Making Magic Magical Again?

[Electronic]

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,

Oh, I don't want both things. I'm perfectly fine with magic being "unmagical". That is sciency or "normal, known, practical, mundane, safe, and accepted".

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).

Beginning players are only a fraction of the total player population.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Beginning players are only a fraction of the total player population.

But a very significant fraction nevertheless.

 

[kinem]

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.

Honestly, that seems like a 4e issue. I haven't played 4e in a long time, but it always seemed to me that all 4e characters were identical: they all cause damage, cause minor temporary status effects, and can push opponents a square or two. A fight never ends except by boring old damage inflicted. Bleh. None of it approaches the options a spellcaster would have in 3.X or before: illusions, charms, polymorph, bestow curse, inflict blindness, etc.

 

[ferratus]

Beginning players are only a fraction of the total player population.

If we could trade in five 40 year old players for one 12 year old player, I think the hobby would be healthier.

Maybe not for WotC's sales though.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

More magical magic? Here's a few prescriptions:

(1) Reduce it's frequency. One should only encounter a few magical trinkets at lower levels, enough to make them truly unique and special (take a look at the BD&D magical treasure tables for example).

(2) Don't make the magical mundane -- no "magic as technology." Eberron, I'm looking at you. Drop everburning torches as the light source for every city, etc.

(3) Make enhancements mundane. We can still have +1 swords and +2 chainmail, but the enhancements aren't from magic -- they are from the craft of an exceptional smith with high quality materials. You can buy, sell, and manufacture mundane enhanced items, like a +1 sword; magical items like a flametongue sword are something different.

(4) Take magic out of the economy. Aside from simple potions (which I'd make alchemical and thus mundane, rather than magical) and "enhanced" mundane items, I wouldn't price high powered magic items at all, and not provide a venue to buy-sell. Trading a magic item might be a quest in itself.

(5) Magic breaks the rules. Magic and magic items should have effects which can't be replicated by specific rules, and are thus unique and special. Most "wondrous items" used to be this way, until we took away most of their wonder by being able to make them with 1st and 2d level spells in 3E.

(6) Magic isn't always useful. Sometimes it's cursed. Sometimes, it's just odd -- like a bag from which one can pull an unending supply of mundane white rats.

(7) Magic is unique. When a party encounters a magic spell or item (like the bag of rats, above) it should be extremely rare to encounter another just like it. Spells should be unique to wizards (at least in appearance); each item whether weak, powerful, or just plain odd should be unique from every other. No "bag of golf clubs" -- leave that to "enhanced" mundane items -- every PC carrying 1 or 2 magic items has something truly unique.

(8) Magic isn't necessary. Rules should not assume PCs have magical property; in fact, unless they're a spellcasting class it should be possible to progress for the entire game without having a magic item. 3E I think particularly fell down in this regard.

 

[Niccodaemus]

More magical magic? Here's a few prescriptions:

(1) Reduce it's frequency.
(2) Don't make the magical mundane
(3) Make enhancements mundane.
(4) Take magic out of the economy.
(5) Magic breaks the rules.
(6) Magic isn't always useful.
(7) Magic is unique.
(8) Magic isn't necessary.

Outstanding. Like we share a brain or something.

 

[howandwhy99]

(8) Magic isn't necessary. Rules should not assume PCs have magical property; in fact, unless they're a spellcasting class it should be possible to progress for the entire game without having a magic item. 3E I think particularly fell down in this regard.

You know, one of the odd yet wonderful things about AD&D is that ability scores (physical, mental, social abilities) and equipment (arms, armor, goods, services, gear) were not balanced into the class level. If, by fate or fortune, a 1st level PC could get his or her hands onto a vorpal sword, then they were just as good a combatant as they were before. Only this time their weapon is what made them a fearsome opponent. Like a kid with a missile launcher you may not want to mess them, but sooner or later someone with the capability to wield and secure such a weapon is going to come along and take it. (Before that happens you might want to think about trading it. Or secreting it until you've grown into it.)

My point is magic items are powerful in their own right, but do not need to be included in class ability assessment. A DM testing a combined group's overall power level, sure. That's different though. Unfortunately, I doubt somehow these divides will make it back into D&D Next, but some kind of option could be provided. <fingers crossed>

 

[KarinsDad]

Honestly, that seems like a 4e issue. I haven't played 4e in a long time, but it always seemed to me that all 4e characters were identical: they all cause damage, cause minor temporary status effects, and can push opponents a square or two. A fight never ends except by boring old damage inflicted. Bleh. None of it approaches the options a spellcaster would have in 3.X or before: illusions, charms, polymorph, bestow curse, inflict blindness, etc.

Yes, precisely. The point of this thread is that 4E seems so similar from one PC to the other, that magic doesn't seem magical anymore.

 

[hanez]

Yes, precisely. The point of this thread is that 4E seems so similar from one PC to the other, that magic doesn't seem magical anymore.

Its not JUST magic by the way. Many of my fighter players complained that it made combat manouevres were less interesting because of the powers. For example there were powers for soo many things, and the flavor was often combat manouveres (e.g. pierce thru a weak spot in the armor, swing off an item in the room, use a minion in some clever way), that the players felt they could no longer be descriptive about combat in the same way. So when we used to describe our intent in combat and the DM used judgement to estimate the effects, the powers ended up replacing these manoevres and put a simple number to them (e.g. 2[w] + daze).

Don't get me wrong, some fighters loved the powers, but some also complained that they replaced a certain part of the class where they could do ANYTHING with their sword and the DM would have to wing it on effects to make it interesting.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I think you have to give game balance a whack upside the head and allow for more randomness in what the players get, can use, and most importantly, can buy.

Restrcitions and rarity will go a lot further than awesome descriptions and Wallmart shops with discounted potions.