Low level, low magic

[Bendris Noulg]

I still don't buy this argument. Most of the items higher-level PCs in D&D carry are of the type that only enhance what the PC already can do, not something that allows him to do completely new things. There are the flying boots maybe, but usually it's just ability boosting items, more potent weapons and armor.

Actually, those are part of the equation... When you add in all the "+" and special abilities, the character's ability to defend himself (which, unless you use a Defense modifier, isn't squat in D&D, unless you're a Monk) or attack his foes and deal damage to them becomes more about the powers of the items than about the character's abilities. Rather than the character's ability being enhanced by these items, the items gain a slight boon from the character's abilities. The only notable exception being BAB, which one might say "figures..."

Then add in all the minor goodies that generally make your Sword & Sorcery genre character come across more like an as-yet unnamed X-Man, and the whole thing stops being exciting and just turns into cheese.

It's never been a question what the equipment can do - the character always defines what can be done, and the items strengthen that concept. I guess someone could construct a character that was a rogue but emulated being a wizard through items. Then it would be more of a case what the items can do, but it wouldn't be very efficient or useful.

The issue, I think, is the ratio of that strengthening. It's the line between Hero and Super-Hero (which is relative to the individual and the group, wouldn't you say?).

Riiiight...

Humor Radar off?

And there's no need to call names, no matter what hong said.

Two things. One, I wrote that before hong posted (I think I did, anyway... Let me check... Yes, indeed, I did post that before hand.). Two, like I say in this last quote, I was a munchkin in 7th Grade (killed Asmodeus all nine times and everything!). But then my mom (another fantasy nut) took me to see Conan (likely unaware of some moments of content) and my taste in the genre changed (8th Grade). Then I saw Excalibur, and my tastes changed some more (8th Grade still, I think... It was 3-4 months later). Then I read some Amber novels and got a subscription to Heavy Metal (in 9th Grade, thanks to Uncle Diedrich for turning me on to those two angles of fantasy), and my tastes haven't stopped changing since. This is just a general trait that people, naturally, evolve through over time (be glad you didn't know me during my "Gor" period). Tastes in movies, books, tv shows, cars, partners/mates, and such are quite varied and diverse.

To which my point is, the statement isn't about calling people names, because I don't. What I'm stating is that the only time I've seen a D&D game have as much friggin' loot as standard 3E dictates as the norm, I was in 7th Grade, and I was a munchkin. To which, "everybody" is not meant all inclusive, but I'm sure that most of the people reading this that have played for more than 10 years can look back on earliest games and say the same thing. And those folks playing for less than that? Well, many will be saying it if they aren't already.

 

[hong]

Actually, those are part of the equation... When you add in all the "+" and special abilities, the character's ability to defend himself (which, unless you use a Defense modifier, isn't squat in D&D, unless you're a Monk) or attack his foes and deal damage to them becomes more about the powers of the items than about the character's abilities. Rather than the character's ability being enhanced by these items, the items gain a slight boon from the character's abilities. The only notable exception being BAB, which one might say "figures..."

You have a very strange approach to "defining" your characters, for someone as avowedly story-oriented as yourself. When you make a fighter, is the first thing that pops into your mind "I must have 18 Str for a +4 bonus"? It's almost... munchkiny.

Then add in all the minor goodies that generally make your Sword & Sorcery genre character come across more like an as-yet unnamed X-Man, and the whole thing stops being exciting and just turns into cheese.

There are two solutions one can adopt to that problem:

1) realise there are more subgenres to fantasy than vanilla swords-and-sorcery; or

2) whinge.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Then again, as I always say, "Midnight takes the training wheels off for the DM."

OMG!!! Is that copyrighted? I love it!

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

OMG!!! Is that copyrighted? I love it!

Feel free to quote me.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

You have a very strange approach to "defining" your characters, for someone as avowedly story-oriented as yourself. When you make a fighter, is the first thing that pops into your mind "I must have 18 Str for a +4 bonus"? It's almost... munchkiny.

