Arcane Magic, Divine Magic, Nature Magic and Psionics are too much alike.

[Gez]

It's a DM's job to make the differences felt. I'm all for similar rules (so as to not having to learn one ruleset by type of magic, it's the wizards, not the players, who're supposed to have long white beards by the time they understand how magic works) and similar capacities (so you're not too much screwed when noone want to play a cleric, but you got a druid and a bard, for example).

As a player, I try to respect the flavor. For example, my wizard choose spells that seemed useful (somewhat of a grab-bag, or swiss-army-knife, flavor to the spell list); but my sorcerer only learn spells that can relate to her mythical ancestry (fire or lightning spells, spells that alter her body, spells that charm or read thoughts, and teleportation/planeshifting spells). *Start pimp mode* See an example here, and please rate and comment it, by the way. *end pimp mode*

 

[Psion]

Does anybody else agree with me that the four basic types of supernatural powers are too much alike in their effects?

I'm sure someone does. I don't, however. I rather prefer the unified spell list and similarity between the way they operate because it is more convenient, less confusing, and takes up less space.

 

[Li Shenron]

I would like to see different spell lists for Cleric of different deities, added to a common base list for all. Domain spells are supposed to be exactly this, but since they are completely separated from the normal (non-domains) daily spells, AND they are very few spells/day, AND they are only 1 spell/level/domain, the system does not make a Cleric of X very different from a Cleric of Y unless they deliberately choose to always prepare different spells.

As a Cleric, I try to prepare and cast spells that suit my concept character: he's a CG Cleric of Kord, with Luck & Strength domain, and so I cast a lot of Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance, Divine Favor, Augury, Spiritual Weapon... Spells like Make Whole, Find Traps, Silence, Detect X and Summon Whatever don't fit my PC at all, but it's hard to resist and not use e.g. Silence (and Harm in the future...).

I think it would be better if (for example) the all-Cleric list was cut in half, down to very generic spells, and the spells from one's deity's ALL domains lists were added into a Cleric spellcasting capabilities (at which time, it would be pointless to keep domain spells/day separated from the rest).

BTW, I have liked the Encyclopaedia Arcane books for different yet simple ideas on alternate spellcasting: the Chaos Mage is IMHO what a Sorcerer could have been from the start, although I have some doubts on playability still.

 

[Afrodyte]

Does anybody else agree with me that the four basic types of supernatural powers are too much alike in their effects? I would much prefer them to have more unique effects...As it stands, it seems to me that all these supernatural powers more or less duplicate the effects of each other (yes, there are some differences, but still). Am I the only one who feels this way?

I agree with you, and as a response, I created an entirely new magic system for arcane and divine casting that deals with this (and eliminates the spell slot system). I did my best to make the options available to sorcerers, wizards, and clerics different and to have a distinct flavor. I am thinking of browsing through the ELH and getting ideas for building spell effects to allow more customization in spells.

 

[dave_o]

clerics prey

Ohh, the irony.

 

[kenjib]

I agree. In my opinion, this is one of the areas in D&D where the flavor is shaped by the rules rather than the rules being shaped by the flavor. It is an example of the drawback of a generic rpg system not tailored to a specific world.

If the different spellcasters all worked in more different ways, I think this would necessitate more assumptions about the campaign world the game is played in. Thus it would reduce the flexibility of the system.

I'm all for campaign settings changing the magic rules in any way necessary to capture the mood of the setting.

 

[Psion]

I agree. In my opinion, this is one of the areas in D&D where the flavor is shaped by the rules rather than the rules being shaped by the flavor.

I'm not sure this is a problem. In fact, I am convinced that it is best this way. If manipulating arcane power has a consistent underpinning, it just seems more logical and self-consistent. Throwing in a dozen different systems that work in different ways not only would be a nightmare to manage, but give a "kitchen sink" feel to magic. It seems much more reasonable to me that most magic would operate in a similar fashion.

 

[Mordane76]

Originally posted by Psion
Throwing in a dozen different systems that work in different ways not only would be a nightmare to manage, but give a "kitchen sink" feel to magic. It seems much more reasonable to me that most magic would operate in a similar fashion.

