How do I make it really "low-magic"?

[mistergone]

Well, if anyone is still paying attention, I went out and got Swashbuckling Adventures I like it, I think it will help me out a lot. It even has "low-magic" versions of rangers, bards, and paladins, which will fit perfectly into my setting. The new core classes they present are good too, especially the Highwayman. Some of the material won't be as useful to me, especially a lot of the prestige classes, but that's okay. Overall, I'm glad I got the book.

My plan now is to figure what I'm gonna let the players have access to. Shouldn't be too hard. The new big problem is adapting my existing world to all this material. I was wanting to update my old campaign world anyway, but now it's looking to be a lot more work than my lazy self ever wanted to do. Ah well.

So, I'm taking most of the classes in SA and using them as a base, plus all the rules for firearms there. That will be the foundation of my main area. Eventually I plan to add Oriental Adventure elements in, and maybe even drag parts of Rokugan into the world. I can see where I have to redo my world maps. I'm going to use some of the Theah nations to take the place of some of my exisiting world nations, as they are already really similar. It'll be interesting to see just how much I can use unaltered from the books I have.

 

[National Acrobat]

When I run low magic campaigns, I do one of two things:

1-All spellcasters must multiclass and take the levels of spellcasting at every other level

or

2-The Adept NPC class becomes the only available spellcasting class.

Seems to work pretty good for me.

 

[Ravellion]

I am thinking about: Removing spells from the bard, paladin and ranger (actually, I use an alt ranger anyway). Give the bard d8 hd and 6 skill points per level to compensate.

The other spell casting classes use the bard spell progression. And wizard and sorcerer go up to d6 hd. Clerics do not have heavy armour proficiency (but can very easily acquire it with a feat).

Reduce monetary wealth to 10% from what it is now, but every now and then drop powerful magic items. Instead of a +1 cloak of resistance, a +1 sword, a +1 shield a +1 armour and a +1 ring of protection, give out a Ring of Something with lots of different abilities, worth as much as all those previous items together.

Rav

 

[nharwell]

When I want to run a "low-magic" campaign, I simply use a game system that's better suited to that genre, rather than try to rewrite D&D to make it work...

 

[Razuur]

Did no one even catch my post about adjusting the world, not the game?

 

[Alchemist]

Did no one even catch my post about adjusting the world, not the game?

I certainly did.

I, for one, don't want the characters to be revered as gods just because one (or two, or 3, or all of them) are spellcasters. If spellcasters are so rare and have such influence and perceived power, who is going to want to play a non-caster in a supporting role? The king wants to talk to William the Wizard, but Fred the Fighter is just another fighter. Ho-hum.

Making casters rare without having *extremely* mature players or imposing a no-caster rule on the party looks like a recipe for campaign self-destruct. They might play along for a while, but sooner or later they're going to want to do something you're not prepared to deal with in your campaign, and it's all downhill from there. For example, If I'm such a big-shot spellcaster, why is that chump fighter on the throne? I want that throne.

Alternately, if casters are feared why aren't they snuffed out (cf: The Inquisition, esp. the Spanish variety) by mobs of terrified commoners and/or the local powers that be? I wouldn't want such a loose cannon roaming around my kingdom and would direct all efforts to eliminate it.

Anyhoo, I think the only way your plan works out is to keep casters out of the players hands. Otherwise, it's not going to work for most campaigns. It accentuates the power differential between casters and non-casters instead of moderating or eliminating it.

 

[KnowTheToe]

Those of you who make magic users multiclass, can they multiclass with other magic using classes. I figured if a 6th level character was Sorc 3 / Cleric 3, the character would still only have access to low level spells and abilities. What is your experience?

 

[0-hr]

"Oh wait, there's an anti-magic field around the fortress? Well shoot, let's summon some winged mounts!"

That would be really funny when the summoned critters flew into the AM field and disappeared

 

[Hecatæus]

Not mentioned here so far is the problem of AC not matching ability to hit. Fighters depend on the magic users to make magic armour. I never liked the AC system much. Some have suggested elsewhere that a few feats be available which gradually use one's to hit bonus for their AC. Fighters with their greater number of feats will take all the AC feats naturally. In doing so I would keep the Dex Bonus to AC; remove an Armour's AC natural/material AC bonus and replace it with DR.

But this all gets into Home Rules where you can find more information.

 

[Endur]

D20 Low Magic = Restrictions

After much thought and reading of many threads, I've come to the conclusion that the fix to have a D&D low magic campaign is to restrict what is available.

i.e. don't make new rules. Just have restrictions.

i.e. There are no magic item shops. You can't buy items. End of story.

i.e. Besides the PC wizard, there is one other (good) wizard on the continent. Deal with it.

i.e. There are temples, but none of the priests in the temples other than the PC priest have access to spellcasting.

if you don't like certain spells, eliminate them or modify the spells, but leave the classes the same. For instance, the Fly spell requires a specially prepared material component of a broom or a rug.

I've liked all of the suggestions I've read in this thread (CofC magic system, d20 modern magic system, mages as prestige classes, Adepts, etc.), but I think restrictions will probably work best.

Tom