Definition of a Low Magic Setting [Archive] - Wizards Community

Definition of a Low Magic Setting [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
BladeDrinker
06-17-06, 04:20 PM People talk about low magic settings a lot, but I've always been confused as to what exactly they mean. Does a low magic setting mean "no elves, wizards, dragons, etc." or does it mean "no spells or magic items"?
celtredleg
06-17-06, 04:36 PM Most often it means magic and casters are rare. No magic for sale, commoners may be anti-magic, magic creatures are more legendary than often seen.

And sometimes it means the party is low on magic, but NPCs get a full load. OIf course those are not popular with players.....
Taeldrin Laesrash
06-17-06, 05:30 PM Low magic settings often have the unfortunate result of being unbalanced for noncasters, and depriving everyone of the magic items they need to keep up with the standard CR system. Sadistic DMs often employ low-magic settings since the lack of healing magic makes wounds far deadlier.
Zyphus
06-17-06, 05:42 PM It means magic items are rare and usually low-powered.
Arcane magic has some kind of stigma attached to it.

For example, in my low-magic campaign is like most D&D campaigns,
except most NPCs are level 6 or less. So it is very, very hard to find
ANYTHING that does a 4th level spell effect or higher. There is a Kingdom
with a Mage's Guild, lots of temples and clerics, just nothing very strong.

Like most campaigns I've seen, there was a time of high magic that ended so it is possible to find fantastic items or even bring high magic back.

Most monsters are mundane - humans, elves, dwarves, with some goblins, giants, and monstrous humanoids. Magical ickies are very rare - dragons, undead, aberrations, etc.
Humans tend to be the most common enemy.
zae
06-17-06, 09:13 PM Usually when I hear someone say "I'm running a low-magic game", I can translate it as "I'm running a game with no magic items."

Occasionally they also do something to limit the power of casters. Often the classes that have casting as a side-feature (bards, rangers, paladins) swap out their casting for other abilities.

Healing is often the first to go. Well, resurrection, then healing.

Then there's "Low and Wide magic" where almost everyone has a litle magic ability. A friend of mine runs one such campaign where you cannot have levels in a caster class (this includes any "+1 caster level" level in prestige classes) exceeding levels in non-casting classes (including every odd level of prestige classes that only give +1 caster level on every even level, or whatever).

Bard counts as neither, being a special class.

The idea worked pretty well, but all encounters were against humans with class levels, not giant monsters with Spell Resistance and huge saves.
Steidas
06-17-06, 09:52 PM I'm running a campaing with very low magic, so mages are rare, clerics a bit less. Healing is the primary issue, so resting is always a necesity (I like that).

Of course, magical comunnities exist, so there are a few places that break that stigma (magic items are down, CRs aren't, get it? can't be too SOB against the PCs).
Voldar_Mecorthio
06-17-06, 10:33 PM There are four basic kinds of "low magic settings":

1. the "DM :censored:s off his players by making the strongest weapon in the game a masterwork greatsword and healing unavalible while monsters readily have damage reduction and regeneration only bypassable by magical elements (like good aligned weapons or sonic energy)." and can deal 100+ damage easily while the only method of healing is with tedius bed rest, run by sadistic control freak DMs who are often 40 years old, overweight, unemployed, and live in their mother's bacement.

2. The "DM tries to create a more realistic world by limiting the effects of magic, making magic avalible yet rare, creating a psudo-Lord of the Rings world where magic is impressive and hard to find", which can be fun depending on weither the DM is a jerk or not.

3. The "DM says he likes D&D, yet he eliminates all magic and changes just about everything magical to the point where the game resembles just about anything BUT D&D", which usually end with the DM being introduced to another RPG.

4. The "DM thinks magic is overpowered so he makes magic NPC only and makes players beg on their hands and knees before if they want a +1 item.", usually run by the same 40 year old control freaks as #1.

5. The "DM wants a hack-and-slash game and hates the tremendous firepower that mages can have", which can be okay if you like hack-and-slash.

Low magic games usually end with either projectiles being fasioned and utilized against the DM or a superb game that is almost always roleplaying oriented. They can be very fun or completely boring depeding on the jerkiness of the DM.
Zyphus
06-18-06, 10:34 AM A good example/reason for low-magic games and low-powered games is Tolkein.

