Quote from: Rincewind1;645109So, what's the point of my babbling? When a character picks up a "special" magical item, he's not just picking up a hammer of Better Slaying of Goblins, to use a notion from Warhammer - he is/ought to pick up a piece of history of the world, something that has a deep rooted symbolism for various people within it, and may lead to various people interacting with him in a completely different way - and not necessarily a good one. Heck, in a way, the history of the weapon may be more important that any properties of the blade itself - an Excalibur may be just a well - made sword, a Masterwork one to speak in DnD's terms, but having it would still brand one as true king of all Britons.

Yes, I've said I like to have history behind my magical items.  I'm not sure why you think otherwise.  See my first post in this thread.  

My point was really countering the "if every item is special, then none are" notion, and promptly got off track.

I don't give a fuck if magical items are "special," whatever Pundit was getting at with that little piece of pith.  I like my items to have history, and I don't think that makes them less special.  Sure, some items will have larger significance to the culture or whatnot.  I'm not arguing against that.

I'm just saying that I like my permanent magical items to be unique (again, my first post in the thread said this), and I don't care one bit about their "specialness" in that context.  If the +1 mace that emits light and hums when undead are around because it was used by a minor holy man 100 years ago isn't seen as "special" by my players because every item has a little backstory and unique elements like that, I don't give a fuck, is all I'm saying.

Quote from: KenHR;645212Yes, I've said I like to have history behind my magical items.  I'm not sure why you think otherwise.  See my first post in this thread.  

My point was really countering the "if every item is special, then none are" notion, and promptly got off track.

I don't give a fuck if magical items are "special," whatever Pundit was getting at with that little piece of pith.  I like my items to have history, and I don't think that makes them less special.  Sure, some items will have larger significance to the culture or whatnot.  I'm not arguing against that.

I'm just saying that I like my permanent magical items to be unique (again, my first post in the thread said this), and I don't care one bit about their "specialness" in that context.  If the +1 mace that emits light and hums when undead are around because it was used by a minor holy man 100 years ago isn't seen as "special" by my players because every item has a little backstory and unique elements like that, I don't give a fuck, is all I'm saying.

There's a difference between an item being special and having an unique backstory, and part of that is the point I made in my post. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Quote from: Rincewind1;645214There's a difference between an item being special and having an unique backstory, and part of that is the point I made in my post. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I think we agree more than you think.  I'm probably just being muddled in making whatever point I'm trying to make.  I still haven't finished my coffee.

I guess in the end I'm looking at it from the standpoint of my players.  In actual play, grand symbolism and literary goodness (and I love that shit...I was an English major with one of my minors in Anthropology) doesn't usually have the impact it does in a good novel.  The items are there to be used, and my players tend to look at them in those terms.  Like finding a randart weapon in Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup or something.

I like magical items that have weird appearances or side-effects. One of my old DMs was especially good at coming up with these sorts of things: a magical breastplate that turned your hair to chrome; an amulet of water-breathing in the form of a shrunken mermaid's head;  a cloak of protection that makes the user cast the shadow of a pit fiend, or leave bloody footprints as he walks. Items that were activated by cutting off one or your digits. They didn't have history, but they had strange, apparent effects. You got the sense of magic being dangerous, alien, and a little unwholesome.

That is related to my fashion analogy of history=color and mechanics=pattern. I guess you could add utility=fabric cut, to strain an analogy.

Often people design simple patterns then assume the result also should come with little to no color. A lot of drab colors everywhere ends up with a muddy palette. The same happens with utility, where it is straightforward, not tailored, and ultimately unimaginative. Bland tunic shape is bland: one can cut out utility into different interesting shapes.

Let me give examples of the analogy in action:

Basic "pattern" mechanic is +1 sword. History is about Neo Punic Wars. Utility is about goblins. Potentially boring, yes?

Dark color, drab tone, tight tailored cut -- No real history outside of being created during the Neo Punic Goblin Wars, likely a lieutenant's sword. A +1 sword that becomes +2 versus goblins.

Bright color, vibrant tone, bare midriff cut -- famed Sword of Umbrage, used by Flubbergart the First to establish his kingdom during the Neo Punic Goblin Wars, used to slay goblins throughout the ages. When rapidly bathed in water during a full moon becomes for one week a sacred +1 sword that hums whispers of impending death into the minds of nearby goblins.

Bright color, drab tone, shapeless cut. The legendary Excruciator sword used in the Neo Punic Goblin Wars, supposedly killed over a thousand goblins in one campaign. Just a +1 sword.

The components to magic item aesthetics can be broken down and analyzed just like anything else. And having such a structure helps give guidance to creating one's own material. To teach that to others in the DMG would be more beneficial than mere item generation chasing bumper sticker slogans of "everything must be unique!"

I still prefer mechanical hooks associated with the story behind magical items where possible, unless the story itself has power, as Rincewind was saying. Quite often nonmagical treasures have a long history of interesting owners, but all the PCs want to know about is the gold piece value rather than getting bogged down with details, and they're right, their characters probably wouldn't be interested in the minutae of a tapestry's provenance. Magic should be more connected somehow.

Quote from: Opaopajr;645346Let me give examples of the analogy in action:

That sounds really cool.

But... could you maybe expound on that a bit more? I kind of got the gist of what you were saying, but didn't quite follow it all the way.

Quote from: KenHR;645217I think we agree more than you think.  I'm probably just being muddled in making whatever point I'm trying to make.  I still haven't finished my coffee.

