Do Magic Item "Shops" wreck the spirit of D&D?

[The Shaman]

As far as "handwaving"... that's the best part about Classic! If you're a Northman Fighter of Arnor, you get to do Rangerish things if you want, etc. Men of Laketown know about boating, veterans of Ithilien are also Rangerish, men of Rohan are expert riders, etc. I don't need a spreadsheet and 15 full-color supplements to do that stuff. That stuff is Baby Easy.

You are facing a problem of moving goal posts and shifting definitions. Since the people you are arguing with advance no definitions of what mysterious might be, they can say anything that they want and you can't call them on it because they aren't advancing any position or defend any position anything. You just are going to run around in circles listening continually to, "No, you're wrong. No, you're wrong."

You are also trying to prove a much stronger assertion than you really need to prove. You don't need to prove that magic meets some arbitrary standard for what is 'mysterious' in the past. All you have to prove is the relative assertion that it was more mysterious in the past than it is now. So any counter argument that it wasn't really 'mysterious' being advanced from someone with no firm or even open standard for what 'mysterious' is and who is just using the word as an emotional signifier ('It doesn't feel mysterious...') can together with a $1.98 buy you a coffee.

It should have been obvious that the thread was basically done when people were reduced to claiming, in defiance of the evidence of thier eyes and the text and the declaration in the text of the author's intent, that artifacts had been stated out in the 1st edition DMG.

Both QFT - double-true!

Do Magic Item "Shops" wreck the spirit of D&D?

Does the overcustomization and overtwinking of the game wreck the spirit of the game? Does it just become a Mario-Bro's game where you're just trying to get enough "coins?" Can you hear the blinging sound in your campaigns?

The "spirit" of D&D varies from group to group and player to player. For some it's a tactical wargame only slightly removed from chess, for others it's a framework from which to craft a shared story experience, and for others it's a mix of the two or possibly something else entirely.

My experience is that magic shops appeal to players who have a very specific concept for the character they want to play and want the opportunity to customize that character's gear to fit that image. The motivation isn't necessarily twinkery: it could be a player who wants her paladin to wield a holy avenger greatsword that was entrusted to her by the master of her order, something that is important to the player from a roleplaying standpoint as much or more than the mechanical advantage it confers. For this player, a +1/+3 v. trolls longsword found in a dungeon doesn't carry the same significance as the magic blade that was blessed by her deity and bourne by one of the founders of her order.

I can understand why a player running a thief character might want to convert a horn of Valhalla and a helmet of light to gauntlets of dexterity, an amulet of proof against poison, and a pair of boots and striding and springing, and a magic shop, however that's defined in the campaign-world, provides an opportunity to do so.

While I understand that style of play, it's not one that personally appeals to me, and it's not one that someone playing in the games I run should necessarily expect. In my 3.0 game, potions could be purchased relatively easily and scrolls were often available in large cities, but otherwise obtaining a specific magic item was very, very difficult. Wizards willing to craft items for adventurers were few and far between, and rarely were magic items bought and sold - they were more likely to be exchanged as gifts or loaned than purchased for mere gold, if they were available at all. The adventurers were more or less dependent on what they could recover while adventuring, so this was an aspect of character customization that for all intents and purposes wasn't open to them in the game.

In a 1e game many years ago, I did include one "magic shop," but like the Bazaar of the Bizarre, the goods were rarely what they seemed . . .

When I'm on the far side of the screen, I rarely run a character in which I postulate certain gear as essential to the concept, beyond mundane items for flavor. I prefer to let what the character encounters during the course of play determine if an item becomes a "part of the character." It's what I enjoy as a player, so playing in a world where magic items are a common commodity doesn't appeal to me.

 

[Storm Raven]

The list I outlined was not "woefully incomplete" as you woefully assert. In fact, it's woefully complete and woefully functional and we'd have a woefully good time with it.

It is woefully incomplete because you didn't cover even a tenth of what would need to be addressed to make LotR work. You didn't address numenoerans, and the related issue of rangers, clearly subsets of humans, and yet different. You didn't cover half-elves - which didn't appear in 'Classic" D&D, but would need to be added, and didn't resemble AD&D half-elves in much other than name. You didn't cover elves, which don't resemble D&D elves except in passing. You basically glossed over a wide variety of very salient problems.

