D&D spellcasters in the modern world

[Tar Markvar]

As the originator of the original post this one refers to, I'm very interested in hearing what you guys have to say. If there are any questions about the setting I want to use in specific, hit me. I love talking about this sort of thing, especially if it makes my setting better.

In my world, I imagine magic as something known by VERY few. I separate spellcasting (The D&D-like casting of spells by a single, adept individual) and ritual magic (groups of people focusing tiny amounts of power together to create an effect that works mostly on the placebo effect). Ritual magic is a little more common (though still relatively obscure... think of a cabal of young people casting "love spells" or spells to improve their grades... More of a social thing than anything else. You'll find these rituals in books in the New Age section of Waldenbooks), while true spellcasting is rare in the extreme. Since the death of the Mythic Age, centuries-old spellcasters have kept the secrets of the Arcane away from the rest of humanity, because while they may all have their own agendae, they all share a deep love for the Art, and don't want to see it reduced to little tricks for controlling stoplights or summoning doves to impress old people. Of course, any PCs who want to become wizards (no sorcerers... I might make a combo-class that mixes wizards and sorcerers together) will be among the very, very few who can do this. I like the idea of taking a feat to represent their innate ability to study magic.

Of course, the whole time the PCs are using magic, they're being watched by liches and archmages who have it in their best interest to make sure the new adepts aren't messing up.

I was considering forcing Fear checks (possibly modified by Spellcraft) on those who witness obvious magic in use. Watching a lock come open with a touch or a man lifting into the air with no visible support can do wonders on one's mind. Watching a Cure spell work not only forces one to realize that a wound is closing before his eyes, but he must also face the fact that there is a very good chance that there IS a god. True clerics won't be any more frequent than true spellcasters, but they are out there, and they all have a conduit to divinity, be it God, Jehova, Allah, The Goddess, the Saints, etc.

As for most of the world, though, the knowledge of magic is hidden, mythical. You won't see criminals casting Magic Missile at cops, because 99.9999999% of the world can't conceive of that kind of thing. Besides, all told, it's easier to just pick up a gun.

 

[Mistwell]

I think the most dramatic change would be to the legal system and laws. Spellcasting would be regulated, and a lot of criminal laws would need to be created to deal with it. Use of spells for harm to others, including the charm person idea (which would be regulated just like rufies are now) would be banned, and prosecuted.

More importantly, it would alter the jury trial system. Spells that detect lies, or force someone to tell the truth, would be used.

And what would detect evil do to moral relativism? To politics?

Police departments would start using divinations to prevent crimes before they happen. Scrying would be used to locate wanted criminals and missing persons.

Political assasinations would happen using scrying, teleportation, and a signle true-strike spell. No world leader would last more than a couple of months.

The laws of physics could never be developed, since magic routinely breaks those laws. This means much of current technology would not exists, if magic had been around for a long time. In fact, much wouldn't have been invented for lack of a need for a machine to do something that magic could already do.

This is all too much. It is a bad idea to run a d20 campaign with magic as a relatively known, common element in society. It just changes way too much. It is inevitable that your players will take advantage of a situation the GM did not think of in advance, because there will be hundreds of thousands of those situations.

Again, I encourage you to make magic very special - something most people do not believe in, very few actually know about, and even fewer can use it. Do not open Pandora's Box! You think it is fun now, but it will rapidly degenerate into an abusive, boring world.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I was considering forcing Fear checks (possibly modified by Spellcraft) on those who witness obvious magic in use. Watching a lock come open with a touch or a man lifting into the air with no visible support can do wonders on one's mind. Watching a Cure spell work not only forces one to realize that a wound is closing before his eyes, but he must also face the fact that there is a very good chance that there IS a god. True clerics won't be any more frequent than true spellcasters, but they are out there, and they all have a conduit to divinity, be it God, Jehova, Allah, The Goddess, the Saints, etc.

Have you looked at the sanity system in Call of Cthulu? I haven't actually looked at it myself (more into pure fantasy), but I hear really good things about it.

