Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Talmariel 03-18-05, 10:36 PM	I got to talking to my DM-to-be about starting a new game, and we got really into the idea of a low-magic setting - really low magic. Masterwork equipment low magic. We're not talking about abolishing magic, though, and magic items will be present; they'll just be extremely rare and important. This has two major effects that I can perceive. The first is the downplaying of the importance of treasure. If a player wants to, say, build a kingdom, buy a large, elaborate house, a boat, or the like, they'll need treasure. For the rest of the group (which I expect will be most), treasure serves no real purpose without magic items to spend it on. That's a minor issue, though. The real issue is how to treat spellcasting classes. Through our discourse, it became clear that spellcasting PC classes should be present, but shouldn't even remotely resemble normal ones. This didn't come up, but I'm going to strongly suggest the generic class variant from Unearthed Arcana. I think my DM-to-be will really dig it, especially because it downplays supernatural and spell-like class abilities. However, the mage just won't do. In fact, conventional D&D spellcasting is right out. What to do, then? I had this idea, a crazy idea (!), to work a low-magic setting and make magic feel a lot closer to a LotR/Excalibur/Conan kind of magic. There are spectacular and terrifying things powerful wizards can do, but they aren't slinging fireballs, you know? The base concept was to model spells as spell-like abilities based around the powers granted through divine rank. This could be taken further, to incorporate salient abilities, and definately incorporate a few actual spells. It could even draw in elements from epic magic. There are two primary elements I want to include here: skill-based casting, and casting that physically drains the caster. So, let me take an example: an AC buff. In-game, this would most likely be akin to Gandalf's display in The Fellowship of the Ring movie against the Balrog, where he surrounds himself in a protective bubble. Meta-game, this would simply be a deflection bonus to Armor Class. All deities with divine rank gain a deflection bonus equal to their divine rank. So, if a wizard wanted such a ward, they would take the ward spell-like ability, which would grant a deflection bonus to AC equal to their caster level. I'd probably have duration as a function of an ability score (such as 1 + your Charisma modifier in rounds, minimum 1). Casting time could normally function like the summon spells, 1 full round (so the effect begins at the start of your next round). You'd have a number of uses of either each ability or magic in general per day. I might also bring in an option to speed up casting or use magic more times per day by accepting a skill check or saving throw, failure resulting in fatigue (then exhaustion, then unconsciousness or the disabled condition). Some things I definately do not want: I do not want spell points, I do not want an extremely loose, free-form casting system, and I do not want ability drain, save for the most powerful spells. What I do want is some help ironing out the details and kinks in such a system, and possibly hammering out specific spells. If not spells, I'd be down with styling it after epic spell seeds. I'd also like to just know what people think about the concept in general. The bottom line is, there's nothing like a good devil's advocate to make a new mechanic stonger. ;)
Lina_Inverse 03-18-05, 10:59 PM	the pcs will die.horribly. for merely thinking this can work in D&D shows both of you know nothing of the system.
Talmariel 03-18-05, 11:24 PM	for merely thinking this can work in D&D shows both of you know nothing of the system. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate on this well-formed and clearly astute opinion? I expect you mean dealing with monsters with spell-like abilities, damage reduction, and the entire grab-bag of normal high-magic D&D? We aren't planning on using it. Low-magic monsters only, lots of NPC villains based on the same model. It's as simple as that. And as far as "both of [us] know[ing] nothing of the system," we've been playing D&D for over a decade, and 3rd Edition in both forms since they were released. We know effectively everything about the system. Please don't flame again.
HailSpork 03-18-05, 11:48 PM	the pcs will die.horribly. for merely thinking this can work in D&D shows both of you know nothing of the system. Given the posts, I think it's not him that knows nothing of the system. Well, the low-magic thing can work, but freeform magic is a larger problem. The easiest way to do low magic is with classes like Adept or Magewright from Eberron. One thing to possibly balance that is with the save DC's. You'll notice that in most fantasy movies/anime/etc., magic is effective. If I cast a spell at you, it works. In DnD, you're looking at 50% success rate, sometimes. In most cases where magic is necessary, you're looking at much lower than that. What if the DC's for the saves where a bit higher? The mages aren't moving mountains, but they're still something to be feared. Afterall, they're not progressing in spell levels as quickly, so they're going to run into problems with keeping up with saving throw progression. For the GM, there's a decent chunk of work that needs to be done. First of all, you probably want to tone down monsters. Demons and such should be a rarity and have their CR's adjusted, as well as anything that has DR/magic. Thowing them up against other humans or humanoids should work out well, since they're at the same penalties. Also, it may be useful to allow for items that go beyond masterwork, and I don't just mean different materials. I think I heard about codified rules for that, but I'm not sure where they are. Now, as for the free-form magic system. As I mentioned in another thread specifically about free-form magic, I think that the seed method is probably your best bet. I think that the risk of fatigue is a good drawback. I suggest a fort save to avoid it, with a DC dependent on how you're modifying the spell. It should only fatigue them for the rest of the encounter, like barbarian rage. You should not be able to cast while fatigued. Perhaps a natural 1 on the saving throw might fatigue them for the day, but I wouldn't use this rule if you're doing a maximum number of spells per day. If you're limiting the power of each spell, you may want to consider an unlimited casting. Consider the warlock from Complete Arcane. Of course, the warlock is much too powerful for a low-magic campaign, but it's a good comparison. Let's assume that the basic attack spell does 1d4 damage at level 1, +1d4/2 levels. That's 1 die size smaller than the eldritch blast and a risk of fatigue after each casting. Of course, there may be more versatility in the free-form caster, depending on how you set up the system. Also, your low-magic version has to spend a full round to cast the spell. I could actually get a decent build done, but I'm going to wait and see if you like where I'm going with this before doing the work. I'll at least do 1 spell though: Basic attack spell, base DC of 10 -Add 1 to the DC per d4 of damage, max of 1 per 2 caster levels (min of 1d4) -Assumed to be a ray with a range increment of 30', maximum range of 300' -Add 1 to the DC for each extra 10' of range. Also add 100' to the maximum range. -Subtract 3 from the DC if it's a touch attack (nothing between 0' and 30') -Assumed that the damage is acid, cold, or fire -Add 1 to the DC for electricity (only if you want to give it a bonus against metal armor, otherwise group it with +0 DC) -Add 2 to the DC if the damage is sonic -Add 3 to the DC if the damage is force -Add 3 to the DC for a 10' burst (centered from the target; reflex save for half to all but the target hit by the ray) -Add 2 to the DC for each additional 10' of radius -Add 2 to the DC for a 15' cone -Add 4 to the DC for a 30' cone So, you calculate the DC, then when you cast the spell, make a spellcraft check (Spell DC), spend a full round action, wait until your next turn, resolve the spell, people make saves where needed (Spell DC), then you make a fort save (Spell DC) or are fatigued for the rest of the encounter. So, a 6d4 fireball with a range of 40' would have a DC of 10+6+1+5=22 and requires you to be level 12. Easy to make the spellcraft, but it will probably fatigue you. It's also hard to dodge, but remember, I think that they should be harder to avoid. Also, because I like the idea of keeping the to-hit intact, this would require a touch attack (A spot in the ground has an AC of 5; makes a difference if it's 400' away, since that's a -20 to hit; perhaps 5' of scatter for ever 1 that you miss by? determine direction by a d8) Countering a spell would probably require a spellcraft check to beat the result of the caster, or just ignore that roll and have them make an opposed check. Would probably also require both to make a fort save to avoid fatigue.
