D&D 5E Magic Item Creation: Which book should contain rules for magic item creation?

[Umbran]

In that case it needn't be a magic item. It could be a compliment from the king.

If that's in line with one of the character goals, yes. Rather less so if the character hates the king and wants to depose him. But, yes, you don't need to give magic items. Nobody's arguing that magic is the *ONLY* reward available.

Do you know anyone that has major hobbies, or a job that calls for them to personally own equipment relevant to their tasks? Such people are often have their days made better when they are given relevant equipment. It shouldn't really be a surprise, or arguable, that a magic sword would often be appealing to a fighter, or the player whose hobby is running that character.

Really, guys, this isn't rocket science. There are times when the high-concept gaming theory gets in the way of remembering there are people playing the game. Just people. Not theoretical emotionless people with theoretical game agendas. But this guy named Joe who likes killing orcs.

 

[Balesir]

I am saying that one goal of the game is immersion, and that you appear to not only prefer to disassociate from immersion, but to deride those who do enjoy it.

Ah, I see; no. I accept immersion as a valuable part of the enjoyment of playing the game.

The emphasis there is because it's useful and enjoyable (among other things) during the actual play of a roleplaying game. Where I would disagree that it is useful is in the design or planning of a roleplaying game. These are two very different activities with very different requirements.

Playing an RPG while "inhabiting the mindspace" of a character in the game world makes sense. Trying to design the game world while inhabiting such mind space does not make sense. That's what I'm saying.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I voted DMG, because I don't always use the IC rules RAW. No use confusing the players.

 

[billd91]

Ah, I see; no. I accept immersion as a valuable part of the enjoyment of playing the game.

The emphasis there is because it's useful and enjoyable (among other things) during the actual play of a roleplaying game. Where I would disagree that it is useful is in the design or planning of a roleplaying game. These are two very different activities with very different requirements.

Playing an RPG while "inhabiting the mindspace" of a character in the game world makes sense. Trying to design the game world while inhabiting such mind space does not make sense. That's what I'm saying.

I don't think anyone's advocating designing the game while inhabiting the mind space of a player character. Rather, I'd say that an RPG's design and setting need to reflect that a significant goal of such games is that immersion goal. Having rewards aimed in that direction - gratification of a PC's goals, whatever they are - is an important and necessary ingredient.

 

[Balesir]

That's irrelevant. It doesn't matter that they are the same reward - it is sufficient to note that the player *does* get something out of it.

If you think the person does get something out of it, fine - let's discuss what they get out of it, not what we might imagine that an imaginary character might get out of it, if they were real.

No, the form is important. Players frequently form attachments to their PCs - rewarding the PC makes use of the emotional attachment. You can ignore that connection, but you're discarding a strong and useful tool in so doing.

Yes, the player may well form an attachment with the character, but if we are to make a good judgement of whether the "reward" is useful for our game objectives, we should consider the value of the reward to the player, not to the character. In other words, a reward is "useful" or "not useful" based on its value to the player, not on its value to the character.

In addition, rewarding the player through the character helps makes sure the character action and player actions are aligned. If you reward the player through a method that isn't directly connected to the character, you risk unintended consequences.

Now, there's a hole with no bottom. If you want to talk "unintended consequences" let's talk about how the "reward" is justified and by whom. I honestly think that, if we are getting into someone consciously deciding upon rewards for players/characters then the nature of that reward is relatively small beer, as far as "unintended consequences" are concerned.

No, because that reward is not *meaningful*. Rewards that have no impact are like a stilted pat-on-the-back. Give them something that means something to the function of the character, they'll recognize the value.

The player might superficially see any sort of "power up" as a good thing, sure. But let's pause and consider a minute; a character power up means either:

a) That challenges and opposition will get harder to compensate, in which case this was a reward how?

b) That the mission/task/quest to be achieved will be easier and quicker to achieve, removing both challenge and time spent "enjoying the journey" - again, not a great "reward".

or c) That the power-up has little relevance to the particular challenges to be overcome, which also doesn't sound like much of a "reward".