How are you handling the reaction to manifestations of divinity? Clearly that's been something of an issue amongst us here. Will saves? Flat out role-playing?

Does arcane magic have a definitive alignment component? This is pretty common in literature, after all. Magic is Chaos. Magic is the act of bringing Order to Chaos. Magic comes from Evil spirits. Etc. If nothing else, that can help define the ultimate goals of your magical cabals, if you haven't done that already.

 

[Tar Markvar]

Well, magic is a tool, in my opinion. If an evil man kills someone with a hammer, and that same hammer was used earlier in helping to build a home for the homeless, what is the hammer's alignment?

I thought about the Sanity system for Cthulhu, but I don't like the idea of hopelessness that breeds. I don't need magic to be truly horrific in my game. I'd just require a Will save, modified by level (you can replace the save with Spellcraft if you want), or be shaken by the display. Really low saves might cause you to be frightened. If the players RP it well enough, though, I won't need those saves.

Divine manifestations are similar. Instead of Forces You Cannot Comprehend, there's the realization that faith can move mountains. Some people might find hope there, but only the most hardened could leave an encounter with divine powers without being deeply affected in one way or another.

 

[Michael Tree]

Originally posted by Mistwell
More importantly, it would alter the jury trial system. Spells that detect lies, or force someone to tell the truth, would be used.
In the U.S. those spells are clearly unconstitutional, going against the 5th amendment.

Besides, neither are entirely reliable. Zone of Truth allows a saving throw, allowing strong-willed people to foil it, and Detect Lies is dependent upon the honesty and reliability of the person using it.

And what would detect evil do to moral relativism? To politics?
Hah! That's a very good question.

Police departments would start using divinations to prevent crimes before they happen. Scrying would be used to locate wanted criminals and missing persons.
D&D magic wouldn't be all that effective at preventing crimes before they happened, unless you know where to look. It would make investigation a lot easier, though in the U.S. a lot of divinations would be restricted by the constitution.

Political assasinations would happen using scrying, teleportation, and a signle true-strike spell. No world leader would last more than a couple of months.
Doubtful. Political leaders will have access to 10 times the magical resources of the average assassin. Can you imagine a dozen secret-service wizards in black robes and pointy hats, with wires in their ears, flying alongside the presiden't car?

The laws of physics could never be developed, since magic routinely breaks those laws. This means much of current technology would not exists, if magic had been around for a long time. In fact, much wouldn't have been invented for lack of a need for a machine to do something that magic could already do.
We've been talking about magic suddenly appearing, not appearing thousands of years ago.

Besides, it could be that our current physics is still essentially correct, but missing an essential principle that explains how magic work. As as analogy, Newtonian physics works perfectly adequately on the surface of the earth, but in space it starts to fall apart. Einstein's theory of relativity can explain all that Newton explains, and much more.

Again, I encourage you to make magic very special - something most people do not believe in, very few actually know about, and even fewer can use it. Do not open Pandora's Box! You think it is fun now, but it will rapidly degenerate into an abusive, boring world.

I think you're seriously underestimating people's creativity and motivations. There have been several examples of internally-consistent workable worlds where magic appears in the modern world, such as Shadowrun.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Originally posted by Michael Tree
In the U.S. those spells are clearly unconstitutional, going against the 5th amendment.

....though in the U.S. a lot of divinations would be restricted by the constitution.

Actually, no they wouldn't. The Constitution is structured to include very specific things. Magic isn't one of them. Unless you can demonstrate that they would create an unfair trial, they would be acceptable. Magically compelling a guy to testify against himself would be unconstitutional, but simply making sure the witnesses spoke truth would be quite acceptable. The Supreme Court might very well be inclined to rule against their use, but that's not surprising. The Judiciary regularly exceeds their mandate, just not as much as the other two branches of the federal government. Besides, NO politician wants the world to determine the truth of their actions, and Supreme Court Justices are politicians like the rest. Accountability would be seen as a bad precedent to set.

