Identifying Magic Items

[the Jester]

There is a lot of chatter from time to time about how magic items don't feel very 'magical'. Though it's not the whole issue, I think part of the problem is how easy it is to identify them these days.

Consider: In the pre-1e versions of D&D, you had no choice but to experiment with an item to figure out what it was, and if you were lucky, you might manage it.

In 1e there was a dangerous spell (identify) available for the task. It was costly and time-consuming and didn't let you avoid cursed items.

It became easier to manage in 2e (IIRC), easier still in 3e, and by 4e we've dispensed with the spell completely, as well as experimentation, in favor of a handwave and a short rest; now, you automatically learn an item's characteristics when you handle it over the course of five minutes.

I say, let's go back to making magic item identification not so easy. When your party finds a broom that radiates magic, let them play with it in character to figure out what it does! I have nothing against a spell or ritual to make it easier- as long as there is some kind of cost involved, to encourage people to try the experimentation method first.

I remember in 1e, we found a magic ring.

The party ranger put it on, then tried bossing us around (nothin'), stuck his hand in a flame (ow!), then in some ice (brr), tried to look through a wall (no luck), tried to fly (nope) and then jumped off a chair (aha, a ring of feather falling!).

That was fun- fun enough that I remember it, even 28 years later, even though I was the wizard watching, not the ranger experimenting. I'd like to see that kind of thing return.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Springtime for exploration. I agree completely.

 

[Mengu]

This is one of those things that you can play however you want to. Decide in your campaign, how common or rare magic items are, and how easy or difficult they are to identify. Done.

I have no problem with the 4e style. Saves a lot of time, when time is something in short supply, it's what I do in my games. I do have the occasional custom item that doesn't reveal all its properties right away, but that's rather the exception than the rule. If a DM wants to keep all magic items mysterious, and keep the PC's guessing, that's fine too.

 

[Hassassin]

Remove identify so that only detect magic gives low level parties hints about magic items (school, approximate power level). Let some higher level spells like arcane sight and divinations reveal more.

Casting cost for such spells is boring. Chance of missing a curse or side effect is more interesting.

 

[Tortoise]

The house rule I use in my B/X style campaign is as follows: (copied/pasted from my blog)

Identifying magic items (not potions). (this rule was created on the go during play and will be discussed in detail in a future blog post).
This is done by the use of a lengthy and dangerous ritual that all arcane casters know how to perform. The ritual takes 8 hours and leaves the caster so physically and mentally drained that immediately afterward another 8 hours of uninterrupted rest is required. If the required rest is not completed, a save vs paralysis is required with failure indicating collapse of the caster into a coma for 6d4 hours.
At the time of the ritual the caster must succeed on a save vs spells to know what the item can do. Failure gains no knowledge. A roll of natural 1 on the saving throw results in the caster immediately falling into a coma as above. The caster may only try to identify one item at a time.

PC's may also experiment with items.

In that style game there are 5 save categories, compared with 3.x and 4e which had different save mechanisms and would need a different method.

The B/X - LL game lacks an identify spell so the "ritual" above was thrown together in play to facilitate the on-the-spot situation. It worked and appealed to player sensibilities so it was kept. Since the saves improve as the caster levels it reflects increasing competence.

If at some point I develope a bard class for the game then they may have a form of Legend Lore.

There are a ton of different approaches that could be used for the identification of magic items. Finding what works for the group and system is what is important.

I would like to see something similar or at least flavorful and interesting done with 5e. I consider identify a form of divination and would like to see all major divinations be rituals. Minor ones still work better as spells.

 

[Bohemian Ear Spoon]

Ayup.

 

[TheFindus]

I remember how we needed to try out different things to find out what a magic item did back then as well.
I did not like that back then and would not want that for a +2 weapon, though. And a bag of holding is a bag of holding. Actually, I do not miss having to fiddle with magic items at all today.
I think there need to be rules with which I can find out what an item does the quick and easy way. But which at the same time leave room for more exploration when there is a reason in the story for it.
So I guess I want both options.

The reason why magic items sometimes do not feel magical anymore is that a lot of them are about the +x and not about the special powers they have. Magic items should be about special powers and play no role in the mathematical design of a rules system.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Do the "experiment" route too much, and it isn't magical anymore, either. Plus, if you are playing in a campaign with lots of low-level magic (potions of healing, +1 swords, etc.) then people ought to have an easier time identifying the common stuff.

So I prefer that "experiments" be kept to a low roar, and mainly reserved for magic that is more interesting--though it can also include ongoing spell effects, portals, and such things, not just "items".

Also, it is a pain in the behind when you force "experimentation" on everything, and someone finds a weapon with an unknown plus. They don't even know what their total is, now! They way they are going to find out is make you tell them if they hit or miss until they happen to roll close and narrow it down. So why not just hand out that information the first time they swing in earnest?

I really like the Arcana Evolved take on this, with the object lore and related spells and skills. If the item is pretty cookie-cutter and mundane, the players can easily ferret out what it does. However, if the item is more interesting, even identify may not suffice. Yet now you have the magic to dig out information about it and/or track down someone who has used it, or even made it.

 

[Sunseeker]

Lets not have the rules tell us at all how to handle magic items. If the DM wants to let their players know what it is right away, that should be their decision. If a DM wants to make their players "work for it", then that's their decision.

That way DMs playing low-magic settings aren't restricted by rules that say a player automatically knows what this shiny new sword is. That way DMs playing high-magic settings can allow their players to be "intuitively knowledgeable" about magic items. That way DM's who want to do their own thing might tell their players they need to take the items to the local Sage and get it evaluated, for a fee of course.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Frankly, I pretty much just handwave it.

But if identification could (in one option) be an interesting and mechanically deep process, I'd like that.