Xeviat-DM 03-19-05, 12:05 AM	the pcs will die.horribly. for merely thinking this can work in D&D shows both of you know nothing of the system. Great job being suportive. I'd be hypocritical if I said anything more. As for your idea, Talmariel, your best option is to go with using the classes as they are, and using a class based armor class bonus that stacks with armor. You should probably use the bonuses in the 3 higher collumns of the bonuses presented in UA, and apply them to classes based on BAB. I have ran a no magic items tournament at 15th level. The only spellcasters in the tournament were half-casters (characters with the bard, paladin, or ranger PrC versions from UA), but fights were still over incredibly quickly. While it is true that a straight spellcaster will have much extra power when their enemies don't have magic items to defend themselves, the casters will not have magic items to augment their abilities as well. CRs will need to be altered; I suggest adding +1 to all CRs over 5 and +2 to all CRs over 12 (more if the creature relies upon failed saving throws, just like the Gestalt system suggests). You don't need to change the system entirely.
Lina_Inverse 03-19-05, 12:16 AM	sorry if i was a bit tart.but i keep seeing posts like this and i kinda wish people would look for them so i dont have to keep explaining.so im gonna explain in depth one last time. a large portion of D&D is based on a very simple assumption,go into your dmg and open it to the wealth per level guidelines.the game assumes PCs of level X will have X gp of magic stuff.how much would you have to change because of this? you would have to include non-magic AC advancement.since its entirely from magic. you would have to include non-magic damage advancement,as again its entirely from magic. you would have to greatly buff tankss and nerf casters,as fighters benefit far more from magic for the amount of GP they put into it. you would have to throw allmost all premade monsters out the window,they make alot of assumptions based on treasure. thats alot of work to do as DM.in general its simply a much much better idea for you to find a diffrent system designed for such low magic play. such as saaaayyyy BESM ^-^
Talmariel 03-19-05, 12:40 AM	You don't need to change the system entirely. It's not that I need to change the system entirely, it's that I want to. :) HailSpork, you've got a lot of good material there, but I'm actually trying to avoid free-form magic. Check the first sentence of the last paragraph of my first post. I understand there could be a need to simply create rules on making spells instead of creating a massive list, which is where I was going with the epic seed thoughts. Basically though, I'm looking at still terming magic by "spells," but each spell is somewhat broader in application, and not restricted by spell slots in a conventional sense. Absolutely, crazy-magic monsters will be out. I doubt we'll be seeing an demons, and if we are they'll probably have their damage reduction brought down to special-material-based or even alignment-based. Magic items will still exist, but in a very different capacity. Raw enhancement bonuses will be extremely rare, and bonus damage dice and flashy effects are right out. This is more about synergistic magic that augments other things rather than D&D's "wham-pow" magic. I have no problems with "wham-pow" magic, of course, but I'd like to try something different. :) To elaborate on the ward spell I supposed earlier, here's what it might look like: Ward Abjuration Casting Time: 1 full round Components: V, S, F Area: 10-ft. radius centered on caster (S; see text) Range: Personal Duration: Standard Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: No Spellcraft DC: 15 The caster can generate a protective field around himself. The ward creates a bubble with up to a 10-foot radius, or smaller if the caster wishes. The size must be determined at the time of the casting. A ward provides a deflection bonus to Armor Class to anyone within it equal to the caster's caster level. Point by Point: Now, I'm not even sure if I want to use magic schools, though I don't really see why not. I included a focus component because I'm probably going to do that for all spells, though this can be a wizard's staff, a holy symbol, a magic circle, etc. The Spellcraft DC is a nod to the idea of requiring a skill check to cast the spell, rather than the DC to learn it based on epic seed magic. I'd want spell acquisition to be a level-based class feature, kinda like the warlock, and let the caster class keep a full effective caster level for determining overcoming spell resistance, effects, et al. My theory is that a wizard (just for clarity, I'm using the term "wizard" very loosely to mean any spellcaster) would have a fixed number of times they can cast spells in general, with the option of exceeding this by raising the DC to cast the spell, and risking fatigue. I like using Fortitude saves to handle that, or at least something Constitution-based (maybe Concentration?). I wouldn't prevent all casting if the caster were fatigued, I'd just maintain the same risks with the chance of becoming exhausted on the next failed save/check, followed by becoming unconscious or disabled. That last stage could be left to the caster's option, considering how risky disabled can be. Unconscious may be bad, but it doesn't risk death nearly as much (unless there's someone who can get within melee to kill an unconscious caster). I'd want magic to have a rather different flavor than traditional D&D magic. Spells would only be able to do certain kinds of buffs, protections, enchantments, illusions, divinations, and necromancies. "Wham-pow" magic is out, which includes a lot of evocations, transmutations, and conjurations. I won't be tossing all of them, of course. Wizards need some kinds of offense, so there will be a few attack-oriented spells (like the ray spell you suggested at, HailSpork), and definately summonings. Magic that affects the state of nature is also fine, such as creating storms, maybe making plants animate, and calling or commanding wildlife. I think that roughly explains what I'm after, at least. So, in a nutshell my thoughts are strongly leaning on spell-like abilities (similarly to how the warlock was handled, sans eldritch blast), where the casting class grants one maybe every other level like fighter bonus feats, and the effective caster level is 1/1 like fighter base attack. Spell knowledge could be suplimented somehow, perhaps simply through feats. I also definately want to incorporate ritual magic to cover more powerful things. Originally, I was going to ditch all forms of resurrection, but then I got to thinking about the resurrection scene in Conan: The Barbarian and couldn't resist. That will be the grounds of ritual magic, though, which will probably work a lot like the Book of Vile Darkness' evil rituals.
Talmariel 03-19-05, 01:07 AM	Lina_Inverse, I fully understand all the issues you're talking about. The system I'm discussing here takes all of them into account. This is only the magic system, but as I said, we'd be reducing the need for treasure and scrapping high-magic monsters. Not everything in D&D assumes the need for magic items. AC can be gained through class abilities (duelist, for instance), through non-magical armor, and through feats. All other bonuses fall into the same category. If the game uses the generic class variant from Unearthed Arcana, we're not worrying about how the normal classes balance anymore. The generic ones throw out all the supernatural stuff, which completely allows for low-magic gaming. Basically, I know all the pitfalls of low magic in D&D, and I'm dealing with them. I don't need a search to tell me other people have a hard time with it. I definately don't need someone else telling me I can't do it just because other people had a hard time. I believe a game without magic items or spells of any kind would be balanced on its own, if kept to feats, class abilities, racial modifiers, and standard equipment. Obviously spellcasters aren't because they don't have their spells, but fighters, rogues, and barbarians (and the non-magical paladin and ranger from Complete Warrior) are all balanced against each other. If this is brought down to just the Warrior and Expert of the generic class variant (not the NPC classes), and the spellcaster is totally re-worked, it'd still be balanced. Then just balance the rest of the world and you're set. ;)
Xeviat-DM 03-19-05, 01:33 AM	Perhaps if you want to make an entire rewrite, start your creative focus with the Warlock from Complete Arcane. Good luck. From experience, trying to change everything is a lot of work. I'm on year 3 of my process.
