The loss of mystery in spells, magic items and monsters (rant)

[Kol Korran]

(the rant takes it's examples mostly from D&D 3.5, but i believe it may pertains to many systems, this mostly deal with fantasy settings, though it may also be relevant to sci-fi, i don't know)so, in my campaign in Eberron (in which there are very few high level people, the characters are 9th level, and that is considered BIG in Eberron). the party are in a major church, and there is a siege of fiends, led by an army of fiend possessed creatures and soldiers. in the siege and battle there are a few events that i'd like to mention:
- the party are given specific tailored legendary items, to help fight the siege. these partly have qualities from the books, but some qualities i made myself.
- the high priestess is a child linked to the flame that is the faith's focus. , in the church she has 18th level casting, but i also gave her thematic powers to aid the siege, such as effects that all the believers share in the waves of battle, or animating the statues of saints, or conjuring great divine wings that push enemies of the church, scorching them.
- the possessing fiend is likewise linked to a great evil force, and is strengthening specific forces, or casting it's spells through creatures that can't normally (wyverns, ogre crushers and so on) plus a few minor effects

what my beef is? i was hoping this would feel epic, dramatic, you know... special. without relying on "plot effect" (each thing had it's own mechanics, which could be resisted, manipulated and interacted with. and NO one was impervious) but the player's response? mostly they are saying things like: "oh, so it's a +X sword with Y powers that can do this. ok."" or "so she used an 8th level spell called X" or "so.. .the great bear can cast 5th level spells. anyone still got dispel magic?"

.... it was all so... mundane, so stripped down to tactics, numbeers and statistics. i don't know, maybe i could have described things better (not really my strong point), but i feel that most players' approach to magic, fantastic creatures and magic items is mostly as "elements in the game you either use, or need to know how to deal with".

i understand this approach. this is, after all, also a tactical game. tactical thinking is valid and quite important, or your characters die. but... i can't help it. i feel that since this is fantasy, there should be more- a sense of wonder, mystery, sometime awe, sometimes revulsion (necromancy for example), sometime fear and the like. you know- EMOTION. i remember some movies i watched when i was younger where you saw some unknown monster, or magic effect, or a really cool magic item, and you marveled at it! it stirred the imagination, drew you in.

damn, that is why i came into roleplay!... players look at 7-9th level spells as cool tools, "nice guns" and swimming psychic abominations of the depths as "ok, so what are it's low saves? think it has DR?" this depresses me a bit.

i tried giving better descriptions, and changing monster appearances or conjuring new monsters. players seem to pay more attention then, but still mostly to find the "chinks in their armor".

my players DO roleplay, but this is mostly reflected towards themselves, towards their party members, and NPCs. but they'd be damned if they show anyone any respect. (but i got no real problem with that. they want to feel the hotshots after all)

i think i may be repeating myself, so i'll stop here. i just wish that... well... i could bring back the mystery and fascination with magic and fantasy into the game.

thanks for reading.
Kol.

[Yora]

I think there are two things that do a good job to stop RPGs from being games of numbers and abilities.

First is to keep things mundane. I think the worst experiences with players playing a tactical wargame in an RPG are with D&D 3rd Edition and it's derivates. The primary reason for this seems to be an overload of abilities and items.
My personal solution is to play only low level games, in low level settings. PCs range from 1st to 8th level, and some of the really big legendary heroes of the setting have made it up to 12th. But normally, all those spells of 6th level and higher and items that replicate them, just don't show up in the game.
Also D&D in 3rd and 4th Edition floods players with alternative classes and other stuff. If you have the options, you'll want to use them. The indexes on wotcs page list 175 character classes, 782 prestige classes, 3304 feats, and the PHB and Spell compendium have 350 pages of nothing but spells. How can a player not constantly try to find new ways to improve his characters stats? So say, "screw it, we're playing old school in this campaign: PHB only and don't expect to ever get higher than 10th level".

The second thing is to create the adventure in a way, in which killing creatures does not benefit the PCs. The biggest problem arises, when the amount of XP is tied directly to the number of creatures killed. Instead, let the players face obstacles. Monsters and NPCs can be obstacles as well. The PCs want to do something, the obstacle is in their way. When they overcome the obstacle and continue with their quest, they gain XP. Captured enemies are defeated. Fleeing enemies are defeated.
But I think you get the best results if you don't give XP on encounter basis at all. At the end of the adventure, the PCs gain XP. If they killed anyone during the adventure or not does not affect how many XP they get. And suddenly the question to fight or not is about if the enemy will cause greater problems if he lives, or if the long term consequences of a fight will cause trouble. Also, make encounters the PCs can not win. Most players expect that everything they encounter will end in a fight, and it will be a fight they can win. Tell them they will not be able to defeat every creature they find, and they realize that they are not supposed to kill everything they meet.
When the progress of the plot becomes more important than the number of killed enemies, start making adventures in which killing creatures and people doesn't progress the plot at all. I've had a couple of sessions in which not a single enemy was killed.

Wizards idea of D&D is a tabletop wargame. If you want it to be an RPG, you have to not play it by the books.

[Eldan]

Just a suggestion:

What could help you and your group, perhaps, would be a change of game system. Get into something new. There are thousands of systems out there. Take one that works well with a bit of mystery (I'll let others handle this), give your players the minimum setting informations, and let them discover everything through the game.

Then, as Yora said: don't reward them for killing things, reward them for solving problems.

[Jair Barik]

In a way I think adding a sense of mystery to things can really help. Use creatures the players haven't heard of or make your own (this can be as simple as using the stats of an existing creature with entirely different appearance/motives) and do the same for magic items. Also limit the effectiveness of divinations/the availability of them particularly identify.

A magic ring of flame blade 3/day at low level is an alright piece of equipment. The same ring with known magical powers but no specifics and a command word to activate is fun and interesting. In my campaign specificly it was (unbeknownst to the players) an item blessed by a prankster spirit, whenever the wearer spoke the word 'the' it would activate. The players loved it but hadn't a clue how it worked.

Same campaign one of the players looted a sword from a tomb of a respected local hero (that is yanked it from his cold dead hands). Using this sword against the abundant undead of the tomb they were quickly amazed by it. It seemed to hit all the time and took the strongest undead down in a single blow (it had about a +5 to hit and did bonus d8 damage or so, the players knew neither these stats only that I was rolling bonus damage and that it was getting some sort of modifier). Continuing through the tomb they found some monstrous spiders. Player with the sword rushes in and rolls well...only to miss. Try as he might he rarely hit the enemy and when he did he barely wounded them. Swapping out to his normal weapon he found that upon attacking the magic sword was still in his hands. Switching to his bow he found the same problem. Again the players loved it. They worked out (without any prompting) that the sword (used in a famous battle against undead hordes) had brilliant bonuses against undead but against anything else had penalties of roughly the same value. Having cleaned out the undead problem they quickly went about getting a remove curse then traded it for a notably weaker but not cursed sword.

Again same campaign a group of troglodytes in flame proof leathers used homebrew flame thrower devices against the party. After beating the first lot they quickly began using one of them, twiddling with several settings on the device each encounter to try and work out the different settings (more deadly line and wide cone) until they eventualy saw one of the enemy explode whilst trying to use it (had about a 1/10 chance to explode with each use). They stopped using it immediately after but enjoyed it while it lasted.

So yeah in general players often enjoy things they don't know the rules for.

[Gamer Girl]

This is very common in 3E. A lot of folks just 'play by the numbers', and you get a lot of 'oh I use X to do 50 damage and then roll Y and done' instead of 'I call upon the holy power of Ugmor and cast the fire fame spell'.

Some easy, immediate things to try:

1.Don't give out any game information. While playing the game as a character, keep the players focused on the description of the game reality, not the game numbers. Don't tell DC's for things, or Ac's or anything else. And if a spell does not effect a monster, don't say why. And so on and so on.

2.Add new stuff that they can't just 'look up'. GinP is full of homebrew stuff...

3.Add special effects. 3E treats necromancy as bland and 'just like other magic', so change that. Add in draining effects, summoning of random ghosts and such to make it creepy and bad.

4.Cut back on character knowledge. As per the core rules, a character can with a single dice roll know everything about anything. So put a stop to that and make the rolls harder or even impossible.

5.Add in bad effects. 3E made all things D&D safe, but this was not so in 1/2E. So bring them back. Add in harmful effects for powerful magic. Add in some strange stuff. And don't be afraid to hurt the characters. Have them hit with an effect that they can't just blink and remove.

[Shadowknight12]

This is a very common issue that crops up every so often.

My advice would be to get yourself another group. Rather than attempting to "educate" your players, merely recognise that their playstyle is not the same as yours, that they don't value the same things you do, and that you should find players who do. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this, merely a difference in tastes. Not everyone plays D&D for the same reasons you do, and not everyone enjoys the same things you do. Rather than struggle to get the game to "feel" the way you want to, with uncooperative players to boot, I'd advise you to find a game where this is already happening.

The problem is not with the system. It's not D&D that "makes things mundane." Your problem is that your players aren't cooperating with you to make the game feel the way you want it to feel.

[LansXero]

One minor fix that Ive used is in my home campaign, we are playing in the Warhammer Fantasy world (modified a bit) using D&D 3.5... but then, every school corresponds to a wind of magic, and every race has their own racial version of spells. Entangle cast by an elf is a lot of plants, by an skaven is rat guts stretching from the ground, by an ogre would have to be something else and by a dworf would be something else altogether. And Im pretty sure only in the elf case they would know they were entangled. So if I keep it imaginative and thematic enough, they will stop trying to figure out which altered spell is it and start trying to deal with it in-character. So mixing it up more may help.

[deuxhero]

My problem with this is that the settings (bar Eberron) fluff.

"Mundane" magic works perfectly well as long as the world accepts that it is (unlike FR and Greyhawk)

[Seatbelt]

We encounter this problem from time to time in my group. How do you describe a +x sword? Your character knows that it enhances his ability to fight and it has powerful enchantments woven in to it. But as players we need a way to communicate this information. We eventually got past the issue and started calling the +1 sword a +1 sword.

It might also be the case that your players understand the coolness of the situation they're in but... they still have to communicate about the world to each other as players. We met an Efreet from the elemental plane of fire. He was badass. Super cool NPC and fighting him was a scary prospect. But we still tossed about metagame terms like DR, "wall of fire" at will and teleport at will and etc.

[Kol Korran]

Thanks all for the responses. i'd like to respond if i may:

@ Yora: though i love what i read about E6/E8, my players (except one) do not like it so much, so i opted for Eberron, where the high level characters are very, very rare. (most rulers are 9-12 approximately, an army general is about 6-7 th level and so on. the church leader i described is one of the 4-5 people in the main continent to be above 12th level. that was supposed to make her feel unique). we have played games of up to fifth level mostly, and now the palyers wanted more. the cmpaign is supposed to be fantasticaly heroic and end at 12the level, where they are the stuff of legends.

this is also the first game we introduced a lot of new material to the game (psionics, ToB, MiC, SpC and so on.) but most players mostly stuck to basics. i accept that an abundance of options leads to perhaps excessive optimization, but i don't get how it leads to a loss of sense of wonder... it could be argued that it focuses players mind on mechanics, but i don't think this argument is strong in my group. the aren't great optimizers and min maxers...

i actually don't award XP for killing things, and award XP for accomplishing "goals" (some are obvious, some are less obvious, and most have degrees) this has indeed led to a more clever approach to solving problems, and trying to circumvent threats (at most times the party faces obstacles that can't be easily won by just chopping and blasting at things). but still- the though is mostly tactical. the players try to "win/succeed/ solve" the situation, while experiencing it is somewhat left aside.

and this matter touches not on the "sense of mystery/ wonder" that i hoped to create. still this approach to XP is a VERY good advice, that i preach to myself.

thank you Yora.

@ Eldan: an interesting suggestion... i have recently read about Fate systems (after the PbP game you led quite a long time ago. about... "thw second wave" i think it was called?) and the system seems fascinating to me- a truly imaginative and collaborative style of game... i actually think i need to demand my players to read more of the setting information than what i gave them on Eberron (we do "Eberron light") perhaps after playing in the FR for so long, an 18th level cleric doesn't seem that big of a deal, almost mundane...

Jair Barik:i LOVED your ideas for magic items! slight curses or interesting "side effects" might indeed make magic items more interesting... thanks for the idea!

