What makes a high or low magic campaign?

[TheGogmagog]

I'm playing in a module where the character wealth is about 70% the DMG suggested level. I'm happy with this as I typically run games where character wealth lags behind the DMG table. The thing that came to me though was that my DM considered this a typical mid to high powered forgotten realms campaign.

So what makes a high or low magic campaing?

Personally I use the DMG wealth guidelines by party. If you are exceeding that then you are in a high powered game. Below 2 levels behind is getting on the low side. I would consider the above game mid to low.

The other factor would be item availability. The above game advanced from 'You can't buy anything magic, not even +1 armor', to pre-generatated store limited availability to being able to place orders for anything in dmg. 50k worth of stuff (38k max item) took about three days to arrive, not bad for 13th level characters. The DMG lists trade wealth by city size, personally I go by 1/4 character wealth they probably have acess to it, 1/2 may take a while to locate.

Anything else I am missing?

 

[FireLance]

What makes a high or low magic campaign?

Upfront disclaimer: I personally do not like low-magic campaigns.

That said, I think there are basically two "flavors" of low-magic campaigns:

1. Magic is rare, but the PCs have access to it anyway. Most people will never encounter magic, but the PCs are the exception and just happen to encounter lots of it. This type of campaign may be most compatible with baseline D&D. The "fact" that magic is rare only comes up in a few instances: magic shops do not exist and magic cannot be bought and sold so PCs must find or make their magic items, most people are awestruck when they witness magic of any sort, magic-users are treated with respect and/or fear.

2. PCs don't have access to magic. Baseline D&D has to change to run this kind of campaign, e.g. spells above a certain level do not exist, certain types of spells do not exist, PCs may only take spellcasting classes every other level or may not take spellcasting classes at all, PCs only have access to non-magical gear and thus are usually under-equipped for their level, etc.

As mentioned, I personally do not like low-magic campaigns, but others do. I've always wondered about one thing, though: why don't the DMs who run low-magic campaigns just give the players items that are non-magical, but provide all the necessary bonuses because they are very well made. After all, what is the difference between a magical +3 longsword and a non-magical longsword made by a master craftsman that grants the user a +3 enhancement bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls, and costs 18315 gp? That way, the PCs will be closer to baseline D&D assumptions and they can spend less time and effort in adjusting the challenges.

 

[irdeggman]

There are a couple of ways of interpreting high and lowmagic.

One pertains to magic in general. Basically there are fewer spellcaster types at all.

The other pertains to magic items. This is general what is referred to as low/high magic campaigns.

The two are different and that needs to be kept in mind.

Examples of campaigns with one theme or another:

Birthright. Portrayed as low magic. But what this really translated to was low magicitem availability. There were restrictions on all spellcasters. Elves couldn't be clerics and non-elves ahd to have bloodlines (a rarity for non-PCs/heroic characters) in order to access anything but Illusion and Divination magics (well other than 1st or 2nd level spells).

Dark Sun. Also special magic rules. Arcane castes were generally hated and peceived as causing the blight that occured tothe world. Hence the keep to themselves and survive off of secrecy. This made access to spell components and spells rarer. Now to make up for that the setting was rich in psionics (in fact most of the 2nd ed psionic rules were from the Dark Sun setting).

Forgotten Realms. This is without a doubt a very high magic settting. Magic shops abound and spellcasters are everywhere.

Now Complete Warrior has some pretty good ways of imposing "limits" on magic items in order to give a setting that "low magic" feel. Basically increasing the cost of creating magic items (measured in gp) by 100% to 300% will automatically place a limit on them. This occurs by notonly having tospend more gp to create magic items but the expcosts aredirectly related to the gp cost so creating higher powered magic items will keep the levels of the spellcasters down.

 

[Li Shenron]

I agree that there are different angles to assess the question

One thing is spellcasting, another thing is magic items.
One thing is how many spells/items you can have, another is how powerful they are.
And finally the degree of "customizability" of them (have exactly what you wish for) is another thing.

