Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Fox Lee 04-01-07, 08:57 PM	So, I'm starting a campaign soon, and I'm still trying to sort out exactly what I'm going to do with house-rules. I know I want a low/wide magic setting; magic is supposed to be widespread but not very powerful - something like Eberron (where magic developed alongside technology and is largely used to fill the gaps in everyday life, rather than to cause huge world-impacting events), but without the high-level magical craziness inherent in normal D&D. So far, I've determined that the Wizard, Cleric and Druid are gone; for the style in which my group plays (fewer but more difficult fights, pretty much no random encounters), they are too powerful anyway, and I don't want to risk making them even more powerful through a lack of magic items for non-caster characters. I'm still working out what to do with the sorceror, but the basis of my plan is to force the remaining spellcasters (and psions, since psionics is core) to be more specialised; for those who do use magic, I want them to identify as, say, "a pyromancer" or "a summoner" or "a healer", rather than "a mage". Magic items are severely cut back, and in return characters defence bonus, greater ability score bonuses, and more feats (like getting a portion of the Vow of Poverty feat, without the divine thematics). Though most magic items will be unavailable, I'm also using rules for "superlative crafting" (which allow for non-magical items to have increasing bonuses, but rarely any special effects), and much more varied and useful alchemical items. Part of the theme here is that I want the characters' own abilities to be more important than their gear, and if you want an awesome weapon, you should ask a blacksmith, not a wizard. Anyway, there's some other stuff to it, but that's the basics. And please, I'm not asking whether you like it or not - each to their own :) What I am asking is for any rules variants or mechanical tweaks that you've found useful for running low-magic campaigns (not "play Iron Heroes", please ;p). I'm scanning forums and using the search functions too, of course, but if it's no trouble I'd really appreciate links and such to make the job easier ^_^; Much appreciation in advance ^^
johnhansen 04-01-07, 10:35 PM	Here is a idea, just say that there are no magic items and any character who wants to take a level in a class with magic must have four times as many levels in a class with out magic. Character has 4 levels as a fighter and 1 level as cleric. Character has 8 levels as a fighter and 2 levels as a cleric. Just a idea.
Fox Lee 04-01-07, 11:47 PM	I see what you're saying, but I think that would more likely encourage bad builds than force balanced ones. I should have mentioned, I'm not destroying primary-caster classes entirely; I'm just replacing them with less-powerful variants found in other supplements (such as Wu-Jen, Warmage, Shugenja, Healer, and so on). These caster classes are generally thought of as sub-par, but only because the big three are almost impossibly difficult to surpass. There's also the question of versatility; I mentioned before that I want to force casters to specialise, and I really dislike the cleric and druid for their ability to (more or less) seamlessly switch between combat brute or spell-user as the situation warrants. The druid in particular is being split into nature-themed spellcaster variants and an animal-themed sort-of-shapeshifter warrior class.
GoriceXII 04-02-07, 12:08 AM	A few ideas: 1. a reversion to some 2nd ed themes of specialization. Ie: a conjurer can only do certain kinds of magics while a necromancer can do other kinds. 2. Use a theme from something like Elric, where you have to devote yourself to certain kinds of powers or the like to get magic. 3. Make int/wis requirements that are fairly tough for certain levels. 4. Do what I do: make it rare. For instance I only have so many spellcaster clerics in my game. Most are npc class types. Mid level wizards or druids should be rarities in such a setting. In the city of Fineberg in my game there are only 10 wizards, 26 clerics, 4 spellcaster level rangers.
spartyr 04-02-07, 06:37 PM	check out Iron Heroes, that might do the job.
SilvercatMoonpaw 04-02-07, 07:45 PM	check out Iron Heroes, that might do the job. Apparently someone didn't read the original post very well (or to the end). (not "play Iron Heroes", please ;p)
Grizzled Gryphon 04-02-07, 09:07 PM	Here is an idea. Make every given caster class that you have in your game, effectively, have to specialize like a Wizard can. So, all of them lose two other schools of magic, and they all gain a bonus spell to cast. I would also make them have the alternate class feature in Complete Mage called Focused Specialist. With that, they have even less spells from the schools they are not specialized in, and have an additional school they cannot cast from. They gain an additional two spells from there chosen school, for a total of three. A first level Evoker (Wizard) would have 3 evocation spells, and one from a high Int that he could cast. Bascically, any caster in your game would have three schools they can't access, and would have a few more spells per level of there chosen school, and wouldn't be able to cast many spells from outside that school. Is that specialized enough for ya?