@ Gamer Girl: i like the "Special effects" to magic. might add to to my next game. however, i fear that this will be just new rules information to digest, deal with and take into account.

as to the knowledge rules. i use modified rules, for monsters and other stuff. each has a knowledge DC of 10-30 (in jumps of 5) depending on rarity. beating the number gives you the most common feature of monster/ phenomena/ place/ so on, and 2 less common facts. every 5 above the DC you get 2 more facts. i usually makes a list of 5- 7 facts of each item, the knowledge aspect kind of works really well.

thanks for the other advice as well.

@ shadowknight12: i half agree and half don't agree with you... the players do like the feeling of awe, and fantastic things, but we're all over 30, and we are jaded to a degree, and that is i think the main problem. i like this people, and other than this issue, they are a fantastic group and we have a blast. i enjoy the other parts of the game that they contribute to- tactics, celever surprising solutions, roleplay and more. so i don't want to leave this group, it took me a looooong time to find it. (you try find a group of 30+ year old people who can work anf have fun together, are not jerks, quite amiable to play styles, and can commit to play)

i think that other than trying some of the other suggestions on the board, i'll need to let this slide, and accept a difference in tastes.

but the heart of the matter is in fact the players and my own approach to the matter, less the game system itself.

@ LansXero: hey there! i'll get to the update of the last session in the next few days (i hope). adding a theme or "personal touch" to spells by race/ religion/ group and the like sounds nice, i like the idea! perhaps even with slight effects? hhmmmm... i'll need to ponder this.

@ deuxhero: not quite sure what you meant... in Eberron i would believe that quite a lot of "day to day: magic would be considered Mundane (it is somewhat magi tech after all) but i would imagine some magic, especially powerful rare effects to draw attention, awe and wonder.

@ Seatbelt: to tell the truth, i haven't considered what you suggest. the player do say they are having a good time, and seem, quite pleased. i'll need to ask them. interesting point of view.

thanks again to all responders, it eases up a DM's blues. :smallsmile:

[Emmerask]

Well to me this is mostly a problem of 3e and other similar high magic, high power gaming systems.
Of course if you get your magic weapon at second level a better version of a magic weapon will not make you awestruck.

I think for what you want you should use other ie low to low-mid level magic systems because d&d just does not translate well into mythical awe inspiring gaming experiences.
D&D at its core is a tactical dungeon crawl system and it very much shows in the behaviour your group is showing which is absolutely encouraged by d&d.

So yes I would suggest another system, sadly the only one I would recommend is only available (in its complete form) in german which I guess not everyone speaks ^^.

[Yora]

I agree with the people who mentioned predictability. If you use things straight out of the book, chances are players recognize it and now exactly what works and what not.
Some years ago, I talked with some people about the very strong influence of naming things. If you can name things and have a definition for them, they are just mundane and you can deal with them with reason. But if you don't have a classification for them, that's where things get interesting and scary. With monster manual creatures, many players will immediately say "Oh that's an ogre.", "This is a wight.", "This is a carrion crawler." This will put all the players at ease, they know what they are dealing with. So to come up with new creatures is quite important in my mind.
Same goes for identifying active spells. Say they come to a wall of force, tell them they run into an invisible wall. One of the spellcasters will probably cast detect magic and find it's an evocation, but don't tell them it's a wall of force spell unless one of them makes a successful spellcraft check. If they ask if it's a wall of force, tell them the character failed his spellcraft check, so he doesn't know. Could always be an unique effect...

The great thing as a gm is, that you don't have to explain what the players are encountering, unles you play the game purely by the numbers. If it seems cool, make up spells on the fly. The evil necromancer raises his arms and chants a few words, and a dozen zombies rise from the ground. There's no such spell in the books and the players can't learn it, but it fits the scene, so just do it.

I think the two keys are not making things predictable for the players, and not telling them what is going on. Even if it is the end of the adventure and the players ask what that strange thing was they saw in that one room, don't tell them. If the murderer is killed but his motives have not been discovered, don't tell it. The key is to make the world fantastic and mysterious, and for that you have to maintain it throughout the entire campaign.
Speaking of predictablity: What setting are you playing in? I loved Forgotten Realms quite a bit, but once everyone knows the hidden agenda of every organization and the secret rulers of every city, as well as their alignment and class levels, it's no longer interesting to explore.

[Jair Barik]

Your welcome Kol Korran.
In the case of the ring it was just something silly, whilst it was good for a few encounters it was hardly the worlds best magic item (having a flaming sword appear in your hand whilst trying to sneak about or perform diplomacy is not a good thing).
The magic sword worked exactly as I expected it to. It made for interesting battles in its intended dungeon allowing them to fight undead whose CR would normally be a bit on the high side for the party level but ultimately it was unusable and so after that dungeon was traded out for more standard loot. Having the spider encounters meant they didn't find out the weapons horrible flaws in an important encounter (potentially causing a TPK) and meant in that encounter the person wielding it tool the back seat for a little (where for a lot of the rest of the dungeon they shone and took the centre stage).
In a similar manner the flamethrowers were in a dungeons consisting of narrow passages which at points opened into large caverns where enemies awaited. This meant that the line function was often useful but at the same time the cone function was invaluable at the choke points which opened into wider caverns with spread out enemies. Again, upon finding out the weapons flaw it was sold off after that dungeon (worth a fair bit each as they were experimental new weapons) making up for a lack of much other treasure.

In a way it is sort of the 'videogame' philosophy of things like LoZ where a specific item within a dungeon solves its problems. Obviously doing this exactly as in VGs is a dreadful idea for D&D as it railroads the party into looking for a single magic item macguffin but by including magical trinkets that excel for that dungeon whilst not being generally useful can make for interesting gameplay.

In general though I'd say the most important thing is not giving every item rule/property away to the players. Using hidden means of activation, properties not necessarily obvious and flaws can really spice up a campaign.

[Frozen_Feet]

My advice would be to get yourself another group. Rather than attempting to "educate" your players, merely recognise that their playstyle is not the same as yours, that they don't value the same things you do, and that you should find players who do. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this, merely a difference in tastes. Not everyone plays D&D for the same reasons you do, and not everyone enjoys the same things you do. Rather than struggle to get the game to "feel" the way you want to, with uncooperative players to boot, I'd advise you to find a game where this is already happening.


Putting aside problems of finding another reliable group of people with suitable schedules, it's not always just a matter of different playstyles. Some times, the players don't even have an idea that the game can be played in some other way. "Educating" players or encouraging them to play a familiar game in a different manner is not a crime; it's not fundamentally different from explaining contents of a new sourcebook to them.

Besides, there's always a chance that they'll appreciate it. :smallwink:

[Cerlis]

well i was thinking that the "issue" is the players and not the game. and by "issue" i dont mean "problem" Like you said they are older and "jaded". Even if you do like good story and fantasy and mysticism, if you are a rules lawyering, technically inclined organized problem solver....thats an aspect of your personality. I'm not saying your players are the following, but i've always had a problem with all my friends being munchkin powergamery players who couldnt take roleplay seriously if i tied em to a machine that made them feel pain when their character did.

to prove my point many people talk about players that spend oh so much time on their character background. One person talked about a player who talked to everyone, spent forever thinking about what spell he'd cast in combat. He was accused of hogging the spotlight, but i think he was just trying to make sure he didnt get anything wrong and actually DO what his CHARACTER would DO. Other times you have players or even groups who dont need a diceroll for the longest time cus its all roleplay.

I think there is hope and possibility to make things "better". but i think alot of the suggestions here target a group with a different mentality. what you need to do is ease them into situations where stats dont matter as much and get them thinking about mechanics that cant be measured.

unpredictible magic items are a good idea.

this is one idea.

I thought of an encounter where they are in a giant (harry potter esc) chess game, in which their damage is restricted. it doesnt matter if the player is a mage or a fighter his hit does do damage. The challenge is unlike a normal chess game, each piece has certian abilities. The bishop can negate an attack on someone within his range of movement. Anyone can kill someone with one hit, but a Fighter is given a lance and can attack from 2 squares away rather than one. The idea is since the damage doesnt matter in this fight, and its all about positioning and knowing the vague effects of abilities (For instance the bishop isnt casting sanctuary on someone, he's just doing something that makes the target not crumble when hit).

If you tried you could put secret elements in there (the problem always being if players would pick up on them). For instance maybe the the queen instant kills pieces across the board with a light beam. with a mirror you could deflect/reflect it. perhaps you go against regular chess and have some pieces die in one hit and others it takes more. and each piece can be resurrected 3 times. Maybe the Rook can take alot of hits, but if you steel the lantern off the knight or use the queens laser you can set the building on fire, thus the slowest strongest piece is sitting there by itself losing hitpoints slowly without you wasting time hitting it. It could also be possible to break the rules, but with a great penalty. i think it would be fun(ny) if the players (depending on which piece they play) have different HP and the guy who get stuck with Pawn at the beginning moves to much, gets blasted. The players freak out and then he reappears in the spawn zone waiting for someone to spend their turn resurrecting him. For someone like a knight rook or queen if they did something against what their piece is suppose to do they take a blast but its not enough to kill them. this leaves room for a player to Jump in front of an attack out of turn to block it. or backstab someone when they arent able to attack that person normally (like i think a pawn cant attack someone to his side. but the queen moves next to your pawn. so he stabs the queen against the rules, and gets disentegrated a second time by the game, but the enemy loses their best piece).


Anyways, the point is to create a cultured creative encounter that relies on effects in which the only way to measure it (hitpoints) is limited. hes not charging and using his greatsword, she's not casting disintegrate. They are pieces moving into position and one shotting each other.

but there are other ways how in the mundane world you cant predict stuff. just cus you take out a bridge with a fireball doesnt mean you can do it to others. This one was rickety, on the verge of collapes.

He may be casting Divine Rays, he may be casting scorching rays. all you know is the giant monster of doom is shooting lasers that are disintegrating people

[Jair Barik]

Ooooh!
Another fun magic item is the following.

Intelligent weapon with chaotic evil alignment.
Abilities are +(whatever is appropriate bonus), holy and axiomatic...
It and its owner are the origional odd couple!
It has the special purpose to corrupt paladin's to black guards and whilst it cannot directly control the wielder to perform evil acts it can make the sword so much more interesting than a +2 sword of fiery burst (but shouldn't be an excuse to make the party paladin fall for trivial things). Ideas for special powers include the ability to cast create undead on its wielder in case they die, or to cast polymorph any object in itself in case it needs to attempt...more traditional temptations :smallamused:.

[Shadowknight12]

Kol Korran: Glad to hear that. It sounds like you're well on your way to acceptance, which is the final stage when dealing with something that is beyond your control. :smallsmile:


Putting aside problems of finding another reliable group of people with suitable schedules, it's not always just a matter of different playstyles. Some times, the players don't even have an idea that the game can be played in some other way. "Educating" players or encouraging them to play a familiar game in a different manner is not a crime; it's not fundamentally different from explaining contents of a new sourcebook to them.

Besides, there's always a chance that they'll appreciate it. :smallwink:

Haven't we disagreed already on this many times before? :smalltongue:

They are adults. It's not your responsibility to "encourage" them or "educate" them. If they do not express an interest to expand their experiences and see what other ways the game can be played, that's their loss. If that's a problem with you, then guess what? You're the one with the problem, therefore you're the one that has to find a way to solve it on your own (meaning: without dragging others into your problems, friends or not).

You're quite right it's no different from explaining the concepts of a new sourcebook to them, though. My point still stands, however.

[Frozen_Feet]

They are adults. It's not your responsibility to "encourage" them or "educate" them. If they do not express an interest to expand their experiences and see what other ways the game can be played, that's their loss. If that's a problem with you, then guess what? You're the one with the problem, therefore you're the one that has to find a way to solve it on your own (meaning: without dragging others into your problems, friends or not).


There are a lot of things that aren't anyones responsibility, yet doing them is beneficial nonetheless. More to the point, nothing is lost by suggesting your adult friends that maybe they'd benefit from learning something new. If they express disinterest after the idea is presented to them, that's one thing, but just sucking things up and pre-emptively shutting up is not very sensible.

And even if it's only a problem to you, solving that problem might still count as an improvement to the others as well. To give an example, it's not a problem to me if a character sheet is in English even if a game is in Finnish, since I'm fluent in both languages; it might be a problem to a lot of my younger players. To them, having the sheets in Finnish is great help; to me, it's not necessary, but it does smooth things up.