I guess in the end I'm looking at it from the standpoint of my players.  In actual play, grand symbolism and literary goodness (and I love that shit...I was an English major with one of my minors in Anthropology) doesn't usually have the impact it does in a good novel.  The items are there to be used, and my players tend to look at them in those terms.  Like finding a randart weapon in Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup or something.

Well, can't trust the buggers to bring their own dice half of the time, what do you expect? Players, worst bloody sorts over the tables, am I right?

Jokes aside - I mostly agree on that, yeah. The good way to make player interested in history of the item is when it's either some rumour/foreshadowing that gets the player to look for it in the first place, or if NPCs start reacting to that weapon. Of course, not every +1 sword is worthy of such attentions, in my opinion at least. But perhaps with the right user, it will be someday.

It's a basic analogy to associate the breakdown of aesthetics into components. Any creative discipline has its theories, and core theories about the basic compositional elements are often the first taught to new students. A DMG is designed to give guidance for a new GM to create their own works, but just like any aesthetic discipline it helps to know the basics to then build your own.

And ultimately that's what you want. You want the student to know what it is they are copying and how to one day create their own. Some people need more structure and guidance on how to build up to works they admire (and some are just naturals, and others are just confident to develop their own style from the beginning. but those don't really need a DMG.)

What we've been discussing here as the winning elements of our favorite magic items are aesthetic categories. There is no formalized item creation theory to RPGs, so this is new territory for terms. However, other disciplines offer terms and design principles that can help shape our understanding. So for example system mechanical effect determines item usage; it determines if an item is glaring or subtle, big or small (in impact), complicated or simple. Not having a term in RPGs for that, but having one in another discipline, I can appropriate it through analogy to see how it suits this item element.

The leap of faith is testing how far another discipline's principles of an element can go. Eventually the analogy of RPG item mechanics to Fashion pattern will break. This is natural and expected. The usefulness is to see how much that term, and the theoretical ideas behind it, can help us think about item creation components and be a transmissible vehicle to others to think of the same.

There is a difference between "well crafted items" and magic items; unless you want to judge that a really well crafted sword not only does +1 to hit and damage but can also harm supernatural creatures; in which case, how is it really distinguishable from magic?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;645848There is a difference between "well crafted items" and magic items; unless you want to judge that a really well crafted sword not only does +1 to hit and damage but can also harm supernatural creatures; in which case, how is it really distinguishable from magic?

I don't really use a whole lot of "can't be harmed by normal weapons" monsters in my games, it gets messy way too quickly, especially when you have a group as imaginatively destructive as my own.

I mean sure it can't be harmed by normal weapons, how about dropping from the top of a castle wall, hanging, drowning, suffocating, having a bucket of acid thrown on it, lit on fire and horsedragged for thirty miles across jagged scree slopes, pulled apart between horses when on fire and on one memorable occasion having a largeish brothel dropped on it? Still unfazed? That's one hell of a monster, Rasputin should be taking notes!

If I have to use something with that advantage, I usually grade it on a sliding scale - werewolves for example take half damage from anything not made of silver, and regenerate damage from non silver weapons if they aren't killed outright. You would not believe how ungodly tough that makes them.

Other monsters might take a third or a quarter or even a fifth damage after their armour is figured into the picture, but they drop one grade for every +1 a truly magical weapon has. So monster invulnerability might run:
Grade 1: Take half damage
Grade 2: Take one third damage
Grade 3: Take a quarter damage
Grade 4: Take one fifth damage

But someone with a +2 magical sword versus a grade 3 monster will do half damage (3-2=1) instead of the quarter damage they were going to do otherwise. Sometimes as in the case of werewolves magic isn't even needed or sometimes won't be effective at all, but their 'kryptonite' will do the trick nicely (silver in this case). Herbs like wolfsbane being burned might also temporarily reduce or negate their resistance to damage, there are an infinite number of sneaky ways to work it.

Only very rarely are monsters truly immune to weapons and most damage, the incorporeal would usually be among them, such as possessing demons and other seriously nasty pieces of work.

Quote from: RPGPundit;645848There is a difference between "well crafted items" and magic items; unless you want to judge that a really well crafted sword not only does +1 to hit and damage but can also harm supernatural creatures; in which case, how is it really distinguishable from magic?

RPGPundit

That's a setting question. An important quetion, but ultimately one that may distract from discovering what it is about magical items that makes them feel magical. Perhaps the fiat judgment that only magical items can hurt X (magical?) creatures is part of the charm some enjoy from their items. For me, it is not as winning a feature, personally.

Quote from: RPGPundit;645848There is a difference between "well crafted items" and magic items; unless you want to judge that a really well crafted sword not only does +1 to hit and damage but can also harm supernatural creatures; in which case, how is it really distinguishable from magic?

RPGPundit

Well, Tolkien for one didn't see a difference.

Quote from: LibraryLass;645983Well, Tolkien for one didn't see a difference.

But there's other sources that do.

RPGPundit

Even in Tolkien, who was drawing heavily from typical Greek mythos of "the weapon is as magical as it's owner", there were strictly magical swords - What about those three ones from the Hobbit, that glow when goblins/danger* are nearby, and at least two of them are supposedly a bane of the goblinkind (though that might have been a goblin myth related to the users of those swords)? I mean, Sting* does make reappearance in Lord of the Rings. Mithrill is a magical metal as well.

*I read Hobbit ages ago, and I can't recall precisely.