In terms of defining low magic. I think rather then defining the effect, one should define the intent.
What are you trying to achieve with low magic? In my mind there are 3 areas a gm is trying to adjust.
1. The feel of the world.
...2. Curtailing narrative power.
...3. Curbing Direct Power
...
This is a nice complement to the list I've produced. I see it as a list of reasons to choose a Low Magic setting and system, whereas I've been working at collecting how to characterize a Low Magic setting and system.
A third section would be perhaps about the art of mixing correctly different categories to obtain the desired effect, and meet the needs as detailed in your post.
Thanks again for the meaningful input!
A few ways to get a lower-magic feel to a campaign without restricting spellcaster levels or monsters encountered:
1. In general, magic items are pried from the hands of your dead enemies, found as parts of a long-forgotten treasure, or found in other similar ways. You don't get them from the express lane. And enemies should USE these items...don't have them keep their sword +3 in a chest while they swing a rusty piece of tin at the PCs. The magic mart is all but eliminated...and when they exist, their inventory tends to be almost exclusively one-use items such as scrolls and potions.
2. The only item creation feats allowed adventurers are Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion. There are NPCs that can create other magical items, but they are very rare, and they devote their lives to crafting these items. It's not something they do in between adventuring sessions.
- As something of a balance, healing potions can be created for any of the healing spells (Cure Light Wounds, Cure Moderate Wounds, Cure Serious Wounds, Cure Critical Wounds, and Heal), despite the fact that they might exceed the usual spell level 3 limitation for potions. The cost to create healing potions is also greatly reduced, using the formula [spell level x caster level x 10].3. All the workarounds for spellcasters to exceed their normal number of spells memorized per day are eliminated, with the exception of bonus spells granted by Intelligence.
4. Likewise, all methods for prepared spellcasters to cast spontaneously are eliminated. As are all methods for spontaneous spellcasters to gain new spells known.
- Spontaneous spellcasters gain access to new spell levels at the same rate as their prepared counterparts.5. There is no concentration check for damage taken while attempting to cast a spell. Even a single point of damage disrupts the spell.
6. Spells take 10 minutes per spell level per spell to prepare. Cantrips take 1 minute to prepare each. The arcane discovery...
These are certainly great ways to implement a Low Magic system, though they might not suit everybody's needs or objectives. In my case, I would have to think long and hard about 4, 5, and 6.
As for 1, it made me think... One of the things I'm unimpressed in Pathfinder and D&D, and from which I'm hoping to move away, is the looting assumption, and the 'adventuring career.' I'm not sure how to reach my goal though...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have in fact or at least a version of them. My Rules
Updated Distinctsions
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A few ways to get a lower-magic feel to a campaign without restricting spellcaster levels or monsters encountered:
1. In general, magic items are pried from the hands of your dead enemies, found as parts of a long-forgotten treasure, or found in other similar ways.
2. The only item creation feats allowed adventurers are Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion.
5. There is no concentration check for damage taken while attempting to cast a spell. Even a single point of damage disrupts the spell.6. Spells take 10 minutes per spell level per spell to prepare. Cantrips take 1 minute to prepare each. The arcane discovery...
1 & 2. This is more or less how I play. No "Ye Olde Magik Shoppe" but plenty of Phat Lewt drops, including personalized ones ("wish list). Indeed, WBL often exceeds guidelines, but since it isnt optimized it isnt over powering.
5. Too open to abuse. Just have something where the spellcaster takes continuous damage and he is now a poor Crossbow archer. Boring.
6. Just slows the game down.
A lot of people may also want to play PF because it is drowning in magic. Even the people who mainly play fighters.
A lot of people may also want to play PF because it is drowning in magic. Even the people who mainly play fighters.
"Drowning"? It's about normal for D&D. Which has been the Gold Standard of FRPGs since there was such a thing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
God I feel like such a red headed step child.
I am one of those DM's that like low magic. I promise it's because I'm trying to offer the kind of game I would want as a player, not because I'm a bully.
God I feel like such a red headed step child.
I am one of those DM's that like low magic. I promise it's because I'm trying to offer the kind of game I would want as a player, not because I'm a bully.
The question is... "What do you mean by 'low magic' Grimmy?" Since that's what we're trying to figure out here, and as you can see from the OP those words can mean a lot of things.
God I feel like such a red headed step child.
