Sensing the presence of magic - isn't the mechanic backward?

[hong]

I think the idea is that the Arcana check to detect magic that ISN'T OBVIOUS gets harder as the magic gets more powerful.

Anyone can see that a flaming sword is magic. Ditto a flying carpet that's flying. Also, an item may not be obviously magical but has so much bling hanging off it that you want to hang on to it anyway. But if something is magical but not obviously so... then that's when you roll the check.

 

[Rith the Wanderer]

I think it would be hard to model a sliding scale differently. You would end up with magic being impossible to find at low levels and ridiculously easy at high levels. Like if you did (35-1/2 level of spell) you would not be able to detect magic with any frequency until about 10th level at the earliest. And at late levels it would be so easy you wouldn't even need a roll. I think the best solution would be to do a tier based system(25 for heroic, 20 for paragon, 15 for epic level effects). This would have similar problems but to a lesser extent maybe?

Like I said, it would be difficult to model. Though I do completely agree with your logic.

 

[AuraSeer]

Hmm... well the problem is thinking of it this way - I still think I'd be able to see a shark in the water quite a bit easier than a minnow.

The minnows are noodling around at the surface, making ripples, maybe eating bugs. The shark is cruising a hundred feet below you.

 

[Cadfan]

Go with the magical leakage explanation. I mean, honestly, this is all TOTALLY MADE UP STUFF anyways, so why not take the option that creates the better game?

How about, you're not detecting magical auras, you're detecting the degree to which the item in question is out of phase with the natural world. True magic blends seamlessly into reality. The magic of the unskilled is unharmonious.

 

[mmaranda]

Mechanics aside, big magic that is obvious you can detect as being magical pretty quickly but the nuances of what that magic can do and how deeply it permeats the item are the tricky points. Also if somebody or something is extremely powerful (magically speaking) and they are trying to hide then they are probably taking some pains to hide the magical aura's an the more powerful the magic the better it can hidden.

 

[hamishspence]

Compared to 3rd ed

In 3rd ed, high powered magic items gave you a massive headache to look at.

In 4th ed, high powered items are harder to spot.

It may be a reversal, but it leads to interesting implications. Maybe its like this: all magic is cloaked, and the more powerful the effect, the better the cloak. A flashy item is weak. An understated, subtle item is strong. In a sense, it reverses the bling-bling: bling is a sign that the item as not as good. I kinda like it. its a trope in certain kinds of fantasy that "Real mages" are subtle and poseurs are flashy.

 

[Tale]

I pondered this recently myself. It seems counterintuitive, but it also seems proper for game mechanics, and is reasonable. Higher level effects behave in more exotic ways that are less familiar.

 

[Klaumbaz]

Jordan's "Wheel of time" gives a good example. powerful/experienced casters learn to invert weaves and stuff and even hide the magical presence. And it takes even more experience and active knowledge of it's presence to try and detect/defeat it.

Granted, the big "ritual of evil at the top of the hill" will make every magic user around go "WTF is going on up there".

 

[JDillard]

Those above said it as well, but I'll reiterate it in a way that I like (in case you're still unsure, or don't agree). From a game mechanics rule, it's that way because that's the way that all other similar mechanics work. The higher your level, the harder it is to spot or track or know about or whatever. Skill checks scale like that. However, so do your 1/2 level bonuses so basically as long as what you're doing is the same level as you, the difficulty doesn't change.

From a "flavor" rule, just think of it this way. You've got two kinds of magic: flashy and subtle. Flashy magic is always going to be obvious, and never really going to need a detect magic check to tell if it's magical or not. The sword that crackles with lightning, the shield that obviously glows, etc.

Conversely, powerful magic that's intentionally subtle (i.e. non-obvious) seems like it should be harder to detect than weaker magic that's subtle. A 20th level wizard making a magic dagger that he doesn't want to be obviously magical is going to be better at doing that than a 5th level wizard doing the same.

 

[starwed]

Go with the magical leakage explanation. I mean, honestly, this is all TOTALLY MADE UP STUFF anyways, so why not take the option that creates the better game?

That's not really true. D&D doesn't stand in isolation; it draws from the rich pool of fantastical literature out there.

That powerful magic is easier to detect is pretty much a given in most narratives in the fantasy genre. Deviating from narrative expectations in the name of your own narrative is cool. Doing so in the sake of a minor point of game balance, not so much.

I'd just house rule it that, unless the item is designed to hide, invert the level dependent part of the DC. I can't imagine a situation where this would cause the DM problems.