D&D General What does "magic" mean? [Read carefully, you can't change your vote]

[Lanefan]

One other way I've explained magic in my world. Magic taps into the Aether that permeates everything without interacting directly and using it's energy to manifest something. The Aether is potential magic, much like a wound spring has potential energy waiting to be released.

In some cases, creatures are born with or made at least in part from that energy stored in the Aether in their formation. Things like dragons can fly and breath fire because they are, in part, made from Aether and are innately tied to it.

Spells on the other hand channel the Aether to create their effect. So antimagic zones work by neutralizing that transformation of Aether.

You use Aether, I use a force of physics; but after that I suspect we're mighty close in our thinking as to how this all might work.

 

[Vaalingrade]

My favorite trope to play with its that magic is a branch of physics that we in this realty on the terms we currently have, cannot measure or interact with so it might as well not exist for us.

The second we find a way however, a whole new world opens up, like once we learned fire or germ theory or molecular science.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Suddenly you-as-DM need to know how it was made, and you can't just handwave it.

If constructing the trap used only spells that are already in the game then the reverse engineering process should be easy for both the PCs and the DM. But if it was made using magic that's not in the game* then that magic is in the game now, and the PCs are going to want access to it.

And that's exactly when the handwave does come in... rather than trying to invent all the spells that were used to justify all the whackadoodle magical traps we find in all the adventures.

Maybe you have time to make all those up, but for me I just consider them all the "background magical effects" that exists in the world but which don't have specific rules (aka spells) for them in the book. I never want to have my imagination tied down to just those spells that WotC deemed worthy of including in the PHB... especially considering those are the spells that were specifically meant for adventurers' use.

If the PCs saw a magical trap somewhere and wanted to create it for their own home? DOWNTIME RULES, BABY! A couple weeks of study and experimentation, a pouch of cash, and then a wave of the hand... Boom! They now have that animated statue in their front hall... and I never had to adapt and make up a version of 3E's Permanency spell at the barest minimum to do so. LOL!

 

[Micah Sweet]

And that's exactly when the handwave does come in... rather than trying to invent all the spells that were used to justify all the whackadoodle magical traps we find in all the adventures.

Maybe you have time to make all those up, but for me I just consider them all the "background magical effects" that exists in the world but which don't have specific rules (aka spells) for them in the book. I never want to have my imagination tied down to just those spells that WotC deemed worthy of including in the PHB... especially considering those are the spells that were specifically meant for adventurers' use.

If the PCs saw a magical trap somewhere and wanted to create it for their own home? DOWNTIME RULES, BABY! A couple weeks of study and experimentation, a pouch of cash, and then a wave of the hand... Boom! They now have that animated statue in their front hall... and I never had to adapt and make up a version of 3E's Permanency spell at the barest minimum to do so. LOL!

I see the appeal, but I'm afraid I'm too much a fan of "magic A is magic A" to be ok with that.

 

[Lanefan]

And that's exactly when the handwave does come in... rather than trying to invent all the spells that were used to justify all the whackadoodle magical traps we find in all the adventures.

Perhaps, though I'm the sort of player (and DM) who would want to know how it was built so I could a) replicate it later and b) find other uses for this "new" magic.

Maybe you have time to make all those up, but for me I just consider them all the "background magical effects" that exists in the world but which don't have specific rules (aka spells) for them in the book. I never want to have my imagination tied down to just those spells that WotC deemed worthy of including in the PHB... especially considering those are the spells that were specifically meant for adventurers' use.

Same here, except I want those background effects to (be able to) be quantifyable for if-when they end up in the foreground. That, and I find there's very little that can't be done with the right combination of existing spells, even without Wish.

If the PCs saw a magical trap somewhere and wanted to create it for their own home? DOWNTIME RULES, BABY! A couple weeks of study and experimentation, a pouch of cash, and then a wave of the hand... Boom! They now have that animated statue in their front hall... and I never had to adapt and make up a version of 3E's Permanency spell at the barest minimum to do so. LOL!

Permanency is a very useful spell. Not so much for locking in minor spell abilities to characters (that got a bit broken in 3e) but for creating permanent items and magical effects.

I'm the sort of player who, were I in a party doing this statue-building, would want to drill down to much more detail than just handwaving cost, time, and effectiveness. In particular, what are we doing, how are we doing it, and - most important - what are we learning that might come in handy in the field someday. Particularly if I was playing a caster!

