5e Magic Items: How wands will work this edition

[CyberThread]

So now we know how magic items are going to be a nearly unbuyable thing. So this is what we have


Wand of Magic Detection Wand, uncommon
While you hold this wand, you can cast the detect magic spell at will, without using any components.


Wand of Magic Missiles Wand, uncommon
While you hold this wand, you can use an action to expend 1 to 3 of its 7 charges to cast the magic missile spell without using any components. For 1 charge, you cast the spell as if you used a 1st-level spell slot, and you increase the spell slot level by one for each additional charge you spend.

The wand regains 1d6 + 1 expended charges each day at dawn.

However, if you expend the wand’s last charge, roll a d20. On a 1, the wand crumbles into ashes and is destroyed.

[Arzanyos]

You know what I love about this? Don't have to be a spellcaster to use wands.

[1of3]

Interesting. The playtest required the ability to cast at least one spell to use any wand (so High Elfs, Drow and Tieflings already qualified). It seems the opened it up even more.

[Person_Man]

First, I'd like to say that the magic items themselves seem to be really cool, and I like the "per day charges, and using the last one is risky" instead of "you get X charges, the end, then go buy a new one."

But my current take on the issue is that the lack of a gp cost or some other real valuation/rating system is a massive a cop out.

"Hey, lets just let the DM decide on whether or not to use them!" That's works fine if you're Mike Mearls, who by all accounts is a great DM who obviously plays D&D on a very regular basis. But if I'm a DM and I want to start a new game above 1st level, I have to approve every magic item for every player on a case by case basis. I can't even give my players good guidelines for what to pick, especially at high levels, since Rarity is not a good stand in for power level, and is not granular enough to account for the many power levels represented in D&D magic items.

And if I'm a player who has built a character concept or build around a particular magic item (see Elric/Stormbringer, Bilbo/Ring of Invisibility, Thor/Mjolnir, Every PC in the D&D Cartoon/Whatever Item They're Given) that character isn't portable between games, which is a big deal if they want to get some kind of 5E organized play off the ground equivalent to the Pathfinder Society.

If they didn't want to give everything a valuation, they could have also solved the problem by sticking to their guns on the Attune rules. (You get a maximum of 3 magic items. Each magic item is cool enough that its worth it. Period). And just eliminating potions and scrolls. But that would require cutting a classic (but unwieldy and hard to balance) part of the game, and they're unwilling to do that. Alternatively, they could have made PF Alchemist-like rules for potions and scrolls. A certain mid-level spell or Feat or separate optional Ritual rules are required to make one, you infuse it with some of your magical power, but can only have X number active at any given time. That way there would be no real economy to buy and sell them, but a player could still theoretically find them on the corpse of an enemy magic user or the occasional treasure chest.

Basically I think they just decided, "This is hard to balance, so lets not even try."

[1of3]

There were rules in one of the playtests that resembled the Alchemist. Apparently it didn't jive with the people taking the questionaire.