your a wizard harry ... and arrested


Advice


So I wanna make a low magic campaign...

Everyone has different ideas on what low magic means so what I'm thinking is mages (anyone that can use magic) were outlawed as to not take over world (not sure if just arcane or divine too or what)

So players can make martial characters in attempt to hunt down rogue mages (or free mages in custody or what have you)

Or they can make mages in attempt to free the brethren from the tyrannical oppression of magic

Or they can be mixed martial and mages but not sure how well that would work

Main questions are.

Who would be good "peacekeepers" and what would be good end goal (or bbeg)

And would you outlaw divine too and what about magic gear? It is usually assumed you have magic gear by a certain point but low magic might hinder that


If they go magic route they can craft armor and weapons and what nit but what of they go martial how can they be efficient mage-hunters without magic gear


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Low magic isn't as much a question of magic being illegal, but magic being unavailable, which is considerably different. While I think you've got the seed for a very good campaign there, I'm also not sure that it's a good way of enforcing "low magic", and it may be easier simply to say that magic doesn't work (as well) in your universe.

The problem with "magic is illegal" in an otherwise normal Pathfinder universe is that no one is typically equipped to handle magic if and when it comes up.

This shows itself in several ways. First, if you restrict magic gear (and you kind of have to, because otherwise anyone can get as much magic as they can afford to buy), you really hurt people. The game is balanced around the idea that everyone will have a magic weapon by about 5th level, so DR/magic at level 5+ is no big deal. And the people you really hurt are the martials, because the casters don't need magic weapons (they can make their own, essentially -- scorching ray to the rescue!).

The other issue is that without counter-magic, there's no way to deal with magic within the rules. If mages are illegal, then any of the mages who do exist will be able to do as they please. No one will have items to boost Will saves, no one will have ways to keep invisible thieves from making off with the contents of the bank vaults, et cetera.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It sounds like you are making a world that is hostile to casters. But I don't see anything in that description that makes it low magic.

Low magic typically means that powerful magic doesn't exist or is rare. If a player can play a Wizard or Sorcerer as written in the CRB it will not be a low magic campaign for long.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My personal suggestion for low-magic games is to say 9-level casters and Summoners don't exist. That makes the game a whole lot lower magic right there, without depowering or penalizing any class you're actually allowing.

A 'magic is illegal' game is a very different thing from a real 'low magic' game.

If going that route, it's up to you whether to outlaw Divine Magic, too. On gear, there's a simple Feat called Master Craftsman that lets non-magical people make magic items with Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item that you could use to keep them available, if you wished. Or you could go with something like this if you wished (probably replacing the 'Cool Trick' and successor abilities with stat bonuses of some sort).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd love to play a wizard in this kind of campaign.


Of course Divine casters are not outlawed. The Church was secretly (or not so secretly) behind outlawing of magic, and thus allowing them to control it. Except for the Clergy of the Gods/Goddesses of Magic, which have become underground cults, and form the core of the resistance.

Though, keep in mind, there are a limited number of allowed Arcane casters, registered and controlled by the governments - to assist in hunting down rogue casters, as well as maintaining the balance of power (Mutually Assured Destruction).

Witch Hunter Inquisitors form the core of the enforcement forces.

As for goal, it entirely depends on if your players want to play Imperials or Rebels.

For Imperials, ultimately defeat and destroy the Rebels, and perhaps (if going that far into the campaign) destroy the God/Goddess of Magic, and thus destroy Arcane Magic.

For Rebels, over throw the corrupt system, and eventually create a world accepting and encouraging Arcane Magic.

Dark Archive

I would say for every four levels of martial, they can have a level of caster. Cannot be both divine and arcane. Magus not allowed. The campaign would be focused on "rogue" casters. The worship of all deities are illegal save one. Practicing the arcane is illegal unless your doing so in the name of your sovereign king.

The group could be enforcers, or the hunted.

The BBEG'S is actually the king who happens to be a mystical theurge.


While I agree with others that say 'Magic is Illegal' isn't the same as 'Low Magic', by using 'Magic is Illegal' but still around, it gives the GM significant control over what magic and magic items are available. Which can effectively amount to the same thing, depending on how it's played.

It's also a HUGE story driver, if your players center around it. How long has it been outlawed? How much arcane lore has been lost through time? Are there great artifacts, lost and forgotten? Or possibly secreted away by corrupt governments?


Ooh! Those in power have wizards and sorcerers controlled by collars. Like the Domani using Idom from the wheel of time series.

