What is "grim and gritty" and "low magic" anyway?

kamosa said:

Sure there are good GM's that can pull it off. But, for the most part it just falls flat and becomes an excuse to screw over the players and have a boring, lame game.

Click to expand...

I don't believe there's a single GM out there who wants to run a boring, lame game. If it turns out that way, it's not because they want it to be that way. It's because they have an ideal picture of what the campaign should be like, but they maybe don't have the skill to do it. And as I mentioned elsewhere, maybe there's a stubbornness that keeps them from either admiting that it's not working, or learning how to do it right?

Joshua Dyal said:

The only reason someone would insult someone else over a question of taste is that they're a troll.

Click to expand...

And there's certainly no lacking of them in this thread...

As usual.

I love the manner that some folks just can't talk about some things without making baseless and ignorant attacks on the competance and ability of other gamers without any actual knowledge of what that person's game is actually like. It says a lot about the people that are making these statements without ever actually addressing the topic (i.e., they're ignorant and have nothing credible or interesting to add to the discussion beyond illustrating their own ignorance).

kamosa said:

Sure there are good GM's that can pull it off. But, for the most part it just falls flat and becomes an excuse to screw over the players and have a boring, lame game.

Click to expand...

I believe this argument can hold true for some high fantasy games too. While it is clear that a GnG game is not to your liking, why do you feel the need to disparage those that like it? The need to "screw over the players" is a DM trait and is not specific to any campaign style.

Cheers,

Mark

Joshua Dyal said:

In my experience, the poor and inexperienced GMs I've played with have instead run "default" D&D. Usually in a dungeon. It's odd that we have two conflicting stories from those who are trying to "bash" low magic and gritty games; both that poor and inexperienced GMs run them, and that they are much more difficult to run well. If both of these are true, then grim and gritty and low magic must result in monumentally bad games. While I have no doubt that monumentally bad games do exist, to suggest a correlation between "suckiness" and fans of a certain style of game is ludicrous.

Click to expand...

They are easier to run, if you are not at all concerned about the much touted "balance" of 3.Xed. I've seen many a GM strip powers, spells, and classes without providing anything in recompense.

Often these inexperienced or poor GMs will view higher level spells as plot destroying character abilites. In an effort to prevent this, they will decide to run "low magic, gritty" campaigns. Thus, at 1st level they will: nerf any spells they wish, limit access to spells, nerf any magic items above 6th level, nerf magic item creation feats, and nerf the meta-magic feats in pre-emptive fear of the maximized hasted fireball.

In recompense, they grant no extra abilites. No increaded hit die for mages, no ability to cast in armour, etc etc. Then, just as they planned, everyone is playing fighters and rogues. This is easier on the GM because they will view that fighters and rogues have no "game breaking" abilites. It's much easier to compute on average how much damage a fighter can dish out in a round. It's much harder to compute the tactical, game changing abilites that spell casters provide. So, many poor or inexperienced GMs use the terms "low magic and gritty" as a shield.

Does this mean that all "low magic gritty" campaigns suck (a word that I never used). No! But it does mean that there is a selection bias for poor or inexperienced GMs to be running these types of games.

Well, to me, grim and gritty means that all the combats are tough, very tough. None of this standard 25% of a party’s resources. Grim and gritty combats make the PCs use 99% (and then some) of their available resources to survive. An example would be a Conan-type world campaign I played in a few years ago. At the end, our PCs got involved in a big combat in the temple of an evil priest. As we took down bad guy minions, we started getting taken down ourselves. In the end, we had 4 party members that were unconscious for various reasons (0 or less HP, but stabilized under old 2E rules) and the sole remaining PC ended up with 1 hit point when he landed the killing blow on the BBEG. To top it off, the temple started collapsing around us when the BBEG died and the sole remaining PC had to make some good rolls to drag our unconscious butts out of the building in time! That was surviving by the proverbial skin of our teeth.

Another would be in a Kalamar campaign we ran in '98-'99. At the end, we had 9 PCs going up against a demon whose demon-bride was about to give birth to a Dark Child that would bring the world 300 years of Darkness (or something like that...)... in the end, 8 of the PCs had to sacrifice themselves to slow down the demon and allow one PC in to kill the demon-bride before she could give birth...

Some DMs run games where the PCs are challenged, but they do not give you that Fear of PC Death feeling. In a grim and gritty campaign, you always have the fear that death is waiting for you around every corner and it is going to take all your skills and wits as a PC just to survive.

