PDA

View Full Version : how magical do you like your worlds?



krossbow
2010-03-26, 12:11 AM
Exactly as the topic says. What type of games do you enjoy most, as far as magic and the world go?


Do you like your world to be like the dark ages, with people living in squalor, existing in small thatched hut villages, with wizards and magic in general few and far between?

Do you prefer it to be akin to technology/renassaince, with magic being prevalent in the world, complete with magic marts, ect.

Or do you like it to go even further, with things such as floating cities, entire cities of magic users, and wonders of magic effusing all parts of the setting?

Grommen
2010-03-26, 12:27 AM
I like magic to be a tool. A powerful one but still just a tool. One that is in competition with technology, good old fashion brute force and evil cunning.

A trained guy with a stick should have a chance against a wizard always.

Shadowrun is a good mix of mind bending technology, and pure raw magical firepower. And then there is the Panther Assault Cannon. Everyone is made equal by the Panther.. :smallbiggrin:

Aik
2010-03-26, 01:29 AM
I like magical feeling magic. Doesn't necessarily mean there's heaps of it (indeed - usually it's very carefully placed). It's the opposite of magic-as-a-tool and the opposite of grimdark everything-sucks.

I don't mind magic as a tool - it can be interesting, but my preference is vastly for wondrous magic. Grimdark everything-sucks I tend to avoid.

Taelas
2010-03-26, 01:31 AM
The first.

Or rather, a combination between the first and the second. If you know Wheel of Time, that's the level of technology I prefer.

Satyr
2010-03-26, 01:43 AM
The less, the better, both in quality and in quantity.
Magic is supposedly magical and strange. It is supernatural, and for me, that strongly implies that it is not supposed to be an everyday appearance, but something rare and strange.
Game worlds I like ususally feature few spellcasters,and most of the time they only have one or two innate talents, or make Faustian deals to get their powers. Spellcasters are never, or almost never major characters, they are either villains, or support characters to the real heroes, including player characters.

JonestheSpy
2010-03-26, 02:01 AM
slightly edited version:

My feelings are in line with Satyr's. If magic doesn't evoke some sense of wonder, if it can be taken for granted, then it's not magic, it's just a kind of technology. Not even exciting, scifi space opera technology, but boring pick it up at WalMart or Sharper Image at best technology.

I don't discourage players from being spellcasters, but they are rare in their worlds, and they can't count on having access to every spell they want to pick up, let alone buying magic items.

When magic does show up, it should be powerful and impressive. No going crazy because the party finally found a +1 dagger - an actual magic weapon would be a prized item to be treasured throughout an adventurers career, not something to be traded up as soon as something better is found.

By the way, I find it interesting that the OP seems to equate magic with technology - lack of magic means everyone squatting in mud huts, etc. My main fantasy setting has pretty wide range of technology levels - averaging around early medieval but ranging from stone age to early Renaissance - but magic is rare wherever you go, with a few exceptions.

Mordokai
2010-03-26, 02:05 AM
I like a low magic games. In fact, I prefer those to the ones where magic can be found in abundance. It's not that I don't really like magic, but I also have no big love for it. Therefore, low magic setting are very much to my taste and that's part of why I like d20 modern so much.

krossbow
2010-03-26, 02:05 AM
My feelings are in line with Satyr's. If magic doesn't evoke some sense of wonder, if it can be taken for granted, then it's not magic, it's just a kind of technology. Not even exciting, scifi space opera technology, but boring pick it up at WalMart or Sharper Image at best technology.

I don't discourage players from being spellcasters, but they are rare in their worlds, and they can't count on having access to every spell they want to pick up, let alone buying magic items.

By the way, I find it interesting that the OP seems to equate magic with technology - lack of magic means everyone squatting in mud huts, etc. My main fantasy setting has pretty wide range of technology levels - averaging around early medieval but ranging from stone age to early Renaissance - but magic is rare wherever you go, with a few exceptions.



The more reliable something becomes, the less distinguishable from technology it is; If magic isn't chaotic or unreliable in some way, its will inevitably end up analogous to technology. hence why i was equating it with technology in the world (and like it is used in several D&D settings where it replaces technology)

If people are bereft of BOTH technology and reliable and magic in the world, then its highly unlikely that people wouldn't be living in squalor/dark ages, hence my second view; There's nothing wrong with technology advancing in a world with magic remaining rare however.

Satyr
2010-03-26, 02:11 AM
Not neccessarily, it is also a question of quantiy and quality of spellcasters. If you have only 1 in 25.000 who has a basic magic spark, and only 1 in 50.000 who has trained this ability to an approach that it can be used reliably, will have a lot different impact as if more people can manipulate magical forces.
Likewise, the degree of what people can do and what they have at hand is the other aspect. If every potential mage has only a very limited field of expertise, and trouble to expand this horizon, it is yet another structure.

JonestheSpy
2010-03-26, 02:19 AM
The more reliable something becomes, the less distinguishable from technology it is; If magic isn't chaotic or unreliable in some way, its will inevitably end up analogous to technology.

Well, it's a matter of narrative and DM storytelling ability. Yes, for the sake of playability magic rules are codified and predictable. But in the campaign world, it can be an art, not nearly as reproduceable the way technology is. for instance, I like to keep PC's with core spells, but an npc villain might use stuff almost exclusively from the Book of Vile Darkness, just so it's not as predictable. That kind of thing.

Making it not analogous to technology is the whole point, in my pov. Magic should be a matter of talent or however you want to define it - if person A makes the same gestures and says the same words while waving a white feather and some bat guano around, they will not necessarily get the same result as person B doing the same thing.

I think it's worth noting that most works of "High Fantasy" would be regarded as very "low magic" in DnD terms.



If people are bereft of BOTH technology and reliable and magic in the world, then its highly unlikely that people wouldn't be living in squalor/dark ages.

Well, why is a particular technology level tied to magic? There are plenty of things in the game that require a relatively high tech level - full plate armor, for instance - that have nothing to do with the commonality of magic.

Piedmon_Sama
2010-03-26, 02:25 AM
Yeah, likewise with Satyr and JonesTheSpy. I don't want magic shops anywhere in my campaign worlds. I'm a history major (well, Medieval Studies but anyway) and one of the things I love to study is how people before our time actually lived, altered their environment to suit them etc. I love reading about where they threw their garbage, how they organized trips to the barber and public bath, how they got their mouths feeling clean in the morning, how they heated their rooms, etc. I don't want Magic Handwavium Solutions for these, at least not in a society that I want to be recognizably human.

I think for me, "magic" or any fantastic element in a story is inseperable with a certain element of Dread. If something is truly supernatural, whether it be a demonic conjuration, a divine visitation, or whatever, then it should feel otherworldly and therefore slightly hostile to our human sensibilities. Outside our comfort zone. I like fantasy with a solid grounding in mythology. No good mythos developed in a vacuum, but borrowed and evoked older ones. Look at the original greek myths or norse sagas where sorcery and the supernatural comes up, and the most common message I find by far is "don't go messing with that ****." People tend to end up dead, transformed or messed up for life. Getting back to the point, I prefer campaign settings firmly grounded in our own world, with magic that feels unnatural and evokes a proper sense of dread or awe.

Totally Guy
2010-03-26, 02:26 AM
I like magic with a cost.

Sorcerers (human and rat men only) in my world have to be gifted (trait) in order to cast any spells. Then they test their Fort stat (like Con) to see if it weakens them.

Elves have spell songs that aren't all devastating like Sorcery. Their use accelerates the elves Grief (a bit like the morality track from nWoD). Eventually the elf will wither and die of get on the boat to the west. (We still don't know what that means.)

Orcs have it hard as they have to be gifted, then resist tax and they accelerate their Hatred by casting tough spells.

krossbow
2010-03-26, 02:28 AM
there's nothing stopping society from advancing their technology without magic; just in that situation civilization would have evolved apart from magic, while technology and society would be symbiotic. Hence magic really wouldn't fit in with civilization, and would only exist outside of it.