[Shadowknight12]

There are a lot of things that aren't anyones responsibility, yet doing them is beneficial nonetheless. More to the point, nothing is lost by suggesting your adult friends that maybe they'd benefit from learning something new. If they express disinterest after the idea is presented to them, that's one thing, but just sucking things up and pre-emptively shutting up is not very sensible.

And even if it's only a problem to you, solving that problem might still count as an improvement to the others as well. To give an example, it's not a problem to me if a character sheet is in English even if a game is in Finnish, since I'm fluent in both languages; it might be a problem to a lot of my younger players. To them, having the sheets in Finnish is great help; to me, it's not necessary, but it does smooth things up.

Suggesting is one thing. Trying to change behaviour is another. The suggestion has already been made. See: the OP. The DM tried offering something to the players and it wasn't picked up. What is being discussed here is trying to change a player's behaviour because the DM doesn't like it.

And there are plenty of ways to solve that problem. I am advocating one that doesn't drag the players into the problem as well and attempts to modify their behaviour. Your use of the word "improvement" is meaningless. Brainwashing someone into liking something could be argued to be an "improvement" to them (because now they have another thing to enjoy), but that doesn't make it any less brainwashing.

[Drachasor]

This reminds me of a link someone brought up in another thread.

Sanderson's First Law of Magics: An author's ability to solve conflict with magic is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well the reader understands said magic. (http://www.brandonsanderson.com/article/40/Sandersons-First-Law)

The same is true in an RPG. You'll run into problems if you have magic helping the players play a significant role in solving problems and still be mysterious. Chiefly, it WILL come across as a Deus Ex Machina. This is a problem faced in ANY RPG where magic is used to overcome obstacles.

Magic that causes problems can still be strange and inexplicable, though the PCs will still need some understandable way to deal with it. Points of interaction that they can understand must be there. Like Sauron in LotR...largely inexplicable in many ways, yet the Eye is somewhat understood and most importantly the Ring itself is fairly well understood, especially the significance of destroying it and the dangers of possessing it.

[Frozen_Feet]

Changing behaviour =/= brainwashing. In the OP, there's little saying that changing behaviour was directly stated to be the intent - only that the GM gave more detail in hopes that it would elicit or encourage a change.

So, being more upfront about changing the feel and goals of the game is still very much an option, sublety be damned for once.

Trying to change someone or teaching them something new isn't automatically the wrong thing to do. The game leader, who has to do most of trouble anyway, shouldn't be the only one willing to bend for the sake of everyone else, that's just unfair.

[Shadowknight12]

Changing behaviour =/= brainwashing. In the OP, there's little saying that changing behaviour was directly stated to be the intent - only that the GM gave more detail in hopes that it would elicit or encourage a change.

Semantics. Whenever you want to change someone's behaviour, you perform actions in the hopes that it will elicit or encourage a change.


So, being more upfront about changing the feel and goals of the game is still very much an option, sublety be damned for once.

Trying to change someone or teaching them something new isn't automatically the wrong thing to do. The game leader, who has to do most of trouble anyway, shouldn't be the only one willing to bend for the sake of everyone else, that's just unfair.

Firstly, I do consider it innately wrong to change someone without their permission or desire. I do recognise that it's merely my opinion and not an objective fact. It does colour my advice, however, as it did in this very thread.

I'm not saying that the game leader has to bend for the sake of everyone else. I'm suggesting for the person with the problem to solve it on their own without involving anyone else. I would suggest the exact same thing to a player who was in a hacky-slashy game and wanted more roleplaying. "Find yourself another group." If that's not a possibility, "find yourself another way to solve the problem without involving anyone else."

[Frozen_Feet]

When the problem is, at its core, other people, trying to go around not involving them can be much more of a hassle than just adressing the thing with them.

To the OP: is the feel and nature of magic a big issue to the group as a whole? If you presented a rules change to make it more mysterious, or a new setting, would they be against it or more "sure, why not?"

Just because it's not a problem to them, doesn't mean solving your problem with them is going to be a problem to them. If probing around proves that it's not a big deal to them, co-operation is a better choice than trying to shoulder it all alone.

[Drachasor]

To the OP: is the feel and nature of magic a big issue to the group as a whole? If you presented a rules change to make it more mysterious, or a new setting, would they be against it or more "sure, why not?"

How would you make magic more mysterious? I haven't seen one suggestion in this thread on how to do it, nor one proposal of another game system that does it.

As for the OP: Regarding monsters, refluffing them can help make them unknown entities. That or use existing ones as a guideline and make your own.

Beyond making enemies a bit more mysterious, I don't see much that can be done here without very undesirable effects.

[The Glyphstone]

For the OP's issue, the setting may be part of your problem. Sure, high-level characters and thus high-level magic are rare in Ebberon, but low-level magic is everywhere. Its schtick is, in addition to pulp adventure, the 'mundanization' of magical effects, as is proper in a world where city streets are lit by Everburning Torches and the signature PC race is a type of animated, sentient golem.

[Emmerask]

How would you make magic more mysterious? I haven't seen one suggestion in this thread on how to do it, nor one proposal of another game system that does it.

As for the OP: Regarding monsters, refluffing them can help make them unknown entities. That or use existing ones as a guideline and make your own.

Beyond making enemies a bit more mysterious, I don't see much that can be done here without very undesirable effects.

Having a setting that has only very rarely magic in it makes it pretty much by default more mystical.

Using a system that is far less reliant on magic and magic items (unlike d&d where you get potent magic stuff at lvl2), examples would be rolemaster, dark eye etc which do have magic but its far less potent and can´t be flung around like candy.

These two point for me would be the best way to tackle the ops problem.

[navar100]

Refluff the mechanics. I'm playing a Pathfinder game. An NPC cleric allies with us and is traveling with us because of a mutual enemy. All I know of his faith is is a wolf motif. During combat the cleric created an effect that had wolf-like heads biting our enemies. He did this a couple of times. It was awesome. What did the cleric actually do? Use Channeled Energy. As a Neutral cleric, he chose negative energy channeling. For his faith, he chose wolf-pact fighting roleplaying aspect. He wants to slay his enemies first then heal afterwards. He has Selective Channeling feat so that he doesn't have to hurt his allies.

Brilliant! Special effects refluffing disguised what was happening. In addition, neagative energy channeling, usually depicted as an evil thing, was actually used for a good cause in a non-evil way.

My Sorcerer uses a color motif. I can cast a spell that creates a rainbow arch between two allies. They step on the arch and travel to the other end. I casted Benign Transposition.

That said, as the DM you know everything. You have to know everything. Players only know thier characters. In combat situations, they need to know and learn what they can to keep their characters alive. Raw numbers of game mechanics helps them focus on how to fight the combat. You can say an enemy spellcaster sends 5 glowing balls of light slamming into the fighter dealing 16 points of damage all you want. The party spellcaster rolls his spellcraft check. He needs to know the enemy spellcaster "only" casted Magic Missile. If the party is 8th level, he can surmise the spellcaster is 9th level, 10th or 11th if the BBEG of the combat.

[Drachasor]

Having a setting that has only very rarely magic in it makes it pretty much by default more mystical.

Using a system that is far less reliant on magic and magic items (unlike d&d where you get potent magic stuff at lvl2), examples would be rolemaster, dark eye etc which do have magic but its far less potent and can´t be flung around like candy.

These two point for me would be the best way to tackle the ops problem.

Well, like my first post here (which no one commented on), the only way to really make it more mysterious is to essentially make it less useful. If you want to avoid Deus Ex Machina (DEM), that is.

Useful magic has to be something that can be understood, or you get DEM. If it is understood, it is very natural for characters in such a world (as well as the players) to treat it like an understandable thing. If you make magic largely unknowable, then you have to restrict how it comes up (otherwise you get DEM), largely having it as something bad guys have. Of course, even when confronting bad magic it has to provide understandable elements which allow it to be fought. Or you could leave it out of conflicts altogether and have it largely as flavor.


Refluff the mechanics. I'm playing a Pathfinder game. An NPC cleric allies with us and is traveling with us because of a mutual enemy. All I know of his faith is is a wolf motif. During combat the cleric created an effect that had wolf-like heads biting our enemies. He did this a couple of times. It was awesome. What did the cleric actually do? Use Channeled Energy. As a Neutral cleric, he chose negative energy channeling. For his faith, he chose wolf-pact fighting roleplaying aspect. He wants to slay his enemies first then heal afterwards. He has Selective Channeling feat so that he doesn't have to hurt his allies.

Brilliant! Special effects refluffing disguised what was happening. In addition, neagative energy channeling, usually depicted as an evil thing, was actually used for a good cause in a non-evil way.

My Sorcerer uses a color motif. I can cast a spell that creates a rainbow arch between two allies. They step on the arch and travel to the other end. I casted Benign Transposition.

That said, as the DM you know everything. You have to know everything. Players only know thier characters. In combat situations, they need to know and learn what they can to keep their characters alive. Raw numbers of game mechanics helps them focus on how to fight the combat. You can say an enemy spellcaster sends 5 glowing balls of light slamming into the fighter dealing 16 points of damage all you want. The party spellcaster rolls his spellcraft check. He needs to know the enemy spellcaster "only" casted Magic Missile. If the party is 8th level, he can surmise the spellcaster is 9th level, 10th or 11th if the BBEG of the combat.

Refluffing only goes so far, especially with magic the players already understand. Pretty soon they'll be saying "oh, that was that cleric's channel energy" or "ah, a dimension door" or "hah, what a funny Fly spell!" Well, that's actually the best case, imho. Worst case the players just feel like the DM makes up convenient crap.

It works best with enemy monsters, since by giving them a completely different form, it is harder to recognize what they are. Since they are only around for a little bit, this is very effective.

[Emmerask]

Well, like my first post here (which no one commented on), the only way to really make it more mysterious is to essentially make it less useful. If you want to avoid Deus Ex Machina (DEM), that is.

Useful magic has to be something that can be understood, or you get DEM. If it is understood, it is very natural for characters in such a world (as well as the players) to treat it like an understandable thing. If you make magic largely unknowable, then you have to restrict how it comes up (otherwise you get DEM), largely having it as something bad guys have. Of course, even when confronting bad magic it has to provide understandable elements which allow it to be fought. Or you could leave it out of conflicts altogether and have it largely as flavor.


True, understanding would be the largest factor if something is mysterious but there are others too.
Even something that is understood, if it is rare enough then it becomes more mystical too, if it can´t be used like a gatling gun it becomes more mysterious too.

For example a rainbow is perfectly understood (by most people), it is the refraction/reflection of light through water droplets, yet it is still rare enough to excite people (double rainbow guy for example^^)

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/dcf83410c7/insane-double-rainbow-guy

[SowZ]

Kol Korran: Glad to hear that. It sounds like you're well on your way to acceptance, which is the final stage when dealing with something that is beyond your control. :smallsmile:



Haven't we disagreed already on this many times before? :smalltongue:

They are adults. It's not your responsibility to "encourage" them or "educate" them. If they do not express an interest to expand their experiences and see what other ways the game can be played, that's their loss. If that's a problem with you, then guess what? You're the one with the problem, therefore you're the one that has to find a way to solve it on your own (meaning: without dragging others into your problems, friends or not).

You're quite right it's no different from explaining the concepts of a new sourcebook to them, though. My point still stands, however.

In general, I agree with this.

But another solution might be to just talk to them about the style you are going for. See if they are willing to try something out. I know I can do heavy roleplay or practically wargame. Collaborative freeform or more traditional D&D and I can have fun in all of them. They may have one playstyle they like, but they may be willing to adapt and play differently and see which they like better. If they prefer playing the way they already are, they'll tell you, (or else ask them,) and figure it out from there.

[Urpriest]

Another problem is that even when you go away from stats things still exist primarily as challenges to be overcome. I'm in a game that, while nominally FASERIP, is almost completely freeform in practice, but it still has no sense of wonder because everything eventually becomes a challenge for the PCs to overcome. We know that we'll win, we just have to apply our powers correctly and figure out how the GMs want us to proceed. The fact that the primary limits on our powers are fluff-based makes it even more of an intellectual challenge and even less of a story because we know that all we need to do is figure out a plausible story for how we can accomplish what we need to.

