Fantasy becoming too fantastic...?

[Hussar]

There are some really excellent points in here.

I think it can be boiled down to, as a DM, actually describe things rather than rely on the crutch of labels. Any encounter becomes more interesting when the players aren't sure of what's going on.

The idea of the vampire cube, the displacer beast and the others are just great ideas. Don't let the mechanical aspects of the game tie you down. Let them allow you to bring your creations to life and still guide you into not obliterating your PC's. In other words, the rules are there to help you, not hinder you. Use the rules. They really do work when you let them.

 

[Remathilis]

Half-and-half

how many halves are there?

Half-Celestial - MM (template)
Half-Dragon - MM (template)
Half-Elemental - MotP (template)
Half-Elf - PHB/MM
Half-Farspawn - LoM (template)
Half-Fey - FF (template)
Half-Fiend - MM (template)
Half-Giant - XPH
Half-Golem - MM2 (template)
Half-Illithid - Und/FF (template)
Half-Janni - Sand (template)
Half-Ogre - RD
Half-Orc - PHB/MM
Half-Troll - FF (template)
Half-Vampire - LM (template)
Yuan-ti Halfblood - MM

I guess that is alot of halves.

 

[Wik]

We ran a "knightly" 1e game with all cavaliers and no magic.

It was a freaking blast.

3e is even more flexible, and has loads of support. I would gladly redo that campaign with 3e with the additional d20 support it has for that sort of game.

There are a few threads like this one running on various fora. Where I am seeing the limitation lie is not with the rules, but the imagination and nerve of those using them.

It's your game. Take charge of it.

If I want to run a low-magic D&D game, I can't use any of the base classes, with the exception of the fighter, rogue, barbarian, and (maybe) the monk. Everything else gets access to spells. Seriously - the game caters to higher-magic play.

If I *were* to run a low-magic D&D game, I'd use the generic classes from UA - it's a great option. But, it's not really "core" D&D - "Core" D&D by the way it is written is written from the standpoint of "there will be at least X amount of magic in the campaign world".

***

To answer the Shaman - I am playing something else, as an earlier thread of mine discussed at length. I'm playing the d6 sytem right now, although not because of any beefs I had with the level of fantasy inherent in D&D right now.

***

 

[Psion]

If I want to run a low-magic D&D game, I can't use any of the base classes, with the exception of the fighter, rogue, barbarian, and (maybe) the monk. Everything else gets access to spells. Seriously - the game caters to higher-magic play.

I'm uncertain why you would need more.

 

[rounser]

I'm uncertain why you would need more.

Paladin, ranger and assassin would be nice. There's nothing in the mythological basis of these classes that suggests that they use spells....yet, there they are.

 

[Psion]

Paladin, ranger and assassin would be nice. There's nothing in the mythological basis of these classes that suggests that they use spells....yet, there they are.

That's a bit of a tangent; none of these were required for the knightly game to which I alluded. Only ranger would I want to add to the list for LotR, and their spellcasting would be fairly trivial to house rule out.

That said (entertaining the tangent reminding you that it's a tangent), D&D uses spellcasting to represent general miraculous abilities not just more blatant incantations. That being the case, your going to be hard pressed to convince me that there is no mythological precedent for the sorts of things represented by those spell lists, such as calm animals.

 

[Umbran]

I sometimes get the feeling that folks mistake what exists in the entirety of all available game products with what actually appears in the majority of games.

The products exist to give us options. I may only use a couple of them in a given campaign, but in order for each of us to just use a couple, and have us each able to choose stuff the other DMs aren't, there needs to be a whole lot of stuff out in the products. I really want the avialble products to have many more templates and stuff than I'll ever actually use, so I am more likely to fid the ones I want.

And, of course, on messageboards you're selecting for a certain kind of gamer too rabid to leave well enough alone, he has to go on the internet to hunt down new stuff about his hobby. So we aren't a particularly good sample of what most folks might do. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of games are far more mundane that described here.

 

[The Shaman]

To answer the Shaman - I am playing something else, as an earlier thread of mine discussed at length. I'm playing the d6 sytem right now, although not because of any beefs I had with the level of fantasy inherent in D&D right now.

Noted - I read your earlier post, and it sounds like fun. I was speaking to the point generally, not to you specifically.

As a slight tangent, I have a growing appreciation for games that only use d6!

 

[Hussar]

And, of course, on messageboards you're selecting for a certain kind of gamer too rabid to leave well enough alone, he has to go on the internet to hunt down new stuff about his hobby. So we aren't a particularly good sample of what most folks might do. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of games are far more mundane that described here.

Here now, I resemble that remark.

*Slouches off to go spit the foam out of his mouth.*

 

[vulcan_idic]

Personally it's not Mechanical half-half-half things that turn me off I'm fine with those. I'm also fine with low magic worlds. I prefer high magic ones, but I also do enjoy low magic worlds on occassion too. The key to me is (a) having a good story to tell (and one that I'm interested in hearing/telling) (b) telling it well and (c) really giving the sense of being heroes who are making a difference in their world whether as a small town sheriff and deputy or superheroes.