Limited magic campaign......has never failed yet!

[Sir ThornCrest]

magic only in the hand of mystical beasts....its awsome & yes for role playing

why does no magic = role playing?
The Medusa a mystical beast, with no magic to combat becomes a little tougher. The players have to work out stratagem to conquer the beast, more than usual. This causes interaction thus = role play. Without magic the party really has to work together to thwart enemies, there is a lot more interaction. example; they have to motivate NPC's to go get the troll hiding in the hills.

I know why divine is gone but why is arcane?

#1 its not gone, in fact its on a come back. Only Elves have it-that the humans know of and inherantly magical / mystical creatures. No human wizard/warlock/sorcerer is known, doesnt say they dont exist and be encountered while adventuring. When the gods went to war they used everything at there disposal ie mages as well. They were used as weapons. Over the thousand year war they too died out. People begain to hunt them down blaming them (and demi humans) for their woes in life...So you might encounter one in the world while adventuring but that to date is unheard of bwcause there is little to no adventuring. Its been several hundred years since the end of major conflict. Most that could teach magic were killed, coupled with human short life spans = most magic is gone...waiting to be found again by some curious adventurers brave enough to leave the kingdoms patrolled land.

The adventuring pc is all but extinct. Kingdoms are isolationist, very little trade, and the little has just started. In the wars so many treaties and trusts were broken Kingdoms now supply for there own. Most long distant sailing vessels gone, only a hand full of pirates possess the skills and abilities to navigate the open seas. And they use it to rob and pillage sea shore towns. Kingdoms may have some shore hugging craft, but really thats it. This leaves most kingdoms with little to no info about the rest of the world. Who can afford to trust in trade again, very few?

If a character plays a wizard, he can, but he has no spells to start off with. He is a sage-an educated historian, that can read ruins etc. He is adventuring to find magic so he can cast spells. He incidentally is basically an educated tomb raiding rogue until he finds magic, or somehow gains the ability to cast it.

Elves guard their nature based magic and refuse to train anyone other that a select few "the chosen."

think the movie postman with Kevin Costner.......people are isolated from each other, ignorant of the world. Roving bands of bandits. 99% of the worlds surface is unknown. Only the pc's will and few others have ever braved the unknown for hundereds of years now.

ThornCrest

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

This really increases your pc's....

You see they may have (after adventuring) a magical or two. Since nobody else is adventuring whatever magicals they find will be setting them above all others. So there is magic but you just got to go get it. They will undoubtedly have the only magical around, or do they? Most people will keep them hidden. And when they come into a new town with a glowing sword will they be meet with awe? fear? apathy? All towns are different, most very suspicious about having strangers.

We have in the past allowed Palidons, rangers to use their innate powers and spell casting but this is somewhat limited...your DM should set up rules prior...

Thorncresat

 

[Mallus]

Instead, try embracing it. Instead of trying to constantly nerf the magic in the world, why not use those oddball tricks to make the game more interesting.

Sure, using oddball magic tricks to overcome obstacles is fun. No argument there.

The problem arises when magic begins to be the only solution to problems. When casters arnd items are so plentiful that the whole skill-system (and non-magical abilites in general) is rendered obsolete, for instance.

It doesn't have to be like this, buts its certainly a danger in the default D&D paradigm (and it always has been).

I think eliminating the bulk of the settings magic is too draconian (pun intended). What's the point of playing a fantasy game if you can't wield the fantastical?

Howver, limiting magic to a greater degree than is suggested by the RAW is a viable alternative. Its nice if winning strategies didn't involve magic every once and a while (though you can certainly make that true for very high fantasy games, its just harder...)

 

[Crothian]

why does no magic = role playing?
The Medusa a mystical beast, with no magic to combat becomes a little tougher. The players have to work out stratagem to conquer the beast, more than usual. This causes interaction thus = role play.

Actually it leads to players planning and talking strategy which is not always role playing......

 

[Aristotle]

It seems to me that there is a faction of people who enjoy 'low magic' settings, although their definitions of low magic are quite varied, and there is obviously a great number of people who don't like such settings (as is evident from the anti-low magic posts that quickly flood most threads about low magic).

