Got the boxed Starter game yesterday. The magic item section was interesting:
- Some magic items require that you "attune" them with a Short Rest in order to use them. You can have a maximum of three attuned magic items at a time.
- Other magic items don't need to be attuned, such as +1 armor, +1 weapon, potions, or scrolls. So the Magic Christmas Tree effect still exists to some extent, though its not as bad as it was in previous editions.
- I wonder if +1 weapons and armor don't need to be attuned because they're weaker then attuned magic items, or because they only provide a +X bonus.
- If +5 weapons don't need to be attuned, then that benefits classes that use weapons (as opposed to spells).
- In previous editions having to get 2 magical weapons has always been a big drawback to mid-high level character that use Two Weapon Fighting. However, now that the extra attack from Two Weapon Fighting is limited to the Bonus Action and some magic weapons don't need to be attuned, it seems like this issue has been addressed.
- If +5 armor doesn't need to be attuned, then getting armor proficiency of some kind from Mountain Dwarf or multi-classing will be a lot more important for mid-level Wizards, unless there's a "Greater Mage Armor" or some similar equivalent spell.
- Maximum Ability Scores, relatively small Proficiency bonuses, and Concentration restrictions make +X weapons and armor a lot more useful then they were in previous editions. I'm hoping that higher level bonuses on weapons also overcome additional Resistances as well, as they did in 3.0 and currently do in Pathfinder with DR.
- Magic items that effect your Ability Scores or movement rate set it at a fixed number, rather then providing a bonus. For example, when attuned Gauntlets of Ogre Strength grants you Strength of 19. So a character with 19 or 20 Strength gains no benefit from them. (This is also how it worked in 2E).
- From the Basic Rules we know that you cannot buy or sell magic items other then (one use) potions and scrolls. You have to find them. This should hopefully cut down on the metagame of choosing magic items (making a 1st level character with 8 Strength knowing that you'll buy Gauntlets of Ogre Strength when you hit mid levels).
- In keeping with the above rule, reusable magic items do not have a listed gold piece or other value. This could make balanced mid-high level character creation a tremendous hassle, since the DM will have to approve any magic items on a case by case basis, rather then just giving out an gp or +X budget.
Thoughts?
Since the introduction of magical items in the playtest to your perspectives it seems they're still wearing kid gloves when it comes to magic items in play. Magic items were never a problem in any game session I played and discretion was used by both DM and player. In a way it comes down to the amount of meta-information that's divulged to the player and how the gaming communities (any, not just this one) relish playing the numbers presented.
Attunment was basically called questing for knowledge, once upon a time, and the presentation (especially being in the PHB) removes a little more of the organic process and mystical sense of what magical items could mean to a campaign/adventure. Character Development has shifted to Player Resolution.
Person_Man wrote:
No such thing as +5 items - bonuses run from +1 (really quite rare), through +2 (very damn rare) to +3 (almost never found, unique and powerful kinda rare)
- Some magic items require that you "attune" them with a Short Rest in order to use them. You can have a maximum of three attuned magic items at a time.
I'm not a big fan of "attuning" magic items. It's a needless restriction.
- Other magic items don't need to be attuned, such as +1 armor, +1 weapon, potions, or scrolls. So the Magic Christmas Tree effect still exists to some extent, though its not as bad as it was in previous editions.
It's also inconsistent which is another reason attunement is needless.
- I wonder if +1 weapons and armor don't need to be attuned because they're weaker then attuned magic items, or because they only provide a +X bonus.
It's because the game designers don't like the thought of players out there somewhere amassing a golf bag full of magic items that can be pulled out as a need arises. Thus we have inconsistent attunement rules. A measly +1 isn't powerful enough to trigger those feelings causing the rules hammer to fall.
- If +5 weapons don't need to be attuned, then that benefits classes that use weapons (as opposed to spells).
Don't know what your point is here. Whether they need to be attuned or not, any sort of weapon benefits classes that use weapons...obviously.
- In previous editions having to get 2 magical weapons has always been a big drawback to mid-high level character that use Two Weapon Fighting. However, now that the extra attack from Two Weapon Fighting is limited to the Bonus Action and some magic weapons don't need to be attuned, it seems like this issue has been addressed.
Since when does anyone "have" to get 2 magical weapons, and why is that more of a drawback than a sword and board character "having to get" a magical sword and a magical shield?