I actually feel exactly the opposite; IMO, magic by its very nature should be chaotic and mysterious, and the unified system just drains away some of the mystery of the operation. A lot of people have gone out and altered the way the system works, to varying degrees of success -- and I think this is great; the Vancian system that D&D uses, while straightforward and elegant in execution, is completely... dull.

Parallel Yet Connected Topic:
DMs can try all they want to impose flavor, but a lot of players aren't taking the flavor if it's not in the books. I know how much I've struggled with this aspect of the game -- I want things to look and feel a certain way, but they don't, because the players see them as the black-and-white rules out of the book, and are either incapable or unwilling to move beyond the simple explanations provided in the PHB. Even when one players starts to rise, the others do not, and this creates tension between players.

I like innovative players. I like solid descriptions. I like complete speaking in character and intricate, flavor-driven spellcasters. Unfortunately, the system provided, IMO, is draining player's innovation -- why should they put forth the effort to play up their character? How can I penalize one player for not playing up flavor when they all don't do it? How can I reward one player for staying in flavor without looking like I'm playing favorites?

 

[Celebrim]

You would also be hard challenged to find a game system in which any two types of magic did have widely varying feel for the mechanics.

Is D20 less diverse in the way it handles magic than GURPS? Even in say WoD where everything had its own little individualized progressive spell list with its own mechanics for each 'spell', there are close similarities between a mage invoking a magical effect and things as different as a wraith's powers or a vampires disciplines.

Ok, it is fine to say, 'I think that the various types of magic are too much alike', but I don't see anyone discussing viable alternatives.

One of the big problems in having spell systems with entirely different mechanics is that it is very hard to balance one system versus another one. Another problem is that you end up having to know different spell mechanics for every player in the game. Another problem is that of extensibility. If every new things requires a new system, pretty soon the whole game system starts to drown. One class starts borrowing effects from another classes list of abilities and converting them to thier own mechanics. Then pretty soon you have five different definitions of 'fireball', with five different means of resolution.

Plus magic is not really a stand alone system (or if it is, then you have bigger problems), in that it interfaces with the substrate of the larger game system. D20 magic is always going to involve saving throws, casting times, damage, caster level, and areas of effect. Can any system manage to seem all that different from another if both must carry with them the underlying rules of the game? Integrating psionics into the game is a fine example, and the consequences of treating psionics from a rules perspective as something completely different than magic is discussed in the text.

 

[WizarDru]

I'm not sure this is a problem. In fact, I am convinced that it is best this way. If manipulating arcane power has a consistent underpinning, it just seems more logical and self-consistent. Throwing in a dozen different systems that work in different ways not only would be a nightmare to manage, but give a "kitchen sink" feel to magic. It seems much more reasonable to me that most magic would operate in a similar fashion.

My general feeling is that anyone who wants a system where all the magic systems work differently has never played D&D up to 20th level with the full array of magical powers available to characters therein. Just this weekend, I ran my party of 18-19th level characters against a Winterwight (CR23). Some characters had 10 separate spell effects running, not including their equipment. This included a battle with Six players including a Druid, Wizard, Paladin, Gatecrasher/Shadowdancer, Archer/Sorceror and Cleric. I need four different magic systems like I need a hole in the head. If you can juggle that many details, and then throw more magic mechanics into the mix, more power to you. For me, the unified system works just hunky-dory, and if I want a different one, then all my magic systems move to that one.

As to the flavor issue, I agree it can seem very much the same. The next time I start a game, I may take steps to modify the system some, but not the core mechanic. As Celebrim points out, if you think D&D magic is dull, you've never played a "Mage-by-flowchart" from GURPS. I like the system in GURPS, but it has all the flavor of corrugated cardboard. Things like ecentuating the nature of the spell-lists that are available is one way to customize them, and enforcing the often ignored restritcions is another (for example, how many mages actually carry a piece of fur and a glass rod in their inventories to cast spells? Beuller? Beuller?). But you have to do so in a responsible manner as DM, or else you're penalizing someone's choice in class, which is usually not that fun.

In terms of capabilities, each class has it's own emphasis, and the system reflects that, to a limited degree. The DM can reinforce that in many ways, all without changing the system, or making slight alterations.