Insane Pixie 03-19-05, 01:35 AM	Ok...I kinda "skimmed" over this post, but it seems the main idea is that you want a low magic campaign, and are having trouble with magic wielding NPC's and spellcasting classes. The answer is simple. Read Complete Warrior. There are entire sections on martially focused campaigns - it will help a ton - trust me.
Vanamir 03-19-05, 09:26 AM	sorry if i was a bit tart.but i keep seeing posts like this and i kinda wish people would look for them so i dont have to keep explaining.so im gonna explain in depth one last time. a large portion of D&D is based on a very simple assumption,go into your dmg and open it to the wealth per level guidelines.the game assumes PCs of level X will have X gp of magic stuff.how much would you have to change because of this? you would have to include non-magic AC advancement.since its entirely from magic. you would have to include non-magic damage advancement,as again its entirely from magic. you would have to greatly buff tankss and nerf casters,as fighters benefit far more from magic for the amount of GP they put into it. you would have to throw allmost all premade monsters out the window,they make alot of assumptions based on treasure. thats alot of work to do as DM.in general its simply a much much better idea for you to find a diffrent system designed for such low magic play. such as saaaayyyy BESM ^-^ I think the original poster made it quite clear that he doesn't want to play 'D&D' in the usual sense but rather play a low-magic fantasy game with the basic D20 rules. This surely is something that can be done and it doens't have to do with 'nerfing' something, an expression i have come hate with a passion. Actually it is rather sad that some people apparently cannot think outside the box that a game system provides and think that whenever you try to do something differently you have to buy a new game system / box. If you don't think that a D20 based system can work without tons of magic items then just look at the Star Wars D20 rules. Here is a system that uses the D20 mechanics without excessive amounts extraordinary items (maximum +3 mastercraft bonus) and still is playable even at higher levels. Sure, you have to do some balancing but i am quite sure Talmariel is willing to do so. And lets not forget that most of the alleged need of balancing comes from all those ridiculously powerful monsters that have no place in a low magic campaign anyway.
HailSpork 03-19-05, 09:32 AM	HailSpork, you've got a lot of good material there, but I'm actually trying to avoid free-form magic. Whoops, I must have misread something. Well, everything but the paragraph on free-form magic still stands ;)
Grigori 03-19-05, 10:20 AM	Actually... Something you might want to consider: If you really want to play D20 'low magic' then seriously consider the D20 modern 'urban arcana'. That fits the bill pretty darned well. Even from D20 modern the following advanced classes would easily apply with little or no modification: Soldier, Martial Artist, Infiltraitor, Daredevil, Bodyguard, Field Scientist (Academic), Medic (Healer), and Investigator (bounty hunter perhaps?). Negotiator and personality don't really have much of a place without getting really creative, but the Gunslinger can very easily be converted to a ranged-combat specialist. For psionics you already have the telepath and the battle mind. For really low magic you have the Shadow Slayer and the Occultist, for things a little closer to 'fantasy' you have the Mage and the Acolyte. Even D20 future has a few classes easily converted with only cosmetic changes: Ambassador, Dreadnought, Explorer, Field Officer, Swindler, and Tracer (tracker, bounty hunter). That's not even tapping into Urban Arcana or D20 Past, and the best part: Most of the work has already been done for you. All that's left for you to do is change a few skill requirements here and there, drop a feat or two, and change the name of a few abilities so that they have a fantasy 'flavor'.
Talmariel 03-19-05, 12:41 PM	Actually... Something you might want to consider: If you really want to play D20 'low magic' then seriously consider the D20 modern 'urban arcana'. That fits the bill pretty darned well. Aye, I have d20 Modern and d20 Future (Past will come as soon as my FLGS gets it in stock). They turn down the volume, so to speak, but they still use the D&D sensabilities of what I'm calling "wham-pow" magic. Apart from just toning down the power levels, I want to change how magic viscerally feels. I'm looking for that mysterious, sometimes terrifying tone that magic in most fantasy fiction has, particularly Lord of the Rings (books and movies), Excalibur (movie), and Conan: The Barbarian (again, movie). Read Complete Warrior. There are entire sections on martially focused campaigns - it will help a ton - trust me. Trust me, I have. I adore the low-magic variants for the paladin and ranger. They're still very high-magic, though - even without spells they've got oodles of supernatural and spell-like abilities. However (!), I think it would be extremely workable to take the ideas from them and implant them into the prestigeous paladin and ranger model from Unearthed Arcana. Besides that, the feats and many of the prestige classes from Complete Warrior are instantly usable, no tweaking required. Likewise goes for material from Complete Adventurer. Believe you me: my collection of suppliments is staggering, and I plan to use as many as I can. Whoops, I must have misread something. Well, everything but the paragraph on free-form magic still stands ;) That it does, and I think you've got a similar mind on my project as I do. I especially like the idea of raising the DCs of spells. I'm wondering if it'd be possible to base them on caster level somehow, perhaps replacing spell level. At first glance, that seems grossly overpowered, so I'm leary. It might be possible to write the save DC as (5 + caster level + casting ability modifier), which would tone down the initial saves but allow much more growth, and make powerful casters quite fearful. Ultimately, the combat effectiveness of magic is being toned down. Longer casting times, a required focus component, and the potential for fatigue (or worse) - it all adds up to magic being harder to use in combat. However, if it's effectively the only source of magic, I think that balances itself. At any rate, that DC model I set up seems to undermine low-level casters. Then again, it might make a good deal of sense if many spells don't directly affect other creatures (such as the ward spell I outlined). This means low-level casters are much better served with non-aggressive casting, which also helps ingrain the flavor I'm after. If I can, I'm going to seek ways to severely hamper the ability to gain direct attack spells. There will be some, make no mistake, but I want to eliminate flashy wizards' duels. I can accept force effects, I think, and a small handful of energy-based attacks. I definately was digging on Gandalf's light-based attack on the Nazgul from the Return of the King movie, for instance. Another model to look at, which is perhaps more of a medium-magic setting, is Record of Lodoss War (anime). I think that gives a very good idea as to where I'd want the ceiling of flashy magic to be. I also rather dig the idea of invoking names of power ("I call upon the fires of Agnor!" - Gandalf; "Sooth, Spirit of Wind..." - Deedlit; apologies for mis-quotes or mis-spelling), which might be a great way to address metamagic to really give it some flavor. It might even be possible to ditch the verbal component for normal spells, but metamagic invocations add a verbal. Hmm...
HailSpork 03-19-05, 01:02 PM	That it does, and I think you've got a similar mind on my project as I do. I especially like the idea of raising the DCs of spells. I'm wondering if it'd be possible to base them on caster level somehow, perhaps replacing spell level. At first glance, that seems grossly overpowered, so I'm leary. It might be possible to write the save DC as (5 + caster level + casting ability modifier), which would tone down the initial saves but allow much more growth, and make powerful casters quite fearful. I don't know if Star Wars d20 uses it, but KotOR 1 used a DC system similar to that. It angered me. How about 5+half caster level+spell level+attribute? Almost anything fantasy can inspire you to low magic; I don't think I've seen anything on tv or such that has a magic system as powerful as DnD with only a few ridiculous exceptions *cough* dragonball z *cough*.
