Overuse of monsters and magic.

[CruelSummerLord]

Ever notice how when ever a monster is overused or becomes too common it makes it seem less "monstery". For instance, the overuse of Dragons (everyone having one to ride on in our high level games) turned dragons (once a cool creature bringing images of Smog into ones mind) into little more then domestic flying battle horses. After that we never thought of Dragons the same.

Same with magic. Once we started letting PCs buy magic (to eat up their GPs) we ended up devaluating the rare pieces we found adventuring. Ho hum was what we felt.

The same can be said for game settings where continual light spells light entire dungeons or even city streets. Once magic becomes as common as modern technology, its no longer "magic" in practicality.

Or do you disagree with this assessment?

I totally agree. Magic should not be a tradeable commodity, nor should PCs be discarding magic swords in favor of something "better." Making a magic sword should be an undertaking made by the most powerful of wizards-you had to be an 18th level mover and shaker to do it in previous editions, and now wizards can do it even before they hit double digits.

Blech.

And worse, magic items are mass-produced, and become a cheap commodity.

Double blech.

 

[airwalkrr]

Agree.

This should have been a poll.

 

[Victim]

I totally agree. Magic should not be a tradeable commodity, nor should PCs be discarding magic swords in favor of something "better." Making a magic sword should be an undertaking made by the most powerful of wizards-you had to be an 18th level mover and shaker to do it in previous editions, and now wizards can do it even before they hit double digits.

Okay, then why are there weak magic items? Why would powerful wizards bother making marginally useful magic items like +1 daggers? Magic item construction requiring epic tasks done only by the most powerful wizards around doesn't sync well with the numerous unimpressive (noticeably, but not overwhelmingly better than normal gear) magic items typically found in DnD.

Besides, characters needed level 16 for Permancy, not 18.

 

[AllisterH]

This keeps coming up and yet people ignoring this.

How do you make magic items feel mysterious and magical when 2 members of the classic group (rogue, fighter, wizard and cleric) are busting out magic every day and making reality sit up and beg?

What makes a magic +2 flaming sword "magical, mysterious and powerful" when there's this guy RIGHT NEXT TO HIM that can literally teleport across the continent, gate in a freaking angel, bring back the dead etc....

Unless the SETTING itself is like Conan or Iron Heroes, a.k.a. "no magical PCs" allowed, there is NO way to actually make a +1 sword seem "mysterious and magical" and something a PC will keep from level 5 to level 20.

 

[AllisterH]

Okay, then why are there weak magic items? Why would powerful wizards bother making marginally useful magic items like +1 daggers? Magic item construction requiring epic tasks done only by the most powerful wizards around doesn't sync well with the numerous unimpressive (noticeably, but not overwhelmingly better than normal gear) magic items typically found in DnD.

Besides, characters needed level 16 for Permancy, not 18.

There was something funky going on as well in that respect. THe number of items in modules AND the fact that if you were a 9th level fighter, the leader of your bodyguards himself could be wielding a +2 sword, +1 platemail, +1 shield AND horseshoes of speed seemed to suggest magic items werent THAT rare....

 

[Eric Tolle]

I have to think that the whole "Magic items should be rare and fantastical" is far more of a GM attitude than a player one. Specifically, GMs at a loss for bringing the fantastical into a game, and blaming one element. Admittedly, it's easier to railroad players the less magic there is: a wight is much more terrifyng when there is no magic. Players tend to be more practical then GMs: where the GM is thinking "Hey, I'll have them do an overland journey to get to McGuffinland, forcing them to have an encounter every day", the players are going to be thinking "Screw it- let's teleport."

This is also something of a misapplication of classic high fantasy tropes to RPGs- GMs read of swords alike Stormbringer or Excaliber, and think "Hey, ALL magic items should be as rare and cool as these items, because rarity is how these things are cool". When actually, the items themselves have nothing to do with the coolness, it's the magic item's owners and the stories that they appear in that make for the coolness. I personally don't think that limiting magic brings any more sense of the fantastical into a game: it's how those things can be used that gives the sense of wonder, and how game elements can be described that give that sense.

Unfortunately, it's easier to try to limit magic, then it is to actually come up with something new and interesting in a game. for my part, I'll prefer Eberron over Greyhawk with the interesting things taken out.

 

[Imp]

How do you make magic items feel mysterious and magical when 2 members of the classic group (rogue, fighter, wizard and cleric) are busting out magic every day and making reality sit up and beg?