I am one of those DM's that like low magic. I promise it's because I'm trying to offer the kind of game I would want as a player, not because I'm a bully.
Yes, Grimmy but is it the kind of game your players want? And like Anzyr so wisely said "what do you mean by Low Magic"? I even use and agree with several things here listed as "Low Magic".
I'll even change my statement (where I was just adding to Anzyr's list) to "DM doesnt like magic, but finds no one will play xxxxxx, so adverts his game as Pathfinder (Low magic).
This does go back to the OP. WHAT IS "LOW MAGIC?
Are my "No Ye Olde magic shoppe & No significant PC crafting" games "low magic" if there is still plenty of Phat Lewt?
Or I have seen Low Magic defined as "No PC spellcasting" (No magical healing, either, etc).
Between those two is a whole world of "Low Magic". The term is too broad.
Well as I've stated many times, I play with only a single table of six players for many years, so I don't have a need to advertise for a possible "low magic game". However, if I were in a position to trying to acquire players for such a game, I would spell out in some detail specifics up front, so no player could suggest I lured them into a PF game while slaying some sacred cows.
Something like: Pathfinder RPG (low magic campaign 1st - 10th level) no full casters, all human in a post-apocalyptic homebrew setting. Contact to learn more details... (or whatever the parameters for the game, plainly stated.)
Again, I'm not in the position of needing to recruit players, but if I did, I would be as transparent as possible for a given game's intentions.
Well as I've stated many times, I play with only a single table of six players for many years, so I don't have a need to advertise for a possible "low magic game". However, if I were in a position to trying to acquire players for such a game, I would spell out in some detail specifics up front, so no player could suggest I lured them into a PF game while slaying some sacred cows.
Something like: Pathfinder RPG (low magic campaign 1st - 10th level) no full casters, all human in a post-apocalyptic homebrew setting. Contact to learn more details... (or whatever the parameters for the game, plainly stated.)
Again, I'm not in the position of needing to recruit players, but if I did, I would be as transparent as possible for a given game's intentions.
This is probably the correct way to advertise a low magic campaign.
I do not see why people want to play low magic at high levels. At high levels even non casters are basically magic in what they can do and what they can survive.
I do not see why people want to play low magic at high levels. At high levels even non casters are basically magic in what they can do and what they can survive.
As we can see from this thread, for some people the high level low magic game will have no casters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I argue in my OP that Low Magic needs to be split into Spells, Gear, and Creatures. I also mentioned that distinctions can change perceptions, in particular Players and Setting.
Are those sufficient to clarify what one means by Low Magic? Should there be more or less categories? Are the subcategories provided sufficient? Relevant?
Thanks for helping clarify the waters :)
I think the trick is getting people to *use* the categories when they use the term low magic. I think the OP covers most of what it needs to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the trick is getting people to *use* the categories when they use the term low magic. I think the OP covers most of what it needs to.
Is this a real problem?
I can understand clarifying it for board discussions, but do people really advertise games as "low magic" with no further description? Because I struggle to understand this as a real-world, at the table problem - rather I see it mainly as useful for clarifying discussions on the forum. Even that doesnt seem too difficult as it usually becomes clear pretty quickly when people are using different definitions.
As we can see from this thread, for some people the high level low magic game will have no casters.I do not see why people want to play low magic at high levels. At high levels even non casters are basically magic in what they can do and what they can survive.
Which still doesn't work. A high level fighter is magic.
They can toss rhinos, drink gallons of poison, while jumping off the tallest mountain to swim through lava.
If low magic does not mean more realistic, then what it really means is I want my PCs to be able to do less, or I want a simpler game.
If you actually want a rustic LoTR feel, then high levels are not for you in the game of PF.
As we can see from this thread, for some people the high level low magic game will have no casters.I do not see why people want to play low magic at high levels. At high levels even non casters are basically magic in what they can do and what they can survive.
Which still doesn't work. A high level fighter is magic.
They can toss rhinos, drink gallons of poison, while jumping off the tallest mountain to swim through lava.
If low magic does not mean more realistic, then what it really means is I want my PCs to be able to do less, or I want a simpler game.
If you actually want a rustic LoTR feel, then high levels are not for you in the game of PF.
For me, it's about vesting the powers in the characters rather than in their purchasable equipment. I don't mind the odd, legendary item (1 per PC is my ideal number) but I don't want them to be a defining feature of the PCs' success.
