Where Has All the Magic Gone?

Tuft · Dec 12, 2008

Starbuck_II said:
Why did your group dislike magic item compendruim?
I thought it was the best book yet.

No one simply seemed able to find anything they liked. Note that no one was very interested in weapons or armor in that group either.

Oh, yes - there was the rules for creating your own Runestaff, and the enhancements rules - but not really the items themselves.

Nebulous · Dec 12, 2008

EroGaki said:
I agree with Jack7, for the most part. It has been my observation that magical items have become very "blah." Most of them have lost versatility and flavor in exchange for steady mechanics. I really wish the creators would have taken a bit more time and developed magic items that contained solid mechanics as well as flavor.

I mostly agree with Jack7 as well. Magic in 4e lost something in the balancing act. I'm particularly displeased with spellcasting, but his post was focused mainly on magic items themselves so i'll stick with that.

Granted, although magic items in 2e did seem more "magical" it might be nostaligia tainting my opinion.

The Bag of Tricks in the AV really bothered me and some of my players when we first read it. That was our favorite magic item from 2nd edition (along with the Deck of Many Things). The 4e BoT is so bland and balanced that none of them would actually enjoy using it. So i made up my own with my own rules and my own animals. After some playtesting i'll post it here eventually if anyone wants to use it. It does not follow the 4e magic item paradigm at all and should probably be considered a Minor Artifact, OR, just take up multiple parcels because anyone in the group can use it.

Jack7 · Dec 12, 2008

along with the Deck of Many Things

I never played 2E, but the Deck of Many Things was the geschnizzle-snazzle.

Now there was magic, opportunity, and danger, all rolled into one.

Lacyon · Dec 12, 2008

FireLance said:
4e seems to have made a clearer distinction between magic items that are basic tools, and magic items that are clearly meant to be complex and mysterious. The former are the magic items that you find in the PH and AV (although you will find a few relatively complex and multifunctional items there, too). The latter are the artifacts in the DMG and sourcebooks such as Draconomicon.

This.

Once you start making magic items creatable and/or available for purchase, they start crying out for balance and predictability.

It's the kind that players can't (easily) make for themselves or purchase anywhere that need, and can have, "wacky" functionality. These are the things that should be added to taste by an experienced DM.

Nebulous · Dec 12, 2008

Jack7 said:
I never played 2E, but the Deck of Many Things was the geschnizzle-snazzle.

Now there was magic, opportunity, and danger, all rolled into one.

Oh, i'm reintroducing the DoMT to the group eventually. It's internally balanced by offering you glorious riches or eternal damnation. god, i love that deck of cards.

Anyway, the bag of tricks i made uses the same check and balance system: every time you pull is a gamble, get a rabbit or get a lion, and there's a healing surge cost associated with it. Making this thing too me forever, but hopefully it's an item the group will cherish.

In past editions, pulling a bear from the Bag of Tricks to save your butt in a fight was a definitive game moment that no one ever forgot. That "gamble" is lost in 4e with every animal you pull being a (mostly) identical minion. And you only do it once per day. I can't see how the Bag of Tricks in an 8th level item as good as a +2 sword.

Miyaa · Dec 12, 2008

EroGaki said:
I feel that magic was more mystical and mysterious when it was a supernatural force. In the current editions, magic is an applied science.

This, I think, maybe part of the problem here. 3rd and especially 4th editions makes the powers, rituals, and magical items derivatives (I think that's what they are for the most part) are more or less utilitarian tools. I think it's also the nature of having such a gaming system with a long and evolved history: everyone grows more sophisticated and thus the systems may seem like it now.

I think the solution for me will be to amend or ignore most of the intricacy of the various abilities that the magical items will give you, like how often they can be used, and some of the secondary effects.

Mallus · Dec 12, 2008

As someone who never found a whole lot of magic in the D&D magic item lists --though I am partial to the Decanter of Endless Water Cannons and things with borderline brilliant/stupid names like the Sword of Wounding-- I find that the magic is exactly where it always was; in the fertile --or is that febrile?-- imaginations of the people playing the game.

I can't be alone in having friends who pawed through the 1e DMG magic item section treating it like a proto-Amazon Wish List, can I? Players have been busy robbing the game of "wonder" since 1974. And it's hard to blame them. Their characters have problems to solve, frequently problems that are trying to eat them. It's no wonder that the wondrous items of their fantasylands get treated like the tools the players need them to be.

If you're shooting for "real wonder" in your game, especially of the item/consumer goods variety, it's been my experience that you have to add that to the campaign yourself. It's hard to impress your players with off-the-rack items of magical mystery (seeing as they probably have the same rule books you do). You pretty much have to custom-tailor. All of the most memorable items I remember from gaming-days past were custom DM creations.

edit: except for Daern's Instant Fortress. That was just too damn cool.

Kid Charlemagne · Dec 12, 2008

Lots of good comments here - I'm still playing 3.5 and I think that 4E did some nifty things with magic items. I'm surprised that not everyone loved the Magic Item Compendium, 'cause everyone in my gaming groups thinks its the best thing ever. It reintroduced a lot of items that could do lots of little things, and made them inexpensive enough to buy a few of them.

As Plane Sailing and El-Remmen have also noted, the wealth guidelines changed the character of games - at least mine. I'm planning on junking the guidelines and going back to the way I did things in 2E and 1E for my next campaign. Fewer items overall, but more interesting ones when you get them. I also want to reintroduce magic with the occasional drawback into my games. This has been something I've noted since the early 3E days, and its always been one of my (relatively few) complaints about the 3E philosophy.

Miyaa · Dec 12, 2008

I found that the Weapons of Legacy book in 3.5 was the most interesting book of the bunch, and I used that often to improve the coolness of most magical items. I'm not completely satisfied how those concepts have been carried out into 4th edition, but I still think it's really good.

I feel like what's missing from 4th edition are magical backfire from use or perhaps more importantly overuse of an magical weapon, item, or whatever. It's probably how most of the intelligent magical items come into being.

Nebulous · Dec 12, 2008

Mallus said:
If you're shooting for "real wonder" in your game, especially of the item/consumer goods variety, it's been my experience that you have to add that to the campaign yourself. It's hard to impress your players with off-the-rack items of magical mystery (seeing as they probably have the same rule books you do). You pretty much have to custom-tailor. All of the most memorable items I remember from gaming-days past were custom DM creations.

Agreed. And that's what i'm shooting for, to bend the "safe" rules of 4e and interject a healthy dose of "WTF just happened?"

I'm hoping that the "group magic item" will be something i can continue using, i just don't know who to balance it within the existing magic infrastructre. As much as i love adding new stuff, there's always the potential to give them too much of a good thing.