Do some classes "need" magic items?

[0-hr]

Do the rules as written make some classes more dependent upon magic items than others?

I'm thinking of putting together a campaign with almost no magic items in it but I'm afraid this might unbalance the classes. If I don't introduce any house rules to compenstate, will class balance be destroyed? Or will everyone suffering equally keep things in line?

My first guess is that things would be ok, except that "buff spells" would be in higher demand. Assuming the main tanks had one magic weapon to deal with damage reduction, I don't see any critical problems. But I figured it would be nice to get a second opinion (and to have something to read other than that stupid See Invisibility argument).

 

[hong]

Classes with innate supernatural (ie, "magic") powers will be very happy. If you can fly and hide behind protection from arrows, you're at an advantage compared to the mud-sucking grunts. Add in the ability to be invisible, to _see_ invisible (sorry), be hasted, etc.

One way to balance this out is to ratchet up the violence. Spellcasting classes basically have lots of powerful abilities that are usable a limited number of times per day. A fighter has a few not-quite-so-powerful abilities that are always on. The more fights you get into, the more oomph the fighter gets out of those always-on abilities, and the more you force spellcasters to pick and choose when to use their spells.

 

[Crothian]

I played in a campaign where we had no magic items, the game lasted till 9th level. I was a rogue/fighter and I did just fine with no magic. The sorcerer also did well (he did have the ability to create scrolls). The other two characters were a Ranger and a Barbarian.

As long as the DM realizes thay have no magic and makes sure that they face challenges magic isn't needed with, it can easily be done.

 

[Darklone]

We had a group till around lvl10 and for a long time our fighter had a cursed +2 longsword and the others two +1 daggers. Many other magical items but no weapons, armours or other so called standard equipment.

The wizard7/cleric3 was always stronger than the others (polymorph self), but he was a few levels ahead, so noone really complained.
As the cleric at lvl9 started to use Greater Magic weapon, Magic Vestment and similar spells to enhance his fighting abilities, he quickly surpassed anyone else.

The bard, fighter/rogue and monk who were one level behind (additionally) suffered a lot from not being able to accomplish anything while the big ones did solo adventures.

On the Kalamar board have been lots of discussions with many good ideas how to keep spellcasters balanced in a low magic campaign.

The ideas range from: "Force them to multiclass" to "Defence Bonus a la WoT" or other nice things.

 

[Oni]

I believe that magic items are an important part of the balance of 3E and that either making them overly available, or restricting them overly much has a great deal of potential to throw a campaign completely out of whack. And while it might be an over generalization, in my opinion, the fighting classes are really only as good as their equipment. Druids, Clerics and Sorcerers (and possibly wizards depending if that limited magic access extents to acquiring new spells) will grow to dominate your game. On the upside, the monk suddenly becomes a much more viable option.

 

[mikebr99]

And Forsaker's become the norm...

 

[hong]

And Forsaker's become the norm...

Not really. If there's no magic items around, there's no magic items to break!

 

[mikebr99]

Not really. If there's no magic items around, there's no magic items to break!

True... I would envision a 'Forsaker-like' PrC as some type of religious or royal police unit... to hunt down any "evil" magic throughout the realm. Or something that goes and confiscates everything.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not convinced that any one class really needs magic items any more than another. After all, by the standard wealth guidelines, each class is supposed to have roughly as much magic - if everyone's getting the same, it cannot really be correcting an imbalance. Wizards and clerics depend as much on magical items, though they tend to choose different types of items. Take away a wizard's goojaws (no scrolls, no wands, no staves, nothing to help him carry those heavy books, nothing to boost his AC or saves) and he too starts having problems and vulnerabilities.

Remember, a spellcaster can do many things with magic, but he is limited in how many things he can do at once. He can only cast (and usually prepare) so many spells. If he doesn't have time, or has chosen the wrong spells, his abilities are as useless as the fighter without a magic sword against a critter with DR...

 

[mikebr99]

I'm not convinced that any one class really needs magic items any more than another. After all, by the standard wealth guidelines, each class is supposed to have roughly as much magic - if everyone's getting the same, it cannot really be correcting an imbalance. Wizards and clerics depend as much on magical items, though they tend to choose different types of items. Take away a wizard's goojaws (no scrolls, no wands, no staves, nothing to help him carry those heavy books, nothing to boost his AC or saves) and he too starts having problems and vulnerabilities.

Remember, a spellcaster can do many things with magic, but he is limited in how many things he can do at once. He can only cast (and usually prepare) so many spells. If he doesn't have time, or has chosen the wrong spells, his abilities are as useless as the fighter without a magic sword against a critter with DR...

I would think that the Wizard is the MOST hurt by a lack of magic in a world... he would only be getting 2 spells per level in his book total... A lack of magic in a world would mean that he isn't finding any books adventuring (or isn't able to purchase any), and it would mean that there also wouldn't be any libraries for MAGICAL research either.