Why do so many people refer to Forgotten Realms as "High Magic?"

[Wombat]

My feeling is that any system that has stores that openly sell actual working magical items on a regular basis is a High Magic setting.

By that count, all of D&D is High Magic, and I can agree with that statement.

The sheer amount of magical items available (and expected) in D&D is far above my normal limits; as a GM I heavily restrict magical items and even access to certain kinds of spells ("Sorry, that one isn't generally available -- you have to find someone who actually knows that one and pay through the nose to copy it..."). When I label something "High Magic", I am doing so in comparison to the literature I have read -- LotR, Earthsea, various Arthurian tales, etc. Again, by these standards, D&D is High Magic. And Forgotten Realms, from what I have read of it, is Very High Magic.

But that is merely a personal take. The problem here is do the D&D rules set the standards? That seems to be the starting place for most arguments for and against FR as High Magic. If we accept the rules as representing Standard Magic, then FR is only Slightly Above Standard, with Greyhawk being Standard; if we take a definition outside of the game rules, then we will have entirely different answers, depending on the base.

So, of course, YMMV -- quite heavily, as a matter of fact.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Darn skippy.

The point about extensive development of the setting is also an important issue. Keep in mind that each authorial add-on to the Realms (whether via a novel, supplement, or contribution to a new-edition FR rulebook) is going to ADD to the magic level; it can't really subtract, by definition. Keep in mind also that it was never Ed Greenwood's original intent to actually apply rules to many of the story drivers present in the setting (spellfire, Netherese and High Elven Magic, circle casting), but that the creation of rules for those forms of magic were in part a response by other authors to fan demand, and in part a requirement under the guiding principles of 3e, which barred "NPC-only" benefits. Finally, keep in mind that there are wildly inconsistent definitions of levels and powers in the setting due to a multiplicity of sources; Ed's original incantatrix, for instance, was a weaker but interesting NPC-only arcane spellcaster, not the metamage developed by Sean Reynolds. Likewise, the levels given in the Volo's Guides differ radically from those in previous and later supplements (and seem to represent Ed going more than a bit overboard, if you don't mind my saying so.)

Also, those epic-level wizards and Chosen benefits were never meant for popular circulation in the setting; Elminster and the other Chosen are supposed to be Macguffins and plot devices, not characters with whom PCs regularly interact. The culprit in making them more PC-interactive parts of the setting is really the novels, in which El and the Seven get to be protagonists. If you just ignore the novels and focus on the supplements (i.e., the actual rules), those high-level spellcasters really are supposed to stay in the background.

 

[Arnwyn]

Although it would certainly be a "somewhat higher magic than normal" setting.

Aaaand... your asked question answered (interestingly, by your own self). That's why "so many people refer to Forgotten Realms as 'High Magic'" (as noted by your own thread title).

(Thankfully, not everyone follows the absolute and rigid "D&Disms" found in the DMG and other WotC books when they speak and post on messageboards. When people say "FR is high magic", they may not be vomiting forth the absolute definition found in the DMG.)

As for further reasonss why some might consider FR "high magic": the prevalence of magic, at least as described in many books, seems to be fairly high. Notable are Ed Greenwood's Volo's Guides series of books - in there, a large number of inns, for example, are described as having layers of spells that dampen sound and make it fire resistant. Whoa - permanent spells on some country inn just to dampen sound? Hmmm....

 

[MerakSpielman]

The Darksword series is pretty high-magic, too.

 

[jrients]

I admit to labelling FR as "high magic", probably unfairly. I think this stems back to my earliest encounters with the Realms, as the back drop for endless "Pages from the Mages" articles. I think I got the impression that FR was chock full of MU's with customized spellbooks. My own Greyhawk games up until that point had been rather "rusty dagger", as someone earlier called it. The difference left quite an impression. In fact, I recall getting the City of Greyhawk boxed set and thinking to myself "Did they write an FR city and file off the serial numbers here?"

 

[Numion]

In fact, I recall getting the City of Greyhawk boxed set and thinking to myself "Did they write an FR city and file off the serial numbers here?"

A common problem in comparing GH and FR is that people dismiss whole parts of GH canon as "it ain't the real greyhawk*", and then nonetheless judge FR by every single one of the X hundred supplements printed for it. I think thats bogus - everything printed for GH counts if it does for FR. Castle Greyhawk all the way, boys!

I don't know if you meant it by this comment, I mean implying that the CoGH boxed set wasn't "in".

* the real greyhawk meaning probably Gygaxs work exclusively

 

[Dark Jezter]

(Thankfully, not everyone follows the absolute and rigid "D&Disms" found in the DMG and other WotC books when they speak and post on messageboards. When people say "FR is high magic", they may not be vomiting forth the absolute definition found in the DMG.)

Gee, thanks. I'm flattered.

 

[Darkness]

(Thankfully, not everyone follows the absolute and rigid "D&Disms" found in the DMG and other WotC books when they speak and post on messageboards. When people say "FR is high magic", they may not be vomiting forth the absolute definition found in the DMG.)

Come, now. Dark Jezter's view on high magic might differ from yours but I don't think he was at all rude about it. Please be nice, mate. Thanks.

- Darkness

 

[jrients]

A common problem in comparing GH and FR is that people dismiss whole parts of GH canon as "it ain't the real greyhawk*", and then nonetheless judge FR by every single one of the X hundred supplements printed for it. I think thats bogus - everything printed for GH counts if it does for FR. Castle Greyhawk all the way, boys!

I don't know if you meant it by this comment, I mean implying that the CoGH boxed set wasn't "in".

I run a earlier incarnation of Greyhawk, escewing much of the later material. Basically I stick to the original boxed set, some of the early modules, and the stuff printed by Gygax in Dragon. The Dragon material I stray from considerably. What other people do with the setting is their business. That's always been kinda the point of Greyhawk, IMHO.

And I don't hold that FR must stick to all of its supplements. I doubt I've read much more than the original boxed set and the Magister. Although as a youth I said "yuck, this is too high magic" nowadays I might say "this is so similar to Greyhawk why bother switching?"

 

[dcas]

Not to mention Castle Greyhawk itself. Exactly how many levels did Gygax say he wrote for that thing?

I think it eventually expanded to 40-some. Perhaps you might want to ask in the Gygax Q&A thread.

I believe he said that Zagyg's Castle (which he is developing for Troll Lord Games) will eventually have some 20 levels.

Also, the Temple of Elemental Evil is pretty dang big too.

Yes, and characters can get quite lost in there, particularly if they get caught in the Elemental "nodes."

A fully-developed D1-3 would be huge!