The classic dirty trick is to have systems of magic unavailable to the PCs, and use those (or no system at all; the 1E method, pretty much) when you really gotta go for the mysterious and magical.

I have a prejudice towards low-magic myself, but there's got to be at least a way for the PCs to sell a magic item if they want. And can they buy a magic sword? Maybe. Possibly. Can they buy a magic sword with specific properties that they request? Well.

there is NO way to actually make a +1 sword seem "mysterious and magical" and something a PC will keep from level 5 to level 20.

If you assume that all magic items have static properties I suppose. Another dirty trick!

 

[Valiant]

Q: "I disagree with how unilateral your assertions are." My assertion was not unilateral, despite your attempt to label it so. Infact, thats why I supplied specific examples of the kind of thing I was talking about (dragons reduced to steeds (or have you ever played the Dragon Lance series, yuk!, and light spells lighting up city streets at night (see TLG's CZ1 for example). Sure, some magic is "common" for casters, but those are spells. In a low magic campaign, finding that flame tounge should make your mouth water, not yawn. Infact, in 1E most classes (like fighters for instance) start about the same (with no skills or feats remember) individuality of 1E fighters often involves the rare piece of magic they find and use that helps destinguish it from all the others. For instance, I once had a thief with a flame tounge sword (found at around 4th). He used it in all kinds of situations sometimes creatively, sometimes foolhardedly....thats the sort of thing that really gave this PC depth.
Really, its not unlike Biblo Baggins finding the ring of invisibility in the Hobbit (before you know its the "one ring of power"). His use of the ring to save the dwarves several times destinguished him really. And because he found it risking his life, it gives it a more meaningful value then if he'd purchased it.

The point of playing a fantasy game is to experiance the fantasy setting afterall. When module writers try to wow their players by throwing in novelty for the sake of being different, which often includes the kitchen sink then the setting suffers in the long run. Esp. when it becomes a competition for "novelty". One example of this can be seen in 3E when first they introduced one half this and half that, and then when people got bored with that introduced another 1/3 this 1/3 that 1/3 that, and then to "one up" that one we eventually ended up with the most obsured mixes to the point monster archetypes are becoming second place citizens in the classic fantasy setting. And once all these new monster combo's with odd class combinations become "ordinary" and there is nothing left to make novel, the game implodes upon itself (infact anything novel driven dies the same death). Late 1E/2E did this sort of thing, and so did 3E. I imagine 4E will follow the same path. The only ones that kept a handle on this was Gygax in OD&D and early 1E (before the shiat hit the fan at TSR).

 

[WayneLigon]

There's simply no way to make magic as novel as some seem to want it, in D&D. Magic is usually like that in many early stories and novels, but that doesn't work well in a game. Most novel mages spend time standing around dispensing advice and being mysterious, saying that oh they could wipe out the Dark Army but they cannot use magic like water because The Enemy will notice them, or that The Balance will be disturbed. That works wonderfully well as a plot device, and I've seldom if ever seen a person want to play that sort of character. Unless the setting itself specifically makes people play like that, it just doesn't wash.

D&D magic, by it's very nature, makes the idea of a 'mysterious magic' campaign into a joke about the time people hit 5th level. I can make water any time I want. I can make fire any time I want. Hey, i can make fire that lasts forever. The first thing someone does when they get that spell is put it on a stick and make a light source that never goes out. The first thing a city mayor is going to do when someone like that comes into town is pay him a crapload of gold to make lanterns. Midieval cities are dark, and no-one wants them to be that way. Torches are too dangerous. You come into town with a cold light that never runs out and you have a job for life.

Similar to this are the spells that let you mend and fix things, or create certain goods out of thin air.

Once spells like that exist, the cat is out of the bag and there's no way to get it back in unless you simply start monkeying with the spell lists.

 

[Hussar]

I brought this up elsewhere, but, I'll bring it up yet again.

1e does not assume low magic. The proof is in the paladin. Paladin's a limited to 10 magic items. This is a big deal. Going over that limit turns you into a fighter. So, this is meant to be a fairly significant limitation.

TEN magic items is a limitation. It's only a limitation if everyone else in the party has more than ten magic items.

Party size in 1e was assumed to be 6-8 PC's. That means that the party is expected to have 60-80 magic items at some point. Minimum.

The idea that 1e defaults to low magic is flawed. YOUR campaign may have done so, but, the rules certainly don't.