The extreme proliferation of magic in D&D

[der_kluge]

There are rules for giving XP for things besides fighting. And the way to do that is go the unobvious way. It is harder and takes a bit more from the players and DM, but it is possible. THat's all I'm saying, you seem to think that it is impossible to play D&D any other way when that is so not true.

I don't have my DMG handy ATM, but I can only surmise that such a method of advancement would be painfully slow, and I don't know anyone that plays D&D in that way. The game is all about killing things, and taking their stuff. The DMG also has rules for laser pistols, but I bet if you took a poll on here, you'd probably find no one that actually uses those rules. So yea, there are other ways to play the game, but *most* people play it in the traditional sense.

Does the game only have powerful and worthlessf feats? I'm pretty sure there is a middle ground. And whats wrong with a tracking fightier that has survival ranks? Is he going to be as good as the Ranger? No, but he's still a tracking fighter and that's what the concept is. Skill don't have to be maxed out to be useful. And there are feats like Skill focus so if you really wanted the fighter to be able to track you'd take that. And the same for stealth. People seem to think that if its in the concept then their character has to be better at it then anyone else and that is simply not the case.

My point is that is the game rewards people for sticking to the stereotypes/archetypes. Making a cleric is great, but trying to make a cleric who hides in shadows, pick-pockets people, and moves silently is not only difficult, but downright impossible unless you multi-class.

But we're diverging off the topic at hand. My only point is this: D&D is a very specific kind of game, and yes there are other ways to play that game, but deviating from those ways is to go against the grain of the game, and one would be better off switching to a different system. Sure, you could implement a sanity rule into D&D, but if you want to play horror, you should play CoC. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Merlion]

I don't have my DMG handy ATM, but I can only surmise that such a method of advancement would be painfully slow, and I don't know anyone that plays D&D in that way. The game is all about killing things, and taking their stuff. The DMG also has rules for laser pistols, but I bet if you took a poll on here, you'd probably find no one that actually uses those rules. So yea, there are other ways to play the game, but *most* people play it in the traditional sense.

I dont really agree with this. Every game I have been in or run has included extensive XP awards both for killing stuff, and for roleplaying, reaching goals, and various other factors.

My point is that is the game rewards people for sticking to the stereotypes/archetypes. Making a cleric is great, but trying to make a cleric who hides in shadows, pick-pockets people, and moves silently is not only difficult, but downright impossible unless you multi-class.

Well technically the Cleric can still take the skills. But yes, overall your completely right.

But we're diverging off the topic at hand. My only point is this: D&D is a very specific kind of game, and yes there are other ways to play that game, but deviating from those ways is to go against the grain of the game, and one would be better off switching to a different system. Sure, you could implement a sanity rule into D&D, but if you want to play horror, you should play CoC.

I cant entirely agree here either. I think mechanically, D&D can do different genres and styles of that sort...horror etc pretty well especially with supplements like UA.

But changing something like the level/commanlity of magic items, while entirely possible, would entail considerable work.

Changing some of the other oddities, like how Wizards are supposed to be masters of magic and yet lack a number of very useful magical abilities that are for some reason reserved for Clerics is very easy to change mechanically, but very hard to change most peoples minds about.

 

[Crothian]

I don't have my DMG handy ATM, but I can only surmise that such a method of advancement would be painfully slow, and I don't know anyone that plays D&D in that way. The game is all about killing things, and taking their stuff. The DMG also has rules for laser pistols, but I bet if you took a poll on here, you'd probably find no one that actually uses those rules. So yea, there are other ways to play the game, but *most* people play it in the traditional sense.

Yes, they do. Doesn't mean that you can't play it the other way. I run two D&D games set in the same world with completely different people. One is more traditional with dugeon cralws and fighting and adventurers as that is what the players know and are a bit more comfortible with. The other went from 1st level to twety one without setting a foot inside a dungeon. There was a some combat, but that was at most every fourth session. Half of the games had few if any dice roles. I used the rules of D&D but ran a differnet game. THere is no reason that I see that other people cannot do the same if they want to.

My point is that is the game rewards people for sticking to the stereotypes/archetypes. Making a cleric is great, but trying to make a cleric who hides in shadows, pick-pockets people, and moves silently is not only difficult, but downright impossible unless you multi-class.

