why the attraction to "low magic"?

[Numion]

Actually, all I'd be interested in is addressing my point; that other than about half a dozen named characters, most of whom are actually divine/angelic beings, nobody seems to do any magic in Middle-earth. And yet, you still make the claim that it's not very clear if it's low magic or not. I'm not interested in a per capita breakdown of spellcasters either, I'd merely like to see one counter example to what I said. And I'm not asking you to reference it by page number, just refer to it. If Tolkien wrote it, I almost certainly have read it half a dozen times at least, and I'll catch up on my own.

Wasn't there something about the gifts Bilbo had ordered for his birthday, that many of them were magical? And wasn't there mention that some people in the shire had magic items, like buttons that opened and closed on command? If true, then it would imply that magic wasn't that rare, and there even was trade in magic items, a notion people usually attribute to 3e or Diablo

Also there was even the wonky magic item worth a villages yearly income sort of thing, that people usually accuse D&D of: Bilbos magic armor was worth the whole shire ..

My LOTR is a bit rusty though, just something I seem to remember.

 

[molonel]

So you want the name of a non-Istari, non-maiar, non-elven, non-main character in Middle Earth during the Third Age of the Sun who is a spellcaster? Okay: the Mouth of Sauron.

 

[Desdichado]

molonel; you already got one of the groups I mentioned though;

Near as I can tell, other than a few named characters we actually see; namely Galadriel, Elrond, Gandalf, Saruman, Sauron, Radagast, and the Witch-king, all you've got are some very vague references in the Appendices to a handful of sorcerers in Rhudaur, and some equally vague references to sorcerers amongst the Black Numenoreans, including some very apocryphal legends about Queen Beruthiel. Exactly what sorcerer means in this context is, however, completely unknown.

The Mouth of Sauron was a Black Numenorean. I'd hardly say that goes anywhere at all towards making your point of localized high magic. It does make the point that there is actually some magic, but nobody has ever accused Middle-earth as being a no magic world. And other than the Mouth of Sauron, maybe Queen Beruthiel, and probably some of the Nazgul before falling into wraithhood, those are the only examples of Black Numenorean sorcerers we know of. Not that we know a lot about Black Numenoreans anyway. Nor do we know what sorcerer means in this respect. It's entirely possible that they were more like ritualistic priests of Sauron or Morgoth; since we never actually witness any of them doing any magic, it's possible that they never actually do. Although I wouldn't put that out there as a strong possibility, it is telling that nobody except for Gandalf, Saruman, Galadriel and Elrond (and indirectly Sauron and the Nazgul) are ever doing anything that could generously be described as magical.

On the other hand, Numion actually raises a good point:

Wasn't there something about the gifts Bilbo had ordered for his birthday, that many of them were magical? And wasn't there mention that some people in the shire had magic items, like buttons that opened and closed on command?

Yes, some of the toys are described in "A Long Expected Party" as "obviously magical." Not sure exactly what that means, though -- after all, the blasting seige engines of Saruman are also called "sorcery" when I think it's clear that Tolkien was describing engineering rather than magic. But rather than try to set up some special pleading here, I'll take what it says at face value and say that yes, that is an example of a higher level of magic than the rest of the books seem to imply.

As for buttons that opened themselves, I'm not sure I remember anything like that, although now that you mention it, I almost seem to remember someone mentioning it as a legend of sorts; that either the Old Took or the Master of Buckland had them as a gift from Gandalf. If so, and I'm remembering correctly that that anecdote does even exist, then it would still be attributed to Gandalf.

And this entire discussion has gone a fair amount beyond the original scope here; although I strongly believe that both Hyboria and Middle-earth are great examples of low magic settings, my own interest in low magic is not necessarily based solely on them. I like the pseudo-historical feel of low magic; I like that it is realistic, but with a twist.

And I like some high magic settings too. I think the Wheel of Time game is excellently done, and it is also a very high magic setting, albeit one quite different from a D&D-ish setting.

