Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zylo_drizzt Jul 16, 2008 17:55:28	One of the other players is playing a rouge. But, and here is the kicker, he is going to try to play without magic. He is very religious so divine and magic is out. Is there anything he can do to keep up with the rest of the party without this power called magic items? He does not have internet access to ask this question himself so I am asking it for him. And if you went to the DM thread you will find a similair post And yes it is the same fellow and I am the same poster.
#2 hazard84 Jul 16, 2008 18:26:49	Not all "magic" items are really magic. Have a look at the Holy Avenger. Its a magic weapon per the rules, but fluffwise its a divine weapon. Edit: Read you other post with the same topic. Well if his religion forbids the use of magic in a fictional game, then give him Items that are simply of really high quality. (So the best he would get, would be a simple +6 weapon. Not magic, just really well made. I did that with a scale mail.)
#3 zylo_drizzt Jul 16, 2008 18:30:43	yeah against divine things as well. sorry I did not clerify
#4 Novacat Jul 16, 2008 20:42:43	I would handle it one of three ways: 1. Allow him to play such a character, without changing anything. He can choose not to use magic items if he wants, but he must suffer the consequences for it. Personally, I would throw in the occasional snarky comment whenever his character did something sinful (which tends to be frequent in D&D). 2. Tell him that I cannot accept players into my game that cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality. I have enough players already (personally I don't like running more than 6 players anyways), and I foresee his character being disruptive. 3. I love a good argument, so I might try to persuade him to see that he's being silly, which he is. PM me and I can give you some talking points. I've been through this argument many a time before.
#5 bobbidog Jul 16, 2008 21:06:57	If you're playing 3.5, have him consider the vow of poverty feat. It prevents him from using/owning magic items, but gives him some fairly powerful benefits in return.
#6 meryule Jul 17, 2008 6:45:24	Why not just fix it with a cosmetic change like using the stats for the magic items like normal but changing their names and giving them a different explanation for how they are special... Liiike, maybe a long sword +1 isn't magic, it's just really well made, or... that character comes from a plane of existence where magic doesn't exist but where they've managed to make up for it by using science, or psychic powers, or... anything. Not the best idea... but... your DM could come up with something more creative! It's not as if magic is actually magic... If he's uncomfortable with the explanation that things happen because of magic... Give him a gasoline-powered flaming long sword! lol You wouldn't even have to change the rules, just the flavor, really. May seem a little cheesy but at least your friend could play with you and I guess that's what's important.
#7 bodyknock Jul 17, 2008 7:00:31	I think all of the rogue powers are non-magical, so he should be ok there. As far as using magic items, change the phrase "magic items" to "high power items" and allow them to be sci-fi high-tech instead of magical. A +1 sword is extremely sharp and well balanced. +1 armor is made of extremely durable material. A weapon that does lightning damage basically has a built-in taser, etc. Healing potions aren't magical, they're just basically very potent drugs, and items that let you use healing surges are giving you adrenaline boosts. Residuum isn't magical; it's just a very potent and flexible form of matter that holds a lot of chemical or nuclear energy. Then when you're stocking the items in your adventures as a DM, make the ones the rogue is most likely to use "high tech" instead of "magic". Also, allow someone who knows the Enchant Magic Item ritual to create high-tech items that simulate magic items at the same cost, and change the name of the ritual to Create Powerful Item. Likewise change the name of the ritual Disenchant Magic Item to Deconstruct Powerful Item. In the end you'll end up with a campaign whose game mechanics are almost identical to 4th edition, but with more of a Final Fantasy or Shadowrun type flavor where you're mixing ultra high-tech and magic in the world.
#8 Simonides Jul 17, 2008 23:08:03	I would handle it one of three ways: 1. Allow him to play such a character, without changing anything. He can choose not to use magic items if he wants, but he must suffer the consequences for it. Personally, I would throw in the occasional snarky comment whenever his character did something sinful (which tends to be frequent in D&D). 2. Tell him that I cannot accept players into my game that cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality. I have enough players already (personally I don't like running more than 6 players anyways), and I foresee his character being disruptive. 3. I love a good argument, so I might try to persuade him to see that he's being silly, which he is. PM me and I can give you some talking points. I've been through this argument many a time before. Wow. Just wow. This is certainly an informed and inclusive attitude. Anyway... The D&D Podcast Mailbag episodes might have the answer. There was a question about running low/no magic campaigns. He has chosen a martial character, so no trouble there. According to the mailbag: The powers/properties of magic weapons aren't really figured into the math of the game. They are just gravy. The only real progression to worry about is the enhancement bonuses. So, you can just include a progression of bonuses to attacks and damage, AC, and other defenses. For instance, by 6th level, everyone has a +1 weapon/implement, +1 armor, and a +1 neck item. So, say, at level 2nd, everyone gets a +1 to attacks and damage across the board and +1d6 on a crit. At 4th level, everyone gets a +1 bonus to AC. At 6th level, everyone gets +1 to all other defenses. You can work out a good progression looking at the magic item tables. If you can get everyone to agree, strip off the enhancement bonuses to all items. A magic weapon simply gives powers/properties. That way, the people who like magic items get the powers/properties, but everyone is even in terms of numerical bonuses. Otherwise, let the rogue player use the progression and let everyone else find items organically. That shouldn't change too much in terms of balance. In either case, I would recommend that you remove one of the magic item treasure parcels at each level to represent the fact that you have one less player in the group gaining magic items (remove parcel 3, for instance, for a 5 person group). Otherwise, you might find game balance affected. To really balance it perfectly, you should also remove one tenth of the gold from the treasure parcels at all levels (remove 72 gold at first level, 104 gold at second, and so on). The rogue won't be spending gold on magic items and won't have much else to spend on, so he might give gold to the party so they can load up on magic items. At the same time, you don't want to leave him broke. The one tenth isn't perfect and still will allow some minor magical item power creep if the rogue is generous. If he is stingy, it'll slow down magic item gain a little bit. You may have to see how it works after a couple of levels and adjust. It all depends on how finely you want to tune game balance. Frankly, just removing the one magic item (parcel 3 at each level) and letting the rogue use a progression for attacks/damage, AC, and other defenses should be just fine.
