Has D&D become too...D&Dish?

rounser said:
Give it a rest. That argument was how many threads ago? I could say something about how meaningful I find your thoughts, but I don't snipe at you behind your back about it.

Dude, it was in this thread. I'm hardly bringing up stuff from elsewhere when you brought it up here.

Raven, see, the basic disconnect is how much magic you seem to think is in the standard assumptions. When 7th level characters get a +1 lumpy metal thing and a +1 set of armor and a couple of other odds and sods, I don't consider that terribly high magic. It isn't until well into double digits that you get large amounts of magic items.

I still maintain that if EVERY ENCOUNTER is countered by magic, that is, by definition, high magic. Whether or not the party is using a magic lumpy thing or a fireball, doesn't matter. If a campaign features the use of magic constantly, then it is not a low magic campaign.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Don't "dude" me, buddy.

That was days ago (such that I don't even remember it being in this thread), and I'd long since left the thread till now, and you're still sniping. I don't think much of your "meaningfulness" either. Just drop it okay?
 
Last edited:

Hussar said:
I still maintain that if EVERY ENCOUNTER is countered by magic, that is, by definition, high magic. Whether or not the party is using a magic lumpy thing or a fireball, doesn't matter. If a campaign features the use of magic constantly, then it is not a low magic campaign.

Well, then it becomes an argument about semantics. If you don't consider what I'm talking about to be low magic, I certainly won't worry about convincing you otherwise. :D

(And, if anyone ever complains about the game being "low magic", I'll just point them to you. :lol: )
 

True, it's an arguement about semantics. Of course it is when you start inventing new definitions of words.

DnD magic isn't defined by setting. It's defined by level. True, slowing the advance of characters would to some degree limit the magic they had, although the magic that they have in relation to the challenges they face would be the same regardless of the speed of advancement.

In other words, if a +1 sword is within the wealth limit of a given level, the fact that I spend twice the time at that level doesn't make the setting low magic. It just means I spend a lot more time at the same level.
 


I think the original question, at least, has been answered, kinda, and we came to the conclusion that D&D always has been its own genre in the greater universe of Fantasy, and that within itself, it can show an amazing bandwidth of variants that can cover a lot of different tastes. With the appearance of the D20 and the OGL licenses, we even have a wider spectrum of possible fantasy worlds to choose from that run the whole spectrum, from stuff like Thieves' World and Conan across Midnight and the classic Forgotten Realms to the more magitech settings of Eberron, Iron Kingdoms and Dragonmech. Add to that a handful of variant rule systems like Arcana Evolved, True20 or Iron Heroes, and we should have something for really everybody.

And it all can be called Dungeons & Dragons, if we're not trying to play silly hairsplitting.

Incidentally, would you all mind lowering the snark level in this thread, please? Or has it run its course by now and can be closed anyway? Because there's easier ways to do that than sniping at each other. :)
 

Nice to know things haven't changed that much. :p People still trumpetting from the rooftops about how the game has become all about the magic goodies like this was a sudden shift in gaming.

I still laugh about the fact that someone a few pages back talked about his low magic setting where he had a fighter with a +3 sword and how 3e is so high magic. Never mind that by 3e rules, a 7th level fighter can't even AFFORD a +3 sword. But, hey, whatever floats your boat.

If you want to believe that a game where each and every encounter is solved by the use of magic is a low magic campaign, then, well, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. Conan is low magic because, while it still occurs in the stories, it does not occur in EVERY story, nor does it occur in EVERY EVENT in the story.

A campaign which features core casters is not low magic by any stretch of the definition. It might be low wealth, but, then, well, all you're doing is screwing over the fighters.
 

Hussar said:
If you want to believe that a game where each and every encounter is solved by the use of magic is a low magic campaign, then, well, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. Conan is low magic because, while it still occurs in the stories, it does not occur in EVERY story, nor does it occur in EVERY EVENT in the story.

A campaign which features core casters is not low magic by any stretch of the definition. It might be low wealth, but, then, well, all you're doing is screwing over the fighters.

You know, not every campaign which features a core caster will have each and every encounter solved by magic, too. He might participate in a lot of them with magic, and not do so in a few, but there will be precious few encounters, especially at lower level, where magic will be the only solution when the day is done, at sometimes it won't be a solution at all.

And yes, you can have a core caster with the group, and still have a low-magic campaign...you can even have a core caster as the villain and have a low-magic campaign. The label, as appropriate or not it might be, does not only describe the group's make-up and how they react to the encounters they face. It describes the whole campaign.
 

Raven Crowking said:
The terms "high" and "low" relate to some standard median. In D&D 3.X, the standard median is very clearly spelled out. From a D&D standpoint, anything significantly lower than this median is "low magic" and anything significantly higher than this median is "high magic".

From a literary standpoint, the terms "low magic" and "high magic" most often relate to how the characters interact with magic, rather than with the presence or absence of magic in the setting. If most magical effects are within the means of the POV characters, or of the average citizen of the setting, the work is considered "high magic". If most magical effects are not within the means of the POV characters, and not within the means of the average citizen of the setting, the work is considered "low magic". In some cases these terms are used instead to represent what magic can accomplish; in this case keeping the higher level spells rare through controlling NPCs and slower level gain is sufficient.

The works of Robert E. Howard are almost always considered "low magic", yet magic is often used against the heroes...and even by the heroes (example, Solomon Kane's staff).

From a literary standpoint, my game world would probably be considered "mid magic", were such a term in common parlance. From a D&D 3e standpoint, however, it is definitely low magic.

