D&D 4E What Should 4e magic be like?

[Kae'Yoss]

There is a chance to mess up a skill check or attack. It's called rolling low.

That's not the same. You could also say that there's a chance to mess up spells: You miss your touch attack/ the enemy makes his save. And attacks: You don't hit.

But we're talking about mishaps here. The spell doesn't just not transform the enemy into a toad - it turns you into a toad. The attack doesn't just fail to hit the enemy - it cuts your own leg instead. You just don't fail to tumble past the enemy - you fall prone and make it easier for the enemy to pick on you.

I know, some skills have something like that right now (fail to disarm a trap by 5 or more and you set it off), but if we use a system such as this, it should be for everything, not just some instances. Like luck rolls in WoD.

Now I do agree that spellcasting fumbles are a bit annoying as a core rule, but why not just reduce everything to a spellcasting check? This is one of the things that could really *differentiate* D&D from a CRPG; the thrill of rolling for your spellcasting result is not easily duplicable in a computer-game spellcasting medium.

I already said that a spellcasting "attack roll" would be nice. This could be done with or without fumbles (without fumble: If you don't meed the enemy's "spell ac", the spell fails. with fumble: If you roll too low on that spell roll, like less than 15 + spell level or something like that, roll on the spell fumble table)

With what WotC has put out so far...I'd say we are a five foot step away.

I'd say it's still several non-coterminous planes to hop in order to get there - and without teleportation magic. It might be the same multiverse, but that's it.

Rogues can't mow down armies. swordsages can't rain down arcane destruction upon their enemies, obliterating them wholesale. Fighters can't do magic at all. monks can't bring back the dead or even heal others. And so on.

As I said: While it isn't as strict as it used to be, you still don't have classes who can all do everything equally well.

Yes, there's a core class that combines martial prowess with arcane ability - the Duskblade. Great class. But they can't do high-level magics. A wizard, sorcerer, or warmage (especially a warmage) will outcast the duskblade by lengths. Striking down the enemy by the dozen, by the score. That's just one example.

Tell me where there's actually classes that can do everything equally well.

I don't remember monk being able to swing rapiers or monks having Psionics as a class abilities. When did Wizards say all classes can do everything?

They didn't.

[/QUOTE]
one of my favorite characters in AD&D was a monk, but was mot a shaolin martial art monk, rather a Fryer Tuck type of monk. I took the martial Art Monk class, but played it as Fryer tuck. It was a City which was ruled by the Church and he was picked to be a sort of 'secret Police' which is why he was trained in unarmed combat.

Funny thing is, if I where to bring him into 3.5 he would have to be a Monk/Paladin/Cleric to do some of the things he did in AD&D.[/QUOTE]

Such as?

Ever take the time to play Core Classes 20 levels through? Even if its one level up a session, its a wonderful thing.

What's that got to do with restrictions? The fun part about a game without restrictions is that no one forces you to use all options (that would be a restriction). You don't like the concept of a dwarf with arcane magic? Don't play one. You want to stick to a class for your entire career? Do so!

 

[phoenixgod2000]

I just wish magic was creepier and more atmospheric. All too often, magic is just too video game-y. I think it has become that way to help new people get into the game but I think magic loses something when it becomes a numbers game.

I wish magic had the same feel it does in the stories of Clark Ashton Smith, Robert Howard and HP Lovecraft. Magic should be mysterious and wierd. Half the time people shouldn't know if you are using a spell or just a blowgun with a poison made from frog guts. Wizards should be figures of fear even at lower levels, but they should also be half bluster. they should have few true spells but lots of quasi mystical skills. Thinks like the poison mastery skill from Iron Heros, hynotism, and strange alchemies.

But when push comes to shove they can crack the world with a word.

Unfortunately I don't think I'll ever get my wish.

 

[Kunimatyu]

I just wish magic was creepier and more atmospheric. All too often, magic is just too video game-y. I think it has become that way to help new people get into the game but I think magic loses something when it becomes a numbers game.

I wish magic had the same feel it does in the stories of Clark Ashton Smith, Robert Howard and HP Lovecraft. Magic should be mysterious and wierd. Half the time people shouldn't know if you are using a spell or just a blowgun with a poison made from frog guts. Wizards should be figures of fear even at lower levels, but they should also be half bluster. they should have few true spells but lots of quasi mystical skills. Thinks like the poison mastery skill from Iron Heros, hynotism, and strange alchemies.

But when push comes to shove they can crack the world with a word.

Unfortunately I don't think I'll ever get my wish.

I agree with you, on both the type of magic you want and that you'll never get your wish, at least not in bog-standard D&D.

