Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6558532" data-attributes="member: 996">It doesn't seem like that to me, but go on... Quite the opposite, it would tend to increase the difference between caster and non-caster builds and how they are played and manage their respective resources.Changing the duration of short or long rests should be fairly transparent.  The vast majority (I can't think of an exception) of PC abilities are either at-will (quite a few, if you include /everything/ PCs can do, however universal or trivial), short-rest recharge (relatively few, really), or long-rest recharge (the majority of really meaningful ones).  Changing a short rest from an hour to 8 hours sleep, and a long rest from 8 hrs with 12 hours between long rests to a full day of R&R in a (relatively) safe environment, with a week between long rests, actually has no impact at all on the relative power of the classes - iff the DM paces his campaign such that the number of encounters and the number of short rest between long rests averages about the same as it does under the normal assumptions (which the DMG, IIRC, states as 6-8 med-hard encounters between long rests, and at least implies (IMHO) that there would also be 2 short rests, on average, between long ones). If you want a lower magic world, you need to do 2 things:1) cut down on the number/power of magic items you give out.  this is easy, it's entirely within the normal realm of DMing, you can even reduce the number of items all the way down to 0, since items are /not/ assumed in D&D's level progression the way they were in prior eds.2) ban full-caster or 'primary caster' builds.  That means EK, AT, Pally, Ranger OK - full Sorc, Wiz, Cleric, Druid, Bard, Warlock, banned or restricted.   You could make primary caster classes into de-facto PRCs.  For instance, you could take Wizard 1 if you've raised your INT by at least 1 since first level and have Expertise in Arcana, and have acquired a spellbook during your adventures (since they're too rare to buy).  If you want to make magic less overt, you could trim spell lists.   Fun is subjective.  D&D 5e is very open about being just a starting point for the DM.  Yes, you could do either or both those things and it's still very much in the spirit of 5e.  You can do whatever you want, up to and including re-writing the 5e rules until you are not only figuratively, but actually, running it out of 1e, 2e, or BECMI rulebooks, and you'd still be running D&D in the spirit of 5e.   It'd just be a matter of banning most classes and sub-classes.  You'd still have barbarians, monks, champions, battlemasters, thieves and assassins.  Lack of healing would be a serious issue, and you'd want to be careful with encounter design and pacing, but you could make it work, and, 5e, by it's own philosophy, is never the wrong game. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />   (Still, there're games that do magic /that/ low significantly better and/or more easily - like 4e or Iron Heroes or 7 Seas or even FATE or - well, almost any game that's not D&D - but, that doesn't mean you /shouldn't/ go ahead and run it in 5e.) Like whether it's fun, that's an answer each group would have to answer for itself. Not that any of that is false -  a lot of it may even be more or less true of most versions of D&D - but it's not quite that daunting an undertaking.  Blanket banning primary casters or all caters or all builds that use magic is excising the majority of PC options, but it's not hard to explain or implement.  Tailoring encounters to the abilities and resources of the resulting party means fewer and/or weaker encounters (because HD don't allow much healing), but simply not selecting monsters that need magic to defeat (or ignoring the traits that make it so) is not that cumbersome compared to tailoring encounters to any other party, or trying to keep everyone in party of mixed full-/half-/non-casters interested and relevant - it could even prove to be easier.</blockquote>

Verification