Lina_Inverse 03-19-05, 01:35 PM	now i have to aplogize again,as i merely skimed your post.*grumble grumble*anyways. id suggest pulling out d20 modern/past and a custom magic system.it allows for the advancement of things normally constricted to magic. and no,its not easy to raise AC without magic.the only feat that does so is dodge and thats crap.the duelist is a PrC that CANT WEAR ARMOR,and still needs magic for deflection,natural AC bonuses as well as int up itemry.
Talmariel 03-19-05, 01:51 PM	HailSpork, the half caster level to save DC's sounds pretty good. I might go with that, instead. Lina_Inverse, I still disagree that AC is hard to raise without magic, mostly because I've been doing it for years. Still, if it proves to be a problem I might look into including the class-based AC bonus from Unearthed Arcana. I'd have to fix it to work with the generic class variant, but that's fine. It might make the most sense, since other low-magic settings like Star Wars and d20 Modern both use it. I'm thinking we'll also want to use the d20 Modern massive damage rule, so the inordinate amounts of hit points don't get out of hand. Yeah, all that starts to point to just using d20 Modern, but honestly it just doesn't give the right flavor to my thoughts. I love the system, don't get me wrong (look at my d20 Future Star Wars thread in my sig if you need proof), but in this case it just doesn't seem quite right. I started writing up a Mage class to replace the generic class variant mage. It's real basic: a half base attack progression, good Will saves, 4 + Int skills per level, and a d6 Hit Die. For class abilities, at 1st level they get a bonus feat (metamagic or item creation), and a number of spells equal to their casting ability modifier. I might change that to 1 + casting ability modifier. Right now, you pick what ability score you cast with, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma. I'm looking into setting these apart further by distinguishing a few basic elements each adds to casting. The Intelligence-based caster, for instance (also called a "wizard," if you couldn't guess), requires an arcane focus. An arcane focus can be anything they can hold (a staff, talisman, weapon, etc.), and requires 1,000 gp and 100 XP to create. A 1st-level wizard gets one for free. Without an arcane focus, a wizard can create a casting circle, as well. I'm thinking that will require 1 minute to prepare, and obviously must be stationary. It might be common practice for wizards to have a permanent casting circle in a private chambers. I'm still working out ideas for the others. I'm also thinking about designating two of the three ability scores you can cast with based on race. For instance, humans can only have Int- and Cha-based casters (human clerics would actually be wizards, since I'm not distinguishing arcane and divine magic), elves can only have Wis- and Cha-based casters, gnomes can only have Int- and Wis-based, etc. I'd probably want to group them very akin to how the Races book line does, so elves and halflings cast the same, humans and half-races cast the same, and dwarves and gnomes cast the same. Monstrous races would have their own casting methods (and half-races could pick their human or other ancestry), but that can be addressed on a case-by-case basis during play. I'd also include a feat to use a non-standard ability score, I suppose, although that seems peculiar. Maybe a class on the lines of the Ruathar from Races of the Wild... Then again, maybe not. Just tossing ideas at the wall right now. :)
HailSpork 03-19-05, 01:58 PM	Yeah, but it's also difficult to raise your to-hit. Weapon focus and greater weapon focus will do it. As for raising AC, I know of quite a few more feats to do it: Combat expertise, heavy armor optimization (from Races of Stone), greater heavy armor optimization, expeditious dodge (Races of the Wild), formation expert (complete warrior), quick staff (Complete Warrior), spinning halberd (Complete Warrior) I'm sure there are more. Anyways, those feats aside, you're still only getting an extra +1 or +2 to hit beyond strength, BAB, and masterwork. If you're concerned about being hit, use a shield. Another option, and I mentioned this before, is allow for craftsmanship to excede masterwork, to a point where you can get better to-hit, damage, or ac without using magic.
HailSpork 03-19-05, 02:00 PM	Btw, I thought about the 5+half caster level+spell level+attribute, and I realized that it's actually lower until level 10. Depending on the upper limit of spell levels that the Mage receives, perhaps 10+half level+spell level+attribute instead?
Talmariel 03-19-05, 02:09 PM	Yeah, I think allowing masterwork items to go past the +1 limit would be wise. D20 Modern allows up to +3, which I think is a good limit, and I might also allow that to affect attack or damage. The trouble with the spell save DC is that I'm probably going to ditch spell levels entirely. Spell save DC's will have to work like monstrous spell-like ability saves, which is usually 10 + 1/2 HD + ability mod. Honestly, I don't think that'd be a problem. It would effectively mean that anything a caster casts is Heightened (like the feat) to their highest available spell level. Rather than 1/2 HD it'd be 1/2 class level, of course. Maybe that'd work out just fine...
HailSpork 03-19-05, 02:46 PM	Yeah, it does help that they're all at max. Still, I suggest you provide some feats that increase dc's built-in to the mage class, kind of like the bonus feats wizards get. Perhaps either +1 to a school (if you're doing schools), or +2 to a single spell (that is, those are both options). Maybe even make those numbers one higher; now that we're not worrying about death spells and such, it's probably ok to restore those feats to their 3.0 glory.
DM Zoc 03-19-05, 04:55 PM	Low-magic D&D works. It worked throughout all of the previous editions. The only thing you need to throw out when you make magic rare are the "character wealth by ECL" table and the CR system. You kind of need to free-form your EXP a bit. The tough magical enemies that tend to have DR/magic or DR/lawful also tend to not show up much in less-magical campaigns. Wizards will end up slightly nerfed even if you don't change the magic system any, merely because they don't have easy access to scrolls. Sorcerers will shine. Save DCs on spells will be artificially higher because not everyone will have access to a cloak of protection. In a less-magical setting, the material components for creating magical items, which are normally just generalized as costing X amount of GP because you can get them in any town, need merely be specified. If you want to make a flametongue, that requires a large ruby and hand-smelted iron from a lost mine that nobody has ever heard of, so you'll probably have to go on a quest or two for that... and the whole ordeal will mean that what wizards do exist will not be making tons of magical items.