I'm happy for my high level PCs to do extraordinary, impossible things - it's just that I want it to be because they are remarkable, James bond like individuals, not because they've got a portable hole full of wands, staves, potions, scrolls and other paraphernalia for every eventuality. Similarly, I'm happy for them to get insanely good with their weapons, but I really find the need to "upgrade" ones weapons, armor, cloaks, rings, etcetera drags me out of the story.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
God I feel like such a red headed step child.
I am one of those DM's that like low magic. I promise it's because I'm trying to offer the kind of game I would want as a player, not because I'm a bully.
The question is... "What do you mean by 'low magic' Grimmy?" Since that's what we're trying to figure out here, and as you can see from the OP those words can mean a lot of things.
A lot of the stuff people are talking about here are the same things we've tried. Always tweaking but the consistent thing I can think of is no shopping and crafting except consumables.
Yes, Grimmy but is it the kind of game your players want?God I feel like such a red headed step child.
I am one of those DM's that like low magic. I promise it's because I'm trying to offer the kind of game I would want as a player, not because I'm a bully.
Mixed group, most would rather play 5e or OSR at this point. A little less than half still really like the build game aspect of 3.x. When they ask me to DM it means they feel like playing pathfinder on gritty mode, for the most part.
The idea that you can translate lord of the rings magic onto D&D magic is fundamentally flawed, in my view.
Different magics across different stories/games/campaigns are just different. Levels, classes and magical items in one just don't translate directly to the concepts of the other.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you check the other threads I've referenced in the OP, you'll notice they too have been threadjacked by endless (and pointless, since it's all opinions) discussions about LotR.
Please stay on topic and feel free to create a thread about whether LotR is High or Low Magic.
Or, in other words, stop the threadjacking.
It's easy to get lost in a LotR discussion, but it is nevertheless a somewhat relevant topic because many GM aim to use Low-Magic system to emulate LotR adventures.
Things is, even if the fellowship had access to magic, the setting falls apart when you allow all your characters to play spellcasters and assume the same level of spellcaster demographics that you would in a typical Pathfinder setting.
So "what to consider if I want to play in Middle Earth" is right in your alley.
Ok, then let's use the list I've built as a checklist for DMs:
1. POWER CATEGORIES
1.1 Spells
- Level Demographics (Setting)
- Classes available
- Character Level
- Caster Level
- Spell Level
- Specific Spells
- Healing Access
- Resurrection Access
- Counter Magic Access
- Casting Ease
- Rituals
1.2 Gear (Magic Items)
- Crafting Arts
- Big Six Access
- Magic Item Availability
- Magic Item Ubiquity
- Magic Item Power
1.3 Creatures
- Fantastic Creatures
- Fantastic Races Availability
2. DISTINCTIONS
2.1 Arcane and Divine Magic
2.2 Players and Setting
2.3 Locations and Periods
2.4 Mobile and Immobile Magic
And I'll give an example.
I'm toying with a setting based on Eberron. Now, to me, Eberron is a mix of high and low magic aspects (high ubiquity, low power). I'll use the checklist to show where I'm at with my decisions. Some things are still unclear to me though, so don't expect the setting to make sense yet.
1. POWER CATEGORIES
1.1 Spells
- Level Demographics (Setting): Casting classes are fairly common. I'd say about 2 % of the working population is a casting professional, with another 5 % working as professionals around those casters. The great majority of NPCs have access only to NPC classes, plus the Magewright, the Priest, and the Artificer (NPC classes specific to the setting).
- Classes available: Any, except my usual (gunslingers, gunslinging archetypes, possibly paladins).
- Character Level: E7, though I'm still oscillating between E7, E12, or no limit.
- Caster Level: E7, though a capstone feat allows to expand it.
- Spell Level: Level 3 for full casters, level 2 for partial. Higher slots can be used for metamagic. Dragonmarks could allow PCs and NPCs to gain specific spells of a higher level.
- Specific Spells: No specific spell banned.
- Healing Access: No restriction, though I'm toying with the idea of introducing a Vitality and Wounds system, and then, only the Mark of Healing would give access to cure spells.
- Resurrection Access: E7, possibly through rituals and deity's work.
- Counter Magic Access: Normal.