And then when this gets pointed out, you got yourself in a huff.

So now we've gone to the old saw that nobody knew how to play D&D back then... we all just fumbled around and it somehow happened to be the world's most successful roleplaying game.

No, we got to the stage where everyone knows how to play D&D, but wonders why their characters aren't able to do all the cool special things that you gave to lake-men and rohirrim, and wonder how they can get those abilities, or why they can't other than "because I said so". You know, reasonable questions asked by players.

I'm sorry but that's just not how it was. If your Fighter is a woodsman, you can do woodsy things like track, survive in the woods, make shelter, etc. If your Fighter is a sailor than he can handle a ship, gauge the weather, etc. Just because it is freeform does NOT make it confusing.

If I'm a sailor and want to learn how to track, how do I do that?

Or I could rattle off any number of pointless speculations, too. I gave you a viable means of representing the sort of things that happen in LotR.

Means that don't fit what is described in the books. Hence, they are't very viable. Elrond takes days to cure Frodo, with assistance from Gandalf. How long does cure disease take to cast? That's not a very good fit.

What issue? Give them out as appropriate. Numenorean, Dwarven and Elven blades will usually be +1. Something like Narsil/Anduril is more powerful.

So, having characters laden with piles of magic items seems LotR-like to you? How about folding boats? Magic potions (didn't see any of those). Scrolls? Wands? And so on and so forth. Playing D&D "by the book" results in piles of magic items that just don't fit. Many of which are ubiquitous in D&D (potions and scrolls for example), one of which (scrolls) is almost necessary for wizards.

Well here we have the real explanation. "I have an anecdotal data set and therefore I will assume that everybody is as inept a DM as some guy(s) I played with back then." You really played with a dozen or so guys who all tried this and they all failed? OK. But nothing follows from that necessarily. Maybe they were a dozen guys who didn't know what they were doing.

Out of the dozen guys, at least half were excellent as DMs. About a quarter were pretty good. One was incompetent. All had troubles getting D&D to work in a LotR style.

You should really try to be a little bit more fair with people, particularly when they set out to honestly provide you with information.

The information you gave was perfunctory at best, and assumed that I didn't know anything about older editions of D&D. You assumed that I was some dumb ignoramus who just bounced in off the turnip truck and needed to be shown the "light" of classic D&D. Which is a huge and erroneous assumption on your part, and quite rude to boot. I have seen attempts to make D&D work as a LotR system, attempts made by very good DMs with quite willing players. None worked well. None worked nearly as well as LotR campaigns using different RPG systems (such campaigns often involving the same DMs and players as the failed D&D campaigns). I've seen classic D&D, I have copies of the game sitting on my bookshelf as I type this. I know what it can do, and what it isn't very good at doing.

 

[Storm Raven]

No...I contend that this is something that wouldn't necessarily happen. For example, in my campaigns during my 1e days, there were many items that were never fully identified.

Maybe in your campaign, but that's not the way the rules worked. Look at all of the published adventures for which sample characters are provided. If they have magical treasure, in no case is their treasure listed in anything other than an explicit manner (and it would have been almost trivially easy to make their treasure more opaque). When evaluating what the "standard" is, and I am confronted with the experience of a person in his home campaigns, and the evidence provided by dozens of published texts, I'll go with the published texts. And in those, magic was not only fully identifiable, it was expected to be fully identified.

Again, only assuming that the DM does not include additional variation of his own -- a process that is encouraged rather than discouraged by the RAW. Not to mention that several of those variables themselves have variable interpretations (and therefore variable effects in play).

And interesting element, however, not actually part of the rules of the game. House ruling is great, and most D&D campaigns I have played in have been rampant with house rules (moreso in the 2e era than any other, since that system seemed to need it more, but a lot in 1e, slightly less in 3e). But house rules are not a particularly good basis for discussion on this sort of issue, since they vary so much, and the original question concerned the "spirit" of D&D, which has to be based on the rules in the books - otherwise you are talking about "the spirit of Storm Raven's campaign" or the "spirit of Raven Crowking's campaign", which is an entirely different question.

