Too much magic in DnD - lets do something about it !

[mmadsen]

_3rd level_ counts as "high-level"? What game are you playing?

Bestow Curse and Remove Curse are 4th-level spells, and if it makes you feel any better, I can call them "higher-level spells".

You suggested a low-level campaign to get a low-magic feel. Unfortunately, many "low magic" spells aren't available to Wizards from 3rd to 5th level (the levels you suggested), and many flashy spells are. Bestow Curse is higher level than Fireball and much, much higher level than Magic Missile.

In any case, the important point is that bestow curse and similar spells are _powerful_, regardless of how flashy or otherwise they are.

In a typical 1st-level dungeon crawl, which spell would you use more often, Bestow Curse or Magic Missile?

It's a moot point anyway, since we can easily scale up or down the power of most spells.

I don't see anything wrong with _some_ flashiness in the game, whatever level I happen to be at.

In a low-magic setting where magic's supposed to be subtle?

 

[mmadsen]

What if all spells that exist have no identifiable result? They do have a quantifiable rules result, but the result operates in such a way that nobody can be sure that it was actually a natural event or magic. Many existing spells already work like this. We would be dealing mostly with enchantments, charms, curses, and the like, which all operate more subtly than other spells.

That's exactly what I've been suggesting -- with the addition of "classic" spells from folklore (e.g. polymorph) and perhaps the flashy spells at higher levels. If you want to see a spell used more often (for flavor), lower its level. If you want to make a spell less common, increase its level.

Healing is a tough area though...

All the healing spells could be modified to follow the pattern of the Aid spell: temporary hit points rather than healing. By being blessed before going into combat, brave warriors know the gods are watching over them and protecting them -- very subtle, but mechanically very close to healing.

 

[mmadsen]

If that's a good justification for why we have a Tojanida, a Yrrthak, an ethereal filcher, and a digester (!), but we don't have a cyclops, then we have truly reached the point for D&D in which the fantasy has become less important than a ruleset that is becoming increasingly self-referential and divorced from any mythological and cultural themes...D&D is becoming ever more insular and disconnected from the rest of our cultural traditions...As it is now, D&D is about psion half-dragon tieflings and +3 ghost touch spiked chains. You can't use the system to play things that non-D&D people can relate to because the rules do not support it.

I'm generally opposed to "me too" posts, but I couldn't agree more, kenjib. Very well put.

 

[Corinth]

I don't understand the problem here. D&D is the best example of the concept of RPG-as-Toolkit; use it to put forth your vision of fantasy into terms that make it playable as a game.

 

[rounser]

D&D is the best example of the concept of RPG-as-Toolkit; use it to put forth your vision of fantasy into terms that make it playable as a game.

Well, yes and no. In many ways 3E is a step forwards from prior editions as a toolkit, and in some others a step backwards.

These are all IMO:

Steps forwards
Greater character customisability through feats and skills.
Addition of classes, stats, feats, templates and skills for monsters.
Breaking down of multiclassing barriers.
Improving the attractiveness of humans as a race to play.
Greater capacity to plan adventures due to encounter codification.
Skill system enhances adventure creation codification.

Steps backwards
Introduction of codified, default high magic level in core rules.
Low modularity and high interdependencies of the rules makes them tend to respond poorly to modification or removal.
"Computer game" RPG style overtones to levelling, gathering prerequisites for prestige classes and creating magic items can induce an undesirable powergaming feel to campaigns.
Questionable and limited range of monsters in the core rules compared to past editions.


I've used the word "codified" a lot, because that's a lot of what 3E does compared to past editions, and brings with it attendant pros and cons.

I don't think 3E was designed as a pulp fantasy toolkit to model what you wanted, otherwise we'd probably have a different focus in the rules - towards customisability without breaking, rather than tight as written but fragile when modified. No, it was designed to be a better version of D&D.

I hope 4E is designed to be such a toolkit though, because that's what I think people primarily use D&D as.