Some DMs like low-magic to be a limiting on what effects a spell or item can let you achieve. For example, the DM may impose a max level on spellcasting classes, or force you to multiclass or just ban some classes, and another DM may say "no items worth more than X exist".

In general, I don't have problems with spells, I like characters to be able to do extraordinary things at high levels. OTOH I don't like the amount of magic items. I think the real reason is maybe that while I always want the PCs to be special, I don't want there to be thousands of "special people" in the world who make items that the PCs just buy.

So for me "low-magic" usually means to restrict what the rest of the world does in terms of spellcasting (which implies items availability), but not what the players do. But I think the vast majority of DMs around always start from banning something to the PCs.

 

[Targos]

I don't necessarily like low magic settings, but I thought one of the better ways of achieving it was to use non-casting varient classes and/or making casting core classes prestige classes. This would require a new core class to make these PrC feasible however. Lets call it the 'scholar'. With primary casters PrCs magic items would be rarer in turn. Lastly, I'd recommend a lower wealth level. With magic items not as readily available they won't need it and won't have anything to spend their money on. Unfortunately I haven't actually seen any details on such a 'scholar' class or PrC wizards, sorcerers, clerics, druids, etc. Non-casting ranger and paladin varients were printed in Unearthed Arcana I think.

One thing I've done before is simply eliminate wizards. (Actually only elves could be wizards as the rest of the world was savage and elves were an NPC race.) Being the primary casters with bonus feats for item creation it tends to reduce the number of magic items. But in the end settings based on restrictions and limitations don't last much longer than a campaign in my experience.

 

[TheGogmagog]

High or Low POWER campaigns.

In general, I don't have problems with spells, I like characters to be able to do extraordinary things at high levels. OTOH I don't like the amount of magic items. I think the real reason is maybe that while I always want the PCs to be special, I don't want there to be thousands of "special people" in the world who make items that the PCs just buy.

This DM, or others that I have played with, has no desire to reduce spell casting availability or power. What they wanted was the feel that a magic item was something special. More like Lord of the Rings, at the end of the movie you had two magic swords and one mithril chain shirt (probably not even magic).

The concept of limited magic item availability made more sense in 2e, where creating a magic item meant losing a point of constitution. In that system if you were going to bother to make one you would make it good, not much point in making a +1 sword.

In 3e, It's a reasonable thing for a group to do, make thier own magic items, and increase them in power as the party progresses. So it's likely that other groups have done this to varrying degrees of success, leaving a variety of items on the market.

I suppose I was basing the level of magic or power of a campaing on % of character wealth. And was considering the suggested character wealth (for the former default game world Greyhawk no less) as an average campaing. More wealth = high powered, significant less wealth = low powered.

Where he was basing it on the fact that we find magic weapons and want to sell them to buy something with the money. In this type of campaign character wealth can't be maintained, or if it is it's in one goober weapon. I suppose I don't grasp this style any more than those that restrict spell casting acess.

 

[sinmissing]

Some quick methods for determining whether you're in a high powered (magic) campaign.

Is requiring a magical weapon mandatory by 4th level
Is requiring magic of any kind *necessary* to solve the majority of challenges the party faces
Are "magic beyond the ken of players" a typical feature of an adventure/trap/or locale (reverse gravity traps, teleporting, etc)
Are elements like far ranging ESP, communication via telepathy, MTS (Mass Teleport System) a part of the campaign world
Are flying creatures and mounts prevalent throughout the game

 

[Li Shenron]

What they wanted was the feel that a magic item was something special. More like Lord of the Rings, at the end of the movie you had two magic swords and one mithril chain shirt (probably not even magic).

Then, market control is your key. You can decide that no magic weapon below +3 is available for sale for example. This has implications in the game, such as the party having problems vs DR until they can afford such weapon (unless they have item creation feats).

