Embracing the D&Disms

[Aaron L]

Not to mention that in order to teleport somewhere you first have to know where you are going. Teleportation in no way excludes exploration.

 

[Quasqueton]

Careful, Quasqueton – this rabbit hole is far deeper than you imagine.

<snip a lot of hyperbole>

First, if you wanna have this discussion, don't stretch your examples so far and wide that it would take 10 pages to rebut. Second, let's stick to the core spells and items (as I said in the opening post). Third, don't assume Forgotten Realms - that is not core.

If you wanna discuss this, pick just one or two spells/items from the core rules, and then we'll figure it out.

Quasqueton

 

[Desdichado]

I think there are three possible ways you can go:

1) Ban stuff like raise dead, keep the giant carnivores wandering the countryside to a minimum, etc. Allows you to keep the pseudo-medieval world of knights, castles and so forth. These campaigns are typically described as 'realistic' or 'low fantasy'.

2) Embrace the weird and see what sort of world it leads to as the original poster suggested.

3) Allow all the DnDisms but keep the typical fantasy Tolkien-esque world that now has about a million times more weird stuff in than Tolkien's but is otherwise the same. The justification for this? None whatsoever. It's just a genre thing, like alliterative names in superhero.

Personally I favour option (3), like option (2) and think option (1) is boring.

I agree; we've had some discussions in the past on this essentially being the three methods. Personally, I favor option 1, am coolly ambivalent towards option 2 and get a pounding headache thinking about option 3.

 

[Reynard]

not everyone can cast teleport you know... its only about 1% (or less) of the worlds population that can use such spells

In fact, it may even inspire it (meaning exploration). Those powerful wizards don't want to go hucking through the wilderness to get to the nift artifacts and spell components. they'd just rather pay some "muggles" to do it for them. So they craft a magic item that creates a faux "Have visited the place many times" effect and say, "Go find the lost laboratory of Rary!" or whatever and *poof* adventure and exploration.

Overall, I find that embracing the D&Disms creates a campaign that is more fun for everyone. If you create adventures where the PCs capabilities are required, it requires the involvement of the PCs. Anyone can seek out a hole in the ground. but only a party that can can Plane SHift and Locate Object can find and use the long lost portal to the Demiplane of Limitless Riches.

The same goes for baddies. One poster said they never had a villain get raised. That is a waste. If the PCs manage to kill a villain, and six months of eal time later he shows back up again with a mad on for having spent any time at all suffering under the lashes of a Balor in the Nine Hells (Abyss? I don't remember), they are gonna understand that *this* is D&D and they best use every resource at their disposal to defeat him, or else he is going to keep coming back, madder and smarter than ever.*

*I understand the mechanical penalty for dying and getting raised. But as far as experiences go, you'd thinkthat one would be a biggie. But is probably just asking for trouble to grant an XP bonus for dying.

 

[Mac Callum]

First, if you wanna have this discussion, don't stretch your examples so far and wide that it would take 10 pages to rebut. If you wanna discuss this, pick just one or two spells/items from the core rules, and then we'll figure it out.

Sorry. Take your pick. I'll talk about any of them.

Edit --> Just a thought; some things look innocent alone, its the combinations that are often more powerful than you'd otherwise think. Commune gets some cool info, and other spells create loads of ways to spread that info far & wide. Probably the biggest thing which retarded the growth of societies in the past was the inability to retain and spread useful information. Commune + long range Telepathy is almost as good as high-end research labs connected by the internet. Just a thought.

Second, let's stick to the core spells and items (as I said in the opening post).

The spells I mentioned were straight from the SRD. I didn't have any books with me, only Sovelior.

Third, don't assume Forgotten Realms - that is not core.

Mordekainen then, instead of Szass Tam. I just used the FR geography because it was something most people would know and I've never played in Greyhawk. Teleportation Circle is a core spell, and that was the point of that example.

not everyone can cast teleport you know... its only about 1% (or less) of the worlds population that can use such spells

It only takes one guy to make a permanent Teleporter. Once he's done it, anyone with a couple GP can instantly go anywhere in the Prime Material. There's no marginal cost - its all up front, which means it will pay for itself eventually with even just a small toll.

Why is Oghma giving away knowledge. I have trouble envisioning a God that gives away power and knowledge without a price. Maybe I play my God's more the greek/Roman kind that are petty and human in their traits. I just can't see a God of any pantheon/focus just giving away what makes them a God.

There are no standard rules explaining exactly what makes a God a God. Granted in your world maybe the God of Knowledge just collects knowledge without ever putting it in a Library - but that sounds more like a God of Secrets to me.

Many religions horde their secrets - but others might see it as their divine duty to spread knowledge and share it with others (or at least members of their own religion). Can you make up reasons for why they would not do this? Sure, but that's not "rules."

Overall, I find that embracing the D&Disms creates a campaign that is more fun for everyone. If you create adventures where the PCs capabilities are required, it requires the involvement of the PCs.

I just want to drive home the point that I agree. I just think that the logical consequences of D&D-isms makes for a really weird, dangerous, wonderous place. One like no campaign setting released to date, with the possible exception of Planescape. PS probably does come the closest. Wombat has also made an excellent analysis.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It only takes one guy to make a permanent Teleporter. Once he's done it, anyone with a couple GP can instantly go anywhere in the Prime Material.

Um, no. Once he's done it, anyone with a couple GP can instantly go to one place in the Prime Material.

"Once you designate the destination for the circle, you can’t change it."

-Hyp.

