I absolutely love the Pathfinder system, and in general I like magic. However, at times I want to play a somewhat more 'realistic' roleplaying experience with significantly toned-down or virtually non-existent magic.
I understand this is possible with pathfinder rules, but how much of a hassle is this? Is it common practice to run this - have you or someone you game with played a low magic pathfinder setting?
If so, what sorts of things on the boundary between magic and extraordinary ability did you allow and what did you forbid?
I haven't done it.... but I'd take a look at Indiana Jones.... and Robinson Crusoe. I believe Tom Lehrer sang it best, "plagiarize! Let no ones work evade your eyes. Don't shade your eyes, but plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... only be sure to be calling it please, Research."
What I'm driving at is take a look at medieval combat or ever real life combat... Indiana Jones level 12 Swashbuckler 7/Gunslinger 5... Tomb Raider? Braveheart... You could run a campaign to help William Wallace while totally lacking magic.
Then there is also the idea of Mine I'll be running next week. I plan to start a save Atlantis campaign with Zeus and Poseidon facing off against the Norse gods... >.> Don't ask me why. I thought it'd be fun to have the myths side by side. The only magic is usable by the gods, so if they bless something you can use it... But no one can cast anything.
I'd say it's very hard to make a Pathfinder game low-magic without seriously altering the game.
I mean, just look at cantrips/orisons. Several of those almost completely negates low-key, gritty challenges you can throw at a party. A dark dungeon? Who cares, we got Light. Mending, Create Water, Purify Food and Drink and Spark makes outdoor living almost a breeze.
I.e., even lvl 1 casters have way more magical abillity than you'd (I'd) want in a medieval-ish game where magic is a rare occurence, the stuff of legend.
And if you simply remove casters, well, it's hardly Pathfinder anymore.
I hate to sound negative, but I'd be hard-pressed to think of a worse games system for a low-magic campaign system than Pathfinder. I'd strongly recommend that you consider using another system.
While I'm not personally familiar with them, I've heard good things about Iron Heroes and the Game of Thrones RPG. I believe both are D20 variants and more gritty/low magic than Pathfinder.
I've been playing a low magic version of Giantslayer this past year. It is definitely a big change and takes some getting used to. First, the full level 9 casters are eliminated completely from the setting. The GM implemented several rules from Unchained to make up for the lack of casters such as scaling weapons. I could probably link you to the recruitment thread, but the last time I did that, the person complained that it was too many rules. lol
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I may be mentioning this far too often, but I recommend that you check out Spheres of Power. It has within rules for a lower level magic system, particularly with the option to completely toss and replace the Pathfinder/D&D magic system. You can go from low magic, mid magic, or high magic... though not as high as vanilla and more balanced. It is a very versatile system, good for many concepts.
I try to stick to low magic as written in the Core Rulebook.
In my experience, Pathfinder characters are very powerful, and stripping away half of their assumed gear hardly makes a dent in their ability to steamroll over just about everything I throw at them at the assumed CR-level.
It is no more hassle than any other Pathfinder game. Pathfinder prep is what it is, and you just have to eyeball one or two levels lower than you otherwise would.
Just watch out for magic bullets like facing a Shadow at level 3 without a magic blade, or very high AC, and you should be fine.
Sean K Reynolds wrote a very good article on 3.x action economy back in the day. The article explain why this works way better than I ever could.
The main problem with low magic as written is that there hardly are any worthwhile rewards in the Core Rulebook at a low cost - so if you like magic, just want less of it, you and your players could get frustrated quickly. YMMV, and good luck
(One of) the basic problem(s) with a low-magic pathfinder system is that caster PCs will dominate. Without magic of their own, the monsters will be hard pressed to deal with relatively low-level spells like charm person and vanish In a really low-magic world, the ability to cast prestidigitaition would let you get away with almost anything.
So what you end up with is a game where you're forcing everyone to play a fighter or a rogue in order to maintain the feel of the world and a reasonable challenge.
There are basically two factors that need to be altered to run a "low-magic" (note, this can mean different things to different people) Pathfinder campaign:
1) Access to magic items. Usually, this means banning the item creation feats and "magic marts" (the ability to easily buy and sell magic items). You may want to look at Pathfinder Society for inspiration on how to handle this while still allowing PCs access to ways to personalize their character. Alternately, you could use the rules for occult rituals (including the item creation cost in the component requirements) in place of the item creation feats; making it possible, but much more difficult, to create magic items (as each magic item requires a different ritual that needs to be researched).
2) Access to spells. This is usually the more difficult change and requires more work. The truth is that spells are tremendously powerful, even at low levels (although Words of Power can reduce the power level a bit); at medium- and (especially) high-level play, magic is so powerful and versatile that it can completely destroy a normal campaign, let alone a "low-magic" one. One possible solution is to restrict access to spell-casting classes (including alchemists and investigators that use extracts, instead of spells): banning the 9-level casting classes (cleric, druid, sorcerer, wizard; oracle, witch; arcanist, shaman; psychic) reduces the "game-breaking" potential at higher levels (and slows access to that point), although low-level magic is still fairly powerful (which some groups like); a different possible method is to make the Eldritch Heritage* feat a requirement before being able to take levels in any spellcasting class** (delaying access to even low-level spells until 4th character level); as another option, using the slow advancement track (or even the slow advancement track with half the XP and treasure values) to delay level advancement and/or placing a restriction on allowable levels (E6, E8, E10, etc.) helps keep the overall "power level" of the campaign from getting "out of hand"***; or some combination of these (or other) restrictions.
