Rambling about the nature of campaigns and magic

[Dr. Harry]

Why do some DMs feel a need to change magic's power level?

Anyway, DMs need to understand ... before they go and start changing things. I am in no way saying that changing things is bad; it's just that work is a lot more efficient when you understand the basis of what you're doing.

I just wanted to put up the part of RangerWickett's post that I agreed with, 'cause the points that occured to me are scattered in everybody else's responses. I'm interested in Gothmog's modifications, having removed the travel magic from my campaign as well.

 

[Andor]

I'm amused to note that about 70% of the posts in this thread boiled down to "I want to play Iron Lore or a reasonable fascimile thereof." On the fascimile note, I was thinking that using the d20 Modern/Arcana rules work pretty well for this sort of thing. IE: Mage is a 10 level advanced class therefore spell casting caps out at 5th level spells, plus the spell list is trimmed down a bunch. If you need to be 4th level to cast a cantrip magic is suddenly rarer and more impressive.

 

[A'koss]

You can add me to the list of those who went looking to create a certain style of game - as Galethorn put it, "Epic Medieval Fantasy" is as good a label as any. As a few others have pointed out RW does make a good point in that you should understand the game and how it's balanced before making changes.

I ran a campaign a few years back that was essentially my take on how a world might really evolve with D&D levels of magic and monsters. It was fun, but the players started to refer to it as "Bunkerworld" which gives you an idea how well humans fared in it...

The point being that, at that time, that was the style of game we liked to play - epic magic, massive treasure piles, teleportational getaways with magic permeating many facets of society. Over time, tastes change, and we wanted to play in a world which whose flavor is more in line with "cinematic sword & sorcery". Iron Lore is shaping up to be the closest thing to the style of game I want to run. It's still about powerful heroes and cinematic action, but without all the setting/story-breaking magic that D&D introduces.

A'koss.

 

[RangerWickett]

Honestly, my post was inspired by a conversation I had with a friend, where he was talking about how DMs might want to change the core D&D magic system because it doesn't fit the type of game they want to play. I responded by saying change is fine, but a lot of people change without considering what possibilities lie with just going with it. Piratecat's game is an example of a full-on D&D game where all the items and powers are available, yet the plots still work.

All I wanted to say was that if you're going to write up suggestions for altering the magic system, you need to understand why someone would want to change it in the first place.

Me personally, I can't stand having tons of effects that improve AC. I loathe instant-death effects. I hate stunning that lasts for more than 1 round. I'd like it if the system just took out a lot of these complications and non-fun things. I'm fine with high magic, but not with high maintenance.

Right now, though, my big beef is temporal railroading. But that's a story for another thread.

 

[The_Fan]

I've toyed with making a campaign where arcane magic is nothing but alchemy, ki, and trickery, but it didn't pan out. Not the system, the game itself.

And personlally, I wouldn't ditch evocation. It's rather light on save or die and seems to fit my view of a fantasy wizard better than things like Otto's Irresistable Dance

 

[Hand of Evil]

I think this problem is due to the DM not thinking about pacing of the game and character advancement, the problems with high levels steam roll and catch many DMs off guard to the point where they see magic as a problem that most be fixed.

 

[The Shaman]

And personlally, I wouldn't ditch evocation. It's rather light on save or die and seems to fit my view of a fantasy wizard better than things like Otto's Irresistable Dance

I prefer a wizard casting irresistible dance to fireball-fireball-fireball-magic missle-magic missle-magic missle-magic missle every damn day of the campaign.

 

[boredgremlin]

I changed it because i think that sneakin rogues, rangers and druids tracking evil and figthing it alone out in the dark, fighters and barbarians facing the enemies of thier people. Swords flashing, sparks flying, blood, grunts, and squeels of pain. To me thats fantasy. People risking thier guts. Not high level PC's who kill 15 NPC's at a shot. Or trading instakill spells and hoping for a low save roll.
Anytime an armed man attacks you should be scary. So i love the grim and gritty rules.

 

[iwatt]

One idea that I picked up on another board but haven't tried yet is eliminating evocation spells - no more wizard-as-heavy-weapons-platoon. Puts the magic emphasis on summoning, divination, and abjuration. I'm giving this idea a serious look.

We sort of discussed this in this thread . There was some interesting ideas, been bandied around. We can cast Raise Thread and restart the discussion for those interested.

Personally, I just don't like it when it only makes sense that every city worth its salt has Zone of Truth cast during important trials, or when every smart king is wearing Glamoured Deathward Mithral Full Plate of Heavy Fortification at all times, or when a foe's ability to fly or summon demons or teleport inside is an important factor to consider in fortress design.

I agree. This kind of game is fun, but it isn't the fantasy genre that got me started into DnD in the first place.