Do Magic Item "Shops" wreck the spirit of D&D?

[Numion]

Hyperbole. I'm hoping the extrapolation of the ideas some are suggesting here might help show how false they are.

Hyperboling tends to make claims false. So it's not going to help you show anything false, except your own logic.

 

[howandwhy99]

Nobody's saying that. Just that most of magic has always been predictable. There has always been a list of spells - with complete effects listed that are quite predictable. There are a couple of exceptions, like Wish and Limited Wish (and Miracle in 3E).

There has always been a similar list in the DMG for magic items. Almost all were and still are quite predictable. The exceptions like wand/rod of wonder and deck of many things are the exceptions.

Rose colored glasses in action once again. Magic would still seem unpredictable to a player just starting 3E just as it did for us when we started 1E. But once you've read the rules, there's no going back in either system. The system is what it is once you know it, in both systems. I claim that it's quite predictable in both editions due to the fact that 99% of magical effects are well defined and predictable. Potion miscability table or wand of wonder doesn't change this.

Predictability is a requirement of the DM to run the game. It's what the players are their to learn IC in game. The fact that the spell lists are in all AD&D editions and now spells are considered "ubiquitiously known, easily trusted, and repeatedly predictable in the gameworld" means they are nothing less than science. So, yes. Spell lists belong in a DM-only DMG. Along with magic items. Once your players know them, change 'em.

No need to hyperbole, even if it was kinda your thing judging by your earlier posts.

I'll try and lay off. Much of what has been said in this thread by many others has been just as hyperbolic, imo.

It would be a loss to the game if anyone who's ever DMed a game could no longer function as a player. 60% of my current group do both.

I understand with the level of complexity the game contains now, altering spells, monsters, and magic items is difficult. But it is no harder for any one DM than another. You wouldn't share your world secrets with DM-players too, right?

 

[dcas]

It would be a loss to the game if anyone who's ever DMed a game could no longer function as a player. 60% of my current group do both.

I think the DMG (and the MM, etc.) should be off-limits to players at the table.

What they do on their own time is their business.

 

[howandwhy99]

Oh, baloney. The magicalness of magic has never sustained D&D. It is a spice, just like any other spice. Some people use more of it. Some people use less. If I had to play in a game where magic was this unpredictable thing where two potions might make my stomach blow up, and at any moment my +1 sword might turn into a wet noodle - because hey, magic is UNPREDICTABLE! - or a block of stinky cheese, then that wouldn't be any fun, either.

I agree wands of wonder would be a horrible choice if D&D could only have one magic item. See my post above for how magic is predictable, but unknown to both players and their PCs.

D&D is a game that people play to have fun. The magicalness of magic is only one element, and frankly, not one of the most important ones, either.

Since people are complaining about the customization of magic items, and how this makes magic more available, and yet, destroys the game while D&D is presently enjoying it's largest success is an odd contortion of the facts before us.

Magic is fun. Maybe not that important for you, but to leave fun out of the game because character optimization is more enjoyable should really be a DM choice, not a publisher one.

D&D sales have declined since 2002. 3rd edition was not its largest success ever.

Whatever. We all combed through the DMG back in 1st Edition, too, and told the DM what sort of items we wanted. We metagamed and powergamed like a bunch of mad little fiends. Just like people now.

Now I understand why magic was never magical for you. Not reading the spoilers before every mystery novel actually helps in their enjoyment too.

Because the DM controls the rules. That's written into the rules. You are given a baseline, and then you pick and choose what you want. Just like always.

Then books like MIC and the DMG shouldn't have ridiculous, setting dictating, sentences like "magic shops should be available to players" or "give players what magic items they want unless you have a good reason not to".

Yes, I have a good reason.

 

[I'm A Banana]

If one proposes that all birds fly, one doesn't have to itemize every non-flying bird to prove him wrong. One need only point to a penguin or an ostrich.

If I said "birds fly," and my friend said "Penguins don't!" I'd slap him in the face and call him bad names. I'd also say "You know what I mean, jerk-off."

Storm Raven is saying "Magic wasn't really unpredictable in 1e" and you're screaming "But the bag of beans wasn't!", so I'm tempted to do the same.

Then books like MIC and the DMG shouldn't have ridiculous, setting dictating, sentences like "magic shops should be available to players" or "give players what magic items they want unless you have a good reason not to".

Yes, I have a good reason.

Okay, then, obviously they're not talking to you. They're talking to the DMs who want to know whether or not magic shops should be available and whether or not they should give the PC's the items they want.

The answer, as far as the core rules are concerned is, "Sure. It's good to let PC's customize themselves."

 

[Vocenoctum]

Then, one might just as well say that the city is a magic shop, in the same way that one might say "a +1 sword is a +1 sword". The mechanics are the same, right? That's all that counts, right? In which case, the idea isn't a strawman.