Any game in which the players are primarily there to overcome challenges is going to fit this mold, you really can only get away from it with horror games or with odder systems like Burning Wheel and kin. A way to step away from it in D&D and the like is to give the game a bit more of a sandboxy feel, so the players don't feel like you've put in prepackaged challenges to make things interesting for them. Your fight is actually a pretty clear example of this: you made up balanced mechanical abilities to make the fight more interesting, so your players are going to view them as mechanical challenges to overcome, not as results of a cohesive world. Once the players see the things they interact with as inhabitants of a consistent world rather than bosses in a game their immersion will be enhanced.

[Shadowknight12]

In general, I agree with this.

But another solution might be to just talk to them about the style you are going for. See if they are willing to try something out. I know I can do heavy roleplay or practically wargame. Collaborative freeform or more traditional D&D and I can have in all of them. They may have one playstyle they like, but they may be willing to adapt and play differently and see which they like better. If they prefer playing the way they already are, they'll tell you, (or else ask them,) and figure it out from there.

That's very reasonable advice. However, one would think that if this was a valid option, the OP would've already tried it, since this is, after all, the obvious course of action to take whenever there's any sort of problem in a group.

[Kol Korran]

ok, so some interesting things so far. a few of my thoughts on various suggestions and comments:

- Yora, the setting we're playing in is Eberron, and only one player half knows what i's about. they all got a bit of a preview material before the campaign, but we're all quite busy people and few have the time to learn of the campaign world between sessions. the campaign is sort of an introduction to Ebrrron, or "Eberron light". they keep learning and getting surprised by all kinds of things, such as Darguun's nation of goblinoids, Xen'dric lost civilization of giants and jungle drows, and recently- the role of dragons. things are pretty much new to them (except for the one player), but i don't think they want to really immerse themselves in the game. most of them just don't have the time to read these books. children, jobs and other commitments take up a lot of time.

Glyphstone- i don't mind them accpeting "everyday magic" as mundane. i just hoped higher kind of magic, or fantastical creatures and locations (underwater sunkne fortress of the Daelkyr, lorded by an exile aboleth and it's minions, or the mournland horrors) would draw mroe attention. surprisingly, they seem to feel quite perplexed and awed by the setting specific magic- the lightning rail, flying ships, and they have ambivalent feelings about the warforged.

- shadowknight12 and Frozen_Feet's discussion: hhhhmmmm.. actually, i haven't discussed this with the group yet. the issue came up in the last meeting only, though i think it "accumulated" over a few sessions. i think iwil ltry and communicate my thoughts to the group, see how they feel. i don't imagine they will continue the same. we all come for fun, and i just think that on this specific issue (which is not, despite my rant, a major issue) we disagree.

- keeping players not knowing: i don't think you should force this, as in "not having a chance to know" my gaming motto is "(almost) everything is possible, but you either need to be very clever, or it's gonna be quite hard". i don't tell players anything their characters don't figure out themselves, but i give a reasonable (according to the circumstances and obscurity of the information) chance to learn about things, at least partially. part of the agreement between players and DM i think is that i don't nullify them from the get go, except in extreme exceptions.

- making effects and magic as i go: i think you can give creatures new abilities or spells, and that they can be thematic, but i think these should have solid mechanics that can be interacted with by the characters. there are a few exceptions (much greater force and the like) but these should definitely be the exceptions. the game is also tactical, and the players should have a way to influence it in measured ways. or so i feel.

- refluffing Magic: that i didn't do, and i think it could work... for awhile. in the end it would become as Drachasor said, just a disguise to a known spell the players need to figure out, and thus, yet once again, mundane. but perhaps i'll try this.

- refluffing monsters. this i do. my players are mostly familiar with MM1 monsters. (and even this not to a great degree except iconic monsters). however, i do 3 things to keep things interesting: first, i use monsters from other sources (mostly MM3) and these got suspicious looks. secondly i refluff and change mechanics of some known monsters, sometimes little, sometimes quite a lot (choice example in one of my threads). third, from time to time i make up monsters (though this is rare, i barely have the time and suck at mechanics).

however, none of these except 1-3 exceptions, didn't cause my party to consider the monsters as special, awe inspiring, mysterious or the like. instead they just treated the monster as "unknown" challenge that they needed to figure out (not necessarily kill as i've explained)

which brings me to the last point-


originally by Urpriest:
Any game in which the players are primarily there to overcome challenges is going to fit this mold, you really can only get away from it with horror games or with odder systems like Burning Wheel and kin. A way to step away from it in D&D and the like is to give the game a bit more of a sandboxy feel, so the players don't feel like you've put in prepackaged challenges to make things interesting for them. Your fight is actually a pretty clear example of this: you made up balanced mechanical abilities to make the fight more interesting, so your players are going to view them as mechanical challenges to overcome, not as results of a cohesive world. Once the players see the things they interact with as inhabitants of a consistent world rather than bosses in a game their immersion will be enhanced.

this is... quite interesting. i;ve tried to give it a "consistent" world feeling, but indeed i mostly put challenges for my party to beat. i'm not sure as to my abilities as a "sandbox" DM, but perhaps i should try it. however, i need to see if my players would even like such a style of play. i think they like some freedom, but they also like a "plot" that somewhat drives things along...

interesting. thanks for the outlook.

[Drachasor]

however, none of these except 1-3 exceptions, didn't cause my party to consider the monsters as special, awe inspiring, mysterious or the like. instead they just treated the monster as "unknown" challenge that they needed to figure out (not necessarily kill as i've explained)

Ok, these players are NEVER going to be in awe of the average monster. They might never be in awe of a non-average monster. Huge city-sized creature shows up, waves its hand and hurricane-force winds level a city, then breathes volcanic ash over a forest, while juggling a dozen houses? Oh, and I forgot to mention the malformed nightmares of all the children of the world are at its beck and call, screaming terrors into the unprotected minds of the masses.

They'll be impressed. They'll be intimidated (they probably can't fight that head on). In awe? Quite unlikely at best, I'd say. That might give them a moment's pause. MIGHT. Then they'll go to work analyzing the critter, figuring out what makes it tick, and how to take it apart or otherwise defeat it. They are thinkers and problem-solvers. Massive engines of destruction the size of cities is just a bit bigger of a day than usual.

You toss in a couple dozen poorly explained magics at them from an equally large number of NPC/objects/whatever, and they won't be in awe either. That etheric druid dryad thingie can use her special soothing powers to help lull the beast into a peaceful state. That mystic artifact of a forgotten kingdom of flying telekinetic dolphins will start opening a rift onto some misbegotten demiplane filled with the half-remembered horrors of a billion wars across the cosmos. High Lord Archmage Huffypants XIV better get his ass in gear and help make that rift wide enough so the creature can go through it. Etc, etc, etc.

There is nothing wrong with this. They just aren't the type to get awed much if at all. If you need a group to have awe, you'll need to find it somewhere else. I don't think it isn't that they are not being immersed by the game. It would seem to me they are. They just have a very tactical look at things. They're kind of like gritty soldiers that have seen so much, the next new thing isn't going to awe them. They'll just figure out how and where to hit it (literally or metaphorically). Again, nothing wrong with that.

What they probably DO enjoy is a new and unique problem. Strange mechanics, complex battle grounds, luring giant skeletons onto slippery slopes, and so forth are the stuff they like, I'd wager. If they love using their adaptability and creativity to overcome obstacles, then indulge them. Now and then toss a problem whose complexity you've dialed up to 11. Push their limits.

Need help with that? We got your back.

[Kol Korran]

Ok, these players are NEVER going to be in awe of the average monster. They might never be in awe of a non-average monster.

In awe? Quite unlikely at best, I'd say.

You toss in a couple dozen poorly explained magics at them from an equally

There is nothing wrong with this. They just aren't the type to get awed much if at all. If you need a group to have awe, you'll need to find it somewhere else. I don't think it isn't that they are not being immersed by the game. It would seem to me they are. They just have a very tactical look at things. They're kind of like gritty soldiers that have seen so much, the next new thing isn't going to awe them. They'll just figure out how and where to hit it (literally or metaphorically). Again, nothing wrong with that.

What they probably DO enjoy is a new and unique problem. Strange mechanics, complex battle grounds, luring giant skeletons onto slippery slopes, and so forth are the stuff they like, I'd wager. If they love using their adaptability and creativity to overcome obstacles, then indulge them. Now and then toss a problem whose complexity you've dialed up to 11. Push their limits.

Need help with that? We got your back.

this is what i pretty much summarized. oh well. i do think i offer unique and challenging problems (so far), and they seem to be quite enjoying it so far.1 thanks anyway!

[Drachasor]

If it helps, they very likely feel it is epic and cool, even if they don't show it. I imagine they feel pretty awesomely badass.

But, you know, if Batman takes out a Cthulu-monster who's about to devour the Earth, you'll just have to be content with a momentary self-satisfied smile. You know, pretty much the same with Superman or most any of the others pros.

[Jair Barik]

Maybe try throwing an elder evil at them as a campaign big bad? (assuming none of them have read the book).

If they still treat monsters they don't recognise as nothing more than a big ole' block of stats perhaps an elder evil is just what you need to spice things up a bit. The two that come to mind are Atropus and Leviathen. Sure their aspect forms are stat monsters to kill like any other but in their standard forms they might inspire some awe or magic back into things.

How do you fight a creature the size of a moon whose mere presence causes the dead to rise across the world?
How do you fight an aquatic beast so large that if it wakes up it will devestate the entire world through the tidal waves it causes by moving?
Some of the other elders are more standard (Kyuss' stats and such like are much better in his age of worms profile) but in general they are an interesting bunch (one of them is a 30ft orb of ahnihalation in its physical manifestation).

[Yora]

the setting we're playing in is Eberron

Well, there is your problem. :smallbiggrin:

As someone else said, the basic foundation of Eberron is, that magic is not a mystery. However, I think it depends a lot on where you are playing. When you are in Breland or Karnath, magic is supposed to be everywhere, the land is well explored and cartographed, and the roads secured and safe. The five kingdoms are not a setting that is about magic and mystery. They are a setting about crime and spy adventures.
However, when you get out of the five kingdoms, things change considerably. Move the campaign to the Eldeen Reaches or the Shadow Marches, and you have a completely different situation. Those regions lack the mage-tech infrastructure, big cities, and urban population of the Five Nations. Instead you have ancient magic, and druids and shamans who either fight against or for the horrors from Khyber.

I'm not a big fan of central Korvaire and never had any interest in eastern Korvaire. But Western Korvaire and Xen'drik? Wow! That's a damn fine setting just the way I like it.
Once the plot of your campaign allows it, I would give it a try and move the action to those regions. I think they make a much better backdrop for fantastic and wondrous games.

[Kol Korran]

Well, there is your problem. :smallbiggrin:

As someone else said, the basic foundation of Eberron is, that magic is not a mystery. However, I think it depends a lot on where you are playing. When you are in Breland or Karnath, magic is supposed to be everywhere, the land is well explored and cartographed, and the roads secured and safe. The five kingdoms are not a setting that is about magic and mystery. They are a setting about crime and spy adventures.
However, when you get out of the five kingdoms, things change considerably. Move the campaign to the Eldeen Reaches or the Shadow Marches, and you have a completely different situation. Those regions lack the mage-tech infrastructure, big cities, and urban population of the Five Nations. Instead you have ancient magic, and druids and shamans who either fight against or for the horrors from Khyber.

I'm not a big fan of central Korvaire and never had any interest in eastern Korvaire. But Western Korvaire and Xen'drik? Wow! That's a damn fine setting just the way I like it.
Once the plot of your campaign allows it, I would give it a try and move the action to those regions. I think they make a much better backdrop for fantastic and wondrous games.

(sigh), as i've mentioned in previous posts, i really don't think that the setting in our problem. for 3/5 of the game so far the party has been in Savage Darguun, the unchartered regions of the Shadow Marches (mainly a large underwater labyrinth of Daelkyr), and in ancient giant age Xen'dric ruins. another 1/5th was spent traveling the Mournland, encountering weird unexplained disturbing effects. and yet- the players are quite unimpressed. their response to meeting a psionic enhanced Aboleth that was swimming over a huge cavern going deep, deep below in it's walls glowing runes etched, was mostly "ok, so we need the best spells for this one. mental defenses anyone? how do we cover the distance to it Fast so it doesn't run off again? beware that chasm, i bet there is some nasty surprise there"

also, the players barely know Eberron (except for one player, who in fact show more "appreciation to mystery" than the others), except that low level magic is common, and high magic is rare. as mentioned earlier- they are more confounded and suspicious about lightning rails, flying ships and warforged than "regular" magic.

the problems is with different perspective of players and myself, and perhaps with the approach to the game (as Urpriest suggested), you can find quite inspiring things even in the five nations if you look for it, or game for it. that's my opinion at least.

