House rule for Detect Magic in Pathfinder

[ewoods]

I just recently started DMing a Pathfinder game and need some help/opinions. I've been a long time 3.5 DM, and this is my first experience ever with Pathfinder. I'm having a little trouble with Detect Magic. It seems as though the spell has been merged with Identify, wherein you cast Detect Magic and then concentrate for three rounds and roll a Spellcraft check and if you beat the DC, you know what the item does. The spell is a zero level spell with no material components, a casting time of one standard action, and a duration of ten rounds per level. So my first questions is, am I reading this right?! A first level wizard can identify the magical properties of up to three magic items with a single level zero spell, as long as he makes his spellcraft check? This is actually precisely what my group is doing. Basically, the first thing they do when they walk into an empty room is cast Detect Magic and then identify everything they find. The group is large enough, with enough casters, that they can cast this like twelve times a day.

So I think I'm going to house rule this somehow. Should I just use the standard 3.5 rules of Identify and Detect Magic having two different and separate effects? Or should I still allow Detect Magic as it is in Pathfinder but add something to it like a high-value material component if they choose to use the Identify portion of the spell? Thoughts or suggestions?

[Yanisa]

Yup, you are competently right.

Relevant link (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/spellcraft).
Spellcraft uses: Identify the properties of a magic item using detect magic
DC: 15 + item's caster level

If you want to go back to 3.5 just rule away that use of spellcraft, and change Identify back to it's original 3.5 counter spell.




Personally I always disliked the way 3.5 identifying items worked. It always felt so mean spirited and the penalties were so minor at low level it barely affected anything (100 gp and 1 hour) and high level was just a huge tax to keep track up. (Good luck identifying the 15 items the big bad had + the 100 other items his friends had.)
Also the magic item companion brought out a item that allowed identify with a spellcraft, which is precisely with pathfinder is doing now.

[BWR]

I don't really think it matters either way. Yes, PF has made certain things trivially easy and nice and this is one of them, so it's up to you whether or not you like it that way. Just make sure to clearly tell your players before you implement any house rule, possibly giving them a session of grace, and explain why you are doing it this way.

I did away with at will cantrips/orisons because it removed all fun from exploration when characters were constantly going around scanning with their magical 'tricorders'. I just said they can cast each 0th level spell they have prepared 3 times each before it's exhausted. I left the Detect Magic allowing you to identify stuff, though. No matter what system I run I will accrue a lot of house rules, even when I try to avoid it (like I have with Pathfinder), so I have to choose my changes, and that was one I left.

[Yanisa]

I don't really think it matters either way. Yes, PF has made certain things trivially easy and nice and this is one of them, so it's up to you whether or not you like it that way. Just make sure to clearly tell your players before you implement any house rule, possibly giving them a session of grace, and explain why you are doing it this way.

I did away with at will cantrips/orisons because it removed all fun from exploration when characters were constantly going around scanning with their magical 'tricorders'. I just said they can cast each 0th level spell they have prepared 3 times each before it's exhausted. I left the Detect Magic allowing you to identify stuff, though. No matter what system I run I will accrue a lot of house rules, even when I try to avoid it (like I have with Pathfinder), so I have to choose my changes, and that was one I left.

To be fair, I also dislike how Pathfinder handles detect magic. I dealt with a dude who basically spammed the line: "I GOT DETECT MAGIC, DO I DETECT MAGIC???". Then getting mad at me because the next chamber had a magic item which he didn't detected even though he looked at the door and can detect magic trough the door! But I didn't read ahead to see if there are magic items in the next room because I wanted the PC to focus at this room, with the deadly poison scorpion trap.
Worse when there are enemies with magical buffs... :smallsigh:

[ewoods]

...it removed all fun from exploration when characters were constantly going around scanning with their magical 'tricorders'.

This is exactly how I feel! LOL There's no mystery left when every magic item they pick up basically comes with a stat card. Might as well throw in some flavor text too...

I have one player especially who I know is going to object pretty strongly to this so I think I'm going to just go back to the well-tested 3.5 Identify rules for consistency. I'm just surprised at such a drastic change.

[Yanisa]

This is exactly how I feel! LOL There's no mystery left when every magic item they pick up basically comes with a stat card. Might as well throw in some flavor text too...

I have one player especially who I know is going to object pretty strongly to this so I think I'm going to just go back to the well-tested 3.5 Identify rules for consistency. I'm just surprised at such a drastic change.

Like I said, it was already possible, in 3.5, and the 3.5 system was pretty flawed and pointless. Besides pathfinder is more aimed to the high power high magic player than 3.5 was.