The difference is, Magic Mart has a large concentration of magic items in a central location where you can walk in and take a number, then get it.

In a more abstract system, the players may take a day wandering around looking for the proper item. The difference in flavor between Magic Mart and Communal Magic Items is a big difference. The straw man is the idea that those of us that allow player choice automatically encourage Magic Mart and the lack of flavor. There's plenty of room for flavor without castrating the players ability to choose their character.

 

[MerricB]

The DMG was OFF LIMITS to the players. Learning how magic items worked was to be as shocking, terrifying, and wondrous as learning what a module had in store for you. If the players CHEATED and knew them all, you're going to have to alter every one or make new ones. Ditto on monsters and the MM.

That was bunk before even the DMG came out. You find Tim Kask (IIRC) admitting in Eldritch Wizardry that players would read the rulebooks.

Gary makes particular note that new players should not read the DMG - which I totally agree with. Let them discover the game through play, when everything is wondrous. But experienced players who also wish to DM?

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

Not all of us. Of course, if you meant "we" in the royal sense, then you might well be correct. My group didn't comb through the DMG back then (aside from the two GM's). Now? Now you'll get labelled "overcontrolling" or a "Bad DM" if you so much as ask a player not to comb through the DMG or MM.

As I recall, my group back in the day was a group of DMs. I spent a lot of time in the DMG (and I wasn't the main DM back then), but I wasn't choosing magic items I had to have. Despite that, the adventures still managed to give my magic-user PC...

* a Wand of Fire
* a Staff of Power
* Bracers of Defense, AC 2
* Bag of Holding

Cheers!

 

[molonel]

Not all of us. Of course, if you meant "we" in the royal sense, then you might well be correct. My group didn't comb through the DMG back then (aside from the two GM's). Now? Now you'll get labelled "overcontrolling" or a "Bad DM" if you so much as ask a player not to comb through the DMG or MM.

You know, I'd venture to say with a fair amount of confidence that you were in the minority by treating the DMG as a sacred text which the players's filthy hands should never touch.

You can ASK your players not to look at it, but you were lucky back in 1st Edition if your players didn't read through the modules you were running.

Didn't they remove Rule Zero from the 3.5 DMG?

If you'd like to point to me where it says in the 3.5 DMG that the DM doesn't control the game, and it gives anything except guidelines and leaves the final choice up to the DM, I'd really LOVE to see that.

Otherwise, no, rule 0 is still VERY much in play.

Magic is fun. Maybe not that important for you, but to leave fun out of the game because character optimization is more enjoyable should really be a DM choice, not a publisher one.

Character optimization and magic have BOTH been a part of the game for as long as its been out there. One need only flip through a copy of the 1st Edition Unearthed Arcana or the 1st Edition Oriental Adventures to understand that.

D&D sales have declined since 2002. 3rd edition was not its largest success ever.

Actually, this most certainly IS its largest success ever. Gary Gygax and TSR never, EVER faced competition from multiple RPG producers and the vast market of games like World of Warcraft which sold - I believe - a million copies during its first week of release.

Now I understand why magic was never magical for you. Not reading the spoilers before every mystery novel actually helps in their enjoyment too.

See, this is why I really have a hard time taking folks like yourself seriously in this discussion. The pretensiousness of a sentence like, "Now I understand why magic was never magical for you" beggars my ability to mock it.

Magic and mystery don't come out of putting a padlock on the DMG, and if you have to shake your finger at your players for reading it instead of inventing your own custom magic items that fit your individual players, then don't accuse me of lacking imagination, sir, because you are exhibit A.

Magic is only one element of the story, and frankly, I'm run low-magic and no-magic games that were every bit as interesting as a high-magic FR monty haul campaign, if not more so.

Then books like MIC and the DMG shouldn't have ridiculous, setting dictating, sentences like "magic shops should be available to players" or "give players what magic items they want unless you have a good reason not to".

Why not? You're free to ignore and change anything you like.

I think animated shields are nonsense. So poof! They're not in my game.

"But it says they exist in the DMG!"

That's great. They still don't exist in my game.

Yes, I have a good reason.

Bravo!

Then you are following what the rules tell you to do.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

The fact that the PCs are assumed to metagame know this massive list of mass produced magic items also assumes that the world must be of a magic level beyond almost all fantasy fiction. How are we to play out our fantasy worlds when the default rules presume absurdity?

You don't think that in Introduction to Wizard Training 101 they have a section of the textbook that lists common magical items and their relative rarity (aka value)?

Why is it so difficult to believe that in D&D world people have heard of things they haven't seen. I have never seen a LOT of animals that exist currently and in the past on this planet but I know *OF* them and could possibly ID one if it came running through my basement. At least until the T-rex did, then i'd poo myself. Thats not the same thing as saying I can go to Petland and buy a three-toed sloth or that I could just head down to South America and find one in the wild.

DS