Are Rituals Vaporware?

[Lanefan]

The game seems to have made a very conscious effort to NOT supply rules for a lot of non-encounter situations, leaving the decisions, instead, to the DM.

*If* that is true...and if there's some guidelines for new DMs as to how to handle these decisions...then it's a major point in favour of 4e design. But let's wait and see; I somewhat expect there'll be some non-encounter stuff included, I only hope it's not just a hodge-podge that takes care of the easy stuff but leaves the sticky bits for the DM to chew on.

Lanefan

 

[Rechan]

One-shot? Yes.
Learnable and repeatable? Yes.
Expensive and time-consuming? Yes.
Limited in availability by the DM? Yes.

This.

We know a few more things about Rituals:

You need a feat to use rituals. Wizards and clerics get it for free. This from a Gamer Zero interview with (I believe) James Wyatt.

We also have this from Keith Baker:

Point number two is one I have to approach with caution, because it's something that hasn't been fully revealed. And that's magic. The core, original idea of Eberron was that arcane magic was essentially a form of science - and that as a science, it ought to be incorporated into society over time and used to provide the basic services we've developed with technology: transportation, medicine, communication, entertainment, warfare, and so on. And we did the best we could, using dragonshard focus items and magewrights. The problem is that Vancian magic really doesn't lend itself to this principle. The concept is that the streets of the cities of Khorvaire are lit by continual flame. But when a magewright specializing in this spell can still only cast it once or twice a day, how many weeks will it take him to light Main Street? What does he do for the rest of the day after casting the spells? We just went ahead with it, saying that the most critical functions were provided by reusable magic items (like the Sivis speaking stones). But it wasn't really what I wanted - a world in which magewright could be a true occupation, not something where you could blow your professional specialty in five minutes.

Here's where I really can't reveal anything, because if someone official hasn't already explained how it works, I sure shouldn't be spilling the beans. However, I will say that the way non-combat magic (rituals) work creates a far stronger foundation for a magical economy than Vancian magic did. It's a system where it's clear how that lamplighter can put in a full day of work, as opposed to burning out his power with a single spell. So again, Eberron was founded on 3E, and the idea that magic was a force that followed logical patterns, that could be reliably controled by formula and ritual, and which could be taught - but Vancian magic always put some limits on the logic of a truly magical society. The rules for rituals make the idea of a professional, full-time magewright a simple and logical idea - and in fact, the system is such that it doesn't even require the existence of a separate magewright class.

So NPCs can take rituals and do the magic thingie. In one thread on these forums, Keith mentioned one spell that is a ritual: Gentle Repose. Which an NPC mortician could use to make big bucks, etc etc.

 

[muffin_of_chaos]

Vancian magic is basically the idea that a magic-user can cast a certain number of very specifically-defined spells per day that they can use before they sleep (or meditate in the case of elves). This applies to anyone who can cast an organized spell, including Dragons.
All spells of a certain "level" are grouped together so that you can pick whether or not to cast Wish and Foresight any given waking cycle.
Why would it work this way? No one knows. That's the problem.

 

[Voss]

And nor should they, really. The game seems to have made a very conscious effort to NOT supply rules for a lot of non-encounter situations, leaving the decisions, instead, to the DM. I see this as a feature, not a missing element. 3E made a very great effort at hitting the other side of the spectrum and I found out that it wasn't for me, so this aspect of 4E is just what I'm after.

No, we just haven't seen a lot of non-combat situations. We have very little idea about how they're actually handling rules on everything else.


@Stogoe- thats kind of awesome. I want to see someone do a research paper on the humours of the internet. Spite, nitpicking, deranged optimism and lust? (Can't forget the porn, after all).

 

[hong]

No, we just haven't seen a lot of non-combat situations. We have very little idea about how they're actually handling rules on everything else.

The only piece of noncombat information we've had is skill challenges and tiers of play.

The only TWO pieces of noncombat information we've had are skill challenges, tiers of play and multiclassing.

The only THREE pieces of noncombat information we've had are skill challenges, tiers of play, multiclassing and paragon paths.

The only FOUR pieces of noncombat information we've had are skill challenges, tiers of play, multiclassing, paragon paths and racial benefits.

... mang, that was the BEST part of Life of Brian.

 

[Fifth Element]

... mang, that was the BEST part of Life of Brian.

You've added a bit of the Spanish Inquisition sketch there, too.

 

[hong]

You've added a bit of the Spanish Inquisition sketch there, too.

Don't be ridiculous. The Spanish Inquisition killing Inigo Montoya's father was the best part of the Princess Bride.

 

[Kordeth]

The only piece of noncombat information we've had is skill challenges and tiers of play.

The only TWO pieces of noncombat information we've had are skill challenges, tiers of play and multiclassing.

The only THREE pieces of noncombat information we've had are skill challenges, tiers of play, multiclassing and paragon paths.

The only FOUR pieces of noncombat information we've had are skill challenges, tiers of play, multiclassing, paragon paths and racial benefits.

... mang, that was the BEST part of Life of Brian.

Much as I hate to ruin a perfectly good Python gag (though I don't remember this one from Life of Brian, are you sure you're not thinking of the Spanish Inquisition?), I think only skill challenges can really be called "noncombat."

- Tiers of play is more of a meta-concept, and primarily deals with what you fight.

- Multiclassing is all about acquiring other classes' powers, all but the utility powers of which are entirely devoted to combat.

- Paragon paths give you new combat abilities and powers.

- Racial benefits, so far, are almost all combat abilities or relate to combat.

 

[hong]

- Tiers of play is more of a meta-concept, and primarily deals with what you fight.

- Multiclassing is all about acquiring other classes' powers, all but the utility powers of which are entirely devoted to combat.

- Paragon paths give you new combat abilities and powers.

- Racial benefits, so far, are almost all combat abilities or relate to combat.

They all fall under the category of noncombat. Tiers of play deals with the challenges you face and your role in the milieu. This might happen to involve fighting, but only to the extent that the game as a whole involves fighting. Multiclassing is about acquring other classes' powers, and if this involves combat powers, this is to the extent that everyone gets combat powers. Paragon paths give you a way to explore and expand your role in the milieu again, and are a hook for further character developments apart from extra ways to fight. Racial benefits are about playing a different race, and do not have to involve combat.

If you define "noncombat information" as "stuff that can only be used out of combat", then yes, the only noncombat information released so far is skill challenges. But this is a stupidly restrictive definition, because it means that the more creative you are in how you can use the stuff provided, the less noncombat information you have. And since anything with an activation time of less than 1 round is stuff that can be used in combat, I guess means that such things as 3E teleport and divination don't count as noncombat information.

 

[Mirtek]

"Rituals can fix everything" makes as much sense as "spells can fix everything".

In previous editions spells could fix everything