- Casting Ease: Normal, though I'm considering giving free feats (like Power Attack), one of which could be Step Up. This would impact the ease of casting.
- Rituals: Yes. DM fiat.
1.2 Gear (Magic Items)
- Crafting Arts: Only NPC classes have access to crafting (magewrights, priests, and artificers). Artificers have access to greater forms of crafting arts, related to great works like flying ships, elemental binding, etc. Most of the knowledge (and specialists) has been partially lost during the War and the Mourning.
- Big Six Access: I'm stuck a bit here... I would prefer to replace the magic with advanced crafts, but I'm not yet sure how. Perhaps with an expanded masterwork system, with specialties by regions?
- Magic Item Availability: Potions and scrolls are readily available. Wands are rare. Magic weapons and magic defences... See Big Six dilemma.
- Magic Item Ubiquity: Certain low magic items are ubiquitous (potions and scrolls). Others are not. Immobile magic enhancements, and magic vehicles are ubiquitous in great cities.
- Magic Item Power: Low, very low, except for the Great Works like the Lightning Rail, or the flying ships, and other wonders from before the War.
1.3 Creatures
- Fantastic Creatures: Normal?
- Fantastic Races Availability: New races (Warforged, Shifters, Changelings, Uruks). Some races removed (gnomes, half-elves and half-orcs). Normal availability for core races, but more tied to territory (you won't see many Halflings or Shifters in Valenar).
2. DISTINCTIONS
2.1 Arcane and Divine Magic
No distinctions for rules, unless I add the Vitality and Wounds system.
2.2 Players and Setting
Distinction in classes available, but not in magic power.
2.3 Locations and Periods
Some areas are permanently linked to certain astral planes (Sharn for example). Also, astral planes becoming coterminous can create periods of higher magic, related to that plane, and enhance or hinder the magical aspects of linked regions.
Some areas are more remote and don't show the same ubiquity of magic. Great cities differ vastly from rural areas, and remote areas don't have the structures to allow much access to magic items and crafting classes.
The Pre-War era had a higher level of magic.
The Mourning changed opinions on the use of magic to create Great Works.
2.4 Mobile and Immobile Magic
Immobile or tied to big items magic is easier to do and to make "permanent". Small items can generally be imbued only with ephemeral magic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doing the exercise was helpful for me in the following way:
-Seeing the gap between the official setting and my own vision for a setting.
-Identifying the fuzzy areas: crafting and the Big Six.
-Helping me solve the crafting distinction: you need extensive training to craft. More than a feat. It's a rewarding and lucrative career!
-Identifying a possible solution: ephemeral vs permanent, tied to immobile vs mobile distinctions. Crafting of ephemeral small objects, and crafting of monumental structures imbued with permanent magic, or powered by elementals (which perhaps need maintenance or "feeding").
-Making clear for me that I don't need too much work on the Big Six impact, as long as I stay E7.
-Highlighting the general E7 question. I'm still wondering about E7, vs E12, vs normal (E20).
Odd level Epic games are problematic, because they force people into the odd level progression casting classes. The restriction on permanent magic items luckily for martials matter less at E7, but it will make a real impact on their performance, while the Druid for example will laugh his way to the bank. I personally prefer E6, though mine has crafting and magic item shops (because those are consequences of the rules) so I consider it to be high magic.
At present your Post War Eberron looks perfect for Druids, Clerics, Lunar Oracles, Heavens Oracles, Shamans, Summoners, and Witches. Alchemists, Barbarians, Bards, Inquisitors, Hunters, Paladins, Sorcerers and Wizards can probably cope the next best.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's easy to get lost in a LotR discussion, but it is nevertheless a somewhat relevant topic because many GM aim to use Low-Magic system to emulate LotR adventures.
Things is, even if the fellowship had access to magic, the setting falls apart when you allow all your characters to play spellcasters and assume the same level of spellcaster demographics that you would in a typical Pathfinder setting.
So "what to consider if I want to play in Middle Earth" is right in your alley.
I agree with others...lets not make this another "what level are LotR characters". Ultimately LotR wasn't created under Pathfinder constraints, and can't be expected to follow guidelines for magic use.
And it's not like it's the only low magic setting out there. I expect Game of Thrones/Song of Ice and Fire" and its descendents is the first thing nowadays that a lot of people think about when they hear "low magic"