In The Hobbit Gandalf is about 5th level, a werebear can destroy an entire army, and except for a certain something the dragon would have never been stopped. The enemies consist of goblins, worgs, spiders, elves, and a single overly powered group of trolls (CR party level +4 with a party of 14 members?) that requires the party to do something other than just stand and fight.

By the end of Lord of the Rings Gandalf is probably 7th level. He still can't teleport. Sauron was probably 12th level just to be able to Forge Ring. After the end of the series you can count the number of magic items found on your hands, even if you lost a finger.

There are no magic shops, wizards are unusual, and there aren't even clerics.
Zevox
06-18-06, 11:03 AM In The Hobbit Gandalf is about 5th level,
<snip>
By the end of Lord of the Rings Gandalf is probably 7th level. He still can't teleport. Sauron was probably 12th level just to be able to Forge Ring.
Actually, both Gandalf and Sauron were Gods (Gandalf couldn't use his full power due to a prohibition by his superiors and being stuck in a human body, and Sauron never got the chance to since most of his was in the Ring). The same is true of the other wizards (Saruman, Radagast, and the blue wizards) and the Balrog. Simply put, theres no way to translate them into D&D accurately. Magic works very differently in Tolkien - its more innate ability of a few races, mostly the Elves and Ainur (Gods), than anything else. Its quite true that magic wasn't widely available, mostly because of it being largely the dominion of Elves and Ainur and thus being almost completely unavailable to humans and utterly of no interest to most Hobbits and Dwarves, but by no means are the characters that wield it as weak with it as they may appear at a glance.

Zevox
The_Levitator
06-18-06, 11:56 AM Geez, it sounds like there are some deep emotional scars from sadistic DM's out there. :rolleyes: We play a high magic/low availability world in my main group and my players love it. They are the heroes, so of course they will end up with the uber-powerful items, as will their enemies. For the rest of the world however, magic is very misunderstood. Magical items are only available in the largest of cities (over 20,000), and they won't be better than +2. Magic is unstable, otherwise, why have vast armies when a few wizards can take down entire kingdoms? Spellcasters are feared for their power, respected for their dedication, and pitied for the long term effects that using magic has on the human mind. In our area, it seems most players want magic to be special, not mundane. Rarity is what makes the fantastic, fantastic. Seeing a runway model at Daytona beach is not nearly as fantastic as seeing one at the local flea market.

I find it hard to make any mechanical comparisons to LotR since the books weren't written with any game rules in mind. It's like trying to put a square peg in a round hole. Tolkien was telling a story. He wasn't worried about the "level" of his spellcasters or his magic. He wasn't concerned with how much magic there was per capita. He was telling a story. The only corrolation I make to LotR is that I attempt to write my campaigns like a movie, and play them like a game. I don't keep track of high magic/low magic ratios. I just tell a story that makes sense and gives the players the chance to be epic heroes. Who cares if you can't buy magic weapons at the local Walmart? Most players I've had over the last 25 years seem to prefer either finding their items, being bestowed their items, or questing after specific items. I know powergamers (not meant to be derogatory) would rather just run down to WeaponMart for their +5 Sword of Ultimate Power, but it's hard to put a compelling story around that. The compelling story for them is the battle with enemy, not how they gained their items.

It's kind of easy really. If your group is into Hack N Slash powergaming, make the magic as accessible as possible. That group doesn't want to waste time hunting their items down. They want to spend their time hunting their foes down. If your group prefers deep, rich storytelling, then make the magic rare and special, something they will have to spend some time in acquiring. For these players, gaining their abilities and weapons are as important as killing bad guys.