Krynus Ogrebane 03-20-05, 10:27 AM	Three words: Wheel of Time (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/d20acc/886800000)
rigon 03-20-05, 10:54 AM	Three words: Wheel of Time (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/d20acc/886800000) Yes!:cheer::cheer::cheer: Class Defense Bonuses, scalable "Magic" system with fatigue, and some very cool "spells". :cheer:
Gilean 03-20-05, 01:48 PM	First off, add expanded masterwork and defense bonus, or some similar, rules. Sample MWK rules follow: Cost of masterworked weapon is standard price + amount of enhancements added squared and multiplied by 300. Sample enhancements: +1 to hit, +1 damage, +1 hardness and 5 hp or +2 hardness and 10 hp, +2 to specific combat maneuvre (trip, disarm, sunder), +10 feet range increment For example, weapon with +3 to hit and damage would cost (3+3)^2*300 gold, plus base price, totaling 10800 and weapon's base price. Not cheap. Reduce price for lower cash game. Enhancements to armor would include +1 AC, +1 maximum dexterity, -1 check penalty and -5% arcane spell failure, hardness and hp boost. If there is no ASF, add maximum dex boost and check penalty reducement to same enhancement. On defense bonus, it can be lowered if you allow it to stack with armors. Maybe make maximum dexterity bonus limit the sum of defense bonus and dexterity bonus? On magic system, if you want spells to be hard to resist, make DC 10+half ranks in spellcraft+ability modifier. That way, it scales with level, is skill-based, is bit higher than standard DCs, and is possible to increase with fighter levels, but with greater cost. My next RPG will have 3 "paths" of magic: Arcane, divine and innate. If translated to context of D&D, stats are easy enough to determine. Innate magic always follows a theme, such as animals (quite common, have you read Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan or Assassin-books by Hobb), certain element (earth for most dwarves), or planar connection (shadow, dreams). Innate magic is quick and easy to use, but hardly evocative or mighty. Arcane magic is very powerful, difficult to master (maybe require ranks in knowledges, at least arcana, to use effectively?), time and wealth-consuming to use, and often demonized by divine casters. It is essentially ritual magic where caster needs precise components (such as blood of a maiden, lock of targets hair, basilisk eyes), lots of time, knowledge of the spell to be cast... see incantations is UA, such as Fires of Dis. Divine magic is entirily at greater being's mercy. The one who grants powers will only grant magics strictly under its control (deities of healing only cure or boost against harmful effects). Divine magic is, in thery, the most powerful one, but is limited by both strength of caster's will (wisdom, possibly base will save) and h(is/er) current standing with the power. Possibly grant per day-miracles that have list specific to each deity? To maintain campaing coherence, increase requirements of magic item creation feats, or remake the entire mechanic.
weasel fierce 03-20-05, 01:55 PM	I'd wager your players will find the game much more challenging, and much more rewarding. The remarks that D&D dies without magic is the mark of inferior players. My current group (AD&D) has a halfelf fighter, a halfelf fighter/thief and a human cavalier. The fourth character is a human magic user, but only present for one in 4 games. I present them with plenty of combat challenges, and guess what, they manage, because they've learned to think, withdraw if the going gets too tough, and learn from the challenges.
Xeviat-DM 03-20-05, 05:32 PM	Not sure if anyone suggested it yet, but D20 Past comes out soon. That will probably be able to be used with little to no changes.
Lord Welkerfan 03-21-05, 09:28 AM	To suggest a product that will be released this summer, Iron Lore by Malhavoc Press. It is an alternate Player's Handbook written by Monte Cook and Mike Mearls with a heavily combat-focused system and a mysterious, unreliable magic system. It appears to grant what is in my opinion the perfect rules ideology.
lostone 03-21-05, 09:57 AM	A few suggestions/comments if you want to do this. Consider leaving magic the way it is, but limiting the caster level possible to achieve. Maybe the most they can hit is 8th caster level meaning 4th level spells, or similar. This way you'd see more fighter/mages and rogue/mages, a bit more flavor and variety. You could also add in some kind of concentration check to cast every spell, to represent the unreliability of magic. Maybe a DC of 10 + level of the spell, relatively easy to overcome if the spellcaster maxes out concentration, but still will fail occasionally in dramatic times. Another idea is to expand the masterwork system, you can get a +1 or +2 or +3 masterwork weapon, which does include damage as well as attack bonus, or masterwork just includes the attack bonus and you can get a brutal weapon that adds to damage. So you could have a +2 masterwork +5 brutal weapon for +2 to attack and +5 to damage. Masterwork armor could raise the AC of armor, so you could have +3 masterwork full plate that has 11 AC, a +3 masterwork buckler that has 4 AC, etc. That would replace the need for magical weapons and armor somewhat, you'd need to come up with custom prices, of course. Change creatures DR from 5/magic to 5/masterwork and/or 5/brutal with the really powerful creatures being 5/magic and brutal both. In games with low magic, Leadership will rule the day. It will be just like in the real world, armies conquer everything except better (smarter, better armed, bigger) armies.
Gilean 03-22-05, 12:50 PM	lostone, (s)he said changing the feel of magic is one of the goal.
lostone 03-22-05, 01:21 PM	lostone, (s)he said changing the feel of magic is one of the goal.I realize that, I was simply suggesting another possibility that they might not have considered. Take it or leave it, but if they had not considered it and liked the idea, then I will have helped. Afterall, it is possible to change the feel of the magic through descriptive terms without actually changing the rules behind it.
Edymnion 03-22-05, 02:01 PM	Another place to look would be the Wheel of Time setting. Its based entirely around the fact that magic items are exceedingly rare (all of them, essentially, are leftovers from an ancient golden age thousands of years ago). So, its built around characters getting by at all levels with little to no magical equipment at all. The classes have built in Defense bonuses which go up as they level, sort of like BAB, except that its BDB, because of the distinct lack of magic to up AC. There are 3 catagories of spellcaster, the Aes Sedai, the Asha'man, and the Wilders. Aes Sedai are all female only, the Asha'man are male only, and go insane if they use their power too often, and the Wilders are limited in what they can do, often with a big drawback (usually a mental block, like only being able to cast spells when you're angry) If you've read any of the Wheel of Time books, you'll know what I mean. Even if you haven't, I would HIGHLY recommend that you look for this setting book for extremely low magic settings. Its part of the d20 system, and it was published by WotC, so balance and all of that isn't going to be a problem, you can easily lift/modify the classes from WoT, or use them as inspiration for modifying the base D&D classes.
lostone 03-22-05, 02:09 PM	I wouldn't consider Wheel of Time to be low magic. It's rare magic, but the magic is powerful. Look at the Forsaken and Rand, throwing Balefire and all that around. Balefire in D&D would be epic, and Rand discovers it within 2 or 3 years of learning he can channel.
Gold Katana 03-22-05, 02:18 PM	Sorry if this has already been mentioned. What about using the Call of Cthulhu magic (insanity) rules offered in UA, or the CoC D20 supplement? That way magic is available - for a steep price! And avoided by most people.
