D&D 5E D&D Magic: Does it Feel Magical to You?

[Tony Vargas]

So, I put the question to you, does D&D's magic feel magical to you?

To answer that question, you have to consider that D&D has two different kinds of magic. It has spells and other magical/supernatural abilities possessed by creatures, and it has magic items.

In classic D&D (which, to me, mostly means AD&D, especially 1e), memorized 'Vancian' spells never seemed that magical, to me. They felt more like some sort of very odd 'sufficiently advanced technology.' A D&D magic-user was like a soldier issued a selection of very specialized grenades and a swiss army knife instead of the usual rifle & bayonet. Conversely, magic items often felt pretty magical, some of them were quite recognizable from myth/legend/fiction - often, but not always: there were also some decidedly technological-feeling ones in the bunch.

3.5 managed to make more sense and inject some consistency into things. Most magic items worked like the spells of the casters who made the item. Spells weren't memorized but 'prepared.' I'm quite fond of consistency, so, on balance, that wasn't a bad thing at all. It did make magic across the board feel more like caster magic in 1e, a little less magical, a little more predictable, like a dependable, if not-well-understood, technology. Where 3.x did manage to make some magic feel more magical was with the Sorcerer and Warlock. One of the things that made traditional magic-user feel so weird was the way they could memorize any spell on in their book (clerics/druids any spell on their list, period), changing what they could do radically from day to day among a huge range of possibilities. The Sorcerer was still a times/day caster, but at least he had a set of known spells that didn't change too rapidly, allowing his brand of magic to be differentiated from the next caster's. Later, the Warlock (and war-mage, I suppose) came along and could cast something every round, which also seemed more magical than tossing a selection of highly-specialized grenades.

4e took all the casters more in the direction of the Sorcerer or Warlock, making them feel a great deal more distinctive at the individual character level, able to free do a few magical tricks most of the time, and thus a bit more magical. Likewise, it threw away the consistency of 3.x in having PCs, NPCs, and monsters all neatly using very similar rules (and spell lists), which was sad in its own right, but did have the benefit of making NPC/monster magic-use less like PC magic-use, and thus less familiar/predictable and more distinctive and 'magical.' It also added rituals, which necessarily feel a bit more like traditional (that is, RL traditional beliefs about) magic, than the combat-useable/point-and-shoot magic of D&D. Magic items became distinct from caster abilities again, but they also faded into the background a bit, because they were relatively low-impact.

While 5e hearkens back to a lot of the feel of the classic game, it does keep at-will cantrips and rituals for casters, which allow them to have a few frequently-used, slightly defining magical abilities, rather than just odd pick-a-set-of-grenades sufficiently-advanced-technology, though neo-Vancian 'slots' don't stray as far from that as they could (now each grenade is configurable in the field). Magic items, OTOH, are right back to feeling magical again.

In our last session a PC turned into a bear.

A bear!

Did it happen when he walked into The Enchanted Forest?

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

It doesn't feel terribly magical to me, no. More akin to Batman's Utility Belt ("Holy Magic Missile, Batman!", "Pass the Wound-Repellent Bat-Juice, Robin").

As others have said, the magic Items can feel much more magical, especially the rarer ones, but even they can have a Utility Belt aspect to them ("Time for a Figurine of Wondrous Bat-Power").

A magic system I really liked was from the 80s RPG, Maelstrom.

I traded away my copy years ago, but it essentially had no Spell Lists at all. Magick-users affected the 'Maelstrom' (read: Weave) and simply described what they wanted to happen.
The GM then makes them make a Knowledge check to see if they know the proper incantation (without having an Ars Magica style need to combine actual words), then a Will check (or checks, depending on how complex on a scale of 1-5 the desired effect is), to see if they pull it off...with the chance, especially at higher difficulties, of there being a Breach where the Maelstrom breaks through with unintended effects (read: free form version of Wild Magic Surge).

It being a percentile system, though, how easily translatable a system of this sort to D&D would be, is doubtful.

It did give the feel of a Jonathan Strange type of magic, where magic is a little more subtle, more personalised, and mysterious.

 

[Ulthur]

Ever increasingly, I'm starting to feel that no, magic isn't all that magical. It's just become so commonplace that it might as well not be magic at all. IME, this is due to two factors - 1. The upward spiral of just how much magic a character can use during an encounter and, 2. The number of magic using classes in the group.

Remember, typical groups used to be 3 fighter types, a cleric, wizard and thief. You only really had two spell casters and one of them had virtually no spells that applied in combat. Sure, you might be dropping Cure Lights after a combat, but, in combat? The cleric was far more likely to be a front line fighter than a spell caster. So, you really only had one character casting spells in a given encounter, and even then, probably only one or two spells for the entire encounter.

Compare to now. It's not unreasonable to have a group where 5 out of the 6 characters have spells that they can cast, and every class has spells that directly relate to combat and are widely applicable. Water Breathing might be a great spell, but, it's a pretty limited use choice. Now, every class has several broadly applicable spells at every single level. Plus the ability to jack up lower level spells into higher level slots for increased utility as well.

I've been beating this drum for a while, but, I do think it's a valid complaint (or I wouldn't be beating this drum... durrr). We've gone from a system where you might see a couple of spells cast in an entire encounter to a system where you see multiple spells being cast every single round of every encounter. Plus, with at-will utility spells, we can easily see magic being used in every single encounter period. It's very likely in a campaign to have magic being used in combat and out for every single scenario throughout the entire campaign.

D&D has dialed up magic to about an 8 out of 10 with 5e. And I'm feeling a bit bummed about it.

