So I know that in Forgotten realms the change in how magic worked from 3rd edition to 4th edition was explaned as being caused by the collapsing of the weave, but is it every explaned in Eberron? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

So I know that in Forgotten realms the change in how magic worked from 3rd edition to 4th edition was explaned as being caused by the collapsing of the weave, but is it every explaned in Eberron?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
mopsofgolgari
May 25, 2013 13:28:09 So I know that in Forgotten realms the change in how magic worked from 3rd edition to 4th edition was explaned as being caused by the collapsing of the weave, but is it every explaned in Eberron?
#2
skrapsan
May 26, 2013 5:20:16 Not realy but then again magic has always been seen as different in Eberron compared to other settings.
The basic premisse is that Magic is viewed as we see tecnology. It can be harnessed to create magnificent things. Sort of what we use electricity for. Even the divide between divine and arcane is a bit muddy. Especially when you take the Artificer class into account, who mixes divine and arcane magic to create temporary effects and bend already exsistig magic to new ways.

Besides the Eberron timeline never got moved forward, so a big retcon of how magic worked isn't really possible.
#3
Syltorian
May 26, 2013 5:48:50 I've never gotten away from 3.5, so I'll have to ask: how exactly has magic changed in 4E that would require an explanation?

I vaguely recall hearing something about rituals (which I believe Keith Baker described as being actually quite appropriate to the way Eberron magic is supposed to act), but haven't really gotten into this, but I dislike not knowing things ;)

#4
skrapsan
May 26, 2013 6:26:30 Quick explanation: Fireball and other instantanious effects concerned mostly with combat = spell.

Things concerned with creating longlasting effects and with long casting time = rituals.
Keith Said something akin to "a magewright is an expert who knows how to fast a few rituals in 4th ed."

#5
Syltorian
May 26, 2013 6:47:28 Thanks. Are rituals anything similar to Unearthed Arcana Incantations?
#6
skrapsan
May 26, 2013 12:09:25 Yes that is almost exaclty what it is. But quite a few of the more utility oriented spells from the 3.5 spell list were transferd over as well.
#7
Syltorian
May 26, 2013 13:19:17 Allright. Yes, considering Eberron's industrial take on magic, as you (Skrapsan) mentioned above, I agree that a Spellplague is not required. 3.5 has schemas, which allowed magecrafters to go about their craft, even where their own arcane powers were not sufficient - replacing that by instructions on how to conduct a ritual should not be too much of a paradigm shift.
#8
Madfox11
May 28, 2013 3:01:24 4e magic system actually works better in Eberron than 3rd did. The whole ritual part of 4e, including that you don't need to be a spellcaster to perform rituals, fits perfectly. It would have been better if they made the connection between dragon mark and rituals a bit tighter, making a mark a requirement for some of the more fundamental rituals (e.g. Linked Portal requires Mark of Travel). Furthermore, 4e also outright states that level is only important for PCs. You can have simple casters able to perform high level rituals without making them 14-level NPC class Y.
#9
skrapsan
Jun 01, 2013 17:24:21 Does anyone have any thoughts on how DnD nexts understanding of magic will work with the industrial Eberron feel of it?
#10
Hellcow
Jun 02, 2013 19:22:51 This is essentially an question of if the world needs to change to have the system make sense. Converting Eberron from 3.5 to 4E is really no different from converting it from 4E to GURPS or Savage World. Rather than changing the world itself to account for different magical rules, I'd rather adapt those rules to the theme of Eberron. Rituals fit Eberron's theme of industrial magic quite well - better, in fact, than magewrights using Vancian magic. Under 3.5 rules, it's hard to imagine a magewright arcane locksmith making a living when he can only cast arcane lock twice per day. Using rituals, he can cast it as many times as time and components allow; he just needs to charge enough to cover these costs and make a profit, and it can be a full time job. Since the IDEA fits Eberron's themes perfectly, I'd sooner ignore the fact that there was a mechanical change. Essentially, I see the STORY as something that continues seamlessly; it's a world with industrialized magic, where magewrights perfrom work. It simply happens that we've changed the mechanics working behind the scenes.

A few dragonmarks are especially relevant to this:
10/18 - Converting Eberron
5/1 - The Dragonmarked Houses

And a random question from another post:

Keith, I’ve been enjoying your take on 4e Eberron (which I’m calling Eberron 4.K) but I’m trying to deal with the cost of rituals. Magewrights can learn one or two rituals but how do they handle component costs? I’ve been thinking of the lamplighters, walking around Sharn with Continual Light rituals and re-casting every 24 hours but the ritual is 20 gold or a healing surge. Adventurers can pay that but that’s something like the annual income of the average laborer to power one lamp.
That’s a case of the ritual being poorly designed for Eberron. You’re right; there’s no way people are paying 20 gp/day to keep a streetlight going. I think the answer lies in the streetlamp itself. The ritual allows you to place a continual light on ANYTHING. I can make my boot glow… but it only lasts for an hour. Now think of it as oil. I can pour oil on my boot and set it on fire, and it will provide light for a little while until it burns up the boot. However, if I use that same amount of oil in an oil lantern, it’s going to last far longer, because it’s a tool designed for that purpose.

So, in the case of Continual Light, what I’d say is that the streetlights are designed with dragonshard “wicks” that hold and channel the power of the ritual for an extended period of time. You pay the base cost to start it up the first time; from that point forward, you have a mini-version of the ritual that simply uses a pinch of residuum to keep it going. So the typical lamplighter is going around recharging, but only spending a small amount – which would come from municipal taxes. The “recharge” ritual isn’t a full ritual in its own right, it’s something anyone who knows Continual Light can perform.

