Does anyone do non-overpowered anymore?

[barsoomcore]

Magic in D&D doesn't feel like magic from myth and literature- it feels like a game. There is no sense of wonder, no mystery, its simply a tool almost like technology.

Exactly one of the things I wanted to address on Barsoom. When I was first developing the campaign, I knew I wanted a magic system that would frighten and startle and give the players a sense of wonder -- something that D&D magic's not very good at.

So I didn't let the players take magic-using classes -- indeed, I told them at the outset that there was NO magic on Barsoom (I'm a DM. I lie.). When they first encountered the supernatural, it really freaked them out and we had GREAT fun with PCs having nervous breakdowns, turning into alcoholics and other strange behaviour developing (see the Story Hour for details -- some of that is just starting to emerge in the most recent episodes).

It's gotten less and less "magical", however, as they've learned more about the system and started using it themselves. I've kept portions of the rules to myself, however, and so they still keep encountering things that their knowledge doesn't explain.

It's a really hard thing to balance, though -- the mix of consistent game rules and wonder-inducing mystery. The players have to know ENOUGH that they feel like there's SOME predictability to it, but they have to NOT know enough to feel like they're only scratching the surface.

As a DM, you have to really WANT this effect, because you will end up spending a lot of time re-jiggering stuff to keep the balance right. I do, anyway.

The problem is that D&D characters are so reliant on magic under the core rules that in order to prevent this kind of thing from happening, you have to reduce the power level of the game.

Actually, I disagree with you. Simply reducing the power level doesn't create a sense of mystery -- if the players still know all the rules, magic remains the straightforward application of rules that it is in standard D&D. If you really want to have your player's eyes widen in wonder as some NPC casts a spell, you have to yank the rug out from under their expectations as to how it ought to work.

Which, like I said above, is a full-time job to keep under control.

 

[Desdichado]

I think "mystery" and "usability" are goals that tend towards cancelling each other out. To make a magic system for an RPG that has that flavor is very, very difficult.

 

[barsoomcore]

Exactly. In fact, I would say that it's simply impossible to create a system that has mystery.

If there's mystery, there's no system. If there's a system, there's no mystery.

The only way to do it, as far as my experience indicates, is for the DM to take an active role in creating the mystery and shaping the reveal of the system over the course of the campaign. Once the players know EVERYTHING about the system, there is no more mystery.

 

[Jhamin]

Ok, is it me or does this thread stray dangerously into the "Have you stopped beating your spouse yet?" catagory?

 

[Numion]

Exactly. In fact, I would say that it's simply impossible to create a system that has mystery.

If there's mystery, there's no system. If there's a system, there's no mystery.

The only way to do it, as far as my experience indicates, is for the DM to take an active role in creating the mystery and shaping the reveal of the system over the course of the campaign. Once the players know EVERYTHING about the system, there is no more mystery.

This is no different from the point in our lives when we were new to D&D. We didn't know the mechanics at first, and everything seemed very mystic and strange. Thats a nice feeling, of course, and for some worth all the hassle to re-create it.

I would maintain that that isn't for everyone. Most addictive phase in the game for us was when we had learned the rules, somehow (partly due to players unwillingness to try D&D, because they hated 2e. Only after they learned the rules and saw that 3e is a different beast were they totally into it). Maybe we like the game part more than the mystic part, but to each their own, and all that.

 

[Altalazar]

Ok, is it me or does this thread stray dangerously into the "Have you stopped beating your spouse yet?" catagory?

Yes - which is why I had a problem with the original question in this thread - it is an impliedly condescending and insulting question.

 

[Nifft]

This is why I love incorporating rules from sources that my players don't have, such as the Book of Vile Darkness. Would it ruin Vile damage if they knew how it worked? Maybe not, but it's sure fun to see the looks of horror when I say: "Somehow, that wound remains open and raw, despite your best magic."

I like Psionics too.

