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

[Jaeger]

From my experience, magic in dnd lacks that spark, because there is no cost to the character to achieve the desired results (spell slots are not a risk or a cost, they are a managed resource).

In shadowrun and other games, mages can choose to burn more energy on a spell at the risk of overloading or passing out. As a player in these games, I witnessed SR mage players get very excited when they are assessing the risk of burning out. Its a trade off for more power, something dnd doesn't do well.

Dnd mages in 5e get their spells without any hindrances to direct power (spell components don't count, because I have never ever seen them tracked or mentioned in a game in person). If mages had more risk to casting spells (or any risk at all really), they would likely be more excited when they see the results of their efforts.

Risk brings excitement, instant gratification leaves players feeling something is lacking.

Yeah you had to earn magic back then, with 5e its everywhere. I guess in the rapid modern world getting stuff now is what younglings want / need.
I'm not sure trying to de-magic 5e would work. Despite being a fan of 5th, 1st, basic, TOR, MERP and Decipher LOTR......something just didn't work for me with AIME. The books had excellent re-sale value though so wasn't that much of a waste!
...

It does seem like there are just not enough players out there who find limits of any kind fun, and so the issue will continue to snowball.

There are some very interesting youtube videos and articles out there about game design from a video game perspective.

Do a search with the phrases:

Players will optimize the fun out of a game
How Game Designers Protect Players From Themselves

All of WotC's D&D survey's have been very player facing...

The reason why I think that these video game design issues are relevant to RPG's despite the media being different, is that I think that if WotC keeps the player facing survey model to shape their design direction: D&D will gradually succumb to this effect over time.

In my opinion, the signs of this are already there when you compare to how things were done to restrain PC power levels in past editions.

 

[Minigiant]

There are some very interesting youtube videos and articles out there about game design from a video game perspective.

Do a search with the phrases:

Players will optimize the fun out of a game
How Game Designers Protect Players From Themselves

All of WotC's D&D survey's have been very player facing...

The reason why I think that these video game design issues are relevant to RPG's despite the media being different, is that I think that if WotC keeps the player facing survey model to shape their design direction: D&D will gradually succumb to this effect over time.

In my opinion, the signs of this are already there when you compare to how things were done to restrain PC power levels in past editions.

The problem is TSR and WOTC didn't design fun within the limits. And they let the problem go too long.

One example of how limits were designed to be fun is Class/Faction based Card Games. In Class/Faction based CCGs, each class/faction is given clear strengths and weaknesses and isn't allowed to overcome limits. Whenever a class/faction overcomes a limit, the community riots.

The issue with D&D's magic is that the strengths and weaknesses of each type of magic and each magic using class is not blatantly defined, not stuck to, and fraankly uneven. No shock magic doesn't feel special if no one asks "what can't an X do?".

 

[gorice]

If death spirals deter the low-to-no-risk combat-as-sport style of play I'm all for them.

And to answer @Fanaelialae 's point: as a player I too like switching my brain off sometimes and just beating up on some bad guys...but I'm also willing not only to recognize but to sometimes even lean into the idea that our PCs are every bit as "bad guy" as the opposition, and sometimes worse. We're just better at being bad.

I think you can have your cake and eat it by having lasting effects that are a long-term problem but not a short-term one. So, maybe the fighter can have a big heap of HP and doesn't suffer for losing them, but recovery takes a long time or involves some other difficulty.

 

[Jaeger]

The problem is TSR and WOTC didn't design fun within the limits. And they let the problem go too long.

One example of how limits were designed to be fun is Class/Faction based Card Games. In Class/Faction based CCGs, each class/faction is given clear strengths and weaknesses and isn't allowed to overcome limits. Whenever a class/faction overcomes a limit, the community riots.

The issue with D&D's magic is that the strengths and weaknesses of each type of magic and each magic using class is not blatantly defined, not stuck to, and fraankly uneven. No shock magic doesn't feel special if no one asks "what can't an X do?".