- If +5 armor doesn't need to be attuned, then getting armor proficiency of some kind from Mountain Dwarf or multi-classing will be a lot more important for mid-level Wizards, unless there's a "Greater Mage Armor" or some similar equivalent spell.
Wizards don't need armor. They need meat shields.
- Maximum Ability Scores, relatively small Proficiency bonuses, and Concentration restrictions make +X weapons and armor a lot more useful then they were in previous editions. I'm hoping that higher level bonuses on weapons also overcome additional Resistances as well, as they did in 3.0 and currently do in Pathfinder with DR.
Previous editions meaning 3rd and 4th editions? +X weapons were the vast majority of items in editions prior to that and they were extremely useful.
- Magic items that effect your Ability Scores or movement rate set it at a fixed number, rather then providing a bonus. For example, when attuned Gauntlets of Ogre Strength grants you Strength of 19. So a character with 19 or 20 Strength gains no benefit from them. (This is also how it worked in 2E).
I can take it or leave it.
- From the Basic Rules we know that you cannot buy or sell magic items other then (one use) potions and scrolls. You have to find them. This should hopefully cut down on the metagame of choosing magic items (making a 1st level character with 8 Strength knowing that you'll buy Gauntlets of Ogre Strength when you hit mid levels).
Stupid. This is another example of the game designers not liking the thought of someone out there having magic shops, or players being allowed to spend their money on gear appropriate for their level - or perhaps it's game designer laziness, where they don't want to go through the effort of figuring out what these items might be worth. The availability of items has always been up to the DM, and all this does is serve to make the DM's job harder since those DMs that want to have their magic shops now have to figure out how much items should be worth.
- In keeping with the above rule, reusable magic items do not have a listed gold piece or other value. This could make balanced mid-high level character creation a tremendous hassle, since the DM will have to approve any magic items on a case by case basis, rather then just giving out an gp or +X budget.
As mentioned above, it's stupid.
FWIW, Mearls & Co. have emphasized that the DMG will allow for magic item shops if a particular table wants them, but they aren't the default, and no one will be required to have a dozen magic items to keep up with the rules' assumptions about character progression. As I see it, R&D isn't trying to take away high-magic campaigns. Folks have a right to be upset that they are no longer the default assumption, but that playstyle hasn't been eradicated or put under censure, merely shifted to the same rules space as low-magic campaigns (i.e. an option that table X is free to adopt or not).
I knid of like this, I recently had some new players in my 4e game take WAY too long shopping for the perfect magic gear to augement their characters, it really dragged the game down and made it less enjoyable for the others, who were taking a rest in-game to recover from the fights.
I know as the DM I could have kicked them out of the shop or demanded they hurry, but they are completely new to TTRPG's and I just ket hoping they'd hurry it along on their own and I didn't want to ruin something they seemed to be enjoying an awful lot.
But, when they went to the smith shop to buy new weapons and armor, realized they were already pretty well off and that nothing offered them a signifigant boost, it went much much faster
To be sure, 4th edition's magic items were a disaster. It seemed practically every item had some special feature and/or rules, making it extremely difficult to pick and choose for the DM and players alike, and the suggested awards/parcels gave the party magic items every level.
I'd actually prefer if anything you wear or wield required attunement in order to put an easy cap on christmas trees. You might have a huge hoard of magic items for versatility, but you're required to be strategic and careful about what you're going to put on. I might just make that a houserule.
I'd prefer it if items have a 'minor' benefit but you can attune to get extra gravy. Not only does this limit stacking but you can attune to diffierent items depending on your mission.
My world has no shops which sell magic items beyond common consumables or ammo. There will never be a scenario in my games where someone walks into a magic shop with a large shopping list of magic items and is able to buy every item on the list. That actually happened in a game I was a player in.
Looking at the way Adventurer's League organises the award of magic items, it seems to work out that an individual PC can expect to gain about 4 permanent magic items in the course of working up all the way from level 1 to level 20, Of course, home games that are not part of OP may be more generous but it gives us an indication of how the designers see things.
I forget who mentioned it or where, but I really like the idea of magic items being something that are only bought/sold at Sotheby's style auctions in the major cities. You might not be able to find the exact magic item you want, and worse yet, you might get outbid!
