Do you no longer get better hit/save/etc. chances at higher levels? I'm used to the TSR rules sets in which you do - hence the same quantitative bonus makes a greater difference in proportion to unmodified chance of failure, while increasingly smaller ones become superfluous (as you can't succeed more than 100% of the time).

AC bonuses then are worth less in proportion to better hit chances,  while hit % is the multiple of a damage bonus. The slant in favor of offense goes up against increased hp.

You do get better as you level. However there is a monumentally important distinction that a lot of people overlook in 5e that was very much assumed or baked-into D&D 3.x/4e especially - Itemization is not part of class balance.

So this keeps with the modularity concept that GM's can run their games according to whatever magic-economy they want based on the genre/setting conceits they have for their game.

Quote from: tenbones;803241You do get better as you level. However there is a monumentally important distinction that a lot of people overlook in 5e that was very much assumed or baked-into D&D 3.x/4e especially - Itemization is not part of class balance.

So this keeps with the modularity concept that GM's can run their games according to whatever magic-economy they want based on the genre/setting conceits they have for their game.

It is worth noting that in 5e by default you don't get a lot better as you level.

The difference from a 1st level guy to a 20th level guy is +2 rising to +7 and that is the same for all classes.
Now on top of that you have feats, skills and stat increases but that is up to individual players and even then not a huge lift.
This is in marked contrast to earlier editions (fighter thaco is +1 to +20 over the same range for example) and is I guess the bounded accuracy part of the game.

Magic items weren't presumed in TSR D&D until you get into one of those Fighter vs MU arguments and the Pro fighter lobby insist that you give a 15th level figther +4 armour and shield and a +5 weapon although they are generally quite light on the MU side of the fence.

This might fly in the face of people that hate making the comparison...

but even in fiction, it seemed that the non-casters got all the iconic goodies. Sure casters invariably had their staves and wands and shit - and Gandalf was running around with Glamdring - but fuck it, he was already OP *long* before any of the Hobbits and humans were introduced...

Unless you're running a very strict setting in terms of what magic is and how is it used - you almost have to pimp items out to non-casters to keep them relevant. I don't necessarily have an issue with doing that as much as I'd simply rather keep the proliferation factor down.

Of course you can introduce whatever campaign elements you want to mitigate Caster dominance. I introduced the concept of a Psionic "legendary" item I lifted from R. Scott Bakker's 'Prince of Nothing' - called a 'Chorae'. They called them "The Tears of God" - they look like little rune-carved metal marbles. Basically kills an Arcane caster on contact (turns them into a crumbling statue of salt), unweaves magic and makes you immune to directed magical effects, was a very convenient tool to scare the bejeezus out of everyone when Elminster got salted, followed by Khelben a month later. Yeah, talk about putting all the casters on notice. Good times.

Edit: I added the stipulation - that if you possessed one of these, you couldn't therefore *have* any arcane crafted items. So...