Making Magic Magical Again?

[Electronic]

When I first played D&D, I most certainly did not analyze the rulebooks and weigh the strengths and weaknesses of the various classes. I rolled the dice and wrote "1st-level Fighting Man" on the top of my character sheet.

Only later did I learn how Magic-Users worked.

Well, I think you're in the minority. Most people do know the capabilities of other classes.

I don't think that ruined my early Fighting-Man days.

It also didn't ruin the game when I ran into a carnivorous ape and didn't know its stats.

Didn't say it did.

 

[Wormwood]

Giving the 1st level M-U one Magic Missile per day is good start.
Magic starts to feel less magical when it can be used too often, like an bow.

What about when your *single* magical power does less damage than the arrows the archer is throwing every single round?

 

[Hassassin]

What about when your *single* magical power does less damage than the arrows the archer is throwing every single round?

I'm not advocating one magic missile at 1st, but the difference is the archer misses.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Well, I think you're in the minority. Most people do know the capabilities of other classes.

I'd say the vast majority of beginning gamers don't. I know I didn't when I started. My first character was a Fighter too - and I just enjoyed running around hitting things and being tougher than the other characters. Only after I read some of the books a bit did I choose the Magic User (although I thought it was rubbish at low levels).

 

[Incenjucar]

It would be interesting to see how people would react to, say, a 4E wizard that has a more Vancian structure.

All powers have to be memorized, but so long so long as you keep something of the usual level limits to powers (no having all 27th-level encounter powers)...

4 At-Will Powers/day, +1/3 levels, infinite use of magic missile and cantrips.
x2 Encounter power use/day (So, up to 6 encounter powers/day, discounting paragon path powers)
Usual dailies.

Utility powers function in a similar way. Get an encounter utility power? You get 2 encounter/day slots.

 

[ferratus]

I'm a big fan of magic being mysterious and hidden, to the point that I think that evocation is stone cold boring. In other words, I like Tolkien or Robert E. Howard over Harry Potter.

However as much as I like rare/hidden magic as the default, I don't buy that scarcity is necesary to make things seem magical. Harry Potter makes magic seem very magical, and it takes place in a world where magic is commonplace and everywhere.

I think for magic to be magical, it has to be wierd, mysterious, whimsical, awe-inspiring, terrifying, taboo or some combination thereof.

The opposite of magical is normal, known, practical, mundane, safe, and accepted. By having magic be commonly known to the npc population, in equipment that helps your PC build, used for basic tasks, having no risks or mishaps in their use, and having wizards be normal instead of feared and hated by NPC's is why magic isn't very magical in 3e or 4e.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I disagree.

I pick Wizards because I want to fight using magic. Not because I want to fight with swords (or crossbows or darts) and occasionally use magic.

While I support your way of thinking in this regard, I cannot see how you can have both things, and that's what I was talking about. In my opinion, "pick wizards to fight using only magic" and "make magic more magical" cannot coexist, and that's why throwing a magic missile in 4E is so much like shooting with your crossbow in 3E.

Cheers,

 

[kinem]

To make magic more mysterious, perhaps some spells could be 'mystery spells'.

A mystery spell has randomly determined but roughly balanced properties. These properties are the same every time for the same spellcaster, but the player does not know what they are until they are discovered in play.

For example, a particular wizard's charm person spell might be especially effective against one character class. Or his fireball might not harm an ally who is carrying his familiar.

 

[HeinorNY]

Sometimes magic can "fail", even in D&D. It can be more effective than ordinary weapons, but it can make its blunders now and then. If magic is always reliable and predictable, it becomes less magical, IMO.

 

[KarinsDad]

To make magic more mysterious, perhaps some spells could be 'mystery spells'.

A mystery spell has randomly determined but roughly balanced properties. These properties are the same every time for the same spellcaster, but the player does not know what they are until they are discovered in play.

For example, a particular wizard's charm person spell might be especially effective against one character class. Or his fireball might not harm an ally who is carrying his familiar.

The game has enough bookkeeping without adding more. The Chaos Sorcerer tried to do this a bit, but I know of very few players who have actually played one.

I don't think that mystery in spells is the answer.

I think that the answer is to segregate effects so that not everyone and his brother does the same thing. For example, nearly every "spell caster" in 4E has some type of area fire effect. They are not identical, but they are similar. Meh. It would be better if there were less overlap between power sources and even less overlap between classes so that each class feels a lot more unique. At the moment, there are close to a dozen melee striker classes and although they have some minor differences, they pretty much all feel the same to me.

I also think that 4E went class and race crazy. Do we really need a game with so many classes and so many races, just so that we can have so many powers and so many feats and even more magic items? I realize that WotC has to sell books, but half of the classes and races could easily be tossed.