If I were to theoretically have a game where no magic items were available at all, when would the CR system begin to break down?
If I were to theoretically have a game where no magic items were available at all, when would the CR system begin to break down?
I would assume when DR/magic first came up. As a guess I would say this starts around level 3 , darn shadows. I had first had experience with incorporeal creatures and no magic weapons. It is not fun.
PS: I think I am done for tonight.
when would the CR system begin to break down?
When the GM drops his bundle and doesn't think through the ramifications of an encounter. DR would be one of the bigger issues - Ad/mith/silver/coldiron will only take you so far.
Would just ignoring DR/magic for monsters work?
Would just ignoring DR/magic for monsters work?
You COULD do it that way, but then there's usually a historical or supernatural reason WHY that Dr/Magic is in place.
The GM is better off either avoiding those sorts of encounters, OR putting something in play to help counter it... ie the players think to gather Wolvesbane in the Mystic Forest and coat their blades in it's juices before trying to ambush a Werewolf on a full moon; or melt down the Holy Relic of St Somebody to make silver arrows to fire at the Vampire.
All that sort of Storytelling can be used.
The entire game would break down at around level 3 or 4.
Magic items are a major fundamental assumption for the game, to the point where a lot of classes flat don't work without them after the earliest levels. 3.5/Pathfinder is a tremendously high-magic game, and can't abide the removal of magic items past those extremely low levels.
If you want a game devoid of magic items, I suggest either capping things at level 3 or finding another system entirely, one that's designed to operate without the vast amounts of magical items.
The entire game would break down at around level 3 or 4.
Currently in a campaign around the 7 mark that has been running perfectly fine, with the best items being masterwork quality mundanes.
No sign of the game breaking down yet.
I think people are overstating a bit. DR 5/magic might seem pretty hefty... but all the DR in the world doesn't stop magic missile and inflict wounds.
And there are still spells like magic weapon, magic fang, etc. for when it matters.
I suspect the problem starts being felt by 6-8, starts getting really obvious after 10 or so.
One potential solution is to run an E6 or E8 game (stop leveling at 6 or 8, gain feats thereafter). This blunts the importance of magic items, as well as having other effects that may or may not suit you.
At some point the monsters will start hitting all your PCs, every single time, even with their lowest to hit attack. Mundane AC does eventually become obsolete. The question is when does that really cool mundane AC of 10 + 8 (Full Plate) + 1 Dex + 2 Shield total 21 become pointless? At first to 3rd level I'm sure you're rocking with such an AC... but eventually you may as well be naked.
Sure, at some point there's probably going to need to be a few tokens thrown in to keep the AC going - but as per another thread on these boards, AC loses relevance towards the end game anyway.
It gets substituted for 'avoidance'.
Also, knowing that if you push toe-to-toe with NastyCritter_01 is going to SERIOUSLY hurt, it encourages the players to consider terrain and tactical decisions in greater depth than the simple - "Ok, I charge the Balor". Pre-fight setups and Ambush become big concerns.
That's true, but recently there's been a bit of a movement on the boards to come up with a replacement system. To have heroic characters that aren't dependent on stuff to succeed.
A way of granting the necessary bonuses to PC's (particularly martial types) that they need so it stops being "The Mage and the dude decked out in magic crap" and it becomes "The mage and the champion" or whatever.
Oh, that's trivially easy.
The game fundamentally relies on magic items' power along an approximate progression as one of the big, basic assumptions of the game. However, just because the power is necessary doesn't mean the items are.
So, instead of giving players gold and swag to get magic items to wear and bandy about, you give your players 'awesome points.' You don't spend four thousand gold on a +2 strength belt. You burn four thousand awesome to get a +2 strength enhancement because the character's just that strong. Your Fighter didn't just drink a healing potion to heal her wounds; she dug deep and gathered the force of will to keep going despite her wounds. The Rogue didn't pull out a wand and use UMD to zap someone with a wand of Ray of Enfeeblement; she's a minor mage who just cast a spell. The Barbarian isn't getting that +1 enhancement from a magic sword; she's getting it from being really good at swording stuff.
Get creative, and you can easily cover most of the major magic effects, possibly even through mid-levels.
I think people are overstating a bit. DR 5/magic might seem pretty hefty... but all the DR in the world doesn't stop magic missile and inflict wounds.
And there are still spells like magic weapon, magic fang, etc. for when it matters.
Note that Magic Missile, Magic Fang, and Magic Weapon are all spells. Which people who don't cast spells don't have. The entire problem is that it reduces non-casters to irrelevance. That casters are still relevant does not resolve the issue.
Also, knowing that if you push toe-to-toe with NastyCritter_01 is going to SERIOUSLY hurt, it encourages the players to consider terrain and tactical decisions in greater depth than the simple - "Ok, I charge the Balor". Pre-fight setups and Ambush become big concerns.
If the Balor is legitimately dangerous to begin with, you're not going in charging it without a plan to begin with. Mind, a balor isn't supposed to be a threat once you hit level 20. By defined parameters of the game, it's supposed to be a nuisance at that point.
Uh. Except that magic weapon is generally not something the sorcerer or wizard is going to be making use of herself. The fact that there are spells that make melee types more powerful and able to get through a problem doesn't mean melee types aren't useful -- it means you require more teamwork than 'I bought a +1 greatsword.'
And note I said 'for when it matters' -- there will be plenty of times when it doesn't, or the barbarian shrugs and just fights a little longer, or...
Also note not every monster has DR magic. In fact, it's not even the majority.
However, the fundamental problem is, all those things you used to do with magic items now have to be done with spells, in a game that's already skewed towards spellcasters, which makes the noncasters more of a drag than a contribution, because they have to gobble up the casters' spells just to look useful. More so than ever, the party would be better off with another Cleric than a Fighter, who can be a full-function warrior and still bring a full battery of those all-important spells.
Uh. Except that magic weapon is generally not something the sorcerer or wizard is going to be making use of herself. The fact that there are spells that make melee types more powerful and able to get through a problem doesn't mean melee types aren't useful -- it means you require more teamwork than 'I bought a +1 greatsword.'
And note I said 'for when it matters' -- there will be plenty of times when it doesn't, or the barbarian shrugs and just fights a little longer, or...
Also note not every monster has DR magic. In fact, it's not even the majority.
There are also alignment DR's that have to be overcome with magic. The higher level ones that don't have DR/magic have other ways to make you hate life. Once again incorporeal beings come to mind.
You also need magic armor to up your AC, and potions, and wands....
However, the fundamental problem is, all those things you used to do with magic items now have to be done with spells, in a game that's already skewed towards spellcasters, which makes the noncasters more of a drag than a contribution, because they have to gobble up the casters' spells just to look useful. More so than ever, the party would be better off with another Cleric than a Fighter, who can be a full-function warrior and still bring a full battery of those all-important spells.
There are few things that 'have to be done with spells.' If a creature has DR 5/magic... you can still hit it, and most melee types will still do credible damage. Plus, there are a lot of other things they can do: bull rush, trip, disarm, etc. Then there are new feats that allow someone to focus more on one or two high damage hits than many lower damage hits.
The times when magic items are critically necessary are relatively rare. And when they occur, there are usually other ways to deal with them.
I once played in a 3.0 campaign where magic items were basically unheard of. The DM said that he had one magic item suited for each character.
There was also no divine magic. Rangers and Paladins got the non-magic variations - Clerics and Druids did not exist.
The campaign was made to go to level 18.
I played a fighter (archer). Soon I found that arrows are really bad at piercing DR. I ended up in Melee most of the time, since I could do more damage on a single hit.
When my artifact showed up, my (*^*&%*%(*&*$^( DM gave me a magic chain shirt. No magic bow, no magic arrows.
I retired the character and made a Wizard.
If I was ever to play in a very low magic campaign again, I would definitely make a caster, no question. If casting isn't an option, I would make something that has a really hard hit.
There are few things that 'have to be done with spells.' If a creature has DR 5/magic... you can still hit it, and most melee types will still do credible damage. Plus, there are a lot of other things they can do: bull rush, trip, disarm, etc. Then there are new feats that allow someone to focus more on one or two high damage hits than many lower damage hits.
The times when magic items are critically necessary are relatively rare. And when they occur, there are usually other ways to deal with them.
You're splitting the hair of 'necessary' versus 'so much better as to make the alternative trivial' so finely as to miss the point. Sure, melee types can still do damage, but the boost in effectiveness and adaptability across the board from having spells available is so massive as to make the point ultimately silly.
I'm not splitting hairs, we disagree. There's a difference.
And I pointed out that the premise you put forth for that disagreement is a distinction so minor as to hardly be a distinction at all. Point, counter point is the basis of logical discourse, after all.
It breaks down pretty quickly, by level 5 or 6 non casters have trouble doing anything, and casters have to spend most of their resources covering for whats missing, meaning a 1 or 2 encounter day instead of 4. At 10+ you simply cannot face monsters of your CR, they will party wipe you, your saves are lower then they should be, the monster almost always hits with all its attacks doing more damage, and the party has trouble hitting back. A party full of casters will have less trouble most likely, as they are less dependent on items, but they will be very very squishy if they cant keep the enemies at bay. So basically you are looking at a party wipe far too often.
meaning a 1 or 2 encounter day instead of 4.
But is there anything WRONG with 1-2/Day? Newp :p
meaning a 1 or 2 encounter day instead of 4.But is there anything WRONG with 1-2/Day? Newp :p
Of course not, but that is a breakdown of the system, since it was designed for 4. That's what the poster asked for right? It also means those 1-2 are significantly more dangerous and difficult then they would be otherwise. If this is what you are going for great, but it is not how the system was designed.
meaning a 1 or 2 encounter day instead of 4.But is there anything WRONG with 1-2/Day? Newp :p
For class balance sake there is something very wrong with 1-2 encounters per day, it makes magic using classes far stronger than they should be. If a magic class gets to blow its whole wad in 1-2 fights instead of having to space them out over 4-5 fights.
It's not the CR that's the issue, the GM can always adjust fights to keep players effective.
However...
I retired the character and made a Wizard.
This is really what removing magic items boils down to. You end up with two distinct classes of characters at the table, those with magic and those without. Those without will be out shined again and again by those that have it and eventually those players that care even a little bit about being effective in combat will either reroll or quit showing up.
To the OP the answer to your question is 'it really depends on the GM, the class composition, and the number of players at the table'. But the GM can only keep things in check for so long without intentionally nerfing casters or removing them from the game. When a full caster's power starts to really ramp up your non-casters are going to feel like second class citizens. They do anyhow with magic items but magic items help to keep things balanced for longer.
In the end removing magic items will have serious repercussions and your party will be better off all rolling casters and taking non-caster followers... because otherwise you'll have other PCs that feel like followers around level 5 or 7.
I guess maybe this is where some of the difference's of opinion come from in interpreting how you play the game.
No group I have been a part of has ever worried about the number of encounters each day, as the number of encounters tends to vary based on the storyline put forth by the GM, and the tactical considerations of the party.
In fact, not knowing how many encounters may be ahead means that the casting classes have to be much more vigilant than mapping only 4 fights, and that stuff like healing becomes a pace issue for the Healers, and stuff like when to 'drop the Fireball' becomes much more significant than 1/Combat by default.
Obviously this is all bent towards campaign play, which was probably made in a sandbox, and would probably not gel cleanly with the published AP's for example.
Personally, I like this approach as it means the players have to think carefully about their choices, and it tends to mean that they build more 3 dimensional characters than one trick ponies or 'ultra-specialists'.
Yes it also makes the game a lot harder, and initially some players who aren't used to the concept can balk a little (as they expect to need XYZ items to survive) but after a short while they have loads of fun - been doing this since the 80's with a lot of groups, and so far nothing has derailed.
Play the flavour that suits you, and if thats high magic then so be it... but just bear in mind that both systems work, and both systems are equally valid (I just like mine more :p)
*Sigh.*
The encounter limit is not about story, it's about when people start dying brutally and in vast quantities. It's not about uber-specialists who only do one thing, and in fact, those tend to fare worst, as even one encounter where their one trick or specialty is inapplicable can kill them. You're ascribing traits that have absolutely nothing to do with anything that anyone has ever said in this entire thread.
Axing magic items entirely is not simply a different system. It's annihilating a major aspect of the game. If you simply said, "I think characters with a hundred hit points are unrealistic, so I'll just stop giving characters hit points after level one," that would be as massive a shift in the game as removing magic items.
What this is about is the ramifications of removing magic items, and they are extensive. It fundamentally alters the balance of power in the world. Specifically, it completely removes any magic from the hands of those who do not have their own magic internally. That's massive. It's a huge shift in the balance of power, as nobody has any magic at all unless they're casters, in a game where characters (including complete muggles) are assumed as having vast amounts of magic items at higher levels.
*Sigh.*
/sigh is about right.
Simply put, 'the game' is extremely flexible and allows for a metric shedloads of variables. Removal of magic items (or their restriction) does not 'radically alter the game', it just radically alters the game 'as you know it'.
If that isn't to your taste, then don't do it.
The game wont magically implode when billy can't have his +35 Axe/mace Combo of underwater breathing & treasure finding, in fact it will keep right on ticking.
Yes, stuff like CR needs to be taken with a big grain of salt, but then the level indicators have been taken with a grain of salt since the first Monster Manual rolled off the printing line in the 80's.
The game *is* playable right to the end game without magic items.
Whether you'd *want* it to would be another matter entirely.
So feel free to *sigh* all you want, and add the odd *faceroll* in for good measure; I've seen it all before, and frankly your way is not my way and that's fine - it doesn't have to be, but kindly refrain from trying to take a right/wrong stance - and I'll refrain from inferring that your way of play tends to have the depth of a postage stamp.
...in my opinion of course.
if you were very carefull in monster and Npc class choices you could probably build an entire 20 lvl campaign
Yes it would, but it doesn't HAVE to be bland, there's a lot you can play with within those confines :)
/sigh is about right.
Simply put, 'the game' is extremely flexible and allows for a metric shedloads of variables. Removal of magic items (or their restriction) does not 'radically alter the game', it just radically alters the game 'as you know it'.
If that isn't to your taste, then don't do it.
The game wont magically implode when billy can't have his +35 Axe/mace Combo of underwater breathing & treasure finding, in fact it will keep right on ticking.
Yes, stuff like CR needs to be taken with a big grain of salt, but then the level indicators have been taken with a grain of salt since the first Monster Manual rolled off the printing line in the 80's.
The game *is* playable right to the end game without magic items.
Whether you'd *want* it to would be another matter entirely.So feel free to *sigh* all you want, and add the odd *faceroll* in for good measure; I've seen it all before, and frankly your way is not my way and that's fine - it doesn't have to be, but kindly refrain from trying to take a right/wrong stance - and I'll refrain from inferring that your way of play tends to have the depth of a postage stamp.
...in my opinion of course.
How?
Your post is idealistic, but it is not realistic. With the token 4 party members you will not make it to level 20 without the DM fudging dice assuming he runs a variety of encounters. This also assumes the DM does not tailor to the group, which was VV's point.Edit: I initially quoted the wrong post.
How?
Your post is idealistic, but it is not realistic. With the token 4 party members you will not make it to level 20 without the DM fudging dice assuming he runs a variety of encounters. This also assumes the DM does not tailor to the group, which was VV's point.
Not realistic?
Perhaps not at your gaming table, but I've been at this through multiple generations of the D&D system - from little white box all the way to now - and it has always managed to work out fine.
Yes the game will probably have to live without hordes of Balors, and Dragon meat feasts every second Saturday, but ultimately it WILL and DOES run. Published modules and AP's may cause a bit of a problem though, so these would need to be altered in order to work.
In a sandbox campaign you can tinker with magic levels to your hearts content, and it has a noticeable effect on the campaign flavour and the style of play (ie tactics) you will see. Indeed the storylines themselves begin to look radically different.
As I say, I find it better - and others won't like it.
If you *really* want to know how, other than to try and pick faults to come back and try counter argue for the sake of arguing, I suggest you put on your thinking cap and actually give it a go. Either you will like the change, and have a whole fresh take on your favourite game, or you will find it not to your taste and be happy as you were. Not bad for a VERY short investment of your time.
The bottom line is, taking magic items out of the game means that parties, no matter their make up, cannot face level appropriate challenges past level 3 or so.
Does this mean the game is unplayable? Certainly not, but as previously stated, it is going to widen the gap between martial classes (specifically fighters, rogues, and monks) and any class with innate magic related class abilities.
Will fighting level 15 goblin warriors be boring? To some people, but I am willing to bet that fighting demons would be boring to others.
And to be quite honest, the OP asked "Where does a lack of magic items begin to affect CR?" Not "can you remove magic items from the game entirely and still play it?"
And to be quite honest, the OP asked "Where does a lack of magic items begin to affect CR?" Not "can you remove magic items from the game entirely and still play it?"
To which I would then have to answer "it won't, but it WILL affect your choices of available encounters, as it will skew the effectiveness of certain attributes - and this adjustment will need to occur from level 1"
Simply put, 'the game' is extremely flexible and allows for a metric shedloads of variables. Removal of magic items (or their restriction) does not 'radically alter the game', it just radically alters the game 'as you know it'.If that isn't to your taste, then don't do it.
The game wont magically implode when billy can't have his +35 Axe/mace Combo of underwater breathing & treasure finding, in fact it will keep right on ticking.
You're just not getting it. Changing stuff changes stuff. Yes, there are a lot of variables. And when you change the variables, you have to consider how things change.
The loads on a concrete beam can change any number of ways, and it can bear any number of load combinations. Doesn't change the fact that if you pile too much weight on it, it's gonna break. And a drainage system designed for a five-year storm can handle a vast array of different rain events, but when the fifty-year storm rolls 'round, that system's gonna get backed up, even though it's just a shift in a bunch of variables. It's just this particular variable arrangement causes the drainage system to fail.
The game is designed under the assumption that you follow a certain item progression. Pre-epic, that never includes a +35 axe. Rather, the game assumes that you might have a +10-equivalent weapon, tops, come level 20. If the best the party has is a +8-equivalent weapon, or an epic +12-equivalent weapon that's probably not a big deal. But if the best the party has is a masterwork sword? Or if the party has a +100 lightsaber of awesome? Those dramatically break the fundamental assumptions of the game, and the game ceases to function, the premises on which the game was balanced cease to exist.
There is a point where you remove so much from the game and the tatters are in such shambles that it becomes pointless to use. If you were to cut all the magic out of D&D, yes, you'd still have a system afterward, but you wouldn't get a good low-magic game. You'd get a broken game.
The way D&D works is, you start out with minimal magic, and it grows, and it grows, and the entire game goes higher- and higher-magic as you go along. At level fifteen, you have characters who can literally turn a burrito into a Chippendale dancer four times a day, every day. To have no magic items on one hand, and people who can turn burritos into Chippendale dancers four times a day every day on the other is schizophrenic and nonsensical.
In order to get something like a low-fantasy, low-magic feel, you have to look at what and where the system can best service low-magic, low-fantasy. That's not at level 20. However, at level three, maybe even level six, the game, the system can service the low-magic, low-fantasy game quite well. If you actually consider the consequences of modifications, and honestly appraise what the system does and how it works, it can be worked out with more grace than just doing whatever and declaring the result automatically awesome because it's just variable manipulation. Rather, folks may just use E6 in Pathfinder, which could work great. Or even E3.
The game *is* playable right to the end game without magic items.
Whether you'd *want* it to would be another matter entirely.So feel free to *sigh* all you want, and add the odd *faceroll* in for good measure; I've seen it all before, and frankly your way is not my way and that's fine - it doesn't have to be, but kindly refrain from trying to take a right/wrong stance - and I'll refrain from inferring that your way of play tends to have the depth of a postage stamp.
...in my opinion of course.
Don't try and hide behind opinion as if it's some sort of shield against all commentary. All opinions are subject to logic. If you don't want your opinions to be subject to analysis, reflection, discussion, or criticism, then never speak. Ever. Especially not on an open forum.
And just because a game is playable doesn't mean it's any good. F.A.T.A.L., popularly accepted as the worst game ever, is completely playable (technically). Also, just because some system is playable and you have fun with it still doesn't mean it's any good. RIFTS is a horrible game, but at the same time, a lot of people had a ton of fun with it in its day. Some people still do. That doesn't make the system itself quality. 'How to make a crappy game' isn't very useful, since anyone can make a crappy game. The idea is to make a game that's actually quality, within whatever defined parameters, with all the foresight that requires.
There's such a thing as a badly-designed system. If you cut magic items out of D&D, then just run it as normal, the result is a badly-designed system. However, if you cut the magic items out of D&D, but actually account for and adapt to the massive and sweeping changes in the game as a whole that it would cause, you can actually get a game that is at least as good as the original template, more suited to the needs of a lower-magic game.
If you *really* want to know how, other than to try and pick faults to come back and try counter argue for the sake of arguing,
How do you get defeat the dragon(very old) in an open area?
How do you take on Pit Fiends and Balors?How do you defeat incorpeal creatures?
How do you restore ability damage, and ability drain?
To go further how do you deal with incorpeal creatures?
How do Rakshasa with caster level or without additional caster levels
How do you deal with Iron Golems and the caster that controls them. He will probably use a free action to speak so using whatever tactics are used against a dumb brute or not an option.
How do you deal with remove curse and disease?
What do you do when you need to cross the world or at least major parts of it?
What do you do with monster that can regenerate?
How is your AC high enough to avoid monsters that hit hard?
How are you saves high enough to avoid making rolls above a 10 almost mandatory?
I am sure others can come with more and better examples.
Any of these and more can occur between levels 1 to 20. Your caster can only learn so many spells, and scrolls can't be purchased.
Another point is that sometimes things happen on a rushed schedule so waiting a day to redo the spell list is not an option.
Many of these came from published campaigns, so its not like I am going out of my way to stack the odds against you.
Don't forget the monsters will most likely try to kill the casters first since they are the primary threat.
You're just not getting it.
No, I'm simply not agreeing with you. I see your point entriely, I just don't accept that it is 'the only way'
Don't try and hide behind opinion as if it's some sort of shield against all commentary. All opinions are subject to logic. If you don't want your opinions to be subject to analysis, reflection, discussion, or criticism, then never speak. Ever. Especially not on an open forum.
See when you dont get your way your ONLY tool is to go on the attack. It's my opinion, sure, and others also have the same opinion - you are entitled to your game and I am entitled to mine, the point I made is that it doesn't 'break' and become all unworkable, you just *feel* that it does.
There's no *hiding*
Indeed all opinions are subject to logic, it's just you have taken to adding a dose of dogma to go with it. And whilst I am happy to debate the finer points of how something does or doesn't work in play, there's obviously little point doing so when you have no intention of even considering what the other person is saying unless what they are saying is "you are SO right".
So before you tell people what to do, how to do it, and on what sort of forums they may like to do it, perhaps you'd care to take a measure of that wisdom yourself.
If you only want to read threads that are going to completely agree with you, and praise you, and not damage your delicate sensibilities the perhaps you'd care to consider building a VV Fan Page and frequenting that - as open public forums are possibly not for you.
And to be quite honest, the OP asked "Where does a lack of magic items begin to affect CR?" Not "can you remove magic items from the game entirely and still play it?"To which I would then have to answer "it won't, but it WILL affect your choices of available encounters, as it will skew the effectiveness of certain attributes - and this adjustment will need to occur from level 1"
That is all you had to say before I made my post. Of course you can change the encounters. I was saying its not realistic without doing so. I thought that was clear when I said "variety of encounters", but I guess I should have said without the DM compensating. Oh, well. At least I know we agree now.
A suggestion for finding ways to make a Pathfinder game work with low/no magic items would be to check out the d20 derivative game, Iron Heroes. It's a system that's designed around the idea that magic is inherently unreliable and not to be trusted. As a result, PCs rarely get much in the way of magical loot, and definitely not magical loot of the +x variety. It's not a perfect system by any means but it does several things that I think help it to deal with lower magic levels. I'll see about listing some of those when I get access to my books again after the holidays.
|
If I were to theoretically have a game where no magic items were available at all, when would the CR system begin to break down?
Where did all these worms come from? I thought this was a can of corn!
Seriously though. In a magic-less campaign, I would:
1)Give stat bumps every 2 levels instead of every 4. Give all classes a bonus to AC equal to half their BAB. Now AC boosting items are scaled, combat bonuses are scaling as you are now higher in your main stat.
2)Allow feats at +3 BAB (prereq weapon focus) that allowed a class to treat a weapon as magical. Alternately, give creatures more exotic DR combos (silver and blessed, cold iron and good aligned) and the PCs need to use knowledges to find out what they are. Or you could replace DR with fast healing.
3)Allow feats at higher levels (+6 BAB perhaps?) that allowed you to 'energize' your weapon so that it gets a +1 weapon enchantment effect (flaming/frost/keen). For another feat and +9 BAB prereq, you can make it a +2 enchantment effect.
The feat options assume pathfinder, where feats are a little easier to come by. Or you could just make the BAB driven abilities innate.
Personally, I think DR is boring and would much rather have something more colorful. I also would prefer to not do away with magic entirely, but have one, maybe two magic items per character. Its sort of silly to be in a world with dragons and vampires, theres a wizard and a cleric whipping spells around, but nobody can enchant magic... at all.
You popped up a load of excellent and very valid questions, and I have taken the time to write a few answers that should serve to give a good idea about where I am coming from.
I haven't answered ALL of them as I figure there's enough there that the questions corresponding answer would be pretty clear, but if you REALLY REALLY wanna know then I am sure we can discuss a finer point in more depth :p (just making this clear before some pedant tries to level a 'hiding' or 'ducking' charge against me)
How do you get defeat the dragon(very old) in an open area?
Why would you WANT to face off a Dragon in such terrible conditions unless you had martyrdom as your end goal. In a low magic game, a dragon once again becomes a DRAGON from fantasy lore. Frankly it becomes the sort of thing people spend a long time preparing for, and possibly many sessions of backstory would go into building the encounter.
As opposed to "ok so we stomped the Smaug this morning, what time does the Gates of Hell ride start running?"
How do you take on Pit Fiends and Balors?
Ditto above; that said, there's a whole other thread about how a Balor, played well, can pretty much one round you even IF you had best of the best gear. Hence such critters become significant.
To go further how do you deal with incorpeal creatures?
How do you defeat incorpeal creatures?
Why does your GM feel the need to field them? Were they relevant to the plot? Are magic items the *only* tool that works?
How do you restore ability damage, and ability drain?
How do you deal with remove curse and disease?
As above, it becomes significant. The power to fix this sort of thing is not at the party's fingertips, however perhaps a significant NPC is rumoured to be a healer etc... once again, why are they here, and do they need to be frontally assaulted?
What do you do when you need to cross the world or at least major parts of it?
Pony Express? Boats? Hoof it?
The same way Frodo got from the Shire to Mt Doom, can't tell me that story sucked.
Another point is that sometimes things happen on a rushed schedule so waiting a day to redo the spell list is not an option.
Sure, and I alluded to this earlier - it means that *generally* the party needs to prepare for a range of contingencies, which is especially challenging for the casters. If they REALLY make a mess of it, tactical withdrawal also works, and the party can return when better organise - or perhaps they might even fail to stop the bad guys evil plan. The consequence of failure isn't restricted to a party wipe :)
Don't forget the monsters will most likely try to kill the casters first since they are the primary threat.
You betcha! Happens at all levels though - not just low magic.
Many of these came from published campaigns, so its not like I am going out of my way to stack the odds against you.
Indeed, and as I have pointed out, the published stuff tends to be published to fit with the 'average Joe' set-up, which would be it's broadest market, and as I also pointed out, this means they will need re-work, or may even be incongruous to your playstyle.
Thanks for taking the time to ask more questions, and further an interesting discussion without making it a religious debate :)
At least I know we agree now.
LOL and I just went and answered your post in detail :P
A suggestion for finding ways to make a Pathfinder game work with low/no magic items would be to check out the d20 derivative game, Iron Heroes. It's a system that's designed around the idea that magic is inherently unreliable and not to be trusted. As a result, PCs rarely get much in the way of magical loot, and definitely not magical loot of the +x variety. It's not a perfect system by any means but it does several things that I think help it to deal with lower magic levels. I'll see about listing some of those when I get access to my books again after the holidays.
I played that once. I thought it was a nice system. I tried to get my new group into it once, but they did not want to try it.
How do you get defeat the dragon(very old) in an open area?
Why would you WANT to face off a Dragon in such terrible conditions unless you had martyrdom as your end goal. In a low magic game, a dragon once again becomes a DRAGON from fantasy lore. Frankly it becomes the sort of thing people spend a long time preparing for, and possibly many sessions of backstory would go into building the encounter.
I assumed the OP was asking not so much about a setting where the low/no magic was accounted for, but a regular encounters with no magic items. That is why he had the word breakdown in the opening remarks. If you account for the lack of magic there may not be a break down.
As for wanting to fight a dragon in the open, I am sure nobody would do it by choice, but you don't always get to choose your fights. I am sure even in a full magic game a dragon is not the a monster you want to dance with.[quote
To go further how do you deal with incorpeal creatures?
How do you defeat incorpeal creatures?
If I typed this twice I did not mean too.
Why does your GM feel the need to field them? Were they relevant to the plot? Are magic items the *only* tool that works?
Magic weapons and spells IIRC. As to why they were fielded. These encounters came from published AP's or actual homebrews. I did it that way to make it fair.
How do you restore ability damage, and ability drain?
How do you deal with remove curse and disease?As above, it becomes significant. The power to fix this sort of thing is not at the party's fingertips, however perhaps a significant NPC is rumoured to be a healer etc... once again, why are they here, and do they need to be frontally assaulted?
Sometimes you may be near a town, and another time you may be in a dungeon and leaving due to ______ may not be possible. Normally _____ is a time issue.
What do you do when you need to cross the world or at least major parts of it?Pony Express? Boats? Hoof it?
The same way Frodo got from the Shire to Mt Doom, can't tell me...
At higher levels you can teleport of course, but without scrolls available if the wizard/sorcerer did not learn that spell.....
Now of course I would assume that any low-magic setting is accounted for but if not I hope the DM plans on a short game.
I found this past summer that a game with highly restricted magic items was very tough. The game ran until level 12 or so, and I had to tailor encounters to the players starting around 5 or 6. This was the main reason for my ending the campaign.
What I found in another campaign later that summer was that if I nixed magic altogether, with rare exceptions for enemies and artifacts, it worked out pretty well. Most enemies were NPC's with class levels, animals, plants, and some fantastic beasts. When not custom building enemies I still had to disregard CR, but the game was rewarding in the end.
The game I am playing in now has a dearth of magic items being given in loot, and little opportunity to buy them. I am the only person playing their original character in the campaign, so all the others got to use starting gold of higher leveled character when making their replacements. This was far ahead of the actual in-game loot, and allowed for them to buy magic items during character creation. My character is just now getting any amount of gold, and still has no place to spend it. This is on top of the fact that I am playing a monk, so I'm already a bit underpowered. I am pretty clearly feeling the power gap, and every action I take focuses on trying to contribute while being the weakest character.
I know that none of these things directly answer the question, but I thought they might be interesting contributions.
Thanks for all of the excellent input!
It seems that the easiest way to make what would amount to magical bonuses inherent to the characters themselves. At least as far as the melee characters go.
... ok, I've got the wheels spinning and smoking in the back of my head while I've been staring at this square for the past 5 minutes. *laugh*
Off to writing!
I played a campaign with no magic items once, and it was actually quite a bit of fun. This was back in 3.5, but it carried all the problems the previous posters have discussed.
The DM basically did away with everything of magic items (except wands/scrolls/potions, as they were expendables). Magic Weapon, Magic Fang, etc. were all eliminated. She then gave all the classes the following bonuses:
Every 3 levels add 1 to two different ability scores. (In place of regular ability increases)
Every 4 levels gain a +1 inherent bonus to your armor class.
Every 4 levels gain a +1 inherent bonus to your attack bonus.
Every 4 levels gain a +2 inherent bonus to your damage rolls (weapons only). Full Casters (Druid/Cleric/Wizard/Sorcerer) gained only a +1.
Every 4 levels gain a +1 inherent bonus to your saving throws.
At 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, & 20th gain a skill feat (skill focus, acrobatic, nimble fingers), toughness, improved initiative, minor magic feat (from Complete Arcane), dodge, mobility, weapon focus, weapon finesse, or armor/weapon/shield proficiency feat. Full casters did not qualify for this.
It worked out wonderfully, and the system remained balanced.
I was planning on extrapolating many of the bonuses that the Book of Exalted Deeds Vow of Poverty feat gave PCs to every character, in order to better remove dependence on magic items - the bonuses would be inherent to the character instead. Haven't gotten to see it in action so far, but I think it might be a reasonable bit of fix...
I agree that there is room for a game without magic items, but it's true that if one just removes them, the game would probably break after level 6.
What is needed is a way to compensate for the lack of "Big Six" items.
One solution might be to just go Gestalt, but I'm not sure...
Another would be to add bonuses following guidelines like Wealth by level to give bonuses to attributes, AC, hit, damage and saves as well. I like some of the suggestions posted earlier.
Also, it would be nice to allow characters to really become heroic, giving them access to esoteric training. One could use the dragonmark system used in Eberron, or something similar, to give access to families of SLA scaling with levels and following a theme like Healing, Mobility or Dread.
Finally, I would keep potions, but those could be concoctions tied to a knowledge (tied to schools of magic, for example). A character could know a certain number of "recipes" that allow him to replicate some spells. This ability would scale with ranks in the knowledge, allowing to go above 3rd level.
All this put together (someway!) would give a feel that is closer to fantasy genre and further from the "Great! Now that I've defeated the 1,000 ronins, I'll just collect all their MW stuff to buy me a new Belt of Strength!"
Characters could actually leave the equipment of the defeated where it fell, and move on, like heros.
DW