Magic is a get out of jail free card for poor writers and a power-trip for hoople-headed gamers who are unable to take on NPCs without a little extra help.

As far as I'm concerned, the less magic there is in a game the better.  Sometimes it is nice to have a little bit just for the atmosphere but in general I like my games to be rich in possibilities and human emotions.

Anyone agree?

Yes and no. Basically you can assume yes except that

1. Magic expands the range of tactical options in skirmish-level combat, especially pre-modern.

2. Well, there is no "2" since you've covered it in the bit about atmosphere.

But "1" looms pretty large since modelling one-on-one combat in a detailed and interesting fashion is fairly difficult. Add more figures and terrain and it gets better, but magic does very nicely as well.

OTOH we may have a bit of disagreement in practice since I'm unabashedly fond of well-done technological gadetry, which aren't much different from magic when you get down to it.

I'll agree with the caveat that magic should be the realm of NPCs.  I am still not used to running games with PCs who have a lot of magical power.

I've never played a PC without powers in any genre except horror and I never would. Not even Traveller, unless I can have some psionics.

Granted, I use a pretty wide definition of the term that includes stuff like virtual reality hacking in cyberpunk games, but you get the idea.

Basically, I come to RPGs for fantasy. I have no interest in playing "mundanes" with no superhuman capabilities.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalMagic is a get out of jail free card for poor writers and a power-trip for hoople-headed gamers who are unable to take on NPCs without a little extra help.

As far as I'm concerned, the less magic there is in a game the better.  Sometimes it is nice to have a little bit just for the atmosphere but in general I like my games to be rich in possibilities and human emotions.

Anyone agree?

Well, I don't agree that the less magic the better.

I do agree that sometimes (well, lots of times, actually) it's nice to to have less magic. I came into the hobby not as a fantasy fan, but a sci-fi fan. I like the intense feel of personal wherewithal and tenacity against all odds.

I like magic, and I like the emotional entanglements they can create. Especially if the power tempts the person to use it and has limitations, or setbacks..

I'm not entirely certain that a lack of magic is entirely conducive to the initial complaints of the OP. You could just as easily make the same complaint about poor use of science and technology. Great Christ, just look at the incredibly poor uses of quantum mechanics throughout science fiction. It's enough to make an educated man weep bitter, astigmatic tears.

Appropriate implementation of any "spooky" trope can work, in moderate, well-considered doses. So place the blame squarely where it belongs: with piss-poor writers, unimaginative GMs, and jackass players.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadWell, I don't agree that the less magic the better.

I do agree that sometimes (well, lots of times, actually) it's nice to to have less magic. I came into the hobby not as a fantasy fan, but a sci-fi fan. I like the intense feel of personal wherewithal and tenacity against all odds.

Well, I guess I don't really care how much magic there is, as long as My Guy gets to blast fools with it.

Quote from: joewolzI'll agree with the caveat that magic should be the realm of NPCs.  I am still not used to running games with PCs who have a lot of magical power.

  Yes, I'd agree with that.  I'm less bothered about magic when it's kept to NPCs.  For example, in this week's game we took on a pirate ship which was under the protection of a rune casting wizard.  One of us went off and found another NPC sorceror in order to neutralise the rune caster and it worked pretty well.

  I just have a problem with PCs being given lists of powers.

I like magic best when it's doing something poetic or symbolic: heightening or highlighting something in the fiction. Kewl powerz is all very well, but magic is something else again.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalAnyone agree?

No. I play RPGs as an escape, a diversion. I like larger-than-life characters, hard-charging action, colorful settings, and strange and wondrous occurrences. If it's a scifi game, I want stupendously advanced tech - ringworlds, faster-than-light travel, terraforming. If it's a fantasy game, I want horrendous monsters, scurrilous villains, and high magic. I don't have much use for in-depth roleplaying; I'd rather spend that energy interacting for real with friends and family. I'm not pissing on people who enjoy intense roleplaying and character development. If that works for them, cool. But I play RPGs for the stuff I can't get in real life, magic being one of those things.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalMagic is a get out of jail free card for poor writers and a power-trip for hoople-headed gamers who are unable to take on NPCs without a little extra help.

As far as I'm concerned, the less magic there is in a game the better.  Sometimes it is nice to have a little bit just for the atmosphere but in general I like my games to be rich in possibilities and human emotions.

Anyone agree?

Mr. Analytical, weren't you just criticizing how how low-powered magic is in the Decipher LOTR game?

I know the bit about "a foolish consistency" but, man, you're making my head spin.

While I normally lean towards fighter-y characters, there's something to be said for the fun of setting your opponents on fire with your dread sorcery.  I don't like lots of 'cheater' magic, though.  "So what if we run out of rations?  We don't need to eat or sleep, because I cast Tenser's Transhuman Transmogrification."  "I cast Protection from Lava and we swim through your obstacle, Mr. DM."  That sort of stuff gets annoying real fast.

I like the really amazing magic, as Hardisson does.

Quote from: jrientsI don't like lots of 'cheater' magic, though.  "So what if we run out of rations?  We don't need to eat or sleep, because I cast Tenser's Transhuman Transmogrification."  "I cast Protection from Lava and we swim through your obstacle, Mr. DM."  That sort of stuff gets annoying real fast.

And I actually also love that sort of use of magic- the really tactical format. In a game, thats kind of how I want players to use magic, as a way of trumping or bypassing obstacles. I really like when it does something unexpected. I don't think of it as cheating at all.

Once in a game, I had this high level outsider as the big bad guy at the end.  Just as I unveiled him, the players surprised me by hitting it with a bunch of debuffs (to wreck it's saving throws) and followed it up with a dismissal spell. It was a really textbook takedown of a plan!

As a DM, I suppose I could have been pissed because they pretty much took the toughest encounter in the game and hosed it in two rounds. But they did it through smart play, and gathering clues (they pieced together that they would be facing an outsider- and then they planned for it).  

So yeah- I like amazing magic, used specifically in a codified way that interacts with the rules of whatever game.

Low magic and freeform magic be damned.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalMagic is a get out of jail free card for poor writers and a power-trip for hoople-headed gamers who are unable to take on NPCs without a little extra help.

As far as I'm concerned, the less magic there is in a game the better.  Sometimes it is nice to have a little bit just for the atmosphere but in general I like my games to be rich in possibilities and human emotions.

Anyone agree?

Nope, it's part of the game and part of the fun.