In the end, although I can see that being "awarded" magic items might provide a momentary frisson for some players, I can't really see them as useful rewards in the overall structure of the game design.

 

[Balesir]

I don't think anyone's advocating designing the game while inhabiting the mind space of a player character. Rather, I'd say that an RPG's design and setting need to reflect that a significant goal of such games is that immersion goal. Having rewards aimed in that direction - gratification of a PC's goals, whatever they are - is an important and necessary ingredient.

OK, that justifies the inclusion of magic item(s) for those player-characters whose character goal amounts to "get a magic sword" or something similar. Are such characters ubiquitous, or even common, in your games? What about any other characters - should they not get any magic items?

 

[Umbran]

The emphasis there is because it's useful and enjoyable (among other things) during the actual play of a roleplaying game. Where I would disagree that it is useful is in the design or planning of a roleplaying game. These are two very different activities with very different requirements.

Let me get this straight. You would prefer they design and plan... ignoring how people play?

If I am designing software, I should... ignore the fact that people use some kind of pointing device to interact with the software?

Trying to design the game world while inhabiting such mind space does not make sense. That's what I'm saying.

Okay, that clarifies somewhat.

Trying to design the game world knowing that many players will inhabit such mind space seems pretty crucial. One might, in fact, choose to try to inhabit the mind spaces of various types of players before and during design, so that you gain some understanding of them to serve their needs and desires. That seems eminently reasonable.

Some folks might even call that wacky activity, "playtesting".

 

[Balesir]

Some folks might even call that wacky activity, "playtesting".

I would say it's "playtesting" if you get some other people actually playing the game with that (and other) mindsets. Doing it by a bit of impromptu roleplaying of your own is more of a "design assessment via thought experiment".

 

[billd91]

The player might superficially see any sort of "power up" as a good thing, sure. But let's pause and consider a minute; a character power up means either:

a) That challenges and opposition will get harder to compensate, in which case this was a reward how?

b) That the mission/task/quest to be achieved will be easier and quicker to achieve, removing both challenge and time spent "enjoying the journey" - again, not a great "reward".

or c) That the power-up has little relevance to the particular challenges to be overcome, which also doesn't sound like much of a "reward".

In the end, although I can see that being "awarded" magic items might provide a momentary frisson for some players, I can't really see them as useful rewards in the overall structure of the game design.

Sure, they may mean those things with your particular spin on them. But I think they all suggest a dysfunctional mentality toward the game and players. They could mean:

a) That the players will be able to take on tougher challenges, enabling them to survive deeper into the story or risky environment where the rewards are even better and more interesting.

b) That the mission/task/quest to be achieved will be easier and quicker to achieve, enabling the players to take on more quests and tasks without getting bogged down in frustrating slogs. Yay!

or c) That the power-up has little relevance to the previously planned challenges so the GM uses the new powers to open up new and more varied play environments now that the PC have the ability to enter or interact them.

The idea is, ultimately, to let the players enjoy the fruits of their labor. If they get a boost that makes things a little easier (and really, a +1 weapon is nice but only 5% better), don't take it away... unless they specifically ask for it or deliberately seek out tougher challenges (which have appropriately greater rewards). If they get a boost that gives them a new ability, like a flying carpet, design the adventures to make use of it from time to time.

 

[Mistwell]

OK, that justifies the inclusion of magic item(s) for those player-characters whose character goal amounts to "get a magic sword" or something similar. Are such characters ubiquitous, or even common, in your games? What about any other characters - should they not get any magic items?

Yes. It's an extremely common goal - to obtain items of power, that make the characters more powerful in the world, and which enable them to take on greater challenges. Similarly, it's a common goal in THIS world to obtain rarer, more powerful, more valuable items. There is a reason people want houses, cars, computers, cell phones, etc.. Magic items are one of the major valuable commodities in that imaginary world.

For those characters who do not desire magic items, yes they usually get something else. For example in my 5e game, most of the characters now have a magic weapon, but the mage had no desire for such, and so he ended up with an enemy spellbook and the means of using that spellbook to add spells to his own spellbook with it. The player was as thrilled with that, as the fighter was with his magical glaive.