Not impossible, but you might have to sacrifice some things like feats and skill points and get a high intellgence to do so. Some archetypes like the hiding cleric are just a little more difficult to do, not impossible.

But we're diverging off the topic at hand. My only point is this: D&D is a very specific kind of game, and yes there are other ways to play that game, but deviating from those ways is to go against the grain of the game, and one would be better off switching to a different system. Sure, you could implement a sanity rule into D&D, but if you want to play horror, you should play CoC. That's all I'm saying.

I disagree there. Not every one who wants to play horror wants CoC. CoC is a great game, but it like D&D has certain assumptions that might make certain horror styles difficult, like D&D makes certain things difficult.

So, sure people can play a different game if they have the time to find one that fits their needs, have the money to buy it, and are able to teach trhemsleves and their players to play it. Again not impossible but like the cleric above it can be difficult.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Not impossible, but you might have to sacrifice some things like feats and skill points and get a high intellgence to do so. Some archetypes like the hiding cleric are just a little more difficult to do, not impossible.

The trickery domain makes Hide a class skill.
A Halfling cleric of Olidammara would easily be mistaken for a Rogue, what with the leather armor and dagger, hiding and moving silently...

 

[woodelf]

First, the actual text from the Character Wealth By Level chart:I think a lot of people think it says something else/more.

Now, let's see examples:

Taking 6th level here, because most people agree that this puts the PCs completely out of the low levels (fighter-types have 2 attacks, spellcasters have 3rd level spells).

6th-level fighter [wealth guideline = 13,000gp]
+1 flaming longsword
+1 full plate
potion of cure serious wounds
potion of bull's strength
Total magic: 12,015gp [add in mundate supplies for 13,000]

6th-level cleric
+1 heavy mace
+1 heavy shield
masterwork full plate
+2 periapt of wisdom
+1 cloak of resistance
wand of cure light wounds
potion of bear's endurance
4 0th-level scrolls
3 1st-level scrolls
2 2nd-level scrolls
1 3rd-level scroll
Total magic: 11,980gp [add in mundane supplies for 13,000]

6th-level rogue
mithral shirt
+1 ring of protection
ring of climbing
potion of cure moderate wounds
potion of blur
2 potions of invisibility

+2 cloak of resistance
salve of slipperiness
Total magic: 11,800gp [add in mundane supplies for 13,000]

6th-level wizard
+2 bracers of armor
+1 ring of protection
+2 headband of intellect
6 0th-level scrolls
4 1st-level scrolls
3 2nd-level scrolls
2 3rd-level scrolls
1 4th-level scroll
Total magic: 12,072gp [add in mundane supplies for 13,000]

Is the above list really "extreme proliferation" for a party of adventurers?

In this group, only 1 item (the flaming sword) is "obvious magic". Most of the other stuff is either minor bonuses or one use items (plus one multi-use item - the wand).

Quasqueton

"Extreme"? I dunno. More than i've given to my 11th-level party in the current campaign, and that's handing out every bit of magic i can possibly justify within the setting/campaign. And i don't think of it as a low-magic setting by any standard. And, Back In The Day (TM), i'd say most characters only had 1-2 permanent magic items by 6th level, IME. Conversations with others seem to support the notion that the "standard" level of magical gear in D&D3E is higher than with older editions.

But, on another point: what's the point of non-obvious magic? I mean, if all it is is a +1 to hit or +2 on a save, why (1) stick that in a magic item, or even (2) put it in an item at all? Why not just raise everybody's stats by the extra few points, and ditch the items, and simplify things? If you're going to give more-or-less everybody those bonuses (because of "level-appropriate wealth"), you could just give the bonuses directly, without the items as intermediaries. Something like the way we have stat improvements and skill points by level, why not just give other allocable bonuses by level? Why not just save the magic for the flashy stuff?

Similarly, i'd prefer to blur the line between magic and non-magic a lot more. Have more non-magical items that can provide higher bonuses: frex, get "Masterwork" or whatever weapons that can give you +2, +3, even +4 bonus, rather than just +1; exotic armors that can give you appropriate protection for high-level characters, without enchantment; larger skill bonuses from "extra-masterwork" tools; that sort of stuff. Doing this would, also, reduce the amount of magic in a group.

 

[Nightfall]

*will only comment in the face of Scarred Lands issue of "what to do with purchasing, finding and getting magic items"*

Mostly I think its because people BUY stuff so much and thus feel like their equipment can't match their power. Thus becomes the "prolifiration" issue.