Basically a braclet (controller) connected to a collar (controllee). The collared and their spellcasting is under complete control of the bracelet weared. The catch is not everyone can wear a braclet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also I predict more sorcerers than wizards in this world. The latter being mostly a secret coterie that is either very old and powerful or a magic hit squad for the king.


Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:

Ooh! Those in power have wizards and sorcerers controlled by collars. Like the Domani using Idom from the wheel of time series.

Basically a braclet (controller) connected to a collar (controllee). The collared and their spellcasting is under complete control of the bracelet weared. The catch is not everyone can wear a braclet.

Not sure on the 'control collar' thing, particularly if PCs are going to play Sanctioned Wizards (in my mind, Sorcerers are never Sanctioned, because you can't control what spells they learn). But Sanctioned Wizards would have brands or tattoos which could not be concealed, even by magic, identifying themselves are Wizards - which would change color (from Blue to Red, for example) if the Wizard went rogue.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Blackmoor had an interesting take. Sorcerers are actively hunted as dangerously unstable mages. (an idea heavily promoted by the wizard's guild) Part of the problem is at that Sorcerers ARE very dangerous when they first come into their powers.... explosively so.


Is the banned magic arcane, clerical, druidic, all of the above? How is a paladin viewed compared to a bard or to a wizard? Do official spellcasters exist, sanctioned by the government? What happens to spellcasters who are "born that way", such as a sorcerer? What about races with spellcasting, such as a gnome? Why is the world like this? What happened in the past?

I would create a new trait, called "Outlaw Caster" or something, that gives Bluff and possibly Disguise as class skills.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ciaran Barnes wrote:

Is the banned magic arcane, clerical, druidic, all of the above? How is a paladin viewed compared to a bard or to a wizard? Do official spellcasters exist, sanctioned by the government? What happens to spellcasters who are "born that way", such as a sorcerer? What about races with spellcasting, such as a gnome? Why is the world like this? What happened in the past?

I would create a new trait, called "Outlaw Caster" or something, that gives Bluff and possibly Disguise as class skills.

In one Forgotten Realms case, there was a ruling family called the Krannocks or something like that who were Priests of an entity called Entropy. In the duchy they ruled all spellcasting outside of their clerical magic was outlawed so to answer your question, your sorcerer, your bard, your wizard, and your gnome with spellcasting ability would all be burned alive on piles of witchweed. And a paladin who tried to stop them, would be burned as a witch sympathiser.


Cid Ayrbourne wrote:
While I agree with others that say 'Magic is Illegal' isn't the same as 'Low Magic', by using 'Magic is Illegal' but still around, it gives the GM significant control over what magic and magic items are available. Which can effectively amount to the same thing, depending on how it's played.

Not as much as you'd think -- and the people who get hurt the worst by this kind of control, as I said, are the martials.

Sorcerers, in particular, are completely unaffected by 'Magic is Illegal,' as they still learn every spell they would in a high magic campaign and can cast just as often as they would be able to. With a single feat (Craft Wondrous Item) they can make as many Pages of Spell Knowledge as they like and thereby increase their spells known, without the GM having any opportunity under RAW to take control. Bards are in roughly the same position.

Wizards and Witches still get their two spells per level, which can be a significant reduction from a more typical campaign, but still allows them (and indeed encourages them) to take the most generally effective spells they can manage.

However, the fighter is basically hosed without access to all the magic toys he would normally have.


I think you would have to settle on the party composition rules ahead of time, that will dramatically change the game.

I think a no magic party hunting 'witches' would be very interesting and challenging. Even a level or two of spell casting can be huge if the characters don't have access to any magic. The big thing to remember is that the CR system assumes magical augmentation, so you would have to alter the challenges your players face as you go up in level or you just kill them off. Purely mundane characters coming up with ways to defeat magical threats would be quite a challenge.

Mages on the run would be interesting too. After a certain point though, unless the witchhunters have equal magic or some huge advantage, it becomes fairly trivial for magic to defeat mundane, at least in the I can get away from you.

I don't see any real advantage in a mixed game. Doesn't really have a strong theme and with some of the party having magic, then everyone needs it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Indeed, the most effective "low magic" campaign is to run an E6 or E8 campaign, which is a campaign where charactes and NPCs do not go above level 6/8. At best, caster get 4th level spells. Not that there aren't shenanigans to be had with magic at that level, but they are severly reduced.