The only wrong way to play it is in a way that doesn't suit your group. The best thing to do is just ask your players what kind of world they want their characters to live in, and what kind of gaming experience they are looking for. I have 2 groups; 1 of them is a very Hack N Slash group of aspiring powergamers who don't give a copper about storyline. My main ( only designated as main because it's the larger group that playes more often) group is all about the story and a believeable world. As a DM, my job is to make the game entertaining, not dictate the player's world around them. It's a little more work having 2 distinct kinds of worlds for my 2 groups, but I think the end result is well worth it. Both gaming styles have their strong points and it keeps me from getting bored with 1 style of gaming.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BladeDrinker 06-17-06, 04:20 PM	People talk about low magic settings a lot, but I've always been confused as to what exactly they mean. Does a low magic setting mean "no elves, wizards, dragons, etc." or does it mean "no spells or magic items"?
celtredleg 06-17-06, 04:36 PM	Most often it means magic and casters are rare. No magic for sale, commoners may be anti-magic, magic creatures are more legendary than often seen. And sometimes it means the party is low on magic, but NPCs get a full load. OIf course those are not popular with players.....
Taeldrin Laesrash 06-17-06, 05:30 PM	Low magic settings often have the unfortunate result of being unbalanced for noncasters, and depriving everyone of the magic items they need to keep up with the standard CR system. Sadistic DMs often employ low-magic settings since the lack of healing magic makes wounds far deadlier.
Zyphus 06-17-06, 05:42 PM	It means magic items are rare and usually low-powered. Arcane magic has some kind of stigma attached to it. For example, in my low-magic campaign is like most D&D campaigns, except most NPCs are level 6 or less. So it is very, very hard to find ANYTHING that does a 4th level spell effect or higher. There is a Kingdom with a Mage's Guild, lots of temples and clerics, just nothing very strong. Like most campaigns I've seen, there was a time of high magic that ended so it is possible to find fantastic items or even bring high magic back. Most monsters are mundane - humans, elves, dwarves, with some goblins, giants, and monstrous humanoids. Magical ickies are very rare - dragons, undead, aberrations, etc. Humans tend to be the most common enemy.
zae 06-17-06, 09:13 PM	Usually when I hear someone say "I'm running a low-magic game", I can translate it as "I'm running a game with no magic items." Occasionally they also do something to limit the power of casters. Often the classes that have casting as a side-feature (bards, rangers, paladins) swap out their casting for other abilities. Healing is often the first to go. Well, resurrection, then healing. Then there's "Low and Wide magic" where almost everyone has a litle magic ability. A friend of mine runs one such campaign where you cannot have levels in a caster class (this includes any "+1 caster level" level in prestige classes) exceeding levels in non-casting classes (including every odd level of prestige classes that only give +1 caster level on every even level, or whatever). Bard counts as neither, being a special class. The idea worked pretty well, but all encounters were against humans with class levels, not giant monsters with Spell Resistance and huge saves.
Steidas 06-17-06, 09:52 PM	I'm running a campaing with very low magic, so mages are rare, clerics a bit less. Healing is the primary issue, so resting is always a necesity (I like that). Of course, magical comunnities exist, so there are a few places that break that stigma (magic items are down, CRs aren't, get it? can't be too SOB against the PCs).
Voldar_Mecorthio 06-17-06, 10:33 PM	There are four basic kinds of "low magic settings": 1. the "DM :censored:s off his players by making the strongest weapon in the game a masterwork greatsword and healing unavalible while monsters readily have damage reduction and regeneration only bypassable by magical elements (like good aligned weapons or sonic energy)." and can deal 100+ damage easily while the only method of healing is with tedius bed rest, run by sadistic control freak DMs who are often 40 years old, overweight, unemployed, and live in their mother's bacement. 2. The "DM tries to create a more realistic world by limiting the effects of magic, making magic avalible yet rare, creating a psudo-Lord of the Rings world where magic is impressive and hard to find", which can be fun depending on weither the DM is a jerk or not. 3. The "DM says he likes D&D, yet he eliminates all magic and changes just about everything magical to the point where the game resembles just about anything BUT D&D", which usually end with the DM being introduced to another RPG. 4. The "DM thinks magic is overpowered so he makes magic NPC only and makes players beg on their hands and knees before if they want a +1 item.", usually run by the same 40 year old control freaks as #1. 5. The "DM wants a hack-and-slash game and hates the tremendous firepower that mages can have", which can be okay if you like hack-and-slash. Low magic games usually end with either projectiles being fasioned and utilized against the DM or a superb game that is almost always roleplaying oriented. They can be very fun or completely boring depeding on the jerkiness of the DM.