My initial statement about magic/technology is merely the inverse of clarks law; "any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology".

Egiam
2010-03-26, 02:36 AM
I'm kind of a hypocrite, because I prefer low-magic, but am an Eberron fanatic.

When it comes to roleplaying games, I consider magic to ideally be a tool to keep the plot moving. When it is not that, it turns into an impediment for good gameplay. "Good" magic keeps the action coming, while still maintaining an organic plot, or, even better, augmenting it.

EXAMPLE OF GOOD MAGIC IN POPULAR MEDIA:
The Harry Potter series is a masterpiece in this regard. Magic coats the world, and yet the plot still moves like any other great story. The same themes can be found in Shakespeare's works, Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, and The Odyssey.


I also think that Changeling: The Lost (A supernaturals expansion from White Wolf for the World of Darkness series, for those not in the know) deserves special mention. While I have not actually gotten around to playing it, I have a great feeling about the game from reading the book. The magic system is creative, original, and well constructed for the RPG medium.

Vitruviansquid
2010-03-26, 03:34 AM
I'm really okay with any treatment of magic as long as it's consistent.

J.Gellert
2010-03-26, 04:00 AM
High fantasy, low-magic. Not as low as in The Lord of the Rings, but close. Maybe something like Conan, in the sense that there is magic around, most definitely, but still, the majority of people don't understand it, or haven't even seen it for themselves. They have only heard rumors about it...

There are only like three and a half schools of magic in my campaign setting, and they are all more akin to hidden temples or dark fortresses than your generic "pay tuition and be taught by professors" magic university.

Also, even adventurers can't expect to ever have more than three or four magic items, which are all unique, and never mass-produced +1 swords. Magic items are never for sale. Retired adventurers either hide them away or pass them on to the next generation, and only those muggles who don't know what that amulet really is may try to sell it.

Zen Master
2010-03-26, 04:02 AM
As far as I'm concerned, the pc's should feel special - in this regard meaning that their access to magic is noteworthy and unusual.

For that reason most enemies will not have magical gear, and enemy spellcasters will be (relatively) rare - however, those enemies that have magical assets will be extremely dangerous.

In other words, I have (relatively) low magic worlds, with the pc's at a noticably higher magic level.

Saurus33
2010-03-26, 04:35 AM
I like magic which makes sense. If I can look at the thing and ask why something is the way it is, and have the reply "It just is," then something has gone wrong.

Magic is relatively common; high up people might have a few trinkets, and a military champion is going to have a magical sword.

+1 style magic items are the most common; what boggles my mind is that they are considered "boring". In character, if you hadn't seen one you'd probably be amazed. Consider masterwork weapons now; people still talk about that really sharp "x" that could cut through iron sheets or whatever; where you have weapons that are better than it is humanly possible to make, people will talk, though if they're as common as a fairly well-made sword, like in my worlds, then it might only be the +2's and +3's.

Magic does not have the combination of inexplicable actions and talking swords that people seem to think of as "magical"; any truly impressive feat of magic is going to have a good reason and either perfect clarity or intense willpower behind it.

Also; no talking weapons, rods of wonder et al without some reason to exist. Everything that has been created was created for a reason, much like how some of the more complex technological items now are.

Magic itself is a source of energy which can be manipulated through willpower/natural talent; achieving anything requires either a precise conceptual construct, much like a program(Int-based), a strong image of what you are trying to achieve and how (Cha-based) or utter serenity and the guiding hand of divine influence (Wis-based).

PC's are not special by virtue of existence; they are exceptional people, doubtless, but they are not chosen by fate. Fate doesn't exist; personal agency is the cause of all choices made or not made.

magic9mushroom
2010-03-26, 04:38 AM
Also; no talking weapons, rods of wonder et al without some reason to exist. Everything that has been created was created for a reason, much like how some of the more complex technological items now are.

Rods of Wonder at least could have been made for the Chaotivulz. And intelligent items are useful, look at all the robotics research today.

boomwolf
2010-03-26, 04:54 AM
In my games magic is very varied, going all the way from "common junk traces of magic" to the "all mighty wonderful magic"

Yes, a +1 sword is rather common. and a guy with a few first level spells can be found all over the place, but that +5 shocking burst longsword is damn hard to get, and the sorcerer that can dominate people and shoot cones of cold is scary as hell and entire platoons will be sent after him if he is an enemy.

Ossian
2010-03-26, 04:58 AM
In my games magic is very varied, going all the way from "common junk traces of magic" to the "all mighty wonderful magic"

Yes, a +1 sword is rather common. and a guy with a few first level spells can be found all over the place, but that +5 shocking burst longsword is damn hard to get, and the sorcerer that can dominate people and shoot cones of cold is scary as hell and entire platoons will be sent after him if he is an enemy.

Low magic is my favourite. Protective gear and weapons with bonuses are ok, with few spellcasters, mostly NPCs of mid to high level. Two of the PCs now are a Duskblade 12 and a Wizard / Bard 13/1, although theyx can pretty much count only on their spells and a good sword :)

Optimystik
2010-03-26, 05:43 AM
I like psionics the most, because they can fit in every setting - from medieval swords and wenches, to a 20th century noir detective story with guns, to a hyperadvanced society bristling with alien technology.

I tend to prefer high magic, though low magic can work if there are rituals/incantations strategically placed in the world to handle the heavy stuff (like plane-hopping.)

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-26, 06:03 AM
+1 style magic items are the most common; what boggles my mind is that they are considered "boring". In character, if you hadn't seen one you'd probably be amazed. Consider masterwork weapons now; people still talk about that really sharp "x" that could cut through iron sheets or whatever; where you have weapons that are better than it is humanly possible to make, people will talk, though if they're as common as a fairly well-made sword, like in my worlds, then it might only be the +2's and +3's.

"Well, it's a greatsword which is slightly better at cutting things"
"How much better?"
"I'd say about, oh, fifteen percent or something."
"Can it cut through rocks?"
"You can scratch them half the time. Instead of forty percent of the time."

Vs.

"Well, it's a greatsword. Which can cut through pretty much anything."
"What do you mean by pretty much anything?"
"I mean I can cut through an inch-thick wall of stone in about ten seconds"


Adamantine weapons are far more interesting than +1.

Jon_Dahl
2010-03-26, 06:05 AM
If there is too much magic, it becames mundane.
Keeping things low-magic is the best.

boomwolf
2010-03-26, 06:13 AM
"Well, it's a greatsword which is slightly better at cutting things"
"How much better?"
"I'd say about, oh, fifteen percent or something."
"Can it cut through rocks?"
"You can scratch them half the time. Instead of forty percent of the time."

Vs.

"Well, it's a greatsword. Which can cut through pretty much anything."
"What do you mean by pretty much anything?"
"I mean I can cut through an inch-thick wall of stone in about ten seconds"


Adamantine weapons are far more interesting than +1.

But you forgot that the +1 is getting you closer to a sword that can ignite itself or shoot lightning then adamantine one does.

Hal
2010-03-26, 06:20 AM
I like my fantasy settings medium to high magic. Proliferation of a "technology" just makes sense as far as I'm concerned.

And personally, I often see "low-magic" games as synonymous with "I don't want you to have any treasure, ever" from the GM.

Nero24200
2010-03-26, 06:49 AM
I like variable magic. Sometimes I like low-magic settings, other times I'm looking for Dragonball Z levels where the PC's have enough magical power to destroy planets.

Though usally it's the low magic one, hence why I prefer Iron Heroes (where the magic is limited to what you put in it). It -is- a pet peeve of mine about D'n'D in that remove certain magical elements starts to screw the game (for instance, removing certain casters and suddenly healing potions can't exist).

