Residuum: A Re-Fluffing

[Boarstorm]

Personally I think it's kind of irritating for D&D to come down so firmly on the "it's just a kind of energy lol", especially as I'm not sure that's going to fit entirely well with some of the setting they've proposed to bring back (it fits perfectly with Eberron, though, and that's first up after the Realms, where magic has been portrayed both ways).

I'm kind of curious as to which setting it doesn't fit. Care to enlighten me?

 

[Dausuul]

Melting down a sword to make another sword does seem pointless. But what if I want an axe or a spear? Could I not take the material and remake it to suit my purpose? Why do I have to find another hunk of metal?

The analogy I'm drawing is:

Iron = mundane item
Forging = enchantment process
Sword = magic item

So, if you melt down the sword and use the iron to make an axe, that's equivalent to casting Mordenkainen's disjunction on the magic item and then enchanting it in a different way. You can do it, but you'd be much better advised to go get another mundane item and enchant that instead.

Moving this into the enchantment argument: if there is magic in this sword, and I have the knowledge and skill to force magic into an axe, why would I want to pay for the materials to create a new source of magic rather than taking the magic from the sword?

But there is no "magic in the sword." Magic is a property of the sword, like sharpness and balance, not a physical thing that's been stuffed inside it.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Already done (and rebuked) in the News post...

DC

I don't see how you can rebuke it. WoW does have something similiar.

 

[AuraSeer]

I don't like the idea of disenchant that much, I mean it's ok for a videogame but in my campaign magical items have a history and meaning behind them. there are no +2 Swords but rather there are items with a history behind them with meaning behind them. Almost everyone of them is a religious icon, someones heritage, something made with painstaking work and with rare materials hard and often dangerous to find.

Emphasized a part I think is important. To me it seems perfectly reasonable that a crafter could break an item down into its component parts, and recover some of those rare materials.

Out of character we work abstractly, and say the wizard can tear up some old items and get 2000 gp toward a new item. But in character, the wizard may say something like: "To craft my new magic scimitar I need this long list of special materials. I can purify just enough Astral Iron from the links of the dead orc chieftain's magic armor. This magic dagger we looted from a tomb has a suitable Feywild Ruby as its pommel-stone, which I can extract and reuse. So since I don't need to buy either of those things at the merchant, I only have to spend 8,000gp on ingredients instead of 10,000gp."

Even if the books explicitly say that you're taking out the "magic essence" of the old item, you can safely ignore or change that; I probably will. As long as the game mechanics are sensible, I'm quite willing to eliminate fluff I dislike.

 

[Alkiera]

I heard a podcast by a few fiction writers about writing magic systems in fantasy stories; the fantasy author was very big on having sensical rules for magic, and gave several reasons(Google 'writing excuses').

How does magic work in the world if it doesn't involve an energy source? I think the generic D&D assumption is that Arcane casters use a spell's VSM components to channel energy from Elsewhere into the Material Plane, with their will and the spell affecting the resulting release of energy. Item enchantment is a variant on this where that energy is slowly fed into a physical object, using arcane techniques related to various spells to align the energy within the item to cause various effects.

If a magic weapon contains no magic, how is it different from a non-magical weapon?

To go back to the sword analogy, 'forging' is a process that takes metal and produces a sword. You can't get the forging out of the sword because it's not a thing, it's a process; a shaping of the thing(bar of metal) into a weapon. In the same way, we assume 'enchantment' is a process that takes magical energy (xp in previous editions, Residuum in 4E) and shapes it into a magical effect within an item.

You could argue that 'enchantment' is a process that manipulates the object directly; but I don't see that creating magic items much better than a master craftsman; perhaps slightly better, but not much. And certainly no 'weird' effects, like flaming longswords, rods that shoot lightning bolts, etc. In this case, the 'magic' is that the blade is 'really sharp', or 'very well balanced'. Perhaps it's better than what a talented smith could do, but only a qualitative difference, not 'my sword bursts into flame to burn my enemies'. If you do allow for other effects, flaming swords, etc... then you get lots of 'where does the fire come from?' type questions, which, in my experience, never have as good answers as the 'the magic energy in the sword makes the flame' solution.

 

[Alkiera]

I don't see how you can rebuke it. WoW does have something similiar.

The rebuttal was that Eberron Campaign Setting's Artificer class had this ability in it (called Reclaim Essence), and was released before WoW.

People don't seem to understand that little to nothing in WoW is new. Blizzard, in it's entire history, hasn't 'invented' anything... they only recombine and refine, and they are very good at it. They take what they see as the best mechanics, rules, fluff, whatever, from many sources, polish them up a bit, and make a game out of it. The vast majority of the mechanics of WoW were in other games before WoW, just not the same game.

Most of the 'D&D stole X from WoW' people lack the history to see that Blizzard probably slote X from D&D first, and D&D is only stealing from it's own previous editions.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I have always viewed the forging of magical items as a multi-stage process. Firs their is the actual forging of the weapon, so this is something a ordinary blacksmith can complete, to whatever level of skill he has.

The next stage is the magical process where a magic-user (could be the blacksmith if he has the knowledge) enchants a substance or object that can hold within it the power granted through the enchantment. A normal blade cannot hold this power thus, you see things like religious wording engraved in a fine sliver of silver, or a ruby, etc.

