Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Archive-threads
What is "grim and gritty" and "low magic" anyway?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1438260" data-attributes="member: 6398"><p>See, I've experienced this from the other side. That is to say, a thread discussing low magic possibilities turning into a low magic bashing thread. But you need to understand my perspective. Most threads about "standard" D&D I stay out of because, most of the time, I've little to add. And if the thread's about FR (or Eberran or any other high magic setting), I'm virtually guaranteed not to make an appearance.</p><p> </p><p>Now, consider what this means: I, personally, don't see the high magic bashing because I'm not reading the threads where high magic bashing is occuring. And chances are, this is the <em>norm</em> for most LM/GnG style gamers: Why spend our time reading threads of no real interest when other threads can be found that discuss topics that we <em>are</em> interested in discussing. But what I (we) <em>do</em> see (indeed, what we experience first hand) is plenty of low magic bashing.</p><p> </p><p>This is why I try to be informative in my replies (at least at first, until I feel the line's been crossed too many times or that information is being purposely ignored for the sake of continuing an arguement, instances of both can be found around pages 4-6).</p><p> </p><p>So I guess I don't think it's come full circle... I think it came full circle a <em>long</em> time ago (regardless of how it started) and it's just been spiraling outwards ever since.</p><p> </p><p>(On a side note, I agree that FR is near-identicle to Core in regards to magic content. If anything, it <em>appears</em> to have more magic because the setting is so developed that the presence of magic is more quantified than it is for Greyhawk, which is under-developed except for what the RPGA is doing with it. However, I'd posit that this quality also makes it more difficult to reduce the magic level because it's so integrated into that development, which would make it less appealing to those that would like to do so. However, one thing to consider is how the Core defines demographics, with Class/Level of NPCs set up in a ratio based on population density. By this nature, looking at a map of Oerth and a map of Toril, I see <em>a lot</em> more cities in FR. With this as a consideration, demographics would suggest that the presence of magic is more noticable in FR because of it.)</p><p> </p><p>And no reason to hurl insults (like lazy, incompetant, fearful, power mad) at a preference.</p><p> </p><p>And not all cheese is bad. It worked for <em>Mortal Combat</em>. It just didn't work for <em>Street Fighter</em>.</p><p> </p><p>Now, first, let me say that I agree with you.</p><p> </p><p>However, this point has also come up previously in this thread alone. Several times. That is really <em>half</em> the problem... Just when folks reach this conclusion, another round of insults get hurled in. However, here's the pattern: Those that threw the insults are gone, leaving you debating for the "other side" after the "other side" has become irritating. I'm man enough to admit it's not your fault, specifically. However, I think there's also a matter of weighing the battle. For example, I've seen debates similar to this where both sides were getting insultive. Being that the people I would be "siding with" (and in some instances, already had) were being rude, I opted not to get involved or to step out of it.</p><p> </p><p>So, here's a proposal for Boards Ettiquette: Regardless of <em>your</em> personal taste, whether you prefer low magic, high magic, min/max, in-depth RP, or what ever, if you see anyone that shares <em>your</em> preference making baseless, generalized and (dare I say) prejudicial statements about another gaming preference, take the initiative to say it's wrong. That is to say that, if I see a Low Magic gamer ripping on high magic games, a post from <em>me</em> as a Low Magic gamer informing the individual that what he's saying is uncool <em>should</em> be more effective than a High Magic gamer telling him he's being uncool.</p><p> </p><p>Of course, it's just a theory. But I also figure, at worst, those who are open minded of other styles will see the common curtesy, and eventually those that seek to purposefully cause discord (i.e., trolls) will eventually become an irrelevant side-show (such as the case of those whom have already identified themselves).</p><p> </p><p>I think it's because defining GnG is easier than defining low magic. For instance, one can say that W&V adds GnG elements because a character can get creamed on a bad roll (much like real life) but still allows for cinematic sequances similar to Hit Points, while Ken Hood's GnG No-Hit-Points System is extensively GnG as it removes the cinematic element. This provides two "benchmarks". A lot of it also has to do with mood, flavor, theme, etc. One need only point to Beastmaster (light hearted dialogue, comic-book violence, minimum "splat" factor in sword fights) and Gladiator (vengeance as a prime motivator, imperial politics involving patricide and incest, near-death by infection, decapitation, dismemberment, enslavement, Christians sitting passively while the lions walk up and start feeding, etc.) to define the differences in clear terms that everyone can understand (even if they only represent "part" of the whole picture).</p><p> </p><p>Low Magic, on the other hand, isn't so easily quantified. It can mean less magic, magic scaling caps, Spell Level maximums, or even an entirely different magic system, which may be as potent as Core magic but at a cost and with risk (ala <em>Sovereign Stone</em>) or less potent (ala <em>Fading Suns</em>).</p><p> </p><p>As such, the debate will touch back on GnG from time to time (as it's a matter of taste and still isn't an "exact" description of the individual campaign) while Low Magic will remain a focus throughout (as the ambiguity resulting from its many variations make it a natural target for people that are accustomed to having rules and settings clearly detailed in exacting text).