I JUST had this debate with the current group of players I'm DMing for, and I couldn't sell them. I hate how back in the day magic felt like a craft - only true specialists used it, and it took all their effort. Now everyone and their brother has some magic. Hell, bards just get to randomly pick two of anyone's spells, theme or source be damned! Even wizards now get two free spells with every level, instead of having to rely on finding and/or creating magic.

Back when I used to DM 3.5, I would ban the sorcerer class. If you want magic you gotta do the traditional wizard and worry about finding spells and protecting your spell book. Now with 5e there's no point; you would have to edit and rebalance every single class. I don't think there's a single class that doesn't have a variant that doesn't have spells available, even if it's via rituals.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Rarity aside (please), what are your opinions on how magical D&D magic feels to you?

I think rarity is one the major factors that makes it feel magical/special/mysterious - if not many people can do it, or do it often, you get superstitions and misunderstanding and fear and so on, which you don't get when magic is common and well understood.

So you want - I think- ideally very rare magic, it is mysterious and inherently dangerous - I like the idea of "dark and dangerous" magic - where each time you cast a spell, bad stuff might happen. Sure, your wizard PC might be well intentioned, but he doesn't fully understand how magic works (no-one does), it is a little bit unreliable, and from time to time, sh*t happens that no-one intended. This is not meant to be a direct "nerf" to magic - magic is still strong and powerful, it is just a little more mysterious/unreliable/inherently dangerous to not only the caster's enemies, but also possibly himself and our allies.

I suppose it is a kind of indirect nerf to casters - but I think the "magical" feeling you get is well worth it, and as long as the occasional unintended side effect has an equal chance of affecting enemies as opposed to the caster or ally - I don't think it is a nerf of any significant - it could well be a boon half the time.

 

[Imaculata]

Magic in any role playing system, or any edition of D&D, feels as magical as the DM is able to narrate it. It's less about the rules or the spells themselves, and more about what the magic is described to look like, and how the fictional world responds to it.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Even wizards now get two free spells with every level, instead of having to rely on finding and/or creating magic.

Back when I used to DM 3.5, I would ban the sorcerer class. If you want magic you gotta do the traditional wizard and worry about finding spells and protecting your spell book.

Wizards got two free spells each level in 3E as well, and one free spell each level in 1E and 2E. They've never had to rely solely on finding scrolls and the like. (Reference 1E DMG p. 39 and 3.5E PHB p. 57, for example evidence.)

 

[Ristamar]

If we're talking about magic as in something truly wondrous, then the answer is mostly "no." Player controlled magic usually doesn't feel particularly magical, nor did it ever feel very magical, nor does much else with codified rules and systems feel wondrous or magical once you understand how it works.

FWIW, I don't have a problem with any of the above.

If we're talking about magic as in player empowerment and enjoyment via his character's ability to conjure, craft, and wield cool powers above and beyond those clumsy, mundane martial types, then the answer is "yes, if you have a good DM."

 

[LoreMaps]

For me it's based on the spell effects, casting procedure (time or materials) and situation. Rituals for example do have a certain feel, or spells like Dream, teleportation circle or arcane eye to name a few. Other spells seems less impressive to me, like haste for example or rays. I find it nice to imagine my wizard using the materials instead of an arcane focus. Using materials makes the spells more wondrous in my eyes.

 

[Hussar]

I think, for me, part of the issue for magic seeming less... magical... is because so many of the caster classes essentially do the same thing. Sure, the cleric can cure light wounds. But, then again, so can the druid, ranger, bard and paladin (IIRC). Sure the wizard drops fireball. But, then again, so does the warlock, sorcerer, I'm sure at least one kind of druid and cleric can do so also.

There's no siloing of magical effects. Everyone can do everything - every caster gets a full suite of effects for combat, exploration and social interaction. How can magic feel special when everyone and their brother can do the same thing. It's like trying to make swinging a sword special. It's not. Anyone can swing their sword. Heh. We make fighters special by allowing them to swing their sword more often and better than anyone else.

But, as far as magic goes, when no one has a schtick, then, it becomes commonplace and humdrum. Fighter walks up, Action Surges and burns a couple of Superiority Dice and everyone knows that that's a Battlemaster. Character walks up and drops Fireball, he could be a cleric, druid, warlock, sorcerer or wizard. There's nothing special there.

 

[Imaculata]

One of my players plays a cleric, and he used a spell that conjures up force-based jaws against a bunch of undead. He told me that he wanted the spell to look like they were piranha jaws made out of water, so I told him that there was a small river nearby that he could use for that purpose. So the player made eager use of that, and narrated how his character conjured up these watery piranha jaws from the river, which then began to bite the enemy. A perfect example of a player being creative, and adding his own flair to the spell.

In another example, I told one of my players who plays a Druid, that whenever he teleports via trees he first walks a path that opens up into a sort of special fey forest. Basically, he needs to find some trees, and then he walks a forest path that normal people cannot see, which takes him to this pocket dimension. Its sort of like a hub, where other druids can also meet with one another. And if he wishes, he can then continue on to emerge from a forest somewhere else. Its a slight modification of the standard spell, but it adds more of a magical feel to it. Plus it also gives me the DM the opportunity to have him meet other Druids occasionally who also make use of this hub.

You can make any spell in any version of D&D feel magical, if you simply put in the effort to do a bit of storytelling. You don't have to stick to the literal description of the spell. Be creative with it, and describe what the spell looks like. When the Druid in my group casts Conjure Lightning, I tell the players that they see thunder clouds appear in the sky, and it also intimidates enemies. When someone casts Icestorm, I tell the players that they see a frosty blue cloud appear above them first, which then starts raining blocks of ice the size of a fist.