*- you can even require specific heritages for specific classes (Abyssal, Celestial, or Infernal for divine casters; Arcane for wizards; Elemental for kineticists; Maestro for bards; etc.)
**- note that the OGL prestige bard, paladin, and ranger can be adapted to Pathfinder and used as inspiration to develop prestige versions for other classes (such as the hybrid classes from the Advanced Class Guide)
***- high-level play just doesn't work well for "realistic," "low-magic" campaigns; this article and the sequel says it much better than most
It's hard to have a game feel low magic if the party has a caster. That said, low magic is doable as long as you avoid any creatures or threats that can only be dealt with via magic. Doing otherwise is basically forcing your players to bring knives to a gun fight.
You may want to consider e6, particularly if you also remove 9lv caster options, that can provide a more realistic and low magic feel.
[http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ltpk?Brainstorm-How-to-do-Low-Magic-without#1]-Here is a thread about a similar topic-[/url]
Just a note that "low magic" has a variety of meanings, and often varies tremendously depending on who you ask.
I would start with a reduction on Wealth By Level aka magic items. You could keep everyone's WBL a level down, or even cut it by half.
Alter or eliminate item crafting. I recommend making items cost to make equal to the market price.
Limit starting stats to something like 15 or 16 after racial adjustment. This will make it a lot tougher for caster characters to disrupt the game.
Be very aware that some monsters absolutely require magical means to defeat. For example, even a shadow can devastate a group with only mundane abilities and equipment.
I'll assume you're talking no spells (or few spells), so that things like skills and carrying appropriate equipment become much more important.
A couple things to consider.
1. Monster AC, abilities assume a level of magic as you advance. You'd still want some kind of material or manufacturing that allows magic + on weapons and armor to keep the PCs close to some of the underlying mechanical assumptions.
2. Ability Score drain and HPs. Without magical healing the game will be -a lot- more deadly. Just consider it going in so everyone knows PC death is probably going to happen, and could happen in almost any encounter. That being said, 1E had Herbalist/Healing proficiency combinations that allowed a PC to create poultices etc that could act as toned down versions of CLW potions. So you could do a similar thing and include things for restoration, or enforce natural healing. I already house-rule that any successful healing check of 20 or higher succeeds in restoring HD worth of HP. Maybe "Clerics" are the only class that can make those herbal mixtures or get a bonus to add variety to the classes since pure casters like Wiz/Sorc are going to be gone or very limited.
3. Skills suddenly become a major component of the game. Since this would tend towards a martial heavier package in most group, you might consider house-ruling 4 Skill ranks per level + INT as the minimum for all classes. That being said - just like drain/HPs...
These are the kinds of insights I was hoping to stir up, and thanks to everyone else in this thread for the informative and interesting discussion. Also special thanks to JonathonWilder, Snotlord, and Fergie for pointing me in the direction of other resources which go into detail on this. However, Snotlord, I'm having a hard time finding the low-magic rules in my CRB - are you sure you aren't referencing a different paizo book?
A couple of clarifications:
1. What am I hoping to do with these contributions? I'm not actually planning to dm a low-magic pathfinder setting - I was really just interested in the concept and curious about what you all thought, what your experiences are, etc.
2. What sort of low-magic setting did I have in mind? Well, GM 1990 is getting pretty close to what I had conceptualized.
Generally no casters (PC or otherwise) except in incredible rare occurrences.
Some access to basic low-level magic to make the game playable - especially healing items/potions or a buff to heal skill.
Possibly give access to some extremely limited spell casting or magic items as sort of 'long-forgotten arts.'
Also, access with fair consistency to some magic-damage-giving items, but dress them up thematically ex a +1 bastard sword is an heirloom with a strange glow.
But, more importantly, I wanted to get your guys' thoughts on what a low-magic pathfinder setting should be/what you have actually played. This community always has insightful things to say, and I wanted to pick your collective brain a little.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have run it - I used the simple rule - no classes that can cast spell at first level. I allowed an investigator who played up the alchemy / healing herb thing.
I also gave them each one magic item, that basically leveled up with them and provided at certain levels the bonuses of the big six items. (Cloak of resistance etc). If I did this again I'd use the varient in unchained that gives the player these bonuses. I leant my copy of the book out so I don't have the actual name.
I also used the wounds and vigor varient. It meant characters were more survivable as no magic healing was easily around. I still used hp for monsters as I'm lazy.
I used lots of monsters with class levels. Greens kind and gnolls were common bad guys. They had the same class restrictions as players.