Krynus Ogrebane 03-22-05, 03:46 PM	I wouldn't consider Wheel of Time to be low magic. It's rare magic, but the magic is powerful. Look at the Forsaken and Rand, throwing Balefire and all that around. Balefire in D&D would be epic, and Rand discovers it within 2 or 3 years of learning he can channel. Rand and the Forsaken are not typical spellcasters. That aside, magic is powerful in the Wheel of Time, but spellcasters are very rare. They have to deal with Multiple Ability Dependence. They have to take particular feats just to learn certain types of spells, like teleporting (even then, it's a time-consuming process), compulsions, or flying. The setting includes class defense bonuses, masterwork/masterpiece equipment, VERY rare magic items of any sort, a medium saving throw for classes, Reputation and Madness scores, and a dangerous mechanic for Overchanneling magic.
sooperspook 03-22-05, 04:28 PM	i like the spell-like abilities the OP mentioned in the first post. the Warlock might be the best place to start. get rid or replace some of his more magic heavy abilities. remove Eldritch blast or reduce its dmage to d4s. come up with some new invocations. i'd suggest going to the Classes board and looking for the Warlock varients that someone posted there (called the Strange , Gifted and Natural i think). he had some very nice ideas. if you combine it with D20 Mod class structure you've got your low magic level game right there. should be easy enough to build a Warlock advanced class. use the Incantation rules from UA for the really big magic effects , like the ever popular Demon summoning that every BBEG and his dog seems to like. :) if the incantations are still to 'blasty' for you , increase the DC for Evocation magic, maybe lower it for Divinations to encourage more 'mystical sage' casters
smithwick05 03-22-05, 05:15 PM	Well, I've already posted an idea I came up with twice but here's a link: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=398964
Talmariel 03-22-05, 05:28 PM	I like where some of these ideas are going. I'll definately have to take a peek at the Wheel of Time RPG, or at least steal some of the ideas that have been mentioned here. I'm very fond of the idea that more powerful types of magic could be constrained by feat requirements. Given that, it might alleviate the confusion I was getting into trying to seperate types of magic within the mage base class. I've heard a lot about the overchanneling, but I'm still not sold on it. I like the idea plenty, don't get me wrong, but it feels more appropriate in more free-form games like Mage from White Wolf. D&D has a very hard-and-fast feel to it, which is a trait I'm happy to maintain. I got a look at d20 Past... was I the only one that didn't know it was going to be so small? I had to have someone point it out to me, as I was unable to perceive it on the shelf unaided. I'm a pretty easy-going consumer of Wizards' products, but this time I was seriously let down. The breadth of coverage from d20 Future was so perfect. To see d20 Past as nothing more than a few (albeit useful) advanced classes, literally a handful of feats, some equipment, and half precious few pages taken by adventures... it was disheartening. As there was nothing contained within that sparked my interest in regards to this project, that leaves d20 Modern's magic, which is still a bit too "wham-pow" for my sensabilities. Anyway, here's my basic plan. I'm using the generic class variant from Unearthed Arcana, but replacing the mage's spellcasting entirely. Each class will gain a class AC bonus, and I might talk to the DM about incorporating Reputation, but let's assume things won't go that far. A mage will have a very limited assortment of spell-like abilities (for now, let's say 1 + casting ability modifier). Maybe every even-numbered level they'll get 1 bonus spell. Each spell-like ability will replicate the broadest or most common spell effects, so they greatly resemble epic spell seeds. Saving throw DCs will be equal to 10 + 1/2 caster level + casting ability modifier. Casting a spell will require a Concentration check, with a DC low enough that a character not under particular duress with max ranks should be able to pass it without rolling, or at worst on a 5. Let's say a DC of roughly 10 + caster level used. That way you could lower your effective caster level if you didn't need a big effect, guaranteeing results. It also translates to a +2 to the Concentration DC per +1 to the save DC. Beyond this, I'm including the idea of ritual magic, via Knowledge (arcana). This will be treated pretty much identically to the Book of Vile Darkness sacrifice rules, except with different potential results to reflect the new spells. I'll also include feats to permit learning spells that are outside the normal range of learning. What I might do is put requirements on certain spells, so there'd be more broad-based feats to permit access to a handful of closely related spells (like an Evocation Magic feat to open up an energy ray spell, energy wall spell, force-based spell, and a telekinesis spell). I'll also have to rework item creation, but that won't be as complicated. I'll write a bit more later on, even some specifics, but it's time to run to work! Thanks again for all the input, and sorry I'm not mentioning names. :)
Crashy75 03-22-05, 07:44 PM	Wow Low magic!!!! after your last *unspeakable* project Got sick of all that supernatural stuff huh?. ;) Anyway just skimmed but i wanted to say, it is possible to have useful non-magical equipment I think. I've seen alot of post's about alternate masterwork items for low magic games. Some were even pretty good. Can't rember where tho...
Talmariel 03-22-05, 10:24 PM	Good to hear from you again, Crashy75. :) Well, I've got some time again, so let me take a crack at this. The gist here is that the mage class gets a few spell-like abilities. I was going over these ideas at work (greatest brainstorming locale, second only to the porcelain throne), and a thought occured to me. I could keep with an epic seed theme and drop most of the properties (range, duration, area, number of targets...) down. As a caster progresses, they would have the option of either learning a new spell, or making one of their current ones more potent. There's also the option of allowing skill checks to boost spell performance, but that also gets into the realm of more free-form magic. I'm not completely opposed to it, mind, but I'd like to avoid it if I can. Anyways, for now the mage is looking like this: Mage: Class | Base | Fort | Ref | Will | | AC Level | Attack | Save | Save | Save | Class Features | Bonus 1 | +0 | +0 | +0 | +2 | Starting Spells, | +0 | | | | | Bonus Feat | 2 | +1 | +0 | +0 | +3 | Spell | +1 3 | +1 | +1 | +1 | +3 | | +1 4 | +2 | +1 | +1 | +4 | Spell | +1 5 | +2 | +1 | +1 | +4 | Bonus Feat | +2 6 | +3 | +2 | +2 | +5 | Spell | +2 7 | +3 | +2 | +2 | +5 | | +2 8 | +4 | +2 | +2 | +6 | Spell | +3 9 | +4 | +3 | +3 | +6 | | +3 10 | +5 | +3 | +3 | +7 | Spell, Bonus Feat | +3 11 | +5 | +3 | +3 | +7 | | +4 12 | +6/+1 | +4 | +4 | +8 | Spell | +4 13 | +6/+1 | +4 | +4 | +8 | | +4 14 | +7/+2 | +4 | +4 | +9 | Spell | +5 15 | +7/+2 | +5 | +5 | +9 | Bonus Feat | +5 16 | +8/+3 | +5 | +5 | +10 | Spell | +5 17 | +8/+3 | +5 | +5 | +10 | | +6 18 | +9/+4 | +6 | +6 | +11 | Spell | +6 19 | +9/+4 | +6 | +6 | +11 | | +6 20 | +10/+5 | +6 | +6 | +12 | Spell, Bonus Feat | +7 That's using the worst class AC bonus progression. Alternatively, I could use the second-worst, depending on how I treat the other two classes. My thought is to either do away with the upper-most or lower-most progression, and right now I'm leaning towards nixing the upper-most. It seems excessive for one, and for two it's hard to imagine it's place within a warrior/expert/mage class structure. Perhaps I'll toss it in as a class feature option. It's that, or offer it to the warrior in exchange for a 3/4 base attack. The bonus feats will be metamagic or spell feats, most likely. Otherwise, I doubt there's anything unexpected there. That gives a caster with maximum casting ability (we'll say it tops out at 25 by 20th level) a grand total of 18 spells. (I'm going to make a caveat that raising one's casting ability retroactively grants a new spell from the Starting Spells ability.) Now then, for spells themselves, they'll need to be balanced between the broadness of epic spell seeds and the finiteness of normal spells. I think a satisfactory median can be found pretty easily. Just to give an idea of what I'm after, let me list a few spell ideas. I'll compile them here at home in a .doc file if anyone wants a complete list with full spell descriptions. Resistance - Subjects gain resistance bonus to saves equal to caster level. Produce Fire - Cause focus to spontaneously burn. Arcane Sight - Perceive magical auras and identify magical effects. Produce Light - Cause focus to generate light. Illusory Sound - Create figment sounds. Illusory Image - Create visual figments. Shield - Subject gains deflection bonus to AC equal to caster level. Ward - Prevents subject from being harmed. Basically, I'm taking ideas from existing spells and combining and generalizing them. Resistance, for instance, is the 0th level spell of the same name kicked up a notch (BAM!). Arcane sight is a combination of detect magic and analyze dweomer. Ward is a combo sanctuary, protection from evil, and repulsion. Take some of these up a notch, such as giving them range or an area, and you're modeling spells like dancing lights, magic circle against evil, and so forth. Spells like produce fire allow some energy manipulation, but it ain't slingin' fireballs. Anyway, it looks like I've got somewhere to be tonight, so I'll leave it at that for now. Most of what I've got to play around with is details, and exactly how I want spells to operate. Feel free to drop more suggestions, they've been great so far. :)
Edymnion 03-22-05, 11:20 PM	Something else you can consider. Make the spellcraft skill into exactly what it sounds like. Go through and set DCs for every spell in the game (takes a lot of setup, I suggest doing it on the computer so you can look things up easily). The caster literally makes a Spellcraft roll to see if they can actually craft the spell into what they want. Make it so anybody that takes ranks in Spellcraft can cast spells. The way to control it though is that you have to take a feat for every spell level over cantrips. The way the mage class manages to cast spells better than anybody else is that they are the only ones with Spellcraft as a class skill, and they get the spell level feats as bonus feats. So, if the fighter really wants to learn to cast magic, he has to spend cross-class ranks in Spellcraft, and then only be limited to 0th level spells. Or he can take the First Level Spells feat, and be able to make checks to cast cantrips or first level spells. That way, if he wants to, he can dump all of his skillpoints into Spellcraft, and all of his normal feats, and by 20th level, he'll be able to cast 7th level spells, while the mage will have 9th, and a full 20 levels worth of feats.