Southernskies 04-02-07, 09:21 PM	I found an easy way to model a low-magic game. Make every spell +1 spell level. As an option, you can also halve all caster levels (but that *really* hurts any casting at all) You can flow this into magic items as well (but would have to recalculate the costs for many items). It makes spellcasters very low-powered compared to fighter types, yet still worth the opportunity cost if they can live long enough to increase in power. You will get "battle priests" so the party isn't entirely without some magical healing. Also, make sure to read the "warriors campaign" section of Complete Warrior; it has some really good suggestions about low-magic games.
doink1212 04-02-07, 09:33 PM	I have a world where arcane magic exists but the PCs always play in the world that hates arcane magic. Arcane Magic gets replaced by the sublime way. As for magic items... Whatever
Fox Lee 04-02-07, 11:16 PM	Make every given caster class that you have in your game, effectively, have to specialize like a Wizard can. So, all of them lose two other schools of magic, and they all gain a bonus spell to cast. I would also make them have the alternate class feature in Complete Mage called Focused Specialist. With that, they have even less spells from the schools they are not specialized in, and have an additional school they cannot cast from. They gain an additional two spells from there chosen school, for a total of three. A first level Evoker (Wizard) would have 3 evocation spells, and one from a high Int that he could cast. I was thinking something along those lines (though I probably won't even give them extra spells; I'm trying to tone down magic overall as well as force specialisation). This could do the trick fairly well. Thanks! ^^ Make every spell +1 spell level. That's surprisingly elegant in its simplicity o.o I wonder how well it would work in game? I think I'll run that by the players and see what they think. It would be great to start with such a simple patch XD As an option, you can also halve all caster levels (but that *really* hurts any casting at all) You can flow this into magic items as well (but would have to recalculate the costs for many items). Hrrm... I probably won't do that for the classes, but I may keep it for magic items, since I really want to make those tough to get (or rather, I want to make powerful ones difficult to get). It might be a bit much with the budget cut, but it's worth looking at, I'm sure. It makes spellcasters very low-powered compared to fighter types, yet still worth the opportunity cost if they can live long enough to increase in power. You will get "battle priests" so the party isn't entirely without some magical healing. Ultimately, "battle priests" are something I hope to avoid, at least if I take your meaning correctly. Unless a class is specialised for a warrior-mage role (like the PsiWar, which has always seemed a great benchmark for that sort of thing to me) I hope to make it harder for casters to be fighters as well as casters. Boom spells I'm fine with, but when it comes to wading in and fighting, I want the non-caster classes to be better (since with fewer encounters per day, warrior-mage builds who rely on uses-per-day things like spells would have those abilities on for most - if not all - encounters). If you mean battle priests in a "battlefield medic" kind of sense, that would be cool. Maybe I should give the Marshall more in the way of healing abilities?... Also, make sure to read the "warriors campaign" section of Complete Warrior; it has some really good suggestions about low-magic games. I'll be sure to do that, thank you ^_^ I have a world where arcane magic exists but the PCs always play in the world that hates arcane magic. Arcane Magic gets replaced by the sublime way. I appreciate the response, but I don't want to use a flavour issue (world hating magic) to enforce a rules issue (less and less powerful magic). I need to have solid mechanical backing for anything like that. You have me wondering, what's the "sublime way"? Is it something that would fit into a setting without gods?
doink1212 04-03-07, 01:55 AM	Tome of battle: Book of the Nine swords. A Game Mechanic called the sublime way. It gives melee combatants options to learn maneuvers that are similar to spells... Except not really at all. Long discussion will evolve... Just read the book lol.
Schmacker 04-03-07, 04:44 AM	... Make every spell +1 spell level. As an option, you can also halve all caster levels (but that *really* hurts any casting at all) ... With this +1 spell level, are you meaning that a 0-lvl becomes 1st-lvl, 1st-lvl becomes 2nd-lvl, etc? Would this mean that there is no longer 9th(10th) lvl spells? or would you give them some right near the end? I've been toying with the idea of lowering the number of lvls that supply spells. Maybe something like +2 levels of spell caster every 3 class levels? I dunno. I'm working on a frontier idea in my head and the Adept would work for me for many, if not all, NPCs, but I don't know how it would go as a PC class.