Volkov
2010-03-26, 06:51 AM
High-magic, balanced out by the presence of Aliens who are beyond sufficiently advanced and psionics. Armies of ethergaunts duking it out with armies of mind flayers just screams awesome.

arguskos
2010-03-26, 07:06 AM
Wow. Based on this thread, I feel like a criminal for actually liking a world where magic is a commonly practiced art form. To me, magic is a way for someone to achieve something with their life in these worlds. I like it when there are colleges for mages that focus on teaching methods of using their powers, for good or ill, and similar. I don't have extreme magic marts, but I reason in a sufficiently old magical society, there are people who will sell what magical gear they can, and given how old some of my campaign worlds can be, that could be quite a bit.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 07:19 AM
If there is too much magic, it becames mundane.Yes.
Keeping things low-magic is the best.That does not necessarily follow.

I like my worlds high on magic, preferably fully integrated with the society (and resulting in the magitech you'd expect to find in such a setting). Minor magical talent wouldn't be noteworthy at all, though someone lacking it could be considered retarded.

Cities floating in the air? It wouldn't even be a particularly impressive style of architecture! :smallcool:

RagnaroksChosen
2010-03-26, 07:32 AM
I like low magic or where magic is common but is horded amongst the elite magicians/wizards. So common folk don't have access to alot of magic.
Yet in the same mind were acient magic was ungodly powerful. and relics of the past are rediculous.

Saph
2010-03-26, 08:02 AM
I use D&D-standard magic prevalence, i.e. lots of it. Magic's not special, but it is powerful.

• Low-level magic is common enough to be common knowledge. Farmer Bob in Podunksville doesn't have enough Spellcraft to identify a spell, but he knows that priests can heal things. Likewise, people know to spot spellcasters, even if they don't understand the details of what they can do. Minor magical items are extremely common - every adventurer of 5th-level and up will have a few magical items, as will nobles, elite guards, high-up professionals, and members of the spellcasting groups.

• Medium-level magic is harder to get hold of. You can buy a few scrolls, potions, or wands of cure light wounds in any small- to medium-sized town, but to get a scroll of restoration or teleport you'll have to go to a city and shop around a bit. Anything that costs more than 1,000 gp is unlikely to be available, and anything that costs more than 5,000 gp certainly won't be. There are no magic shops - magic items are just too expensive for any merchant to keep a good stock of them. If you want a Cloak of Elvenkind, you find a spellcaster and commission him to make it for you.

• High-level magic (ie anything that requires a character of level 11+ to create) is rare. Everyone capable of using this level of magic is a named individual, and their services don't come cheap (and the requirements will probably be more than just money). High-level spellcasters are the movers and shakers of the entire world, and even finding them is difficult.

bosssmiley
2010-03-26, 08:13 AM
High magic; low availability, with the additional fillip of magic as Pandora's Box (WFRP Chaos, S&S warping, artefact side-effects as standard, etc.)

Power has a price.

Mastikator
2010-03-26, 08:28 AM
I prefer to have low level magic be rare. Only a rich merchant (and up) are going to have access to a +1 sword. Unless you're fine with having a apprentice spend 2 months make you a sword like that. Oh, boy, and are you gonna have to pay.
Anything magic items above the lowest of low are legendary artifacts.

Any magic spell that is above a fireball is a ritual that takes several magic practitioners, lots of resources and have casting time in the order of days, no including preparation.
That means if you want a teleportation circle then it's going to take the joint effort of two magic guilds to pull it off. Lots of resources and basically, it's going to be a project bigger than building a castle.


Extremely low level magic is however somewhat commonplace, bards with cantrips can usually be seen in large cities. And clerics with orisons can even be seen sometimes in villages.

Dhavaer
2010-03-26, 08:37 AM
I use D&D-standard magic prevalence, i.e. lots of it. Magic's not special, but it is powerful.

• Low-level magic is common enough to be common knowledge. Farmer Bob in Podunksville doesn't have enough Spellcraft to identify a spell, but he knows that priests can heal things. Likewise, people know to spot spellcasters, even if they don't understand the details of what they can do. Minor magical items are extremely common - every adventurer of 5th-level and up will have a few magical items, as will nobles, elite guards, high-up professionals, and members of the spellcasting groups.

• Medium-level magic is harder to get hold of. You can buy a few scrolls, potions, or wands of cure light wounds in any small- to medium-sized town, but to get a scroll of restoration or teleport you'll have to go to a city and shop around a bit. Anything that costs more than 1,000 gp is unlikely to be available, and anything that costs more than 5,000 gp certainly won't be. There are no magic shops - magic items are just too expensive for any merchant to keep a good stock of them. If you want a Cloak of Elvenkind, you find a spellcaster and commission him to make it for you.

• High-level magic (ie anything that requires a character of level 11+ to create) is rare. Everyone capable of using this level of magic is a named individual, and their services don't come cheap (and the requirements will probably be more than just money). High-level spellcasters are the movers and shakers of the entire world, and even finding them is difficult.

Cntl+C
Cntl+V

2xMachina
2010-03-26, 09:18 AM
Yup, Saph's sounds good to me.

I like a more organized system too. Like magic guilds where most spellcasters are linked to (some are members, most are "Here's my contact. Tell me if you want something done"). So, drop by a branch in the city for anything. They'll recommend you a nearby spellcaster to do the job. If you're willing to pay, you can even get really obscure items that are specialized.

Except maybe for high level magic... They're the guild leaders. You can find/contact them easily, sure. They'd not be bothered with you though, unless there's a good reason to.

(Also, magic museum with a sample of every spell/item known. Off limits except for high ranking members of the guild. More dangerous ones are leader only)

wowy319
2010-03-26, 09:46 AM
Magic in my world is usually plentiful enough that it's improved basic quality of living for everyone, i.e. there's usually a healer within a day of most towns that can cure diseases or fix injuries. I treat arcane magic like a type of science, but usually put a cap on how "advanced" it gets. There wouldn't be any magical trains or airships, but putting constructs and called creatures to work in construction or the military would be standard fare for most developed nations.

Morty
2010-03-26, 09:49 AM
My favorite approach to magic is the one found in Discworld. Which is to say, magic exist, most people are aware of it, but it doesn't affect everyday life very much. Which is low magic, of course. As far as treating magic as science goes, I like to say that I prefer magic to use scientific methods but produce non-scientific results.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 09:50 AM
There wouldn't be any magical trains or airships, but putting constructs and called creatures to work in construction or the military would be standard fare for most developed nations.What if someone wants to put a construct to drag a cart on rails?

Also, airships, man, AIRSHIPS!

[Edit]:
I prefer magic to use scientific methods but produce non-scientific results.:smallconfused: How does that work?

jseah
2010-03-26, 10:13 AM
If I'm DMing, I have a tendency to remake magic from ground up. Or at least come up with a system of rules that can explain most if not all magical effects.

D&D has a good approximation. I have been working on a magical physics for some time already in another system.

That said, the magic-level in the campaign merely depends on how developed the civilization is. If it's been around since forever, then magic's all over the place, interesting uses for it have been found and so on. If it's a young civilization, without much understanding, then it's understandably rarer.

*************

As a player, I prefer high magic games although low magic ones are not out of the question.

For those GMs that try to use "magic is rare and moves at the speed of plot" on me, I either play a magic researcher or not play at all. Those kind of games make me itch to explore the underlying rules. (which may even intrude into metagame, but if it affects the world, it's a rule in my book)

Have a nasty tendency to break any consistent system though. Well, break meaning radically change the setting.
The only D&D setting that I'll run now includes strange devices like permanent wall of fire boilers.

Fhaolan
2010-03-26, 10:30 AM
The problem with the magic =/= technology analogy is that most people nowadays don't need to understand technology much at all. Heck ask random passers-by some basic questions about how *electricity* works, and the answers you get are more likened to magic than anything. You don't need to be a computer engineer to use a workstation, and you don't need to be a mechanical engineer to drive a car. Magic in most RPGs work in exactly the same way. In D&D you don't need to be a Wizard to use a wand of fireballs, you just need to have Use Magic Device with a high enough skill.

This is a side-effect of RPGs. In order to have a consistant game mechanic for magic; magic becomes mechanical. In which case there really is no reason not to have a pseudo-modern world in D&D, like what I understand is called a Tippyverse here.

