D&D General How does magic work in D&D (In-Universe/Lorewise)?

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah it seems to.me that most of the in-game "lore" regarding magic is specifically set up to discourage critical thinking.

"It's all magic maaaann...you just gotta feel the Weaaaaavvee brooo. "

Personally, I'm not too stressed about classifying the magic and the nonmagic stuff (though I'd agree there are ambiguities there).

The bit I would like better explanations for is the mechanics of spellcasting, e.g.

--what's so special about the way that spellcasters deliver spell components that prevents non-casters from being able to do it?

--how is it that the only action that has no chance of user error is "casting a spell"?

--what makes one spell more difficult to cast than another (such that it cannot even be attempted at all until it can be executed with 100% effectivness), and how does that manifest in the fiction?

Stuff like this would (IMO) help casters feel more physically tethered to the worlds they dwell in rather than just having a growing list of game mechanics they can take advantage of with near zero fictional justification.

Magic shouldn't always work. I see that as an error in the rules.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The Weave does not come from a God.

Who is Elminster having sex with then? Aside from all the others?

 

[Tony Vargas]

The Weave does not come from a God.

True.
Mystra is a Goddess,
because gender binary.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Magic shouldn't always work. I see that as an error in the rules.

I certainly share that preference.

But I could be ok with 100% never-fails magic if there was a bit more justification for it.

Edit: Really, I think I'd like something that's more of a hybrid. Have spells within a certain level range that are reliable and predictable, and then have some that maybe you're "still learning" that have a chance of failure and related consequences. Maybe a 2nd level wizard should be able to try and cast "fireball", and risk it backfiring, but by 5th level, they've got it figured out. You know..make learning magic feel like you're..learning.

 

[Voadam]

--how is it that the only action that has no chance of user error is "casting a spell"?

Many but not all spells are no chance of error.

Certain spells are negated on a save or require a successful attack roll. A spellcaster can hit user error with an attack roll same as anybody else.

Come to think further on it though, most class powers are no chance of user error. Fighter second wind, and action surge for example. Attack rolls and ability check/skills are the big two action type chances of user error.

It is a bit weird that the only negative to casting while threatened in melee is if the spell requires a ranged attack roll (but no problem if it requires a saving throw).

 

[Tony Vargas]

It is a bit weird that the only negative to casting while threatened in melee is if the spell requires a ranged attack roll (but no problem if it requires a saving throw).

The martial/caster gap is deeper than just class disparities, the basic rules of the game are also in on it.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Many but not all spells are no chance of error.

Certain spells are negated on a save or require a successful attack roll. A spellcaster can hit user error with an attack roll same as anybody else.

It is a bit weird that the only negative to casting while threatened in melee is if the spell requires a ranged attack roll (but no problem if it requires a saving throw).

I guess I think of that stuff as "the target defended against your attempt, rather than "you failed to produce the effect". I suppose some of that could go either way, depending on the DMs taste in narration.

 

[Voadam]

The martial/caster gap is deeper than just class disparities, the basic rules of the game are also in on it.

Making casting while threatened much easier and less risky to do was a shift from prior editions.

 

[Voadam]

I guess I think of that stuff as "the target defended against your attempt, rather than "you failed to produce the effect". I suppose some of that could go either way, depending on the DMs taste in narration.

Isn't the comparison to fighter and rogue attack roll user errors though? And skills?

 

[Gammadoodler]

Isn't the comparison to fighter and rogue attack roll user errors though? And skills?

More to skills than to attack rolls from my perspective.

To me, the act of conjuring something from nothing using a combination of specific words and motions, seems like a complex activity that should require some skill to perform well.

And it kinda doesn't.