Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="molonel" data-source="post: 1704964" data-attributes="member: 10412">And you are acting like the only solution, therefore, is to remove those elements from the game. I'm pointing out that your solution is NOT the only viable solution, and not necessary in many campaigns since it's only possible at 9th level and above with an arcane spellcaster. Let me be clear about something: I'm discussing this, and to me it's only a discussion. Play whatever game you want in any way you like. I do not consider low-magic games an inferior type of gaming. I never have, and I never will.I do not, however, think that low-magic games are the best solution or the only solution to the objections raised to a standard D&D game.Who was I talking to at the time? That's a pretty good clue.So, naturally, the only viable, enjoyable, imaginative solution is to just NOT deal with the problem. I've played a high-magic, high-fantasy game where our group destroyed just such an artifact. Not only was the creative and intelligent use of high magic helpful, it was REQUIRED. You want to have your characters quake in their boots at the approach of 10,000 orcs? Cool. I'm not going to stop you. But don't pretend that's more imaginative or interesting than staggered armies with war trolls, battlemages, dragons and clerics. I can create interesting and appropriate challenges for characters no matter what their level. Sticking with orcs - lots and lots of orcs - and making characters FEAR orcs (lots and lots of orcs) is not a method of DMing that I find extremely imaginative. Even Tolkien had to up the ante at the Black Gate. Of course I'm making sense. Mass combat can be extremely interesting. But it doesn't have to be mundane in order to be challenging. At high levels in a standard D&D game, the battle is decided by higher-level characters in cinematic fights. Large armies are often routed after the death of their leaders, just like - gasp! - classical fantasy stories like the Iliad. What happens after the powerful champions or rulers are defeated? Typically, the army around them flees. Why? Because otherwise, they are going to get their arses kicked. The lack of high magic at Helm's Deep may make it interesting to you. Personally, I preferred the presence of characters I knew, enjoyed and cared about. I liked Helm's Deep. Did I enjoy it more than the Chaos War in the sixth book of the Elric saga? Not really. Was it fun because it was low magic? I think that's stretching things more than a smidgen.Some things truly are a matter of taste. But low magic doesn't necessarily make a better story, or a better game. A good DM with a good group of players makes a good game. Once you've got that, high magic or low magic doesn't matter.Wow. How many times can I say, "Play whatever you like!" I don't assume anything. But I do know that the solution you advocate is not the only solution to the perceived problem. I'm interacting with what people say, and doing so in a much more thorough fashion than you are. If you want to insist that I'm not paying attention, fine. I see that as lazy argumentation, though. That's like me calling you a big poopie head. It's not really that funny, it's not really accurate, and it's beside the point.If people want to say, "I prefer low-magic campaigns. That's what I like!" then there is nothing anyone can say to that. Nobody should say anything. But when people start saying things like, "Tolkien was low-magic!" or "Conan was low magic!" that creates some problems, because those statements require some unexamined assumptions, and aren't entirely accurate.</blockquote>

Verification