And what would detect evil do to moral relativism? To politics?
Hah! That's a very good question.

In an ideal world, it would eliminate them.

Maybe even bury them along with Jimmy Hoffa. Who, incidentally, we would be able to track down, finally.

 

[Chrisling]

Detect evil and those spells

Doods! They'd <i>so</i> mess with society. Not because you could tell if someone else was evil, but . . . because you could tell if <i>you</i> were evil. Or good.

I mean, what would it be like to think you're honestly, really, completely a good person and have the local priest tell you honestly and without any real chance of him being wrong that you're <i>actually</I> an evil human being. What does that realization to do a person? The certain knowledge that they are <i>not</i> good, but evil?

I think what it might do is . . . well, it could create social norms that prohibit the use of alignment detection spells. But along with that . . . it might destroy their credibility. I mean, let's say that a king is told that he's really evil. He doesn't buy it. He says that the priest is a liar, or the spell is false. Well, now you've got a king saying that the spell doesn't work the way it should -- there's a margin of error! In short, it doesn't work.

I'm not so sure that alignment detection spells would change too terribly much. I just think evil people with power would create enough ambiguity that no one would be certain they work as reported.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Re: Detect evil and those spells

Doods! They'd <i>so</i> mess with society. Not because you could tell if someone else was evil, but . . . because you could tell if <i>you</i> were evil. Or good.

I mean, what would it be like to think you're honestly, really, completely a good person and have the local priest tell you honestly and without any real chance of him being wrong that you're <i>actually</I> an evil human being. What does that realization to do a person? The certain knowledge that they are <i>not</i> good, but evil?

That's why I believe people are so good at denying the existence of good and evil, even in the real world. It's very difficult to live a life where you actually look at each choice you make and put it on the scale. And it's even harder to live a life where you don't have to because your conscience always beats you to it.

 

[Kesh]

Actually, no they wouldn't. The Constitution is structured to include very specific things. Magic isn't one of them. Unless you can demonstrate that they would create an unfair trial, they would be acceptable. Magically compelling a guy to testify against himself would be unconstitutional, but simply making sure the witnesses spoke truth would be quite acceptable. The Supreme Court might very well be inclined to rule against their use, but that's not surprising.

THe game Shadowrun handled the issue this very way. The SC ruled (will rule? wioll haven rule? ) that magical lie detection spells were the equivalent of 'spectral evidence' and could not be admitted in a court of law.

 

[Mistwell]

Originally posted by Mistwell
More importantly, it would alter the jury trial system. Spells that detect lies, or force someone to tell the truth, would be used.
In the U.S. those spells are clearly unconstitutional, going against the 5th amendment.

Besides, neither are entirely reliable. Zone of Truth allows a saving throw, allowing strong-willed people to foil it, and Detect Lies is dependent upon the honesty and reliability of the person using it.

Police departments would start using divinations to prevent crimes before they happen. Scrying would be used to locate wanted criminals and missing persons.
D&D magic wouldn't be all that effective at preventing crimes before they happened, unless you know where to look. It would make investigation a lot easier, though in the U.S. a lot of divinations would be restricted by the constitution.

Hey, Mr. Canadian trying to tell the lawyer in the US about US law and the Constitution...you're wrong.

1) The 5th amendment only applies to a criminal defendant, not witnesses and victims, nor civil cases at all. So all police interrogators would cast the spell, and all witnesses (including the victim) would be speakig to a judge and a grand jury with a detect lies spell in effect. Almost no criminal matter would go to trial because of this. In addition, everyone, including the defendant, would have it impacting them in a civil case. And in criminal cases, of course, when the 5th is not invoked (which is often), it would also be in effect.

2) How would divinations be restricted by the Constitution? Maybe you are referring to the right to privacy, which is a very limited right. Unless the crime happened in your own home or property, you have no right to privacy when committing a crime.

Man it bugs me when non-lawyers start throwing around the law and using it along with phrases like "clearly unconstitutional". When you become a member of the USSC, then you let us know what is clearly unconstitutional, okay?