Not really... We use a default spread of 9, 11, 11, 13, 15, and 17, so there's no inherent "must have" for anything. We used to use the Powerful Characters method, mostly because we know that buffing and magic won't be coming out of our ears. It makes sense, after all. In an environment where the local population isn't dependant on magical aid, evolution is going to dictate characters to be more self-reliant.

There are two solutions one can adopt to that problem:

1) realise there are more subgenres to fantasy than vanilla swords-and-sorcery; or

I do. That's what this discussion is about, different styles of play (notably the age-old debate between more power and less power). After all, my current gaming leans heavily towards psionics, with many psientific themes. Of course, we use the Fading Suns Psi System, as it's flavored right, scales well, and isn't overly complicated.

2) whinge.

Ehr..? This means..?

 

[Numion]

Actually, those are part of the equation... When you add in all the "+" and special abilities, the character's ability to defend himself (which, unless you use a Defense modifier, isn't squat in D&D, unless you're a Monk) or attack his foes and deal damage to them becomes more about the powers of the items than about the character's abilities. Rather than the character's ability being enhanced by these items, the items gain a slight boon from the character's abilities. The only notable exception being BAB, which one might say "figures..."

From my D&D experience I've noticed that my players at least never think about it like that. They always say "My character has +43 to attack!" or something like that. They never break it down to "My character and my equipment". Of course it might be just a difference in our groups.

Then add in all the minor goodies that generally make your Sword & Sorcery genre character come across more like an as-yet unnamed X-Man, and the whole thing stops being exciting and just turns into cheese.

In all the games I've DMed or been in, the cheese comes from the characters abilities, either via some crazy PrC or spells of a spellcasting class. Never from the items. Because as I said, they just make someone better (very much better) at something they do. But being an incredible archer doesn't make you X-men. It's those wacky abilities gained from the zillion archery PrCs. Character abilities, not items.

The issue, I think, is the ratio of that strengthening. It's the line between Hero and Super-Hero (which is relative to the individual and the group, wouldn't you say?).

That difference almost never comes from items. Items offer linear strengthening of abilities. Like I said, you have to get some wonky feats or PrC abilities to push the barrier between Hero and Super-hero.

Humor Radar off?

A bit ... but I also remembered someone at RPG.NET boards saying that he's played in such a campaign - as intelligent items carried around by NPCs Truth is stranger than the fiction, or something.

to which my point is, the statement isn't about calling people names, because I don't. What I'm stating is that the only time I've seen a D&D game have as much friggin' loot as standard 3E dictates as the norm, I was in 7th Grade, and I was a munchkin. To which, "everybody" is not meant all inclusive, but I'm sure that most of the people reading this that have played for more than 10 years can look back on earliest games and say the same thing. And those folks playing for less than that? Well, many will be saying it if they aren't already.

Just a misunderstanding then .. I thought you were equating standard D&D magic level to straight munchkinism .. but you wouldn't do that, now would you?

 

[hong]

Not really... We use a default spread of 9, 11, 11, 13, 15, and 17, so there's no inherent "must have" for anything. We used to use the Powerful Characters method, mostly because we know that buffing and magic won't be coming out of our ears. It makes sense, after all. In an environment where the local population isn't dependant on magical aid, evolution is going to dictate characters to be more self-reliant.

The point, Bendy one, is that noone I know (and I know some heroic number crunchers) considers their characters to be "defined" solely in terms of numerical quantities and the proportions contributed by magical bonuses. You have a character concept, that defines what you intend to do with the character, and then you build things up around it. All this talk about how items "define" a character really is meaningless. They fade into the background during actual gameplay, because it's their _effects_ that are important, not the fact that they are items as such.

I do. That's what this discussion is about, different styles of play (notably the age-old debate between more power and less power). After all, my current gaming leans heavily towards psionics, with many psientific themes. Of course, we use the Fading Suns Psi System, as it's flavored right, scales well, and isn't overly complicated.

So why the vitriol regarding high-powered D&D, featuring flying, teleporting people? Is it because there's no context or framework to work with? You know, that's still a subgenre of fantasy. It's not a _western_ subgenre, but it exists nonetheless; check out movies like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon; Hero; Stormriders; Chinese Ghost Story (which features a fighter/mage casting a boom spell with somatic, material and verbal components!); etc. Even Star Wars is moving in this direction, with Yoda tumbling around and kicking butt in Ep 2. High-level D&D, for all intents and purposes, is wuxia. They toned it down somewhat in 3.5E, but it's still much the same.

