D&D 5E Caster attack roll bonus items attunement vs. attack roll bonus items of other classes

Cergorach said:

Background:
I'm currently playing a Warlock that has a "Wand of the War Mage +1" and two other attunement items. Now I have gotten my hands on another attunement item and choices are now hard on what to attune.

I was thinking of other non-spellcasting classes and how they handle the limited attunement of weapons? And... They don't.

Not only do they get plusses to attack roll, but also damage, without the attunement requirement. Unless we're talking very special weapons. Even something like "Wraps Of Unarmed Prowess" don't require attunement by Monks. And even things like "Dragon/Giant Slayer" weapons don't require attunement. My next thought was, maybe this is because us casters have additional attacks with spells when we hit certain levels, but so have non-casters with (magical) weapons when they hit certain levels. Maybe it's because we make ranged attacks? But no attunement is required for magical ranged weapons, even worse, it can stack with non-attuned ammo. Resulting in a +6/+6 stack without any attunement required.

Sure, as a Warlock I can stack abilities on my attacks, but so can non-casters with their abilities...

It is as it is, I have no desire to get this house ruled, the best I can hope for is that it's changed in D&D5.5E, but I am wondering why this distinction has been made? Am I overlooking something why attack roll abilities of spellcasters are so 'special' vs the attack roll abilities of non-casters?

Click to expand...

NotAYakk said:

First, Rod of the Pact Keeper is better for a Warlock than Wand of the War Mage usually.

Second, they stack. Weapons don't. A +2 Wand of the War Mage and a +2 Rod of the Pact Keeper gives you +4 to spell attack rolls, +2 to spell DCs, ignore cover, and regain 1 slot as an action 1/day.

Second, note that melee characters ... get to attack. They have no spells backing them up for harder fights (if they do have such spells, they are quite low level).

Spellcasters using cantrips is doing stuff when you don't consider it a high stress situation; slots are when things get dangerous. And slots are often exponentially more flexible than attacks are.

Note that, barring Warlock's EB, caster at-will actions suck pretty badly past T1.

Click to expand...

Cergorach said:

It is as it is, I have no desire to get this house ruled, the best I can hope for is that it's changed in D&D5.5E, but I am wondering why this distinction has been made? Am I overlooking something why attack roll abilities of spellcasters are so 'special' vs the attack roll abilities of non-casters?

Click to expand...

NotAYakk said:

First, Rod of the Pact Keeper is better for a Warlock than Wand of the War Mage usually.

Second, they stack. Weapons don't. A +2 Wand of the War Mage and a +2 Rod of the Pact Keeper gives you +4 to spell attack rolls, +2 to spell DCs, ignore cover, and regain 1 slot as an action 1/day.

Second, note that melee characters ... get to attack. They have no spells backing them up for harder fights (if they do have such spells, they are quite low level).

Spellcasters using cantrips is doing stuff when you don't consider it a high stress situation; slots are when things get dangerous. And slots are often exponentially more flexible than attacks are.

Note that, barring Warlock's EB, caster at-will actions suck pretty badly past T1.

Click to expand...