Frankly, I fail to see how "less magic" = "more roleplaying". But there you go.
I don't think most of the pro-low magic folks think that less magic offers greater role playing opportunity than a setting with more magic. I'm sure there are those who feel that way, and the exact opposite as well, but in my experience it isn't the level of magic in a setting that decides how much roleplaying gets done. That is ultimately up the the DM and the players.

it might result in frustration, resentment and finding another DM.
I don't think I've ever lost a player, or had a player threaten to leave, over something as trivial as the mechanics of the game. The only time this has ever come up in a game was when I wanted to run a game with a heavy religous influence (think Prophecy), and a very religous player expressed concern over possible content. Once again, in my opinion, it is the story that matters 75% of the time. Any setting (low magic, high magic, or whatever) rarely matters as much as the quality of the story, and the quality of the game master. A bad story or a game master that tries to control the players will definately lose players.

And I actually prefer my players/PCs having lots of options since there are more chances that they will do something creative and interesting.
I really don't see the "less options" argument. Low magic generally means (to me, at least) that encountering unfriendly magic is just about as uncommon as encountering friendly magic. In other words, the playing field is fairly even most of the time, and the proportion of options available to the player characters are kept mostly to scale with the number of options that can be used against them. I think creative players, who work hard at coming up with surprising sollutions to the problems you throw at them, can be creative regardless of how much magic is available to them (so long as the mechanics of the game allow for creativity).

DnD is "high magic".... always has been, and IMO, it always should be.
That may have once been true but now, more than ever, DnD is a tool used to power settings with all sorts of variation on magic, technology, and other facets of the game. Go to your bookshelf, or the local book store, and pull down a few different setting books. In some the changes are subtle, and in others they are less so. In my opinion the rules shouldn't dictate any aspect of a newly created setting absolutely. A DnD setting shouldn't be forced to include elves, magic, polytheism, or any other setting element simply because the 'implied setting' that ships with the DnD core rules has those things.


Low magic settings can be fun. You can have great adventures. You can experience amazing role playing. And, yes, all of those things can be acomplished in high magic settings too. Some folks just like a 'different' setting now and then. I've run incredibly high magic campaigns and campaigns with no magic at all. In the end my players' were rarely concerned with such things so long as they were given a clear picture of what the setting entailed beforehand and the story they took part in was enjoyable and memorable.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

pc's say less magic = more play

With this campaign setting players and DM's have noticed that we talk to each other more, we have to depend on our skills, witts and abilities more often. Without magic to remove the mundane everything is harder, more challenging. The pc's also enjoy having some of the only magicals around, this in contrast to normal campaigns, where magic is commonplace.

In this campaign its a great reason to adventure NO ONE ELSE DOES! You will be the first visitors in some villages for years....its kinda cool again think Postman.

Sneaking up on the huge Bug Bear Barbarian guard requires suspense in the form of a series of rolls as opposed to saying we are all in magical silence 15' and in a invisio 10' sphere.

Not all of our campaigns are like this. Its just different, new & kinda refreshing back to the basics...After having parties casting 4th 5th sometimes higher level spells it really is refreshing. Kinda like a steak after a week of your wife making casseroles. Basic yet really hits the spot!

ThornCrest

It seems to me that there is a faction of people who enjoy 'low magic' settings, although their definitions of low magic are quite varied, and there is obviously a great number of people who don't like such settings (as is evident from the anti-low magic posts that quickly flood most threads about low magic).

Frankly, I fail to see how "less magic" = "more roleplaying". But there you go.
I don't think most of the pro-low magic folks think that less magic offers greater role playing opportunity than a setting with more magic. I'm sure there are those who feel that way, and the exact opposite as well, but in my experience it isn't the level of magic in a setting that decides how much roleplaying gets done. That is ultimately up the the DM and the players.

it might result in frustration, resentment and finding another DM.
I don't think I've ever lost a player, or had a player threaten to leave, over something as trivial as the mechanics of the game. The only time this has ever come up in a game was when I wanted to run a game with a heavy religous influence (think Prophecy), and a very religous player expressed concern over possible content. Once again, in my opinion, it is the story that matters 75% of the time. Any setting (low magic, high magic, or whatever) rarely matters as much as the quality of the story, and the quality of the game master. A bad story or a game master that tries to control the players will definately lose players.

And I actually prefer my players/PCs having lots of options since there are more chances that they will do something creative and interesting.
I really don't see the "less options" argument. Low magic generally means (to me, at least) that encountering unfriendly magic is just about as uncommon as encountering friendly magic. In other words, the playing field is fairly even most of the time, and the proportion of options available to the player characters are kept mostly to scale with the number of options that can be used against them. I think creative players, who work hard at coming up with surprising sollutions to the problems you throw at them, can be creative regardless of how much magic is available to them (so long as the mechanics of the game allow for creativity).

