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

[Mercule]

My reasons for preferring low-magic games are pretty simple.

First, I just like the images evoked better. It's much cooler (IMHO) for the Rogue to make a series of balance and jump checks as he leaps from one precipice to another, slowly working his way across/around a chasm than it is to see his Wizard buddy look around and say "Screw that!" and cast Fly. I can understand someone preferring it the other way.

And don't mistake my preferrence of scenes for an inability to build an adventure that can handle high magic. Having run both, I find high magic much easier to plan for, but far less rewarding story-wise.

The second reason is that I don't think the general fantasy genre works particularly well with off-the-shelf magic items. Excalibur is almost as famous as Arthur. Most of the magic weapons in Lord of the Rings are named, as well (Sting, Glamdring, etc.). Those are cool. Why would you name a +1 sword in a high magic setting? Makes no sense. Likewise, Frodo never even considered the idea that he might "upgrade" Sting.

In a high-magic world, those items mean very little. They're almost unremarkable. There is no awe surrounding the posssession of a Holy Avenger, in most cases. If there is, it is often more because of its butt-kicking potential than the spiritual signifigance.

Third, ironically, given the second point, is that the characters are often secondary to the items. Very rarely does a high magic game have a situation where "only Vern can stop this foe". Rather, any schmuck with Vern's gear could stop this foe.

I honestly don't have too many memories about characters "putting the smackdown" on certain BBEGs. Nor could I name even one magic item or spell that most of my past characters have possessed, even the one immediately prior to my current character (heh, I barely care what items the current one's carrying, and we're in the middle of RtToEE).

 

[Fenes 2]

I became a low-magic convert about 8 years ago because it was so novel and different to me, and the campaign world has much more internal consistency and logic, and holds together better. High magic worlds wouldn't have anything like our medieval societies- but most settings seem to ignore this, instead using medieval technology, culture, and beliefs as a basis and slapping high magic on top of it. If you are going to have a high magic world, you have to completely rethink the effect omnipresent magic would have on a culture and modify it from there.

That is another point. I wonder sometimes how the societies of most campaign worlds are supposed to function with the amount of power spellcasters have, especially the economy.

 

[Dragonblade]

High magic worlds wouldn't have anything like our medieval societies- but most settings seem to ignore this, instead using medieval technology, culture, and beliefs as a basis and slapping high magic on top of it. If you are going to have a high magic world, you have to completely rethink the effect omnipresent magic would have on a culture and modify it from there.

This very true. To run an epic high magic game and have it be logical and consistent you would have to have built your world from the beginning with high magic in mind. You can't just slap high magic on a standard medieval world.

Anyway, one reason I embrace high magic so much is because I have spent years playing low-magic. Years fighting kobolds and struggling for that +1 sword. And I got sick of it. It was boring and repetitive.

Few magic items and spells and whenever we broke tenth level the DM was ready to start a new campaign. I will never again play a first level character. I have played at that level so many times and so often it drove me crazy.

I was about ready to swear off D&D until 3rd edition came out and then the epic level handbook. I started DMing high level because no one else in my group would. I also had the chance to play in SHARK's campaign and his world is very epic and very high magic. It was amazing. So many different possibilities and battles that while most of you would snort at, were intense and exciting. My characters using all sorts of spells and magic items that I had read about in the books but never got a chance to use.

Some of you feel sorry for me for missing out on good low-magic gaming, but I've been there and done that. I just wish you guys could play high magic the way I have and maybe some of you would realize how much fun it is!

 

[the Jester]

I often find that DnD is best when I'm high, fast and furious.

 

[Remathilis]

Buddha once said that the road to enlightment comes through the middle of opposites (or something like that.)

Fantatical games (high magic) drain the awe and wonder from the game and reduce it to shock and awe (to use a coined phrase.) If you're one of the high flyers, its fun, if not its as engaging as a fireworks display.

By the same token, I'm not at all a fan of little or no-magic games. Games where healing is limited, magic is rare, and things can and do kill you without a thought. That is not to say there is no fun in polticing, intrigue, and mundane answers, but these games almost always have the deck stacked agains the PCs and one mis-step is death.

Take the middle road, make those spectaular moments worth it, allow PCs a chance to use those spells they learned. If you have a PC that teleports alot, make a puzzle room needing a teleport to get in, but don't make all of them like that.

