Converting a Magic Item Heavy 3.5 Setting to 5e, Need Advice

[Kyouhen]

Ahoy! So I've got a 3.5 setting that I'm transferring over to 5e. It's a bit of a silly setting in a city literally built to cater to adventurers.

Now I've seen that 5e is really light on the magic item requirements. Characters no longer need to stock up on magic items to survive as heavily as they did in 3.5. With the fixed attack roll bonuses and caps on how silly AC and whatnot can go, they just aren't as necessary. The problem is this city is overflowing with adventurers. So many magic items kicking around that a +1 Ring of Protection was worth all of 20g.

So I'm wondering how this type of thing will affect converting the setting to 5e. Should I adjust the rules on character stats to make characters a bit weaker to make up for the huge supply of magic items? Should enemies be buffed? Or would the fact that most (intelligent) enemies have just as much access to these items as the players make up for it? Thanks for any advice.

[Angelalex242]

Ahoy! So I've got a 3.5 setting that I'm transferring over to 5e. It's a bit of a silly setting in a city literally built to cater to adventurers.

Now I've seen that 5e is really light on the magic item requirements. Characters no longer need to stock up on magic items to survive as heavily as they did in 3.5. With the fixed attack roll bonuses and caps on how silly AC and whatnot can go, they just aren't as necessary. The problem is this city is overflowing with adventurers. So many magic items kicking around that a +1 Ring of Protection was worth all of 20g.

So I'm wondering how this type of thing will affect converting the setting to 5e. Should I adjust the rules on character stats to make characters a bit weaker to make up for the huge supply of magic items? Should enemies be buffed? Or would the fact that most (intelligent) enemies have just as much access to these items as the players make up for it? Thanks for any advice.

Actually, don't worry about it so much. Just strictly enforce the 3 attunement slots per character, and you should be fine.

[Ignimortis]

Actually, don't worry about it so much. Just strictly enforce the 3 attunement slots per character, and you should be fine.

Seconded. Attunement is what breaks the magic item christmas tree, not access to items. Maybe limit easy access to uncommon and rare items, and have very rare and legendary items as, well, rare.

[AvvyR]

Agreed. I'm currently playing in a game where the DM has been giving out low end magic items (Rings of Protection, +1 weapons and armor, etc) like candy. Provided you keep a tight leash on the attunement rules, it's not really game-breaking. It can even lead to some interesting and hilarious decision making when a player can't quite use everything they have.

[Unoriginal]

Or would the fact that most (intelligent) enemies have just as much access to these items as the players make up for it?

This should be taken into account. If an useful magic ring cost less than a longbow usually cost, you're going to see more magic rings than longbows in your typical setting.

[Kyouhen]

Right, forgot about the attunement thing. I've only played a bit of 5e myself and my character never really needed much in the way of magic items, so that just kind of slipped my mind.

[Callin]

If you want to keep some of the EPICness of having those items transfer over you can tell them to pick one and turn it into a boon of sorts. Basically pick a simple magic item they have and make it a passive or 1/LR Active use if it casts a spell or something.

Just saying its an option if you want your players to still have some of their old gear.