 

[DungeonMaester]

I just wish magic was creepier and more atmospheric. All too often, magic is just too video game-y. I think it has become that way to help new people get into the game but I think magic loses something when it becomes a numbers game.

I wish magic had the same feel it does in the stories of Clark Ashton Smith, Robert Howard and HP Lovecraft. Magic should be mysterious and wierd. Half the time people shouldn't know if you are using a spell or just a blowgun with a poison made from frog guts. Wizards should be figures of fear even at lower levels, but they should also be half bluster. they should have few true spells but lots of quasi mystical skills. Thinks like the poison mastery skill from Iron Heros, hynotism, and strange alchemies.

But when push comes to shove they can crack the world with a word.

Unfortunately I don't think I'll ever get my wish.

Which is why I would like to see magic done up like a Clerics Domain.

---Rusty

 

[Nahat Anoj]

Something like the True Sorcery system would be nice, IMO.

 

[ashockney]

What are some of the things that challenge us with 3.5:

The universal magic user in 3.5 wizard is too much of a generalist
The wizard is typically the "same" optimized character
The sorcerer doesn't work well, but was a fun flavor option
Warlock was a step in the right direction
The spell choices are way, way too complex
There are clear balance issues with the spells
The threshold for access to radical game-changing effects is too low
Power points, templates, and meta-magic are all sweet and beloved
Counterspell's not really intuitive
Although the new simpler save mechanics (Fort/Ref/Will) is a huge improvement, we've still not really achieved the balance required to do well here

So, I translate these things to imply some of my own thoughts:
Classes with access to far fewer spells - perhaps 7 - 10 at one time, but a handful of abilities that are usable over and over without limit.
Specializaiton among a group of casting classes that allows for a drastic difference between a warlock, a wizard, and a beguiler.
Layer on top a magic system that allows for spell points, templates and/or meta-magic
Retool the balance on the spells and magic abilities and make game-changing effects much harder to acquire, with the truly game shifting effects being one-shot (ie, teleport)
Allow room for a studious book-delving, cat familiar, stave wielding wizard to exist

 

[Kobold Avenger]

There should be a cap on active buffs. Like, three at a time. The only thing is, this can lead to silliness:

I certainly agree there, well it's certainly fun to have a character with the effects of Vigor, Bless, Prayer, Haste, Offensive Precognition, Stone Skin, Enlarge, Biofeedback, and more active at the same time, it just gets ridiculous. Some game systems already implement a cap on the number of active buffs or active spells, it could probably be something based on spellcasting stat or level or perhaps chakras/body slots, which could mean you might have to choose between gaining the benefit of a buff or a persistent effect magic item in that chakra.

......of course, I still want Psionics to be in the 4th edition core rules, as a distinctly different system from the magic system.

That's something I disagree with, making psionics have a system quite different from magic caused it to be marginalized in every edition of D&D, something I don't want to see anymore. I rather it use the standard magic system with some slight variances.

I just wish magic was creepier and more atmospheric. All too often, magic is just too video game-y. I think it has become that way to help new people get into the game but I think magic loses something when it becomes a numbers game.

Not easy the way the D&D system is, with there being standardized effects, damage dice and the like. It would require effort on the DM and Player's parts to have a distinct atmosphere to their magic.

 

[ruleslawyer]

That's not the same. You could also say that there's a chance to mess up spells: You miss your touch attack/ the enemy makes his save. And attacks: You don't hit.

But we're talking about mishaps here. The spell doesn't just not transform the enemy into a toad - it turns you into a toad. The attack doesn't just fail to hit the enemy - it cuts your own leg instead. You just don't fail to tumble past the enemy - you fall prone and make it easier for the enemy to pick on you.

I know, some skills have something like that right now (fail to disarm a trap by 5 or more and you set it off), but if we use a system such as this, it should be for everything, not just some instances. Like luck rolls in WoD.

I don't know about that. In the interests of making magic *different* (and again, I'm assuming a tiered system in which there are a range of "safe" uses for magic, meaning that the subset I'm talking about is stretching it), I can see having a system in which one has to take serious risks to get astounding results. This also might have a positive follow-on effect on campaign design, since there's now an in-game explanation as to why lots of the wacky stuff like raise dead and teleport hasn't permeated the entire lifestyle.

 

[Lanefan]

Someone mentioned about not wanting more restrictions, and that it's easy to put restrictions back: I disagree.

It's far easier on all concerned to *remove* restrictions in a given game than it is to impose them. Just ask any DM who's tried... :\

So, the core rules need maximum restrictions as written, with sidebars indicating options to remove them, along with possible consequences. (this applies to much more than just magic...)

Lanefan

 

[Quartz]

Whatever happens, I'd like the magic system to be completely orthogonal. e.g. all spellcasting classes work from levels 0 to 9.