Quote from: Caesar SlaadAnyway, my "magic deer" is the Virus in Traveller: The New Era. A virus that pysically transforms at a distance at once compiles modern day naivete about computer viruses with placing ill disguised handwavey magic in a hard-ish SF game.

I'm a computer programmer and, in all honesty, the Virus didn't bother me like that.  If you assume that all starships have certain common computer equipment that's so advanced that it works, in part, by physically changing the structure of the chips, it's as plausible as a lot of other goofy science fiction concepts.  

That said, I think they made it far too difficult to recover from and thought that destroying the entire Third Imperium setting to add some chaos and frontiers was like burning down the house to exterminate some termites.

As for handwavey magic, let's not forget that Traveller is a setting with Ancients, Vargr, pocket universes, inertialess drives, gravity plates, air rafts, and so on.  It's harder than many science fiction settings but it certainly has it's share of handwavey magic.

Quote from: Abyssal MawAs a point of 'realism' or whatever- sure. Memorized spells seem ridiculous. (Although they have changed it into 'prepared' spells now).

As a game mechanic, though, D&D magic is great. Because here is a renewable, gameable resource that allows players to strategize in several different ways. Some of my favorite gameplay moments are listening to players try to assess clues from the adventure and figure out what spells to prepare. "Well, sounds like undead..zombies or mummies...  so I get my fire spells ready, plus I swap out some of my 0-levels for Disrupt Undead.." (etc).

Yup. I sort of think that D&D magic doesn't so much belong in this discussion because it's more a gameplay shaping detail than a setting shaping detail. Yes, I realize there is some cross connect, but I certainly don't think D&D magic is as setting shaping in its specifics as, say, Unknown Armies. For many settings, I could replace it with a spell point system with little consequence.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadWhat is your "Magic Deer"? No, I am not talking about which authority figure shackles and oppresses you. What element of an established setting really bothers you? Be it for reasons of shattering disbeleif, making statements you don't agree with, or any other thing that makes the setting annoying for you?

To answer your question, I think Glorantha has a few "Magic Deer" for me, including the literally flat world, the mishmash of influences that feel like a mishmash of influences, things like the ducks and plant-elves, and the fact that it's Bronze Age but really doesn't feel Bronze Age.  Ugh.

Metaplot. It can be done right (see Heroquest), but any railroady metaplot ukillable npc junk leaves me cold.
-Zam

Empire of the Petal Throne's "Tekumel" is intricate and fascinating, but I hate that the setting doesn't have fast-moving riding animals.

Quote from: zamielMetaplot. It can be done right (see Heroquest), but any railroady metaplot ukillable npc junk leaves me cold.
-Zam

That's actually the only major problem I have with Midnight. Izrador is basically presented as unbeatable.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonThat's actually the only major problem I have with Midnight. Izrador is basically presented as unbeatable.

I hate that. If there's a god that ticks you off in a fantasy setting, you should have a shot at taking it down.
-Zam

Quote from: John MorrowAs for handwavey magic, let's not forget that Traveller is a setting with Ancients, Vargr, pocket universes, inertialess drives, gravity plates, air rafts, and so on.  It's harder than many science fiction settings but it certainly has it's share of handwavey magic.

Handwaves have levels of plausibility. I've seen a plausible handwaves for inertialess drives. I see none for phyically altering non-cymbeline based chips at a distance with radio waves. That's on the order of psionics to me, but unlike psionics, it's way more in my face and doesn't have a comfy spot in my "this belongs in traveller" conceptual shelter.

Quote from: zamielI hate that. If there's a god that ticks you off in a fantasy setting, you should have a shot at taking it down.
-Zam

But why set a god up as the DIRECT ruler of the world or continent? Might as well just say to the players "look, your characters will never be able to affect their world in any meaningful way."

It's hard for me to think of any ... usually, if a setting doesn't click for me, it fails whole-hog to be my thing. For a single detail to be the deal-breaker ... My brain would just have to be wired differently

Sometimes single elements embody what I dislike about a setting. Elminster, for example, came to embody the broad range of things I started disliking about the Forgotten Realms as the years went on (I enjoyed - and still enjoy - the original AD&D1 boxed set and the Dragon articles leading up to it ... and the first few "FR-Series" books ... and that's about it. Somewhere after FR3 I lose all patience with it).

But Elminster isn't the reason I dislike the modern FR; he's just a convenient focal point for many of the real reasons.

My magic deer is, obviously, the magic deer.

RPGPundit

QuoteI sort of think that D&D magic doesn't so much belong in this discussion because it's more a gameplay shaping detail than a setting shaping detail.

I have to disagree here.  The unholy abortion of "fire-and-forget" magic is so deeply entrenched in D&D that it ends up bleeeding out into nearly every setting based on D&D.  Note that in any of the D&D novels -- not that I'm admitting to reading any of those sorry steaming turds... especially not five complete series -- there is a tortuous explanation of "how magic works," all trying to justify that hideous excuse for a magic system.

While it's obvious that my big setting-stopper is the way the D&D magic system makes changes to the underlying implied world of any game using the D&D system.  However, my own personal magic deer:  Fighting, adventuring priests and the entire D&D-esque setting treatment of religion and deities...

Quote from: McrowIsn't that sort of what could happen in Future Skein?

Yeah, but that is sort of the point, I am going to make it work much better.

Quote from: Wandering MonsterI have to disagree here.  The unholy abortion of "fire-and-forget" magic is so deeply entrenched in D&D that it ends up bleeeding out into nearly every setting based on D&D.

So? It's still not setting defining in the way that magic is in UA, and I could still replace most of the settings that use it with a spell point system with relative ease.

(Further, I don't take the form of craptastic novels as bearing on the setting in any meaningful way. Unless the setting follows the novels. In which case, even if the novels are gold, the setting is crap, if history is any indication.)

Quote from: Caesar Slaad[...] I could still replace most of the settings that use it with a spell point system with relative ease.

This much is certainly true. We did a GURPS Forgotten Realms game for a while that was really nice, actually highlighted a lot more of the setting than AD&D did (IMO) and the shift in magic-system assumptions wasn't even a blip on the setting radar (we used standard GURPS + Umana option).