In any case my two cents: Use discretion. A lot.

 

[ThirdWizard]

And, Back In The Day (TM), i'd say most characters only had 1-2 permanent magic items by 6th level, IME. Conversations with others seem to support the notion that the "standard" level of magical gear in D&D3E is higher than with older editions.

Based on modules produced by TSR, I would say that it is lower. No, I didn't run the modules. Yes, a lot of people apparently did. I was very surprised when I found out! But, then, as I like to point out, I'm not normal.

Why not just raise everybody's stats by the extra few points, and ditch the items, and simplify things? If you're going to give more-or-less everybody those bonuses (because of "level-appropriate wealth"), you could just give the bonuses directly, without the items as intermediaries. Something like the way we have stat improvements and skill points by level, why not just give other allocable bonuses by level? Why not just save the magic for the flashy stuff?

That is exactly what Iron Heroes is all about.

 

[Nightfall]

Which is probably why I like Iron heroes even if it's a slightly confusing read, especially some of the mechanics.

But it's still fun.

 

[FireLance]

But, on another point: what's the point of non-obvious magic? I mean, if all it is is a +1 to hit or +2 on a save, why (1) stick that in a magic item, or even (2) put it in an item at all? Why not just raise everybody's stats by the extra few points, and ditch the items, and simplify things? If you're going to give more-or-less everybody those bonuses (because of "level-appropriate wealth"), you could just give the bonuses directly, without the items as intermediaries. Something like the way we have stat improvements and skill points by level, why not just give other allocable bonuses by level? Why not just save the magic for the flashy stuff?

Similarly, i'd prefer to blur the line between magic and non-magic a lot more. Have more non-magical items that can provide higher bonuses: frex, get "Masterwork" or whatever weapons that can give you +2, +3, even +4 bonus, rather than just +1; exotic armors that can give you appropriate protection for high-level characters, without enchantment; larger skill bonuses from "extra-masterwork" tools; that sort of stuff. Doing this would, also, reduce the amount of magic in a group.

I think there are several schools of thought on this issue. For me, magic is just a convenient handwave for getting the PCs to the required level of effectiveness for their level. It doesn't matter to me whether the +1 enhancement bonus to hit and damage comes from a magic weapon or a extra-masterwork weapon that has the same cost. It doesn't matter to me whether the +2 resistance bonus to saving throws comes from a +2 cloak of resistance or an innate ability.

Then, there is the "magic should be rare, but wondrous and powerful" school of thought that you seem to sympathize with. As you have suggested, substituting magic items that just add anothe plus with non-magic items that have exactly the same effect might work fine for this group.

And then, there is the school of thought that equates low magic with low effectiveness, and thinks that the current wealth guidelines don't make life difficult enough for the PCs. For such people, whether the +1 or +2 bonus comes from magic or well-crafted equipment is not the issue. The PCs shouldn't even have that bonus in the first place .

 

[Hussar]

Just a thought on the idea that "DND doesn't support my campaign setting of choice."

When comparing magic items in a novel to the magic items in the game it is important to remember that magic items in a novel are NOT setting elements. They are PLOT elements. The author gives item X to character Y to overcome hurdle Z. You don't give a funky potion to your hero in the beginning of the story and then never have him use it.

However, in the game, this happens all the time. People get all sorts of magic items that they never use. Happens all the time. So, when people start to say that, "Well the Fellowship didn't need a golf bag full of magic items." the simplest answer is, "Well, duhhh. Of course they didn't. Tolkein didn't bother to give them any because it wouldn't make sense in a novel."

It makes perfect sense for guards in Eberron to walk around with magic swords and a wizard. You have creatures out there that are more or less immune to normal weapons. Sending out patrols without magic weapons is just delivering pizza to the bad guys.

To some extent, the system always dictates the setting. It has to. Unless you make massive adjustments to DnD, you require a fair level of magic in use. There are fairly low level creatures like Wights who need magic weapons to be hit. These creatures make more of themselves every time they kill. The only thing that would keep them in check is constantly being killed by people with magic weapons. Take away the magic weapons and, logically, wights and other undead should stomp all over your setting. Never mind other critters.

Be careful not to confuse plot elements with setting elements. It makes the discussion much more difficult if you do.