Zyphus 06-18-06, 10:34 AM	A good example/reason for low-magic games and low-powered games is Tolkein. In The Hobbit Gandalf is about 5th level, a werebear can destroy an entire army, and except for a certain something the dragon would have never been stopped. The enemies consist of goblins, worgs, spiders, elves, and a single overly powered group of trolls (CR party level +4 with a party of 14 members?) that requires the party to do something other than just stand and fight. By the end of Lord of the Rings Gandalf is probably 7th level. He still can't teleport. Sauron was probably 12th level just to be able to Forge Ring. After the end of the series you can count the number of magic items found on your hands, even if you lost a finger. There are no magic shops, wizards are unusual, and there aren't even clerics.
Zevox 06-18-06, 11:03 AM	In The Hobbit Gandalf is about 5th level, <snip> By the end of Lord of the Rings Gandalf is probably 7th level. He still can't teleport. Sauron was probably 12th level just to be able to Forge Ring. Actually, both Gandalf and Sauron were Gods (Gandalf couldn't use his full power due to a prohibition by his superiors and being stuck in a human body, and Sauron never got the chance to since most of his was in the Ring). The same is true of the other wizards (Saruman, Radagast, and the blue wizards) and the Balrog. Simply put, theres no way to translate them into D&D accurately. Magic works very differently in Tolkien - its more innate ability of a few races, mostly the Elves and Ainur (Gods), than anything else. Its quite true that magic wasn't widely available, mostly because of it being largely the dominion of Elves and Ainur and thus being almost completely unavailable to humans and utterly of no interest to most Hobbits and Dwarves, but by no means are the characters that wield it as weak with it as they may appear at a glance. Zevox
The_Levitator 06-18-06, 11:56 AM	Geez, it sounds like there are some deep emotional scars from sadistic DM's out there. :rolleyes: We play a high magic/low availability world in my main group and my players love it. They are the heroes, so of course they will end up with the uber-powerful items, as will their enemies. For the rest of the world however, magic is very misunderstood. Magical items are only available in the largest of cities (over 20,000), and they won't be better than +2. Magic is unstable, otherwise, why have vast armies when a few wizards can take down entire kingdoms? Spellcasters are feared for their power, respected for their dedication, and pitied for the long term effects that using magic has on the human mind. In our area, it seems most players want magic to be special, not mundane. Rarity is what makes the fantastic, fantastic. Seeing a runway model at Daytona beach is not nearly as fantastic as seeing one at the local flea market. I find it hard to make any mechanical comparisons to LotR since the books weren't written with any game rules in mind. It's like trying to put a square peg in a round hole. Tolkien was telling a story. He wasn't worried about the "level" of his spellcasters or his magic. He wasn't concerned with how much magic there was per capita. He was telling a story. The only corrolation I make to LotR is that I attempt to write my campaigns like a movie, and play them like a game. I don't keep track of high magic/low magic ratios. I just tell a story that makes sense and gives the players the chance to be epic heroes. Who cares if you can't buy magic weapons at the local Walmart? Most players I've had over the last 25 years seem to prefer either finding their items, being bestowed their items, or questing after specific items. I know powergamers (not meant to be derogatory) would rather just run down to WeaponMart for their +5 Sword of Ultimate Power, but it's hard to put a compelling story around that. The compelling story for them is the battle with enemy, not how they gained their items. It's kind of easy really. If your group is into Hack N Slash powergaming, make the magic as accessible as possible. That group doesn't want to waste time hunting their items down. They want to spend their time hunting their foes down. If your group prefers deep, rich storytelling, then make the magic rare and special, something they will have to spend some time in acquiring. For these players, gaining their abilities and weapons are as important as killing bad guys. The only wrong way to play it is in a way that doesn't suit your group. The best thing to do is just ask your players what kind of world they want their characters to live in, and what kind of gaming experience they are looking for. I have 2 groups; 1 of them is a very Hack N Slash group of aspiring powergamers who don't give a copper about storyline. My main ( only designated as main because it's the larger group that playes more often) group is all about the story and a believeable world. As a DM, my job is to make the game entertaining, not dictate the player's world around them. It's a little more work having 2 distinct kinds of worlds for my 2 groups, but I think the end result is well worth it. Both gaming styles have their strong points and it keeps me from getting bored with 1 style of gaming.