No More 15-Minute Adventuring Day: Campsites

[Jhaelen]

D&D magic is not the least bit supernatural. It's physics; do this, do that, and a ball of fire shoots from your fingertips.

Ah, nope. It only works if you happen to be a magic user of a sufficiently high level. It it was physics everyone could do it by reproducing what the magic user is doing, i.e. utter nonsense phrases and wave your limbs in erratic patterns.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Ah, nope. It only works if you happen to be a magic user of a sufficiently high level. It it was physics everyone could do it by reproducing what the magic user is doing, i.e. utter nonsense phrases and wave your limbs in erratic patterns.

Add to that the fact that some an achieve identical results without going through the same steps.

It's almost physics...but not quite.

 

[jonesy]

The real reason was to prevent him from overshadowing the other heroes, which shouldn't be an issue if you've got a party where all the PCs are roughly the same level. Book writing bears little resemblance to actual gaming.

Which was my point exactly. Using Gandalf as an example for something in a game gets really silly really fast.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Enter the DM.

When you create a world where time doesn't matter, a plot which waits for the PCs and a dungeon which does not react to intrusion of course the 15MWD will happen as it is just the safest way to proceed.
But that is not a failure of the game system.

You don't have to create a world where time doesn't matter to encourage the 15MWD.

A DM might want to challenge his players, inadvertently forcing those players to nova or die. In this scenario, players are forced to rest after most combats because a second combat will almost certainly kill them.

A DM might want to use wandering monsters at night, but make those encounters a little too frequent and/or a bit too challenging. In this case, the players might end the adventuring day early, keeping strength in reserve in case the next rest brings danger. To do otherwise would be to risk a TPK.

Both of those styles can exist within a world that is alive and reacts to the PCs. In fact, I expect that the latter case is more likely to be found in that kind of world.

The 15MWD is by no means necessarily a fault of the players. The DM can do much to either encourage or discourage this style of play and, as [MENTION=40166]prosfilaes[/MENTION] mentioned, so can the system.

 

[prosfilaes]

Ah, nope. It only works if you happen to be a magic user of a sufficiently high level. It it was physics everyone could do it by reproducing what the magic user is doing, i.e. utter nonsense phrases and wave your limbs in erratic patterns.

When I go to a physics conference and utter nonsense phrases in the way that Stephen Hawking does, it doesn't work. When I go to play tennis and wave my limbs in erratic patterns the way Andre Agassi does, it doesn't work. I think physics things can be a little more complex then you imply.

"So you want to be a wizard" has colored my view of wizardry. In particular, it's not just nonsense phrases; it's specifying a bunch of properties in a terribly precise language. Perhaps in D&D the wizard has to factor in his location, the relative location of his target, the phase of the moon, the quantity (and quality) of the elements in the vicinity, etc. Nothing that someone without incredible training and a certain innate intelligence could do.

Perhaps there is something more. That doesn't mean it's not physics; I mean, Michael Jordan can reach things I can't, and I can slam-dunk in ways that he can't. (Seriously, have you have seen MJ try to slam-dunk a 3-ft tall hoop? It's silly how bad he is at it.) The fact that only people with certain innate skills and the right training can handle magic doesn't make it not physics.

 

[Gentlegamer]

re: D&D magic

The component that only wizards can do is the "memorization." Over the editions I think that term has become a bit fuzzy and had different meanings, but it originally specifically meant the the storing of mnemonic energy in the mind that is released by certain triggers. When a wizard "memorizes" a spell, he is imprinting his mind with a type of energy pattern. In OD&D, the spellcasting was wholly mnemonic, with verbal triggers releasing the spell. AD&D's spellcasting mixed mnemonic with sympathetic magic (inspired from the "Harold Shea" stories, "The Roaring Trumpet, Mathematics of Magic," et al) to include material and somatic (gestural) components.

All this adds up to a level of skill and training required for spellcasting that cannot just be mimicked by an onlooker, particularly the mnemonic part.

 

[Jhaelen]

When I go to a physics conference and utter nonsense phrases in the way that Stephen Hawking does, it doesn't work.

What is "it"? And what does talking about physics have to do with being affected by physics?

When I go to play tennis and wave my limbs in erratic patterns the way Andre Agassi does, it doesn't work. I think physics things can be a little more complex then you imply.

