I'm an incompetent normal-magic DM--how do I fix it?

[Heathansson]

I feel like I'm in the same boat as the OP. I tend to shy away from running wizards at the party, because I suck at them. I also notice that as a player I tend to play fighters a lot. One time I deigned to play a cleric, and I felt the experience helped me from a standpoint of running enemy npc clerics.
If you are like me, one of those one trick pony players, maybe take a wizard out on the road as a pc and check out what it's got under the hood.

 

[Numion]

Why on earth would you take that foolish statement seriously? Ignore such rubbish!

I was quoted out of context. My comment was made in response to this:

Yep Dogbrain, I've been running a low-powered campaign for the last 12 years now. I find it more rewarding to DM and play a lower-powered campaign- too much magic is a crutch for ONLY using magical methods and brute force to solve problems.

In any case I'd prefer if you treated my opinions with a little more courtesy than calling them "rubbish" or "foolish".

 

[Brother MacLaren]

I prefer low-NPC-magic games, without doing much to affect PC abilities. NPC magic has to be a bit rarer to justify a pseudo-medievalish feel, which really is a tone that I enjoy (e.g. castles, mounted knights, etc.). Games with even the DMG level of magic should probably resemble the modern age quite a bit more, which is not a setting that interests me at all.

If you tone down NPC caster frequency, PCs are slightly hosed in immediate short-term impacts, but also become movers and shakers much more quickly.

 

[DonTadow]

For a long time I've thought I that I prefer running low-powered, low-magic games. I haven't minded playing normal/high-magic, I just haven't liked running it. I ended up scuttling my one real attempt at a high-magic campaign in FR, in part due to my inability to sort out all of the consequences of such prolific magic (and in part because I wasn't familiar with the setting outside of the FRCS and some of the players were very familiar with the setting). At the time, I blamed it more on the published setting and it feeling like doing homework when preparing for the next session. I started a homebrew, experimental lower-magic setting (the experiment being the use of "hero abilities" to compensate using the NPC wealth per level guidelines for the PCs). I've been very comfortable with it, but lately I've been missing all the treasure and thinking that perhaps I'd prefer the something a little closer to core. Then last night, I read this post in another thread:



That's when I realized that it's not so much that I prefer low-magic as it is that I'm "an incompetent DM who can't make a normal-magic game work."

So, how do I fix it?

Are there any campaign settings, city books, high-level adventures, or even story hours here on the boards that would serve as good examples on how to make normal-magic game work well once the characters hit level 11-20? I hear that Eberron does a good job of incorporating magic into the setting, but not so much with high level characters. FR is fairly high-magic, but as far as I can tell from the FRCS the "big guns" of the setting seem to stay in the background in a cold war of sorts.

Anyway, the current campaign will probably be wrapping up within the next 6 months or so (maybe sooner, if we can't make our proposed internet game work now that half of the players moved out of state), and if I can't talk someone else into DMing for a bit I'll want to try something closer to core, I think. I just need to figure out how to gain a little competence in that area first.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Oh please , Numian sounds "Incompetent". for making that statement. To label anyone an incompetnent is wrong (surprised he's not banned or otherwise). People like different things. I've run high and I've run low and my group far more enjoys the low magic campaign. It's a bit closer to the fantasy world they like to watch on television. To say low magic world's make you a bad DM is like saying Lord of the Rings is a bad set of fantasy movies because there are only 8 spells cast in the entire 14 hour epic. That is what we like to get close to.

PLay the game you want and have fun doing it. Don't switch up because of some dude's false impression on waht dungeons and dragons is. Anyone whom tries to push their views on you is just trying to improve their own position.

Ironically, I've oftne found new DMs use magic or high magic as a crutch, allowing a monster or npc's abilities to bel imited to that of their magical object/items. They use magic to turn encounters into battles of paper, rock, scissors.

YOu'd probably get a lot of inspiration for your low-magic game from the iron heroes books. GREAT set of books for fans of low-magic campaign even if you're not running all of their rules or classes.

I agree with what was said, low-magic doesnt have to be no magic. I still have magic, even in my iron heroes campaign. The key is to make magic important and not just another set of weapons.

 

[Agent Oracle]

That's when I realized that it's not so much that I prefer low-magic as it is that I'm "an incompetent DM who can't make a normal-magic game work."

Okay, one, there is nothing wrong with not liking high magic. I never plan campaigns to run past 10th level, does that mean I dislike 6th level spells? No! It means that I want to be able to finish the gosh-darn story before real life interferes and players start vanishing! If they actually finish the story, I'll start making up another story.

I don't think you have a fear of magic, I think you have a fear of killing your players.

The easiest way to overcome a fear of magic, and magic items is to play the game by the book. Roll treasure according to the entries, sooner or later, (probably sooner) someone will come up with a rod, staff, or magic weapon with a special function.

Equally, throw them encounters that are of their CR. Mix up lesser baddies in groups with bigger "boss" baddies. A wyrmling dragon and some kobolds, as an example. Start small, work your way up. Fight with the book open to that monster's page, or use a "monster sheet" to write out everything it does.

Write up a short campaign, or run several from modules. you'll begin getting a better feel for the balance.

Oh, and let characters die. it happens. better to go out on the pikes of orcs than be overwhelmed by apathy.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Okay, one, there is nothing wrong with not liking high magic. I never plan campaigns to run past 10th level, does that mean I dislike 6th level spells? No! It means that I want to be able to finish the gosh-darn story before real life interferes and players start vanishing! If they actually finish the story, I'll start making up another story.

I don't think you have a fear of magic, I think you have a fear of killing your players.