You typically also offer additional feats at every point when charactes would have leveled I believe while not really increasing the CR of monsters heavily. *Additional feats help, but they only do so much.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Check out Barbara Hambly's The Silent Tower and The Silicon Mage for a good look at both low magic and illegal magic.

Quick summary - the Church beat the wizzies in a big ole battle a few hundred years ago. MAgic is sriclty regulated, and the church has its own pet magi - who live under strict law, with regular tests of loyalty and a whole branch of the inquisition dedicated to anti-mage operations.

There are simple runes and materials that render items "Magically Dead" - unable to be affected by magic - and a special antimagic zone prison (The aforementioned "Silent Tower") for troublemakers.

A Mage's guild still exists - and most of the are not adherents to the dominant church, but the 'old gods' - but they are very much second-class citizens, watched like hawks, and easy scapegoats. They can study magic, but are absolutely forbidden from practicing it (though that's pretty hard to enforce 24-7...).

This has been the status quo for a long time, to the point where most people don't really beleive in magic anymore. So when an evil, subtle, manipulative mage outside the guild crops up, no-one is equipped to deal with him.

Might be a nice campaign thread for you: The church has weak mages, the nobility hastes magic, and you (the pc outlaw casters) will be put to death if you do anyhting about the bad guy. But no-one else can...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alright I'm back just got home lol
so its outlawed magic more to the point of shoot on site so mages have dwindled less and less being born hence rare or low magic

I like the idea of the church king outlaweing the magic (church runs everything)
And like the idea of pet mages

So each 'squad' of mage-hunters might have one mages and a couple martial mages might be a buffer or healer

If the PC's go imperial they will be a squad of magehunters if rebel they will have to fight several squads who might get larger due to rising threat ...

This allows me to equip baddie martials (or good martials) with big boy toys while still limiting what I allow

Some classes wouldn't be allowed like summoner for one can't quite think of the others for now and some of archetypes will be limited


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Count Coltello wrote:


Main questions are.

Who would be good "peacekeepers" and what would be good end goal (or bbeg)

Divine Casters, in particular I'd use inquisitors. Its really right up their alley. There is also a 3rd party product called the genius guide to divine archetypes. It is currently available from Rogue Genius games. It has an archetype (in the genius style archetype they can be added to any class, not a specific one) called the exorcist which makes a potent anti mage out of literally any class.

Quote:

And would you outlaw divine too and what about magic gear? It is usually assumed you have magic gear by a certain point but low magic might hinder that

The game assumes magic is available to the party as is magic gear. If you dont allow that, in particular with divine magic, you are going to have serious balance problems once you get past around 6th to 8th level. Either way, unless you want to throw out the CR system entirely, you need to keep the bonuses normally gained from magic items in the game, and the party needs access to divine magic regularly. If the churches control magic and are largely responsible for arcane magic being outlawed this could make alot of sense. Either way its a necessary part of the game, and to remove it would essentially require a major rewrite of the rules of pathfinder.


You might also want to take a look through the arcane spell lists: do you want the players (and hypotheitcal church arcane casters) to have access to all schools and spells?


Orfamay Quest wrote:

Low magic isn't as much a question of magic being illegal, but magic being unavailable, which is considerably different. While I think you've got the seed for a very good campaign there, I'm also not sure that it's a good way of enforcing "low magic", and it may be easier simply to say that magic doesn't work (as well) in your universe.

The problem with "magic is illegal" in an otherwise normal Pathfinder universe is that no one is typically equipped to handle magic if and when it comes up.

This shows itself in several ways. First, if you restrict magic gear (and you kind of have to, because otherwise anyone can get as much magic as they can afford to buy), you really hurt people. The game is balanced around the idea that everyone will have a magic weapon by about 5th level, so DR/magic at level 5+ is no big deal. And the people you really hurt are the martials, because the casters don't need magic weapons (they can make their own, essentially -- scorching ray to the rescue!).

The other issue is that without counter-magic, there's no way to deal with magic within the rules. If mages are illegal, then any of the mages who do exist will be able to do as they please. No one will have items to boost Will saves, no one will have ways to keep invisible thieves from making off with the contents of the bank vaults, et cetera.

You remove pc access to magic, everything falls apart.

Remove pc access to martials, meh, no problem.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Good peace keepers: Barbarians make excellent mage killers, Monks are great since they can resist spells and incapacitate the mages without killing them, Inquisitors are good if divine magic isn't illegal. Paladins would be good if you can justify it(hard since most good gods wouldn't sanction enslavement or killing of people because of their birth.)


