Okay, who here LIKES the magic items and magic system in D&D?

[Virel]

I like the Vancian magic system, all in all.

I like the fact players have to plan and adapt accordingly to regain spells. It part of what keeps the game (all editions) the sort of game you have to think and plan ahead. It rewards those that can do that and penalizes those that can't. Keeping up with the details is annoying for a player etc, those players might be happier with a Sorcerer or a Cleric etc.

The magic items are fine and one can always add to them so I don't see a real problem here either.

 

[EricNoah]

I like it for playability.

Sometimes it's not as flexible as it needs to be to simulate other types of fantasy stories/settings. The psionics "method" (with power points, scalable powers, options for burning your lifeforce to gain more power points, etc.) is one alternative.

Something kind of in-between like Arcana Unearthed (where you can weave 3 lower-level slots to gain a slot of the next level, or unravel a higher-level slot to gain 2 slots of a lower level; and where each spell has a diminished, normal, and heightened version) is another way.

No one way will solve all problems or suit all situations, though.

 

[Alhazred]

I have no problem with the predictability of magic; adjudicating the effects of every Magic Missile and Fireball is time-consuming and adversely affects the flow of the game (IMO). However, I'm none too found of the fire-and-forget aspect. I'm trying to convince my players to adopt UA's spell point system, thereby retaining the predictability of spells but permitting greater leeway in terms of daily selection.

On those occassions when I want my magic mysterious and unpredictable, I use either the magic systems from CoC (Sanity loss) or Masque of the Red Death (which requires a skill check to successfully cast a spell). Both systems correspond well to the flavour of play which CoC and MotRD inspire.

 

[Arnwyn]

Why is it that I am annoyed so much by people who play D&D and yet have a hate-on for the Vancian system or for "Magic not being special."

Sensitivity problems?

 

[Wombat]

D&D magic is ... okay.

Only just.

It doesn't feel like "real fantasy magic" (except now it is, since there are a few hundred D&D books and books inspired by people playing D&D). I loathe the "fire & forget" aspect (okay, there is a slightly different rationale for it now, but it amounts to exactly the same thing). Eventually, I find D&D magic rather boring. But it does work for what is essentially a limited scenario game with heavy miniatures gaming aspects -- you don't want overbalanced pieces on your gameboard.

I use the system (well, a variant, in that I use Monte's AU currently) because the people at the table are more or less uncomfortable with changing to a system they don't know yet. It took quite a bit of coaxing to get them to switch to AU, but now they love it. I am hoping to wean them over the Ars Magica someday, which has a much more interesting magic system. But for the moment, it is usable and we have game.

As long as I have game, I will ignore many shortcomings.

 

[Hand of Evil]

It does what it is built to do and it does it well, no issues with it. I like a spell point system myself by that is just taste, which many will tell you is questionable.

As far as flavor and description, that is best handled at the table between player and DM.

 

[GlassJaw]

I like it for playability.

D&D magic is ... okay.

I agree with both points. What I like to call "standard" D&D is fast, easy, and requires little brainpower. But those are good things. I'm running a "standard" D&D campaign right now and I'm having a blast. I let the players buy and sell magic items and I've even reduced the time and costs for wizards to learn spells!

Overall though, the standard D&D magic system isn't very special. I do think it lacks character. It trades flavor and uniqueness for simplicity.

 

[der_kluge]

I don't like it, but only in the sense that it doesn't really make sense to me. A spell point, or mana system makes so much more sense to me. What is it about a fireball spell that a 5th level caster can only cast one time per day, but the same guy can cast 3 magic missiles in that same day? Why can't I trade the 3 magic missiles for an extra fireball? That makes sense to me.


The thing is, in D&D, there is a chart. And this chart has an X coordindate of "level", and the "Y" coordinate is "power". As a fighter increases in level, his power increases proportionately, so that for the fighter, the line stays flat. That is, his power is equal to his level.

The wizard and sorcerer, however, are more of a diagonal line. Most here would agree that a wizard or sorcerer (hereby refered to as a wizorcerer) starts out very, very weak. A 1st level fighter and 1st level wizorcerer? My money is on the fighter every time. But as the levels increase, the wizorcerer becomes more and more powerful exponentially. So at 20th level, you'll find no one taking bets on the fighter anymore.

Why is that? Is it a sacred cow? I think so.

Why does it have to be that way? I'd like to see a 1st level variant wizorcerer go toe to toe with a 1st level fighter. Why can't they design a wizorcerer with a flat power bar like the fighter? Is having one magic missile at first level really all that powerful? Why can't the mechanic for magic work more like combat? Why can't the wizorcerer have an unlimited amount of "magic rays" that he can use to attack people. Is giving a 1st level wizorcerer an unlimited number of 1d4 dmg rays (ranged touch attack) unbalancing?

Apparently someone thinks so, but I disagree.

 

[shilsen]

Why is it that I am annoyed so much by people who play D&D and yet have a hate-on for the Vancian system or for "Magic not being special."

You can read all the books you want and watch all the TV shows and play all the other RPGs you like where magic is mysterious and dangerous and unpredictable and SPECIAL. But I LIKE having magic that is predictable and safe to use. I LIKE having magic items that are bought and sold and yes, not treated as if they are unique and special because you can't get another one. I LIKE having magic that can be understood by humans and magic items that can be created by PCs.

Anyone agree with me?

I agree with you completely about D&D magic and magic items. Not about being bothered by others not liking it, however. Who cares what random strangers like or dislike?

 

[IronWolf]

I guess I bleed WotC..... I really don't have a problem with the magic system in D&D. Maybe its because I haven't looked around at other systems much.... ::shrug:: For me the system works and is very playable without being overly complex.