The Difficulties Of Running Low Magic Campaigns

I recently talked with a gamer who's often full of unusual, and sometimes impractical, ideas. He asked me about the difficulties of running a medieval-style low-magic D&D campaign. Lord of the Rings had to come up in the conversation, because it's the most well-known low magic fantasy setting in existence. If you take a functional rather than emotional view of the characters, in First Edition D&D terms Aragorn amounts to a seventh level ranger and Gandalf the Grey to an eighth level cleric with a Ring of Fire, and other characters are similarly low level. (I'll discuss in detail this another time.) Magic and "super-power" is immensely rare in this setting.

I recently talked with a gamer who's often full of unusual, and sometimes impractical, ideas. He asked me about the difficulties of running a medieval-style low-magic D&D campaign. Lord of the Rings had to come up in the conversation, because it's the most well-known low magic fantasy setting in existence. If you take a functional rather than emotional view of the characters, in First Edition D&D terms Aragorn amounts to a seventh level ranger and Gandalf the Grey to an eighth level cleric with a Ring of Fire, and other characters are similarly low level. (I'll discuss in detail this another time.) Magic and "super-power" is immensely rare in this setting.


It should be easier to run a low magic rather than a high magic campaign because the powers of both characters and opponents are unlikely to get out of hand. But as for recruiting players for such a campaign…that could be difficult in 2018. (Keep in mind, he's a college student and is likely to have players who are college students, not older players.)

The fundamental problem with a low magic campaign is that people have been "trained" to expect high magic by video RPGs and MMOs, and by video games in general, that are often designed to reward rather than challenge players. In other words, the low magic campaign will feel much too "tame", too dull, too slow, too "lame". Yes, it can be just as dangerous as any other campaign, but I suspect most players are not looking for danger any more when they play RPGs, again as encouraged by video games (where you can never lose).

Will players go for a game where there isn't a "loot drop" with every monster, without magic items by the bucket load?

In CRPG/MMOs leveling is what it's all about, the destination (which is maximum level) not the journey. Yet in order to run a low magic campaign you probably have to have low level characters, and that means they can't level up every other session or sooner. How will this sit with people who are accustomed to computer RPGs?

Perhaps it can work if you tell the players before the campaign starts that it's a military style campaign, that the party is like an elite combat unit (Navy SEALs, SAS, and such) trying to accomplish a series of dangerous but vital missions. Or perhaps they're like elite mercenaries doing the same thing. In other words, you can try to train the expectations of the players, but you're up against their experience, which will often include lots of computer RPGs.

My advice to my friend was to make small differences in capability from one level to the next, to let the players level up with some frequency, but to make magic items very rare, as in LOTR. If the players think of themselves as special service troops/elite mercenaries, perhaps that will work.

Improvement of characters is a pillar of RPGs. If they can only rarely improve via magic item collection, they're left with money collection or improved inherent capabilities (stronger, sneakier, better defenders, etc.). An alternative way to run a low-magic campaign might be to let the players begin as extraordinarily capable characters (compared with ordinary people) who don't really change much. They would be like James Bond and other long-running movie and comic book characters (Indiana Jones, Black Widow), and heroes of many novels. If players aren't focused on leveling up, they could actually have adventurous fun!

Another way is to emphasize collection of wealth, where players become merchant magnates or buy into the nobility or become leaders of mercenary armies. The ultimate goal might be to run their own small country.

I should think some readers have tried low-magic medieval-style campaigns. How well did they work out?

contributed by Lewis Pulsipher
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Koloth

First Post
I would think that a low magic game would be easier to manage then the normal high magic game. Once spells/abilities like teleport show up, why does anyone bother with fortified locations? A castle is a several year project. One mage with teleport easily bypasses. Death and serious injury become minor inconveniences. Pull most magic away, either it is only low power and/or very rare, and the game becomes far more Earth medieval in style. Convincing players that are used to having characters wield castle busting magic that a low magic game can be fun is another issue.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Hussar touched on one of the more difficult things about running most forms of “low-magic” in D&D: the innately magical creatures the PCs may face.