My results -
Players would rest for days after a long haul / bad fight. I'd explain this and impliment the downtime rules if I ran this again.
Fighters were underpowered due to lack of skill points - I'd use the background skill rules varient if playing again.
Players were very very attached to their magic items. They got names and back stories. Much more role playing there.
Players avoided combat and used stealth, deception, and diplomacy more. (Also bows were used more. The gunslinger was a little sidelined at this point)
Random encounters were important and players worked hard to avoid them.
It wasn't more deadly than expected.
You can do some great plots. There is no sending to call for the cavalry or let the king know of danger.
My players had darkness cast on them in a cavern. It was terrifying.
Skil points were far more important. Survival wad essential. Disguise self frequently used. Climb and swim were skills that some players kept putting points into.
Conclusion - good experience. Different. Would do again.
However, Snotlord, I'm having a hard time finding the low-magic rules in my CRB - are you sure you aren't referencing a different paizo book?
No wonder you can't find it, it is hardly there. They are perhaps not rules at all, but more like balancing guidlines. Pazo also uses the term Low-Fantasy, I've always assumed they are the same, but I realise that may not have been the intention.
I use the following design guidelines for my games.
Page 398, NPC Gear Adjustments.
Page 399, Placing Treasure, halfway down the following page.
Page 453, regarding NPC gear and challenge rating.
The gist is that you cut NPC gear in half and lower NPC CR by 1. Treasure is cut in half. Character Wealth by Level is cut in half.
My conclusion from this is that it essentially works, but you have to consider the impact on Determining APL on Page 397.
Now clearly a different kind of low-magic than you looked for, but perhaps worth considering.
No wonder you can't find it, it is hardly there. They are perhaps not rules at all, but more like balancing guidlines. Pazo also uses the term Low-Fantasy, I've always assumed they are the same, but I realise that may not have been the intention.
Ah, yes low fantasy is a bit different from low magic at least in my interpretation of the terms.
Low fantasy essentially nerfs all kinds of PCs and the entire world - fighters dont smash things as hard at the same time that wizards dont alter reality as much. I usually prefer a low fantasy campaign (ie 15 point buy characters, etc).
Low magic as I am referring to here disproportionately nerfs casters and magic users over other classes or removes them from the game entirely.
On this note, do you all have an opinion as to whether casters and martial characters work better at different point buys?
Obviously, MAD characters like monks don't do as well on low point buy (poor monks just cant catch a break sometimes), but do fighters make more use of high point buy stats than wizards do?
None of my players likes point-buy, so we have not tested it any further. I use 10-point-buy for ncps, while the players roll three characters with 4d6 and drops the lowest, and picks the character they want.
This clearly gives the characters the advantage, which is fine as it softens the blow of less gear. It is also more interesting as it shifts combat from pure damage spells to a more varied selection.
IMO, Paizo-style low magic/fantasy gives casters a slight advantage as the magic available becomes more valuable. Spells like charm person become more valuable and npc buffs and gear become scarce.
Fighters are still essential to the groups' survival, rogues are needed for others reasons, and noone bothers playing monk. So nothing really changes.
I absolutely love the Pathfinder system, and in general I like magic. However, at times I want to play a somewhat more 'realistic' roleplaying experience with significantly toned-down or virtually non-existent magic.
I understand this is possible with pathfinder rules, but how much of a hassle is this? Is it common practice to run this - have you or someone you game with played a low magic pathfinder setting?
If so, what sorts of things on the boundary between magic and extraordinary ability did you allow and what did you forbid?
Level cap: 6
or
Unchained automatic bonus progression.
3 Mythic tiers for the mythic rest ability (So you don't need magic healing) or Plentiful Herbal Healing Potions.
Higher level play is balanced around plentiful healing and massive buffs being thrown around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, yes low fantasy is a bit different from low magic at least in my interpretation of the terms.No wonder you can't find it, it is hardly there. They are perhaps not rules at all, but more like balancing guidlines. Pazo also uses the term Low-Fantasy, I've always assumed they are the same, but I realise that may not have been the intention.
As literary theorists use the term, low-fantasy and low-magic have little to do with each other.
"Low Fantasy" is a fantasy story that takes place in our world. The classic example is Norton's The Borrowers, but it would also apply to Emma Bull's War for the Oaks, or Rowling's Harry Potter and the Endless Sequels. High Fantasy, by contrast, takes place in a different world, whether Narnia, Landover, or the Discworld.
Low fantasy is often lower-magic precisely because the story can't break the conventions of our real world; our world isn't the Tippyverse, so a low fantasy story has to has an inbuild set of restrictions to keep it from turning into the Tippyverse. But there's no reason you can't have a high-magic world where the mages conspire to keep the Muggles ignorant and happy (such as in the Potterverse).
One of the best examples of a low-fantasy high-magic game is Ars Magica, where basically God Himself conspires to protect the common people from overuse of magic (through His own miracles), and the mages have come to recognize this and enforce their own strictures on interactions with Muggles.
If you're going to run a low-magic game -- even if it's technically "high fantasy" --you'll need to find some other set of strictures that keeps magic in check