[Frozen_Feet]

How would you make magic more mysterious?

My answer to this, riffing on few of the earlier posts:

On a meta level, ask your players to treat magic less like a tool, and more like a whimsical and dangerous wild animal that just happens to be at arm's reach and possible to prod into doing what you want. If they are familiar with Lovecraft's work, or any horror for that matter, they should be able to grasp the general idea fairly easily. To put it in other words, ask them to act less Genre Savvy.

In actual play, start including mystical elements that just are there, which don't and aren't meant to interact with the main story. Paths that lead nowhere if followed, questions that can't be answered, all sorts of Red Herrings that the players could (and maybe should) just pass by...

... but won't, since they're geared to think they're obstacles, problems to be solved.

In my games, what did it for my players were rooms covered in religious glyphs... but which were otherwise empty, and without function to them. They spend hours trying to decrypt a message from my improvized thought stream, learning all sorts of things from the mythology of the setting, but becoming none the wiser about their actual goals or situation.

When doing this, remember to include false and paradoxical pieces of information... better yet if the seeming paradox is easily solved by taking a step away from literal logic. (See: koans.)

[hangedman1984]

3E treats necromancy as bland and 'just like other magic', so change that. Add in draining effects, summoning of random ghosts and such to make it creepy and bad.

but necromancy is just like other magic. why should it get to be its own special little black snowflake when all other schools don't?

[NichG]

It is absolutely crucial I think to understand that what you're trying to do is to give the players themselves a sense of mystery or awe, not just the characters. For the characters, you can tell a PC 'you feel overcome by awe' if they fail a save or whatever, and ask them to play that, but the player themselves will not experience awe.

Trying to give the players a sense of awe or mystery is very rewarding if it works, so its worth considering how to do so.

The main thing is, you're dealing with a situation that is at least partially out of game, and so you need to address it partially out of game. What I mean by this is, even if its sometimes inconvenient you shouldn't always give players quantitative information. They find a sword and pick it up. The wielder feels an thrill of energy and has a sense of euphoria. When he gets into a fight, he finds that his right arm is completely controlled by the weapon, but that it seems to fight better than he ever could.

Mechanics: This could simply be a +1 sword. You apply the bonus to hit when the player tells you what they got, and you don't let them know the actual mechanics.

In D&D, you have to go a bit further. Players will quickly figure out that this is just a kind of creepy +X sword, and really savvy players will quickly estimate what X is based on what they hit on versus what their friend hits on.

Have monsters that, whether or not they're hit or take damage show no sign of injury or response, and have it actually feel like the character always hits/always misses. Or creatures that do damage that is only visible to other characters and not perceptible by the injured person (like a leech's natural anaesthetic). Take players out to the hall to tell them details only they notice, to leave other people guessing.

Also, in general, have things that the players will not have encountered before - homebrew, etc. Even things that work in ways that players aren't used to.

Another important aspect of mystery and awe is actually the process of discovery. If everything is just mysterious and unknowable forever, it starts to feel like Deus Ex Machina. However, if everything is consistent 'behind the scenes' and more of that picture is revealed, players will have an 'oh crap' moment when they start to figure things out, and that contributes to the feeling that there's really something there to discover.

An example of something like this: I'm in a campaign where different metals can be activated via the right process, after which they produce some weird effect. There are patterns behind this, and how they interact, which were determined by the DM at the start of the campaign, but which we are still discovering. It makes for a lot of 'I want to see what this metal will do!' sorts of moments. It would've been a lot less interesting if the DM had given us a book out of character saying 'these metals do these things'.

So to sum up: make things internally consistent, but don't give the players rich information about them - make the players have to actively investigate to discover - and even then, the game mechanics should be invisible.

[Calmar]

.... it was all so... mundane, so stripped down to tactics, numbeers and statistics. i don't know, maybe i could have described things better (not really my strong point), but i feel that most players' approach to magic, fantastic creatures and magic items is mostly as "elements in the game you either use, or need to know how to deal with".
I used to be bothered by this phenomenon alot, too. But ultimately I have accepted that different people play the game for different reasons. There are always people more interested in combat or rules than story. I think it's fine as long as they don't ruin the fun for the rest of the group and everyone has fun with the game.


what my beef is? i was hoping this would feel epic, dramatic, you know... special. without relying on "plot effect" (each thing had it's own mechanics, which could be resisted, manipulated and interacted with. and NO one was impervious) but the player's response? mostly they are saying things like: "oh, so it's a +X sword with Y powers that can do this. ok."" or "so she used an 8th level spell called X" or "so.. .the great bear can cast 5th level spells. anyone still got dispel magic?"
I started playing D&D because I love the old Icewind Dale and Baldur's Gate series of computer games. One aspect of these games I enjoyed very much were the cool magical items of all sorts with their flavouful descriptions. Therefore, from my earliest days of D&D (I started and learned playing as DM) I use printed handouts for custom-made items. Even the most casual or rules-focused people can't avoid the flavourful descriptions that lie between them and the stats of the items.
I use the format as it appears in Icewind Dale II (because it's 3.x), which you can find here (http://www.gamebanshee.com/icewinddaleii/weapons.php), if you're intersted. On that site you find all kinds of items from the game, which also offer a lot of inspiration for unusual special properties for armour, arms, and other stuff. :smallsmile:

[Tyndmyr]

...what my beef is? i was hoping this would feel epic, dramatic, you know... special. without relying on "plot effect" (each thing had it's own mechanics, which could be resisted, manipulated and interacted with. and NO one was impervious) but the player's response? mostly they are saying things like: "oh, so it's a +X sword with Y powers that can do this. ok."" or "so she used an 8th level spell called X" or "so.. .the great bear can cast 5th level spells. anyone still got dispel magic?"

I'm guessing you're used to DMing for...fairly new players. And these players aren't new to the game any more? See, here's the thing. Special things are only special the first time. Not the seventeenth time. You can no longer whip out an object, describe it in glowing terms, and expect more of a reaction than "...so, that's what, then, plus 3?"

Shiny magic items, finding fiends...these are pretty much standard fair in 3.5. They are not special. These things DO happen with a great deal of frequency.

No, to impress players that are very familiar with the system, you need to go a bit further. They understand tactics? Pit them against a villain that eats, sleeps and breathes tactics. Let marvel at his amazingly complex Xanatos Gambit. Let them appreciate his clever use of insignificant abilities together to create a greater whole.


damn, that is why i came into roleplay!... players look at 7-9th level spells as cool tools, "nice guns" and swimming psychic abominations of the depths as "ok, so what are it's low saves? think it has DR?" this depresses me a bit.

Hell, this is realistic. By level nine, even their characters are likely doing the same. You don't get to be a big damn hero by freaking out whenever you face a new peril. And, to get to level nine, you had to face a few. A cool head and tactics is quite reasonable.

i tried giving better descriptions, and changing monster appearances or conjuring new monsters. players seem to pay more attention then, but still mostly to find the "chinks in their armor".


i think i may be repeating myself, so i'll stop here. i just wish that... well... i could bring back the mystery and fascination with magic and fantasy into the game.

thanks for reading.
Kol.

If you want mystery and fascination, you have to break out something new. Higher levels of tactics. A type of adventure they've never done before. A brand new subsystem(Binders are great!).

Anyone that suggests a low fantasy world is, unfortunately, incorrect. You can't recapture the low level feeling by taking away everything they are used to. This does not result in wonder...except for them possibly wondering why the DM is so stingy with the loot, and caught up with old things. Delve around in the giant pile of resources that exists for 3.5, and bust out some new toys.



(sigh), as i've mentioned in previous posts, i really don't think that the setting in our problem. for 3/5 of the game so far the party has been in Savage Darguun, the unchartered regions of the Shadow Marches (mainly a large underwater labyrinth of Daelkyr), and in ancient giant age Xen'dric ruins. another 1/5th was spent traveling the Mournland, encountering weird unexplained disturbing effects. and yet- the players are quite unimpressed. their response to meeting a psionic enhanced Aboleth that was swimming over a huge cavern going deep, deep below in it's walls glowing runes etched, was mostly "ok, so we need the best spells for this one. mental defenses anyone? how do we cover the distance to it Fast so it doesn't run off again? beware that chasm, i bet there is some nasty surprise there"

I'll bet half your players would be lucky to be able to spell Daelkyr or Xen'dric. They probably don't remember them as such, but rather as "That time we fought the bunch of warforged".

Note that psionic and aboleth is not exactly a wild combination. Nor is seeing it swimming in some deep cavern an unusual encounter for it. Hell, I can think of at least one popular published 3.5 campaign containing a near identical encounter. It is something of a staple, and I'd peg it as the third most popular big bad abberation, after beholders and mind flayers.


also, the players barely know Eberron (except for one player, who in fact show more "appreciation to mystery" than the others), except that low level magic is common, and high magic is rare. as mentioned earlier- they are more confounded and suspicious about lightning rails, flying ships and warforged than "regular" magic.

This is reasonable. Those are not things that are found in the standard D&D setting. Therefore, it is new and surprising to them, and worthy of attention.

Say, a dragon, on the other hand, no matter how much fluff and story you surround it with, is unlikely to be. Anyone who's played a lot of D&D has probably killed a few dozen of them.

So...play up the unique things for the setting. Make those the important things for the campaign. Consider a visit to the mournlands to visit the...unusual warforged. The Lord of Blades awaits them. Those things that they DO react to are the things you need to emphasize. Magic as tech holds a great many possibilities, after all.

Edit: Also, consider Elder Evils. It has some truly epic things.

[navar100]

True, understanding would be the largest factor if something is mysterious but there are others too.
Even something that is understood, if it is rare enough then it becomes more mystical too, if it can´t be used like a gatling gun it becomes more mysterious too.

For example a rainbow is perfectly understood (by most people), it is the refraction/reflection of light through water droplets, yet it is still rare enough to excite people (double rainbow guy for example^^)

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/dcf83410c7/insane-double-rainbow-guy

Coming home from work a couple of weeks ago on the commuter bus, I saw a rainbow over Manhattan. That was a masterpiece.

[big teej]

One minor fix that Ive used is in my home campaign, we are playing in the Warhammer Fantasy world (modified a bit) using D&D 3.5... but then, every school corresponds to a wind of magic, and every race has their own racial version of spells. Entangle cast by an elf is a lot of plants, by an skaven is rat guts stretching from the ground, by an ogre would have to be something else and by a dworf would be something else altogether. And Im pretty sure only in the elf case they would know they were entangled. So if I keep it imaginative and thematic enough, they will stop trying to figure out which altered spell is it and start trying to deal with it in-character. So mixing it up more may help.

congratulations, I am totally yoinking this for my world :smallbiggrin:

[erikun]

This (http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/magic-items.html) strikes me as something relevant and worth reading through.

[Tyndmyr]

This (http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/magic-items.html) strikes me as something relevant and worth reading through.

Not really. He sounds like he already does that.

Sometimes adding lots of fluff is a waste of time. Nobody wants to hear the one paragraph description of the +1 sword that's just going to be sold off anyhow.

Save that for the important stuff. Conservation of detail. Use it sparingly, and it's special when it happens. If you use it consistently, it's not special at all.

[Kol Korran]

thanks Tyndmyr, an interesting read. the following is not meant to be defensive, but rather just mroe details and description.


I'm guessing you're used to DMing for...fairly new players. And these players aren't new to the game any more? See, here's the thing. Special things are only special the first time. Not the seventeenth time. You can no longer whip out an object, describe it in glowing terms, and expect more of a reaction than "...so, that's what, then, plus 3?"

Shiny magic items, finding fiends...these are pretty much standard fair in 3.5. They are not special. These things DO happen with a great deal of frequency.