I would make it a no-monsters or at least very few monsters campaign then. DR/magic is common yes but you could just as easily rework that to DR/masterwork. Not to mention, there are a ton of awesome creatures that different DRs like Devils and Demons. They require different crafting materials rather than magic. At the end of the day, you could just leave the DR/Magic monsters in there; DR is *that* strong anyway. I saw another forum post about changing +1 - +5 weapons from magical to just superbly crafted.

Holy/unholy can be still allowed if divine magic is still allowed which I think it should be. It simply raises too many questions if it isn't. For example, why would be give up on healing magic? Do people still worship the gods? If so, why would they abandon their agents on Earth...equivalent?

This would cut back on wonderous items and magical weapon properties like dancing or speed. If this still seems unfair to the Martials then consider how the mages will fare in a social setting. This obviously doesn't seem like a dungeon crawl campaign so urban adventures have to be taken into consideration. Magic will have to severely cut back on their magic or hide it through things like the still and silent spell feats. Maybe let wizards have access to one for free instead of scribe scroll. Or perhaps ban wizards but allow Magi who can still hold their own in combat without flashy spells like fireball. Even then the Blackblade archetype might still be unfair due to no one else getting such easy access to magic weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In a low-magic game I played in the DM took the 'Magic is illegal' route. Not all magic was illegal, only magic outside the Church was, which meant you still had magic weapons around (Chruch sold them) and magic potions (Church sold them) and magic healing (Churchy!) but you didn't have a lot of mages running around fireballing things. So you had the restricted access to magic, but it didn't stop the world or the party from being equipped to deal with it.

This also did not stop my character from being a sorcerer in a party of martial characters, it just meant that the sorcerer lied a lot! Every spell, rolled a bluff vs the parties sense motive. Oh, I threw a vial of grease! I'm talking to my bow for luck! I bought a fire breath potion when we were in town! Totally not using magic! They were a bit suspicious towards the end, but they never did figure it out.


Outlaw divine spellcasters... now that would be interesting.


also, E6 is one way to enforce "low magic" while still keeping things decent, since it keeps casters out of the REALLY crazy stuff (hello black tentacles and friends), but doesn't stab WBL in the foot for the martials.


Cid Ayrbourne wrote:
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:

Ooh! Those in power have wizards and sorcerers controlled by collars. Like the Domani using Idom from the wheel of time series.

Basically a braclet (controller) connected to a collar (controllee). The collared and their spellcasting is under complete control of the bracelet weared. The catch is not everyone can wear a braclet.

Not sure on the 'control collar' thing, particularly if PCs are going to play Sanctioned Wizards (in my mind, Sorcerers are never Sanctioned, because you can't control what spells they learn). But Sanctioned Wizards would have brands or tattoos which could not be concealed, even by magic, identifying themselves are Wizards - which would change color (from Blue to Red, for example) if the Wizard went rogue.

In the Wheel of Time, the spell casters were basically all sorcerers. There was this one nation that didn't allow free spell casters. They were all effectively magically bound slaves to be used as tools in every sense of the word. It's one of the only ways I can think for a "non-magic" group to be able to compete in any way with magic weilders. It was just a thought.


You could add some mundane things that nullify magic in some way. Such as moving water or some special anti-magic metal. Not cheap, but not exceedingly rare either. Elite troops would have access, but not Mooks.


Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:


In the Wheel of Time, the spell casters were basically all sorcerers. There was this one nation that didn't allow free spell casters. They were all effectively magically bound slaves to be used as tools in every sense of the word. It's one of the only ways I can think for a "non-magic" group to be able to compete in any way with magic weilders. It was just a thought.

I'm familiar with the Wheel of Time and the Seanchan‎, but, again, as some PCs may be spellcasters, I wouldn't go down that road. Rather, I'd go the route more like Shara from that setting, with the Church being the power behind the throne, rather than the spellcasters themselves.

With a'dam, your PCs wouldn't be able to do anything but what another PC or an NPC tells them they can do - or all 'spellcaster' PCs would have to be sul'dam. (Assuming Imperial)


One idea to handle this (and to explain the mage-hate) is some combination or distillation of:

1) this
2) this
3) or this

Especially the second one, granting high (but very generic) "magical" power to everyone equally based on their innate skill and personal "presence".

Why would this be a "thing" that causes (either directly or indirectly) mages to be illegal?