Personally I would remove detect magic and similar spells, and replace with some kind of magical perception, where a wizard can feel magical vibrations in the air. Call it spellcraft for easiness. But it changes a lot of things, and calls for a lot of extra ruling. Then again in a high magic world removing detect magic is kinda a kick in the sensitive spot. Pretty sure half of the pathfinder designers would be straight opposed, no questions asked.

[ewoods]

It certainly speeds the game along, but I just don't think it's "fantasy realistic." In a world where things often aren't what they appear to be, anything with a magic aura should be approached with caution and have an air of mystery about it. I want that mystery to be an experience, not a dice roll. I'm not really concerned with "trivial" stuff, like a standard +1 sword or a set of boots that give a +2 bonus to Dex. Magic items that just give a straight stat bonus and nothing more aren't very exciting. It's the items that have interesting effects (particularly the items that I take the time to make up) that I don't want to be taken for granted. The world may be flooded with bags of holding and I'm fine with that, but I imagine my world having far fewer bags of holding that magically put the item you want on top when you reach in, and even fewer that will magically repair a broken mundane item once per day or will summon a days worth of rations once per week or some other effect. I want my characters to have to put in at least a little bit of effort to find these little secrets, you know?

[Yanisa]

I get you, magic isn't really arcane within DnD.
It´s the reason why I prefer low magic campaigns, but like my players started to point out, it breaks the wacky CR ratings even more, pathfinder is not the system for low magic campaigns..

For the homebrew rule I would say that like perception, not everything requirements a magical sense check. Some things are obviously magic, but it requires greater to study to figure out how they are magic. Dice rolls and Detect Magic are all we have, what is the better option without breaking the game too much, my preference says dice rolls. But like I said changing the system is a lot of work and I lack the current inspiration to deal with it.

Maybe a system based on how long you own the item, the more you get to know its properties? It would mean items will be identified without any checks and you can rule that simple stuff gets identified easier as levels goes by, dealing with the frustration of spending 24 hours to identify 24 +1 sword at level 20. To instill fear or carefulness there is that factor that it could e cursed item, and spending a lot of time with a cursed item is a bad idea.
Maybe finding clues on items on how they work...
It does sound hard to make actual rules for.

[ewoods]

I really like that idea, actually! Just a matter of coming up with a rule to match. I have no problem with "simple" magic items like a +1 whatever being identified immediately, without a check, because realistically they're just jumping through hoops to identify a pretty standard item anyway. But I could do something time or use based to identify other properties.

[Yanisa]

Well the easy way probably would be a "DC", but instead of rolling a die, the DC number represents the amount of days (or hours, or weeks*) to identify the item. Let's call it a Day Check, or DC for short. :smalltongue:
*I am unsure of what time span you are thinking off, but it's easy to fiddle with

The Day Check could be something like 10+caster level of the magical item. The DC would be lowered by 1 for each spell craft, or UMD, or magical sense rank the person has.

So a magical +1 sword would be a DC of 13. Meaning that a caster of level 13 or higher could identify it instantly.

You can lower the DC for mass produced items, like +1 swords, or items the person is familiar with or has identified before. Or make the DC higher for unique items or artifacts. You can even give bonuses if the players understand the clues on the items. (Like a skull meaning Necromancy.)

It wouldn't be to game breaking, you just replace a dice roll with a period of waiting time. And you could do cool things while the party is figuring out the item, vague dreams, buzzing, the sound of electricity in the air when a spell of the same aura is cast near the magic item.

[The Grue]

Why lower the DC instead of adding a bonus to the check?

[VoxRationis]

I would like to say two things:
1) Don't be afraid to have low-magic campaigns where both spells and magic items are rare; just remember the lack of them when designing your encounters, and increase the number of fights against humanoids, which can be interesting and tactical via use of interesting terrain and novel equipment without relying on thousands of GP worth of magic items to balance things out.
2) I would argue that the 100 gp cost for identify would be harder to cope with at low levels, even if magic items are rare at those levels. At mid to high levels, people posting on these forums mention 6000gp items like they were just a pencil stuck behind the ear. In any case, just be glad it isn't a thousand gold pieces, like it was in AD&D.

[Pex]

As far as I'm concerned, I don't find it a tragedy that PCs know what a magic item does. No magic item exists without the DM's permission. If you don't want the PCs to use a particular magic item don't give it to them. Every magic item the bad guys have the PCs will get, exceptions being Capital E Evil items presuming a typical generic party of heroes even if Neutrals among them.

That a PC learns a potion is Cure Light Wounds or a sword is +1 is not a violation of the Geneva Convention. More potent items such a keen dragonbane longsword +2 have a high spellcraft DC. When the spellcaster can identify it, the party will be of a level the item is appropriate to have. If you feel it more potent than for a mere Detect Magic to identify, you can say the spellcaster learns it's a +2 longsword but something more he can't determine. That's when Analyze Dweomer is to be used or maybe even just Identify. Analyze Dweomer is for sunblades and vorpal weapons. Legend Lore/Vision is for holy avengers, intelligent items, artifacts, and campaign plot point items.