SilvercatMoonpaw 04-03-07, 09:05 AM	(like getting a portion of the Vow of Poverty feat, without the divine thematics) I like this idea. I've always thought it was kind of funny that D&D whips magic items about while fantasy heroes have maybe a couple of interesting things (usually just one iconic item per hero), but the heroes often have something like divine luck and/or great skill. While one can do Iron Heroes if they want, I prefer to have more magic flavor than it gives you. Vow of Poverty seems exaclty like the sort of thing I think D&D should give out to those of us who want low gear but still have some magic to it.
Southernskies 04-04-07, 12:15 AM	With this +1 spell level, are you meaning that a 0-lvl becomes 1st-lvl, 1st-lvl becomes 2nd-lvl, etc? Would this mean that there is no longer 9th(10th) lvl spells? or would you give them some right near the end? Yep. No 9th level spells without going epic. The simplicity is the key here; you don't need to change any base classes or core rules. Much less work, especially when you start adding in expansion books.
Southernskies 04-04-07, 12:23 AM	(since with fewer encounters per day, warrior-mage builds who rely on uses-per-day things like spells would have those abilities on for most - if not all - encounters). If you mean battle priests in a "battlefield medic" kind of sense, that would be cool. Maybe I should give the Marshall more in the way of healing abilities?... If you're planning to have fewer encounters per day, the players will barely notice the low-magic setting. If you reduce the access to magic and also reduce the frequency it is needed, then you get the same relative balance in effectiveness. At the end of the day, spellcasters in a low-magic setting should be effectively "dry" of useful combat spells, and having to rely on muscle to get through. This will promote more conservation of resources (spells per day) and make spellcasters more likely to enter melee/ranged combat and only cast spells at key moments to turn a battle.
Fox Lee 04-04-07, 09:15 PM	Tome of battle: Book of the Nine swords. Ahhh, excellent! I'm shopping for a copy of that at the moment anyway. Good stuff XD At the end of the day, spellcasters in a low-magic setting should be effectively "dry" of useful combat spells, and having to rely on muscle to get through. This will promote more conservation of resources (spells per day) and make spellcasters more likely to enter melee/ranged combat and only cast spells at key moments to turn a battle. It guess what would be more important to me is reducing the spells-per-day of warrior-mage types, and killing more self-buffing spells of average magic-users. What really bothers me is that in the standard rules, the mage (particularly the druid, I must confess) can essentially make him/herself a better fighter than the non-magic users, and that is an effect that will be heavily emphasised by fewer-encounters-per-day. I don't mind if the mage can fling boom-spells until kingdom come (I love the warlock), but it's the buffing route I object to... I want people to have a reason to play magic-free characters. I guess, ultimately, I feel like they shouldn't be able to rely on muscle at the end of the day ^_^;
Grizzled Gryphon 04-04-07, 10:10 PM	Well, if the buffing spells are the real issue here, then remove them. Any spell aside from the healing types that affect the caster aren't in the game. With this in mind, the caster types don't have the option to "tank" with the right spells; they either blow the baddies to kingdome come, or they heal up their allies. No Divine Might, Righteous Might, Tensers Transformation, Stone Skin, Haste, or any of that. You could limit that a different way, too. Maybe a version of haste, or the like, that only works for one round. And only on someone else. Or, there is another option. In this world you are running your game in, for some reason, if a caster tries to cast a spell on himself that has a duration longer than one round (or can have a duration longer than one round, for low level spells), then bad things happen to that caster. Really bad things. And they happen when you try it. Immediately, that is. Most of those bad things should involve the horendously hideous death of said caster. So, all the spells are there, but you definetely want to cast it on someone else. I would change things so that you can cast such stuff as Righteous Might and the like as a touch spell, rather than personal. Hm, now that would be an interesting game, there. You would cast all your utilility spells on the other players. Detect spells for the rogue, defensive spells for the fighter types, while you are basically a normal guy. That would definetely change the dynamics of combat. Protecting the caster suddenly becomes much harder, as his defense's are going to be in the crapper. Hmm, the more I talk about this, the more I like it...
