|
1 year ago ::
Apr 01, 2012 - 1:32PM
#41
|
|
|
Not at all. In fact the evidence seems clear that magic mart is tremendously popular and has a wide majority of the votes, most of the voters being players who want additional magic. We might, as game developers, conclude this is candy and bad for them, but they will want that candy.
Nor is there much evidence that it is bad for the game. The game has prospered under magic mart conditions.
I would like to see these votes. The impression I get from reading these boards is that magic mart is a definite minority.
On these boards, it might be. We are heavily the heavily involved in the game and are different from the average player in a host of ways. That gives us much more knowledge, but also the delusion that our desires and needs are typical instead of rare.
This poll would seem to back me. It was taken in L&L 10/4/2011 and the results are in 10/11/2012.
Magic items should be...
| A reward given out by the DM. |
87.3% |
| A part of character advancement chosen by players. |
12.7% |
Now there are several problems with this poll. The most obvious is that the writer had just gotten thru with his long impassioned article on the virtues of one side. Then there is the already mentioned point that this is a quite biased sample.
And the results do not stand to reason. Why should 6 out of 7 players think the DM should decide if they get that +2 sword they really want? The results make much more sense if we realize the questions are asked of voters that are heavily DMs.
We can also note that this is an abstract question. The voter decides on vague grounds that do not reflect his actual table experience. The DM who gives out treasure largely gives out what the player wants and so the player is willing to give answers he does not really mean. But when he does not get what he wants, he will often vote a different way, with his feet.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 01, 2012 - 1:38PM
#42
|
|
|
Greed should just die as the primary adventuring reason ... and that is ugly in all its incarnations.
I disagree. I want to be an adventurer(*) not a hero.
I want border towns whose whole economic is based on catering to bands of adventures using it as basecamp for their trips into the unclaimed land. I want to return to basecamp after weeks spend in the wilderness to enter a tavern full of fellow bands of treasure seekers and boost of our discoveries while they boast of theirs. Some of them we might even meet again out in the wild racing toward the same treasure we're set out to loot. Let the paladin handle the hordes of the risen skeleton king, I'd rather keep looking for the other lost tomb that is not yet known for the unrest of it's inhabitants and loot their burial treasures while they yet sleep. And if that theft causes them to stir, well we'll hopefully be far away spending their gold and someone else can certainly handle that. (*) commonly called "sellswords", "thugs", " ne'er-do-well", "rowdies", "scapegraces" by respectable hard working folk, but never while within earshot I think we are all agreeing that we don't want magic mart built into the game
Not at all.
This poll would seem to back me. It was taken in L&L 10/4/2011 and the results are in 10/11/2012.
I hope WotC knows better than to give too much weight to such polls, that only attract people that are particulary invested into a topic more than the average target person.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 01, 2012 - 1:55PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
@David, @Mirtek
I don't disagree but you made a statement and I responded. Based on all the information I have which may be flawed but it's all I have, magic mart is undesired. What information other than yourself do you have that it is desired?
David your comments about people voting not knowing what it is they are actually voting for bla bla bla sounds an aweful lot like another political group that I won't mention here.
If I go by people on these threads alone, my observation is that magic mart is in the definite minority. They had a poll and it didn't do well. I hear all the time anecdotally that magic mart is undesired. So what do you have to go on? Your games? I'm definitely not saying that NO one wants magic mart. I am saying it is a minority position and everything I've seen so far supports that.
EDIT: I would also defy you to prove that most voters are DMs. I definitely don't believe most posters are DMs. There is far too much whining around here for all the posters to be DMs ;-).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 02, 2012 - 1:14AM
#44
|
|
|
Based on all the information I have which may be flawed but it's all I have, magic mart is undesired. What information other than yourself do you have that it is desired?
The easiest evidence is that it is officially denounced, both in 2e & 4e among other times. You rarely waste time and money denouncing the undesired. Quite obviously a lot of people did desire it, so many in fact that they threatened to impose it onto the game if not stopped. And they pretty much did impose it. There may not have been a Max's Magic on every corner, but outside the home games [where the DM can impose his own limits on magic whether or not Max is in business], the PC is able to buy magic just as it there was.
your comments about people voting not knowing what it is they are actually voting for bla bla bla sounds an aweful lot like another political group that I won't mention here.
Possibly, but polls are frequently tremendously inaccurate. The classic case is the beer can poll, where 75% of the households said nobody drank beer, but there were beer cans in the trash of 75% of the households. Another well known case is that virtually all surveys find that boys claim more sex with girls than girls admit to with boys. And perhaps closer to our case here, surveys routinely find large demands for green or other politically correct products, only to have the products languish unpurchased when the company actually makes them.
