Should D&D Abandon Pairing of Elements & Damage Types?

[Huw]

I'm experimenying with a system where there are four circles of magic, each containing four elements. Two elements per circle overlap with another circle, and two elements are unique to a circle. Here's what I have so far:

The circle of prime elements:
-fire (overlaps with energy)
-water
-air
-earth (overlaps with matter)

The circle of energy:
-fire (overlaps with prime elements)
-ice
-light/electricity
-force (overlaps with ?)

The circle of matter:
-earth (overlaps with prime elements)
-metal
-wood
-artifice (overlaps with ?)

The circle of ? (haven't come up with a suitable name - it's sort of science-fcition type magic):
-force (overlaps with energy)
-time/dimension
-words (symbols, power words, etc.)
-artifice (overlaps with matter)

(Conjuring, Enchantment, Illusions and Necromancy are explicitly left out of this system.)

It works quite well, but there are a few problem areas. Sonic, for example, doesn't really fit into words, force or air.

 

[Umbran]

I don't think there needs to be a strict mapping of damage types to elements. It can stay loose and fluffy, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The circle of ? (haven't come up with a suitable name - it's sort of science-fcition type magic):
-force (overlaps with energy)
-time/dimension
-words (symbols, power words, etc.)
-artifice (overlaps with matter)

Circle of thought?

Looks like you are on your way to rediscovering the cosmology of the BECMI D&D.

It had spheres of Matter, Energy, Time, Thought, and Entropy. It was always pure genius for a fantasy cosmology, IMO.

 

[Huw]

Circle of thought?

Looks like you are on your way tp rediscovering the cosmology of the BECMI D&D.

It had spheres of Matter, Energy, Time, Thought, and Entropy. It was always pure genius for a fantasy cosmology, IMO.

Yup, that's one of my influences

(Also Oriental Adventurers, Rolemaster and some other obscure RPGs)

"Thought" sounds a little to psionic-y, especially since I have the more mental magics split out into another system.

 

[Fox Lee]

As far as I'm concerned, they aren't really tied together any more. Damage types are rules, elements are fluff. If I have a water elemental, I will think about whether each attack should do acid, cold, or just normal old "thumping your face" damage (seems to me that most damage dealt by water, when it isn't drowning, is the force of it slamming your body into stuff - why even give it a type?).

Okay, so when they make something with elemental fluff (like, say, genasi) they are usually obligated to tie some "elemental"-ish damage type to it, but that's just an example. You can mix up the flavours however you like. You want the "acid" water genasi to represent a plant-tpe with corrosive sap? Sure! Good on you for being creative.

Is there something I've missed in the DMG or whatever where they say that a damage type must match with a certain element?

 

[Asmor]

The circle of ? (haven't come up with a suitable name - it's sort of science-fcition type magic):
-force (overlaps with energy)
-time/dimension
-words (symbols, power words, etc.)
-artifice (overlaps with matter)

Neat idea! Question: Are these 'the way things actually are,' or is it more accurate to say that this is the model that has been constructed by [im]mortal minds, and the reality of things may not be quite so... differentiated?

Some ideas:

Circle of Reality
Circle of Sentience
Circle of Being
Circle of Motive

 

[Jhaelen]

First, I'd like to note that your issue seems to be 3e-specific. Other editions of D&D don't use these pairings.

While I cannot say that there was a time when I really liked having damage types attached to elements, I wonder if this should really be the case. They just do not make sense, given the way the world works.

Which world? The real world or your D&D setting?

The best treatment of the four classical, Greek elements I've ever seen is in the Ars Magica rpg. Mythic Europe works the way people believed it worked and this means that the elements influence everything, most notably medicine.

E.g. affecting or creating 'ice' requires manipulating the element earth (Terram), not water (Aquam) because ice is 'dry' and 'cold' matching Aristoteles' classification.

So, if you're looking for inspiration on how to improve D&D's treatment of them, look no further

 

[Gryph]

As far as I'm concerned, they aren't really tied together any more. Damage types are rules, elements are fluff. If I have a water elemental, I will think about whether each attack should do acid, cold, or just normal old "thumping your face" damage (seems to me that most damage dealt by water, when it isn't drowning, is the force of it slamming your body into stuff - why even give it a type?).

Okay, so when they make something with elemental fluff (like, say, genasi) they are usually obligated to tie some "elemental"-ish damage type to it, but that's just an example. You can mix up the flavours however you like. You want the "acid" water genasi to represent a plant-tpe with corrosive sap? Sure! Good on you for being creative.

Is there something I've missed in the DMG or whatever where they say that a damage type must match with a certain element?

This is pretty close to my preference too. Earth and Water are most frequently physical damage. Whether it's an elemental attacking you with a stony slam or trying to crush you with a wave; or elemental magic such as a spray of crystal shards or a wall of ice; the manifestations of those elements are typically purely physical and the damage type is untyped.

Fire and Air being less dense physically will typically inflict fire damage or lightning damage, respectively. Though concentrated gusts of wind for forced movement are also fun and they will usually do untyped damage if they do any direct damage at all.

I prefer poison and acid to come from natural effects and don't usually tie them to elemental magic at all.

All of this is of course when I am designing a creature and its powers or new spells. I don't worry too much about refluffing the existing monsters or PC powers as the association of damage types doesn't bother me that much, it's just not how I design them.

 

[howandwhy99]

Damage type is more about the physiology of the characters and the other material world objects in the world. Elements, like the 4 alchemical elements, are really the components of the previous. Having multiple kinds of resource damage pools can be more interesting than something without variety.

Of course you could try something where character composition isn't based off elementals. I've heard of social damage or emotional damage and whatnot in other games.

 

[Fox Lee]

Of course you could try something where character composition isn't based off elementals. I've heard of social damage or emotional damage and whatnot in other games.

Actually 4e is pretty close to that now. Consider hit points being heavily abstracted, and psychic being one of the damage types - if you look at Bard powers in particular, you can see that a lot of those that deal psychic damage have the theme of being demoralising, humiliating, et cetera. Bards basically deal ego damage