D&D is best when the magic is high, fast and furious!

[hong]

No problem. My low-magic PCs will need an artefact to kill him (or may have to bathe their weapons in the pool of blood orcus left when he battled a God of Good in ancient times to be able to wound him), and have to quest for that. After that they will have to find the legendary portal to the abyss Orcus used when he ravaged the kingdom of X 1000s of years back, use the portal with a key recovered from yet another quest, and descend into the abyss. The forces of good may grant them some (one-time) protection on their assault to survive the enviroment of the abyss (perhaps a drink from the fountian in the avlley of the gods), and orcus himself will be tailored so that the fight is challenging but not impossible. My PCs don't need boatloads of magic they have access to every day to succeed in such an epic quest.

How on earth is

... bathe their weapons in the pool of blood
... granted protection from the forces of good
... drink from a fountain in the valley of the gods

not magic?

Some people seem to think "magic" is synonymous with magic items. Some people need to take a break from playing D&D.

 

[hong]

This is really my beef (apart from the problem with the suspension of disbelief I get in magic shop-campaigns still modelled after medieval europe), but why should I change systems when d20 offers me the same? I don't have a problem playing D&D my way, which consists in reducing the amount of magic itemns and spells available to the PCs and NPCs.

Reposting, just to remind people where this came from:

Wouldn't it be much cooler and provide much more options if the players could play gods instead of low-level PCs like a measly Wizard-40? What is the point in having all those cool stats in the Deities&Demigods if the players never can play them? Naw, lets forget gods, lets play overgods! Much more options, less restrictions!

Where do you draw the line? When will your present high-level/high-magic game become boring and "not-cool-anymore", so that you will have to switch to playing gods to get that sense of awe and wonder?

So basically you don't mind people playing gods, after all?

 

[Fenes 2]

How on earth is

... bathe their weapons in the pool of blood
... granted protection from the forces of good
... drink from a fountain in the valley of the gods

not magic?

Some people seem to think "magic" is synonymous with magic items. Some people need to take a break from playing D&D.

I never said no magic, I said low magic, and especially low magic items. In this example the party generally gets a lot of one-use magic to kill orcus - they don't get a wagon load of magic items and weapons to keep. The next adventure will not have them being able to kill greater demons with ease, but could be a purely mundane challenge, with a couple of (well-trained) opponents able to threaten the heroes without a wagon load of buffs and items.,

PCs don't need wish spells, meteor swarms, half a dozen +6 stat items, +5 holy vorpal avengers, full plate of fortification and regeneration +5 and shield of reflection and SR 40 to kill Orcus in my campaign, and PCs generally don't walk around with mnore magic items on them and spells at their disposal every day than major countries have available.

I consider that low-magic.

 

[Fenes 2]

Reposting, just to remind people where this came from:



So basically you don't mind people playing gods, after all?

That last paragraph was sarcasm. Remind me to tag it next time.

Edit: I just wanted to illustrate that if one considers low-level low-magic boring and prefers high-level high-magic campaigns where paladins battle fiends with +6 holy vorpal avengers, then one does wonder why not play gods then, since they are even cooler than high-level PCs and have cooler toys.

 

[drnuncheon]

ShadowX
"I don't get this arguement about making the character more important. So instead of using the abilities of an item you use the special abilities of the character. Whats the difference? Both do the same thing. Killing someone with an item is just as epic as using abilities from you character, especially since the monster power levels will be scaled accordingly and so the battle would be just as tough in either style of game."

Since I'm one of the people who brought it up, I guess I should respond.

Partially, you're right. The method of defeating someone is not really the issue. After all, Thor fighting against the giants was using his belt and gloves of strength and his magical hammer Mjolnir, and many people still think that's pretty cool. King Arthur used Excalibur and his magic scabbard. There's all kinds of examples.

On the other hand, the belt and gloves and hammer are part of Thor's legend, because they're uniquely his. Excalibur is uniquely Arthur's. Nobody else is going to show up with those things. So they become a part of the character in a way that, say, a ring of protection +5 does not.