EDIT: I would also defy you to prove that most voters are DMs. I definitely don't believe most posters are DMs. There is far too much whining around here for all the posters to be DMs ;-).
DMs are hardly immune to doing a good deal of whining too. And very few of our DMs are purely DMs, which means they do whine as players too.
Now I can hardly prove that most voters were DMs, just as you can not prove they were not. The information simply does not exist. But what else would you expect? The very fact someone has read the column identifies them as very interested in D&D, and such are heavily likely to have DM experience. We may also look at the options. Why should a player answer that the player doesn't get to choose his own magic?
As to posters, we have much the same biases. We are much more involved to start with, and that means a much higher percentage of DMs. And the players are much more likely to spend their time and postings on the optimizing threads. Our thread is apt to attract an even larger percentage of DMs.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 02, 2012 - 5:51AM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
Based on all the information I have which may be flawed but it's all I have, magic mart is undesired. What information other than yourself do you have that it is desired?
The easiest evidence is that it is officially denounced, both in 2e & 4e among other times. You rarely waste time and money denouncing the undesired. Quite obviously a lot of people did desire it, so many in fact that they threatened to impose it onto the game if not stopped. And they pretty much did impose it. There may not have been a Max's Magic on every corner, but outside the home games [where the DM can impose his own limits on magic whether or not Max is in business], the PC is able to buy magic just as it there was.
Sorry if I put it the wrong way. I don't disagree that there is a sizable minority that want magic marts. My point was not that everyone is against magic mart. My point was that (and it's my observation from all I've seen) that the majority do not want magic mart.
your comments about people voting not knowing what it is they are actually voting for bla bla bla sounds an aweful lot like another political group that I won't mention here.
Possibly, but polls are frequently tremendously inaccurate. The classic case is the beer can poll, where 75% of the households said nobody drank beer, but there were beer cans in the trash of 75% of the households. Another well known case is that virtually all surveys find that boys claim more sex with girls than girls admit to with boys. And perhaps closer to our case here, surveys routinely find large demands for green or other politically correct products, only to have the products languish unpurchased when the company actually makes them.
No arguments there. But all I have are three inputs. Anecdotal, The Polls, These boards. All three indicate a majority do not want magic mart. I agree that this is not conclusive proof but until something stronger is provided that is the way I'd have to lean.
EDIT: I would also defy you to prove that most voters are DMs. I definitely don't believe most posters are DMs. There is far too much whining around here for all the posters to be DMs ;-).
DMs are hardly immune to doing a good deal of whining too. And very few of our DMs are purely DMs, which means they do whine as players too.
Now I can hardly prove that most voters were DMs, just as you can not prove they were not. The information simply does not exist. But what else would you expect? The very fact someone has read the column identifies them as very interested in D&D, and such are heavily likely to have DM experience. We may also look at the options. Why should a player answer that the player doesn't get to choose his own magic?
As to posters, we have much the same biases. We are much more involved to start with, and that means a much higher percentage of DMs. And the players are much more likely to spend their time and postings on the optimizing threads. Our thread is apt to attract an even larger percentage of DMs.
I think most people are defined at least to some degree by their role as either DM or player. If you want to say that anyone who has ever DM'd or who might ever DM in the future is in the DM camp then I'd say without a doubt in my mind, the majority are DMs. I thinking more about how someone is primarily defined. I for example while I have played am definitely a DM.
Sidenote:
No DM worth his salt would allow something into a campaign just because it was RAW. I've never liked the way raise dead/ressurection work and I've always introduced houserules for it. I also houseruled teleport and scrying in 3e in one campaign. I hand out a sheet of houserules ahead of time.
If you show me a DM that would let himself be bound by the RAW against his will and I'll show you a DM that I will run away from as fast as I can run as a player. And of course I don't mean the Living Campaigns etc.. Those have to follow a common base and thats fine. I've never done any of those and have no interest. I don't think a game should be designed with that primarily in mind. Not against it but just don't consider it super important.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 02, 2012 - 6:27AM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jan 20, 2005
|
Well there is a place for a magic mart if it's limited.
Most of my large towns have an apothacary or two that have healing potions, perhaps a few wants with a charge or two left. Only the mage guild would be able to craft something, and they would charge an arm and a leg for it (being the monopoly). You may find that one crazy old mage in a small town that has a potion or scroll, but that will be few and far between.