That's why my homebrew campaign I usually use, while having pseudo-medieval trappings, is actually more in a Victorian/Edwardian cultural period. It still gives a sense of 'times past', with a 'magic/technology = art' feel. Magic is there, but like medical science of the time it's based on educated guesswork and empirical evidence, and not a core-level of understanding of *why*. While potentially powerful, the potential risk of a bad assumption is just as high. In the case of magical items, the older the artifact the worse the assumptions that went into making it, and the higher the chance of a curse-like side effect. Some may consider the curse worth it, but it falls under the 'there's no such thing as a free lunch' concept. Everything costs *something*.

Morty
2010-03-26, 10:50 AM
[Edit]::smallconfused: How does that work?

Quite simply, really. Mages research magic not unlike scientists, but unlike science, magic can't provide reliable ways of making life easier on a grand scale.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 10:58 AM
Quite simply, really. Mages research magic not unlike scientists, but unlike science, magic can't provide reliable ways of making life easier on a grand scale.I still can't wrap my head around that. If magic isn't consistent, it can't be analyzed through scientific method, and if it is, well, there's bound to be a way to make it improve the quality of life if it can do something.

How do you stop magic that can do consistently anything from being used to improve the quality of life?

Masaioh
2010-03-26, 11:03 AM
How common magic is in my setting depends where you are.

If you're in the planar metropolis, it's focused in the taverns (usually run by former adventurers) and the adventurer's guilds.

If you're in the Prime Material, it's more common because anyone who doesn't use magic or carry magic items won't survive for long in the post-apocalyptic wasteland it has become.

Morty
2010-03-26, 11:04 AM
I still can't wrap my head around that. If magic isn't consistent, it can't be analyzed through scientific method, and if it is, well, there's bound to be a way to make it improve the quality of life if it can do something.

How do you stop magic that can do consistently anything from being used to improve the quality of life?

Because using too much magic leads to serious negative consequences. Also, note the words reliable and on a grand scale. It means that magic can't be used to make, say, ariplanes or trains even though it can be used to make something easier every once in a while.

jseah
2010-03-26, 11:04 AM
How do you stop magic that can do consistently anything from being used to improve the quality of life?
Easy. It can consistently do anything if it's not used to improve the quality of life. XD

Apart from that triviality, making magic come from Faustian pacts only would go a long long way to ensuring that. (Of course, in such a game, I would ask to play a granter of such magic and thus be able to use it directly)

EDIT:

Because using too much magic leads to serious negative consequences. Also, note the words reliable and on a grand scale. It means that magic can't be used to make, say, ariplanes or trains even though it can be used to make something easier every once in a while.
I did write a short story based around magical pollution (sort of) and a world war caused by it. Still, it's a strange cop out, since arguably the world has ALOT of magic. And careful rationing can still lead to general improvement of living standards.

Kaiyanwang
2010-03-26, 11:16 AM
It depends from place to place in the setting. We have hunters-gatherers and internet in our world, so there are people (most) with, at best, an adept, and other places like a sort of Eberron.

Nevertheless even if magic can be common, only low level is cheap. Increasing levels, incresing rarity and drawbacks, directly on spellcasters (taint, sanity), or on environment (magical pollution, defiling, druids p** off). Most limitation are linked to places or specific classes or spells.

High level is very rare anyway. And no magic marts, no way, nowhere. In my current campaigns PCs are trying to BE the magic mart, because are wandering crafters and merchants, but gateher reagents and material is absolutely not trivial.

Even at high levels, magic must not be abused and magic user use it only if rushed (rain of balors), otherwise, if there is a more mundane way, they use that.

Say, you can teleport. Good. But you cannot teleport all the time, because in some places does not work, weak mind like the ones of commoner can be crushed by astral plane (so no Wizardbus) and anywayastral plane is home to things that could be attracted by too much traffic.

Abuse of clerity, timestop and the like --> sunder continuum ---> phane


And so on.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 11:23 AM
Because using too much magic leads to serious negative consequences.So figure out how much is too much (which should be given if you approach it from scientific standpoint) and then don't use too much.
Also, note the words reliable and on a grand scale. It means that magic can't be used to make, say, ariplanes or trains even though it can be used to make something easier every once in a while.Even minor changes can make a big difference. To draw analogies to technology, figuring that you can actually hit things with sharp rocks must've cause a rather large leap in the quality of living, not to mention tying those rocks to the ends of sticks, or using other sticks to toss those sticks farther.

Even a small effect every now and then can lead to measurable improvements. If there's someone who can, to use D&D spell as an example, cast Cure Minor Wounds even occasionally, it will reduce the rates of deaths on childbirth, which over time (or immediately, if it's you giving birth) is a large improvement in quality of life. Or maybe there's someone who can use a branching twig to find pure water.

You don't have to jump straight from wagons to airplanes to improve the quality of life.


[Edit]: Oh, and magic that has internal consistency can be relied to be consistent. If you can't get reliable results from magic, you can't scientifically study it. Grand scale is just made of lots of small scales. :smalltongue:

Emmerask
2010-03-26, 11:25 AM
High magic in times nearly forgotten (the gods roamed the world as physical beings, wars that destroyed whole regions between nearly godlike wizards etc).
Low magic present but still with remnants of the high magic past.
Why magic has faded and the power of wizards and clerics is only a shadow of its former might no one knows (maybe discovered during the campaign :-P)


So I guess I´m more or less in Satyr´s camp on this one :smallwink:

Morty
2010-03-26, 11:32 AM
I did write a short story based around magical pollution (sort of) and a world war caused by it. Still, it's a strange cop out, since arguably the world has ALOT of magic. And careful rationing can still lead to general improvement of living standards.

That's not unlike what I'm aiming at.


So figure out how much is too much (which should be given if you approach it from scientific standpoint) and then don't use too much.

Right, except that the way I see it, you can't turn magic into industry without using too much of it.



[Edit]: Oh, and magic that has internal consistency can be relied to be consistent. If you can't get reliable results from magic, you can't scientifically study it. Grand scale is just made of lots of small scales.

*sigh* If you're going to be such a stickler about it, how about I rephrase it: you can attempt to study magic scientifically, but it doesn't always work.

jseah
2010-03-26, 11:38 AM
Morty:
You can almost imagine the Global Wizarding Council having failed meeting after failed meeting about a magical equivalent to the Kyoto Protocol.

XD Could make for a fun diplomatic one-shot.

EDIT: it does always work. If magic fails for reasons unknown, it's a question to study. Anything that has an impact on the world is something to study scientifically. After all, we're playing a game, and games have rules. All it takes is to characterize and understand those rules.

Remember, if you can describe something, you have given it form. If you have given it form, it obeys rules and it's behaviour can be described.

This is the main gripe I have against "magic is not understandable" position. You CAN understand anything. It just takes time.

Emmerask
2010-03-26, 11:41 AM
Even a small effect every now and then can lead to measurable improvements.

measurable is a huge difference from noticeable in every day life.
If you have 1$ more every month it can certainly be measured but you will take very little notice :smallwink:

jseah
2010-03-26, 11:48 AM
measurable is a huge difference from noticeable in every day life.
If you have 1$ more every month it can certainly be measured but you will take very little notice :smallwink:
For something to be an unnoticeable improvement when used safely, it would mean that magic would have to be so lethal that anything using would have died long ago.

Imagine if using magic gave off a small puff of chlorine every time you used it. (stupid I know, but it's a quick example)
Mass usage of magic would require everyone to use a rebreather or die from poisoning. Little use of magic would net basically no ill effect.

But if you can't use even a cure minor wounds once a day, then even a level 1 cleric can easily decimate an entire village by unloading his entire spell-list at one go, holding his breath and making a run for it.

Yora
2010-03-26, 11:49 AM
I think a magical world does not need much spells, monsters, or magic items.

What it needs it's lots of stuff that people can't explain and players don't know.