This then magically enchanted object is joined with the ordinary item. So a ruby in the pommel, a liquid silver paste on the blade, etc.

Thus the art of disenchanting is simply removing the enchanted object from the ordinary object, the enchantment carries its power through the process if done correctly, ie: not damaging the object and leaves behind a ordinary sword.

Now very basic ones can be removed by a deft hand and a dagger, while very powerful ones require rituals and possibly even sacrifices to ebb the object into allowing the person to remove it (this can be especially important for example with intelligent devices where you must please it or trick it before it will let you remove it from its object).

 

[Dausuul]

How does magic work in the world if it doesn't involve an energy source? I think the generic D&D assumption is that Arcane casters use a spell's VSM components to channel energy from Elsewhere into the Material Plane, with their will and the spell affecting the resulting release of energy. Item enchantment is a variant on this where that energy is slowly fed into a physical object, using arcane techniques related to various spells to align the energy within the item to cause various effects.

If a magic weapon contains no magic, how is it different from a non-magical weapon?

Because it has been modified in such a way that it produces a magical effect.

Perhaps the sword has been blessed by a powerful spirit of fire; when you draw the sword, the spirit's fire flows through it and ignites the blade. The sword is attuned to the spirit like a compass needle to the Earth's magnetic field.

Perhaps there are certain runes that, when drawn upon the right type of object, in the right order, under the right circumstances and with the right tools, create fire.

Perhaps inanimate objects can be woken to consciousness; the sword now has a mind and a will of its own, albeit limited, and the enchanter taught it to ignite in the same way that a human wizard can learn to throw fireballs.

"Magic energy" is only one form of magic system, and not one that appeals to me; there are many others.

And heck, even if you insist on a "magic energy" system, there's no reason the sword must contain magic energy itself. It's clear that it is possible for an object which itself does not contain magic (an apprentice wizard's brain, for example) to draw and channel magical energy. The sword does the exact same thing. It's a conduit, not a battery.

 

[Alkiera]

Because it has been modified in such a way that it produces a magical effect.

Perhaps the sword has been blessed by a powerful spirit of fire; when you draw the sword, the spirit's fire flows through it and ignites the blade. The sword is attuned to the spirit like a compass needle to the Earth's magnetic field.

Perhaps there are certain runes that, when drawn upon the right type of object, in the right order, under the right circumstances and with the right tools, create fire.

Perhaps inanimate objects can be woken to consciousness; the sword now has a mind and a will of its own, albeit limited, and the enchanter taught it to ignite in the same way that a human wizard can learn to throw fireballs.

Okay, these are good examples of what you were talking about. These kinds of things do exist in fantasy... but they've never appealed to me, with the possible exception of the spirit-binding thing. 'Runes' and 'power words' and the like tend towards 'sympatheic' magic... speak the name of the fire, and it comes, write 'Fire' on a sword, and it flames, that kind of thing, seemed too far fetched to be believable. Write the name of god on a paper, put it inside the golem, and it comes to life. To me, magic would be way more common if all you had to do was say the right word or write/carve the right message.

"Magic energy" is only one form of magic system, and not one that appeals to me; there are many others.

And heck, even if you insist on a "magic energy" system, there's no reason the sword must contain magic energy itself. It's clear that it is possible for an object which itself does not contain magic (an apprentice wizard's brain, for example) to draw and channel magical energy. The sword does the exact same thing. It's a conduit, not a battery.

We'll have to agree to disagree, then, as I prefer the 'magical energy' magical systems. As for the sword being a conduit... to my mind, the metal itself does not normally channel magic; the 'gateway' is a construct of energy within the sword. A disjunction spell would destroy the structure of the gateway, an anti-magic field would force it closed. The energy, not being native to the steel, would eventually leak out in the disjunction case, as the stabilizing structure is gone.

Most permanent items are conduits... 'battery' items are things like magical potions, wands, rods, and other items with charges.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I don't like the idea of disenchant that much, I mean it's ok for a videogame but in my campaign magical items have a history and meaning behind them. there are no +2 Swords but rather there are items with a history behind them with meaning behind them. Almost everyone of them is a religious icon, someones heritage, something made with painstaking work and with rare materials hard and often dangerous to find.

These magical treasures aren't things that one casually breaks down into its components because you decided that the 500 year old katana would look better as a chain mail bikini that provides +2 to saves.

It inevitably takes some of the magic out of the setting when you can manufacture items as if it were the end of January sales.

If the 500 year old katana was actually an interesting magical item, then your players are not likely to be willing to destroy it. The problem is that it's +2. They'll throw it away when they find a +3 even if they can't melt it down for parts.

Would someone really go to the effort that you describe for a +2 sword? It's not that big a boost to your combat abilities.

No matter how much story you assign to a magical item, it will still be just it's stats in the eyes of the players.

If you want your players to never melt down or hock off a holy artifact, you could just take a +1 sword, ascribe legendary powers to it, and never let your players identify it fully "It's +1, but there's something else there, something powerful, and legend says that he who holds the sword will be able to strike down his greatest foe!".