Or is it because you can't handle the mechanism by which these powers are handed out? The fact that items are the method by which most characters obtain powers like flight and teleport is, for most people who play at this level, secondary. The important thing is the powers themselves, not the method for obtaining them. However, it appears you are approaching the game with a fundamentally different paradigm, one that regards the method as equally or more important than the effects. If you do this, then of course you're going to go nuts. Me, I prefer not to go nuts.

 

[PJ Mason]

If there is a WOTC commando unit storming your house every game session and making you give out powerful magic items and high-powered magical abilities, then i could see your problem. Since i doubt there is (i've heard rumors, though) why are you complaining? Don't give them out, restrict spell access and whatever else you think will give you what you want. As long as your players are on the same page as you are, you will have no problem playing regular D&D and having it be low-magic. If your players want the same thing you do, then they'll play that style with you. They'll be happy with a masterwork weapon, they'll pick spells that aren't flashy or "adventure-breaking", they'll be happy fighting orcs instead of demons, etc. BTW, if you always send them into lower powered adventures and encounters, then they will gain levels slowly and so "fast leveling" arguements don't fly either. If your looking for a system that will FORCE your players to play the way you want them to, your probably out of luck. No game system ever made can alter the course of rampaging players. They have to want it as bad as you do or it ain't going to happen no matter what system you use.


Thieves World
-Anyone who says Thieves World is the perfect low-magic setting either hasn't read the books lately or wasn't paying attention when they did. They are by far my favorite books and i reread them regularly and they are a perfect example of a setting that can handle all power levels at the same time. There is power-gaming going on in these books that would make most Forgotten Realm players blush. You have at least 15 high-powered wizards, priests, and witches connected to one city, you have at least 4 Divine "Chosen Ones" (TEmpus, Chenaya, Roxanne, and even the lowly neighborhood street thief Hanse, who is the favorite of Ils, banged a goddess and killed a god, gaining temporary limited wish-at will powers in the process). There is at LEAST 6 or 7 instances where the gods walked the streets, battled each other in the sky over Sanctuary, inhabited the bodies of mortals to do the wild thing, created a magic weapon shop out of the blue in street that gave out cursed items to anyone who wanted them (hehe) and plenty other examples. One of its lowly characters, Lalo the painter, gained powers that let him animate anything he drew (including a demonic version of the Vulgar Unicorn that ran off causing mayhem in the streets of Sanctuary).

So was Sanctuary low-powered? Not even close. But it had the right, usually, grim-like attitude with great writing and imagination. Its not about the rules you use or don't use, its the attitude and mindset you and your players chose before the campaign starts. That and great roleplaying (the equiavlent of great writing i guess?).

Someone else in this thread said they liked the scalability of the system. I agree whole-heartedly with that poster. I have played all the big games out (hero, storyteller, palladium, etc) there and i find D20 to be the easiest by far me to scale the game to be what i want it to be. I can pick and choose what i want and easily ignore what i don't want. That is not nearly as easy to do with any other system i have played, which is pretty much all of them.

Thats my 2.000198 cents worth anyway.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

From my D&D experience I've noticed that my players at least never think about it like that. They always say "My character has +43 to attack!" or something like that. They never break it down to "My character and my equipment". Of course it might be just a difference in our groups.

Not so different. After all, only an absolute novice wouldn't have everything added up ahead of time (except for those on-the-spot circumstance things). The difference is in how one feels about that +43. Some people are fine with it regardless of its source, while others would prefer more of it to come from capability than magic. That's generally the problem with the view that low magic games should be confined to lower levels, since, in the grand scheme of things, character ability becomes extremely limited by the inability to advance and defeats the purpose. Some house rules mentioned earlier (those giving more Feats and such) are a possible compromise, but it still limits the introduction of stronger monsters (the type that don't require magic to beat).

