D&D 5E "I would play in a 5e game with no caster classes at all" (a poll)

[jmartkdr2]

Yes I would consider playing in such a game, if I knew the dm or had a good friend endorse them (or something like that.)

If I'm looking at LFP game postings online it'd be a turn off. Not because of a lack of casters by itself, but the low-fantasy type of game the restriction implies. I don't enjoy low-fantasy as much as high-fantasy.

 

[Kurotowa]

I find that utterly ridiculous. I’ve been involved in several all martial campaigns and they were a blast. No magic or low magic are my favorite types of D&D.

You can say that all you want, but it is a true recounting of my experience. An experience with is both as subjective and as true as yours.

Now, maybe it's a difference in what an "all martial" campaign consists of. TwoSix said they'd define it as "no spell slots", not "no magic", and both the attempted campaigns I was in were the more restrictive "no magic" ones. Maybe it's a matter of DM preparation, of what adjustments they make to fit the concept and where they want the campaign to go. Both times the DM was trying to run some high concept "the first campaign arc is about encountering magic for the first time", not run a committed "no magic" campaign, and maybe that makes all the difference.

So maybe I just had bad luck. Still, twice burned is enough for me. It'd be a very hard sell to get me to bite on another no magic D&D campaign. Low magic, maybe. Something that allowed all the half casters and non-spell supernatural abilities, but cut out the full casters. But I don't think D&D is the right system for a no magic game.

 

[ECMO3]

I find that utterly ridiculous. I’ve been involved in several all martial campaigns and they were a blast. No magic or low magic are my favorite types of D&D.

I am glad you liked it, for me, I would find it difficult to even think of it as D&D without abundant magic.

My ideal setting is something like Halruaa, where even peasants have some magic cantrips they can cast and non-casters are outcasts.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I am glad you liked it, for me, I would find it difficult to even think of it as D&D without abundant magic.

My ideal setting is something like Halruaa, where even peasants have some magic cantrips they can cast and non-casters are outcasts.

Yes, but no one says you can’t play D&D that way.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

You can say that all you want, but it is a true recounting of my experience. An experience with is both as subjective and as true as yours.

Now, maybe it's a difference in what an "all martial" campaign consists of. TwoSix said they'd define it as "no spell slots", not "no magic", and both the attempted campaigns I was in were the more restrictive "no magic" ones. Maybe it's a matter of DM preparation, of what adjustments they make to fit the concept and where they want the campaign to go. Both times the DM was trying to run some high concept "the first campaign arc is about encountering magic for the first time", not run a committed "no magic" campaign, and maybe that makes all the difference.

So maybe I just had bad luck. Still, twice burned is enough for me. It'd be a very hard sell to get me to bite on another no magic D&D campaign. Low magic, maybe. Something that allowed all the half casters and non-spell supernatural abilities, but cut out the full casters. But I don't think D&D is the right system for a no magic game.

I don’t have any issue with the idea that it didn’t work for you, just that idea that can’t work for anyone.

 

[Minigiant]

Do you have sources for the Adventurer, Aristocrat, and Scholar?

Unfortunately, they were homebrew of the DM. I don't have the details anymore.

What I remember.

The Adventurer was basically Fighter/Rogue. It could take Actions as bonus actions but was limited per long rest. Like you could Dash as a bonus action once. Dodge as a bonus action once. Attack as a bonus attack once.

The Aristocrat was basically magicless Swords/Valor Bard with a pet Bodyguard.

The Scholar could refine items like potions and poisons and get a power based on each skill.

 

[Maxperson]

No

Why not? The OP implied that the spell slots thing was because of casting spells. No spells and the "slots" are just a smite resource and not spell slots at all. Paladin would fit at that point from what I can tell.

 

[TwoSix]

If I'm looking at LFP game postings online it'd be a turn off. Not because of a lack of casters by itself, but the low-fantasy type of game the restriction implies. I don't enjoy low-fantasy as much as high-fantasy.

To be fair, I'm not envisioning this game as low magic; I'm planning it as a setting where magic is something that isn't intrinsic to the wielder. Magic is the province of items and pacts with outsiders, and magitech type items are relatively abundant. Magic simply isn't gained by progressing your character, the players have to adventure to find it.

 

[jmartkdr2]

To be fair, I'm not envisioning this game as low magic; I'm planning it as a setting where magic is something that isn't intrinsic to the wielder. Magic is the province of items and pacts with outsiders, and magitech type items are relatively abundant. Magic simply isn't gained by progressing your character, the players have to adventure to find it.

...yeah I'd play in that game.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Why not? The OP implied that the spell slots thing was because of casting spells. No spells and the "slots" are just a smite resource and not spell slots at all. Paladin would fit at that point from what I can tell.

It might be fine by the OP, but to me it doesn’t fit the premise. When we play no casters we exclude paladins.