why the attraction to "low magic"?

[sledged]

But seriously, I don't think D&D was really ever about pseudo-medievalism, even back in the early Gygax days.

No, it was pseudo-Middle Earth.

 

[DragonLancer]

To be honest with you, I'm not sure it ever was a pseudo-medieval world. Now, if Kaptain_Kantrip were here, he could launch into an expose of how aw3s0me!!!1111one1!! Hârn is in comparison to D&D...

But seriously, I don't think D&D was really ever about pseudo-medievalism, even back in the early Gygax days.

Yes, your correct. However, I think that in prior editions the feel that was generated by reading through it was of a world that we would recognise from European medieval history, except with the addition of magic and monsters.

The so called "DungeonPunk" look of the 3rd ed rules (all odd leathers, spikes, buckles and a look that isn't close to medieval) has changed from prior editions. I was re-reading the DMG the other day and saw an example of a sign above a tavern that read "No castings or detections." That throws suspension of disbelief out the window for me. Thats too contempoary IMO.

Also I think the change in the nature of D&D has come about because of an increasing desire (I guess the word is) for everything in the game to make sense, have an ecology, and come across more real.
I prefer a game that seems real but doesn't require all that much thought from either the players, the DM, or a third party reading it. I think thats a part of the low-magic setting as well.

 

[DragonLancer]

No, it was pseudo-Middle Earth.

Ok, but then even looking at Middle Earth, that world is still pseudo-medieval.

 

[GlassJaw]

what about options?

Ok, here's another question for you "low-magickers".

How do you establish the low-magic framework of your campaign while still allowing the players to create the characters they want to play? I'm starting to understand the low-magic concept a bit better but I still have this complex that low-magic is associated with taking away options from the players.

Trust me when I say that I haven't been too thrilled with the amount of crunchy stuff lately and I certainly understand that a DM doesn't have to allow everything under the sun in his campaign (I certainly don't I run a more "traditional" campaign right now).

But my short-lived experience with a low-magic campaign amounted to the DM saying "no" to most of the character concepts presented. It seemed more about control to me than trying to establish the flavor of the campaign.

That might be an extreme (and bad) example but my question remains. How much do you have to limit or restrict the character creation process without being an overlord DM?

 

[DragonLancer]

Give us an idea of a character concept or two that was rejected in a low-magic game?

 

[billd91]

Ok, here's another question for you "low-magickers".

How do you establish the low-magic framework of your campaign while still allowing the players to create the characters they want to play? I'm starting to understand the low-magic concept a bit better but I still have this complex that low-magic is associated with taking away options from the players.

Trust me when I say that I haven't been too thrilled with the amount of crunchy stuff lately and I certainly understand that a DM doesn't have to allow everything under the sun in his campaign (I certainly don't I run a more "traditional" campaign right now).

But my short-lived experience with a low-magic campaign amounted to the DM saying "no" to most of the character concepts presented. It seemed more about control to me than trying to establish the flavor of the campaign.

That might be an extreme (and bad) example but my question remains. How much do you have to limit or restrict the character creation process without being an overlord DM?

You're thinking too adversarially here. As far as I'm concerned, the DM can do whatever he wants with his campaign setting, changing or limiting whatever he wants, as long as he explains why. Players should be willing to accept that explanation and run with it (as long as it's not an entirely unhelpful "Because I said so, that's why" from the DM).
Not all character concepts are right for all campaigns. While an adversarial approach might call that DM control freaking or taking away player options, good players will accept it and come up with a character concept that works with the setting. If they really want to play something out of bounds for that campaign, then they should shelve the idea for another campaign or find another game.

 

[barsoomcore]

How do you establish the low-magic framework of your campaign while still allowing the players to create the characters they want to play?

Define "the characters they want to play".

If you want to play a character like, say, Gandalf, in my Barsoom campaign setting, well, I'm sorry but you'll have to find either another concept or another campaign. There are no wizards on Barsoom. If you want to play an elf, well, too bad. There are no elves on Barsoom.

It's my campaign. If you want to play in it, you need to come up with a character concept that fits into it.

Now, I'll work with you to figure out something that's fun for you -- if you're willing to respect my setting and the ideas that go into it. But if you're going to pout and whine about how it's not fair that I won't let you play a halfling sorcerer, well, get yourself a different campaign.

It seemed more about control to me than trying to establish the flavor of the campaign.

Here's the test: I don't let my players pitch concepts and THEN shoot them down. I lay out the setting FIRST, then let my players come up with concepts. When I was starting Barsoom I told my potential players: "Dinosaurs, no non-human races, no spellcasting classes, flintlock pistols, no magic, no gods, red guys and a pink sky."

People who said, "Ew, not for me," didn't join. People who said, "Okay, sounds cool," signed up and created characters that fit with what I'd explained.

And then found out I was lying about pretty much everything. Hee.

The point is, a campaign is the product of a DM's desire and any DM is going to insist on whatever conditions they think will bring forth the kind of stories they're hoping to create. Players can accept those conditions or not. Questions of fairness don't enter into it.

Think of it as a marketplace -- DM's hawk their campaigns and hope to find enough players to make it fun. Players shop around, looking for campaigns that will let them play the kinds of characters they want to play. Not every campaign will please every player, and not every character concept will fit every campaign. Nobody's trying to control anyone here. People are just trying out different ideas as to what's fun.

This is a good thing.

 

[mmadsen]

How do you establish the low-magic framework of your campaign while still allowing the players to create the characters they want to play?

When you, as DM, say "I'm planning on running a campaign more in the style of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings," your players, I hope, don't say, "OK, I'll play an Ogre Magi Ninja Cleric!" Certain concepts fit the campaign; certain concepts don't.

 

[Kalendraf]

When I run a campaign, I want the emphasis to be on the characters and their abilities, rather than on their items.

In a high magic world, the characters don't matter, and it simply boils down to who has the bigger & better magic items. Players could care less if their characters get killed, since the abundant magic allows them to get raised immediately. But they will do everything in their power to protect their precious items. That alone should illustrate the problem.

In a low magic world, the characters do matter. In battles, magic items should not make a huge difference. Players should try to save their characters from death, even if it costs them their only few magical items to do so.

 

[Thanee]

Not giving certain options is not the same as taking away these options.
You never had them, so they cannot be taken away from you.

Campaigns are by their very nature restrictions upon the whole of options available in the core rules plus expansions. Everything, that doesn't fit into the setting, isn't available. It's that simple.

Bye
Thanee