 

[Maggan]

otherwise you are talking about "the spirit of Storm Raven's campaign" or the "spirit of Raven Crowking's campaign", which is an entirely different question.

Aaaah! When I read that I realised where my feeling of Deja Vu had been coming from all day.

Storm Raven and Raven Crowking. Raven and Raven.

Haven't you two been doing this dance in a lot of other threads as well? Did you ever convince one another of changing any views on the subject?

/M

 

[billd91]

But randomness isn't the issue at hand, because 3E has a "wealth by level" assumption, most of that wealth being in the form of gear. It doesn't matter if there's only a 25% chance of magic items in a treasure trove. By the time the PCs are done shopping, they'll have the items they want. 3E is laden with gear for this very reason.

3E isn't the only edition with a wealth by level assumption. Earlier editions had it as well, just not explicitly laid out. NPCs you encountered had particular chances at magical gear as laid out in the DMG, monsters invulnerable to non-magical weapons were rated at levels higher than similar ones that didn't. There wasn't a particular quantity laid out, but there were certainly assumptions made that characters got gear, increasingly powerful as they went up in levels, and were necessary to fight high level monsters (demons, devils, golems, etc).

 

[Raven Crowking]

It has to capture the feel of Tolkien's books. That's hard to define, but there was generally enough consensus on what that would be when the attempts were made that just about everyone was on the same page as far as what the goal was.

Yeah, that's the tough point in a discussion like this. I've played in games that had something of the feel of Tolkein's books without being anything like Middle Earth, and I've played in campaigns designed to be like Middle Earth that nonetheless failed to feel like Tolkein's books. It probably depends very much on what "pings" your "radar" in terms of Tolkein-book-ness, and what doesn't.

As far as the magic system goes, though, if players don't get to choose their spells, the DM can easily give spell lists that more closely reflect a Tolkeinian style of play....as they define the term. Some 1e spells, like fire seeds seem to be derived from Tolkein (The Hobbit in this case). Gandalf and Thorin say spells over the troll's loot to protect it as well. There seem to be various spells of opening....wizard lock and knock would certainly apply, just as fireball would not.

You might have to redo some of the classes, I would agree (although the rigid class system would work well enough for most characters, IMHO....better, in fact, than it would to reproduce many other works of fantasy fiction.)

I agree with you about MERP. In the case of MERP, I think the game failed (for me) because (1) it wanted to allow the PCs to do more than Tolkein envisioned as possible, and (2) the rolemaster system itself has too many charts.

For me, the essential quality of Tolkein's writing was to make things seem to reflect their Platonic ideal -- gold seems to possess more "goldness" than real gold, forests more "forestness", and so on. Rigid class structure is actually a boon in attempting this sort of world -- the Riders of Rohan are horsemen, through and through, and the rangers aren't closet clerics. YMMV, and obviously does.

I've seen my share of lousy DMs too - but many of the DMs I am talking about were, other than trying to use D&D for LotR, excellent in that role.

Yes, but you can be an excellent DM for some types of games, and yet be utterly unsuited to others.

For example, I don't GM Gamma World because, although I quite enjoy playing in it, I don't have the necessary strengths to make GMing it a satisfactory experience for me. While I can describe a smithy in great detail, and have a very good idea of what can be found within a grist mill, I am a lot more fuzzy on an abandoned oil refinery. If the PCs zig where I expect them to zag, I can't make the world seem as precise on the fly as I can with my D&D campaign. Likewise, I'd enjoy playing in Eberron, but the setting doesn't play to my strengths.

A DM who games to his strengths can create a great game. Going against your strengths can result in a good game, or a mediocre game. Often, if you go too far against your strengths, the result is a poor game. (And I don't mean "you" you, that's a sort of general "you" encompasing any given DM.)

It is also possible to be great GMing a particular setting type with a particular ruleset, but to be unable to breathe life into that setting type with another ruleset. It doesn't mean that the ruleset can't do that setting type; it means that it is a bad match for that GM. I am using a modified version of the D20 System to run Doctor Who. I'm not great at running Doctor Who using Time Lord or the FASA ruleset. That doesn't mean that it can't be done, or even that it is the fault of those rulesets.

Those conclusions aren't warranted by the available evidence. In effect, they become a matter of faith, rather than a reasoned conclusion.