PoorHobo 04-08-07, 08:41 PM	I want people to have a reason to play magic-free characters. I guess, ultimately, I feel like they shouldn't be able to rely on muscle at the end of the day ^_^; I don't quite understand this, You want them to play magic free characters but not rely on muscle? :confused: Also taking away a casters self buff spells and nobody is going to play a cleric, Nobody wants to be the walking band-aid, its not very heroic. I suggest if your going down that path to eliminate the band-aid element alltogether. Some sort of regeneration would do it, or even just a full refresh after an encounter, relying on potions to do the in battle healing if needed. Without blasting power of wizard, buffs and no one to heal, give the cleric an extra 2 domain. Call them personal domains, they represent the quality of the cleric and 2 domains from the diety. 4 domains doesn't seem so bad when you can't buff and don't need to heal (except in the most extreme circumstances) As for my own mods, I have toyed around with the idead of making the NPC adept the only full casting class. I ramped up the skillpoints to 4 or 6. However low magic also means that CRs are no longer appropriate. I have thought of lowering everything by 3 (save DCs, saves, AC, AB, HP, damage etc...) of every monster in the MM across the board this over does it at low levels a small bit but I think it might balance out over the long run when a 20th level fighter only has a +2 sword and even then he had to rip from the cold dead hands of a frost giant jarl. I guess thinking about it now, from CRs 1-5 its -1 across the board, -2 for CR 6 - 10, -3 fro CR 11-15, and -4 for CR 16-20
Fox Lee 04-11-07, 07:37 PM	I don't quite understand this, You want them to play magic free characters but not rely on muscle? :confused: Sorry - I don't want casters to be able to rely on muscle. My bad XD Also taking away a casters self buff spells and nobody is going to play a cleric, Um... I did mention that clerics are banned ^^; Nobody wants to be the walking band-aid, its not very heroic. I suggest if your going down that path to eliminate the band-aid element alltogether. Actually, that's not necessarily true - after all, not everybody wants to play an action hero character. Various people in our group have played dedicated band-aids and enjoyed it a lot - it can be a lot of fun to be the healer. So I don't think that will be a problem. As for my own mods, I have toyed around with the idead of making the NPC adept the only full casting class. I ramped up the skillpoints to 4 or 6. However low magic also means that CRs are no longer appropriate. I have thought of lowering everything by 3 (save DCs, saves, AC, AB, HP, damage etc...) of every monster in the MM across the board this over does it at low levels a small bit but I think it might balance out over the long run when a 20th level fighter only has a +2 sword and even then he had to rip from the cold dead hands of a frost giant jarl. I guess thinking about it now, from CRs 1-5 its -1 across the board, -2 for CR 6 - 10, -3 fro CR 11-15, and -4 for CR 16-20 Yes, I think the monster manual will take a lot of looking at... I know some encounters basically assume you have a certain spell by a certain level, because obviously the party should have (if not a wizard or a cleric) somebody who can UMD on wands, at least ^^; Fortunately, the game is such that more encounters will be with class-based NPCs rather than with monsters, so I should be able to evaluate monsters on a case-by-case basis.
LostMage 04-12-07, 08:24 PM	I'd suggest the spellcaster generic class in Unearthed Arcana. They'll learn spells as a sorcerer, with the ability to select from all spells, so that way you can make healers, summoners, evokers, etc. like you wanted. They get fewer spells per day as opposed to the sorcerer. Familiar, Turn Undead, and other class features become feats (the generic class is supposed to get bonous feats, I don't know how you feel about them). Fix the saving throws and skill list, instead of leaving that up to the player. Lastly, I'd make spells themselves rare. I was paging through my uncle's old AD&D DM's guide, and it said that a magic-user starts with something to the effect of three or four spells in their spell book. Put the spell formulae in the hands of private collectors, or make them regional: to learn enchantments, you'll need to find an enchanter from the Autumn of Sleep in the north (if you choose to do this, though, don't put your player's favorite spells out of reach, just one or two that require a search or sidequest). Actually, spell scrolls (non-magical) would make decent additions to a treasure horde.
rbingham2000 04-13-07, 04:45 PM	I'm thinking of making magic require some kind of mystic link to whatever is being affected. For example, you need something from a place in order to teleport there, or something a person owns in order to scry on them or put a spell on them, or some such. Maybe enchantment magic requires that you have the person you want to affect eat or drink something that you've prepared or grown, the way those old faerie stories did. Needless to say, this style of magic does not lend itself very well to combat, but you do not want to let an evil sorcerer get hold of something you own, or eat or drink something he's prepared or grown, because otherwise, he can do all sorts of nasty stuff to you. Summoning monsters from the netherworld or the Lower Planes or whatever in order to kill people is a particular favorite of sword-and-sorcery sorcerers, and the mystic link gives such monsters a good lead to go upon.
