What D&Disms have you never liked?

[Starfox]

Dark Sun's real roots lie in Jack Vance's Dying Earth, which was clearly a huge inspiration for the setting (apocalyptic swords-and-sorcery world beneath a bloated and dying crimson sun). It would have done better to cut its ties with Tolkien altogether.

Beyond the sun and nearness of the end, I don't really see any similarity. Dying Earth is a decadent place full of indulgent people fighting boredom. Dark Sun is a half empty barbarian place, with the remnants fighting for survival.

To me Dark Sun is more like Gamma World in fantasy. Including mutants. Eberron is closer to Dying Earth than Dark Sun IMHO, but still way to energetic.

I do agree that Dark Sun could have used less nonhumans, tough.

 

[Steel_Wind]

I have always hated the buying and selling of magic items as readily available commodities in D&D.

When magic is that common, it's not magic; it's technology by other means. Once that level of commonaility is assumed concerning magic in a D&D game setting, none of the supposedly "magical medieval" nature of the game world makes any sense.

I hated it in 1st and 2nd Ed. I positively despised it in 3.xx. and things are not a whole lot better in 4E, either.

Magic items are the salt of a FRPG; the chocolate in one's dessert.

With every successive iteration of D&D (perhaps peaking in 3rd ed) the salt became so intense that it overwhelemed any other taste in the stew.

Put another way, the chocolate in the dessert of 1st ed became the meat and potatoes in the underlying game system by ver 3.5.

I HATE it. I always have.

 

[Leatherhead]

When magic is that common, it's not magic; it's technology by other means. Once that level of commonaility is assumed concerning magic in a D&D game setting, none of the supposedly "magical medieval" nature of the game world makes any sense.

I never believed this argument. Normal people used to practice rituals and magic all the time. Heck, some still do. Throwing salt over the shoulder to prevent bad luck is a good example. You don't think stuff like that is technological do you?

 

[Steel_Wind]

I never believed this argument. Normal people used to practice rituals and magic all the time. Heck, some still do. Throwing salt over the shoulder to prevent bad luck is a good example. You don't think stuff like that is technological do you?

No, they didn't. "Normal people" (and I highly doubt they were ever truly "normal") pretended to practice magic. And then, like now, it never, ever, not even once, actually worked.

Which would be a rather profound difference between superstition and actual, real "magic".

When magic is dependable, predictable, demonstrably effective and tradeable as a commodity in a large and public marketplace - it's no longer "magic" in terms of its effects in the game world. It then becomes technology by other means and will be integrated in the political economy on that basis.

There is a pretty big difference between a Wand of cure light wounds or a Potion of Gasseous Form and tossing a pinch of salt over the shoulder. The wand and potion do not depend upon a subjective belief structure in the practitioner in order to be objectively evaluated as to whether or not they "work".

 

[Leatherhead]

No, they didn't. "Normal people" (and I highly doubt they were ever truly "normal") pretended to practice magic. And then, like now, it never, ever, not even once, actually worked.

Which would be a rather profound difference between superstition and actual, real "magic".

When magic is dependable, predictable, demonstrably effective and tradeable as a commodity in a large and public marketplace - it's no longer "magic" in terms of its effects in the game world. It then becomes technology by other means and will be integrated in the political economy on that basis.

Oh, you card you. What is "real" magic?

On the one hand you say being dependable makes something not-magic, on the other hand you say being subjective makes it not-magic. What is left, pure randomness?

 

[Dausuul]

Oh, you card you. What is "real" magic?

On the one hand you say being dependable makes something not-magic, on the other hand you say being subjective makes it not-magic. What is left, pure randomness?

What's left is something that's powerful and real, but also unruly and dangerous.

It's the difference between a ring of invisibility and the One Ring; they both turn you invisible--a verifiable, non-subjective effect--but the first is a mere tool while the second is a powerful entity with a will of its own. You can count on the ring of invisibility to make you invisible any time you need it. Depending on the One Ring to do the same is a slightly risky proposition... most of the time, it'll work just like the ring of invisibility, but there's always the danger that it may decide its ends are better served by revealing you to your enemies, and slip off your finger without warning. And meanwhile it's corrupting your heart and soul, of course.

The tough part is translating that concept into game mechanics without placing an overwhelming burden on either the player or the DM.

 

[jdrakeh]

really though that is not a fault of LotR.

it is a fault of the wargame origins. Chainmail in particular.

It might just be me, but I also think that a lot of the rules in Chainmail also seem to be derived from LotR where non-humans are concerned.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Oh, you card you. What is "real" magic?

On the one hand you say being dependable makes something not-magic, on the other hand you say being subjective makes it not-magic. What is left, pure randomness?

No, I didn't say that. You did.

What I said was linked with conjunctive (not disjunctive) commas and the qualities were finalized by the use of the word "and", not "or". (I'm not a rules lawyer in my game sessions - but I am a lawyer in real life. )

When "magic" is all of those things, the game world which would result from it would be radically different then it is portrayed to be. Those qualities make magic rather mundane and the world will evolve to integrate it fully into its economy, social architecture and political and military world setting. What it would look like doesn't match up with what is suggested in the official settings.

So your cities are lit with continual light streetlamps in a 2E setting and similar rocks are sold for lighting in people's homes, etc.. The result is certainly "fantastical", but the underlying world setting that would arise from that power level (and commonality) of magic would be a very different world than the medieval fantasy worlds the D&D rule systems present. It would look a lot more like an urban fantasy -- and a lot less like a medieval fantasy kingdom.

That's my problem with those "D&Disms". They would produce a radically different world than their official settings portray.

 

[Hussar]

I can get behind what Steel Wind is saying here. It's not that the magic works, it's that it works consistantly every time. Fireball produces the identical effect (barring damage) every single time. If you were to find a way to make Fireball permanent, you have a massive heat source that never runs out.

I really do think SW hits it on the head. D&D magic would produce an Urban Fantasy setting like say Eberron, much more than it would produce something like Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. There are just too many cheap, easy to produce magics that would have massive cultural effects on the setting.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Exactly. Setting aside the implications of easily available Wands of Cure Light Wounds, consider the simple implications of 0 Level magic items from Prestidigitation and Mending in 3.5.

In a setting where magic is rare, those things are, well... magical. Sorceror's Apprentice and all that.

But in a rules system which mandates that such things are cheap and readily available for purchase or sale ....what are they then and what does it mean for the rest of the world?

It means theere are magical vacuum cleaners, cooking additives, pot stirrers & pot scrubbers and clothes washing machines and magical brooms that sweep the floor and keep it tidy. The list goes on and on.

Technology-by-other-means.

What you have in the result is not a world setting where the lower and middle classes eek out a living in Poverty, Pestilence, and Inequality. You no longer have something that resmbles Ill Met in Lankhmar or even The Sign of the Prancing Pony near Bree. The Shire? It vanishes under the all pervasive magic salt shaker.

What you have instead is something straight out of The Burrow in Harry Potter. When your adventurers go shopping for their readily available magic items? You're not in the Plaza of Dark Delights anymore. You end up in Diagon Alley.

Interesting? Sure. But once you make magic available for easy purchase or sale by PCs - the inevitable conclusion is that the same thing is available to NPCs too. The implications of your power gamer gameist mechanic turns into something far more profound in terms of its rational effects.

Sorry. That's just not the kind of game I've ever wanted to run. So I hate that aspect to D&D. I always have -- and always will.