To make magic items more special and less in number, you can just merge them. Instead of a PC having:
+1 full plate
+4 gauntlets of ogre strength
+2 ring of protection
+2 cloak of resistance
goggles of the eagle
hat of disguise

let him have a single full plate armor with all those abilities, and it will be less items but much more special. For balance issues, don't let all bonuses be available immediately, but only develop in time (just look at the wealth-by-level table and you'll know when to let the upgrade happen).

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

TheGogmagog
IMO, I'd say your game was well within the 'normal' range. 70% isn't going to hose anyones character over too badly... as long as it's a reasonable mix of gear, or there are opportunities to trade some of it. Probably slightly 'increases the power' of buff magic from PCs. Imagine Clerics and Psionic warrior types come out slightly better than normal, but nothing to write home about.

Medium magic?

I'm going to try another no items game sometime. Last time, I simply turned all magical gear into 'innate powers'. Seemed to work well for the feel of game I was after. You get the upside that your items are unstealable/undestroyable. On the down side, they're a little less flexible. Still not quite sure how to slot single use items into this though...

 

[Old One]

This DM, or others that I have played with, has no desire to reduce spell casting availability or power. What they wanted was the feel that a magic item was something special. More like Lord of the Rings, at the end of the movie you had two magic swords and one mithril chain shirt (probably not even magic).

The concept of limited magic item availability made more sense in 2e, where creating a magic item meant losing a point of constitution. In that system if you were going to bother to make one you would make it good, not much point in making a +1 sword.

In 3e, It's a reasonable thing for a group to do, make thier own magic items, and increase them in power as the party progresses. So it's likely that other groups have done this to varrying degrees of success, leaving a variety of items on the market.

I suppose I was basing the level of magic or power of a campaing on % of character wealth. And was considering the suggested character wealth (for the former default game world Greyhawk no less) as an average campaing. More wealth = high powered, significant less wealth = low powered.

Where he was basing it on the fact that we find magic weapons and want to sell them to buy something with the money. In this type of campaign character wealth can't be maintained, or if it is it's in one goober weapon. I suppose I don't grasp this style any more than those that restrict spell casting acess.

This has been hashed out a number of times on various threads on the boards, but the danger you run by limiting access of all classes to magical "stuff" while leaving spell casting essentially unchanged, is the eventual domination of primary spell-casters (wizards, sorcerers, druids and clerics). The other classes will not be able to compete at mid-to-high levels unless, the GM is providing alternative means to keep up through advanced non-magical crafting, additional feats or other offsets.

I am actually a big fan of low(er) magic campaigns and I think Firelance's deliniation above is helpful. To work properly, IMO, there need to be several considerations:

(1) How do you handle spell-casting? As noted above, nerfing "stuff" without adjusting spell-casting breaks down eventually. One way to handle casting is provide serious (and potentially deadly) consequences for using spells. Temporary ability drain, non-lethal damage, lethal damage, taint and insanity are all mechanisms for achieving this. Grim Tales, Black Company, CoC and other all have methods for achieving this. Another way is to impose significant limits on the spells known and obtained in the campaign...no spell lists...just what the GM releases and/or the PC can research during the campaign (the Grim Tales approach.

(2) How do you handle "stuff"? In a low(er) magic campaign, magic items will probably be few and far between, but how it is implemented is pretty important. Sometimes the secret to crafting true magic items has been lost to the ages (meaning certain crafting skills are removed from the game) or the cost in power items and/or xp is so high that few crafters even attempt it. It is helpful to introduce alternate crafting rules for enhanced non-magical stuff, such as the excellent BCCS rules (I also understand that the new Dark Legacies rules have some nifty crafting mechanisms, but I have yet to see them). Perhaps limited 1-shot items, such as low-level potions, scrolls and charms are more readily available, but permanent magic items require such an investment of time, components and personal power that they are extremely rare.

(3) How do you handle opponents? Creature with DR and other inherent magical abilities/protections become much more powerful in a low(er) magic campaign, so the GM really needs to be circumspect in how these critters are utilized.

Done right, low(er) magic can be tons of fun (as can any campaign)...done "wrong"...it doesn't work very well.

~ OO