A low magic game is where most people are first level commoners. The party has one spellcaster at the most and any sort of magic (items, spellcasters, etc) is rare. Raise Dead is extremely rare, if available at all. If you go to a local tavern, the guy behind the bar is probably not a retired 15th level fighter with a +5 magic sword or two lying around waiting to bequeath to the PCs while his cook wife is a half-celestial magic-user who loves to make items for low level PCs.

Low magic is where most enemies, especially in the beginning, are human, demi-human or humanoid. Things like demons, devils, vampires or dragons are saved for special campaign turning or climactic moments.

kamosa said:

I only see GM's espousing that they love "grim and gritty" I don't see any players jumping up and down for the restrictions. Pound the table that I am wrong if you must, but it doesn't change my experiences.

Click to expand...

Well, I play a standard to high-magic D&D game, but I have nothing against low-magic, either. At Epic-levels, standard magic D&D takes a LOT of work.

I actually don't see players jumping up and down at all in favor of either type of game. I see mostly gamers who are both, and the only folks who are chiming in who don't like it are mostly folks who've been burned by a bad experience. That's not very good non-sampling, statisically speaking.

No matter what style of D&D you play, it all comes down to the DM's skill at managing the game.

When most folks talk about 'grim and gritty' and 'low magic', what I think they really mean is 'a challenging world where our raw abilities and courage are the keys to our victory, and a place where we're never completely without fear of death or danger'. They don't want to have a Brooch of Shielding to be able to battle the wizard, with magic measures and counter-measures...and they don't want a 10th level fighter to become a demigod who can't be threatened by fifty 1st level warriors. it's the difference between super heroes and superheroes, so to speak. Jackie Chan versus Dragonball Z, perhaps.

Joshua Dyal said:

In other words, it's not necessarily different than old style D&D in some regards. CR has become (IMO) a crutch for DMs. Depending too much on it and not actually reading over the abilites of the foes in the encounters, and judging based on that what the party can survive seem to be relatively new problems. I certainly don't recall my 1e or Basic DMs talking about problems like that.

So, no, it's not necessarily "simple" to run a low magic campaign, but that simplicity is artificial and new-fangled anyway!

Click to expand...

Well, yeah. You have basically come out and said what I was alluding to.

kamosa said:

"grim and gritty" has usually had a completely different conitation. It has meant you are powerless. You can't avoid being railroaded into the GM's plots, because, it is a gritty world where you have no allies and you have no tools that will avoid the pitfalls of their world.

The sad thing is that most GM's that say they want "grim or gritty" or "low magic" think they are really accomplishing something great by running a lame game. I've seen more pompus GM's that think they are great because they had the "courage" to ban Magic Missile.

Their arguements all tend to boil down to "D&D would be great, if the players just didn't do anything and just followed my awsome story and plot."

I'm not saying low magic is neccessarily bad, to each his own, really. It just always seems to be an excuse to justify running a lame game. When I meet a new GM, if they start out with "I run low magic" my alarm bells go off and I start marking the exits.

Click to expand...

Wow, I don't think you could be more wrong. A DM being a plot nazi/railroader has nothing to do with low magic/GnG type games- its simply the sign of a bad DM. In fact, most plot nazis I have run into have run default to EXTREMELY high magic games, and want to tell their "epic story". They usually have invincible pet NPCs, and events that the PCs cannot influence at all, and are punished if they try. I don't think all high magic games are like this obviously, but bad experience with previous railroading high magic DMs is one reason I don't tend to like high magic/heroic types of games. That, and I prefer the feel of a game that is more Howard/Leiber like.

milotha said:

I have found that many GMs that are unable to handle higher powered magic (usually any spell caster above 6th level) are often drawn to "low magic" and "gritty" campaigns. This allows them to limit the spell caster abilities that interfere with their plot designs: divination, increased movement capablities, any magical distance damage, increased healing, etc. Thus, you have a selection bias. With many "low magic, gritty" campaigns being run by poor or inexperieinced GMs.

I would also note that many of us play D&D since it offers a "high magic" world. Yes, there are many other systems and other settings in d20 that offer this type of play, and if I wanted one of them, I would go play one of those campaigns.

I've also noted a level of machoism over "low magic gritty" campaigns. As if one isn't really role playing until one plays in a "low magic gritty" campaigns. I would beg to differ. Just because a campaign has high magic, doesn't mean that it isn't challenging or exciting. It just means that the PCs face different types of challenges.

Click to expand...