However, in some campaigns it may be preferable to have the magic mart. For one game I played in we were an adventuring band part of an exploration colony. It was a well funded colony with mages and clerics that would make stuff for the party, as we found very little magical items, but lots of gold. In this case it worked out well as we just had to give up time, so we would order our stuff, go out. Come back from an adventure, our stuff would be ready, and we would resupply.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 02, 2012 - 6:27AM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2009
|
The whole point of the poll is moot. Of course mostly the DMs voted for the DMs to have the exclusive on the choice of magic items...
Because if a player don't want to choose his own magic items (via wishlist, I assume), he can fix it by simply not choosing his own magic items. Simply as that, he say "Nah, I want to be surprised. DM, surprise me" (and 9 times out of 10 they than whine because they did not like what the DM selected, talk about hypocrisy).
For the player, this is just an option like the others, for the DM this is a different beast. Probably because a lot of DM like to extert control even on that, I don't know... What's the big deal with DMs' ego trips anyway?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 02, 2012 - 6:39AM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
@Leekanh Well to try and answer your question without resorting to just saying it's "ego"  .... reason #1 Some magic items can wreck a campaign. Now that is far less likely in newer editions of the game but it is still a concern and DMs are responsible to protect the campaign. The item might very well be ok in some situations and not ok in others. reason #2 Depending on the campaign, the DM might prefer a slightly lower or slightly higher magic campaign. While you could just adjust prices, that would be more intrusive. reason #3 Excessive system mastery can happen when players study three or four different books and find the perfect synergy that breaks the game. This is a corrollary to #1 I suppose. I do think that my players think that I'm strict and no nonesense but they love my campaigns. They may or may not realize that the measures I take to make the game more fun are what makes the game more fun. I'm certain of it. Players given totally free rein will almost always wreck a campaign. I guess I'm of the Gygaxian school of thought on all this.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 02, 2012 - 7:19AM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2009
|
@Leekanh
Well to try and answer your question without resorting to just saying it's "ego" ....
reason #1
Some magic items can wreck a campaign. Now that is far less likely in newer editions of the game but it is still a concern and DMs are responsible to protect the campaign. The item might very well be ok in some situations and not ok in others.
reason #2
Depending on the campaign, the DM might prefer a slightly lower or slightly higher magic campaign. While you could just adjust prices, that would be more intrusive.
reason #3
Excessive system mastery can happen when players study three or four different books and find the perfect synergy that breaks the game. This is a corrollary to #1 I suppose.
I do think that my players think that I'm strict and no nonesense but they love my campaigns. They may or may not realize that the measures I take to make the game more fun are what makes the game more fun. I'm certain of it. Players given totally free rein will almost always wreck a campaign. I guess I'm of the Gygaxian school of thought on all this.
I'm probably a bit biased because I encountered a lot of DMs that really are there just for the feeling of power (a little sad power, but a power nonetheless). But it doen't really matter in the big picture.
You are technically right on the three points, but these are problem of the game steamed from the laziness of designer that put into the patch "The DM decides what to hand over, if the DM screws up, it's his fault, not ours!". If the games is properly done, this is not a problem.
Even then, this kind of problems are best resolved via talking with your friends. If the player is a jerk and strive to ruin the fun for everyone, no rules on earth can prevent this. I'm opposed to the "anti-jerk" rules that punish legit players and allegedly prevents a jerk player to use them to ruin the game (while doing nothing for the other infinite ways to ruin a game). You can't resolve this problem via game rules...
Also, while you can have the best of the intention while saying that you do this or that to preserve the fun for everyone, in the end is just exerting control on the others. You can't know what the other players deem more fun, short of telepathy, the players knows better. And hey, if the players actually has more fun to let others decide for him, he can totally say "decide you for me", it's still his decision though, not an imposition.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 02, 2012 - 7:27AM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
@Leekanh
It's just a playstyle I guess.
As DM I don't ask the players what monsters to put in the dungeon. I've generally viewed magic item placement the same. Maybe I'm old fashioned. I think an awful lot of really cool and flavorful magic items would never appear in my games if I let it be a purely player choice. They would always pick the mechanically most efficient choice and who can blame them. As DM though I take that burden off of them. They can get a cool item and enjoy it just because it's cool.
On the other hand, I am always listening to players and drawing ideas from them. If they seem hot to take on the undead, then I may very well work up an undead themed adventure. If a player seems really interested in getting some magic item and has a good reason beyond just, it would make me uber powerful, then I may put it in the adventure.
I've just never felt like magic items are the kinds of things players control. I guess that may come from playing the early editions of the game where magic item creation was extremely rare (only 1 item made the entire time in my campaigns). I'm not trying to eliminate magic mart as a concept from the game but I do want it to truly be modular and not embedded to deeply into the rules.
|
|
|