In all the games I've DMed or been in, the cheese comes from the characters abilities, either via some crazy PrC or spells of a spellcasting class. Never from the items. Because as I said, they just make someone better (very much better) at something they do. But being an incredible archer doesn't make you X-men. It's those wacky abilities gained from the zillion archery PrCs. Character abilities, not items.

Well, in a low magic game, one would assume spells to be less available. In addition, most Prestige Classes (Core or not) are designed primarily to exist in the default setting, which, consequently, is high magic, and thus need to be designed in order to compete (as it were) for viability. When the need to keep up with that is lowered (or even removed), then the just-as-cheesey Prestige Classes go away as well by merit of being overpowered and generally inappropriate.

Of course, Prestige Classes can be used instead of magic items, kinda in the style of Modern. Hmmm... Might give that some thought...

Then again, I like TGM's manner of tying potent items to Prestige Classes. I've started using that to a limited degree.

That difference almost never comes from items. Items offer linear strengthening of abilities. Like I said, you have to get some wonky feats or PrC abilities to push the barrier between Hero and Super-hero.

Actually, anything that allows you to do anything beyond the limitations of the human form (feats, spells, items or prestige classes) is, by definition, making a super-hero.

A bit ... but I also remembered someone at RPG.NET boards saying that he's played in such a campaign - as intelligent items carried around by NPCs Truth is stranger than the fiction, or something.

Ehr...

Just a misunderstanding then .. I thought you were equating standard D&D magic level to straight munchkinism .. but you wouldn't do that, now would you?

Never in a million years...

Well, once , but I was in a debate with one of the designers (no, I won't name who) and the game had just been released, so I was allowed at the time. But not ever since, I swear.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

The point, Bendy one, is that noone I know (and I know some heroic number crunchers) considers their characters to be "defined" solely in terms of numerical quantities and the proportions contributed by magical bonuses. You have a character concept, that defines what you intend to do with the character, and then you build things up around it. All this talk about how items "define" a character really is meaningless. They fade into the background during actual gameplay, because it's their _effects_ that are important, not the fact that they are items as such.

Yes, they are effects. But they are the effects of the items.

After all, Alladin's lamp wasn't so special because it as an anitique.

So why the vitriol regarding high-powered D&D, featuring flying, teleporting people? Is it because there's no context or framework to work with? You know, that's still a subgenre of fantasy. It's not a _western_ subgenre, but it exists nonetheless; check out movies like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon;

Hmmm... I love that movie. But... I don't remember any magic items in it. I do remember some nifty mystical qualities that the characters gained over the course of years of training and sacrifice.

Hero; Stormriders; Chinese Ghost Story (which features a fighter/mage casting a boom spell with somatic, material and verbal components!); etc.

I didn't see these. How were the character levels and how much gp worth of magical trinkets did they carry around?

Even Star Wars is moving in this direction, with Yoda tumbling around and kicking butt in Ep 2.

Guess he wasn't as feeble at 850 as he was at 900. Consequently, EP1 and EP2 are damn good examples of why someone should write the story when its in their head instead of 25 years later after you've run out of good ideas.

High-level D&D, for all intents and purposes, is wuxia. They toned it down somewhat in 3.5E, but it's still much the same.

Except, unlike wuxia, part of D&D's definition of power involves cash-and-carry magic items that don't resemble wuxia at all but Final Fantasy.

Or is it because you can't handle the mechanism by which these powers are handed out?

No, I don't like being told how to play D&D, or having it implied (yet again, seems common on these boards) that my preference is attached to inability.

The fact that items are the method by which most characters obtain powers like flight and teleport is, for most people who play at this level, secondary.

A lot people watch Friends without a moments hesitation as well.

The important thing is the powers themselves, not the method for obtaining them.

Says you.

However, it appears you are approaching the game with a fundamentally different paradigm, one that regards the method as equally or more important than the effects.

Finally reading the posts before replying?

If you do this, then of course you're going to go nuts. Me, I prefer not to go nuts.

The only thing that could possibly drive me nuts are the number of people that have convinced themselves that any style of play other than their own is wrong and now futily seek to convince everyone else of the same nonsense.