Agreed. The solution to something being "unfun" seems to always be to remove any limitations rather than to properly understand why a given mechanic isn't working as expected.

And WotC has the opposite problem of PvP Class/Faction based CCGs - whenever anyone has ever hinted at imposing limits of any kind on D&D casters: The "community" riots...

In my opinion; This is due to the fact that casters/PC's in general rarely get a taste of their own medicine in the default WotC "balanced encounter" play mode.

As a result with the player facing surveys the natural response is to encourage the designers to give PC's "MOAR POWERZ!", because when you ask "Is this fun?" in your surveys anything player facing that increases PC power levels will always be met with a resounding "Yes!", because most of the people replying to these surveys are players not GM's.

 

[Minigiant]

Agreed. The solution to something being "unfun" seems to always be to remove any limitations rather than to properly understand why a given mechanic isn't working as expected.

And WotC has the opposite problem of PvP Class/Faction based CCGs - whenever anyone has ever hinted at imposing limits of any kind on D&D casters: The "community" riots...

In my opinion; This is due to the fact that casters/PC's in general rarely get a taste of their own medicine in the default WotC "balanced encounter" play mode.

As a result with the player facing surveys the natural response is to encourage the designers to give PC's "MOAR POWERZ!", because when you ask "Is this fun?" in your surveys anything player facing that increases PC power levels will always be met with a resounding "Yes!", because most of the people replying to these surveys are players not GM's.

Well that's because WOTC and TSR both never commits to the limits and often does the limits wrong.

For example, when specialist wizards had to give up 2 schools to specialize and get one bonus spell slot per level... 2 things happened...

1. WOTC created spells of one school that mimiced other schools.
2. Players picked general wizards because the benefits of specialists weren't enough

What should have been done is lower the base slots per day by 1 and raise the specialist spell per day by 2 or 3. And not have as many school copying spells.

This is why the 5e Wizard subclasses are boring. The base wizard should only learn 1 spell per level but learn addition spells based on subclass.

It's weird when the arcane tricksters and eldritch knights have more thematic spell loadouts than sorcerers, wizards, bards, druids, and warlocks.

 

[Undrave]

Fighting should be the last resort, not the first one, particularly for any PCs that want to call themselves Good.

Death spiral games are one the whole a completely different paradigm to modern D&D, and while some people would like it, I don't know if it wouldn't be too much of a departure for the majority.

Now that would be one hell of a shot - not only hit the target but hit it a century back or foward in time.

Ooops

 

[Undrave]

Fighting should be the last resort, not the first one, particularly for any PCs that want to call themselves Good.

They should stop making the fight part of the game so much FUN then. And also not have about two entire classes who are useless when there's no fighting going on (Barbarian and Fighter)... otherwise I'm gonna keep wanting to play that part of the game.

 

[Lanefan]

They should stop making the fight part of the game so much FUN then. And also not have about two entire classes who are useless when there's no fighting going on (Barbarian and Fighter)... otherwise I'm gonna keep wanting to play that part of the game.

When there's no fighting going on, a Fighter is only as useless as its player allows it to be. There's always a way for Fighters to stick their oars in to other situations unless they simply can't get to said situations due to lack of, say, flight.

Barbarians' options are more limited, to be sure; but I've never really liked the class o'ermuch anyway and wouldn't cry were it to disappear. Ideally, Barbarian should be a cultural background rather than a class.

 

[Redthistle]

It's caused by getting older. I mean, Harry Potter was aimed at young adults for a reason.

Oh, damn. I resemble that remark.

 

[Undrave]

When there's no fighting going on, a Fighter is only as useless as its player allows it to be. There's always a way for Fighters to stick their oars in to other situations unless they simply can't get to said situations due to lack of, say, flight.

They can by virtue of being PCs but almost nothing about their ability to do stuff outside of combat has anything to do with their Fighteriness.

They could be two background stapled onto PC stats and it wouldn't really change much to their out-of-combat contribution.

And it doesn't change the fact that the fighting part of the game is pretty darn fun. People are gonna want to take part in the fun part of the game.