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm the sort of player who, were I in a party doing this statue-building, would want to drill down to much more detail than just handwaving cost, time, and effectiveness. In particular, what are we doing, how are we doing it, and - most important - what are we learning that might come in handy in the field someday. Particularly if I was playing a caster!

I have to imagine that party format and group playstyle certainly helps in this regard to accomplish this. Not so much for me, as I'm personally not a DM that does a lot of "off-session" play with the members of my group, and I also don't tend to use sessions doing individual mechanical play for single characters (while the rest are sitting around.) So I would not have the time or need to sit with a wizard character player actually "building" out these traps finding all the bit in the books that we'd need to make it (and inventing additional spells and whatnot to do so). To me that's a lot of work for not much payoff (as I'm not one who really cares all that much about the rigor of the game mechanics as everyone probably knows.)

But now if the "building" of the trap was a roleplay scene and we narratively went through what the wizard character was doing to create these things while the rest of the group had the opportunity to be involved with the scene in some way... either by pitching in or doing other things at the same time while the trap construction was happening, then that'd be fine. But that would end up being part and parcel with the whole "handwave" thing. The actual mechanical expression of how it gets made wouldn't be important or necessary, but the scene itself might be. So we'd RP it all and narratively design what exactly is being made and what it does (and everyone's reaction to it), but then once that scene was done we'd move right along.

That being said... if a player of mine actually wanted to and did all the work themselves to come up with a list of the spells and components and effects that would be needed for the magical trap they wanted to make, plus writing up the process for enchantment... then cool. If that's fun and inspirational for them to do that on their off-session time, then I'm all for it. And depending on how it's presented I might be able to pull ideas from it to use in the future. But I'm also not going to demand it if instead we're all good with saying it that it got done in the background while the entire group moves forward with the the game.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, I'm with @DEFCON 1 on this one. Actually, to be honest @Lanefan, I'm a little surprised that you're not. Considering that AD&D has virtually no rules for creating items - other than 99% handwave - how would you reverse engineer any effect in the system you use? I remember years ago, in one of the Dragonlance modules, there was a pool that granted a temporary +1-4 to any item dipped into it. How would you reverse engineer that using AD&D mechanics?

I mean, AD&D never gave the slightest fig towards the notion of reverse engineering anything. That's almost purely a 3e notion.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah, I'm with @DEFCON 1 on this one. Actually, to be honest @Lanefan, I'm a little surprised that you're not. Considering that AD&D has virtually no rules for creating items - other than 99% handwave - how would you reverse engineer any effect in the system you use? I remember years ago, in one of the Dragonlance modules, there was a pool that granted a temporary +1-4 to any item dipped into it. How would you reverse engineer that using AD&D mechanics?

I mean, AD&D never gave the slightest fig towards the notion of reverse engineering anything. That's almost purely a 3e notion.

There are some retro-clones that put some effort into it, if you don't like Level Up's approach.

 

[Hussar]

Oh sure. I get the approach even if I don’t follow it. The simulationist approach certainly has its advocates.

I just don’t see how an adnd player would go down that route.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah, I'm with @DEFCON 1 on this one. Actually, to be honest @Lanefan, I'm a little surprised that you're not. Considering that AD&D has virtually no rules for creating items - other than 99% handwave - how would you reverse engineer any effect in the system you use? I remember years ago, in one of the Dragonlance modules, there was a pool that granted a temporary +1-4 to any item dipped into it. How would you reverse engineer that using AD&D mechanics?

I mean, AD&D never gave the slightest fig towards the notion of reverse engineering anything. That's almost purely a 3e notion.

Believe it or not, I maintain there's some things 3e largely got right.

Some of the things in the 1e modules probably couldn't be reverse engineered by God. That said, for most of 'em I can usually come up with something if I have to.

That pool, for example. If someone wanted to make one of those in my game it'd probably be based around adding a vial of any liquid found on and brought from the Elemental Plane of Chaos* (to provide the randomness) to a pool of clear water blessed by a Chaotic deity, then casting a ceremonial Bladethirst spell on it (ideally this is cast by a Cleric to the same deity who blessed the water) followed quickly by a Permanency spell from anyone. Most if not all of the item's monetary costs would go into a sacrifice to the deity who blesses the pool.

So that boils down to two spells, a blessing (or consecration?), some exotic material, and some money or goods for the sacrifice. Pretty straightforward stuff, really.

* - or the Dragonlance equivalent, given as this is a Dragonlance-setting pool.