Eberron is boiling over with magic, but it's not magical at all.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 11:55 AM
Right, except that the way I see it, you can't turn magic into industry without using too much of it.Who said anything about industrialization?
*sigh* If you're going to be such a stickler about it, how about I rephrase it: you can attempt to study magic scientifically, but it doesn't always work.So it's not internally consistent?

Imagine if using magic gave off a small puff of chlorine every time you used it. (stupid I know, but it's a quick example)
Mass usage of magic would require everyone to use a rebreather or die from poisoning. Little use of magic would net basically no ill effect.Of course, you'd only have to figure out a way to harvest it. A reliable source of chlorine gas can't be too hard to figure uses for. :smallbiggrin:

[Edit]:
I think a magical world does not need much spells, monsters, or magic items.

What it needs it's lots of stuff that people can't explain and players don't know.

Eberron is boiling over with magic, but it's not magical at all.I think the word you're looking for is "mystic".

Emmerask
2010-03-26, 12:12 PM
For something to be an unnoticeable improvement when used safely, it would mean that magic would have to be so lethal that anything using would have died long ago.

Imagine if using magic gave off a small puff of chlorine every time you used it. (stupid I know, but it's a quick example)
Mass usage of magic would require everyone to use a rebreather or die from poisoning. Little use of magic would net basically no ill effect.

But if you can't use even a cure minor wounds once a day, then even a level 1 cleric can easily decimate an entire village by unloading his entire spell-list at one go, holding his breath and making a run for it.

Why must it be lethal to be unnoticeable in everyday life ?
Say you have a level 1 cleric for a region with 20.000 people this cleric has a lot of work to do (for his church, for the local landlord etc) so maybe he can cure one person / month during a grand display of his gods power (faith healer style :smallbiggrin:)

If you now travel through that region you won´t notice a difference between this region and the region you passed through a month ago (that did not have a level 1 cleric). The avg life expectancy in this region is 1 year longer (the cleric heals one person / month who lets say lives 10years longer then he would have).
Is this measurable ? Yes!
Is this noticeable if you travel through that region? no not really :smallwink:

Morty
2010-03-26, 12:17 PM
Who said anything about industrialization?

:smallsigh: By "industrialization" I meant "large-scale use". As in, using magic for relatively trivial things.


So it's not internally consistent?


Yes, it is. If we say that magic is unpredictable and dangerous and it is unpredictable and dangerous then yes, it's internally consistent.

Ormur
2010-03-26, 12:22 PM
I try to keep magic a little less prevalent than standard D&D but it's still pretty common. Magic is mostly incorporated in the hierarchy of society in order to keep it from altering the world too much. Wizards are all members of the elite and share interests with the conventional aristocracy, they're probably granted lands and titles and most of them are from well to do families. That way magic can be kept from disrupting the fabric of society too much. Magic is powerful and jealously guarded by those that can wield it. But to reflect the existence of magic I make the material culture of society closer to the 18th century than middle ages even though the conventional technology is medieval. Farmers or their landlord have access to plant growth, the occasional healing and utility spells, continual flames light streets, decanters of endless water take care of sewage etc. It also makes it easier not to be too anachronistic.

The magic that the elites can't control reliably is adventurers, mercenaries, barbaric threats, hermits (like druids) and the occasional super-villain threat. Those might disrupt society if they can't be co-opted but even adventurers are usually content with being allowed to hack designated enemies to pieces and receive loot, lands and titles in turn.

erikun
2010-03-26, 12:22 PM
I prefer a slightly different tangent regarding magic in my worlds - I prefer magic to be mysterious, situational, and temporary. I enjoy being able to walk over the next hill and find wonderous ruins with floating trees, talking stones and magical lakes. I like mages who can weave spells for stunning effects of complex solutions - but doing so takes considerable experience in the magic arts.

What I don't like are hoards of magical equipment being produced industrally from your local blacksmithmage. A sword that bursts into magical fire should be interesting and noteworthy, not something every farmer uses to light their fireplace. Having characters cart around tankards of healing potion just feels silly regardless of setting.

I don't thing the technology level matters that much to the magical level of the setting. From Dark Sun to Shadowrun, magic can still be present in the setting.

Reading through the thread, there is one other magic system I dislike: the "only for DM" system, where only insane NPCs or lost evil ruins have access to magic. If there is magic in the setting, the players will naturally want to play around with it; magic equating with demonic possession keeps them doing so for (in my eyes) very little reason.

Tiki Snakes
2010-03-26, 12:23 PM
Why must it be lethal to be unnoticeable in everyday life ?
Say you have a level 1 cleric for a region with 20.000 people this cleric has a lot of work to do (for his church, for the local landlord etc) so maybe he can cure one person / month during a grand display of his gods power (faith healer style :smallbiggrin:)

If you now travel through that region you won´t notice a difference between this region and the region you passed through a month ago (that did not have a level 1 cleric). The avg life expectancy in this region is 1 year longer (the cleric heals one person / month who lets say lives 10years longer then he would have).
Is this measurable ? Yes!
Is this noticeable if you travel through that region? no not really :smallwink:

One person a month magically cured/healed?

I could see that being a big difference. I'm sure combing the obituaries for the last 50 years we could find one or two people who we'd have liked to still have amongst us for each calender year.

Hell, man. Jimi Hendrix was only 27 when he died.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 12:30 PM
:smallsigh: By "industrialization" I meant "large-scale use". As in, using magic for relatively trivial things. Well, you don't have to stick to trivial things to improve quality of life. If you can't use it for small things, and can't use it for big things, well, do medium things!

Yes, it is. If we say that magic is unpredictable and dangerous and it is unpredictable and dangerous then yes, it's internally consistent.But if it's unpredictable, it can't be studied with scientific method (which is about studying things, making a hypothesis about how they work, making predictions based on said hypothesis and then trying to disprove the predictions).

If doing a single thing the exactly same way several times produces a fireball the first time, a vase of begonias on the orbit the second, and nothing on the third time, well, I don't see PCs, or anyone who isn't barking mad, using it at all.

Totally Guy
2010-03-26, 12:37 PM
In the game I'm running, Burning Wheel, not D&D...

Magic can succeed or fail.
Either eventuality has the wizard potentially lose Forte.
If the spell fails we roll 1D6. On a 3-6 nothing bad happens.
On a 2 the magic components pervert themselves into a different effect. Could be ok, could be bad.
On a 1 something creepy enters the world. A blob monster maybe, or (I've homebrewed) the Nucklavee *Rar!*. That's scary stuff.

Magic can do awesome things. They could level a town with enough successes on a weather control type spell. But it has a terrible price. On a failure at least. Succeed everything and it all goes your way.

Trying to use that sort of thing to help everyone forever would result in a lot of sick wizards and regular (at least once every 3 months) invasions of demonic entities.

I can't wait for my players to trigger that random spell stuff. We'd roll dice and anything could happen.

Morty
2010-03-26, 12:43 PM
Well, you don't have to stick to trivial things to improve quality of life. If you can't use it for small things, and can't use it for big things, well, do medium things!

Who said I can't? You seem to be working under an assumption that I don't want magic to be used for anything, period.


But if it's unpredictable, it can't be studied with scientific method (which is about studying things, making a hypothesis about how they work, making predictions based on said hypothesis and then trying to disprove the predictions).

If doing a single thing the exactly same way several times produces a fireball the first time, a vase of begonias on the orbit the second, and nothing on the third time, well, I don't see PCs, or anyone who isn't barking mad, using it at all.

I really can't figure out why you're using the most extreme definition of "unpredictable" except that it supports your argument of course.

Ormur
2010-03-26, 12:43 PM
There's another thing, even though magic could be systematically studied and applied in large scale causing a sort of industrialization it doesn't have to be. Even thought the tools are there to be used it doesn't mean the societal conditions are right. In antiquity and the middle ages in Europe and elsewhere various technologies existed mostly as gadgets and curiosities for the elite. Wizards may be to divorced from practical considerations to revolutionize the means of production. It's not enough having theoretical scientists they have to work with the engineers and businessmen to turn theory into practice. Even more so with magic than technology since the first pioneers of industrialization were not scientists or even educated engineers but you'd have to be able to wield magic to create the necessary magic items.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 12:59 PM
Who said I can't? You seem to be working under an assumption that I don't want magic to be used for anything, period.You said magic can't be used for relatively trivial things. And I'm working on the assumption that you want magic to be something shiny adventurers (and their opponents) can do while it pretty much doesn't exist for the rest of the setting, because that's the picture I've gotten from your explanations.
I really can't figure out why you're using the most extreme definition of "unpredictable" except that it supports your argument of course.I'm using the dictionary definition of "unable of being predicted" because English isn't my first language and I'm unaware of other meanings it may have.

*realistic stuff*Progress is inevitable!

PaladinBoy
2010-03-26, 01:25 PM
I tend to prefer magic which is only marginally strange and unknowable. There's a chance that a lot of magic in an unusual situation will cause a heretofore unknown effect, but there are general formulas and patterns which are known to work almost all the time.

I actually like magitech. If it's a consistent system whose workings are known, of course it's going to get used as a power source for technology. I actually enjoy using magic to drive anything from steampunk up to space opera tech.

Roderick_BR
2010-03-26, 02:07 PM
The less, the better, both in quality and in quantity.
Magic is supposedly magical and strange. It is supernatural, and for me, that strongly implies that it is not supposed to be an everyday appearance, but something rare and strange.
Game worlds I like ususally feature few spellcasters,and most of the time they only have one or two innate talents, or make Faustian deals to get their powers. Spellcasters are never, or almost never major characters, they are either villains, or support characters to the real heroes, including player characters.
Something like that. Magic should be rare, and special. I'd rather magic still be powerful, but not easy pie recipes. Spell casters should either just dable into it (something like paladin or bard), or be powerful, mytical and rare figures. Wizards and clerics still standing among the most powerful beings, but magic being hard to use and costly. Make people work hard and earn their powers. Not just play Magic the Gathering. "I cast spell X, Y, Z, and the encounter's over. Gonna grab some pizza, later."

jseah
2010-03-26, 02:16 PM
Last couple of posts:
What is it with making magic rare and strange that appeals to you? Since I come from a position where I like to know everything about how it works, I hope you can understand my uh... incomprehension.

Does it make the setting feeling more dangerous?
What do you do when a player sets out to tame magic by finding out how you run it?

More importantly, how do you adjudicate effects that are supposed to be unpredictable without being biased?
(btw, speed of plot is predictable, just not without metagaming. A savvy player can game it, and perhaps even use magic's results as a sort of roundabout divination as to where the plot is)

AmberVael
2010-03-26, 02:17 PM
I like magic that is cool. It can be low amounts of magic, high amounts of magic, whatever- I've enjoyed both. I can see how low magic can make it more special and intriguing and awe inspiring, but high magic also has its benefits- you can make it flashy, you can make everyone capable of expressing it in their own way, create flying cities and massively cool things that a more low magic game wouldn't have.

The problem is not necessarily with any particular type of magic system, for me, it's with the presentation of it. High magic tends to have problems in that it is everywhere and becomes samey. Low magic has the problem of frustration in dealing with it (higher costs to using it, more difficulty in actually getting to use it in the first place) and being less of a big thing to begin with.

SilverStar
2010-03-26, 02:19 PM
My worlds are high-magic, because the characters'll need it.

Believe it when I tell you all that when they find the newest trinket or a custom spell, they're all dreading what's gonna happen next.

I don't worry overmuch about abuse, because of my particular Rule 0.5: if you can do it, so can your enemies.

krossbow
2010-03-26, 03:19 PM
In the game I'm running, Burning Wheel, not D&D...

Magic can succeed or fail.
Either eventuality has the wizard potentially lose Forte.
If the spell fails we roll 1D6. On a 3-6 nothing bad happens.
On a 2 the magic components pervert themselves into a different effect. Could be ok, could be bad.
On a 1 something creepy enters the world. A blob monster maybe, or (I've homebrewed) the Nucklavee *Rar!*. That's scary stuff.

Magic can do awesome things. They could level a town with enough successes on a weather control type spell. But it has a terrible price. On a failure at least. Succeed everything and it all goes your way.

Trying to use that sort of thing to help everyone forever would result in a lot of sick wizards and regular (at least once every 3 months) invasions of demonic entities.

I can't wait for my players to trigger that random spell stuff. We'd roll dice and anything could happen.


Just look at a setting like Full metal Alchemist (I will refer to "alchemy" as "magic" for this argument). Magic can have horrible, horrible prices when used incorrectly, and, as far as the series shows, its generally only a matter of time till you make a mistake and something occurs.

However, all that means is that it will be used as strategically as possible. You may not see everyone healed or helped, but those in power or in military/industrial situations will have it used despite the risk. Technology will progress alongside it, but only to support it, as a backup.


No matter the cost, humans will always strive to use dangerous power for good (such as how we have nuclear power plants, use highly dangerous/lethal chemicals in industry, use viruses to make vaccines, ect.)

ScionoftheVoid
2010-03-26, 03:25 PM
I like very high magic, near (or even above) Tippyverse levels.

High-level casters are common in non-wilderness areas. Non-magic users are not common at all (gestalt rules help here). Almost all civilisations are metroplolis sized, some even having large wilderness-like areas for entertainment and/or training. Many of these civilisations use things like multi-story buildings (with Walls of Force used to hold up the higher stories), large-scale magic marts and magic in everyday life (Create Food and Water traps, Teleportation Circles and various magically created creatures used as labourers and suchlike).

Wilderness areas could be tamed quite easily but no one civilisation really needs the space, nor can they be bothered to spare the resources. Mostly they're used as areas for sport, adventuring, creature sanctuaries, the more low magic civilisations and where creatures not wishing to enter civilised society hang out (some of the less intelligent dragons, more self-centred races like the High Elves and creatures that are not comfortable with magic being the most common, though these can and do form their own more focused civilisations). If space does start running out a trip to a nearby (or even far off) planet is feasible, and there are already small, out-of-touch (though still magic focused) civilisations on other planets, but few are above large town levels of populations.

I refer to any non-mundane mechanic as "magic" in the above, including (but not limited to) Shadowcasting, Psionics, Incarnum, Binding and Truenaming.

Thanks for indirectly helping with my homebrew setting, BTW. This originally started off the top of my head but it's been really useful in making me think about the setting. Anyone got suggestions for a name (I know it's a Tippyverse with elements of Spelljammer (I think, from what I've heard of them) but any setting with flying ships from city to city deserves a name, in my mind. It would help unify the setting, and it helps if I can copy-paste and save this on my laptop with a setting name as the title. PM's are fine, so as to keep the thread strictly on rails).

Totally Guy
2010-03-26, 04:04 PM
Just look at a setting like Full metal Alchemist (I will refer to "alchemy" as "magic" for this argument). Magic can have horrible, horrible prices when used incorrectly, and, as far as the series shows, its generally only a matter of time till you make a mistake and something occurs.

Sounds like a good story in there. That's precisely what I want from the system.:smallwink:

Fhaolan
2010-03-26, 04:57 PM
Last couple of posts:
What is it with making magic rare and strange that appeals to you? Since I come from a position where I like to know everything about how it works, I hope you can understand my uh... incomprehension.

Does it make the setting feeling more dangerous?
What do you do when a player sets out to tame magic by finding out how you run it?

More importantly, how do you adjudicate effects that are supposed to be unpredictable without being biased?
(btw, speed of plot is predictable, just not without metagaming. A savvy player can game it, and perhaps even use magic's results as a sort of roundabout divination as to where the plot is)

To a lot of people magic shouldn't be mundane. I vaguely remember some character in a book somewhere saying 'once you understand it, it's not magic anymore'. Stage magicians run into this one *all* the time. With most people once they figure out the illusion, it's no longer interesting to them.

