The Myth of the Necessity of Magic Items

[Hussar]

I've always figured that low magic works something like this:

1-7th level - not much of an effect. Perhaps +1 LA by 7th.
8-13th - +1-+2 LA
14th-18th +3 LA

So, an 18th level low magic party should fare reasonably well against a CR 15 critter. Works for me.

 

[hong]

Given the property market in Oz, I'd say it wasn't just your bank balance that is an illusion...

Unfortunately, my mortgage balance isn't an illusion.

 

[Numion]

Unfortunately, my mortgage balance isn't an illusion.

Did you roll to disbelieve?

 

[green slime]

Unfortunately, my mortgage balance isn't an illusion.

No, I've got one of those as well. They are like some kind of ethereal-filcher lich with an extremely well hidden phylactery. Constantly leaping out from nowhere, grappling you top the ground, tearing out the contents of your wallet.

 

[Sound of Azure]

No, I've got one of those as well. They are like some kind of ethereal-filcher lich with an extremely well hidden phylactery. Constantly leaping out from nowhere, grappling you top the ground, tearing out the contents of your wallet.

No, that would be my ex-girlfriend...

 

[Torack]

AFAI can tell from reading this thread, there are two things that should be noted:

1. You are solely dealing with magic items, not with magic. While that +1 sword might be hard to get to, having your caster use Magic Weapon or Greater Magic Weapon isn't hindered, and neither is the rest of the magic different (a few spell-level changes and not being able to reach level 9 spells before lvl 22 are not BIG changes IMO). You're dealing with a low magic item campaign, not a low magic campaign, and

2. You have pretty much taken away the one thing that would require magic items, namely DR xx/magic, substituting them for 50 hps per plus (though using pure v3.5 rules that'd be simply tacking on 50 hps to the monster, any monster), meaning you've slightly altered the monsters.

As such, I'd have to say, that no, using these changes (and very simple changes at that, good for you!) magic items are not needed to overcome challenges, in your campaign.

Had you kept the DR xx/magic in place you would have seen the effect of reducing/limiting magic weapons as spells would continue doing the same amount of damage (negating the existence of energy resistance/immunity here ftm.) while that warrior all of a sudden has his damage reduced by half or more when facing certain opponents.

 

[Shazman]

I think we have an episode for next season's Mythbusters!

Of course in actuality, if someone would not enjoy a game without magic items, then they are in fact necessary for them.

The only real myth is that one person's way of playing is a better way to play the game than someone else's.

I agree with that totally. I don't think that anyone here is sayin the having a low-magic campaign is the wrong way to play. We are just trying to understand how you are making it viable (i.e. the player's actually have a decent chance of survival) without massive house-rules, deux ex machina, and completely retooling encounters.

 

[Li Shenron]

I don't think it's a myth at all, its an effect from the design of 3.5. The game emphasizes magic items, so much that the rules even state that you should be able to BUY THEM instead of the old-school methodology where you had to find them as treasure. Fighters NEED magic items, or they're even more pathetic than usual (I won't go into that diatribe here, but I'm sure we've all heard it before).

Low-magic D&D does not work unless you make copious rules adjustments. This is by design. Magic items are practically necessary unless you play near-TPK games all the time, because in a low/no magic area the PCs are not going to be able to cope with monsters face-to-face.

So have you tried it personally, to run a game without or with a few magic items? What happened exactly?

Because Emirikol (and others here) are currently running such a game and they are sharing their direct experience. Their result may be different from others, but I think they deserve more respect.

Personally I never dared to run a game which was really low-magic, even if sometimes I would like to, so threads like this one are very useful to me.

 

[Darrell]

I think people are simply saying that you're making it sound like it's easy, with few house rules required, when in fact the game needs to be tailored on several aspects at mid- and upper levels

What I've been arguing, however, is that it is easy, or at least in my experience. I'm currently running an 'upper-mid-level' campaign. I use virtually no house rules, and the magic item proliferation issue is resolved in one line in my campaign document, saying simply, "Don't plan on seeing a lot of magic items, either in your hands or the villains'." My players don't take item creation feats and such stuff, and neither do their foes. The fact that something exists in the ruleset doesn't mean it necessarily has to be utilized. It's true that I dont use a lot of the 'DR' foes from the MM, but that's more because a good many of them are extraplanar critters, and we're a very 'earthbound' bunch, than because of any mechanical reason.

Regards,
Darrell

 

[hong]

What I've been arguing, however, is that it is easy, or at least in my experience. I'm currently running an 'upper-mid-level' campaign. I use virtually no house rules, and the magic item proliferation issue is resolved in one line in my campaign document, saying simply, "Don't plan on seeing a lot of magic items, either in your hands or the villains'." My players don't take item creation feats and such stuff, and neither do their foes. The fact that something exists in the ruleset doesn't mean it necessarily has to be utilized. It's true that I dont use a lot of the 'DR' foes from the MM, but that's more because a good many of them are extraplanar critters, and we're a very 'earthbound' bunch, than because of any mechanical reason.

Regards,
Darrell

Yes, but you also believe balance is an illusion.