Is Magic a Setting Element or a Plot Device

[gamerprinter]

In my ongoing published setting of Kaidan, Hobo touched on it on the first page of this thread, but my setting is a horror setting. By its very nature the magic is intrinsic to the setting. It's also D&D/PF so there are magic items that fit as plot elements too - so both are integrated into the setting.

On the surface Kaidan resembles a typical Japan fantasy setting, aside from its oriental aspects seems like any other non-eastern fantasy realm. Yes, there are many ghosts, ghouls, demons, and shapechangers, which seem 'dark' is just as common in a standard non-horror setting. So while the monsters and magic items hint at the exotic and the dark, these aren't really what make Kaidan a horror setting.

Like Ravenloft, Kaidan has a mechanic or set of rules associated directly with the setting that makes it's dark horror aspect. Instead the Dark Powers rewards system for evil acts, as it is in Ravenloft, Kaidan's horror involves PC Death and a demented form of reincarnation - a spiritual trap.

You don't have to do evil acts to get stuck in Kaidan, all you have to do is die. The acts you performed in life give you a sum of karma points that determine what you will be reincarnated into in your next life. So what you do in life, the heroic/infamous deeds of your character, does matter and affect your afterlife. This becomes more important that what magic you yourself wield.

The magic of the setting is more important/vital/affecting than the magical plot elements that also exist.

 

[TarionzCousin]

If Frodo had been hit by a giant cave troll maul he'd be flat as [-]a pancake[/-]lembas bread.

FIFM.

It's not always the best thought-out, and some corrections are useful, but its a lot more fun for me in a game to find a tool than it is to find a plot-point. The former can be used in any way you can think of, the latter is used for one specific purpose and only that. Part of what makes D&D fun as a game for me is the chaos and interesting effects caused by giving players tools to affect the world, rather than giving them the effect they are permitted to have.

Yes. It has been immensely satisfying over the years to have players create new uses for things they have discovered, like saving up their gold to buy a dozen cubes of heating (mundane magical item mostly used for cooking) to create their own hot tub. While out adventuring they often commented how nice it would be to be back in their hideout in their hot tub.

 

[S'mon]

Sorry, wasn't clear. I was referring to the pre-3e version of Wall of Iron, which can be dispelled.

I treated it as a magic effect - it's a Wall of Iron, that's all - break chunks off the Wall and they vanish, same as killing a summoned creature. I treated 3e version the same by changing duration back to Permanent.

 

[MarkB]

Yeah, that bugged me too, back in the day. Gimli came from the Lonely Mountain. Why in the world didn't Dain Ironfoot give him one of the amazing armaments that ... Dwalin? complained they couldn't figure out how to make anymore?

Well, Dain didn't send Gimli out to escort the Ringbearer and defeat the Dark Lord. He sent Gimli's dad out to ask Elrond's advice about the failed Moria mission and Gimli accompanied him.

Bilbo, on the other hand, had a good idea of how much trouble Frodo was walking into when he chose to give him Sting and the mithril coat.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Maybe I missed it, but has anyone mentioned Eberron in this thread yet? That setting incorporates magic into NPC's lives more than previous settings: everburning lanterns are common, the lightning rail train, other stuff I can't remember right now.

Second, it's been my experience in campaigns that I have run that players love to turn "plot devices" into "setting elements." For example, they turned the quest for liquid starlight* into a long-term source for a PC weretiger and NPC orphan werewolf. After that, they became unofficial godparents to the kid and monitored him for the rest of his childhood.





*Name the game designer who dreamed up this stuff and win XP!

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think (pre-Essentials) 4e takes Rituals as the setting-integrated magic; they're designed to be used by NPCs and at least to some extent the game seems to consider their implications. And there seems to be an effort not to include magic items that would significantly alter a setting. Applications of battle magic outside combat don't get the same consideration though.

Quite possibly. The ritual rules have always turned my groups mostly off of using them, though, so they had a whole other ball of problems. And sadly, the effects are generally weak and insignificant, and even when they aren't, they're limited to a few skill sets. Still, that's a nod.