No, to impress players that are very familiar with the system, you need to go a bit further. They understand tactics? Pit them against a villain that eats, sleeps and breathes tactics. Let marvel at his amazingly complex Xanatos Gambit. Let them appreciate his clever use of insignificant abilities together to create a greater whole.

actually this is the first time i'm DMing after a loooooong pause (more than a decade), but i'm quite aware that most of my players are quite experience3d, though more with length of games and "logged- hours" than in actual versatility (at least that is how i perceived things) first time we're using psionics, tome of battle, magic item compendium, monsters other than the MM1 and so on.

also, i wasn't trying to impress them the whole time. i'm quite fine with "run of the mill" magic items that get no special comment, it is with the things i thought were extraordinary, out of their experience that i was dissapointed at receiving no feedback. the special magic items they got in the church, the magic effects that aren't covered in the rules and so on.

you make a good point about targeting their interests, such as tactics. i haven't tried a tactical genius (not sure i know how to play one really), but that might just work. interesting point.



Hell, this is realistic. By level nine, even their characters are likely doing the same. You don't get to be a big damn hero by freaking out whenever you face a new peril. And, to get to level nine, you had to face a few. A cool head and tactics is quite reasonable.

i tried giving better descriptions, and changing monster appearances or conjuring new monsters. players seem to pay more attention then, but still mostly to find the "chinks in their armor".

i know you need a cool head to deal with things. but i thought that displaying some sing of wonder doesn't necessarily mean you're head isn't thinking at the moment.



If you want mystery and fascination, you have to break out something new. Higher levels of tactics. A type of adventure they've never done before. A brand new subsystem(Binders are great!).

in some ways my campaign are old known things, and some thing i thought are new to them (from what i learned in their experiences, thoughi 'm not 100) sure), but i get what you're saying. though my players won't take to a new system though (except maybe 1), since they don't have the time to learn more rules (i allready mentioned about new rules that were used... they were accepted with mixed feelings)


I'll bet half your players would be lucky to be able to spell Daelkyr or Xen'dric. They probably don't remember them as such, but rather as "That time we fought the bunch of warforged".

Note that psionic and aboleth is not exactly a wild combination. Nor is seeing it swimming in some deep cavern an unusual encounter for it. Hell, I can think of at least one popular published 3.5 campaign containing a near identical encounter. It is something of a staple, and I'd peg it as the third most popular big bad abberation, after beholders and mind flayers.

this made me smile. i actually chose the Aboleth because the players didn't know what it was (in their words- "Aboleth? some sort of fishy mindflayer?") and the psionics was to add a touch of a "new magic system" to the mix. (since this was about the second psionic creature they have ever faced). also, other than one player, this was the first underwater adventure for them.

but i understand the point.


This is reasonable. Those are not things that are found in the standard D&D setting. Therefore, it is new and surprising to them, and worthy of attention.

Say, a dragon, on the other hand, no matter how much fluff and story you surround it with, is unlikely to be. Anyone who's played a lot of D&D has probably killed a few dozen of them.

So...play up the unique things for the setting. Make those the important things for the campaign. Consider a visit to the mournlands to visit the...unusual warforged. The Lord of Blades awaits them. Those things that they DO react to are the things you need to emphasize. Magic as tech holds a great many possibilities, after all.

again, the players fought about 3-4 dragons in their past as i figure, but that's another thing. i have used the mournlands, and some encounters were better, some less. but those were good sessions on the whole, though there is much more potential there, and there will be a repeat visit before the campaign ends. the lord of blades will wait though, for a possible follow up campaign (i have a n entire different take on him than the published material)


Edit: Also, consider Elder Evils. It has some truly epic things.

i heard these mentioned, but i have no idea what or where they are. the lovecraftian entities? not much of a fan of them. i like comprehensible horror.
thanks again!

[NichG]

this made me smile. i actually chose the Aboleth because the players didn't know what it was (in their words- "Aboleth? some sort of fishy mindflayer?") and the psionics was to add a touch of a "new magic system" to the mix. (since this was about the second psionic creature they have ever faced). also, other than one player, this was the first underwater adventure for them.

but i understand the point.


Oh, that brings up another point. Try not telling them the names of things. Instead of 'you see an aboleth swimming through the deeps below' and hoping they don't know what an aboleth is, just describe the effects of its presence: 'The slimy ridge of some aquatic creature breaks the surface of the water briefly, leaving a spreading film of gunk that seems to boil away in the air. The ridge seems almost to be covered in writhing lampreys or worms. A vile smell rises from the pool of water, like rotting fish.'

If they don't have a nice and neat name for it, its harder for them to pigeonhole it into a tactical classification.

[Urpriest]

i heard these mentioned, but i have no idea what or where they are. the lovecraftian entities? not much of a fan of them. i like comprehensible horror.
thanks again!

Elder Evils was published very late in 3.5. They aren't all Lovecraftian, a few of them are more Gnostic or the like. Basically it's a book full of Armageddon scenarios.

[Drachasor]

On a meta level, ask your players to treat magic less like a tool, and more like a whimsical and dangerous wild animal that just happens to be at arm's reach and possible to prod into doing what you want. If they are familiar with Lovecraft's work, or any horror for that matter, they should be able to grasp the general idea fairly easily. To put it in other words, ask them to act less Genre Savvy.

Ask a wizard to act like spells don't do what they do? That seems rather ridiculous, doesn't it? The other bit is sort of like asking that they behave like they are stupid, honestly. If they have ranks in Knowledge(arcane) can't they KNOW how magic works? If it is unpredictable and wild, then they KNOW that and can act on that. If they have a friend with that knowledge, they can get the gist of it.

What you seem to be saying is that you want them to act Wrong Genre Savvy, which is a bit bizarre.


In actual play, start including mystical elements that just are there, which don't and aren't meant to interact with the main story. Paths that lead nowhere if followed, questions that can't be answered, all sorts of Red Herrings that the players could (and maybe should) just pass by...

Well, they'll spend time investigating those things. Almost any group would. Real world people would too. Getting the end result of them randomly shrugging at stuff and going "it's just like that" doesn't really make things mysterious.

Worst case, this will interfere with actual mysteries, making them seem like Deus Ex Machina because the game is loaded with too many magical trivialities.


... but won't, since they're geared to think they're obstacles, problems to be solved.

They are geared to analyze things. If they analyze something is meaningless, they'll move on. I believe I have more or less the same mindset as they do when I play D&D.


In my games, what did it for my players were rooms covered in religious glyphs... but which were otherwise empty, and without function to them. They spend hours trying to decrypt a message from my improvized thought stream, learning all sorts of things from the mythology of the setting, but becoming none the wiser about their actual goals or situation.

Information to be filed away for later use is always good. Pure lore can be fun too. Might find it is the case that a player later wants to use some of this information to the party's benefit though. In any case, this doesn't add MYSTERY to magic or the game...no sense of awe for it. Like I said, I don't think that's possible for this group -- it isn't what they want.


When doing this, remember to include false and paradoxical pieces of information... better yet if the seeming paradox is easily solved by taking a step away from literal logic. (See: koans.)

Stepping away from literal logic is itself logical in certain situations. I don't get the impression these guys are stuck on literal logic. Though, you do run the risk of the players ignore half of what you say with this depending on how you do it (like the red herring thing above). Gotta be wary of pumping too much noise into any system, as you might lose the signal.

Also, if that "wise man" spins koan-like logic and it isn't very well planned out, then he just becomes a joke amongst the players. If it is never useful until after the fact, he'll also be ignored. I mean, it's nice flavor and all, but they do have evil monsters to fight and if the prophet (or whatever) isn't going to be useful there's no reason to ever even talk to him.

I think what you are failing to get is that rationality is a powerful tool because it works. These players are going to analyze things with reason, and that's ALWAYS going to pay off, even if the payoff is "seems to be random." You can't really make it so this doesn't work. Even Call of Cthulu yields to this, though the resultant logic is "avoid magic and supernatural stuff as much as possible, since you go crazy". Naturally you can't avoid it completely or bad stuff happens, but it can be analyzed and the parts that are understood can be utilized while the rest is accounted for within error margins (or shrugged at because however bad it is, it still has to be dealt with).

Overall though, I don't see how this will make magic mysterious again. I think one would get more mileage out of making a magic-based mystery where they have to assemble clues on whatever evil ritual had been done or was being done. Since it would be new it wouldn't have to be any existing spell.

[Drachasor]

Oh, that brings up another point. Try not telling them the names of things. Instead of 'you see an aboleth swimming through the deeps below' and hoping they don't know what an aboleth is, just describe the effects of its presence: 'The slimy ridge of some aquatic creature breaks the surface of the water briefly, leaving a spreading film of gunk that seems to boil away in the air. The ridge seems almost to be covered in writhing lampreys or worms. A vile smell rises from the pool of water, like rotting fish.'

If they don't have a nice and neat name for it, its harder for them to pigeonhole it into a tactical classification.

I concur with this. Don't name it unless they know it already, but I think the OP knows this already.

If they don't know a lot of the game lore, be sure to include bits and pieces of that in the game. Hopefully they do enjoy that.

[NichG]

So a thought about time, pacing, and information access:

When talking about rational behavior from characters in RPGs, there are a lot of layers of separation between characters and their players. I mean, consider that in-world decisions in combat regard six second slices of time in which you pretty much have to immediately start your action or you're going to lose time, but players get to see each fragment of the round and have a whole minute to think about it and digest it before declaring their action. That leads to much more rational and tactical behavior.

Similarly, a mystery that sits still and waits for players to interact with it on their schedule isn't going to remain a mystery for long. If I have a hand-held non-Euclidean object that I can play with, do experiments on, etc, I will very quickly develop some sort of understanding of what rules it follows even if those rules are somewhat alien. If on the other hand, I have a brief encounter with such a thing and then can never access it again to do followups, I'll constantly be plagued with questions like 'what if I had done this to it?', etc. I'll then be primed the next time I encounter the thing to be very inquisitive and curious about it.

Its the same way that its bad for a spy or impostor character to sit there and engage in conversation with the PCs - they'll very quickly end up asking questions that reveal that something is up, and then why wouldn't they take action to check their suspicions immediately? If on the other hand, the PCs only interact with said character second hand through people that the character has duped, it becomes a lot harder to actually get firm facts or pin things down.

So this is the problem with making magic mysterious in D&D. The PCs have it always at hand in one way or other. Either they have their magic items that they've systematically explored and understood, or their spell list - things that character has studied and internalized. From that point of view, its no surprise that these things aren't mysterious, because they're so accessible and repeatable.

If you want to make magic mysterious then, I wonder if the best method might be to have occasional one-use potent magical effects become available to the PCs. These things would have to be too precious to experiment with (since that'd remove your ability to use them later, though you'd know exactly what they did), and would have to have sufficient hint to their powers that they wouldn't just be avoided on the basis of randomness.

[EvilDM]

There are a few tricks I've used successfully to keep players on their toes that you might find useful.

1. Change the name and a part of the description for every monster. Players fighting a group of ogres led by an ogre magi might not feel threatened, players fighting a group of Narocs with skin the color of coal might give them pause, when those same Narocs don't show any pain from the damage inflicted upon them and fight at full strength until they drop from the wounds the party tends to get a little concerned. A name and appearance change and adding something that doesn't effect the encounter directly makes for a more exciting fight.

2. Use monsters in new ways. Players seeing a beholder will take the proper precautions and go into battle, players seeing a 10 armed living statue (picture a hindu god style statue with each arm holding an everyday object like a comb that do the functions of the eyestalks) won't know what to think.

3. Name NPCs. If the PCs are fighting a group of orcs have the orcs referring to one by name ("Korg, need over here!") then the fight is most likely going to be a lot more intense for them. PCs tend to treat monsters with names a bit differently then they do most fodder, even if that monster is no different then the others.

4. Customize NPC spells. Magic Missiles that look like bees or miniature ghosts. Disintegrate spells that are a black void of nothingness that screams as it approaches its target. Water Breathing spells that make gill appear, painfully. Don't tell the players you're doing this, or the name of the spell the NPC is casting. Don't repeat the effects unless there is reason to do so, like fighting a master and his apprentice.

5. I'll admit I don't use magic items that much in my world but the same ideas still work. I simply don't tell the players what magic items actually are regardless of their attempts to identify them. Instead of a Vorpal Sword they get a sword made of a strange glass like material that they can't chip or scratch and that cuts thru whatever they test it on. A bit of research will lead them to a legend of a famous warrior who wielded it and the stories about him will give them an idea of what it does. Wands cast spells the same way the NPCs do, same effect with different animations, so to speak.