 

[Sargon the Kassadian]

I had a semi-revelation!

WHAT IF SOME PUBLISHER MADE A HUGE BOOK ON HOW TO DO A LOW MAGIC GAME (or a radically altered DND ala Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed)! I know there have been some, but I mean a really well thought out one, with different approaches to the goal. Maybe even by WOTC ( )! I don't know how popular it would be with the mainstream players, but judging by the number of wanting-low-magic-RPers here at ENworld, it would at least break even.

 

[barsoomcore]

I'm saying that having three percent of the population in a village of 200 being able to cast a handful of cantrips doesn't rise above my threshold for high magic. It doesn't necessarily rise outside of my threshold for low magic, either. That depends entirely on how the DM handles it.

Well, if you don't consider number of spellcasters to be a determining factor in deciding between low and high magic, you could have mentioned that. Might have saved us a few snarky comments.

And you really, really, need to start being accurate in your statements. "A handful of cantrips"? We're talking about five first-level casters and one third-level. That's two second-level, seven first-level and ten cantrips per day from the clerics alone. Adding in the others we get two second-level, ten first-level and nineteen cantrips per day from this average crowd. That's 31 separate manifestations of magic in a 200-person village per day. Yeah, I think it's fair to say that in standard D&D, everyone witnesses or experiences magic on a near-daily basis.

Which I submit is markedly different from what we see in Hyboria or Middle-Earth. As I have done from the beginning of this conversation.

But the ground of this discussion has shifted several times: it's according to the commonality of "magical" beasts. It's rated according to the distribution of magic items. Now we're dealing with spellcasters per capita. At every step along the way, I've been willing to look at the books. Pretending that I'm being deliberately vague, or avoiding evidence, is just dishonest.

This is the second time you've pretended that my position has changed. You were demonstrated to be wrong the first time -- is there something to suggest you're right this time? I refer to my earlier post in which this same assertion of yours is demolished by the simple expedient of referring to the facts. My position has not changed.

On the contrary, molonel, you are the one who has attempted to shift the ground of the conversation, by attributing to me statements I never said or positions I never held. I have to give you props for audacity, however -- you are surprisingly eager to accuse others of the very failings -- both of logic and of courtesy -- that your statements have demonstrated.

You're willing to look at the books? Fine, then. Look at LotR and tell which community you think is more typical of the average -- Edoras or Lothlorien. Feel free to support your position with references from the text that you are so familiar with.

 

[Akrasia]

WHAT IF SOME PUBLISHER MADE A HUGE BOOK ON HOW TO DO A LOW MAGIC GAME (or a radically altered DND ala Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed)! I know there have been some, but I mean a really well thought out one, with different approaches to the goal. Maybe even by WOTC ( )! I don't know how popular it would be with the mainstream players, but judging by the number of wanting-low-magic-RPers here at ENworld, it would at least break even.

Hey, mon ami, it has been done. It is called the CONAN OGL game, produced by Mongoose games. The magic system is based on what Howard actually wrote about Hyboria. Consequently magic is both very rare and dangerous (spellcasters can become corrupted or lotus addicts, etc.). And it is "well thought out" (or at least the magic system is, with reference to Hyboria).


Seriously Barsoomcore, why do you bother to continue to argue? You won twelve posts ago (or something like that). Anyone who thinks that the standard DnD magic system has any resemblence to either Arda or Hyboria is just not getting it. Crack open a brewski and call it a day.

 

[Desdichado]

WHAT IF SOME PUBLISHER MADE A HUGE BOOK ON HOW TO DO A LOW MAGIC GAME (or a radically altered DND ala Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed)! I know there have been some, but I mean a really well thought out one, with different approaches to the goal. Maybe even by WOTC ( )! I don't know how popular it would be with the mainstream players, but judging by the number of wanting-low-magic-RPers here at ENworld, it would at least break even.

• Midnight
• Conan RPG
• Call of Cthulhu
• Darkness and Dread
• d20 Modern
• Grim Tales

To name the first half dozen or so off the top of my head. And that's only in d20 -- if I go beyond that, the numbers swell even more.