RC

I like the part in bold as an initial working definition of "low" to "high" magic a little more helpful than low magic = no magic. In a game I would use the term in two ways, is it a low/med/hig magic world and are the adventures low/med/high magic. I wouldn't mix the two as a party of adventurers might be quite out of the ordinary compared to the average joe.

The level of magic in a game is not just frequency of spell use to me but also the power of the spells relative to arms/non-magical means, the prevalence of permanent magical items, the prevalence of magic use in mundane tasks, and frequency of spell casters. Let me describe a setting (my own) I consider low-to-mid magic then describe REHs Hour of The Dragon.

IMC (which is not standard D&D) a person able to use magic is pretty rare based on minimum ability requirements (which PCs can often meet), only 1 in a 1000 to 1,500 can be spell casters. To give you an idea of what this means, this is about the frequency of medical doctors in the US. So certainly they are highly skilled and paid people but not unheard of especially in the cities. On the other hand, temples in even large villages (200-400 people) are more likely to be staffed by a lay brother instead of a spell wielder. Those who attain levels high enough to make permanent magic items (besides potions, scrolls, etc.) are 1 in 100,000. Magic items would be exceedingly rare IMC if people hadn't been making them for about 10,000 years. On the frequency of magical items, IMC they are rare and considered a strategic resource (no open magic item market). A well equipped nation might have a +1 sword per 100 soldiers. More powerful magic items are reserved for leaders and very special units. It is not a great comparison, but magic items might be viewed as a tank, nations can afford them, and lots of them, but the vast majority of people never could. The common people will see them on parade days or, unfortuantely, when used against them.

On spell power, IMC there are few, if any, permanent effect spells. Magic can really help society but often in only subtle/tactical ways. The lower number of spell casters means they are unlikely to stop a plague (unless caught very early) but they can save a few select individuals. In the economy, magic could be used to give a boost each day to construction, but again limited spell casters of sufficient level means this is an expedient for the wealthy and does not replace more mundane methods. Divination magic might be the most influential, the mere ability to predict the weather (even with just the present day accuracy a few days in advance) could help avoid disasters, allow people to prepare for hurricanes, get crops in before a storm, avoid planting before a frost, etc. Such a simple thing would have made a big difference to a medieval farmer for example, and a good example of why priests were first astronomers. In warfare, low level spells have little advantage over arms in shear damage potential but can provide some tactical advantage on a small scale given their area of effect and duration. Spells that get to the point of doing respectable damage to a structure are of sufficeint level that only 1 in 5,000 to 10,000 can cast them. Again these people are of limited number. People being what they are, kingdoms will want to stockpile as many scrolls as they can for war, still there will be a limited supply even if you got every mage in the kingdom writing scrolls full time (a risky approach since you might not want to alienate people with such a rare gift).

Adventures IMC, yes spell use is practiced by PCs in about every or every other encounter. At low levels they do not encounter many spell casters casting against them, but they do encounter magic much, much more frequently than in the outside world. After all, they are seeking out those places where it could be found.

So for relatively constant prevalence, common use by adventurers, but no blatant impact on the day-to-day lives of people and something most people could never practice, I'd rate this campaign as low to mid magic.

In REHs Hour of the Dragon, Conan is a deposed King (so name level?) he encounters no less than seven spell casters from his age (not counting the one incredibly powerful BBEG). We have the witch who seems to have some mid-level druidic magic, the fallen priest of Mitra who seems mid to high level, the priest of Asura also mid-to-high level, and the four mages from Khaitan (IIRC) very high level. Also mentioned are other magic wiedling priests of Asura and Mitra, let alone the ever present sorcerors of Stygia we hear about. When magic is encounterd in REH it is often very, very powerful. This setting is typically consider "low magic" but magic is far from infrequent from Conan's perspective, he's always encountering it; and further, the power of the magic is rarely "low". Maybe people think of it as "low" because Conan doesn't use it and most people in his world don't. It's rare but seems to exist in every major city and a whole kingdom, Stygia, is ruled by mages/priests. Maybe it's because magic items are very rare, but when they do occur they are very powerful. Finally, maybe it is because spell casting is more ritualistic and less suited to combat.

All in all a very long winded way of saying, a discussion of what is or is not "low" magic will go in circles unless (IMHO) one starts with a specific definition, whatever that may be.
 

Hussar said:
...
If you want to believe that a game where each and every encounter is solved by the use of magic is a low magic campaign, then, well, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. Conan is low magic because, while it still occurs in the stories, it does not occur in EVERY story, nor does it occur in EVERY EVENT in the story.
...

I don't think we are reading the same Conan stories, or at least the ones by REH. A magical city, beast (often some ape-human abberation), item, caster, etc. is encounterd in every story by REH, other authors I cannot say. In fact, this wierdness is often a core element of the story as you might expect for submission to Wierd Tales and other such pulps of the era. That Conan doesn't solve a problem with magic, although sometimes he does use some magic item, is not surprising as he is a fighter/thief etc.

Hussar, I like your posts but on this point from my point of view you need to be more explicit in what you mean. Is low magic when not every event uses magic? What do you call an event? Or is low magic when not every adventure/story uses magic? What do you mean by magic use? Is it just spell casting? Your aguments so far have been not much more than I know it when I see it and saying "that's not it because of x." Instead of nay saying; just come out and define what you mean, even if it is a list of things that exclude a setting from being low magic. Also do you think there is a middle ground between low and high magic?

With a nod to the OP, D&D IMO has always been high magic.
 

Remove ads

Top