DnD is "high magic".... always has been, and IMO, it always should be.
That may have once been true but now, more than ever, DnD is a tool used to power settings with all sorts of variation on magic, technology, and other facets of the game. Go to your bookshelf, or the local book store, and pull down a few different setting books. In some the changes are subtle, and in others they are less so. In my opinion the rules shouldn't dictate any aspect of a newly created setting absolutely. A DnD setting shouldn't be forced to include elves, magic, polytheism, or any other setting element simply because the 'implied setting' that ships with the DnD core rules has those things.


Low magic settings can be fun. You can have great adventures. You can experience amazing role playing. And, yes, all of those things can be acomplished in high magic settings too. Some folks just like a 'different' setting now and then. I've run incredibly high magic campaigns and campaigns with no magic at all. In the end my players' were rarely concerned with such things so long as they were given a clear picture of what the setting entailed beforehand and the story they took part in was enjoyable and memorable.

 

[Doctor Shaft]

Keep in mind that everyones' version of "Roleplay" is different, as evidence in other previous threads. My reviving an NPC over a PC will be called good roleplay at one table, and then obstructive playing at another. Both intepretations are valid. No one really "roleplays" less or more, because the definition is so broad.

If it weren't, then I could very easily say something like "LARP is the ultimate expression of roleplaying." In one way of defining that, it is... but since not everyone who hears the word "roleplay" thinks of the same thing, that's not the case.

Anyway, I can see where you're going with this thread. I don't think it's necessarily the "low magic" that makes roleplaying easier, but rather it's the options you allow into your game.

I, personally, am not too fond of "Standard D&D" or "Out-of-the-box" D&D. I don't like how they do the gold, I don't like they do the items, etc. The place I play at now runs by the D&D rules, but the setting is low magic. This creates a different feel, not necessarily because it's "low magic" but because things are tailored the way the players like it.

You can still have a high-magic D&D game that is great for roleplaying and the like. It's the options that players enjoy. Most players turn to low magic because they find more use for the other skills sets in D&D that high magic inherently destroys.

For instance... in a high magic game, theoretically when I get to higher levels, I will never need to put ranks in jump, balance, tumble, etc. I'd put a few in there, and then just boost myself with the appropriate items. Or... relying on the party, I simply cast magic to solve my woes. In a high magic world, magic items tend to be the uber-solution. Stuck in a cave with loot? In a low magic world, you'll have to face the logistics of not carrying it all, or organizing physical parties to do this. And then selling it. It becomes more complicated in some ways, and opens up avenues for different kinds of roleplaying.

In high magic, yes, you could conceivably just look in the magic spell sections of the PHB, and find a way to rule your way out of danger, and escape with the loot too. This is also fun for some people, but not for others. Personally, I hate games where magic powers start to play Deux ex Machina too much. But that's just my opinion.

D&D was made as a high level magic game... but I'll never embrace that facet of it. I think it works wonderfully well when things are toned down. Or, when they do get high-magic, there's a serious tone to it, one that suggests awe and responsibility. A place where 12th level characters don't just hang out at bars with their Commoner friend Tommy, but are really people that have been zapped out of one world and stuffed into another where things are, simply put, amazing and convoluted all at once.

Again, you can achieve all of this in high magic worlds too. It's just that some of us don't like that kind of thing, and would rather have things toned down.

Example: Lord of the Rings is not a high magic world. It has high-magic, to be sure. But the characters, etc., do not approach situations with a "Well, we'll cleverly use these following spells to bypass the DM's traps, then port into the room, then thieve all the treasure, AND THEN 'port out with it all." That's a cool story, but not something that all of us like to read.

D&D does not have to be nor does it inherently call for high magic.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

Dr. Shaft..thats my point to much magic takes away from the skill based rogue etc.

by 10th level divine/arcane/psionic
-who needs a rogue. Cast inviso if you need to sneak, teleport for travel, detect traps, read minds for info gather there is a spell for just about everything and this is casting a spell not playing not rolling the dice little to no interaction.

-who needs warriors, rangers, fighters? (in some cases) take a look at the 5th, 6th level astral constructs...they are devestating, summon monster 4,5 or 6th they get pretty damn good. Gate spell whatever you need most of the time there is a spell taylor made. You can beef up a lower level follower or your self for that matter. Cast spells to find people instead of actually using tracking, shadowing etc. I am not suggesting the ranger, rogue or fighter are worthless but their skills become unneeded as you progress to the higher level spells.

no magic campaigns not to much fun. To much magic is less fun, boring for many players. The balance is in the middle and having the pc's not cast spells to shape the worl;d the way they want it but rather have just a few magicals to empower them and make them something more than they already are, and thats the fantasy part of fantasy role playing. We dont play into epic levels for the reason its just to much.