People ask me about my hobbies, and are surprised that I don't list computers. I work with computers for a living. They're not that interesting to me anymore. I spend too much time with them at work to make me want to spend that much more time with them 'at play'. I have a few friends in the film industry that can't watch movies for fun anymore, because they spend the whole time picking them apart as part of their daily jobs. Familiarity breeds contempt, as it were.

So when many people play a game that supposedly has 'magic' in it, they want that magic to be *magical*. Surprising, dangerous, difficult, etc. If it's easy and completely understood, it's just another form of mundane. It's not magic any more.

Totally Guy
2010-03-26, 05:34 PM
I've seen a magic system where magic was low powered but potentially ubiquitous.

Basically magic was the "every-skill". You'd get so many "domains" like Social, Martial or Medicinal, and every time you needed to use a skill of one of your types you could instead use magic to do it.

So the martial mage doesn't need to even have any sword skills. He could just pick up a sword and use his magic to guide his hand. Of course after each stroke he'd be testing his Forte (Constitution) to see if his body could cope. So it wouldn't be good in the long run as eventually he'd fail by enough that he'd keel over.

It looks pretty fun though. Magical blacksmiths and magical scholars round every corner. But of course it lacks the whole "I can blow stuff up with my wiggly fingers" which is a shame.

jseah
2010-03-26, 05:39 PM
So when many people play a game that supposedly has 'magic' in it, they want that magic to be *magical*. Surprising, dangerous, difficult, etc. If it's easy and completely understood, it's just another form of mundane. It's not magic any more.
Then again, dangerous and difficult doesn't neccessarily resut in a magical experience. Since you can understand what is difficult and dangerous to use. My guess is that understanding how something works makes the *magic* go away, so to speak.

Hmm... So it's the exploration of something unknown? That's understandable. But then isn't making magic unknowable so that it never becomes known despite your searching a form of... I dunno, self-denial? Since you're trying to explore something but keeping yourself from finding it.

XD And if your DM doesn't know the magic system (as I imagine alot of "people" that you reference wouldn't) then how can there be anything for the players to find?

EDIT: Analogous to:
"An artifact is out there, let's go find it!"
*players enjoy the journey enough that the DM decides to prolong it*
"Sorry the princess is in another castle..."

Mastikator
2010-03-26, 05:53 PM
You know, in D&D3.5e there's a spell called "Controll Weather", it could be used to make it rain once a week, or month, or as insurance during drought. It only takes one caster and could improve the crop on a very, large scale. Significantly.
Farmers could pool their money to buy this spell every so often to increase their yield, sell the surplus and profit.

Magic doesn't need to be "everyday" to significantly improve the quality of life. The aftermath of magic could very well be awesome, or devastating.

krossbow
2010-03-26, 05:53 PM
To a lot of people magic shouldn't be mundane. I vaguely remember some character in a book somewhere saying 'once you understand it, it's not magic anymore'.




It might have come from a book first, but i remember seeing that in an episode of house with a sick magician; his response being that if knowing the trick makes something lose its awe, there was never anything magical about it in the first place (his implication being that, even if you know everything there is to know about things such as human bodies, bacteria, ect., their very complexity should make them still overawing).


Anyways, off of that. I think that the best way to keep magic unknowable and full of awe is to make sure its not actually something of the human's own actions; that is to say, it can only be granted by another power, through pact or other device. This essentially makes everyone function akin to clerics, but it means that such abilities are still beyond the kin of mere mortals.

As i remember it, this is how iron heroes handles it too; once you reach level 10 arcanist you've learned all that a mere mortal can on their own; you must seek out a demon or eldritch abomination and trade them part of your life/soul for further power and knowlegde.

Orzel
2010-03-26, 05:56 PM
I like low power, medium frequency worlds. In both my homebrew worlds there are a noticeable amount of spellcasters. Everyone knows someone who cast spells. Most people know a couple spell casters, but most spellcasters are very low strength. Getting a low level spell, scroll, or magic item is not a problem if you have the money.

In my Roguish Notes setting, spellcaster groups pump out magic scrolls and items in a capitalist fury (since magic items turn a profit there). Every thief, farmer, and guard has a weak magic sword. There are high level magic users but they all regret it, go insane, or "droop".

In my other setting, using more than weak spells is next to impossible. You can learn how to cast high level magics and have them not fizzle but... "Once you enter the War of the Ranked, you cannot leave it." Most people keep their sanity and use weak stuff.

PaladinBoy
2010-03-26, 07:22 PM
So when many people play a game that supposedly has 'magic' in it, they want that magic to be *magical*. Surprising, dangerous, difficult, etc. If it's easy and completely understood, it's just another form of mundane. It's not magic any more.

I personally feel differently.

For me, at least, something like dropping a hurricane on a city, or blasting through half a battleship with a beam weapon, or even simpler feats like turning invisible or making food out of nowhere, aren't mundane even if the magic system is very well codified and understood. The simple fact that humans aren't able to do these things without assistance of some type keeps it interesting. It might be mundane for the world in question, but not to me, since I don't live in a world where these things are possible. (Admittedly, it helps that the higher end feats usually aren't ever mundane - there aren't a lot of Lyrandars like my character Elina or a lot of TSAB mages of Nanoha's caliber.)

I also think it's easier to see the big, flashy, impressive stuff when you have such a system in place. Not that's it's impossible with a low magic/unknowable magic system, but it is much rarer. If only because the system is designed to make it harder to easily pull stuff off.

This is why, as I said earlier, I prefer worlds with a high level of functional magic and/or magitech.

Yukitsu
2010-03-26, 09:54 PM
To a lot of people magic shouldn't be mundane. I vaguely remember some character in a book somewhere saying 'once you understand it, it's not magic anymore'. Stage magicians run into this one *all* the time. With most people once they figure out the illusion, it's no longer interesting to them.


Interestingly, and though I don't agree with the conclusion, one part of my DM's setting has a group of peoples so familiar with magic, that stage magicians are considered particularly impressive *because* they don't cast any magic (or if they are cheaters, do but aren't caught.) Since my favourite stage magicians are Penn and Teller though, I can't at all agree with the conclusion. A spectacle, even when you understand it is something I can thoroughly enjoy watching.

Anyway, I like high magic settings, where everyone has a very strong understanding of magic, how it works, and how to harness it to a degree. I view it in the same way I view science in many regards. Those with an interest in it will never get tired of explosions, no matter how they see them (mythbusters for example) and so long as the magic is sufficiently fantastic, understanding won't numb people to it.

I dislike magic marts though. I appreciate artisanship, and like it when items are custom made, rather than shop stocked and mass produced.

Fhaolan
2010-03-27, 12:30 AM
Hmm... So it's the exploration of something unknown? That's understandable. But then isn't making magic unknowable so that it never becomes known despite your searching a form of... I dunno, self-denial? Since you're trying to explore something but keeping yourself from finding it.


Think of it this way: The only reason why physics, chemistry, and other sciences are as advanced today is because it built upon the work of hundreds if not thousands of years of very bright people working very hard to do so, and putting effort into making that work available to those that came after them. And we still don't know everything about those topics.

Now if magic existed, I would be extremely surprised if it was easier than physics. And the difficult magics would parallel advanced physics theories such as M-Theory and the like.

Once atomic theories were confirmed in the 1930's, it still took over 100,000 extremely intelligent people working for 15 years to come up with a working weapon. If it takes less than that amount of effort to come up with a working magic spell with the same level of effect, I feel it lacks vermislitude. Magic, while fantastic, shouldn't be *easier* than mundane methods.

Which unfortunately means that if any system of magic is capable of being worked out in complete detail by the *average* gamer it's not hard enough to simulate the pseudo-reality of such things. That's a limitation to RPGs, and it's not really possible to get around that. RPGs depend on there being a reasonably simple mechanic to magic. At best they have stupid random effect tables to simulate the 'you don't know everything' factor.