 

[WaterRabbit]

I'll use true strike as an example. It has very well defined results and is thus easy to balance mechanics-wise with other spells. However, the results of the spell can easily be attributed to chance rather than magic to the third party observer. For example, Llewyrd the witch casts her enchantment on an ally by raising the dessicated claw of an eagle and whispering some strange words. This is the true strike spell. As a result, her ally strikes down an enemy. People who do not believe in magic can simply claim that it was pure coincidence and that Llewyrd's backward, superstitious ways had no impact on the outcome.
[/B]

What you are referring to here is what MAGE calls coincidental versus vulgar magic. If by low magic you mean coincidental, then you might want to check out Mage the Ascension for some ideas on how to implement this. You might not have to change D&D at all, just add consequences to using vulgar magic.

 

[S'mon]

low level - low magic

I have a lot of 'White Dwarf' & other magazine articles from the early '80s that discuss appropriate rates of advancement in 1e AD&D. Various formulae are presented, but typical is 5 adventures/sessions per level needed to advance, eg 5 games to reach 2nd level, then another 10 to reach 3rd...

On this type of analysis you can run a low level game almost forever - rem it used to be assumed that characters retired around 9th level! I suggest maybe dividing the current XP awards by about 10, so an orc is worth base 15 XP the way it used to be.

Other suggestions - far fewer magic items & treasure in the gameworld, PCs & NPCs will be weaker, boost the CRs of monsters, who will now be relatively more powerful. Disallow a few spells - eg fireball. I have no problem with flashy-but-weak spells like magic missile, I've never seen them as disruptive to a low magic ethos in the way fireballs, cloudkills etc can be.

 

[bramadan]

I am very happy to see that there are people who share my opinion on the nature of magic in DnD and its possible consequences as to the type of narative to which rules lead the game.
One of the reasons why I do not participate much in the discussion is that I am working on the magic system rough outline of which I have given previously. It is a fairly large project and one for which I was hoping to possibly get some help.
It seems that the Natural d20 will be doing something along the simmilar lines to what I envisioned (lots of focused spell casting traditions with their own rules, advantages and disadvantages...) I am quite curious to see how much will I be able to steal from them.
In the mean time I proceed with my project. First tradition I am working on is a Necromancer. I have decided to use principle of Necomantic Feats from Mongoose book but to expand on the concept and make feats almost as important as spells for the Necromancers (distinction is blurry anyway if the spells are treated as I intend to do...)
To cut short on the rambling here is one of the fundamental necromantic feats: Animate Corpse. Take a look and tell me what you think. Remember that the intention is for these rules to be used along with Grim and Gritty which on one hand increases the value of having a body to take flak for you and on the other makes a cost of 1HP harder to bear. As a contribution to the discussion here I believe that it represents a very deterministic (and hopefully balanced) ability that yet preserves the "mystical" feel and keeps from being mechanicistic or taken for granted.

Animate Corpse
Prerequisites:
Knowledge Necrology: 5 ranks, Wis: 13+.
Benefit: This is most fundamental of all Necromantic Abilities. With it a practitioner can animate a corpse of a recently deceased human and have it rise as a Zombie. The ritual for doing so is called “Sleeping with the Dead” and is performed as follows: A recently dead but yet unburied copse is used. Through the simple surgical procedure (knowledge, anatomy DC 5) its chest is opened and the heart is removed. Traditionally, it is burned because otherwise it can be used to destroy the Zombie. The cut is then made along the palm of the corpse following the “Line of Life”, bisecting a radial artery. Another cut practitioner makes on his own body at the place where bleeding will be caused but no major vein or the artery will be damaged. That cut is treated with fig-juice or some other anti-coagulant and palm of the corpse is pressed against the cut. Practitioner needs to remain in such embrace with the corpse for one full night, from setting to the rising of the sun. In the process he loses one hit-point. In the morning the corpse is buried and the practitioner needs to pass the Necrology check at DC 15. If successful, the Zombie will rise from the grave on the next sunset. Modifiers to the Necrology check are as follows:
-1 for each full day the corpse has been dead before ritual begins.
+3 if the ritual is done during the night of no moon.
+5 if the corpse was killed within an hour of imbibing “balm of eternity” tasteless concoction that can be prepared with a successful alchemy check at DC 10 (at cost of 3S).
Zombie basically has 2d12+3 HP but gains an additional d12 HP for each full 5 points a Necrology check is passed by. (1d12 for 20, 2d12 for 25 and so on). Roll of 1 on the Necrology check results in Zombie rising but being drawn to the practitioner with the murderous intent.
Negative Energy Check for this feat is DC 3 if animation fails and DC 7 if it is successful. Failure on the Negative Energy Check does not affect the success of the animation.
If the animation is successful a single hit point is permanently lost for the practitioner.
Zombies created by this feat are similar to those described in MM except that during the night or in the entirely enclosed areas their partial action restriction is lifted. If two or more hit dice are added through very successful Necrology check zombie uses the statistics of a Large Zombie from MM in all respects save the size.
Zombies are essentially brainless but they are able to follow the simple commands along the lines of “guard this passage”, “defend me”, “open that door” and so on. They will only follow the commands of the practitioner who animated them. When left without commands they stand in a spot and attack every warm-blooded creature that comes within 20’ of them except the practitioner who created them. In the presence of their creator they can be ordered not to attack particular persons but their memory is limited so it is not guaranteed that that person will not be attacked once she leaves the room and then returns.
Zombies are exceedingly hard to destroy. While they can be brought down when their hit point tally reaches zero adept practitioner will be able to repair them. Repairing a Zombie requires the Knowledge, Anatomy check at DC equal to the number of the hit points Zombie can regain and takes 5 minutes per hit point so regained. Every time Zombie is brought to zero points his maximum total is brought down by one. Also, half of all damage due to fire or acid is irrevocable. Each unsuccessful attempt at fixing the zombie reduces the maximum number of hit points recoverable by 1. Practitioner can choose to recover only a certain amount of points in order to make success on the anatomy check more likely but that number thereafter becomes the maximum hit points for the Zombie. A role of 1 on the anatomy check results in utter ruination of the zombie.
There is no limit on the number of Zombies a practitioner can raise and control using this feat as long as he is willing to permanently sacrifice 1 HP and risk the consequences of NEC for each one. Raising multiple Zombies, however, is probably better done using some spells or other, more powerful, necromantic feats.

