why the attraction to "low magic"?

[Akrasia]

I can't believe that I manage to skim through this entire thread (though I guess that indicates how interesting this topic is to me).

Admidst the blur, I have to say that I found -- in a vague, drunken way -- Barsoomcore the winner.

And Incenjucar's last post was very good as well.

(Ugh. People like different things. Is that so hard to accept? And Howard's Conan is sooooo low-magic!)

 

[molonel]

Admidst the blur, I have to say that I found -- in a vague, drunken way -- Barsoomcore the winner.

Bah. He had three double-dribbles, four fouls and almost got ejected from the game by the ref in the third quarter. You weren't even watching the game, if you think that.

 

[barsoomcore]

molonel, you're establishing strawmen and shooting them down with gusto while ignoring my point. There are two very clear definitions of D&D standard magic distribution -- the distribution of spellcasters in the population at large, and the frequency of encounters with magical creatures. We don't need to debate on those -- they are clearly outlined for us in the Dungeon Master's Guide. And either one alone clearly indicates that the standard D&D magic distribution is far higher than what we observe in either Hyboria or Third Age Middle-Earth.

I don't actually care about fuzzy impressions of "standard D&D" -- all I'm trying to say is that classic fantasy worlds such as Hyboria and Third Age Middle-Earth display lower distributions of spellcasters and lower frequencies of encounters with supernatural creatures that the standard D&D setting does, according to the rules as published.

Ergo, they can usefully be described with the term "low-magic" since they exhibit demonstratably lower levels of magic.

That people may use the term "low-magic" to incorrectly group settings that exhibit very different traits is inconsequential to my point. That the standard D&D setting is not perfectly definable in all its traits is inconsequential to my point. My point is that Hyboria and Third Age Middle-Earth exhibit lower distributions of spellcasters and supernatural creatures than the standard D&D setting does, and thus can be called "low-magic".

And on the basketball front -- at least my scoring percentage is better than the American team versus Puerto Rico. Even if I am vague and drunken.

I could watch that game the rest of my life. What a joy to see.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Since he's proven himself as an excellent point guard...

... but he's much shorter than Magic Johnson...

... does that make Carlos Arroyo 'low magic'?

 

[Akrasia]

... Even if I am vague and drunken. ...

No, no ... you misunderstood me. *I* was the "vague and drunken" one!

Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Desdichado]

No, no ... you misunderstood me. *I* was the "vague and drunken" one!

Sorry for the confusion.

I think we can all agree that we'd all be happier vague and drunk. Just ask this guy.

 

[hong]

molonel, you're establishing strawmen and shooting them down with gusto while ignoring my point. There are two very clear definitions of D&D standard magic distribution -- the distribution of spellcasters in the population at large, and the frequency of encounters with magical creatures. We don't need to debate on those -- they are clearly outlined for us in the Dungeon Master's Guide. And either one alone clearly indicates that the standard D&D magic distribution is far higher than what we observe in either Hyboria or Third Age Middle-Earth.

I don't actually care about fuzzy impressions of "standard D&D" -- all I'm trying to say is that classic fantasy worlds such as Hyboria and Third Age Middle-Earth display lower distributions of spellcasters and lower frequencies of encounters with supernatural creatures that the standard D&D setting does, according to the rules as published.

There is nothing in the rules that mandates any particular frequency of occurrence of "magical creatures". There ARE guidelines on what EL encounters a party should meet. An encounter of a given EL can be made up of one uber-monster, or it can be a group of NPCs, or it can be a huge horde of warriors. In turn, an uber-monster can be something like a giant (not something you meet every day, but not exactly outre either in terms of super powers), or a dragon (more magical, but still definitely run-of-the-mill compared to the truly exotic stuff), or just a high-level NPC.

 

[barsoomcore]

hong's always right, of course. Leaving me with but one lonely statistic to cling to in my efforts. Which is one more than my opponent has, so I'm still ahead.

Okay, forget about frequency of "magical creatures". I don't need it. Never liked it anyway. Let's consider only distribution of spellcasters. It's still clear that Hyboria and Third Age Middle-Earth show vastly lower numbers of spellcasters than standard D&D mandates, according to the rules in the DMG.

molonel, if you want to show that Hyboria and Third Age Middle-Earth are NOT lower in their magic distribution than standard D&D, come up with a different statistic by which they have higher than standard, and we'll call it even. Or show that my statistic is faulty. Or accept that yes, Hyboria and Third Age Middle-Earth are pretty acceptable examples of "low-magic" settings. Whatever differences they may possess otherwise.

 

[barsoomcore]

I'd like to point out that I take very little comfort in the news that my arguments appeal to unfocused drunks. Thanks for effort and all, but, well, not so comforting.

 

[Akrasia]

I'd like to point out that I take very little comfort in the news that my arguments appeal to unfocused drunks. Thanks for effort and all, but, well, not so comforting.

More like: the brilliance of your arguments were such as to penetrate even the haze of drunkenness and sway the reader with their superior force!