I think I really like the "Attunement" rule in 5E...

[Treebore]

I think it is a rather simple way to address a lot of issues with magic items...

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

Yep, me too. It will make the PCs eventually have to make some hard choices - especially since they can no longer just liquidate magic items for gold and buy other ones.

[Arduin]

Yep, me too. It will make the PCs eventually have to make some hard choices - especially since they can no longer just liquidate magic items for gold and buy other ones.

That was only possible in Monty Haul games. Treating magic items like commodities was something only found in Munchkinland type games.

[Julian Grimm]

Care to elaborate on the rule, Tree?

[Treebore]

Care to elaborate on the rule, Tree?

Its a "bonding"requirement on certain magic items, some with additional requirements like Class, race, etc... There are also period of time for Bonding, limit on number of items you can bond to, and so on.

[Ancalagon]

Didn't Rolemaster from the 80s / early 90s have a rule for attunement? Its been quite some time since I looked at Rolemaster.....

[Treebore]

Didn't Rolemaster from the 80s / early 90s have a rule for attunement? Its been quite some time since I looked at Rolemaster.....

I don't recall, closest I got to playing Rolemaster was through the Middle Earth rules, and I don't recall a bonding/attunement requirement from that. I only really got into Spacemaster, and only for about a year before I went back to Traveller.

[serleran]

More Earthdawn.

Do they get more powerful / reveal more secret powers too?

[DreamscapeDesign]

Reminds me of the old Chaosium RuneQuest 2 rule for magic crystals. Nice touch, I thought.

[Treebore]

Do they get more powerful / reveal more secret powers too?

Not that I read with my limited and incomplete reading, but a couple of things implied such possibilities to me.