RC

 

[apoptosis]

...

My experience is that magic shops appeal to players who have a very specific concept for the character they want to play and want the opportunity to customize that character's gear to fit that image. The motivation isn't necessarily twinkery: it could be a player who wants her paladin to wield a holy avenger greatsword that was entrusted to her by the master of her order, something that is important to the player from a roleplaying standpoint as much or more than the mechanical advantage it confers. For this player, a +1/+3 v. trolls longsword found in a dungeon doesn't carry the same significance as the magic blade that was blessed by her deity and bourne by one of the founders of her order.

While I understand that style of play, it's not one that personally appeals to me, and it's not one that someone playing in the games I run should necessarily expect. In my 3.0 game, potions could be purchased relatively easily and scrolls were often available in large cities, but otherwise obtaining a specific magic item was very, very difficult. Wizards willing to craft items for adventurers were few and far between, and rarely were magic items bought and sold - they were more likely to be exchanged as gifts or loaned than purchased for mere gold, if they were available at all. The adventurers were more or less dependent on what they could recover while adventuring, so this was an aspect of character customization that for all intents and purposes wasn't open to them in the game...

When I'm on the far side of the screen, I rarely run a character in which I postulate certain gear as essential to the concept, beyond mundane items for flavor. I prefer to let what the character encounters during the course of play determine if an item becomes a "part of the character." It's what I enjoy as a player, so playing in a world where magic items are a common commodity doesn't appeal to me.

That is a great post Shaman, wanted to say basically the same thing myself, but apparently I dont have to.

Apoptosis

 

[Bardsandsages]

If I may chime in with the one issue that seems to be the real problem:

The Character does not know what the Player knows.

There is no problem with having a magical shop. There is a problem with a 5th level fighter walking into said shop (with no ranks in Knowledge arcane or spellcraft) and asking to buy a +2 keen defending longsword. or a rogue with no appropriate ranks requesting a mage craft +3 moderate fortification leather armor with silent moves and shadow. The players can only request items that are within their knowledge. Now the fighter can walk in and ask the shopkeeper if he has any longswords that might be of interest, to which the shopkeeper can show his wares.

It's like someone who has no knowledge of computers walking into Best Buy or Circuit City for the first time. They aren't going to articulate the exact nature of the computer they want. All they are going to say is "I need something that will run World of Warcraft" or whatever else it is. They may or may not end up with what they want.

If magic shops, or trading magical items, is ruining the game, that is the fault of the DM, because the DM is allowing out of character information to dictate in character actions.

Most major cities in my game do have magic shops. And the players have learned to adapt their purchasing habits to actually roleplay. Sometimes the players find honest merchants and get great deals. Other times they get ripped off by high pressure salesmen trying to offload a lot of +1 shortswords. And sometimes they make the mistake of going to a Thayan enclave and buying in bulk. It's part of the fun.

 

[Pielorinho]

And then when this gets pointed out, you got yourself in a huff.

Moderator's Notes

Again, folks, posting politely, courteously, and respecfully is not difficult, and if you cannot do it, you will receive a ban from the site.

Check your email, Storm Raven.

The rest of you: best behavior.

Daniel

 

[Celebrim]

It is woefully incomplete because you didn't cover even a tenth of what would need to be addressed to make LotR work. You didn't address numenoerans, and the related issue of rangers, clearly subsets of humans, and yet different. You didn't cover half-elves - which didn't appear in 'Classic" D&D, but would need to be added...

Oh, I see the problem.

Elrond Half-Elven got his name from his parentage. But he was fully 100% elf. There is no such thing as a Half-Elven racial type in the LotR. Anyone that gave Elrond different racial modifiers than those of any other elf, clearly didn't understand the situation. There are no racial 'half-elfs', and Arwen is not 'quarter elvish'. Conversely, if someone doesn't cover half-elves, it suggests strongly to me that there is a chance that they know that half-elves don't need to be covered. But, since none of this was clear to you, it seems that what constitutes 'the proper feel' of the LoTR to you appears to be entirely subjective.

So, having characters laden with piles of magic items seems LotR-like to you? How about folding boats?

You think folding boats would be hard for a DM to keep out of the campaign?