The problem with doing it 'realistically', is that it will devolve into a bizare game of cops and robbers. "I shoot you with Murgot's Magical Intercontentantal Balistic Missile." "I counter with Zabon's Impenetrable Shield, and reply with Blifness' Blindness." "Uh... why? I don't need to see you. I've got 4-span Super Sense up, just like you." "Ah, but the Blindness isn't for you, it's for your familiar, which reduces your spellchart's z-function three degrees." "Ah ha! I wondered why you insisted on using the Dilibreth Accords. Not that it matters in the slightest, as I have..."

After about ten minutes of that, the rest of the players go into the living room and pull out the WII. :smallsmile:

RE PaladinBoy: Personally I find that level of magic is fine as long as it's rare. If it's common then it's equivalent to everyone in the world having a nuclear suitcase bomb. If you think that half the planet wouldn't cease to support life a few minutes after that became possible, you have a more optomistic view of humanity than I do.

RE Yukisu: As you say, with Penn and Teller, you're not watching magic, you're watching spectacle. It's entertaining, but it's not magical. You watch for the comedy, the explosions, the in-your-face brashness. They have no interest in being magical. Their act was *based* on them spoiling magic. And when they got bored with doing that, they went on to pointing out other illusions in politics, current events, and other things because they want to encourage people to think and not treat things they don't understand as magic.

taltamir
2010-03-27, 12:32 AM
i like my fantasy worlds oozing magic out of every orfice.
i got boring old mundane world already... its called IRL.

Yukitsu
2010-03-27, 12:43 AM
Think of it this way: The only reason why physics, chemistry, and other sciences are as advanced today is because it built upon the work of hundreds if not thousands of years of very bright people working very hard to do so, and putting effort into making that work available to those that came after them. And we still don't know everything about those topics.

Now if magic existed, I would be extremely surprised if it was easier than physics. And the difficult magics would parallel advanced physics theories such as M-Theory and the like.

To be fair, you only need to be medieval average, literate and own a book to be competent enough to learn the theory of magic. What you're talking about would take rather more in real life terms of competence, as even considering good ecucation most people won't get that far.


Once atomic theories were confirmed in the 1930's, it still took over 100,000 extremely intelligent people working for 15 years to come up with a working weapon. If it takes less than that amount of effort to come up with a working magic spell with the same level of effect, I feel it lacks vermislitude. Magic, while fantastic, shouldn't be *easier* than mundane methods.

True, but even in Tippyverse, a nuclear weapon grade explosion isn't really possible pre epic, assuming you follow the letter of the rules and know that locate city bombs fail.


The problem with doing it 'realistically', is that it will devolve into a bizare game of cops and robbers. "I shoot you with Murgot's Magical Intercontentantal Balistic Missile." "I counter with Zabon's Impenetrable Shield, and reply with Blifness' Blindness." "Uh... why? I don't need to see you. I've got 4-span Super Sense up, just like you." "Ah, but the Blindness isn't for you, it's for your familiar, which reduces your spellchart's z-function three degrees." "Ah ha! I wondered why you insisted on using the Dilibreth Accords. Not that it matters in the slightest, as I have..."

After about ten minutes of that, the rest of the players go into the living room and pull out the WII. :smallsmile:

I see you don't like dungeons and discourse. :smalltongue:

Malificus
2010-03-27, 12:57 AM
I like high magic worlds with epic hero physical characters most.

So giant floating cities, forest where the trees are so big it would take a day to reach the bottom, castles in the clouds, and giant ruined cities underwater. And adventurers eventually can become high powered physical types who do things like survive mile high drops, wrestle elder dragons to the ground, and slash an inland sea in two with a sword, but no spell casters.

So, Exalted, without magic, but keeping charms I guess.

EvilBloodGnome
2010-03-27, 01:05 AM
I tend to like medium or low magic worlds, especially if science is about the same level as magic is. I do enjoy high magic games, too, though; these are especially fun as an excuse to run gestalt and get stupid with how high-powered things are.

Fhaolan
2010-03-27, 01:07 AM
To be fair, you only need to be medieval average, literate and own a book to be competent enough to learn the theory of magic. What you're talking about would take rather more in real life terms of competence, as even considering good ecucation most people won't get that far.

True, for the most part. I have less respect for the average human being, I think. I find that taking someone of average intellect, who is literate, and handing them the appropriate Chilton Manual, will be barely able to change the oil in their own car. They definately won't be able to adjust the timing or anything more complex without feedback from someone who's done something similar before.

I've had the... unfortunately pleasure of actually attempting to read a Victorian medical text. It was full of absolute nonsense, based on assumptions that in hindsight are patently not true. These were not stupid people. It simply took a lot of time for the bad assumptions to be tested. More time that most gamers really realize, or are willing to wait for in their RPGs.

Even now we can't cure or repair fairly basic damage all the time. I blew the ligaments in my knee a couple of years back. I had surgery, and it didn't quite heal all the way. Not the doctor's fault. It's just one of those things we don't quite understand 100%. While I can run and jump and act normally, my knee still goes wonky on rare occasions, and when it does I can't trust it to bear my weight. So I can no longer do stage combat or martial arts reliably, the way I used to years ago. I stopped doing that kind of thing because I didn't want to risk injuring my fight partner if I lost control.

I don't expect the pseudo-medieval wizard to be any more or less competent than a modern doctor.

krossbow
2010-03-27, 01:38 AM
Keep in mind, Magic can be made to be as simple for the lay person as "Point glowy stick, say command word" and it works.


Look at computers and other things; when it comes to programming, only a drastically small portion of the populace can actually make heads or tales of HOW a computer is programmed or what makes it tick (by this, i don't mean just working a computer, ect; i mean actual code in the system itself). However, people still know how to USE them, and how to do things on them.



Just because only a ridiculously small minority know how an incredibly complicated technology works does not mean that it will not be usable by the general populace.

Knaight
2010-03-27, 02:55 AM
Look at computers and other things; when it comes to programming, only a drastically small portion of the populace can actually make heads or tales of HOW a computer is programmed or what makes it tick (by this, i don't mean just working a computer, ect; i mean actual code in the system itself). However, people still know how to USE them, and how to do things on them.

Lets break this down to the level of actual physical reading, and draw the analogy there. Not many people even know the physical differences between a 1 and a 0 on a CD or some such.

jseah
2010-03-27, 07:19 AM
^Fhaolan: You make an excellent point.

It is possible, however, to design a magic system that is easy to use. With a plausible explanation (involving making magic able to process large amounts of information and self-organize)

Still, I see your point. A magic that operates by simple rules similar to current physics will not be simple in application.

EDIT: I don't think it helps the mystical bit, since being inherently unpredictable is very different from being unknown.

Greenish
2010-03-27, 08:13 AM
The problem with doing it 'realistically', is that it will devolve into a bizare game of cops and robbers. "I shoot you with Murgot's Magical Intercontentantal Balistic Missile." "I counter with Zabon's Impenetrable Shield, and reply with Blifness' Blindness." "Uh... why? I don't need to see you. I've got 4-span Super Sense up, just like you." "Ah, but the Blindness isn't for you, it's for your familiar, which reduces your spellchart's z-function three degrees." "Ah ha! I wondered why you insisted on using the Dilibreth Accords. Not that it matters in the slightest, as I have..."That sounds awesome. :smallcool:

I've had the... unfortunately pleasure of actually attempting to read a Victorian medical text. It was full of absolute nonsense, based on assumptions that in hindsight are patently not true. These were not stupid people. It simply took a lot of time for the bad assumptions to be tested. More time that most gamers really realize, or are willing to wait for in their RPGs.But once the things have been figured out, it'll be a lot easier to pick them up. I don't think I could've ever come up with the mathematical concept of "zero", yet I occasionally manage to use it. And of course, you don't need to figure out the exact principles behind something to make it work, it can be done with trial and error.

Note that I don't completely disagree with you: if the magic is very complex, it will take a lot of time and effort to figure it out, if it ever will be figured out, but progress will be made.