I'm not sure what you're talking about here? Are you trying to say that playing tennis is applying physics or something?
Anyway, if you dedicated as much time to playing tennis as Andre Agassi did, it's not unlikely you'd be similarly good at it. This doesn't have anything to do with your or his understanding of physics, though.
The laws of physics just ensure that the results of waving your tennis racket will be exactly the same as when Andre Agassi does, assuming all of the relevant parameters are identical, i.e. the ball's motion and speed, your motion and speed, the wind's, etc.

"So you want to be a wizard" has colored my view of wizardry. In particular, it's not just nonsense phrases; it's specifying a bunch of properties in a terribly precise language.

I'm not sure if D&D explicitly mentions anywhere what it takes to become a wizard.

I think, it's entirely setting-dependent what is required to become a wizard. At one end of the scale it's something everyone can do and indeed uttering nonsense syllables is all it takes (if that).
Ursula K. LeGuin's Earthsea magic is like that: Speak a thing's truename and you gain power over it. Training is only required because the 'Language of Creation' is tricky to use and pronounce and there's a ton of truenames to learn.

On the other end of the scale it's something you must be born with. E.g. in Mythic Europe, Ars Magica's default setting you're either born with 'The Gift' or not. No amount of studying or training will ever enable you to cast the simplest cantrip if you don't have it.

In D&D 3e and later this is comparable to the difference between wizards and sorcerers. Still, 'Wizardry' is not a skill like 'Athletics'. So you must have levels in a spellcasting class or you cannot do it (well okay, in 4e it only takes a feat...).

That doesn't mean it's not physics; I mean, Michael Jordan can reach things I can't, and I can slam-dunk in ways that he can't. (Seriously, have you have seen MJ try to slam-dunk a 3-ft tall hoop? It's silly how bad he is at it.) The fact that only people with certain innate skills and the right training can handle magic doesn't make it not physics.

You aren't talking about physics. Physics means that if you have the same size and distribution of mass as Michael Jordan (i.e. your muscles are exactly as strong as his) you can jump exactly as high as him.

Of course if you aren't as large as he is, you'll never get to test it out and even if you were, acquiring the same distribution of mass will probably take a couple of years of regular training, but this isn't a question of physics!

 

[prosfilaes]

Anyway, if you dedicated as much time to playing tennis as Andre Agassi did, it's not unlikely you'd be similarly good at it.

I don't agree, but in any case, I think it makes the case that magic can be natural without coming naturally to every shlub without training, represented as class levels. Getting hung up on physics I think misses my point; that D&D magic is entirely unmysterious, to players and even to people in the setting. Yes, people can come up with new spells, but that's like a new app for your phone. In practice, it doesn't even have the unpredictability of modern technology.

So you must have levels in a spellcasting class or you cannot do it (well okay, in 4e it only takes a feat...).

In 3e there are any number of feats that grant limited casting of three zero level spells.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I don't agree, but in any case, I think it makes the case that magic can be natural without coming naturally to every shlub without training, represented as class levels. Getting hung up on physics I think misses my point; that D&D magic is entirely unmysterious, to players and even to people in the setting. Yes, people can come up with new spells, but that's like a new app for your phone. In practice, it doesn't even have the unpredictability of modern technology.

The 1E DMG contained notes about spells that players would discover through trial and error.

 

[Jhaelen]

Getting hung up on physics I think misses my point; that D&D magic is entirely unmysterious, to players and even to people in the setting.

And I think you are missing my point: In order for magic to be "mysterious" (whatever that means - see below) it doesn't have to be mysterious to the players. That's simply a matter of roleplaying and presentation.

Magic being mysterious to people in the setting is completely setting-dependent. I'd also like to note that physics is at least as mysterious as magic in a majority of fantasy settings!

Eberron is a good example of a setting where magic is largely not mysterious. But for most other (D&D) settings, magic is definitely mysterious.

Anyway, I think you're actually using the wrong term in your argument. You seem to be concerned about predictability, not mysteriousness. If you want unpredictability, all it takes is a (skill) check to determine if (and possibly to what degree) a spellcasting attempt is successful. Imho, it's arguably a weakness of D&D in every edition that spellcasting is not treated as a skill just like to-hit rolls should really be derived from skills. But that's a separate issue and does not affect "mysteriousness" in and of itself.