As DM rules are more guidelines then truths, manipulate them to fit your needs. If you play with a group of rules lawyers you'll need to either be careful or simply tell them at the start that not everything will be exactly as it's printed, but doing so can add a lot to a game.

~EDM

[Frozen_Feet]

Let's start with this part:


I think what you are failing to get is that rationality is a powerful tool because it works. These players are going to analyze things with reason, and that's ALWAYS going to pay off, even if the payoff is "seems to be random."

No, it isn't always going to pay off, and my gripe has never been with rationality, or analyzing things. My point is that there are aspects to such analytical thinking that can be exploited to bring sense of mystery and danger back to the forte.

Mystery is all about presenting questions and having the players work their brains a little to answer them. Analysis is not the enemy here, you just have to get the players to analyse them from the right angle.

To elaborate:


Ask a wizard to act like spells don't do what they do? That seems rather ridiculous, doesn't it?

Ask the player, not the character. Think of the players as actors here: the actor knows he'll never be in any real danger, he might have read the script and know that the narrative logic of the story won't allow his character to die - but when a scene so requires, he'll still act scared, and even feel scared, because that's what his given goal is. He'll work towards achieving that mindset since that's what's best for the end result.

Besides, Wizards acting wary of magic is not wrong genre savvy in a lot of settings and systems. Compare and contrast with the real-world principle that you always treat a gun as if it's loaded, even if it most likely isn't.

Whether the magic system or setting has uncertainty and danger factors is irrelevant if the players themselves think it as "just a game". They need to come and meet the GM halfway here, and actually pay heed to the described and/or mechanical risks of magic.


Well, they'll spend time investigating those things. Almost any group would. Real world people would too. Getting the end result of them randomly shrugging at stuff and going "it's just like that" doesn't really make things mysterious.

Worst case, this will interfere with actual mysteries, making them seem like Deus Ex Machina because the game is loaded with too many magical trivialities.

They are geared to analyze things. If they analyze something is meaningless, they'll move on. I believe I have more or less the same mindset as they do when I play D&D.

That they will analyze the supernatural is the idea, duh. See earlier post about hw discovery is part of awe. But here's the deal: what I propose doesn't require magic to be trivial, it doesn't even require it to be common. What it requires is that all things magical aren't there to be used, and that there's a lot of incomplete, erroneous and misleading information about it.

Dead ends and sidepaths don't have to be trivial either even if they don't advance the party's goals. A good example from an adventure module I played: an uranium staff behind a plexiglass screen. If left alone, the staff doesn't do anything; it's in no way crucial to getting ahead in the module. The process of obtaining it is very arcane, so one could easily say obtaining it is not worth the trouble.

But would the players leave behind a glowing green thing of potential value? Naaah. It seems too important.

And because it seems important, they will subject themselves to all sorts of trouble and danger that will potentially alter the course of an entire campaign... for the reward of being slowly killed by radiaton.

The module had another great Red Herring too: a simple note reading "beware green", and nothing else. This caused my players to be paranoid of every green thing in the module, including door lights and harmless buttons, because hey, the clue told they might be dangerous.

You see, the key to good Red Herrings is that they aren't obvious, and this goes a long way to making them non-trivial as well. Analysis is a process, and if you present an event or two where the realization comes too late, you can make your players question their own methods - which can go a long way to getting them to the proper mindset of feeling awe towards magic.

In addition, while discovery is part of awe, so is the feeling that there's still more to discover, something more than meets the eye. Leaving some loose ends and open questions will help in that respect.


Stepping away from literal logic is itself logical in certain situations. I don't get the impression these guys are stuck on literal logic. Though, you do run the risk of the players ignore half of what you say with this depending on how you do it (like the red herring thing above). Gotta be wary of pumping too much noise into any system, as you might lose the signal.

Also, if that "wise man" spins koan-like logic and it isn't very well planned out, then he just becomes a joke amongst the players. If it is never useful until after the fact, he'll also be ignored. I mean, it's nice flavor and all, but they do have evil monsters to fight and if the prophet (or whatever) isn't going to be useful there's no reason to ever even talk to him.

Stepping away from literal logic being the right option is the point. More specifically, you're trying to get the players to use symbolic, religious, narrative and/or mystical logic; trying to make them think in metaphors, riddles, so on and so forth. Koan are just an example of this kind of logic; I'm not necessarily proposing a literal Guru spewing wisdom to the PCs.

And again, the thing about good Red Herrings is that they aren't obvious. The players shouldn't be able to easily discern which piece of knowledge is true, or whether there is a truth in the first place. You have to make it so that the players won't, and can't know whether talking to the "wise man" was worthwhile until after the fact. Or, to put in another way: they need to analyze it, but the tools they need are not readily available, or are something they're used to.

Now, you've told your players to treat magic in a mystical manner, and now you're presenting them puzzles that encourage thinking and knowledge of mystical subjects. If that can't get them on the right tracks, chances are they are actively refusing to play along.

[Andorax]

I think Urpriest hit on a large chunk of my thoughts here.


Generally speaking, the two things that most seem to encourage the other players to think tactically instead of story-wise are presentation and difficulty.


Presentation:

I know you said it isn't a strength, but really work on ramping up your description game. Players quote attack/damage numbers, you give 'em back a description of cuts and blood flying. Spells don't have to be totally refluffed...just take the time to talk about the sudden explosion of searing flame in their midst and the overwhelming stench of sulpher and singed hair before getting down to the "Take X, save for half".

They're going to pick up on whatever you put your time and energy into...if that's stats, they're going to gravitate towards the stats. If it's descriptives, then they'll pick up on that in turn and start playing along. Not immediately, and not all at the same pace, but they will pick it up in time.


Difficulty:

I've seen this consistently in my groups over the years. The harder I press them, they more they feel like they "have" to get serious-tactical to survive the fight. If I'm pushing them to the brink, then all the sudden being able to sit back and enjoy the game is no longer an option. Rules have to be poured over, technicalities examined, loopholes closed (or opened). It's simply a matter of survival.

To use a MMORPG example, I frequently chat about inconsequencial things over the headset, mess around with pointless disguises and get out vanity pets, and just generally half-effort my way through content I know I obscenely overpower. Why not? It doesn't matter. But when it's "raid progression night", I'm focused on pushing every button in exactly the right order. No jokes, no distractions.

If your players are getting mechanical on you, consider backing off the difficulty level a bit. Focus on the description, but also ease up on the challenge level so that they don't feel as if they have to bring their "mechanical A game" to win.

[Tengu_temp]

The solution is simple: switch to a less tactical, more cinematic game and/or playstyle. Have a lot of plot magic that does great things without actually mechanically elaborating what those things are. Magic is easy to keep wonderous and mystical even in a game like Exalted, which is as crunch-heavy and high-magic as DND if not more.


5.Add in bad effects. 3E made all things D&D safe, but this was not so in 1/2E. So bring them back. Add in harmful effects for powerful magic. Add in some strange stuff. And don't be afraid to hurt the characters. Have them hit with an effect that they can't just blink and remove.

This doesn't bring a sense of mystery to magic, it brings a sense of paranoia to it. At worst it will only encourage the dry, mathematic approach further, as players are being extra careful and prepared with everything in case the game decides to punish them.

[Eric Tolle]

I can relate to this thread because I had a similar problem in a Western game. I was annoyed at how mundane guns had become, and tried to present them in a more mystical, fantastic light. But my players just looked at me like I was crazy, and said "Dude they're just guns. So I tried not giving giving details, just describing them in mythic, symbolic terms, but my players said "So Is it a Colt Peacemaker, a Sharp's Carbine, or what?

Finally out of desperation I gave them the ultimate gun;a uncanny contraption prophesied by an Indian shaman to be the only weapon that could win the wild west. It's were an impenetrable mystery, the operating and reloading of it merely hinted at in esoteric documents and the insane rantings of desert preachers. Sometimes out would work properly, and could kill the toughest bandit; other times it would shoot in the wrong direction or even harm its weilder. I was thrilled by this masterpiece; this, THIS would restore mystery and a sense of the fantastic to my game!

The first chance they got, my players threw the gun away.

I mean, what the hell? Choking back tears, I asked my players why- what were they thinking? They looked me flat in the eye and said: "Dude, it's a WESTERN."

TL;DR: really, if you're looking for magic that's mysterious and awe-provoking, D&D is the wrong system and genre for the purpose. Instead, why not try that nice Trail of Cthulhu game?

[EvilDM]

really, if you're looking for magic that's mysterious and awe-provoking, D&D is the wrong system and genre for the purpose. Instead, why not try that nice Trail of Cthulhu game?

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you here. DnD in its recent forms has a multitude of resources for different classes and spells, as well as ways to modify existing spells. Not only that but magic from other sources shouldn't be too difficult to modify to fit a DnD game. It is only when the books are treated as unbreakable laws that you loss the freedom to be creative in how magic works.

Whip up a spell that summons a green ooze trapped in a sword shaped magic field, change the color to red or blue and have it effect players when it hits them just like the monster would. Hand it to a crazy gnome illusionist who likes to leave illusions of himself all over town and who has even polymorphed a few drunks and bums to look like him. If you're really feeling evil then give it a 1-5% chance to burst on impact...

(On my way to work the idea that the sword's effect is a slow one that zombeifes the target slowly as it eats them from the inside out and drives them to find more victims for the ooze to feed on. The effects of this can be described in different stages by the DM. Now the PCs have a crazed illusionist leaving body doubles all over town and a nice zombie horde that falls apart at the DM's whim to deal with, as well as the real menace of a town or city-sized ooze. Perhaps the PCs fail to stop the gnome in a smaller town that gets eaten completely, and have now tracked him to a major port city...)

On a side note, in your Western scenario, perhaps a friend/relative/rival/enemy of the PCs could have started a gun company that found a way to produce a weapon that was era specific but different enough from the traditional guns to make it desirable for the PCs to obtain or destroy it. A form of Gatling gun or large caliber, highly accurate sniper rifle comes to mind. Perhaps a box of rounds blessed (or cursed) by the aforementioned shaman, even if said blessing had no effect of them.

[Tyndmyr]

The solution is simple: switch to a less tactical, more cinematic game and/or playstyle. Have a lot of plot magic that does great things without actually mechanically elaborating what those things are.

As a tactical player, I absolutely hate this. To me, this is code for "The GM just wants to tell a story, not actually play the game". If your players like tactical things, giving them less tactics is not likely to please them.


This doesn't bring a sense of mystery to magic, it brings a sense of paranoia to it. At worst it will only encourage the dry, mathematic approach further, as players are being extra careful and prepared with everything in case the game decides to punish them.

This, however, is entirely correct. A percentage chance of something going wrong is merely another factor considered in tactics. It doesn't add mystery at all.

[Frozen_Feet]

This, however, is entirely correct. A percentage chance of something going wrong is merely another factor considered in tactics. It doesn't add mystery at all.
Yup. It only adds a sense of mystery if the players can't know how things could go wrong, which at the very least means that you can't show the miscast rules to them. There needs to be a puzzle other than just whether the tactic will work or not.

[DiBastet]

This is very interesting, because I translated a long list of spells to my player and made a codex, translated a giant list of feats, reworked some, and made them a codex, and even of magic items and made a codex.

However, I made it clear that for the setting, these spells are the most "common" spells. I don't know how to explain, but I made it clear that this is the form of "common" magic, that different traditions around the world, even magical creatures, usually use, but however there are other two kinds of magic the hermetics talk about: Artifact Magic and High Magic. The former is work of wonders by itself, like a maze, or mountain range, or even a city, that is part of a giant super-spell; the later is the kind of ritual magic that makes things otherwise impossible for "common magic".

The important thing that I believe I made is to give a clear distinction that both forms of awe-inspiring magic, artifact and high magic, don't involve levels, not even spellcasting levels. A higher level wizard can't really use one of these powerful spells more than a 1st level monk, if both don't know the ritual. And even if you do and manage to make one of these things impossible to "common magic" (even if it's not INCREDIBLE, but simply impossible for common spells to do, like creating small life from nothing or perfect invisibility, or teleporting to another planet), you don't gain any knowledge on how to use another of this kind of mysterious magic, because they are all unique, and don't follow a set of rules as a group.