 

[Akrasia]

• Midnight
• Conan RPG
• Call of Cthulhu
• Darkness and Dread
• d20 Modern
• Grim Tales

To name the first half dozen or so off the top of my head. And that's only in d20 -- if I go beyond that, the numbers swell even more.

Yes, and most of those have been "well thought out" as well IMO (don't know anything about "Darkness and Dreath" though).

Midnight, Conan, and Grim especially slap the "low magic" puck right into the goalie's net!

 

[Sargon the Kassadian]

I didn't mean a setting, I just meant a book devoted to discussing the issue, although I may be showing my ignorance in reference to third party "systems".

 

[molonel]

molonel; you already got one of the groups I mentioned though; The Mouth of Sauron was a Black Numenorean. I'd hardly say that goes anywhere at all towards making your point of localized high magic ... Not that we know a lot about Black Numenoreans anyway. Nor do we know what sorcerer means in this respect. It's entirely possible that they were more like ritualistic priests of Sauron or Morgoth; since we never actually witness any of them doing any magic, it's possible that they never actually do. Although I wouldn't put that out there as a strong possibility, it is telling that nobody except for Gandalf, Saruman, Galadriel and Elrond (and indirectly Sauron and the Nazgul) are ever doing anything that could generously be described as magical.

You asked me for one counter-example. I gave it to you using the criteria you provided. It's equally "possible" that black sorcerors and spellcasters were a strong part of Sauron's army. We're dealing with possibilities and potentials here. You're asking me to give you the names of people who weren't directly involved in the story using ... what, exactly? When I mentioned something from The Book of Lost Tales Volume II, earlier, that was dismissed as an early version of the story because of course it's OBVIOUS that Tolkien intended Middle Earth to be a low magic world. How would Tolkien have portrayed the parts of the world he didn't elaborate on further? That's a good question, and one that neither you nor I can answer. Men are capable of magic, both wielding it and using it. That potential is obvious. The only thing "telling" thing is that the people we see using magic in the stories are main characters with the backgrounds you describe.

And this entire discussion has gone a fair amount beyond the original scope here; although I strongly believe that both Hyboria and Middle-earth are great examples of low magic settings, my own interest in low magic is not necessarily based solely on them. I like the pseudo-historical feel of low magic; I like that it is realistic, but with a twist. And I like some high magic settings too. I think the Wheel of Time game is excellently done, and it is also a very high magic setting, albeit one quite different from a D&D-ish setting.

And that, ultimately, is the best and strongest argument for low magic worlds, in my opinion: not because that is what Tolkien or Howard did, though elements from their stories can be useful. It is a feel that people are looking for. And people emerge with a different "feel" from fiction which is only imperfectly reflected in gaming terms.

This is the second time you've pretended that my position has changed. You were demonstrated to be wrong the first time -- is there something to suggest you're right this time? I refer to my earlier post in which this same assertion of yours is demolished by the simple expedient of referring to the facts. My position has not changed. On the contrary, molonel, you are the one who has attempted to shift the ground of the conversation, by attributing to me statements I never said or positions I never held. I have to give you props for audacity, however -- you are surprisingly eager to accuse others of the very failings -- both of logic and of courtesy -- that your statements have demonstrated.

barsoomcore, I have a polite, peaceful request: please stop interpreting everything I say as a personal attack on you. I said, "But the ground of this discussion has shifted several times." I didn't say, "That @#$#@ing barsoomcore can't make up his mind." The criteria by which WE in this discussion have considered what makes a low magic world has certainly changed and shifted ground over the 14- or 15-some pages (Edit: Now 17) of this discussion. I know I've personally raised several different points while speaking with at least half a dozen posters. You have not demolished anything other than my faith that you are willing to pursue this argument as anything other than a jones-fix for your ego, and a personal duel. If I am incapable of doing anything other than offending you, then I'm done arguing with you.