Perhaps because (true or not) according to certain "lore", with a high prevalence of mages and magic, the ambient magical energy that otherwise enhances all is, instead, selfishly "channeled" into a mage's personal desires - literally, they drain the ambient magical energy from all people to power their arcane spells.

However, this only functions for "mortal" races, whatever that means, (humanoids without racial HD, as a base example, or possibly any creature without racial HD), which would give some of the more monstrous and cruel (or even otherwise benevolent!) creatures actual reason to grant patronage to would-be or potential mages even if that would-be mage's alignment wouldn't normally be within the creature's desires. They would literally be attempting to reduce the innate power of all men by fostering the growth in power of one (or, well, rather, the growth in power of a - relative - few). This attempt to reduce the power of the mortal races could be for any number of reasons, both potentially benevolent or malevolent.

In this way, hunters are hunting not just for the sake of, say, the church's politics (though some certainly may be), but they are also hunting for the sake of "all mankind" (though they may not be aware that this is the reason).

Now, generic number bonuses to "stuff" probably wouldn't make the hunting and killing of an entire caste of people "justified", unless there were serious problems with mages in the past... certainly something that could be true (and/or just made up... and/or true, but supplemented with entirely fabricated stories to make things worse... etc.), and thus grant "justification" the hunting and purging (and taming) of mages.

Further, the reduction of these "free" bonuses to all, would mean that, if mages were prevalent, they would have even more power - not only would they drain resources away from their fellows, but they would then have the ability to place that very same energy they "steal" into specific items (perhaps even tailoring those items to specific individuals!) granting them even greater power and influence over the world at large.

In any event, it would permit martials to fairly consistently go up against other monsters without their normal gear (perhaps requiring a blade, armor, or other piece of equipment to be "masterwork" by virtue of its craftsmanship before being "appropriate" to channel such ambiant magical essence), while simultaneously not entirely disregarding casters as valid.

Now, of course, there's the natural question: at which point does the number of mages "drain" the local ambient magic (you could call it "weave" or "mythallar" or "ki" or "mana" or pretty much anything else you'd like) such that people no longer gain the benefits?

Well, to answer that: it's really kind of vague, and thus open to GM interpretation.
1) It could be that it's a hard number (ex: "at exactly 43 mages, the bonuses disappear!");
2) it could be a number based on population (ex: "at exactly 43 mages within a 1 mile radius, that 1 mile radius, centered on the average center of the casters, is devoid of bonuses!");
3) it could be based on the local population (ex: "at exactly 43 mages out of every 1,000 people, the bonuses disappear for those local 1,000 people!");
4) it could be based on race (ex: "at exactly 43 elf mages, the bonuses disappear for elves!");
5) it could be based on some combination of these (ex: "at exactly 43 elf mages out of 1,000 people <or 1,000 elves> within a 1 mile radius, that 1 mile radius, centered on the average center of the casters, is devoid of bonuses for elves!");
6) it could be based on something a little more esoteric (ex: "based on averages, typical mages craft 43 items in their lifetime; each item crafted "steals" a bonus from approximately 23 and 1/4 people, thus a typical mage robs 1,000 people of bonuses!" or "based on averages, typical mages cast 43 spells per day; each spell cast "steals" a bonus from approximately 23 and 1/4 people, thus a typical mage robs 1,000 people of bonuses per day for that day!");
7) it could be based on some other similar element;
8) it could be based on nothing but lies and an inappropriate understanding of the world... or a purposeful intent to deceive... or both!
9) it could be that it originated as a fabrication, but is, in fact, true to a limited extent;
10) other ideas go here! (look, I can't think of everything!) :D
EDIT: sorry for cutting off in the middle, distracted by a toddler's poopy-diaper!


So, can I kill a thread, or can I kill a thread? :D

EDIT: added a link!


It ran it's course.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
So, can I kill a thread, or can I kill a thread? :D

No you just made it stink.


Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
It ran it's course.

How so? It seems like there are a large number of un-mined ideas out there. I was also interested in getting people's ideas on what I'd said, if anything.

Titania, the Summer Queen wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
So, can I kill a thread, or can I kill a thread? :D
No you just made it stink.

:(

... why? How?

I'm curious what you mean beyond this?

EDIT: wait, this is a diaper-change joke. Oh, man, that's well played... very well played. :D

Shadow Lodge

Count Coltello wrote:

Who would be good "peacekeepers" and what would be good end goal (or bbeg)

And would you outlaw divine too and what about magic gear? It is usually assumed you have magic gear by a certain point but low magic might hinder that

i would have inquisitors be the antimagic hunters, you know use magic to kill magic type of thing.

other then that a different rout to go would be monks (martial artist), mage slayer build fighters, or witch hunter barbarians as "peacekeepers" for a fully non-magical direction for npc's.

magic gear can be hidden from detection, you can cast a number of spells or place them in a few different containers to prevent people from noticing that they are magical. also magic items do not need to have a visual element to it.

NOW i would require all magic to be crafted by a party member or an NPC that is found by a skill check. this npc could also be used at a later date to expose the party for a plot device.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Titania, the Summer Queen wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
So, can I kill a thread, or can I kill a thread? :D
No you just made it stink.

How rude.

I rather liked his ideas. It also made me think of magic in Dark Sun.

Edit: Ah... I missed the pun, too, apparently. Ignore me.


Magic being illegal reminds me of Dragon Age. Dragon Worshipping, mage led empire enslaves and unleashes a great evil on the world. Divine prophet rises up and overthrows said empire. New Church herds magic users into complexes where they are free to practice magic in, but forbidden from leaving. The church then 'protects' said mages with mage-mashing paladins (Templars) and exploits them for magical objects/potions/spells/etc.

All mages not in a tower or escorted by paladins are considered apostates and hunted down.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Count Coltello wrote:

So I wanna make a low magic campaign...

Everyone has different ideas on what low magic means so what I'm thinking is mages (anyone that can use magic) were outlawed as to not take over world (not sure if just arcane or divine too or what)

So players can make martial characters in attempt to hunt down rogue mages (or free mages in custody or what have you)

Or they can make mages in attempt to free the brethren from the tyrannical oppression of magic

Or they can be mixed martial and mages but not sure how well that would work

Main questions are.

Who would be good "peacekeepers" and what would be good end goal (or bbeg)

And would you outlaw divine too and what about magic gear? It is usually assumed you have magic gear by a certain point but low magic might hinder that

Peacekeepers most likely would be monks. In general (without advanced rules and such) they have good saves, and are more resistant to magic and spellcasters than most of the other general classes.

Otherwise, if you allow divine magic, you could have Clerics be the enforcers, with Monks being their mooks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Consider:

A civilization shattering catastrophe occurred a few hundred years ago and all folks blame the magic users for it. About half of the land mass is in a state of anarchy, and the rest is controlled by a variety of organized civilizations. Martial orders including paladins and inquisitors exist specifically to investigate reports of magic users and hunt them down. These orders are based in the good and neutral dominated civs. In a few evil civilizations magic users are captured and enslaved. Also, each civ has a favored religion, and worshippers of non-state religions are likewise actively hunted down.

Consider some actual magic limiting rules:
1. No summoning functions.
2. No teleportation, dimension door, blink or similar spell accessing other planes or dimensions function.
3. Animating undead requires a tough caster level check unless the creature in question gives consent to being animated this way.
4. Limit spell levels available. Maybe no spells above 7th level work.
5. Consider identifying one or two types of magic that are particularly weak. All spells of the weakened schools occupy a spell slot one level higher than normal. (Examples: all illusions spells or all spells with the light descriptor.)

Whatever rules you settle upon, be sure your players know them long before character creation.

As for the ultimate goals of the world/game play, think about fantasy novels that you've read. Rip off wholesale any themes that appeal to you. Also, the theme that is appropriate will have to evolve in response to the game choices your players make. What they do in the first five levels will tell you which side of the power fault lines they stand on, and which direction your story line should bend.

Good luck!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
It ran it's course.

How so? It seems like there are a large number of un-mined ideas out there. I was also interested in getting people's ideas on what I'd said, if anything.

Titania, the Summer Queen wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
So, can I kill a thread, or can I kill a thread? :D
No you just made it stink.

:(

... why? How?

I'm curious what you mean beyond this?

EDIT: wait, this is a diaper-change joke. Oh, man, that's well played... very well played. :D

ok here are the rules concerning me.

1. Half of everything I say, is non-sensical.
2. Half of everything I say should be ignored.
3. 100% of everything I say is Awesome!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You know, if you want to make a campaign lower magic, all you really need to do is double the casting time of all spells (except swift and immediate). Suddenly busting out the magic is much riskier due to attacks of opportunity ect, and martial classes are far more reliable DPS.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / your a wizard harry ... and arrested All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.