Example of the campaign setting, at 5th level the party may have a total of: 1 bag of holding, thats old and ragedy looking. 3+2 arrows, 1 ring of fire protection, 1 wand of magic missiles 1x daily.

By tenth level a +3 sword (used to be int but jem was broken) a +2 axe, a +2 shield (use to be +4), a couple of wands, a couple of rings, a helm of telepathy (broken has limited usage) etc etc

so there is magic and it will make you stand out and empower you but its a less frequent and no spell casting pc's.....

Thorncrest

Keep in mind that everyones' version of "Roleplay" is different, as evidence in other previous threads. My reviving an NPC over a PC will be called good roleplay at one table, and then obstructive playing at another. Both intepretations are valid. No one really "roleplays" less or more, because the definition is so broad.

If it weren't, then I could very easily say something like "LARP is the ultimate expression of roleplaying." In one way of defining that, it is... but since not everyone who hears the word "roleplay" thinks of the same thing, that's not the case.

Anyway, I can see where you're going with this thread. I don't think it's necessarily the "low magic" that makes roleplaying easier, but rather it's the options you allow into your game.

I, personally, am not too fond of "Standard D&D" or "Out-of-the-box" D&D. I don't like how they do the gold, I don't like they do the items, etc. The place I play at now runs by the D&D rules, but the setting is low magic. This creates a different feel, not necessarily because it's "low magic" but because things are tailored the way the players like it.

You can still have a high-magic D&D game that is great for roleplaying and the like. It's the options that players enjoy. Most players turn to low magic because they find more use for the other skills sets in D&D that high magic inherently destroys.

For instance... in a high magic game, theoretically when I get to higher levels, I will never need to put ranks in jump, balance, tumble, etc. I'd put a few in there, and then just boost myself with the appropriate items. Or... relying on the party, I simply cast magic to solve my woes. In a high magic world, magic items tend to be the uber-solution. Stuck in a cave with loot? In a low magic world, you'll have to face the logistics of not carrying it all, or organizing physical parties to do this. And then selling it. It becomes more complicated in some ways, and opens up avenues for different kinds of roleplaying.

In high magic, yes, you could conceivably just look in the magic spell sections of the PHB, and find a way to rule your way out of danger, and escape with the loot too. This is also fun for some people, but not for others. Personally, I hate games where magic powers start to play Deux ex Machina too much. But that's just my opinion.

D&D was made as a high level magic game... but I'll never embrace that facet of it. I think it works wonderfully well when things are toned down. Or, when they do get high-magic, there's a serious tone to it, one that suggests awe and responsibility. A place where 12th level characters don't just hang out at bars with their Commoner friend Tommy, but are really people that have been zapped out of one world and stuffed into another where things are, simply put, amazing and convoluted all at once.

Again, you can achieve all of this in high magic worlds too. It's just that some of us don't like that kind of thing, and would rather have things toned down.

Example: Lord of the Rings is not a high magic world. It has high-magic, to be sure. But the characters, etc., do not approach situations with a "Well, we'll cleverly use these following spells to bypass the DM's traps, then port into the room, then thieve all the treasure, AND THEN 'port out with it all." That's a cool story, but not something that all of us like to read.

D&D does not have to be nor does it inherently call for high magic.

 

[Saeviomagy]

by 10th level divine/arcane/psionic
-who needs a rogue. Cast inviso if you need to sneak, teleport for travel, detect traps, read minds for info gather there is a spell for just about everything and this is casting a spell not playing not rolling the dice little to no interaction.

I think maybe your lack of enjoyment of a high level game hinges on the fact that you have had a very restricted experience of high level D&D, and thus have a limited understanding of it.

Anyhoo - quit telling us that our games are bad. Try saying how your game is good instead.

 

[Aristotle]

I think maybe your lack of enjoyment of a high level game hinges on the fact that you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

I love low magic settings, but I have to agree with Saeviomagy. Standard D&D, high magic settings, and even epic level play can all be a blast to play (with plenty of excellent role playing opportunities and difficult scenarios for players to work through) if you know how to run them.

Judging by that last post, are you sure you have an issue with "high magic" or is your issue really with "high level play". Epic play is epic in every way, not just magic (although I'll admit some higher level feat chains for epic martial characters would balance things a bit better). Magic just makes an already difficult game a little harder to run effectively. Lots of people, some quite well versed in the rules, have difficulty writing/running adventures for high level play.