Game Balance: possible without magic items?

[Ravellion]

You have a point. But as I see it, this phenomenon only makes for a more deadly game, not a more challenging one. I hate to say it (really,) but Angcuru's right: allowing the beasties to keep all their magic but removing magic items from the heroes simply means dead heroes. Deadly =! Challenging.

You just have to increase the CRs by 4 or something. By that time the saves will have gone up naturally, and even the low magic wizard should be a bit more powerful.

Magic will just hit the game later and more slowly. Which might be good, because at mid level, pitting your characcters against some NPCs lands them some very impressive loot... lots and lots of items +1 and +2. They will then proceed to sell these and make their own items +2, +3 and +4. That is where the flavour problem sets in for most DMs I have found: "Ah, a high level city guard. he must have magical armour and a magical sword."

You really do need a class based defense bonus though. Otherwise attacks rolls become a "do I roll a 1 or a 20? No? I hit." roll.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Defense Rolls help too.

 

[Wolv0rine]

I was actually just talking to someone about this the other day. Encounters/Balance/whatever should never, ever presume that the character have magic gear. I don't care if you're writing a module for 20th level players, it should never be assumed that they have magic items. And especially not specific magic items. I have been playing D&D for easilly half my life, if not more, and I have never had a character who drunk, owned, carried, or otherwise came in contact with a Potion of Healing, for example. Not once. But it seems to be presumed that characters will have these puppies lying around like cases of Coke or something.

Characters should be presumed to have their abilities. IF they have anything else, the DM should correct for it. I mean it's not like the DM doesn't correct for most everything else, including hairbrained ideas the PCs have.

 

[Oni]

Personally I would think to maintain some sense of balance between caster and noncasters you would have to do one of a couple of things.

You could make feats, or class abilities that allow fighter types to mimic magical weapons, armour, or even other things that seem appropriate. The more this seems like it stems from the fighters own skill the better in my opinion. This will of course have a significant effect on the feel of the setting though.

Second you could limit the amount of caster levels that could be taken, by forcing multiclassing for casters. In this manner their spells will be more limited, and they will not be as good of combatants as straight fighter types.

 

[Wormwood]

I was actually just talking to someone about this the other day. Encounters/Balance/whatever should never, ever presume that the character have magic gear.

Yet that's what the entire CR/EL system does assume.

I have been playing D&D for easilly half my life, if not more, and I have never had a character who drunk, owned, carried, or otherwise came in contact with a Potion of Healing, for example.

But 3e, out for a little over 2 years, assumes that your average character has appropriate magic per their level. If people want to deviate from the baseline, that's their prerogative, but the baseline does exist.

 

[Wolv0rine]

Yet that's what the entire CR/EL system does assume.

But 3e, out for a little over 2 years, assumes that your average character has appropriate magic per their level. If people want to deviate from the baseline, that's their prerogative, but the baseline does exist.

But that's exactly what I mean... is it just since 3E? When did it become assumed that all PCs have magic items? And even more importantly on top of that, when did it become assumed that PCs had certain, specific magic items?
While I have used magic items as signature items, I don't like the implication that PCs must have magic gear (and especially when they must have specific magic gear) to be viable. Sure, you can change that from group to group, but what does that say to new gamers?

 

[Theuderic]

I think we all know what it says to new gamers......

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Sure, you can change that from group to group, but what does that say to new gamers?

Heck, it took me six months to convince my group that I could make the changes to allow a low magic campaign; They were all insistant that the game was whacked and that we stick with 2E.

I'm glad to have proved it possible.

 

[Wormwood]

When did it become assumed that all PCs have magic items? And even more importantly on top of that, when did it become assumed that PCs had certain, specific magic items?

Around September 2000.

Dungeon Master's Guide
p.145:
Character Wealth
One of the ways in which you can maintain measurable control on PC power levels is by strictly monitoring their wealth, including their magic items. Table 5-1:Character Wealth by Level is based on average treasures found in average encounters compared with the experience points earned in those encounters. Using this information you can determine how much wealth a character should have based on her level.

All published adventures for this edition of the D&D game use this "wealth by level" guideline as a basis for balance in adventures.

While I have used magic items as signature items, I don't like the implication that PCs must have magic gear (and especially when they must have specific magic gear) to be viable. Sure, you can change that from group to group, but what does that say to new gamers?

If you don't like it, you don't have to play it that way (and there are many who agree with you).

As for what it says to new gamers, I have little indication they have much of a problem with it. Most new gamers like d20 just fine out of the box (but then again, they aren't burdened with a lot of 1e/2e baggage. Not that there's anything wrong with that )

 

[Mercule]

Heck, it took me six months to convince my group that I could make the changes to allow a low magic campaign; They were all insistant that the game was whacked and that we stick with 2E.

I'm glad to have proved it possible.

So, what changes do you make?