D&D is best when it fast, furious, and BALANCED.

 

[Endur]

Favorite Moments

My favorite gaming moments are from adventures where the GM and the players were really into the spirit of the game and something fun happened. Epic magic wasn't necessary. But epic adventure was.

Which meant that the players and the GM had to really be into the role-playing aspect of things. The characters had played several times, so the role-playing flowed well. Suspense existed.

Some examples:

1) My favorite character (6th level Paladin) standing toe to to with a hill giant, watching the giant swing his club, when both of us were at single digit hit points and the next hit would end the fight by slaying the opponent. (The Giant missed, I didn't, but it could have been the other way around).

2) My fiance's character held, my character stunned, monsters about to coup de grace my fiance's character, and a 1st level wizard steps inbetween my fiance's character and the monsters and keeps the monsters off (mage armor, shield, full defense, the monsters couldn't hit the poor wizard).

3) My fiance is "speaking with plants" to some flowers that have been trampled by bad guys. Listening to the plants describe the white humanoids without flesh that trampled them (skeletons).

None of my favorite moments required epic magic. Sure, there are powerful spell combos, of stacking effects. But utilizing a stacking combo isn't the sweet part of D&D for me, its just routine. Having a cool adventure that makes perfect sense for your character, doing what he was born to do, that's the great part of D&D for me.

Also, if you are playing pickup games, where the GM doesn't know who will be playing until game time, lower level games are probably better than epic level games. When characters are level 20+, the GM probably doesn't have a good feel for every spell that the PCs may try to cast. So spellcasting can delay the game somewhat.

Tom

Anyway, think about all your best gaming moments at the table. All of your favorites stories of playing with your friends. Do your memorable moments include your first level fighter running from kobolds? Or do they begin with "...And then we teleported into Lich's citadel and then the cleric cast...."?

All of my fondest gaming memories include doing something outrageous and cool in the game, something that invariably involved a sweet spell combination or taking on a powerful uber magical opponent! Aren't your fondest moments the same way?

 

[The_Gneech]

Plot and interesting locales, hmm...

Low-magic plot: A plot to undermine the king results in the prince being kidnapped and his cousin who bears a strong resemblance and who works for a shadowy organization takes his place.

High-magic plot: A plot to undermine the king results in the prince being kidnapped and replaced by a doppleganger who works for a shadowy organization.

Two simple plots but immediately one is more interesting with far more ramifications both magical and mundane.

Low-magic locale: A grey stone citadel set on a windswept peak overlooking the countryside.

high-magic locale: A gleaming crystal palace floating mysteriously atop the same peak glows with a strange blue light when gazed upon at night.

Two locales but one is instantly more interesting and wondrous than the other.

Yes, but not the one you seem to think, for me at least.

Take a look at movies, for instance: I would infinitely rather run around in Middle Earth as presented in LotR than, say, Zardoz.

I'm bored to tears by most of the aspects of high level D&D. Flying invisible wizards? No thanks. Stones buzzing around everybody's head? Whee. Planar travel? Yuck.

Or, to use another movie example, it's like the difference between Raiders of the Lost Ark and, say, X-Men. They both have magic (even if X-Men calls it "mutation," it's still magic), but in Raiders, magic is mysterious and dangerous, and the world is one that, assuming you lived in 1936, you could step out your door and actually be in. In X-Men, everybody's who's actually important not only has magic, but lacking magic automatically changes your status from "hero" to "hostage."

I can enjoy X-Men ... but my heart belongs to Raiders!

-The Gneech

PS: The idea that 3.5e will have anything at all to do with "low magic" just makes me giggle furiously. Because a few broken spells were toned down a bit, does not a low magic game make. Remove all primary spellcasting classes but "adept," strip rangers, paladins, etc. of their spells, and throw out all magic items with a market value above 2,000 gp, and THEN you'll be looking at a low magic game.

 

[sithramir]

interesting

I keep hearing the people who support "low magic" saying how dragonblade is stero-typing low magic yet you guys are stereotyping much much more.

