7:40:04	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
(Reply to #11) Ainulindalion	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
#14 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 7:50:16	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #13) Skerrit	Ainulindalion wrote:
#16 Ainulindalion Jul 21, 2015 7:58:10	Also, reading the math (in the other thread), I feel like we're probably not getting quite as many consumables as the math suggests.  But that might just be me.
#17 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 8:03:52	Ainulindalion wrote:
(Reply to #15) Ainulindalion	Skerrit wrote:
#19 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 8:05:20	Ainulindalion wrote:
(Reply to #19) Ainulindalion	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
(Reply to #7) Mirtek	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
#22 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 8:42:03	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
#23 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 8:31:56	Ainulindalion wrote:
#24 Mirtek Jul 21, 2015 9:11:19	IHMO any system that allows players to put items back into a pool is terrible.
#25 FrogReaver Jul 21, 2015 9:26:01	1.  Every player that wants a magic item rolls for it.   2.  Players with more magic items simply have a reduced chance of getting the magic item.  Each item lowers their check by -1 or -2 (or possibly even scale this off magic item rarity and such) 3.  Don't have consumable magic items count against your magic item total at all.  Every player can roll for them if they want.  (with the -1 or -2 check penalty for their permanent magic items)     This should be very similar to the current system except we just decrease players chances of getting new magic items the more they have instead of making it impossible.  This should incentivize players taking magic items now since all it does is slightly decrease their chance of a better magic item later instead of making it impossible for them to get it.   Any problems with this system?
#26 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 9:19:44	Kalani wrote:
#27 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 9:29:22	Mirtek wrote:
(Reply to #18) Skerrit	Ainulindalion wrote:
#29 imaginaryfriend Jul 21, 2015 10:06:56	Where in LFR the DM was often relegated to a dice-rolling/adventure text reading vessel, this is not the case in AL. In LFR, if a way to challenge those players that went way beyond the normal scaling was not in the adventure, it took a pretty self assured DM to adjust anyway. Strangely enough the people that went for the most broken options and items were also often the ones to protest if you made things hard beyond what the adventure allowed literally.   Now in AL we have DMs that have a lot more options to scale and that are empowered to do so (how much is still up for debate, but it is definately a lot more accepted). As such we should be able to get away with not having the adventures make a huige base-power-level jump. If you meet a table of munchkins...err..ehm..tactically inclined optimizers?....just adjust as needed.    ANd yes that is kind of an artform, but one that can be learned (so maybe more of a skill) ;)
#30 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 10:34:27	Kalani wrote:
#31 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 10:55:22	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
#32 CahPahkah Jul 21, 2015 13:02:13	All of these numbers seem to be predicated on a constant group playing from session to session; in practice, I've never been at a table of any tier without at least one character who has no magic items (and, at level 9, my main AL PC has five). While the averages might be accurate over the campaign as a whole, they don't feel terribly applicable to actual play.   I don't have much of an opinion on players discarding or placing unwanted magic items into a pool, but I'm pretty strongly opposed to third-party adjudication of whether or not an item is appropriate for your character.  I really don't think that's anybody's concern other than the player in question. If your rogue finds and wants a greataxe, that's his business; non-traditional characters and choices enrich this game, not diminish it -- I'd hate to see a system where the loudest voices on the CharOp forum determine who gets what rewards from an adventure.
#33 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 13:14:56	Kalani wrote:
#34 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 13:19:39	CahPahkah wrote:
#35 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 13:57:00	CahPahkah wrote:
(Reply to #32) Ainulindalion	CahPahkah wrote:
#37 Primarchx Jul 21, 2015 13:37:05	One thing that magic items do in AL is encourage those that want them to play in more public events.  If you want them, that's where you go.  That's probably the reason the whole system exists.
#38 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 13:42:05	Ainulindalion wrote:
#39 CahPahkah Jul 21, 2015 13:43:44	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
#40 Kalani Jul 21, 2015 13:56:53	I was at an Expedition table on Saturday where we left 10 balloon packs and a handful of wingwear in the dust. I considered taking a suit of wingwear for my druid as there are few items that can be used in wildshape anyway - but thought better of it.
(Reply to #40) Ainulindalion	Kalani wrote:
#42 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 21, 2015 14:41:58	Ainulindalion wrote:
#43 CahPahkah Jul 21, 2015 14:51:39	Ainulindalion wrote:
#44 awaken_D_M_golem Jul 21, 2015 14:56:02	Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
(Reply to #15) TheBreen	Skerrit wrote:
(Reply to #9) Sorsohka	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #10) Sorsohka	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #22) Sorsohka	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #43) Sorsohka	CahPahkah wrote:
#50 Coredump00 Jul 22, 2015 8:31:56	Folks, you need to keep in mind the 'feel'' of both 5E and AL... simplicity.  The more complex a system is, the less likely it is going to be implemented.  Heck the *current* system often has issues.... making it have more conditionals and more restrictions and more moving parts..... just isn't going to be implemented.     Whatever change you want to see will need to be short, easily described, easily implemented, little paperwork, and solve a problem that is actually occuring on a regular basis.     Personally, I *don't* want to see some sort of token system.  I want my PCs to defeat the evil leader and discover what he is holding... not find the number for the Sears Catalogue o' Magic. Ideally I think there would be a small chart, and the DM would roll to discover what item was there... but that has other potential problems with it and so far AL has kept a very tight rein on rewards.       While it is not perfect, I still think most problems go away (or get mitigated) if you can put your magic items back into the 'pool' of items.  It will help 'balance' the distribution whenever a good/reallygood item shows up.  It lets a PC go after the items he really wants. Lets 'fun' items be used without worrying about 'missing out' on a good later item.  Lets a PC get *something* when a really good item drops for a diffferent class. etc etc.   Plus, its simple.