 

[maddman75]

I can see Wombat's point. I think this thread is more about finding a better middle ground.

For those that want the heroic story story that doesn't always fit in D&D. Use another system. D&D can't do it all. It is especially bad at simulating anything from fiction except what is based on itself (even then it fails). ( baring some extensive rewrites. I mean D&D not D20 which is a different horse and is much more flexible than credited usually).

I'm not bashing D&D I love to tell great D&D stories with it. It just is what it is.

You the game police or something? Truth be told if my players would go for it I'd run a fantasy game under Unisystem. But they like D&D, so we use that system.

 

[Shallown]

Maddman75
"You the game police or something? Truth be told if my players would go for it I'd run a fantasy game under Unisystem. But they like D&D, so we use that system."

No! not really but I do think the proper tool for the proper job.

Rules, to me, are just tools to craft "something". That "something" is different for different groups some groups want a great story some just want to kill stuff, some just want to play for fun and some are a mix of the above.

I just think some people expect something from D&D its not designed to do. I think D20 is more flexible but D&D is only one part of D20.

If your players like D&D for whatever reason I personally think it best to use it to do what it does best. Tell D&D stories. That still leaves a great deal of variety but it does, in my mind, exclude some types/styles of games.

See I added lots of "my opinion" stuff in my sentences so it is very obvious that this is what I think not what others have to do. I'm just sharing my thoughts ... sorry you seemed to think those ideas were some sort of oppression on my part. I didn't realize anyone thought I had any sort of power


now to answer Mac

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shallown
Why is Oghma giving away knowledge. I have trouble envisioning a God that gives away power and knowledge without a price. Maybe I play my God's more the greek/Roman kind that are petty and human in their traits. I just can't see a God of any pantheon/focus just giving away what makes them a God.

Mac
There are no standard rules explaining exactly what makes a God a God. Granted in your world maybe the God of Knowledge just collects knowledge without ever putting it in a Library - but that sounds more like a God of Secrets to me.

Many religions horde their secrets - but others might see it as their divine duty to spread knowledge and share it with others (or at least members of their own religion). Can you make up reasons for why they would not do this? Sure, but that's not "rules."


Actually a God of knowledge, once again to me, retains his power becuase he knows not becuase he shares. He gives knowledge=power to those who deserve it. True he would share a lot but not everything. Especially anything that gives away his power. Why do we need him if he shares all his knowledge?

Well its not "rules" to assume religions share knowledge.
I sort of base my religions on the real world, not to be realistic but becuase that's what I know and most people easily understand. I don't want to waste the game with people trying to understand everything in the game. Sort of why I use standard calenders and days of week, seasons and so forth. If everything is alien nothing is special. So it goes against most religions sharing info in any time period. But hey that's they way I do things, I wouldn't expect any one else to do it my way. Just thought I would share.

Later

 

[DragonLancer]

Eberron does this pretty well IMO. The prevalence of magic items is an assumption and magic is common in society. Everburning torches line the city streets, mages are payed to arcane lock the prisons, etc. Divine magic is uncommon, but not entirely rare, particularly in faith-heavy nations like Thrane or Eldreen.

Thats sort of thing is anathema to me. I hate the idea of magic as technology.

1st and 2nd ed AD&D took the point that the base world was medieval, and despite the existence of magic and monsters, didn't deviate all that much from how we could imagine such a world.

Under 3.0/3.5, we have this DungeonPunk feel, where its only pesudo-medieval and where magic is so prevalent as to be technology.

Even considering that we have spells such as teleport, and gate, which would allow a mage or an army to cross castle walls and into the heart of the defences, I think that assuming everyone will take it as granted, ruins the mood of the game.

 

[Joshua Randall]

I think we have drifted waaaaay far from Quasqueton's original point, which was that he, as a DM, has decided to embrace the D&Disms and allow his players to revel in their powerful spells and abilities. I don't think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that Quasqueton wanted this thread to turn into a debate over whether teleportation circle is overpowered or not. I also don't think this is supposed to be a thread about how to recreate your campaign world from the ground up to take into account the prevalence of magic. I think the point is that D&D is structured so that the PCs become powerful and use their abilities against increasingly powerful foes.

So, how can we come up with adventures that, rather than being thwarted by teleportation circle, depend upon it? (An idea that just occurred to me: perhaps the PCs need to transport a large group of troops / traders / refugees somewhere, and they want to use teleportation circle; but in order to do so, the PCs must first scout out the target location to make sure it's safe and to have enough detail on it to get an accurate lock -- even greater teleport, which tele.cir. references, says "you must have at least a reliable description".)

Let's look at the powerful divinatory spells like commune. Even they have their limits: commune allows a limited number of questions, and the answers are either yes/no or short phrases (5 words). To me, as a DM, that just cries out "plot hook!" You don't screw over the PC cleric who casts commune, but you don't have to hand him the answers on a silver platter. Make him work for it. Construct an adventure in which no one in the world knows the long-lost password to open the Vault of Doom -- so the PCs must use commune or another such spell to deduce hints about it.

As for raise dead and resurrection and the like -- why, in a game that features so many ways to die, would the DM ever want to prevent the PCs from using these spells? By the time the PCs can even cast raise dead, they're 9th level, which is pretty powerful. Again, don't thwart the PCs. Let them use their powers as they see fit. Maybe the commune from above reveals that the only one who knows how to open the Vault of Doom is dead, and the PCs must find his body and resurrect it. That's an adventure that depends upon the PCs abilities. And I think that's what Quasqueton is talking about.