 

[hong]

Bestow Curse and Remove Curse are 4th-level spells, and if it makes you feel any better, I can call them "higher-level spells".

Bestow Curse: Brd 3, Clr 3, Sor/Wiz 4

Remove Curse: Brd 3, Clr 3, Sor/Wiz 4

You suggested a low-level campaign to get a low-magic feel. Unfortunately, many "low magic" spells aren't available to Wizards from 3rd to 5th level (the levels you suggested), and many flashy spells are. Bestow Curse is higher level than Fireball and much, much higher level than Magic Missile.

Ya know, given how much you want to make over arcane spellcasters, you might be better off just dropping the entire class. That's not an entirely facetious suggestion; the basic "aid of the gods" role that you see magic as playing is filled perfectly well by divine spellcasters. In fact, if you replace the cleric with the shaman from OA, you would go a long way to achieving the feel you want, I bet.

In a typical 1st-level dungeon crawl, which spell would you use more often, Bestow Curse or Magic Missile?

In a typical 1st level dungeon crawl, a wizard will probably cast magic missile ONCE. Maybe twice, if he really wants to blow both his spell slots on the one spell. I hardly call this overpowering in any way. Even a sorc (the boom spell specialist) is probably going to be using his crossbow more than his spells.

In a low-magic setting where magic's supposed to be subtle?

For heaven's sake, man, there's nothing wrong with impressing the peons every once in a while.

 

[hong]

Except that you can easily manipulate game balance by increasing or decreasing a few numbers, shoving game balance into the background where it belongs.

As requested before, please playtest all these changes you're suggesting for 6 months and report your findings.

(One of) the problems with the approach you're suggesting is that it removes any point of differentiation between arcane and divine spellcasters. If your underlying assumption is that "magic is the aid of the gods", well, that role is already filled by clerics and druids. You'll note that all of the effects you're suggesting, including bestow curse and its lower-power variants (bane, doom, command, etc) are on the cleric spell list. What you're suggesting would basically turn wizards into second-rate clerics; I can't see anyone really wanting to play a wizard in such a game. Because of that, you might as well be honest and admit there's no role for arcane spellcasters in your game (and really, the distinction between arcane and divine magic is little more than a D&Dism).

Here's another suggestion: drop the cleric class, and use the shaman from OA. It includes all the spells you're after, and no flashy stuff to steal the lunkhead fighters' thunder. It also doesn't have any baggage about being a crusader or zealous fanatic left over from 1E and 2E; it's all about being an intermediary between the mortal and divine worlds. Just what you're looking for, in other words.