Forked Thread: Magic assumptions in the campaign

[Orius]

Forked from: The Urban Druid

Secondly, historic and low-magic analogues just don't make sense in D&D to me any more. There's too much magic in the game to not take any of it into account. I'm not even talking some Monty Haul high-magic munchkin fest here, even a low-key campaign uses enough magic that campaign development should take it into account. When players put together a D&D party, they try to make sure there's at least one cleric and one wizard. The party will probably find at least a half-dozen magic weapons of at least +1. There'll be plenty of potions and scrolls lying around. And then there's whatever random magic items turn up. That's not even counting whether or not there are magic stores. There's no way that very basic stuff can exist like it does in a normal campaign if magic is supposed to be special and rare.

Forking this if someone actually wants to discuss it. I don't want it taking over the other thread (yeah, maybe a tad posessive, but I spent two hours typing the original up).

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Ehh, I think it depends on the system and what level of houserule and refluffing you have.

For example with 4e, you can quite nicely run a completely Martial party. You can also do the old, +1 every 5 levels to keep up with magic items without giving them out.

One aspect though I do also, is with magic items I simply describe them more mundane. A acid weapon is one coated each morning in the acid, a weapon that allows extra damage on a critical hit is because you have trained more in that weapon, etc.

Magic stores and such are entirely setting-dependent they are quite easy to add or get rid of, as you gauge the amount of magic items in the game.

 

[Loonook]

I was actually having kind of an argument with a buddy about this topic a few days ago... and since this is one of my favorite setting beefs it does come up a lot in conversation.

In general, I don't understand the concept of the magic shop because, let us be honest... someone is going to find a way to bump it off at some point in the future (read: within 12 hours of some mid-level rogue realizing that an adept with identify has decided to enter into the spell-selling game). Between this and the constant stacking up of spells, along with the idea that every party needs a mage AND a cleric to survive... pah, just a lot of irritation.

I can understand apothecaries who sell mundane healing in a setting, primitive surgeons, and yes the occasional heal-by-mystic-assistance. Mostly the mindset of 'there needs to be a +4 dagger in every rogue's hand' comes from a development of mentality from we few, we proud, we first generation of CRPG players/players of early D&D. That mix, combined with the fearsome number-pounded might of damage reductions of Y/+X or greater/immunities in the different versions caused a lot of issues. Personally I don't see why a wizard or a cleric couldn't be the uberpowerful force of nature in a party... as long as they invest in every single minute detail of their craft, venture far and wee, and don't just get to open up a copy of the Magic Item Compendium or (insert other power-book here) and point to what they want.

A thing I like about 4e (and there aren't a lot) are the separations of artifacts vs. 'magic items'. Indeed, a mundanely crafted powerful item should be available in most mid-magic games. Hell, they should be available in most low-magic games if their powers make sense. Example: a mundane acidic dagger? Not so much. A quiver of arrows with small heads filled with said-same acid? Makes sense, as each would be dipped/filled separately, and each 'shot' would let loose that specific bit of acidic goodness.

Artifacts are where you get the cool items, and each should be unique. Even in pretty high-magic settings a characters items shouldn't be 'wow... another +4 keen fiery dagger'... they should look, read, and act like an epic piece of machinery.

I think the assumptions in general re: magic are so skewed by people that it causes a major rift. There were a lot of great stop-gaps in 2e (rarity levels for spells, for example) which made for the ability to give epic power to a PC or NPC which had never been seen before, bend the rules a bit, and grant unique and varied items. The problem of Monty Haul-ism has always existed, but the real issue doesn't come fully from players getting their sweet nothings from lenient DMs or 'power creep'.

The current climate (and I speak mostly of 3e because my experience in 4e is essentially just reading materials and watching a campaign unfold) of constant one-upmanship is mostly perceived due to our state of constant net awareness. Powerful builds existed, but they weren't seen as readily before the Internet. However, I wouldn't trade away all the stupid Pun-Pun Master of Universe script-kiddy type of headaches I get as a DM for the amount of soft, fluffy, excellent ideas I pick up on a daily basis around here. I would love to see some of the groups you guys play in, even if I had to sit through some of the travesties I have also seen here .