[holywhippet]

Personally I always disliked the way 3.5 identifying items worked. It always felt so mean spirited and the penalties were so minor at low level it barely affected anything (100 gp and 1 hour) and high level was just a huge tax to keep track up. (Good luck identifying the 15 items the big bad had + the 100 other items his friends had.)
Also the magic item companion brought out a item that allowed identify with a spellcraft, which is precisely with pathfinder is doing now.

Think about the history of identify in previous D&D editions:

2nd edition: Spend 8 hours preparing and you have a 10% chance per level (max 90%), lose 8 temporary CON points which recovers at 1 point per hour of rest. Result is 16 hours for a chance of identifying an item and you can't cast the spell if you have 8 or less CON.
3.0: Spend 8 hours casting the spell. You only learn the lowest level enchantment on the item.
3.5: Spend 1 hour casting and learn all the details of the item.
4th: Have a short rest and fiddle with the item. Unless the item is unusually powerful you learn what is does and how to use it. No rituals, powers or expenditure of funds required.

Special note: Certain cursed items in 3.X cannot be identified correctly by any means.

So 3.5 was hardly mean spirited. Also, for high level PCs you expect to have some henchmen who could do it for you.

[Raven777]

I like at-will cantrips, because being able to use Mage Hand or Prestidigitation without worrying about resources really do help make magic users feel magical around the clock. But I do agree that a spammable Detect Magic is too powerful when used as a room scanner, which is something a lot of parties seem to have gotten into the habit of doing. Heck, our group Wizard relied on it so much, he had it made Permanent the moment he could afford it.

Personally, my solution would be :


Nerf : Bump the spell to 1st level.
Nerf : Remove the magic item identifying function, leaving the job to Identify.
Keep: The scanning element stays as is, revealing all auras and their nature (school, weak, moderate, strong).
Buff : Add to what is scanned the intent of the aura towards the caster (hostile, neutral, beneficial).


That way, it can still be used as a trap sweeper or a trinket locator, but resources are spent doing it.

[Yanisa]

Think about the history of identify in previous D&D editions:

2nd edition: Spend 8 hours preparing and you have a 10% chance per level (max 90%), lose 8 temporary CON points which recovers at 1 point per hour of rest. Result is 16 hours for a chance of identifying an item and you can't cast the spell if you have 8 or less CON.
3.0: Spend 8 hours casting the spell. You only learn the lowest level enchantment on the item.
3.5: Spend 1 hour casting and learn all the details of the item.
4th: Have a short rest and fiddle with the item. Unless the item is unusually powerful you learn what is does and how to use it. No rituals, powers or expenditure of funds required.

Special note: Certain cursed items in 3.X cannot be identified correctly by any means.

So 3.5 was hardly mean spirited. Also, for high level PCs you expect to have some henchmen who could do it for you.

2.0 was a entire different beast and all I know from 2.0 is Baldur's Gate and similar games. Or was that 2.5? I dunno but Identify there was instant but cost 100 gp to get on a scroll or from a shop. So the 100 GP cost idea was already before 3.0 at least.

And perhaps mean spirited isn't the right word, but the way identify worked, for me and my personal experience, was that the level and cost were low enough so the dm never felt bad at throwing tons of magic items at us. If the cost was higher or more dangerous we wouldn't have to deal with the boatloads of +1 swords we were shipping around. I prefer either the harsher method, giving more weight to finding magic items and probably the less bloated feeling of +1 swords. Or the free for all, where simple items as +1 swords are just easily identified. 3.5 hit that sweet spot of annoyance. For me.
The best would be basic stuff is easy to identify, DM made up stuff, unique items or artifacts are hard to identify.

In the end we struck a deal with a mage guild, but they were a bunch of demanding old men. At least they identified +1 swords by the thousands.

[VoxRationis]

2.0 was a entire different beast and all I know from 2.0 is Baldur's Gate and similar games. Or was that 2.5? I dunno but Identify there was instant but cost 100 gp to get on a scroll or from a shop. So the 100 GP cost idea was already before 3.0 at least.



Baldur's Gate trimmed a few of the mechanics down a bit for the purposes of making a smoother game, if I recall correctly.

[Yanisa]

Baldur's Gate trimmed a few of the mechanics down a bit for the purposes of making a smoother game, if I recall correctly.

Obviously, but that doesn't change the fact the idea of 100 gp for a smoother gameplay existed and that they realized the harsh penalties don't work for the more combat focused style. It might been the inspiration for the 3.5 mechanics, but I dunno how close Baldur's Gate development was in regards to the designers of the books. However 3.5 did put in that hour casting time for no good reason than historic relevance.