Basically I don't see what a low magic game can have that a high magic game can't have other than LACK of magic and LACK of more options. Don't give me some "well i want my barbarian to need to climb that wall and not fly over it". Who said he's not going to in a high magic game? Who said even if he has the ability to fly he still doesn't climb? All I hear is you trying to put some block of "since my guy has magic he's gonna use it" when thats the players choice. The fact is in the lower magic that player doesn't have that choice. I'm not saying low magic is bad in anyway either i'm just saying i've seen nothign you guys have said about low magic that can't be exactly the same in high magic.

You guys are sterotyping high magic in that "because its there everyone has everything". Well maybe theres a huge antimagic shell placed upon a vampire lords castle and your pc's have to use only their wits. Or maybe they have a +5 sword but not a lot else. Now you say well that's exactly what they have to do in low magic. THe difference I see is that they do have other options at other times.

You also say that in high powered magic the fighter types lose out to the wizards. Well funny that i think it quite the opposite. At decent levels the wizard in a low magic game RULES the game. Your fighter with his non to low magic sword goes into the fray. The wizard say why? I have fireballs and ice storms and disintegrates to use. You are obsolete. Oh that huge warlord. Eat finger of death. In high magic games I see its the high magic that allows the game to stay more balanced. Yeah the fighter has some magic too. No he's not giving up his role playing by having some items or using magic sometimes he's just able to be on a level playing field. That mage couldn't hit the fighter with a lightning bolt because he used a whistle of silence or something that the wizard was unprepared for. Well without that whistle he was just another fighter that the wizard slayed on a day to day basis. Maybe you say well the fighter has to use his wits to be able to outbeat the wizard. Well the wizard will have the same wits and the fact is no fighter is gonna beat a wizard that is flying with prot from arrows on while shooting at him with lightning bolts without some kind of help. Hence why magic is in the game!

Oh and the article above me on the difference between raiders of the lost arc and x-men you should go watch x-men 2. They fight a guy who isn't a mutant who's using some mutants as his tools but who still isn't a guy with any magic. The fact is that they had to use their wits to beat him for instance having the shape changer impersonate someone else to get into the complex. This just goes to show how even with magic not everythign is solved. The problem is still there and they still need to find a solution. Its just a bit more complex. I'm not demeaning indiana jones ,in fact I love the movies .But you're comparing a guy in a typical movie where bullets never hit any of the good guys and he uses his wits to save the day to a movie movie aimed at kids where the antagonists still had to use their wits just happened to be in a different world.

If you want to have some fun try playing in a high magic game with a character that doesn't use magic and show them how your character wits are all you need. The same as in a low magic other than much harder and much more "awe-inspiring".

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Lots of posts, so little time...

Anyway, I would like a "low-magic" game. I don't mean "wimpy mages" but I would be happier if fighters didn't depend on buffing and magic items so much.

As for spell-nerfing... I think maybe mages need to be compensated for the Haste nerf, but I still think Haste was broken. Two epic spells in a round? Yeah, right, that's balanced

 

[Desdichado]

Well, IMO, high magic is much more wondrous than low magic. Imagine airships flying across the sky!

I drive by an airport on the way to work everyday. I see this all the time.

Not one young dragon swooping down but a Colossal Great Wyrm stretched across a treasure horde of millions of gold pieces!

Yeah, because more is better! I don't see how making the dragons bigger or the horde of gold pieces larger makes the game any better at all. In fact, I specifically believe that this is the convention that kills a lot of sequels in Hollywood -- the idea that the only way to keep the sense of interest and intensity is turn it up to 11. Blah.

Armies of giants storming a fortress while hundreds of wizards unleash meteor storms in their midst!

So the more mundane yet still fantastic seige of Helm's Deep in the Two Towers (book or movie, take your pick) isn't interesting, because the orcs aren't giants and the Rohirrim aren't meteor swarm machines? No thanks.

A paladin champion dual wielding +5 Holy Avengers of Speed in a furious duel against a powerful Vampire lord and his +8 Unholy Reaver of Souldrinking!

I don't see what the corny names and the +'s add in terms of coolness or amazement.

Now don't these images elicit a cry of "Yeah!! That's cool!!"?? They do for me. Breathtaking images of amazement. Something that I will never see in the real world or even in any movie.

There's a reason you'll never see those in a movie. Because they're corny and silly. Those aren't interesting, those are the kidns of power fantasies I had when I was eleven.

Now, I'm not trying to say that they are immature, or anything, but to me, certainly, I haven't found them interesting since before I was in high school.