Love it or hate it, magic items are part of D&D. It's the way each gamer (player or DM) lets magic function which changes things.

Slainte,

-Loonook.

PS: One question which has been bugging me of late: How does Polymorph work in your world? I mean, a scrawny 90 lb. weakling wizard shapeshifts into a red dragon without any aplomb or regard for the mass he has taken on? Is the weight metaphysical, or should fatties have more opportunities in the altering arena?

 

[Ariosto]

I think the default assumptions have changed notably.

That started with DMs not paying attention to what the assumptions were in the game as designed -- for instance, the in-game reason Clerics were limited to blunt weapons as a handicap whilst Thieves were permitted swords as an advantage (hint: check the old treasure tables).

The very first supplement added not only new spells but new levels of spells -- three more for MUs and two more for Clerics -- and more magic items (including weapons and armor with bigger bonuses).

With 3E, the rules were changed to make both enchanted items and spells more frequently encountered. In 4E, that's been taken up another notch (although it looks as if the "obligatory" items could easily be made into personal powers without much disturbing the balance).

The frequency of supernormal characters (including spell-casters) has always varied from campaign to campaign, but I think has generally risen.

All that aside, the baseline from the start was a departure from the corpus of fictional inspirations. The powers of Clerics and Magic Users were keyed not to duplication of literary worlds but to creation of a game deriving a good portion of its interest from relatively common employment of magic by player-characters and their opponents.

Taking for granted the inclusion at least of all elements present in early volumes, if not of everything from the latest expansion, has perhaps become more par for the course. The books have come generally to be taken as more prescriptive, and the conception of D&D as a genre unto itself has crystallized. "No spells beyond those of level (x)", or some other attempt to limit the scope, seems likely to grate against ingrained notions of "what D&D is".

 

[Ariosto]

Common purchase or manufacture of magic items seems to me basically contrary to the game's premise -- which is one of undertaking adventures to acquire power.

 

[Ariosto]

With polymorph and similar effects, I have tended simply to assume some sort of magical mass-energy conversion involving another dimension / universe ... in other words, to "hand wave" the matter!

There is an interestingly different approach in Fritz Leiber's The Swords of Lankhmar, in which characters shed matter (left as a puddle) when shrinking to rat size -- and "steal" from the environment what they need when enlarging to human size. I don't recall whether it comes up in the book, but I imagine that could be quite perilous for bystanders!

 

[Kask]

Well the 3E rules call for a "middle class" person to earn about ~$30k/year (1 s.p./day). Considering the value of gold . They did an accurate job.

Based on that comparison, a +1 Long sword would cost about $115,000. Now, there are no banks to loan the cash to people to purchase these. So, in the city you live in, how many specialty items are for sale in stores for that price, cash only? How about much more expensive items?

 

[Baron Opal]

And, keep in mind that there are stores where you can walk in, select some jewelry, lay down $1-2,000,000 and walk out with that single item. These stores do not have a storefront. Their doors are simple single door glass affairs with a name frosted on it, like "Winslow's on 32nd".

Now, these stores are pretty much just in Dallas, NYC, Atlanta, SF and other major metropolitan places. They don't advertise; this isn't the Shane Company we're talking about.

 

[Kask]

And, keep in mind that there are stores where you can walk in, select some jewelry, lay down $1-2,000,000 and walk out with that single item.

Right. How many of those stores sell cash only, no credit cards/AmEx? And, how wide a selection to they carry at all times? As you noted, these stores are in areas with hundreds of thousands or millions of people. Also, it doesn't take "life force" (XP) to manufacture those items. So factor that in and you can pretty much determine how likely "magic stores" in a campaign are...

 

[Aus_Snow]

Right. How many of those stores sell cash only, no credit cards/AmEx? And, how wide a selection to they carry at all times? As you noted, these stores are in areas with hundreds of thousands or millions of people. Also, it doesn't take "life force" (XP) to manufacture those items. So factor that in and you can pretty much determine how likely "magic stores" in a campaign are...

Exactly.

Ah, one of the reasons I love XP costs for magic item creation. Not that the rest of what you've had to say is irrelevant. Hardly!