Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2566738" data-attributes="member: 18280">Not really.&nbsp; One merely has to rework the XP rules to effect changes in the frequency of magic items.&nbsp; If the PCs are only getting, say, 1/2 the XP that the DMG recommends, they will be far more careful about using those XP on magic items rather than character levels.Of course, now we are getting into &quot;What do you mean by low-magic?&quot;&nbsp; The assumption that the innate magical abilities of gnomes don't work in such a setting, for example, doesn't necessarily wash.&nbsp; I am using a setting that, by WotC standards, is definately low-magic and low-wealth.&nbsp; However, the only changes I have been forced to make are changing the XP system and varying the amount of treasure I give out from the assumptions in the DMG.&nbsp; Of course, I am using my own definition of &quot;low-magic&quot; here.&nbsp; There are fewer high-level characters than the DMG would suggest (again, 1/2 XP).&nbsp; I make fewer NPC spellcasters.&nbsp; Some spellcasters in the past have caused problems that cause people to look down upon them.&nbsp; There are magic items to be found, but no magic item shops.&nbsp; You cannot even buy a sunrod.Now, some here might classify my setting as high-magic, but the RAW certainly would not.&nbsp; And, I would argue that my setting is as internally consistent as any setting that follows the RAW.&nbsp; Of course, YMMV, but the RAW hand-waves things like commoners and experts gaining XP and levels, IMHO.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 2566738, member: 18280"] Not really. One merely has to rework the XP rules to effect changes in the frequency of magic items. If the PCs are only getting, say, 1/2 the XP that the DMG recommends, they will be far more careful about using those XP on magic items rather than character levels. Of course, now we are getting into "What do you mean by low-magic?" The assumption that the innate magical abilities of gnomes don't work in such a setting, for example, doesn't necessarily wash. I am using a setting that, by WotC standards, is definately low-magic and low-wealth. However, the only changes I have been forced to make are changing the XP system and varying the amount of treasure I give out from the assumptions in the DMG. Of course, I am using my own definition of "low-magic" here. There are fewer high-level characters than the DMG would suggest (again, 1/2 XP). I make fewer NPC spellcasters. Some spellcasters in the past have caused problems that cause people to look down upon them. There are magic items to be found, but no magic item shops. You cannot even buy a sunrod. Now, some here might classify my setting as high-magic, but the RAW certainly would not. And, I would argue that my setting is as internally consistent as any setting that follows the RAW. Of course, YMMV, but the RAW hand-waves things like commoners and experts gaining XP and levels, IMHO. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification