D&D 5E The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D

[Laurefindel]

That’s an interesting conjecture. Not sure I would have stated it as fact, myself.

Admittedly an anecdotal observation from experience, but I stand by my position.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I know that many people enjoy more dangerous and resource management games, but I know that isn't the majority. However, these players as more represented in the same pool of players seeking a decrease in magic solutions, since that is what this thread is (was?) about.

One way or another, no need to ridicule what others find fun (that's a bit of an overstatement, I really don't think @Vaalingrade was ridiculing anyone here)

This seems a strange Venn diagram to paint, given that general deadliness and mundane resource constraints tend to be more effectively addressed through magic..

Unless magic itself is also constrained.

 

[Voadam]

More dangerous and more attrition/resource management-oriented, which tends to interest more players who have a desire to decrease magic, to tie in with the OP.

The easy way to get around being a ranged character tracking RAW 5e resource management ammunition of arrows is to be a caster with at will ranged cantrips. Such as a warlock, sorcerer, wizard, bard, druid, or cleric.

On the flip side, in classic D&D if you want to do resource management every game then an obvious choice was to play a vancian caster managing spell slots.

If you want to avoid resource management tracking in D&D, best bet generally is to be a sword swinger (and later warlocks).

 

[Laurefindel]

The easy way to get around being a ranged character tracking RAW 5e resource management ammunition of arrows is to be a caster with at will ranged cantrips. Such as a warlock, sorcerer, wizard, bard, druid, or cleric.

On the flip side, in classic D&D if you want to do resource management every game then an obvious choice was to play a vancian caster managing spell slots.

If you want to avoid resource management tracking in D&D, best bet generally is to be a sword swinger (and later warlocks).

Absolutely true,

However, gamers that do enjoy a resource management game don't necessarily want to play casters. As a matter of fact, player groups that agree on attrition campaign are usually, in my experience, looking for a game where attrition is not trivialized by magic like at will attack cantrips, and as you say, will tend to adopt a more vancian approach to selection and use of spellcasting requiring careful planning.

I enjoy fast and "carefree" games, and that's how I usually run them.
I also enjoy attrition-heavy games for a completely different ambiance.

But when my arrows are counted and the weight of my food slows my character down, the eldritch-blasting warlock and the goodberry-druid that doesn't need to commit a precious spell slot for that particular spell are out of place. That's why in my experience, players looking for attrition games are also the players looking for a game with reduced magic. That's where the Venn diagram meets.

 

[Undrave]

Oh, that's easy to fix. Let's see...

Add weapon speeds, reroll initiative every round, a stamina meter/system to track/force players to skip turns, give monsters save or die powers back, triple monster hp, make spells cast time multiple rounds, add more subsystems...

hope that's a good start!

Don't forget to count arrows. And maybe a penalty to attack via encumbrance so people have to track that too.

Oh, and don't forget to attack downed players.

I said not make it as fun, not make it annoying and tedious

More importantly, imo, is that if you count arrows, track encumbrance, attack downed players, impose perception penalties to darkvision, enforce somatic spell requirements, and otherwise actually use all the rules, 5e gets more dangerous.

Which, of course, is a downside to many people, but there's also an issue that at least some of those come across as annoying minutia to many, over and above their output effects.

More dangerous and more attrition/resource management-oriented, which tends to interest more players who have a desire to decrease magic, to tie in with the OP.

That's not where I was going with this tough, even if its an interesting idea, but only that, right now, combat in DnD is FUN and if you want people to stop considering combat as a first recourse and instead of a last ditch option, then maybe don't make it that much more fun than the other options. It's one thing to avoid all combat at all cost, it's another if you frame it 'avoid the fun part of the game at all cost' and you can't blame players for not being on board for that second one.

I didn't think it would tie back to OP...

Having to track rations, encumbrance and even torches, I can see that being pretty challenging with the right mechanics (encumbrance would be better if it was abstracted a little more, like in Ryutama), especially if you ditch the magic that can obviate the need for those resources, but I don't think tracking arrows is really on par with that in terms of 'fun'. Tracking arrows just feel like pointless minutiae compared to the rest. It might be too gamist for some purist but maybe we could track arrow in terms of encounters instead of individual arrow.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I said not make it as fun, not make it annoying and tedious

The problem is that this is traditionally the only way D&D seems to consider trying to make the other pillars fun.

We never get a lot of freeform idea on make areas that are fun and wonderous to explore, just a bunch of suggestions on busy work to make it more 'challenging'.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Having to track rations, encumbrance and even torches, I can see that being pretty challenging with the right mechanics (encumbrance would be better if it was abstracted a little more, like in Ryutama), especially if you ditch the magic that can obviate the need for those resources, but I don't think tracking arrows is really on par with that in terms of 'fun'. Tracking arrows just feel like pointless minutiae compared to the rest. It might be too gamist for some purist but maybe we could track arrow in terms of encounters instead of individual arrow.

I try to warn players in session0 (or even before) if we are tracking things.

I once ran a 'lost island' game that session 2 or 3 would find the players stranded on a dessert island... I told them ahead.

 

[James Gasik]

I try to warn players in session0 (or even before) if we are tracking things.

I once ran a 'lost island' game that session 2 or 3 would find the players stranded on a dessert island... I told them ahead.

A dessert island? Well at least they won't starve! Cavities might be a problem though...

 

[DND_Reborn]

As the OPer I'll chime back in for a bit:

Remove magic that makes resource management obsolete. (No Tiny Hut, no Goodberry, no Teleport)

OR

At the very least nerf them back to their originals so resource management is still a factor of the game:

• No Invulnerable Tiny Hut--just protects you from most climate conditions
• Goodberry is a meal, not the whole day's rations--and you actually have to FIND berries to cast it
• Teleport runs the risk of serious complications (not perfect via Teleportation Circle)

NEXT:

Stop spontaneous casting--prepare the spells into the slots again.
Change casting times so casting in combat becomes risky (including interruptions) and/or spell checks.

and so forth...

Apparently, at some point, people complained these things made the game "less fun". It was at a point when I wasn't consulted.

But now we have a lot of people complaining martials (fighters seemingly in particular) can't keep up with casters outside of combat.

FINALLY:

Remove sorcerer and warlock (delegate them to subclasses of wizard and cleric), and make Bards half-casters again. Stop all of the magical subclasses for martials--enough is enough already.

Now...

That doesn't address my issues in the OP other than 5E adds too much magic to the game compared to AD&D or B/X levels. So, banning a lot of stuff seems like the easiest solution and returning casters to the constraints they had, making casting harder.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

A dessert island? Well at least they won't starve! Cavities might be a problem though...

I think I made that mistake on a map once and decided to run with it... chocolate rivers and geysers trees made of hard skittles like candy... cotton candy bushes.