Second, it's been my experience in campaigns that I have run that players love to turn "plot devices" into "setting elements." For example, they turned the quest for liquid starlight* into a long-term source for a PC weretiger and NPC orphan werewolf. After that, they became unofficial godparents to the kid and monitored him for the rest of his childhood.

See, I love that noise -- using a tool to change the world. 4e generally frowns on that kind of behavior, though. For a fairly good reason, I must say: an unexpected tool has unexpected consequences and can make a DM who likes to plan out their stuff feel like the game's kind of out of control. Still, for my style, it throws some sand in the gears.

 

[MarkB]

Maybe I missed it, but has anyone mentioned Eberron in this thread yet? That setting incorporates magic into NPC's lives more than previous settings: everburning lanterns are common, the lightning rail train, other stuff I can't remember right now.

I'll second that recommendation. There's a real feeling that the lower-level, more commonplace forms of magic are integral to the setting, even industrialised in some cases. Higher-level magic is still rare enough to be respected, simply because there are few high-level PC-classed NPCs in the setting.

As for liquid starlight, I'm not familiar with it as a game element, but doesn't the concept originate from Lord of the Rings? The phial Galadriel gives Frodo is full of the light of Earendil's star, as captured in the waters of the spring that flows past her Mirror.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Yes. It has been immensely satisfying over the years to have players create new uses for things they have discovered, like saving up their gold to buy a dozen cubes of heating (mundane magical item mostly used for cooking) to create their own hot tub. While out adventuring they often commented how nice it would be to be back in their hideout in their hot tub.

For me, this is aspect is like a bit of horror or Monty Python jokes in an otherwise straight fantasy game. I don't mind it as a sauce, but I don't want it becoming an actual course. So magical hot tubs--good. Magical forge that lets them turn out something cheaply that is supposed to cost more, thus wrecking the economy of the game world--not so good.

Not that I mind squashing things like this that get out of hand. As far as I'm concerned, things like the Wall of Iron in 3E are presumed to have some unspecified drawbacks that make factory-like production of iron not worth it. It is more reverse-engineering than having to spell everything out, but I think it allows holes in rules to not have terrible effects:

1. The people of the game world are not universally morons.
2. If there was a way to exploit X easily, someone would do so.
3. No one has.
4. Therefore, the reality makes sense, but the game rules that model that reality are missing something that explains why it doesn't work.

Perhaps with wall of iron, multiple castings in short periods of time produce progressively poorer quality of iron. Or something else. It really doesn't matter until it comes up in play.

Not that I advocate deliberately littering the rules with opposed but unexplained drawbacks, or even outright paradoxes. It has to look semi-plausiable to a casual glance. But in general, the attitude of, "exploit the game model as if the game model perfectly matched the reality being modeled," is one I find distinctly not fun in play--and highly counter-productive to heroic action.

 

[I'm A Banana]

As for Eberron, it runs with ideas like that, but its fix is to say "there's no real classed NPC's above about 7th level, just monsters and a few unique exceptions," so that the truly world-changing effects are there for the PC's to discover and use, and shock and awe the NPC's. So there's industrialized magic, but not of significant power.

 

[TarionzCousin]

As for liquid starlight, I'm not familiar with it as a game element, but doesn't the concept originate from Lord of the Rings? The phial Galadriel gives Frodo is full of the light of Earendil's star, as captured in the waters of the spring that flows past her Mirror.

Good answer, but one well-known game designer had rules for it and some fluff in one of his books.

For me, this is aspect is like a bit of horror or Monty Python jokes in an otherwise straight fantasy game. I don't mind it as a sauce, but I don't want it becoming an actual course. So magical hot tubs--good. Magical forge that lets them turn out something cheaply that is supposed to cost more, thus wrecking the economy of the game world--not so good.

The PC's tried to convince an NPC friend to get in the hot water with them, but as he pointed out (and everyone knew) bathing caused illness. They told him that they had their blood leeched and their humors balanced after every soak.