So getting back to "why does it matter"? Because, at least for me, I want it to be important that it is my character there, doing those things. I don't want you to be able to erase his name and pencil another one in and have it come out the same, because that's not what I did when I made the character. The character being more important than the stuff is only a part of that equation, but it is a part of it.

S'mon
"It's strange, I find the pro low-magic arguments here much more compelling, the adherents of high-magic arguments come across as very weak. Yet I've enjoyed GMing ultra-high-powered (deity level) AD&D for many years, and I enjoy high-magic fantasy novels, especially those of Michael Moorcock, where super-powerful magic destroys armies and ends worlds, where heroes battle directly against demonic gods. If anything it's the _mundanity_ of magic in 3e, not its power, that I find dispiriting."

Well said, sir! (And sadly, I agree with you about the seeming weakness of the high-magic arguments). D&D is not only high magic (in the sense of power), it is also ubiquitous magic, and it is the latter and not the former that many people seem to object to.

Even that, though, can make an interesting setting: I refer people (as I have before) to Steven Brust's excellent Vlad Taltos books, where the characters think nothing of teleporting across a city rather than walking (except for Vlad, but that's because it upsets his stomach) and where killing someone is usually only a rather pointed warning.

J

 

[Fenes 2]

Even that, though, can make an interesting setting: I refer people (as I have before) to Steven Brust's excellent Vlad Taltos books, where the characters think nothing of teleporting across a city rather than walking (except for Vlad, but that's because it upsets his stomach) and where killing someone is usually only a rather pointed warning.

J

Reminds me of an adventure back in 2E, where our PCs used to teleport out of the dungeon/wilderness each evening back to their house in Waterdeep for the night, perhaps with dinner in that quaint inn in Calimport. Fun for a short while, but magic really lost its wonder.

The CRPG Baldur's Gate was especially bad in the later levels, with so many "yet another +1 sword" around that it did not pay to gather them.

 

[hong]

Edit: I just wanted to illustrate that if one considers low-level low-magic boring and prefers high-level high-magic campaigns where paladins battle fiends with +6 holy vorpal avengers, then one does wonder why not play gods then, since they are even cooler than high-level PCs and have cooler toys.

And I pointed out that there are, indeed, systems for playing gods who can toy around with mere mortals (Aberrant is another one, IIRC). So the answer to your question, "why not play gods", is "why not indeed?"

 

[Coredump]

In regard to Brust/Taltos:

Yes, but there are restrictions placed there also. Because they can teleport does not mean they have all the spells available that a D&D 13th level mage would have.
Plus, there are other limits on what abuses one can perform, since you are endangering you House as well, plus ritual magic can often track you down, etc.

Most consistent settings that have High Magic usually have specific restrictions and counterbalances for the *few* aspects of High Magic available. High Magic D&D can be done, but it is hard to keep it consistent and logical. IMO.

>

 

[Fenes 2]

And I pointed out that there are, indeed, systems for playing gods who can toy around with mere mortals (Aberrant is another one, IIRC). So the answer to your question, "why not play gods", is "why not indeed?"

Umm, I wanted an answer from DragonBlade. I never stated that I preferred high-level high-magic campaigns and found low-level low-magic campaigns boring. And with D&D (D&DG and ELH) you can play gods as well, so I fail to see the point in your remark.

As far as my answer to this question goes: Because I don't have fun playing gods, or DMing for PC-gods. If I don't have fun doing something then I don't do it if I can help it.

 

[The_Gneech]

D&D is not only high magic (in the sense of power), it is also ubiquitous magic, and it is the latter and not the former that many people seem to object to.

*dingdingding* Yeah! That! Darn you for saying what I've been trying to put my finger on the whole time.

Using Raiders of the Lost Ark again, the Ark is a pretty impressive artifact -- definitely high power magic there. The Conan stories, to use another example, have cities that phase in and out of existence, sorcerers who raise jeweled towers overnight, and so forth. It's not the power level of D&D magic in general that's the problem, it's the everyday nature of it.

-The Gneech