|
Remove all casters from the PC selection
(Bards, Clerics, Paladin's, Ranger's, Sorcerer and Wizard) add martial only classes from other books that have no spell casting abilities.
(such as Gun slinger, Samurai, Ninja, etc)
Limit monsters encounters to Animals, Humanoid, Monstrous Humanoid, plants and vermin (at least those without magical origin)
No Aberrations, Constructs, Dragons, Fey, Magical Beast's, ooze's, Outsiders and Undead
No magical items of any sort.
Alchemy should be fine, but not the Alchemist class.
Non-magical healing
1 HP per level for 8 Hours of Rest (twice this if under a character with the heal skill care)
2 HP per level for each full day of rest (again twice this if under care)
also heal back 1 Pt of ability recovery per 8 Hours or 2 per full day of rest (again double if under healer's care)
was wondering, how many others have played in such campaigns and how many enjoyed it?
There were several threads about reducing the magic level in campaigns in the past. My impression was: Characters with the most remaining magic / pseudomagic still come out at top. In a campaign as described above, this even includes rogues (who can replicate level 1 spells as spell-like abilities), ninjas (who have ki abilities that replicate spells) and monks (who do the same, especially in the quinggong version).
I can imagine a GM to be quite busy to close all the loopholes. And I'd ask 'How does this contribute to fun?'.
|
|
There were several threads about reducing the magic level in campaigns in the past. My impression was: Characters with the most remaining magic / pseudomagic still come out at top. In a campaign as described above, this even includes rogues (who can replicate level 1 spells as spell-like abilities), ninjas (who have ki abilities that replicate spells) and monks (who do the same, especially in the quinggong version).
I can imagine a GM to be quite busy to close all the loopholes. And I'd ask 'How does this contribute to fun?'.
It contributes to games that want that reality grit I suppose. It was fun for some that wanted a more 'realistic' fantasy setting, as for the Rogue Talents for magic those where disallowed in mine, guess I'd have to type that up. But it was originally done as a test to see if what a game would be like.
made several player's stop complaining about magic in a campaign when we went back to a normal campaign in the PFS and ultimately none of us missed the game as there was really not much to miss. [which included my own complaining as well]
Surprisingly we had very few playing monks, likely because the GM just didn't have them gaining a ki-pool or something. [can't remember this campaign was run about 6 year's ago and wasn't a high light for anyone that I remember save the GM that enjoyed murderdom style campaigns]
I've been having fun running for a swashbuckler (picaroon), gunslinger (musket master), and rogue in a Renaissance-era game; they're certainly facing magic though, and they've got access to healing potions/troll styptic. They're having a blast so far. I'd play it enthusiastically if someone else offered it, but I'm a known loon who also played in one campaign as a pair of 5-point-buy commoners (twins!).
If I were going into more modern eras with less magic I think I'd actually use Starfinder as base rather than Pathfinder. I prefer it to d20 Modern, at least. You can also use the Cypher System without cyphers pretty flexibly if you don't mind flushing tactics.
One thing to overcome is the fact that the math of the game relies on the existence of magic items. Accuracy and HP tends to scale with level, but damage and AC tends to scale with magical gear, such that the two are thrown out of balance in the absence of magic.
The question quickly becomes, why are you still playing Pathfinder? 3.5 was one of the highest-magic games on the market short of Exalted, and Paizo came in, with their biggest addition to the material being a lot more Victorian pulp science fantasy ideas with a heaping helping of kitchen sink revelry.
There's not a lot in there to really support a non-magic game, particularly since a lot of the non-magic options are gutted out of an expectation that the magic will be the solution.
I just don't get why you wouldn't use a lower-magic system that's made for that, and brings more besides, like Pendragon or Burning Wheel.
Might be interesting with automatic bonus progression.
|
|
One thing to overcome is the fact that the math of the game relies on the existence of magic items. Accuracy and HP tends to scale with level, but damage and AC tends to scale with magical gear, such that the two are thrown out of balance in the absence of magic.
The question quickly becomes, why are you still playing Pathfinder? 3.5 was one of the highest-magic games on the market short of Exalted, and Paizo came in, with their biggest addition to the material being a lot more Victorian pulp science fantasy ideas with a heaping helping of kitchen sink revelry.
There's not a lot in there to really support a non-magic game, particularly since a lot of the non-magic options are gutted out of an expectation that the magic will be the solution.
I just don't get why you wouldn't use a lower-magic system that's made for that, and brings more besides, like Pendragon or Burning Wheel.
Indeed, I was wondering how many have played such a game, it was okay ish to me. Otherwise I'd rather it stay normal running myself.
Might be interesting with automatic bonus progression.
Just what I was thinking.
I really wish PF had something comparable to D&D4's Warlord (or some other actually useful/viable non-magical healing SOMEWHERE).
The game I run is very low-magic; magic items are nonexistent, the typical citizen will go their entire lives without seeing anything that would be called 'a monster', and normal character advancement tops out at 8th level. It works out quite well IF your players are on-board and understand the setup.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Have you ever seen the game Iron Heroes? It's a d20 game that's basically what you want. The base classes are all variations on martial concepts with one weak caster class. The idea was to allow PCs to play low magic heroes but still use the D&D Monster Manual for threats.
The classes are a little powerful to make up for not having magic items. We're talking a thief class that can max every skill in the game, a fighter variant that gets a bonus feat every level - including several Brawler-style floating feats, and so forth. Feats have also been revamped into generally long trees that have pretty good abilities by the end.
I've played it up to about level 8 and it was pretty fun, if you want that "Conan" vibe where magic is dark and mysterious to the heroes.
|
|
Have you ever seen the game Iron Heroes? It's a d20 game that's basically what you want. The base classes are all variations on martial concepts with one weak caster class. The idea was to allow PCs to play low magic heroes but still use the D&D Monster Manual for threats.
The classes are a little powerful to make up for not having magic items. We're talking a thief class that can max every skill in the game, a fighter variant that gets a bonus feat every level - including several Brawler-style floating feats, and so forth. Feats have also been revamped into generally long trees that have pretty good abilities by the end.
I've played it up to about level 8 and it was pretty fun, if you want that "Conan" vibe where magic is dark and mysterious to the heroes.
Sounds like what several people in the Martial versus Wizard forums are looking for. I'd played in a campaign using old D&D 3.5 rules and wasn't really into the story, neither where the other players as there was nothing but my rogue that could heal injuries and no real 'reward' for going out into old dungeons. No Magical gear and such.
generally I found it good for a lark, but it never shaped up into a full campaign.
However, I have thought about using it as the start of an adventure, as magic comes into the world after a few sessions with the revival of bigger and scarier threats, so too is the revival of magical arms and Armor