I don't know what I did, but I know that making this integral part of the setting is something very important to create this sense of wonder. There was a time, in a campaign, that the players saw a old woman leaving a bowl of milk behind her door, "for the sidhe and the fey to be pleased". The spellcasters could identify it was not magic, just superstition. Two campaigns later, other characters, same players, were involved with a man who sold two years of work for a seelie fey in exchange for a ritual to appease fey (the unseelie wanted something with the village, he was trying to protect his family. Selfish, but human), and said man made the ritual, that involved a bowl of milk behind the door and many other things.

One of my players said "so the old woman of the other campaign WAS making magic and you didn't tell me", and know what other said, with the best face of realization? This: "No. It was superstition guys... Someone knew about this ritual, told other person but didn't taught it, and this person told another and so on, and it became some kind of superstition that only the bowl behind the door was the whole ritual.". Mission: Introduce mysticism. Status: Completed.

I believe the key is to make it part of the setting, and once they know about it, make it clear other people don't know. With time they will start to respect mystic and occult knowledge, specially if it's something NOT tied to character level and power.

[NichG]

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you here. DnD in its recent forms has a multitude of resources for different classes and spells, as well as ways to modify existing spells. Not only that but magic from other sources shouldn't be too difficult to modify to fit a DnD game. It is only when the books are treated as unbreakable laws that you loss the freedom to be creative in how magic works.

Whip up a spell that summons a green ooze trapped in a sword shaped magic field, change the color to red or blue and have it effect players when it hits them just like the monster would. Hand it to a crazy gnome illusionist who likes to leave illusions of himself all over town and who has even polymorphed a few drunks and bums to look like him. If you're really feeling evil then give it a 1-5% chance to burst on impact...


The problem that a lot of people have been coming up against is, if you do that it doesn't end up working. I mean, sure, you can do all that, but the players often won't find it mysterious or awe-provoking. Instead they'll say 'okay, we're dealing with a sword that deals Con damage, here's a Sheltered Vitality spell for the melee and casters, you stay back' and reduce it to its mechanical components.

So while I think it can be done in D&D, there is some truth to the idea that D&D isn't a great system for mystery and awe. D&D magic is almost too comprehensive for there to be any space for something mysterious. There really isn't much you can't do with D&D magic at a high enough level, even without Epic. Go to other planets? Greater Teleport. Cause an army to rise up and serve you? Chain-Gate Solars. Travel through time? Well, Wizards did publish that one spell... Create a new plane of existence? Genesis. Destroy cities? Volcano, or Apocalypse from the Sky, or the Locate City Bomb if your players are well-read.

Even if these things are banned in your campaign, player awareness that they could be done is insidious. You have to work very hard to establish that these things are not accessible before making some of them accessible again in order to make it mysterious. Basically, the players have to think that you have personal rules for the setting and game that you're very strict about for some reason, so that when you introduce something that breaks those rules they're shocked.

[Yora]

That's the reason my campaigns always are only level 1 to 10. High Level D&D is something very different from almost any other works of high fantasy. 10th level characters are already insanely powerful
The drawback is, that you have to watch out to not reach 10th level too fast and then be stuck with no chances to improve your character further, and if played by the books, you level up pretty fast. If you do want to do dungeon crawl, you have to handle XP awards differently.

Out of the book, D&D isn't good for anything but D&D. But I think it's really easy to make the neccesary changes and it's a very popular game that even is for free.

[Caphi]

The problem that a lot of people have been coming up against is, if you do that it doesn't end up working. I mean, sure, you can do all that, but the players often won't find it mysterious or awe-provoking. Instead they'll say 'okay, we're dealing with a sword that deals Con damage, here's a Sheltered Vitality spell for the melee and casters, you stay back' and reduce it to its mechanical components.

You can't fix that, though. And frankly, some tables won't want to. It has nothing to do with how the magic works, how it's displayed, or even whether or not it has ANY similarity to anything that really exists in the system. It's a sign that the players see it as a problem to be solved. They have no time for or interest in being awed, because the sword is flying at them and they want not to gawk but to deal with it.


I mean, what the hell? Choking back tears, I asked my players why- what were they thinking? They looked me flat in the eye and said: "Dude, it's a WESTERN."

Same deal, right? Your players didn't see a mystery, they saw something useless, a slot machine that could potentially kill them. D&D already has an item that does the thing you made: the deck of many things. And you know how popular that is with players.

[Morithias]

I always thought there was never any mystery at all. We just treat "magic" as another form of science. The fact is if those words spoken can produce a fireball spell, then those words spoken can produce a fireball spell. Being a high level wizard is basically just the same as being a quantum physicist. Sure it looks amazing and mysterious, but I'm sure if you sat down the average person in a said physicist's classroom they would be just as confused if not more so, because in the physicist's case "A wizard did it" can't be used to fill the plot holes.

That's why in our settings, anyone can make scrolls or potions, so long as they have a scroll to copy from, or a recipe to follow. (Seriously someone want to explain why if level 2 expert who happens to have ranks in decipher script copies a scroll word-for-word that it for some reason isn't magical? I mean sure a wizard didn't do it, but if the whole point of the wizard is that they got their power via study then in theory anyone should be able to do it. At least with sorcerers and warlocks the argument can be made that it's in their blood. As a famous basketball trainer once said "You can't teach being tall".)

All advanced science can't be told from magic. Well it works the other way too, magic is a science. An incredibly dangerous science, but it is still SCIENCE!

[SowZ]

I always thought there was never any mystery at all. We just treat "magic" as another form of science. The fact is if those words spoken can produce a fireball spell, then those words spoken can produce a fireball spell. Being a high level wizard is basically just the same as being a quantum physicist. Sure it looks amazing and mysterious, but I'm sure if you sat down the average person in a said physicist's classroom they would be just as confused if not more so, because in the physicist's case "A wizard did it" can't be used to fill the plot holes.

That's why in our settings, anyone can make scrolls or potions, so long as they have a scroll to copy from, or a recipe to follow. (Seriously someone want to explain why if level 2 expert who happens to have ranks in decipher script copies a scroll word-for-word that it for some reason isn't magical? I mean sure a wizard didn't do it, but if the whole point of the wizard is that they got their power via study then in theory anyone should be able to do it. At least with sorcerers and warlocks the argument can be made that it's in their blood. As a famous basketball trainer once said "You can't teach being tall".)

All advanced science can't be told from magic. Well it works the other way too, magic is a science. An incredibly dangerous science, but it is still SCIENCE!

Yeah, I don't interpret magic as being something that goes against the laws of physics but instead taps into universal energies to produce effects that don't occur normally. Just like some elements don't occur naturally without human intervention as far as we know, that doesn't mean creating said elements in a lab is against the laws of physics.

[Morithias]

Yeah, I don't interpret magic as being something that goes against the laws of physics but instead taps into universal energies to produce effects that don't occur normally. Just like some elements don't occur naturally without human intervention as far as we know, that doesn't mean creating said elements in a lab is against the laws of physics.

Exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself!

[EvilDM]

The problem that a lot of people have been coming up against is, if you do that it doesn't end up working. I mean, sure, you can do all that, but the players often won't find it mysterious or awe-provoking. Instead they'll say 'okay, we're dealing with a sword that deals Con damage, here's a Sheltered Vitality spell for the melee and casters, you stay back' and reduce it to its mechanical components.


I wasn't thinking just Con damage, I was thinking more of, "Ohh BTW the sword left a red mark on you that seems to be eating your flesh. Red streaks extend outwards and are growing, and roll a save against the crippling pain coarsing thru your body." Getting hit by the sword leaves a real patch of ooze on the player. Of course the first time they 'solve' the riddle they're be ready for it, but in a high mechanics game you do take what you can get sometimes.

Unless of course the ooze type was random...

It's taking the players out of their comfort zones and placing them in beatable yet unfamiliar situations that I work towards as a DM. Nothing should be set in stone, being able to change the game is a right every DM should reserve from day 1.


Disclaimer: I run a homebrew, not a Version X DnD world, for the simple reason there are too many rules in DnD these days.

[Frozen_Feet]

You can make science out of pretty much anything; once it becomes a fact of life, supernatural becomes extension of the natural.

This doesn't automatically lead to, or in anyway have to lead, to loss of awe. A good deal of scientists still can appreciate the grandness or danger of things they meet, even if they shut out those feelings when necessary to do their job.

That's one good thing to think of, actually. In rush of the moment, adrenaline pushes emotions back. When a person is excited, they don't really think of why they are so; they attribute emotion to the event after the fact.

I noticed this best with one of my players who is darn annoying and plays a traditional antisocial antihero adventurer who killls things and takes their stuff. When his character got trapped in a temple with no seeming way out, he didn't really act any different, despite all the horrible things that almost befell his character - but after the session was over and he took a moment to cool down, he came to me saying "you know, that was pretty scary... if we hadn't lucked out, it would've been pretty horrible locked in there forever..."

Take a note of this, and examine feelings of your players not just when they encounter something, but after the situation is done and you're wrapping up a game too. Give them a moment to think of their own opinions and feelings, and they might have surprising changes of heart.

[dps]

I can relate to this thread because I had a similar problem in a Western game. I was annoyed at how mundane guns had become, and tried to present them in a more mystical, fantastic light. But my players just looked at me like I was crazy, and said "Dude they're just guns. So I tried not giving giving details, just describing them in mythic, symbolic terms, but my players said "So Is it a Colt Peacemaker, a Sharp's Carbine, or what?

Finally out of desperation I gave them the ultimate gun;a uncanny contraption prophesied by an Indian shaman to be the only weapon that could win the wild west. It's were an impenetrable mystery, the operating and reloading of it merely hinted at in esoteric documents and the insane rantings of desert preachers. Sometimes out would work properly, and could kill the toughest bandit; other times it would shoot in the wrong direction or even harm its weilder. I was thrilled by this masterpiece; this, THIS would restore mystery and a sense of the fantastic to my game!

The first chance they got, my players threw the gun away.

I mean, what the hell? Choking back tears, I asked my players why- what were they thinking? They looked me flat in the eye and said: "Dude, it's a WESTERN."

TL;DR: really, if you're looking for magic that's mysterious and awe-provoking, D&D is the wrong system and genre for the purpose. Instead, why not try that nice Trail of Cthulhu game?

I don't see that this has anything to do with the system, or even the problem under discussion. If you want mystery in a Western setting, it should be "Who's been smuggling repeating rifles to the Apaches?" or "Who's behind the cattle-rustling ring?", not "How do guns work?". You can't make something that's mundane in our real-life world mysterious in a RP setting, but that's not the problem--the problem under discussion is mystical/supernatural elements in fantasy settings being treated as mundane by players. The problem you describe seems to be that you're running a Western campaign but want to be running a fantasy campaign.

Anyway, in early D&D the problem wasn't there to such a great extent, because, in theory at least, the players weren't supposed to know much beyond what was in the PHB. (In practice, of course, players often read things that they weren't supposed to, and spoilered the game for themselves.)

[Sucrose]

I don't see that this has anything to do with the system, or even the problem under discussion. If you want mystery in a Western setting, it should be "Who's been smuggling repeating rifles to the Apaches?" or "Who's behind the cattle-rustling ring?", not "How do guns work?". You can't make something that's mundane in our real-life world mysterious in a RP setting, but that's not the problem--the problem under discussion is mystical/supernatural elements in fantasy settings being treated as mundane by players. The problem you describe seems to be that you're running a Western campaign but want to be running a fantasy campaign.

Anyway, in early D&D the problem wasn't there to such a great extent, because, in theory at least, the players weren't supposed to know much beyond what was in the PHB. (In practice, of course, players often read things that they weren't supposed to, and spoilered the game for themselves.)

I think that may be Eric's point (concealed with a slight layer of sarcasm). Magic in D&D is not a mysterious, unknown force. It is a weapon and a tool, to be used as appropriate. Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft exist, and allow players to know exactly how the arcane magics of the world function. More, half the standard D&D party uses these forces in their day-to-day life. When you have that much exposure to the mystical forces, that much familiarity with it, any new mystical forces just become a matter of degree, like a gun that you're a sharpshooter with versus a cannon. You might be impressed, but you won't think it's a shaman's barking dragon.

Further, by playing hardscrabble adventurers, players are encouraged to roleplay the people in the world who are the very least likely to regard mystical matters with awe. Reflecting on the beauty of things in the middle of a dungeon means that the disintegration ray that you could have dodged hits you. Opening your mind means letting the mind control take effect. Cynicism is in the very bones of the game concept.