good books for a low-magic campaign?

[Desdichado]

Presumably that one was enchanted.

It's been a long time since I read Beowulf, but I don't remember presuming that.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Of course players need to learn to run away once in a while. That's a given in gaming. But offering that as a complete substitution for retooling D&D to fit a low magic game is insufficient and irresponsible. There are plenty of things you just can't run away from, and if you're thrown into the shark pool with a ladder 90 feet away, and sharks that are immune to every weapon you wield and every spell you can cast, and the DM says, "Swim!" then that's silly.

So your ideal rulebook includes Rule Z, "Do not throw the players into a shark tank with sharks who are immune to every weapon the party has."

I am still wondering how your "sufficient" ruleset is supposed to address the challenge: The PCs cannot defeat the monster they are facing.

In my opinion, having run low magic games and played in low magic games, d20/D&D 3.5 needs to be redesigned substantially above a certain level of play if you run a low magic game.

Then you will be relieved to know that Grim Tales was significantly redesigned. One parameter of Grim Tales was to allow as much d20 compatibility as possible. Thus, rather than create a subset of Grim Tales monsters, which greatly reduces the utility and marketability of the book, changes were made to PC and combat mechanics, NOT the monsters. (The same approach was taken with spells, btw.)

It is a ruleset designed to compensate for the lack of magic items in a variety of ways: defense bonus, action points (including more ways to spend them), MDT, the mechanics of critical hits and misses, and overall greater character optimization, just off the top of my head.

This, plus my apparently rare and uncanny instinct for not throwing my PCs into tanks full of invincible sharks, leads to my dismissive statement that I've never had to change a monster.

 

[GlassJaw]

I love these low-magic discussions. No easier way to get everyone all fired up than to start a thread on low-magic.

Hey Wulf, you have any games/campaigns running in the North Prov area? If not, interested in starting one?

 

[Piratecat]

This, plus my apparently rare and uncanny instinct for not throwing my PCs into tanks full of invincible sharks, leads to my dismissive statement that I've never had to change a monster.

I wish I could say the same for my game. See you Thursday, Wulf, and you may want to bring a snorkel.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Hey Wulf, you have any games/campaigns running in the North Prov area? If not, interested in starting one?

I'm running a bi-weekly game for some newbies (though standard D&D, not low magic), and I play bi-weekly on the other off-weeks in Piratecat's game (see threatening rat bastard above).

I may be persuaded to run a couple of quick demo sessions of Slavelords of Cydonia when it comes out.

That entire campaign is set on a mythical Mars-- desert planet-- a decision subliminally made in order to prevent GMs from throwing their players into tanks with invincible sharks.

Have you been to Tactics Games in East Providence to look for gamers?


Wulf

 

[Desdichado]

So, how close is Slave Lords to classic ERB's Barsoom? Sounds like it's obviously built on the same type of conventions and basic assumptions?

 

[GlassJaw]

Have you been to Tactics Games in East Providence to look for gamers?

NO! Wow, that place is literally a mile from where I live. How long has it been there? I've lived here for years and never knew about it. Sheesh.

I was thinking about checking out Your Move Games too.

I may be persuaded to run a couple of quick demo sessions of Slavelords of Cydonia when it comes out.

Oh wow, that would rule. SoC sounds particularly nasty...I like.

 

[molonel]

I am still wondering how your "sufficient" ruleset is supposed to address the challenge: The PCs cannot defeat the monster they are facing.

Since a "sufficient" rules set, for me, is not a low magic solution, it addresses the challenge of creatures or NPCs or situations where PCs cannot win with a large toolbox of answers that includes magical movement, spells which create a temporary stalement or divide the battlefield (like a Wall of Force), or character abilities that involve some sort of evasive manuevering. A lot of those simply wouldn't be available without magic, and how someone is supposed to "run away" from creatures with higher than 30' movement is an intriguing proposition. Sometimes retreat is not an option. I find a world where you can run away whenever you want, and nothing ever follows you, or hunts you or presses the fight to be an equally implausible world alongside one where you can always win.

Then you will be relieved to know that Grim Tales was significantly redesigned. One parameter of Grim Tales was to allow as much d20 compatibility as possible ... (etc. etc.) ... This, plus my apparently rare and uncanny instinct for not throwing my PCs into tanks full of invincible sharks, leads to my dismissive statement that I've never had to change a monster.

I'm not particularly relieved, since how you play your game is none of my concern, and I'm not going to be playing Grim Tales. When I play low magic again, it will be in the Conan d20 setting, or Midnight, or Testament d20.

 

[molonel]

It does not say that the sword Beowulf used to defeat Grendel's dam was a magical one.

http://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~beowulf/main.html

Chapter XXIII

'MID the battle-gear saw he a blade triumphant,
old-sword of Eotens, with edge of proof,
warriors' heirloom, weapon unmatched,
-- save only 'twas more than other men
to bandy-of-battle could bear at all --
as the giants had wrought it, ready and keen.
Seized then its chain-hilt the Scyldings' chieftain,
bold and battle-grim, brandished the sword,
reckless of life, and so wrathfully smote
that it gripped her neck and grasped her hard,
her bone-rings breaking: the blade pierced through
that fated-one's flesh: to floor she sank.
Bloody the blade: he was blithe of his deed.
Then blazed forth light. 'Twas bright within
as when from the sky there shines unclouded
heaven's candle. The hall he scanned.
By the wall then went he; his weapon raised
high by its hilts the Hygelac-thane,
angry and eager. That edge was not useless
to the warrior now.

...

Now that sword began,
from blood of the fight, in battle-droppings,3
war-blade, to wane: 'twas a wondrous thing
that all of it melted as ice is wont
when frosty fetters the Father loosens,
unwinds the wave-bonds, wielding all
seasons and times: the true God he!
Nor took from that dwelling the duke of the Geats
precious things, though a plenty he saw,
save only the head and that hilt withal
blazoned with jewels: the blade had melted,
burned was the bright sword, her blood was so hot,
so poisoned the hell-sprite who perished within there.

 

[mmadsen]

It does not say that the sword Beowulf used to defeat Grendel's dam was a magical one.

I'm willing to accept that "a blade triumphant, old-sword of Eotens, with edge of proof, warriors' heirloom, weapon unmatched, [...] as the giants had wrought it, ready and keen" is magical -- especially since no normal blade could harm Grendel, and this blade harmed Grendel's mother.

But that sword isn't the sword Beowulf used to slay the dragon. In fact, Beowulf's DM screwed 'im:

Nor took from that dwelling the duke of the Geats
precious things, though a plenty he saw,
save only the head and that hilt withal
blazoned with jewels: the blade had melted,
burned was the bright sword, her blood was so hot,
so poisoned the hell-sprite who perished within there.​