(Reply to #47) Mirtek	Sorsohka wrote:
(Reply to #51) FrogReaver	Mirtek wrote:
(Reply to #52) FrogReaver	FrogReaver wrote:
#54 Skerrit Jul 22, 2015 9:20:45	Its only a trap if you feel its a trap. If you want it and like having it, its not a trap.
#55 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jul 22, 2015 9:31:18	Sorsohka wrote:
#56 imaginaryfriend Jul 22, 2015 9:49:32	Tokens or whatever other proposed system that essentially translates to "I want to pick my stuff"... No Thanks. I am not even in favor of Fai Chen's generic +1 stuff. I would have preferred an enchantment token that can add a+1 to an item you own, having to adjust to the items you find is a plus to me
#57 CahPahkah Jul 22, 2015 10:16:33	Sorsohka wrote:
(Reply to #54) FrogReaver	Skerrit wrote:
(Reply to #57) FrogReaver	CahPahkah wrote:
(Reply to #52) Sorsohka	FrogReaver wrote:
#61 CahPahkah Jul 22, 2015 10:34:15	What are people's thoughts on Prismatic Wall vs. Wall of Text for a 9th level spell slot?   Oh...sorry, wrong thread.
(Reply to #61) Sorsohka	CahPahkah wrote:
(Reply to #62) imaginaryfriend	Sorsohka wrote:
(Reply to #63) Sorsohka	imaginaryfriend wrote:
#65 Mirtek Jul 22, 2015 11:42:49	Sorsohka wrote:
(Reply to #65) Sorsohka	Mirtek wrote:
#67 Mirtek Jul 22, 2015 12:26:57	Sorsohka wrote:
#68 CahPahkah Jul 22, 2015 12:15:07	Sorsohka wrote:
#69 Kalani Jul 22, 2015 12:23:57	Mirtek wrote:
#70 Kalani Jul 22, 2015 12:32:32	CahPahkah wrote:
(Reply to #67) Sorsohka	Mirtek wrote:
#72 Kalani Jul 22, 2015 12:44:37	Sorsohka wrote:
#73 Mirtek Jul 22, 2015 12:53:09	Sorsohka wrote:
#74 Skerrit Jul 22, 2015 13:10:39	FrogReaver wrote:
#75 Primarchx Jul 22, 2015 14:01:23	I have four active 5e AL characters and 6 certed items (+1 non-cert).  I've played a lot of AL - a monthly Expeditions game, weekly Encounters, four cons thus far this year and a couple to go.  I was able to swap a couple of items out at a Fai Chens recently, too.  Do I have all the items I want?  No.  Is that okay?  Sure.   For those of you who say, "I played mod X and didn't get the item I wanted and now will never get it!", I say that's incorrect.  You can trade certed items with other players, you can see if a similar item shows up at a Fai Chens at a con and swap if you have an item of greater/same rarity, you can play the same mod with another of your own characters and trade between them.  In short, if you're willing to put in the time and effort you can get what you need and still follow the rules.   As usual, YMMV.
(Reply to #72) Sorsohka	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #74) FrogReaver	Skerrit wrote:
#78 Mirtek Jul 22, 2015 14:11:15	Primarchx wrote:
#79 imaginaryfriend Jul 22, 2015 14:44:26	Sorsohka wrote:
#80 Primarchx Jul 22, 2015 15:00:18	Mirtek wrote:
(Reply to #79) Sorsohka	imaginaryfriend wrote:
#82 SteveMND Jul 23, 2015 7:06:08	Mirtek wrote:
#83 CahPahkah Jul 23, 2015 7:39:23	Sorsohka wrote:
#84 ovinomancer1981 Jul 23, 2015 8:53:32	Sorsohka wrote:
#85 FrogReaver Jul 23, 2015 9:21:59	What exactly is the problem with doing a completely "fair" distribution at each table?  What's the benefit of always giving the magic item to the player with the least magic items (assuming he wants it)?   I think we can look at this best by looking at an example of a 3 person table compared to a 6 person table.  The 3 person table gets twice as many magic items per character as the 6 person table.  Now let's assume for a moment that a player from the 6 person table swaps out with a player from the 3 person table for a session.   The player that came from the 6 person table will most assuredly get all magic items he wants for quite a while forward.  In other words he gets first dibs on anything he wants just because he played in a larger party table for a while before joining  a smaller party table.  At least it's only going to be the next 2 or 3 magic items going forward typically.  That's still quite a bit before another player even gets a chance on something good.   The player that went to the 6 person table from the 3 person has the opposite happen to him.  He gets no chance for magic items for a very long time.  If he has 4 and the other 5 players have 2 a piece then he has to wait till almost each of those players get 2 more magic items.  That's 10 more magic items in that he wont get any.
#86 CahPahkah Jul 23, 2015 9:30:57	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #81) TheBreen	Sorsohka wrote:
#88 Mirtek Jul 23, 2015 11:17:08	Sorsohka wrote:
(Reply to #87) imaginaryfriend	TheBreen wrote:
(Reply to #66) Coredump00	It seems we may be approaching this game very differently.....     Sorsohka wrote:
(Reply to #84) Sorsohka	ovinomancer1981 wrote:
#92 Mirtek Jul 24, 2015 13:43:31	Sorsohka wrote:
(Reply to #92) Sorsohka	Mirtek wrote:
#94 Mirtek Jul 27, 2015 13:40:50	Sorsohka wrote: