To me low magic is...
1. Spells/scrolls/spellbooks are hard to come by/controlled...
2. Magic items are rare/controlled by kings/nobles...
4. Any item not created will need to be recieved from the kings/nobles, or quested for...
3. Spellcasters are forced into guilds...
5. Spell components, and items needed for items creation must be quested for...
+1
From a semantic perspective I wouldn't call this "low-magic" but I wholeheartedly agree with the approach.
Magic is dangerous, it makes sense that any well functioning society would have to have some way of dealing with it to avoid being usurped by every group of adventurers gone bad.
I wouldn't change much just limit the classes the players can play. Don't allow full casters. You still have lots of options with casters who max out at 6th level spells.
Design your encounters so that level appropriate magic items are not required. You won't run into any issues til much higher level this way.
For example a group with an Inquisitor, Summoner, Ranger, and rogue would work for low magic. This would be heavily on the melee and ranged combat. Magic would really take a back seat in this group but enough there to get them by in most challenges.
I find changing the rules give you more of headache than anything. It's much easier to play with the CR of encounters and limit classes. I actually don't even bother with CR and just hand out XP that I feel is appropriate for the pace of the game I'm running.
[A lot of it has to do with the fact that these societies haven't evolved information networks that we take for granted. We have seen it implemented in limited degrees. The FR kingdom of Cormyr for instance required that arcanists above 3rd level register with the War Wizards, but a fairly substantial number of mages kept thier heads down and simply never appeared on the rolls.
It's a lot easier to stay off the radar in a midieval society than a modern day one. No credit cards, driver's licenses, or phone records to track you by, and if you're a member of the local thieve's guild, (yes they do have non-rogues in their stable) you're pretty much safe as long as you don't do anything stupid.
In a midieval society without magic yes it is easier to stay hidden in one where the dead can be summoned or a crafty wizard created a divintaion called "determine who cast that spell", no not so much. Crystal balls, divintation magic, message spells/ items how, exactly, dosent the advanced communication network exist?
That is of course due to the fact that all the players/ developers and such live in a 20th+ century and adapt useful items to fit the magical-tech of the game.
As long as casters possess versatility and power with very little limitation; then I will always advocate nerfing them in some fashion.
That, to me, is really the heart of the issue. If you want magic to be able to "magic your problems away"; then there needs to be some kind of legitimate consumeasurate cost.
Spells per day is not a true limitation (thanks 15 minute adventuring day).
Component costs are too cheap, thus making them irrelevant.
Components at a low level are hand-waived away in the rules.
Spells don't have inherent drawbacks as written as in previous editions.
Is there ever a reason to *not* do a repeatable spell action? (Lets say Haste). The only reason I can find is eventually you just get re-usable or permanent items to hand-waive the need for those spells... AGAIN. Those items are made by....
There is some kind of thought in the minds of some, including myself, that if you have great power it ought to come with some risk. Let me tell you, Wizards and Sorcerers, and to a lesser extent Clerics and Druids have pretty much 0 risk and drawback, and that's a shame.
-Idle
Here are the guidelines:
- Low Magic, NOT No Magic.
- Must be a simple concept.
- Must not alter game/class balance too much.
- Lets put a PC level cap of 16 on this for now.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around a low-magic game with level 16 spellcasters (presumably).
I'd go with E6, personally.
I kind of assume that a lot of people don't even consider the game worth while playing unless you're 7th level or above.
Actually In our gaming group and the one I was in back in GA 5-10 is considered the "sweet spot"of the game system. You have enough oomph in each class to shine in your area, but not be completely overwhelmed by any other. Granted we aren't in the super optomization mindset either. The "iconic" mythological and DND inspired monsters are in that challenge range. Minotaurs, Mind flayers, chimeras, manticores, giants, trolls, vrocks, succubi, entry level vampires and dragons. To me that range is where the game lives and breathes its fullest.
I've never understood you low magic people. As a set piece for a movie or a single shot story sure it can be cool. Take the Conan movies for example. Pretty low magic classic fantasy to me.
But as a DM why are you asking for a system or trying to come up with new rules to accomplish this. It reeks of agenda pushing rather then unique story telling.
Wouldn't this "low magic" feel you are seeking simply be accomplished by a few house rules or campaign restrictions.
Ask your players to stick with the martial classes.
Control how much you give out magic item wise.
Don't use creatures that are too fantastical or have heavy lists of spell abilities.
What more do you need.
|
Apply the Taint rules from the Heroes of Horror (3.5) book.
For example:
Divine magic forces the caster to connect with the mind of his or her diety, a powerful other-worldly super-intellect. Therefore, casting divine spells leaves one open to acquiring points of Depravity.
Arcane magic is toxic to living creatures after prolonged exposure, and casters are prone to acquiring points of Corruption.
That way, you are simply applying one rule-set, without have to alter those already in place.
Wouldn't this "low magic" feel you are seeking simply be accomplished by a few house rules or campaign restrictions.
Ask your players to stick with the martial classes.
Control how much you give out magic item wise.
Don't use creatures that are too fantastical or have heavy lists of spell abilities.
What more do you need.
Hi Cinderfist,
I think the OP is trying to come up with a way to house-rule low magic, and is just crowdsourcing ideas.
Although I guess I personally fall in the "low magic" camp, I think it's because magic has gone from being something fantastic so something mundane - and, as Mok mentioned, that there can be more entertaining ways to overcome challenges than just sifting through all the spells until you find the one that solves your problem.
I personally don't do "generic" (ie. +1 shortsword)items when I dm, every item has a history and some flavor to it.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around a low-magic game with level 16 spellcasters (presumably).I'd go with E6, personally.
I agree that 16th level casters are pretty damn powerful. I can't say this would work well above 13th level. Maybe. But my goal here is to play Low Magic Pathfinder. At the low levels, this is pretty easy. If there is a little magic healing, and a +1 weapon or two, the party is fine. By 10th level, it gets a little tough. In addition to items, you need access to resist energy, spells that remove status effects, and magical forms of movement. Around 15th level, you need half a dozen magic items just to get out of bed.
If I drop any major chunk of the game (like not allowing the full caster classes at all), then yes, I might as well play a different game. But that really isn't necessary. A full caster with half WBL, and no bonus spells from ability scores is still a powerful character. He can still contribute all the "required" spells and effects, it just takes a little effort, and he can't do it without expending resources. By cutting down on the number of scrolls, wands and other items flowing around, it brings the game away from that video-gamey feel of having all your characters "slots" filled, and gets back to a more AD&D feel.
I'm also thinking of adding a "Buff limit" of say, three spells, or something like that. (Although I think I would exclude hour/level buffs like mage armor.)
Another idea is to make dispel magic more powerful, but this just makes casters better at fighting casters, which isn't very helpful.
Hey Crispy:
I think the OP is trying to come up with a way to house-rule low magic, and is just crowdsourcing ideas.
To what end though. Restricting the players to martial classes instantly reduces the magic in the campaign drastically. Why is anything else needed. Allowing the magic wielding classes but then heaping restrictions/draw backs upon them simply renders those classes 2nd rate compared to the melee classes anyway. So what's the point?
I run fairly low magic campaigns myself but I do this by simply controlling what magic items can handed out. This concept of spell casters have an answer for everything is just flawed. As a good DM you should be able to compensate for these spells without having to nerf casters into uselessness.
|
|
First off, toss out wealth by level. Some classes will get more toys than others because they use toys better. I'm talking about martial classes. Martial classes are all tool-users, and they improve greatly with the use of magic tools. Spell-casters are typically not tool-users, and magic tools are just fun things that make their lives easier. Low Magic settings are not about making lives easier with magic.
Throw out item creation feats. If you want to make or find a specific item, you need to quest for it.
Allow +X generic arms and armor to be made without magic. After all, they're functionally no different from "extra masterwork" items.
Encourage players to choose classes such as:
Alchemist
Magus
Fighter
Rogue
Cavalier
Paladin
Ranger
Monk
Inquisitor
Witch
Oracle
In this list, the casters selected have a more "Low Magic" feel to them than others. Low Magic is not really an issue of power, in my mind, so wizards and such are fine. But they won't be common, and they don't usually contribute to Low Magic.
Improve all magic items and make them more expensive. Healing potions, for example, might cost two or three or four times the normal amount... but they are all maximized potions of healing.
Give your party cool items that they aren't used to, like an Oil of Fireball (thrown), or a Magic Music Box. This will make magic items seem more wondrous and magic, rather than samey and lame.
Cloaks of Resistance, Amulets of Natural Armor, Belts of Statboost and Headbands of Statboost no longer exist. You never really needed them anyway.
Improve the mundane effects of skills and mundane tools. Allow successful Heal checks, for example, to heal hit point damage outside of combat, just like healing magic. Boost the abilities of other skills to a more 'heroic' level. It might seem counter-intuitive to do this, but consider the following:
1) The classes widely regarded as most powerful are typically those with only a few skill points per level. (e.g. Cleric!)
2) If you can heal actual hit point damage, cure diseases, neutralize poisons, and even restore ability drain with Heal checks, you no longer absolutely require healing magic in order to survive.
3) Other kinds of necessary magic can be imitated with proportionally heroic skills. Example: Acrobatics vs. Fly. You might not be able to hover, but if you can jump into the air high enough to grapple airborne opponents, or leap across chasms, who cares?
This will allow your Rangers and Rogues to really shine in a lot of places. Feel free to give Fighters 4 skill points per level so they can keep up with Barbarians.
In some cases, the skills in question might need a boost from some magic item. Feel free to make new magic items that interact with skills in fun ways, like a new set of Boots of Jumping that allow you to jump twenty feet with a DC 20 Acrobatics check.
I think the terms "low-magic" and "low-fantasy" can mean very different things to different people.
I have run a "low-magic" campaign for over a decade. I have experimented with a variety of methods to achieve the tone and feeling without changing the game too drastically. My early experiments always knocked something out of balance that made mid-level play wonky, but I rather like the system I currently use. The most important element, by far, is to develop the tone of the campaign setting to reflect the mood you are looking for. This is very important. If magic is rare, peasants better be impressed with it and those who do know something about it better have visible opinions about it.
These are some of the mechanical changes I've made. Remember that the desire isn't to "cap" magic at some level or to remove it from the game but simply is to make it feel special again.
* Replace spellcasting classes with campaign-specific classes whose tone and theme suit your campaign setting.
In my case, I replaced the Wizard with the Witch, and Clerics with the Evangelist (by Green Ronin). Sorcerers were replaced by Spellmasters (by Green Ronin) and Eldritch Weavers (by Green Ronin) but these are quite rare and usually only found among the ancient races. Druids are unchanged.
* Double the price of potions but make them "alchemical" and non-magical.
* Reduce wealth by level, treasure tables, and NPC equipment by one-half. (As per the PF rulebook guidelines for low-magic/fantasy)
I still provide magical items, but they tend to be more valuable because they are fewer in number. Instead of giving out 12,000gp worth of treasure spread over six items, I provide just one or two, and there is always a back-story and campaign information that makes the item worthwhile. A single +2 icy burst dagger in the hands of a third level character feels way more magical than a pile of +1 items.
* Monsters that are especially magical have their CR increased by +1 or even +2 depending on the circumstances.
These few simple changes have gone a long way towards making magic feel special. It is "lower-magic" but I am not sure if this would meet everyone's definition of low-magic. The most effective change was simply changing the default spell lists by using alternate spell-casting lists. This changed the list of magic items that could be made easily and what magic means in the world. Only the most powerful evangelists in the world (13+ level) can cast Raise Dead, for example.
The mechanics of these minor changes allows one to use virtually anything that exists in the game, but the special "oooh" factor remains present with magic until the very upper mid-level range, at which point the characters know they are legendary.
My biggest thing for spellcasters would be to make it that their levels in a primary spellcasting class cannot exceed levels in a non-spellcasting class.
Additionally, have you read the Iron Kingdoms Character Guide? A couple things I like from that are the Pain of Healing rules (limits healing, esp. of character of differing alignment), rules for Necromancy (caster takes subdual damage = level of Nec. spell) and possibility of permanent HP loss for item creation. The IK in general is not especially low magic, but those ideas certainly made it a bit gritty.
Randy
Growing Up Gamers
I'm still trying to wrap my head around a low-magic game with level 16 spellcasters (presumably).I'd go with E6, personally.
I agree that 16th level casters are pretty damn powerful. I can't say this would work well above 13th level. Maybe. But my goal here is to play Low Magic Pathfinder. At the low levels, this is pretty easy. If there is a little magic healing, and a +1 weapon or two, the party is fine. By 10th level, it gets a little tough. In addition to items, you need access to resist energy, spells that remove status effects, and magical forms of movement. Around 15th level, you need half a dozen magic items just to get out of bed.
I think we just have different ideas of what "low magic" means. To me, it makes me think of a fantasy series where one of the most powerful wizards in the world can hitch a ride from some giant eagles or a really fast horse and that's treated as a Really Big Deal. I can't think of a way to shoehorn a 16th (or 13th) level D&D caster into that sort of world.
I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for, but from what I see I'd probably describe it as a "low magic item" campaign (not a "low magic" campaign). YMMV, of course.
I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for, but from what I see I'd probably describe it as a "low magic item" campaign (not a "low magic" campaign). YMMV, of course.
I think this is a good point, it might be helpful to describe more specifically what is meant by "low-magic"
is it:
1) eliminating the so-called "christmas tree" effect?
2) limiting the power of PC/NPC casters?
3) reducing the presence / impact of magic and magic items in the campaign world?
4) ...?
Since I have time this weekend and there is a huge 48 hour game day this weekend where I am at, I think I will give alot of these ideas a playtest and see what works, what doesnt, and what needs tweaking. So far, I'll try:
- 3rd Level Spells and below only
- Have 4+ spells available but with half the slots
- The magic feats to unlock spells of a certain level
- Multiclassed casters only
- adding 1/2 AC to most stats (AC, BAB, Skills, etc)
- Mostly humanoid NPCs/enemies
- Tweaking of exotic creatures
- Detect Magic/Alignment being touch attacks
- Have spells cost a caster's health
- Only 6th level progression casters allowed
- Change the 9th level progression to 6th, 6th to Paladin/Ranger progression, etc.
- All spells 4+ that require a standard action now require a full round action
Ill give all of these a go. If there is anything I missed here, go ahead and let me know. Ill give what we noticed and the general opinion of each.
Since I have time this weekend and there is a huge 48 hour game day this weekend where I am at, I think I will give alot of these ideas a playtest and see what works, what doesnt, and what needs tweaking. So far, I'll try:
- 3rd Level Spells and below only
- Have 4+ spells available but with half the slots
- The magic feats to unlock spells of a certain level
- Multiclassed casters only
- adding 1/2 AC to most stats (AC, BAB, Skills, etc)
- Mostly humanoid NPCs/enemies
- Tweaking of exotic creatures
- Detect Magic/Alignment being touch attacks
- Have spells cost a caster's health
- Only 6th level progression casters allowed
- Change the 9th level progression to 6th, 6th to Paladin/Ranger progression, etc.
- All spells 4+ that require a standard action now require a full round actionIll give all of these a go. If there is anything I missed here, go ahead and let me know. Ill give what we noticed and the general opinion of each.
Would you be willing to try out something like for every 3 BAB you ignore 1 point of DR/magic,align?
Would you be willing to try out something like for every 3 BAB you ignore 1 point of DR/magic,align?Since I have time this weekend and there is a huge 48 hour game day this weekend where I am at, I think I will give alot of these ideas a playtest and see what works, what doesnt, and what needs tweaking. So far, I'll try:
- 3rd Level Spells and below only
- Have 4+ spells available but with half the slots
- The magic feats to unlock spells of a certain level
- Multiclassed casters only
- adding 1/2 AC to most stats (AC, BAB, Skills, etc)
- Mostly humanoid NPCs/enemies
- Tweaking of exotic creatures
- Detect Magic/Alignment being touch attacks
- Have spells cost a caster's health
- Only 6th level progression casters allowed
- Change the 9th level progression to 6th, 6th to Paladin/Ranger progression, etc.
- All spells 4+ that require a standard action now require a full round actionIll give all of these a go. If there is anything I missed here, go ahead and let me know. Ill give what we noticed and the general opinion of each.
Ill give anything a go. Im off all weekend and so I have the time and capability to do this.
MINOR RE-WRITE:
Change the mechanics of natural healing so that groups can perform equally well without magical healing.
Short Rest = cures 1 hp/level or equivalent of cure light wounds cast by a cleric of your level
Extended Rest= back to full health
Maybe too 4E-ish for some and not "gritty" enough for others, but it works well as a minor re-write with low consequences on gameplay.
Don't use stat-boosting spells or items:
Self explanatory. This means dropping below expected power curve. DM must adjudicate in consequence. Alternately, allow them only in the form of potions and relics/artifacts.
Reduce gold/treasure and readily available magic items
If every adventurer can afford masterwork [insert favorite special material] full plate by 3rd level, they obviously feel frustrated by the lack of "step-up" thereafter.
As a DM, select your villains/challenges wisely
Instead of a single flying, fire-breathing troll that shoots laserbeams, send 50 orcs.
Remove wands from the game
Re-fluff wands using the mechanics of staves. Spell-in-a-can is major perpetrator of high-magic.
If not playing E6, reduce the demographics of high-level character around
Consider level 10 and up as "epic level" games, with accordingly epic level threats for the "common folks".
fluff it up, fluff it up, fluff it up
Lots can be achieved just by changing the fluff (and a minimum of mechanics) of magical abilities...
'findel
How about using the magic system from Midnight? It has a base channeler class who get all you need to be a spellcaster, but any class can get a little bit of magic by taking feats. Spells consume spell points that are very limited. It was a low-magic setting that really worked.
|
Here are some of my ideas:
- All magic items cost 2X. This also applies to paying to have spells cast, as well as crafting.(This just delays the inevitable, at a slower rate of aquistion but they still can buy items)
- Crafting requires special materials.(yes, and should be much harder with greater risks - diminishing returns is the only to make something like this work)
- All spells of level 7 and up take at least a full round to cast.(all spells should take a full round with the exception of those that have a touch requirement or if they are required to be fast to be functional)
- Characters may get some minimal increases to saves, ability scores, hit bonuses, AC, etc. These are not intended to replace magic items, just make it so item are not "required".(Does't address core xmass tree problem)
- Full casters get no bonus spells-per-day from high ability scores.(yes) Another option would limit the ability modifier full casters can add from ability score to 1/2 caster levels.(I would go further and fix the save DC paradigm. This is a core dysfunction of the D20 system)
- No spell lasts longer then 24 hours.
I placed bolded comments to address specific bullet points.
I would say that a low magic (and by that also a low-powered) game is attainable if a few major system functions are changed. When I reference low magic or low magic items I am going back to 1st/early 2nd edition Dungeons and Dragons. To clarify to me that means a low leveled fighter or wizard (4th -5th) with a magic weapon (+1) and some minor magic and he could keep that gear till 7th level.
There is still magic required but NOTHING close to xmass tree of 3rd edition/d20 fame.
Some characters will vary, and some numbers can be modified for no magic, but this is the baseline assumption I have going with what I am going to purpose.
DC system for saves is capped
The baseline save for a creature at your +3 CR should be 50% success on your primary (good) save.
EX - a 6th level Fighter (base +5 fort) should be able to make his fort save against a CR 9 50% of the time.
So the highest a fort save a CR 9 creature (Titan centipede) should generate should be around DC 18-20 (fighter has +5, +2 more for con, + 1 more misc = Fort +8). The current stats for the Titan Centipede has its DC Save for its poison at DC 24 (Base 10 + 5 (half of 10HD) +9 for 29 Con= DC24). With my suggestion the DC is now 20 (Base 10 + 5 (half of 10HD and +5 max modifier for Con = DC20)
This can be achieved by retaining the base save value for the creatures ability (say poison sting) and capping the max bonus it can add to said ability (poison sting Save DC is constitution based) at +5.
What this does (ultimately) is place more weight on the actual HD of the creature vs a specific stat. The max stat bonus to any DC generated ability: +5.
The way to generate higher numbers is to increase the baseline, HD, etc and not a stat. This means that as you increase the HD you increase the CR, vs the current glitch/broken system of stat spikes taking an ability WAYYYYYY out of CR range.
I would go with a lower cap for spells, but for the sake of argument +5 is a good starting point (could do +3, then require casters to get a feat to increase one school by +1 DC, then a second to increase it to another +1 DC - still max +5)
So spells get capped as such - 1st level DC 16 max, 2nd level DC 17 max, 3rd level DC 18 max
That means the caster needs to use his highest spells vs. the toughest opponent. That also means from a DMing perspective it will be easier to use weaker creatures (at or lower than CR) since the Save DCs are capped on how much they are set at based on spell level.
By capping DCs you have reduced (partially) the need for stat boosters. You have also eliminated DC/caster-only style manipulation.
There is also a few other side benefits you have -
A) Reduced the need for save or stat increased items
B) Saves are closer in-line with class level an focus
C) Fights are less swingy/binary. You can use weaker creatures and they still have a chance of saving(even though they may be -1CR to group).
D) Those classes with weaker saves actually still have a chance at saving.
To explain the last one let's go back to the Titan Centipede example.
So our 6th level fighter has a Fort save around +8 (give or take for some item, feat or trait). When he encounters mister Titan Centipede (CR 9) with a poison save of DC 20 (low magic rules) he has a decent chance to save. It isn’t %50-%50 but it's much better than needing to hit a DC 24. Plus with some spells in play or an extra feat he may be closer to a Fort +10 (if he built his guy out that way). So not too bad.
Now lets throw in his 6th level wizard buddy into the mix. A wizards base fort save is +2, he may get a misc +1 here or there, so let’s say he is at a Fort save of +4. In the same scenario as above the wizard (with minimal magical bonuses) actually has a chance to save against a +3 CR creature, granted it isn’t very high, but it is much better than the current rules provide.
So what does this all do?
It allows characters with secondary abilities (and minor magic) to actually have a chance in a fight not designed around their saving throw. The inverse (fighter making will saves vs. spells) works the same way. The guy with the good save for the situation has the best chance but characters with secondary saves are not written off for the encounter……
And all with little or no magic items.
If all Save DCs are capped at +3 instead of +5 you can eliminate pretty much all save related items.
Hit Points
Another big problem with D20 gaming is the exploding effect high stats have on other abilities (besides generating saves an DCs) an that is hit points. One reason why making low powered gaming difficult is that hit points at their core are all still high.
Two methods for dealing with creatures/threats are in hp (grind damage) or save or die (binary). the latter is addressed with reduced DC values and some spell revisions (as they made in PFRPG).
When dealing with hp track a low-magic game runs into some problems. I would still allow damage abilities and weapon enhancements to still function the way they do (since damage needs to be high to deal with high hp). Some creatures may need to respec'd with regard to CR - Fire Giant is a good example. Listed as CR 10 creature when by all rights (even by Paizo's Cr based standards) its stats, hp and damage output are closer to a CR 11 creature.
So enemy damage and player damage remains the same - I would also consider upping the damage of evocation spells - maybe +1d6 per/2 levels.
Even with restrictions on DCs I would still limit the availability of stat boost items (increased cost, only 1 stat boost item at a time).
Also since all DCs have gone down (saves from spider poison, spells, etc) I would also increase the cost of saving throw items and cap their bonus to save at around +3 (instead of +5). A +1 cloak would be good for the first 3rd of the characters career, maybe getting something better at 11th (+2) and then the last being available at the end of their career (+3 at around 17th level).
Spells
Spells that work in a utility capacity must either be dropped or reduced in functionality. Changing the way some spells work is CRITICAL to a low magic game. By making casting take on a risk vs. reward scheme you being to reduce the reliance on spells a primary solution to every problem.
Spell Acquisition: limit this per level, spell getting fixed eliminates the need to control spell selection but even then having more choices and slots = more power and spell use.
Spells that are use to gain information should have reduced info/greater chance of incorrect info
Spells used for travel should have greater risk - teleport: change of very high damage/death -also more restrictions on ease of getting to target destination
Fly: Requires concentration (unless SLA)
Spells that duplicate other class abilities should either be dropped or reduced in functionality (spider climb, detect traps, etc). Creating extra risk while retaining the current level of power is also an option (ex -add a risk element to spider climb while retaining most of its current write-up).
These are just some ideas I have been kicking around, personally I am of the mind that 3rd-ed/d20 gaming is a POS system beyond repair. Most people just add more garbage (up power fighters, etc) to compensate vs. addressing the core system problems - they suck.
Auxmaulous, could you explain what you mean about HP. I'm not sure I follow you.
|
|
Auxmaulous, could you explain what you mean about HP. I'm not sure I follow you.
Well the first part was discussing the different ways to attack creatures, the classic is HP damage. The second is using SOD/SOS to kill/shut down. The latter can be mitigated by capped DCs (my suggestion), reducing the effect of SODs (as revised by PFRPG).
Hps are a different problem, and need to be addressed in any game where you are subtracting /modifying vs. adding abilities or power.
Unless you dump Con bonus for hp, hit points (and generation) are a bit of a trap to deal with. They have exploded (from say 2nd ed) exponentially with the Con bonus. So you can -
A) Dump or reduce the Con bonus (reduce the HD multiplier, one time modifier bonus or none at all - if HD is representation of toughness)
B) Keep it the way it is and still allow item abilities (flaming, etc) to do their extra damage.
If you go with the former everything’s hps go down, the higher and bigger the greater the difference. If you like those numbers you can run with them. It would put evocation spells back on track with hp; you can dump damage enhancers for weapons, and so on.
If you go with the latter you can make minimal changes. So the latter option is the least intrusive.
|
|
Spells (Part II)
Orisons - The number of orisons listed for level should be treated as "uses" instead of number of variable selections. So if you have "4" orisons you can only cast 4 orisons a day. The difference is you can cast any spell on your class orisons list without preparation.
What this does for low-magic games.
A) Reduces the amount of magic use
B) Stops world breaking spamable uses (unlimited water)
C) Restores the function of orisons: minor universal magic. As a "cast any minor magic on the list" ability it allows low-level casters greater flexibility and utility - a limited number of times a day. A series of minor and variable abilities as needed with minimal abuse.
Also the ability to create water in rivers one day and then the next - you can't: Stupid. Instead you can create water as need (up to x4 a day) or use orisons for other minor options.
I know, all spells function this way: one day you have it one day you don't, but the difference here is the spamming part of orisons which imo was very bad design. Spamming water or purifying food all day is worse than being able to prep and cast a fireball one day vs. not having it the next, the former is more flagrant and disruptive to a low magic game world’s immersion.
If I were running a low-magic campaign, I'd:
1)Allow no full caster classes, even divine/nature.
2)Bards, Paladins/Inquisitors and Rangers are the new mage, cleric/oracle, and druid. Leave them as is. Their spells aren't that impressive, no big deal.
3)Have the theme being that magical beasts or aberrations and/or outsiders are myths. Most communities are small cloistered gatherings built around castles, civilization being scattered with large patches of wilderness surrounding them.
When the adventurers go out, they find they aren't exactly myths after all.
4)Use special materials to penetrate the DR of the creatures that have it, since you won't have magical weapons, unless they belonged to the afore mentioned outsiders or the like.
Just a bump. Did some playtesting yesterday and doing more today.
I actually think game designers intended components to be more of a hassle than they are. It is not a huge impediment, but it is not insubstantial, either. It also ups the Sorcerer a bit (the free Eschew Materials feat) and I find that it makes magic feel a little more like the 80s movie Excalibur, which is sort of the setting I am going for.
Every designer i've ever seen comment on the spell component pouch has had the "just grab the pouch and get on with the adventure" attitude towards them.
Does the oracles Haunted curse (Advanced Player's Guide, page 44) affect the items in an oracle's spell component pouch?
The question here is whether or not the haunted curse makes is so that to cast any spell using a material component, the oracle has to first spend a standard action to find the right material component. Fortunately for oracles everywhere, this is not the case. The items in a spell component pouch are nebulous and not defined (intentionally, so as to prevent casters from having to track the amount of bat guano they are carrying). As a result, this curse has no effect on such components. For ease of play, this extends to all material components, including expensive ones. (JMB, 8/13/10)
Material Components(5/6/10)
Q: For some spells in PFPRG their is a listed material component, but no cost. In example the Spell "Form of the Dragon" has Components V, S, M (a scale of the dragon type you plan to assume). What is the material cost for the dragon scale?
A: (Sean K Reynolds 5/6/10) Material components without a gp cost are just there for flavor.
There's no mechanical difference between a spell with Components: V, S and an otherwise identical spell with Components: V, S, M (a scale of the dragon type you want to assume).
You could do away with M components entirely (except for the pricey ones), and by that I mean "change all spell descriptions so they don't mention M components at all except for costly ones" and not affect the game one bit--except in the rare circumstances where your wizard's spell component pouch has been stolen, which is a circumstance where the GM is being a jerk anyway
If you are looking for a low magic experience, why don't you try a Grittier Pathfinder? ;)
I must say that those Grittier books seem VERY interesting...
I guess I should say a point or two about what I am looking for.
- I want to play Pathfinder. Not E6, not a blend of systems, not my own system based on Pathfinder, but Pathfinder. I would like to keep most of the changes to the parts of the rules that are guidelines, such as WBL, and magic item purchasing, not change the way D20 works.
Note: Nothing wrong with any of these things, but they are just not what I'm looking for.
- I don't want to really affect Bards, Rangers, Paladins, or multi-class casters much. I don't want low level casters to be affected much (perhaps a limit on cantrips to 3 + ability mod/day).
- I don't want to screw casters by forcing wild-magic, constant checks, or made-up consequences.
- I want to get rid of the need for the big 6 items in order for a character to be viable. This will mean slightly lower ability scores, AC's, to hit rolls, saves, etc. THAT IS GREAT!
- I don't need all magic items to be "special", but I would like them to be somewhat more rare. I would like casters to actually have a limited amount of casting (including wands and scrolls), rather then a seemingly endless supply.
- I would like to prevent high level casters from totally dominating play. High level magic should still be powerful, but it should be a limited resource.
- I think any system of low magic is going to become more troublesome then it is worth past about level 15. That is fine by me, as I don't think the game works all that well at the highest levels anyway.
- I would like to be able to play an AP without drastic rewriting.
Note: Of course somethings will need to be changed - treasure, perhaps a few encounters, but not sweeping changes. - I am fully aware that characters will be a little weaker then in a high magic setting. As long as they are still fairly equal to each other, that is fine.
I would like to thank everyone who has contributed so far, some really great ideas have come up! I would also like to remind everyone of my original post, and say once again that I'm looking to play pathfinder with a few minor tweaks, not some other system. CR will need to be tweaked, that is obvious.
Thanks
Fergie, without rehashing the details, I am fully convinced that you can accomplish what you are looking for. Mok's right, that you should build a table of values to compare things with, but in principle I am sure that the main game can be played with only minor adjustments.
I believe that the most important issue, by far, is campaign tone. If magic is rare, wizards should be rare so you'll want to make sure the party composition corresponds to this. If magic items are less common, then be sure to reduce the number. I find the best way to reduce the number of magic items is to consolidate the treasure rewards into fewer special items.
Running an AP this way should require only minor adjustments to NPCs, and the only major change would be to particularly magical monsters, but the use of templates and CR adjustment that considers the conditions (lack of magical weapons/defenses) should allow for relatively painless conversion.
Good luck. I am really enjoying this thread.
|
|
I disagree that you can go with the "minor changes" approach and keeping the game functional. I know that cutting out or reducing magic items will change the feel of the game but unless some math issues are addressed you will have a disaster on your hands.
I do agree with Mok though, you will really need to take a hard look at all the numbers because that is where (imo) you are going to see the biggest problems.
You are going to have to look a the basic class builds (and three different save categories) and how they stack up on their damage output and saves vs. encounter at: -1 CR, at CR, then up to +3 CR.
You are going to need to make some hard changes since the numbers (as stated out in the monster books) are already pretty high for their CRs. If you start to eliminate stat boosters (which aid in saves) and magic items that aid in saves (cloaks) then yeah, you will need to revise some save DC numbers down - almost all the numbers.
I go by a baseline formula of +3CR (considered an "even" challenge for a group of 4-5) with the best save making it around 50% of the time. Each DM may be looking for a different rate of success/failure.
An example to illustrate my point (and the problem with just dumping items)
A 10th level Fighter gets a base Fort save of +7 and a Reflex and Will of +3. After stat mods it will probably look like +9, +5 and +3 give or take a +1/-1.
That is with no stat boost items, and no saving throw boosters.
So he and his party get in a fight with a Bebilith (CR 10). The Bebilith has a rotting bite attack that requires a DC 23 fortitude save.
So our Fighter - with his "good save" in Fort, has a pretty low chance of making his save vs. that attack (Fort +9 vs DC 23 are very bad odds).
This is considered an "average" encounter (20% of resources, etc) for the day and is the Fighters best save category.
So again, I think if you are going to dump or restrict stat boosters (which I am all for) you need to deal with the reality of 3.5/PFRPGs math. It assumes magic boosters to the numbers and still the save DCs are way too high. If you can find a way to bring the numbers down - maybe find a way to tie them to the creatures CR instead of a stat (+mod) then you have a good chance at pulling this off.
Just my observations on this, I have been working on toning down the game since 3.5 came out.
Here's what I've done in some games for arcane casters:
Upon leveling up they have to "train" spells, this can be done a number of ways. In order of fastest to slowest in game time.
- Find a mentor (at least 3 levels higher) and pay them to train you (or be apprenticed etc)
- Copy spellbooks (This is hard to do unless you capture other wizards books, as in low magic settings MUs horde their spell books) Reason this is lower than mentoring is due to the fact that some if not all mat info, and somantic gesturing may be excluded. So there is some experimentation involved... which can change spells slightly per DM discretion (had a char trying to copy fireball used a diff mat component and ended up learning an electric varient: same stats just electric)
- Learn from scrolls; the process of learning a new spell from a scroll will expend the magical energy on the scroll. Again you run into the experimentation of somantic/mat components
- Spellcraft checks in combat to observe opponents castering spells. This does require unobstructed view for somantic, and hearing for verbal (sounds of combat cause higher DCs) These allow the caster to research the spells based on this knowledge of the spell (Spellcraft DCs vary as well as cost per DM discretion)
- MY Favorite option... blind experimentation: The caster must spend X amount of gold (on materials) or utilizing items on hand (I give a lot of seemingly mundane items that get used) to research a new spell. Now I chose/randomly roll for the spell in question on this option.
The caster cannot learn from wands, staves, rods, potions, etc.
General limitations:
Magic items are few and far between.
There are no Magic Item stores.
Trying to sell a magical item can get the attention of the wrong group/thing (most magical items are historic in nature)
If limiting magic on items and weapons to handle the higher level "to hits" and damage values have "Master craftsmen" that can create such exquisite and tailor made items that they impart bonuses = to +1-+5, but these are expensive to make (= to magic item cost), and specific for char. Items will be of less bonus to another user.
(Example: BBEG has +2 chainmail, fighter puts it on and since it doesn't fit quite right it only imparts a +1, until he can find a craftsman that can refit it for him... at a cost of course)
For those still interested, I'll be posting the results and my thoughts tomorrow. Currently at work so no access to my notes.
I tried to keep up with some of the options presented here on an hourly basis. Some, in my opinion, were great ideas while others were not so good. One thing I will stress is that you WILL have to work on the monsters. This is an absolute must or else you will kill your PCs. Unfortunately, there is no simple way to do a low magic campaign, but I will try and categorize the simplest ideas so it won't take too much work. Just remember that even though I played these, this is still just my opinion so one's mileage may indeed vary.
I did enjoy the playtests for this and I have to say that low magic is an interesting fantasy sub-genre that I wouldn't mind playing again.
For those still interested, I'll be posting the results and my thoughts tomorrow. Currently at work so no access to my notes.Let us also know what changes you implemented for the playtest, I'm curious to see the results.
I'm curious too. I've been playing lowER-magic (emphasis on ER) for a few years and I'd be interested to compare your notes/experience with mine.
'findel