Magic items are rare. There are no shops. Nobody deals in that kind of money, except the nobility and they mostly trade parcels of land, crop yields and political favors. But that doesn't mean you can't buy a magic item if you really put your mind to it. You first have to figure out if such a thing exists and who currently has it. It might be an heirloom owned by a noble or other townsfolk in some far off city. You can negoiate for it, if you dare! 
Person_Man wrote:
pukunui wrote:
That too. And I bet in the bigger cities there are black markets that deal in magic items. Of course, some magic items might actually be cursed, while others might only appear to be magical.
The point I'm trying to make is that in my games, players will be able to buy magic items, but there will be some risk involved and they may not get exactly what they want.
Do the +1 items still have fun little quirks and minor properties you can roll for? Those were great. You'd end up with stuff like a +1 sword that, whenever it stikes, will play a snatch of an ancient song. The song might have something worthwhile to tell you, but holding the sword also makes you easily depressed, especially when confronted with overwhelming odds. Or maybe some +1 armor that is carved out of quartz and allows the wearer to speak Terran( the language of its creator), but wearing it induces a mild aching pain. They added character to otherwise ordinary magic items.
Fralex wrote:
JC999 wrote:
I can't say if that stuff is in the Starter Set but I believe it will be in the DMG.
edwin_su wrote:
- Buying magic items is for lawfuls. Anyone else would employ a rogue to steal them. That's why they are rare. They've nearly all been stolen already.
- If you are going to buy an allegedly magic item, employ a wizard who can cast Identify. One you can trust. One who knows you will slit his throat if he lies to you about it.
- We had a thread going in the old DDNext forum about flavorful magic items. There were some cool ideas there. We should start a new one.
Karnos wrote:
Magic items that effect your Ability Scores or movement rate set it at a fixed number, rather then providing a bonus. For example, when attuned Gauntlets of Ogre Strength grants you Strength of 19. So a character with 19 or 20 Strength gains no benefit from them. (This is also how it worked in 2E).
Karnos wrote:
I like the fact that you can play this edition without any magic item. Finally i can create no magic / very low magic world without the need to rebalance martials (like in 3ed where without magic items you are gimped as a non caster). Also,I like ideas with auctions. You can recreate that feeling of 2ed where you got random magic items (and not always usefull ones at that).
Mirtek wrote:
thehobb wrote:
FallingIcicle wrote:
One problem I can see attunement solving.
The party is travelling along and comes up to a chasm, 25 feet wide. One of the players has a ring of jumping. He takes a length of string, jumps across safely, slides the ring to the next person, who puts it on and jumps across safely, repeat.
For some, like my group, we'd consider that cheese tactics. Attunement prevents this tactic.
There is one example of attunement in AD&D. Does anyone know which magical item I'm talking about?
dmgorgon wrote:
Titanium_Dragon wrote:
kill_the_wiz_first wrote:
Ring of Sustenance: This magical ring provides its wearer with life-sustaining nourishment even though he or she might go for days without food or drink. The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that its wearer needs to sleep only two hours per day to gain the benefit of eight hours of sleep.
The ring must be worn for a full week in order to function properly. If it is removed, the wearer immediately loses its benefit and must wear it for another week to reattune it to himself. After functioning for any period of seven consecutive days, a ring of sustenance will cease to function for a week while it replenishes itself.
Orethalion wrote:
FallingIcicle wrote:
I see attunement as offering a lot of cool game mechanic possibilities. I talked about some possible applications in a previous thread, including attuning to consumable magic items and attuning to special locations:
Fralex wrote:
FallingIcicle wrote:
Gatt wrote:
Also when they were talking about Attunment they brought up senarios like this.
"Magic Greatsword +3 unless attuned counts as a +1 greatsword."
I am relatively unworried about attunement. The claim is there won't be much magic anyway, in which case attunement is not much of a limit.
If we take the estimate that the player will only get 7 permanent magic items in the first place, and add a] that some won't need attunement & b] you are more likely to get magic at higher levels, then you may be 15th level before attunement starts to bite. By that time, you have quit the game or it is a serious habit. Either way, attunement is not going to be a serious issue.
Mind you. I still deem it a flaw and think the players will be demanding 15 magic items, but this will be decided long before attunement becomes an issue.
And then you have people like me, who prefer ubiquitous and cheap magic items - which means the monsters have them too!
EDIT: I mean worldbuilders and DMs like me
I've removed content from this thread because Baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.
Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
I'm begining to wonder if the act of calling something an MMO has been twisted into some kinda catch-all for anything one finds inferior or undesirable.
Man, I just really hate coconut. I think it might be that texture. It's too much like an MMO.
Attunements help to check bonuses and (eventually) power creep. Designing a system in such a way that Bounded Accuracy has any effect at all would likely be immediately made pointless if magic items all stacked with impunity. Honestly, it feels like a hugely flavorful mechanic even when considered beyond the implications as a balancing factor. Throughout a lot of fiction, well beyond the scope of D&D fiction at that, characters often tote around items nearly as famous as they who employ them. That favor and familiarity helps create stories in and of itself. Just to pop off a couple of easy examples: Bilbo/Frodo and Sting, Han Solo and the Millenium Falcon, Drizzt and Icingdeath/Twinkle, etc.
For those who are absorbed in the story of the items they are discovering, it's a huge incentive to bring that roleplay to the fore.
Brimleydower wrote:
Brimleydower wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Brimleydower wrote:
Many people like to run published modules and the like. They will likely include a decent smattering of magical items within. Modules published in specific settings tend to be grounded in commonalities of said setting. Forgotten Realms, for example, is markedly high magic. A delve through Undermountain or a trip into a Netheril ruin will likely result in coming across a lot of magically powered goodies. If a DM doesn't want a lot of magic items, that's cool too. I offered no argument against the merits or viability of that (in a lot of cases, I enjoy that sort of thing myself). Scarcity vs. Monty Haul isn't even part of the comment really.
I never claimed attuned items would force people to appreciate the item's flavor. I said it was an incentive that encourages (potentially) roleplay based on the item. This might not be the case for you or people you play with (and it's totally fine if that's not the case) but it could be for others. Again, scarcity and attunement aren't mutually exclusive: you can have rare and evocative items that still require attuning. I don't see any practical purpose in pitting the two concepts against one another (especially given that any individual can simply take them or leave them—both of them).
Brimleydower wrote:
If the act of attunement becomes too prevalent across magic items, it would probably become an annoyance. Personally, I'm of a mind to restrict it to the items with a history and cool functions. A ring of protection +1? Not so much.
Brimleydower wrote:
I like attunement for items beyond a simple +X.
I loved that playtest bit about rolling for cool 'flavor' properties.
I also like, and use, masterwork items. They might have a +1, or some interesting property (ie: mithral being lighter, serrated being +1 to damage, but not hit, adamantium ignoring some or all metal/stone-based DR....) but they are all purchasable, at the right shops.
Selling and buying magic items should be up to the table, campaign world, etc. I like the auction idea, but I also like underworld buying and selling, and planar cities. Also, something I've used, is the mysterious caravan...They just appear one night, and have something for a price, then vanish.
I do not like random magic treasure tables, or barely rationing out stuff PC's want. If a fighter at my table gets a +1 sword, than everyone gets the equivilant quickly. I do like the PC 'wish list'; it worked really well for 4e. Not for Dark Sun, though, lol.
My personal campaign world is much like Eberron, in that magic is common.
dmgorgon wrote:
I really dig the way that Wands and Staves are presented. Gives them limited value per day, but continuing value. Good stuff.
edwin_su wrote:
thehobb wrote:
caddok01 wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
caddok01 wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
caddok01 wrote:
I am more concerned about equal access to magic, along the same line as feats. It should be rare that a magic item or feat is restricted to a specific class. That way casters can't use magic items to extend or store power in reference to spell ability to cover for any contigency.
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Eventually, I’m pretty sure a Wish spell can still create rare magical items.
Just remeber kids...
All magic items have been touched by the Red Death!
Use them at your own risk!
Mwa ha ha ha
Overpromises wrote:
FallingIcicle wrote:
Sturmunddrang wrote:
I like the idea of fairly rare magic items, but not tooooo rare. I do hope the crating permanent magic items part of the DMG includes a very significant personal cost to crafting a magic sword, etc - like you can only make 1 per level, and the process takes a year and is very taxing, etc - you impart part of your personal essence into the item, kinda thing, so they cant be made production line style. I dont mind if you can buy potions and scrolls, one use items, but not anything more than that, and even such a potion/scroll "shop" should be extremely rare, I only the largest cities, expensive with no guarantee of what you want being in stock.