Talmariel 03-23-05, 02:06 AM	That's not so bad an idea. I was primarily concerned with over-weighting Spellcraft, which is why I initially posed Concentration as the casting skill. Spellcraft definately needs some usefulness towards more than perceiving spells, though. On the same token, I'd like Concentration to have some more weight to it. I'm using Knowledge (arcana) to cover ritual magic, which works quite nicely. I could concievably require a Spellcraft check to learn spells, effectively "crafting" them in their initial form. Using them could still require Concentration. That would jive with how epic magic is set up, also. That starts to get into issues of the unreliability of gaining abilities. Of course, if the mage is guaranteed their class ability spells, it would open the door to learning additional spells. I'm not sure how I'd want to treat that, though. Perhaps it could work like item creation, costing gold and XP for research? Wow, I just went on quite the tangent from your initial suggestion. :)
Edymnion 03-23-05, 11:30 AM	Maybe risk lash-back damage? Spellcraft checks against DCs to cast spells, and then a Concentration check against the same DC, where you take 1 point of subdual damage for every point you miss the DC by on the Concentrate check?
lostone 03-23-05, 12:01 PM	Maybe risk lash-back damage? Spellcraft checks against DCs to cast spells, and then a Concentration check against the same DC, where you take 1 point of subdual damage for every point you miss the DC by on the Concentrate check?That probably isn't severe enough. How are you figuring the DC of the spell? 10 + level of the spell? And I don't think the amount of subdual damage you have listed is severe enough if it is subdual. Maybe 2 or 3 points for every missed point on the check, or 1 point of lethal damage for every missed point (allow the spell to go off but you burn yourself with magical energies). Or if you want to be really severe, if they fail the check they take 1 point of temporary constitution (or some other attribute) damage for each level of the spell, so screwing up a Time stop could result in 9 temporary damage, would be most devestating if the damage is to the primary spellcasting attribute, but constitution could be lethal :D. But 1 point of subdual for every missed point at higher levels is just going to be a slap on the wrist, since every spellcaster using this system will max out the concentration skill ranks. If you make it severe, that will make it more logical for magic to be rare and mysterious, but those few individuals who master it will be fearsome.
Talmariel 03-23-05, 12:02 PM	Two checks to do one action, though? I'd sooner scrap the idea of skill-based casting, honestly. Looking at epic spellcasting, it simply grants a number of epic spell slots. I might work with that model, and grant a number of castings per day. It might make things feel more like spell-like abilities. Of course, that basically turns it into spell slots again, where I'm just re-writing spells themselves. Hmm. I can't tell if that's bothersome or preferrable. I guess the catch here is that I'm not working with spell levels any longer. Some spells will have requirements, which limits their availability. If casting is based on a skill check, metamagic would necessarily simply raise the casting DC. I'd probably include the sorcerer rule that it raises the casting time, as well. I'm thinking about how one of the kensai's class abilities works (Complete Warrior). It's also set up on a Concentration check, where each subsequent use per day raises the DC. Initially, I thought it might be too much bookkeeping to tally the use of each spell, but it wouldn't be that bad really. You'd have a seperate sheet of paper with each spell written on one side, and every time you cast a spell you put a tally mark beside it. Count them up each time you try to cast again to find your DC modifier. That would limit spell use in a fairly reasonable manner, for sure. Here's another thought, which relates to learning spells. Instead of learning new spells with a Spellcraft DC, you could alter how your existing spells perform. You could modify a spell you know for greater duration, range, lower casting time, area, etc. This presents two options. Option one, you can research and alter your spells like item creation, where it requires several hours, gp and XP, and creates a permanent alteration. Option two, you can alter spells on the fly, like using metamagic (or perhaps only through metamagic), and it requires a second skill check with Spellcraft but no gp or XP.
lostone 03-23-05, 12:15 PM	Another option which would require a lot of work (and I seem to recall something similar to this in some other game but I don't remember what): Have a handful of basic spellcasting feat trees for each type of spell. Say Lesser Evocation (Fire) allows casting spells up to 3d6 damage (max 1d6 per level), Intermediate Evocation (Fire) allows casting spells up to 8d6 damage, greater allows 15d6, master evocation allows 20d6. Then have another for mobility (lesser allows levitation, intermediate allows short range teleport like dimension door, greater allows teleport, and master allows teleport without error). Spirit for charm/dominate type effects, divination, etc. This way you'd have EXTREMELY specialized spellcasters with maybe two maxed out feat trees and dabbling in others, throw some level requirements on the intermediate through master feats. Using this you could do away with the spellcasting classes altogether and characters could use their feats every three levels to pick up some minor spellcasting, and maybe assign some lesser and intermediate feats to add in to bonus feats for classes, so a fighter could take Lesser and Intermediate Buffing so they can cast bulls strength and cats grace on themself, etc. It would take some work and be completely rewriting the magic system, but could give a whole new feel to the game.