The easiest way to overcome a fear of magic, and magic items is to play the game by the book. Roll treasure according to the entries, sooner or later, (probably sooner) someone will come up with a rod, staff, or magic weapon with a special function.

Equally, throw them encounters that are of their CR. Mix up lesser baddies in groups with bigger "boss" baddies. A wyrmling dragon and some kobolds, as an example. Start small, work your way up. Fight with the book open to that monster's page, or use a "monster sheet" to write out everything it does.

Write up a short campaign, or run several from modules. you'll begin getting a better feel for the balance.

Oh, and let characters die. it happens. better to go out on the pikes of orcs than be overwhelmed by apathy.

I think that is really the best advice. Simply play the game as is, and only make changes if you really encounter problems.

For High Level play, Monte Cooks advice (linked somewhere above) is good.
To sum up: Don't block and hinder magic capabilities of PCs - count on them.
(You can sometimes hinder them, but not on a regular basis)

Characters dieing is perfectly acceptable - that's why Raise Dead is available at so early levels. Total Party Kills are the only thing you want to avoid, since they cause a break in your campaign (unless you have prepared for such an event, which might be sensible). TPKs should be rare though, if you use the encounter guidelines carefully enough and know your players.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I was quoted out of context. My comment was made in response to this:



In any case I'd prefer if you treated my opinions with a little more courtesy than calling them "rubbish" or "foolish".

Ah, I see, your broad, sweeping, and inaccurate statement was a snippy response to someone else's broad, sweeping, and inaccurate post. I have made more than a few of those myself. Knowing this does make it much more palatable.

Knight Isa - I run either way, high or low magic, depending on what I want from the campaign. My homebrew is low on magic items, largely because magic has only recently returned to the world (so magic items are either very old or very new), and my favored published setting (Iron Kingdoms) is, err, differently magic. (Possibly low magic, but with an industrialized form of magic items that is almost mass produced.)

Go with what you like running, if your players are happy, and you are happy, then all is good. Do give Eberron a looking over, if I had not already started using Iron Kingdoms when that came out I would likely be running it. I was surprised to find that I liked it, but then I am an Auld Grump.

The Auld Grump

 

[Gothmog]

Yep Dogbrain, I've been running a low-powered campaign for the last 12 years now. I find it more rewarding to DM and play a lower-powered campaign- too much magic is a crutch for ONLY using magical methods and brute force to solve problems.

I'm the one that originally made the comment Numion responded to in an old thread. What I meant by my statement was in my experience playing D&D (20+ years now), the DMs that ONLY run high fantasy games tend to use magic as a band-aid for all problems, and that players tend to rely on magic to circumvent all problems. Why try to KO a guard, bluff your way past other sentries, undermine structural supports and free prisoners to take down the bandit chieftain when you can go invisible, summon a horde of creatures, stone shape and fireball the place into cinders? Not to mention with Detect Evil, Zone of Truth, True Seeing, and various divinations make it VERY hard to run a good mystery/investigation that can't be solved with minimal effort. To counteract that and still make it challenging, every bad guy has to have just as much magic to counteract the PCs. While some people might enjoy that much magic, to me it becomes a modus operendi for ALL adventures (witness the numerous scry/buff/teleport tactics, or Fly/Imp Invis/Fireball wizard done to death), and takes away fun and unusual opportunities that are present in a lower-magic game.

Does it make me an incompetent DM to prefer low magic? I don't think so. I have better things to do than sit there and memorize dozens of pages of spell and item descriptions, looking for counters to each of the PCs abilities and/or trying to squeeze the system for every ounce of synergy I can. I've been running a successful low-magic D&D game for 13 years now (characters around 12th level, with about 1/4 the magic suggested in the core books), and my players still love it and talk about old events in it frequently. With my prep time for games becoming more restricted with time, I prefer to focus on plot, making memorable NPCs and villians, and raising interesting moral quandries than engaging in a magical arms race with the players. Does that make ALL high-magic DMs incompetent storytellers or have less deep campaigns? Absolutely not, its just not a playstyle I enjoy, and there is a tendency of inexperienced DMs to go very high magic and neglect other areas of their game.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Gothmog - the problem is that you made the assumption that not running a low magic campaign is the sign of an incompetent DM. And that is what does make you an incompetent DM in my eyes.

I have been running games since 1976, so the length of time 'in harness' does not exactly swing my opinion from my current stance that all styles of play are acceptable if the players and GM are having fun. And for what it is worth I have not had any difficulty running high level mystery adventures. Just remember what tools the PCs have to discover the clues, allow for them, and make them part of the game. Remember, the bad guys have access to some good stuff too.

And now back to our originally scheduled topic.

Knight Isa - One of the best ways to get a grip on a 'normal magic' game is to run it from level one, learning the feel at the same time and rate as the players. My first response to the treasure table in the DMG was 'wow, that is a lot of treasure', and I very nearly chopped it down. But I also remembered comments from my players regarding 'two copper pieces and some pocket fluff? Huzzah!' (Never underestimate the power of a sarcastic player...) So I gave it a try, aside from dropping the availability of magic items (but replacing them with treasure of similar GP value) and found that in some regards they were right - the players were having more fun. (I will admit to being a tightwad in regards to treasure if I do not use a guideline...)

The Auld Grump

 

[DonTadow]

I think the whole incompetient word syhould be avoided in either case. Everyone has preferences. Both can be used as crutches; high magic and low magic. It is a matter of waht type of campaign you are running and what you wish. It's very difficult to realistically run a mystery or investigatiion in a high level high magic campign. The focus usually becomes about proving the mystery as opposed to solving it.