DonThelonious 04-19-07, 10:58 AM	Okay here is what I did. I wanted a very magic limited world, so I limited arcane to strictly elves and 1/2 elves. Divine magic is there, but you have to speak directly wit ha 'god' to get it, and then you could only use it if it furthered your gods agenda, and this is strictly enforced. Whats great about that is PC's don't decide the will of thier god. With the elves/half elves thing I made it something like I say in 'The Covenant' in that full blood elves can only be sorcerrers and have to wait a 'very' long time to get high caliber magic. When they do finally get it they can cast all the spells from the start. The catch is each spell takes a number of years off the lifespan, 0lvl=1 year, 1stlvl=20, etc. exponentially from there. This makes using the magic a very desperate thing, also they can get addicted (see book of vile darkness). !/2 elves have a better deal in that they can follow the regular path of the wizard without restriction, but a hunted ruthlessly by the elves for not having to pay with thier lives. Just a thought.
chuff80 04-19-07, 12:36 PM	I created a magical backlash system (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=738335) that works in my campaign. I do the same thing with Druids that you're planning. It works out well. I also limit the spells available to wizards. Something you'll find in a low magic campaign. Your characters will become much more specialized, which is what you're going for, but because of that, they'll often be much better at what they do that they would otherwise be in a regular D&D campaign. At higher levels, when the party is together they can be quite lethal. My player's lvl 7 paladin took out an Illithid by himself in three rounds. Yikes!
Holy_Beholder 04-19-07, 08:30 PM	I just made every single spell cost xp. Each spell takes a percentage of xp that it would take to get to next level assuming you just achieved last one. Cantrips cost 1% 1st levels cost 5%, 2nd levels cost 10%, 3rd level spells cost 15% 4th level spells cost 20%, 5th level spells cost 25%, etc, until you get to ninth level spells that cost 45%. Epic spells cost 80%. My other version was to make it harder to get spells. Instead of increasing each spell level by one, I changed spell progression, so that casters got a new spell level every 3.5 levels, making it: 1st level-cantrip, 4th level-1st, 8th level-2nd, 11th level-3rd, 15th level-4th, 18th level-5th, and it continues throughout the epic levels.
Grizzled Gryphon 04-19-07, 08:42 PM	Here is another thought. In the Shadowrun game (first edition, I think), a mage (or any caster, for that matter) could cast any spell he knew all day. That is, as long as he made the saves for it. If they failed the save (very commonly), they took damage. This could easily kill the mage, if he wasn't careful. Now, this would mean a complete redo of the magic system, so I don't know if this is what you want to do, but it is an option. As an aside, I noticed there were no spells in that game that allowed flight. So, using the rules presented, I made just such a spell. I made and remade the spell at least 20 times. Each time, it was the same; the save was, in DnD terms, basically a DC 1, or 1 point of damage. I found that rather amusing. Something that man has dreamed about for ever, and it is that easy in that game. Odd, isn't it? Of course, the most poweful weapon that a guy could carry, in a world of guns and high explosives, was a Bow. Go figure.
Red12 04-19-07, 08:58 PM	Seriously, "Iron Heroes" by Mike Mearls is the BEST no/very low magic model out there. It was originally published by Malhavoc, but is now under Fiery Dragon. It's essentially based around no magic equipment. The new classes and feats in the book are able to compete with standard classes in terms of power, but with no magic items involved. They also have a couple nifty mechanics like "stunts" and "skill challenges". You can get it hardcover or PDF. PDF is 5 bucks. Well worth your investment.
SilvercatMoonpaw 04-19-07, 09:40 PM	Of course, the mechanics of Iron Heroes are very intimidating. Plus they assume a "testosterone-fuled" attitude.
Werral 04-20-07, 01:44 PM	Have a look at the Call of the Cthullu magic system now it's D20. Spells cost ability damage, powerful spells cause permanent ability drain and all magic gives you insanity points (if you took out the insanity it would still be balanced too). There was an idea in the early Dragonlance books that magic use drained the user of energy. How about every spell cast causes 1d4 per level nonlethal damage? Then you could have wizards, clerics and druids who'd be balanced 'cause they'd pass out if they got carried away. You could also have a fumble table for any Concentration checks - on a natural 1 something dire happens. Basically my idea is that wizards should be able to cast even the most powerful spells, but the dangers of spell use means they don't do so willy-nilly. Another idea is to add "Apprentice levels" to the spellcaster classes - use the Commoner as a template but add 0 level spells and maybe have them get "scribe Scroll" at apprentice lv 3. A level 1 standard wizard would be a level 4 wizard under this system. For item creation, use the 2E system where making anything other than a potion or scroll required a major quest (under that system you catually GAINED XP for creating magic items). The fact they're so hard to make explains why they're so rare. There's a nice post on Redgars too "Low-Magic campaigns made easy" I think it was called.