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bendris Noulg, post: 1438260, member: 6398"] See, I've experienced this from the other side. That is to say, a thread discussing low magic possibilities turning into a low magic bashing thread. But you need to understand my perspective. Most threads about "standard" D&D I stay out of because, most of the time, I've little to add. And if the thread's about FR (or Eberran or any other high magic setting), I'm virtually guaranteed not to make an appearance. Now, consider what this means: I, personally, don't see the high magic bashing because I'm not reading the threads where high magic bashing is occuring. And chances are, this is the [i]norm[/i] for most LM/GnG style gamers: Why spend our time reading threads of no real interest when other threads can be found that discuss topics that we [i]are[/i] interested in discussing. But what I (we) [i]do[/i] see (indeed, what we experience first hand) is plenty of low magic bashing. This is why I try to be informative in my replies (at least at first, until I feel the line's been crossed too many times or that information is being purposely ignored for the sake of continuing an arguement, instances of both can be found around pages 4-6). So I guess I don't think it's come full circle... I think it came full circle a [i]long[/i] time ago (regardless of how it started) and it's just been spiraling outwards ever since. (On a side note, I agree that FR is near-identicle to Core in regards to magic content. If anything, it [i]appears[/i] to have more magic because the setting is so developed that the presence of magic is more quantified than it is for Greyhawk, which is under-developed except for what the RPGA is doing with it. However, I'd posit that this quality also makes it more difficult to reduce the magic level because it's so integrated into that development, which would make it less appealing to those that would like to do so. However, one thing to consider is how the Core defines demographics, with Class/Level of NPCs set up in a ratio based on population density. By this nature, looking at a map of Oerth and a map of Toril, I see [i]a lot[/i] more cities in FR. With this as a consideration, demographics would suggest that the presence of magic is more noticable in FR because of it.) And no reason to hurl insults (like lazy, incompetant, fearful, power mad) at a preference. And not all cheese is bad. It worked for [i]Mortal Combat[/i]. It just didn't work for [i]Street Fighter[/i]. Now, first, let me say that I agree with you. However, this point has also come up previously in this thread alone. Several times. That is really [i]half[/i] the problem... Just when folks reach this conclusion, another round of insults get hurled in. However, here's the pattern: Those that threw the insults are gone, leaving you debating for the "other side" after the "other side" has become irritating. I'm man enough to admit it's not your fault, specifically. However, I think there's also a matter of weighing the battle. For example, I've seen debates similar to this where both sides were getting insultive. Being that the people I would be "siding with" (and in some instances, already had) were being rude, I opted not to get involved or to step out of it. So, here's a proposal for Boards Ettiquette: Regardless of [i]your[/i] personal taste, whether you prefer low magic, high magic, min/max, in-depth RP, or what ever, if you see anyone that shares [i]your[/i] preference making baseless, generalized and (dare I say) prejudicial statements about another gaming preference, take the initiative to say it's wrong. That is to say that, if I see a Low Magic gamer ripping on high magic games, a post from [i]me[/i] as a Low Magic gamer informing the individual that what he's saying is uncool [i]should[/i] be more effective than a High Magic gamer telling him he's being uncool. Of course, it's just a theory. But I also figure, at worst, those who are open minded of other styles will see the common curtesy, and eventually those that seek to purposefully cause discord (i.e., trolls) will eventually become an irrelevant side-show (such as the case of those whom have already identified themselves). I think it's because defining GnG is easier than defining low magic. For instance, one can say that W&V adds GnG elements because a character can get creamed on a bad roll (much like real life) but still allows for cinematic sequances similar to Hit Points, while Ken Hood's GnG No-Hit-Points System is extensively GnG as it removes the cinematic element. This provides two "benchmarks". A lot of it also has to do with mood, flavor, theme, etc. One need only point to Beastmaster (light hearted dialogue, comic-book violence, minimum "splat" factor in sword fights) and Gladiator (vengeance as a prime motivator, imperial politics involving patricide and incest, near-death by infection, decapitation, dismemberment, enslavement, Christians sitting passively while the lions walk up and start feeding, etc.) to define the differences in clear terms that everyone can understand (even if they only represent "part" of the whole picture). Low Magic, on the other hand, isn't so easily quantified. It can mean less magic, magic scaling caps, Spell Level maximums, or even an entirely different magic system, which may be as potent as Core magic but at a cost and with risk (ala [i]Sovereign Stone[/i]) or less potent (ala [i]Fading Suns[/i]). As such, the debate will touch back on GnG from time to time (as it's a matter of taste and still isn't an "exact" description of the individual campaign) while Low Magic will remain a focus throughout (as the ambiguity resulting from its many variations make it a natural target for people that are accustomed to having rules and settings clearly detailed in exacting text). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Archive-threads
What is "grim and gritty" and "low magic" anyway?
Top