Talmariel 03-23-05, 03:37 PM	I don't think there's a need for spell trees, but I definately think ability damage could have a place. It jives with Call of Cthulu magic, and vile and sanctified magic, all of which have the flavor of what I'm after. I might keep things centered on Strength damage, so it's not lethal, but clearly has a physical toll. I'd probably toss in a note that any time you're suffering Strength drain from overuse of a spell, you're also fatigued. I'd probably allow at least the first use of a spell for free, but after that you get his on any failed attempt to cast. I could offer double the penalties (double Strength damage and exhausted) to overcome a failed check, too, just in case you really need a spell to work. If not Strength, then I'd probably have each spell use an individual ability score. I'm leery of Constitution, only because of the potentially lethal results. If each spell hits a different ability, Constitution could apply to the biggest, most potent spells. Just to organize a bit, my current thoughts are to cast with Concentration, work metamagic through Spellcraft, and do ritual magic with Knowledge (arcana). Each spell will have 1 use per day, and each use afterwards requires a Concentration check (DC 10 + caster level + 1 for each additional use per day). Caster level becomes a very ephemeral thing, scaling to suit the needs of the situation. It would often behoove casters to lower their effective caster level for unopposed situations, lending to the idea of restrained power. Save DCs to resist spells are equal to 10 + 1/2 caster level + casting ability modifier. I'd still like some kind of option where a caster can devote multiple spell slots to a single spell, mastering it somehow. Perhaps if each spell slot devoted to a single spell doubled its free uses per day? Initially it's not very potent, but if a caster really devotes themselves they'll have quite a reliable ability. Perhaps instead of doubling, a second selection of a spell makes it 3/day, and a third could make it at will. It would lend itself to the feeling of spell-like abilities, at least. If I maintain that certain spells will have requirements to gain, it shouldn't be a major balance issue, since the most potent spells couldn't become at will until quite high levels. I haven't dicussed it in detail much, but I'm thinking of a very simple expansion to masterwork items, specifically armor and weapons. Any item can have a total of three masterwork elements. Armor masterwork elements can do any of the following: raise the armor bonus by +1, raise the max Dex bonus by +1, reduce the armor check penalty by +1, reduce the arcane spell failure by 5%. Weapon masterwork elements can do any of the following: +1 to attack rolls, +1 to damage rolls, increase the critical threat by 1. I'll also be including all the normal special materials (mithral, adamantine, darkwood, dragonhide, etc.). I'm also considering for weapons that you could devote two masterwork elements to do one of the following: raise the damage die by one type, increase the critical multiplier by 1. Those last two are almost certainly worth more than a single masterworking, but I'm unsure if that would unbalance things or not to include them at all. I thought about allowing two masterwork elements to drop armor by one weight category, too, but that becomes tricksy with mithral. Can anyone say Light full-plate? Of course, I've seen people doing cartwheels in real full-plate (thank you, History Channel's Conquest - where did you go?), so it's not that much of a stretch.
JohnSnow 03-25-05, 04:32 PM	Sounds like Talmariel, Edymnion and I are all working on similar ideas. Maybe we can bounce ideas around. I'll contribute the same thing I usually do when "Low Magic" discussions come up. If you haven't yet, I STRONGLY suggest looking into Fantasy Flight Games' Midnight campaign setting. There's going to be a 2nd Edition coming out soon, but if you can't wait, all the info I mention is in the core book released a few years ago. Here's the basics of what the Midnight designers did to the D&D magic system. 1. Midnight does away with ALL the PC classes that cast spells. No wizards, clerics, druids, bards, sorcerers, paladins or rangers. 2. Spellcasting becomes feat-based, so that any character can learn spells. Spellcasting now requires a feat (Magecraft) to be able to cast spells, and a feat (Spellcasting {school}) for each school of magic. Two schools (conjuration and evocation) are broken into Lesser and Greater schools. The most "powerful" (and flavorfully problematic) spells are moved into the Greater schools. For instance, all the damage dealing evocations (even Magic Missile) are Greater Evocation spells. In Midnight, you have to be 7th level minimum to learn this school. 3. Spellcasting comes in 3 distinct "flavors," based on what ability score "powers" your casting. Spiritual channelers use wisdom, hermetic channelers are INT-based, and I think you can figure out what ability Charismatic channelers use. 4. Spells take spell energy to cast equal to their level, so a 1st level spell costs 1 spell energy. Casters get spell energy equal to their spellcasting ability score modifier. When a character runs out of spell energy, they can cast spells by causing spell damage. Spell damage is temporary CON damage equal to the spell energy cost. It goes away with a good night's rest. Rituals and talismans exist which lower the spell energy cost. Some specialized classes also get extra spell energy. 5. Casting level = character level. The spell energy system automatically means dedicated spellcasters are better spellcasters. Characters can learn spells of a level equal to one-half their character level (rounded down). So you have to be 2nd level to cast 1st level spells, 4th for 2nd, and so on. 5. Learning new spells, beyond the few you learn from the spellcasting feats (or from certain classes - see below), takes XP. There is only one spell list, and it has all the spells from the core rules that are not exclusive to the Cleric and Paladin lists. Their level is equal to their spell level on the available lists. Oh, all spells are arcane, so they are ALWAYS subject to spell failure. 6. A new class is created (Channeler) that is particularly adept at spellcasting. The Channeler is based loosely on the core Bard, with Medium BAB, 6 skill points per level, bonus magic feats, a granted ability (which depends on the "flavor" of channeler) and improved "facility" with magic. Specifically, Channelers get free access to a few schools of magic (as they level up), spell energy equal to their class level, a couple of free "spells known" every level, and reduced XP costs to learn spells. Characters with more levels in Channeler than any other class can add "1" to their character level before dividing by 2 to determine the level of spell they can cast. Or, put another way, Channeler-types round UP instead of down. So a Channeler (or primarily Channeler) can cast 2nd-level spells at level 3, rather than waiting until level 4. I've been working on adding spells from the WoT game and Oriental Adventures. I'm personally not sold on the notion of the 9 (+2) spellcasting "schools," but I'm not sure I have the energy to recreate 10-12 schools of magic. Fantasy Flight also recognizes the dependence of the D&D game on magic for balance and has a few chapters addressing that and a suggestion for "heroic paths" that change the feel of the characters. Various members of the Midnight community have adopted the Unearthed Arcana variant of healing spells converting lethal damage to non-lethal to better preserve the "flavor." Since the Wheel of Time game did this to, I'd say it's a natural "control" on healing that takes the videogame feel out of it. For the record, my group's been using this variant for a year in our standard D&D game, and it works great. Also, the Midnight designers played with the notion of having the spellcasting (after your energy is gone) do subdual damage, but abandoned it because of the circular problem with restoration. The easy answer here is to eliminate the spell restoration, or make its fatigue-washing rule work the way the WoT weave renew does, where it wears off. You could also institute some form of check or subdual save for casting "too much" and a concentration check for casting (per the WoT game again). One thing I'm definitely stealing from the WoT game is the "scaling" of spells, so that healing is just ONE spell, which can be cast to varying levels of effect. I think I'm going to do the same thing to the damage spells (per WoT, XPH, and the spell point system rules in Unearthed Arcana). Since a lot of this stuff is very "elemental" based, I've started thinking about pulling some ideas from The Codex Alera Volume I: The Furies of Calderon by Jim Butcher. Essentially, all the residents of Alera are bonded to "furies" (elementals). While Alera is nominally high magic (since EVERYONE has spell like abilities), there's some interesting ideas there.