As for the general costs of rituals (like arcane lock), the Magewright would simply have to charge enough for her services to cover the cost of the components and generate a profit.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 mopsofgolgari May 25, 2013 13:28:09	So I know that in Forgotten realms the change in how magic worked from 3rd edition to 4th edition was explaned as being caused by the collapsing of the weave, but is it every explaned in Eberron?
#2 skrapsan May 26, 2013 5:20:16	Not realy but then again magic has always been seen as different in Eberron compared to other settings. The basic premisse is that Magic is viewed as we see tecnology. It can be harnessed to create magnificent things. Sort of what we use electricity for. Even the divide between divine and arcane is a bit muddy. Especially when you take the Artificer class into account, who mixes divine and arcane magic to create temporary effects and bend already exsistig magic to new ways. Besides the Eberron timeline never got moved forward, so a big retcon of how magic worked isn't really possible.
#3 Syltorian May 26, 2013 5:48:50	I've never gotten away from 3.5, so I'll have to ask: how exactly has magic changed in 4E that would require an explanation? I vaguely recall hearing something about rituals (which I believe Keith Baker described as being actually quite appropriate to the way Eberron magic is supposed to act), but haven't really gotten into this, but I dislike not knowing things ;)
#4 skrapsan May 26, 2013 6:26:30	Quick explanation: Fireball and other instantanious effects concerned mostly with combat = spell. Things concerned with creating longlasting effects and with long casting time = rituals. Keith Said something akin to "a magewright is an expert who knows how to fast a few rituals in 4th ed."
#5 Syltorian May 26, 2013 6:47:28	Thanks. Are rituals anything similar to Unearthed Arcana Incantations?
#6 skrapsan May 26, 2013 12:09:25	Yes that is almost exaclty what it is. But quite a few of the more utility oriented spells from the 3.5 spell list were transferd over as well.
#7 Syltorian May 26, 2013 13:19:17	Allright. Yes, considering Eberron's industrial take on magic, as you (Skrapsan) mentioned above, I agree that a Spellplague is not required. 3.5 has schemas, which allowed magecrafters to go about their craft, even where their own arcane powers were not sufficient - replacing that by instructions on how to conduct a ritual should not be too much of a paradigm shift.
#8 Madfox11 May 28, 2013 3:01:24	4e magic system actually works better in Eberron than 3rd did. The whole ritual part of 4e, including that you don't need to be a spellcaster to perform rituals, fits perfectly. It would have been better if they made the connection between dragon mark and rituals a bit tighter, making a mark a requirement for some of the more fundamental rituals (e.g. Linked Portal requires Mark of Travel). Furthermore, 4e also outright states that level is only important for PCs. You can have simple casters able to perform high level rituals without making them 14-level NPC class Y.
#9 skrapsan Jun 01, 2013 17:24:21	Does anyone have any thoughts on how DnD nexts understanding of magic will work with the industrial Eberron feel of it?
#10 Hellcow Jun 02, 2013 19:22:51	This is essentially an question of if the world needs to change to have the system make sense. Converting Eberron from 3.5 to 4E is really no different from converting it from 4E to GURPS or Savage World. Rather than changing the world itself to account for different magical rules, I'd rather adapt those rules to the theme of Eberron. Rituals fit Eberron's theme of industrial magic quite well - better, in fact, than magewrights using Vancian magic. Under 3.5 rules, it's hard to imagine a magewright arcane locksmith making a living when he can only cast arcane lock twice per day. Using rituals, he can cast it as many times as time and components allow; he just needs to charge enough to cover these costs and make a profit, and it can be a full time job. Since the IDEA fits Eberron's themes perfectly, I'd sooner ignore the fact that there was a mechanical change. Essentially, I see the STORY as something that continues seamlessly; it's a world with industrialized magic, where magewrights perfrom work. It simply happens that we've changed the mechanics working behind the scenes. A few dragonmarks are especially relevant to this: 10/18 - Converting Eberron 5/1 - The Dragonmarked Houses And a random question from another post: Keith, I’ve been enjoying your take on 4e Eberron (which I’m calling Eberron 4.K) but I’m trying to deal with the cost of rituals. Magewrights can learn one or two rituals but how do they handle component costs? I’ve been thinking of the lamplighters, walking around Sharn with Continual Light rituals and re-casting every 24 hours but the ritual is 20 gold or a healing surge. Adventurers can pay that but that’s something like the annual income of the average laborer to power one lamp. That’s a case of the ritual being poorly designed for Eberron. You’re right; there’s no way people are paying 20 gp/day to keep a streetlight going. I think the answer lies in the streetlamp itself. The ritual allows you to place a continual light on ANYTHING. I can make my boot glow… but it only lasts for an hour. Now think of it as oil. I can pour oil on my boot and set it on fire, and it will provide light for a little while until it burns up the boot. However, if I use that same amount of oil in an oil lantern, it’s going to last far longer, because it’s a tool designed for that purpose. So, in the case of Continual Light, what I’d say is that the streetlights are designed with dragonshard “wicks” that hold and channel the power of the ritual for an extended period of time. You pay the base cost to start it up the first time; from that point forward, you have a mini-version of the ritual that simply uses a pinch of residuum to keep it going. So the typical lamplighter is going around recharging, but only spending a small amount – which would come from municipal taxes. The “recharge” ritual isn’t a full ritual in its own right, it’s something anyone who knows Continual Light can perform. As for the general costs of rituals (like arcane lock), the Magewright would simply have to charge enough for her services to cover the cost of the components and generate a profit.