Ok, I'll give you that I don't really like the high-powered spells in D&D. Its not that I can't handle them in play, as much as I just don't like the feel and flavor they give the world. However, I will disagree with you that more inexperienced/bad DMs tend to run low magic games. Almost all inexperienced DMs run standard D&D since the guidelines are set out for you in the core books. Think of it this way: in standard D&D, if a character wants to learn something, you use divination/commune/what have you and an answer is provided for you. In a low magic game, such options often are not available, and the PCs have to do lots of invesigation, legwork, and make contacts to learn the required info. That takes a HELL of a lot more work on the DMs part to come up with, roleplay through, and make sure the info given makes logical sense.

I really don't understand the vehemence with which some posters attack low magic/GnG gaming. Yes, I could come on and say how much I hate high magic epic level gaming, but what would be the point? Its not going to change anyone's mind, and only make me look like a fool. Its a taste preference, nothing more. There is no right or wrong way to play the game, as long as you have fun!

The three worst (by far) campaigns I have ever been in were all High magic.

Two entailed plenty of railroading and the players having little/no control of what was happening.

Does this mean High magic is automatically horrible? Nah, just had some bad DM's. (heh, I was one of the three, I did a lousy job that campaign.)

As far as LM=Bad DM. Well yeah, that is a pretty troll like comment. Same as saying that liking high magic is only because the players are too pathetic to accomplish anything without uber magic at their disposal.


And that is what I think the problem comes down to. Munchkins prefer really high magic. So there is a backlash that paints all high-magic types as munchkins or potential munchkins. So those that like high magic blast back with lowmagic types are pompous and too stupid to use the 'real rules'.


BTW, I succeed at using the 'real rules' and still have a pretty low magic campaign. I make sure the players can get/find/recover/etc enough magic that is 'good enough'; and make sure the monsters/obstacles are appropriate for their abilities and equipment.


The other problem is that different folks define low magic in different ways. I don't have magic shops on every corner. But some of the larger cities might have something resembling one, with a limited selection.


And I disagree that low magic automatically makes magic users uber powerful. Afterall, it will be harder for them to get spells/scrolls, and wands, etc.

Gothmog said:

However, I will disagree with you that more inexperienced/bad DMs tend to run low magic games. Almost all inexperienced DMs run standard D&D since the guidelines are set out for you in the core books.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree, I think this is probably true.

Gothmog said:

I really don't understand the vehemence with which some posters attack low magic/GnG gaming.

Click to expand...

They must have had some bad gaming experience and now they blame all bad gaming experiences on low-magic/grim/gritty style games instead of blaming their bad DM. Which is pretty silly, as it is quite clear that others have had good, fun experiences with them.

Mean DM said:

I believe this argument can hold true for some high fantasy games too. While it is clear that a GnG game is not to your liking, why do you feel the need to disparage those that like it? The need to "screw over the players" is a DM trait and is not specific to any campaign style.

Cheers,

Mark

Click to expand...

I would agree that high magic can fall flat, and can go over the top. The reason I come out so strong on this is that unlike high fantasy, no one ever seems to say that low magic can be bad.

While I would agree that the problems are tied to certain GM's. I'd also say the the style is also tied in many cases to those same GM's.


The GM's I've ranted against could never understand why we were bored. Would never even consider that they were running a game that just wasn't interesting. Didn't understand that they were using these terms as a way to crush the players.

They'd come out to boards like this and get reaffirmed that they were doing the right thing. That low level is the ultimate style. That we were just whiny players. No one ever said to them that the game is supposed to be fun for everyone not just the GM. In reality they were on an extended ego trip and games would end after a few sessions.

GM's go through several stages as they learn the game. First they go over the top. Everything is ok, the players are never challenged and the treasure is ridculous. The game falls flat, becomes a joke and the GM suddenly is faced with god like PC's that they can't challenge.

But then, many react back and take everything away. Call it the second stage of learning to be a GM. The problem is that many in this stage never realise that this is just as big a problem to the game as too high magic. They lean on the players and take away ability after ability until all you can do is literally sit at the table with folded arms and listen to them prattle on.

Hey, in their mind the problem is solved. The players aren't breaking the game and they are getting out their story. In discussions around the table I've called this subsituting low level with low magic. IE, you can't keep the players at low levels, so you take away abilities until they are essentially still low level.

If you don't want a world with Magic shops and insta raise dead potioin despensers modeled on soda machines, good for you. If you want tough encounters, good. I railed for this last week. But be honest with yourself as well. Are you nerfing teleport for flavor reasons, or because you'd rather be playing at low levels?

Disclaimer: broad strokes, doesn't apply to your game, etc.