-- N

 

[Saeviomagy]

I strongly disagree with that. Every class, race, and concept has strengths and weaknesses. Playing with low-magic (in my experience) really gets players to play their characters (instead of playing their collection of magical items) and to play more truly to the core of what their character is.

So a group is trying to kill or capture a wizard that is capable of going invisible, flying, and unleashing death and destruction from above? Maybe the group did not know about the Flying Invisible wizard with the perfectly anticipated set of spells for player-killing. Obviously, the group messed up and allowed said wizard to know they were coming for him (or you have a sadistic DM that enjoys killing player characters more than telling good stories).

In a world where fly+invisibility=invulnerability, why would a wizard expecting trouble NOT memorise the combo? And it's not really something that's difficult to fire up once a combat starts - unless the players totally get the drop on him, then he'll be able to do it.

The fundamental problem is that magic cancels magic, and also has the potential to cancel everything else.

Besides; I never said a NO magic setting. I was talking about LOW magic setting. For example, if at any given level (I don't have my book handy) player characters "should" have about 20,000gp worth of magical items, I like to run games where they have about 10-15,000gp value of items that are all unique and have more purpose than generic +1 longswords of boring repetition.

That's fine - as long as each magical item is useful while being interesting. +1 longswords should be the LAST investment that someone (a non-spellcaster) short on cash should make anyway. Counters to nasty tactics should be top of the list - counters to darkness, invisibility, flight, illusions, death magic etc. Next up is probably armour (or other items to boost class abilities, like cloaks of elvenkind, or pearls of power), and finally those plus one longswords.

After that is minor useful items, like bags of holding, which solve problems which are more-or-less ever present, but not life threatening.

After that is stuff like murlynd's spoon, which solve relatively minor, uncommon threats that have many other solutions (unless the DM has set you up to starve to death, or you're playing on athas).

In keeping with context with your example, even though spellcasters would have more access to magic than others, they must also expend more of their own spells (or experience to create items) for protections than they normally would. Otherwise they are quite fragile and vulnerable.

True - but since everyone else is less dangerous, and less likely to be able to counter your protections, you end up being much more resilient. In a campaign where no flight items exist, flight negates melee combatants, forcing them to use ranged weapons. In a campaign where detect invisibility items don't exist, invisibility more-or-less means you win any combat at range. The counters to these tactics all reside in magic, whether that magic is items or spells. You NEED a spellcaster or magic item to defeat the tactic. Conversely any opponents will NEED a spellcaster to defeat tactics employed by your spellcasters.

 

[Psion]

Magic in D&D doesn't feel like magic from myth and literature- it feels like a game.

I disagree with this inasmuch as any well codified and gamable system can feel like it. I find that the sort of magic system that many would be game tinkerers seem to want to create doesn't feel too much like magic to me, because people want them to operate like batteries or a tank of gas.


At any rate, I find that it is fairly easy to maintain a sense of mystery and work within the system. Just throw in things the players aren't familiar with.

For example, only one of my players is big on psionics, thus it seems alien and threatening to the players. A new spell, new feats, new prestige classes with strange special abilities, new subsystems (like R&R's ritual system) and so forth are all things I can drop in and add to the mystery.

I think this relates back to what some people have been astutely pointing out in the flurry of template threads: fiendish anarchic owlbears is blase or fiendish orcs are lame... "a twisted creature with writhing flesh and a distorted beak" or a group of barbaric riders forges of evil are mysterious when the players don't know that's what they are.

 

[barsoomcore]

This is no different from the point in our lives when we were new to D&D. We didn't know the mechanics at first, and everything seemed very mystic and strange.

Exactly. Mystery depends on not knowing the rules.

I would maintain that that isn't for everyone

Oh, absolutely. Like I said, you have to WANT to make it happen -- you have to be willing to constantly be giving out drips and drops of information, judging how much they need to know in order to feel satisfied, and how much you need to keep back in order to keep that feeling.

I enjoy it a lot, and my players do, too, but it is one of the whole points of Barsoom, for us. I don't think it would work if you weren't interested in doing that.