Besides making some unique creatures of legend into whole species (thereby decreasing their rarity) some creatures (regardless of origins) are possessed of abilities and- most importantly- defenses that make magic use a requirement to stand any chance against them. That can be a difficult balancing act to manage.
 

Basically, there's loads of magic going on in the books, much of which the D&D rules clearly draw inspiration from, but which isn't explicitly called out as "spellcasting".

Lots of magic item activation or things that are innate to a race or bloodline, but almost no actual spell casting. And many of the magic items were created hundreds, or even thousands, of years in the past.
 

Psikerlord#

Explorer
To answer the OP, low magic campaigns work excellent with the right system. They are one of my favourite kinds of games, because they make magic feel "magical" again. I dont think 5e works for low magic however, well, not without removing or modding 75% of it (at which point you're not playing 5e anymore).
 

Wrathamon

Adventurer
I'm not quite sure what you're saying, but the wizard with a crossbow is exactly what I was getting at. If a wizard can still contribute to combat in a meaningful way, by firing that crossbow, then you can have as much combat as you want and the wizard won't ruin the low-magic tone by casting spells non-stop.

If a wizard is not contributing with that crossbow, because they're probably going to miss and a successful hit deals trivial damage anyway, then you're stuck with the design dilemma of raising the magic level so they can always cast spells or turning that character into a bystander for half of the encounters.


Give them a cantrip called Throw Darts that uses the wizards Int to hit instead of Dex. They're smart and know how to aim.
 

Give them a cantrip called Throw Darts that uses the wizards Int to hit instead of Dex. They're smart and know how to aim.
This isn't fourth edition.

And it should go without saying that the first thing you must do to enable a low-magic campaign setting (that still has PC spellcasters in it) is to throw out the whole concept of cantrips. At-will magic has no place in a low-magic world.
 

Jay Verkuilen

Grand Master of Artificial Flowers
Low magic in terms of Tolkien meant little or no spellcasting. For the most part, magic was passive or from an ancient time. As best I can remember, the only characters in the books who used any actual magic spells/energy/whatever were the three Wizards. And I do not think Radagast used any in the books, regardless of what he did in the movies.
As I recall Radagast doesn't appear in the books, he's just referenced. Galadriel uses magic when she scries in her pool, although arguably she's one of the most powerful non-Valar in Middle Earth. Less grandiose, the "dwarves of old" who "made mighty spells" after all. In the case of the dwarves, ancient wasn't really that long back, even: Erebor was settled by Thrain only about 400 years before the Hobbit (more or less). There are some other examples, such as Queen Beruthiel of Gondor and of course the many constructions of both the Dunedain, Dwarves, and Elves. What rarely happens is spectacular spellcasting. Really only Gandalf seems to be able to do that. In addition, part of the whole story is the death of magic in the world and the passing of the marvelous and diminishment of the elves and dwarves.
 

Jay Verkuilen

Grand Master of Artificial Flowers
To answer the OP, low magic campaigns work excellent with the right system. They are one of my favourite kinds of games, because they make magic feel "magical" again. I dont think 5e works for low magic however, well, not without removing or modding 75% of it (at which point you're not playing 5e anymore).
The 5E chassis works just fine for pretty low magic: AIME is definitely recognizable as being 5E without there being any caster classes.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
And it should go without saying that the first thing you must do to enable a low-magic campaign setting (that still has PC spellcasters in it) is to throw out the whole concept of cantrips. At-will magic has no place in a low-magic world.

At-will magic is fine as long as it isn’t significantly more powerful than mundane options. An at-will darts cantrip can’t easily be negated, and it doesn’t run out, but it’s range is limited. And if you use it while incarcerated, your jailers may opt to literally disarm you.

Furthermore, if the at-will ability works like a 3.5 Reserve Feat, that means the caster has to tie up resources in order to have it available...it isn’t free, and it probably has an explicit or implied level requirement.
 

At-will magic is fine as long as it isn’t significantly more powerful than mundane options. An at-will darts cantrip can’t easily be negated, and it doesn’t run out, but it’s range is limited.
That's not low-magic, though. The difference between a darts cantrip and just darts is that one of them is gratuitous magic, which goes against the tone of a low-magic setting. You're not playing in a low-magic setting if your resident spellcaster is literally throwing magic in every round of every encounter.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top