#9 DrWorm Jul 18, 2008 3:59:20	I will be the Jerk here and say what a lot of us are thinking: Be firm. Perhaps I am being intolerant here, but your player is being a hypocrate. He is playing in a game where magical creatures are a reality, and polytheism is also a reality, but he balks at things called "magical" even if they are "holy" in-game. I am sorry, and I am a religious person (Jewish), but I can pretend; and when I pretend I do not have a problem really placing my character in the world, I don't just pick and choose. If the player is willing to play in a world that is not Judeo-Christian it is just as much of a "sin" to pretend there is more than one god as it is to pretend that magic exists. If your player will not suspend enough disbelief to call the weapons "holy", then he is just being difficult and should be dropped.
#10 Novacat Jul 18, 2008 4:02:19	I will be the Jerk here and say what a lot of us are thinking: Be firm. Perhaps I am being intolerant here, but your player is being a hypocrate. He is playing in a game where magical creatures are a reality, and polytheism is also a reality, but he balks at things called "magical" even if they are "holy" in-game. I am sorry, and I am a religious person (Jewish), but I can pretend; and when I pretend I do not have a problem really placing my character in the world, I don't just pick and choose. If the player is willing to play in a world that is not Judeo-Christian it is just as much of a "sin" to pretend there is more than one god as it is to pretend that magic exists. If your player will not suspend enough disbelief to call the weapons "holy", then he is just being difficult and should be dropped. Exactly.
#11 jutter Jul 18, 2008 6:24:52	As a DM, I wouldn't make it my problem. Make adventures as usual. Award treasure as usual. Let the players divide it amongst themselves, as usual. If he doesn't want any, that's unusual, but he's the only one that suffers from it. There is no reason to play favorites, just because he decides to handicap his character. But there's no reason to be snarky either. Live and let live. If you even start the discussion about religion, you'll lose. If you lose the discussion, you have lost. If you win the discussion, chances are he leaves or holds a grudge and you still would have lost. Are you sure he isn't doing this because he wants to be disruptive? I can understand people who don't want to play D&D because of religion. But simply refusing just one part of the game, that seems like a very specific religion to me.
#12 squarecircle Jul 18, 2008 9:27:13	As a DM, I wouldn't make it my problem. Make adventures as usual. Award treasure as usual. Let the players divide it amongst themselves, as usual. If he doesn't want any, that's unusual, but he's the only one that suffers from it. There is no reason to play favorites, just because he decides to handicap his character. But there's no reason to be snarky either. Live and let live. If you even start the discussion about religion, you'll lose. If you lose the discussion, you have lost. If you win the discussion, chances are he leaves or holds a grudge and you still would have lost. Are you sure he isn't doing this because he wants to be disruptive? I can understand people who don't want to play D&D because of religion. But simply refusing just one part of the game, that seems like a very specific religion to me. No, it seems more like a specific way of interpreting something in said religion. Personally, if I were DM'ing, I'd find some kind of workaround so I could play with a friend, assuming I wanted to keep him as a friend. I suppose that makes me a "generous DM."
#13 drmorganes Jul 18, 2008 11:46:17	I will be the Jerk here and say what a lot of us are thinking: Be firm. Perhaps I am being intolerant here, but your player is being a hypocrate. He is playing in a game where magical creatures are a reality, and polytheism is also a reality, but he balks at things called "magical" even if they are "holy" in-game. I am sorry, and I am a religious person (Jewish), but I can pretend; and when I pretend I do not have a problem really placing my character in the world, I don't just pick and choose. If the player is willing to play in a world that is not Judeo-Christian it is just as much of a "sin" to pretend there is more than one god as it is to pretend that magic exists. If your player will not suspend enough disbelief to call the weapons "holy", then he is just being difficult and should be dropped. /agree If this person is unable or unwilling to separate a fantasy game from his real-world beliefs, you have more issues to deal with than simply having to tweak the flavor of your game. Jutter makes wonderful points on why engaging in debate is not a good idea. Discussing religion and politics constructively requires a very open mind and a willingness to agree to disagree. It is rare that two people with contrasting (dare I say conflicting?) views on those subjects are each in possession of both. Personally, I'd take this person aside. Gently explain that is IS just a game, that you appreciate his reasoning, and would never ask him to compromise his beliefs just to hang out. Offer to do something else with him as a friend, and suggest that perhaps this isn't a good match.
#14 Zherog Jul 18, 2008 12:30:17	As is often the case, I agree with the Good Doctor. However, if you're intent on playing the game with him anyway, there's two very good suggestions in this thread: A) Vow of Poverty and B) it's not magic, just more powerful.
#15 jutter Jul 19, 2008 3:01:54	No, it seems more like a specific way of interpreting something in said religion. That's a possibility as well. Just to make certain: I don't accuse this guy of being a Steve. I just mentioned the possibility that he might be a Steve. Anyways, the OP knows this player personally and can probably (hopefully) dismiss that possibility at once.
#16 Simonides Jul 19, 2008 11:50:19	I am surprised and saddened by the responses above. D&D is supposed to be a social game and it is supposed to be about having fun with friends. I simply cannot believe the number of 'exclude him' and 'he's an idiot' responses. You do not have to understand another person's religious beliefs or opinions to respect them. This is just elitism and intolerance. This player has a set of beliefs that are important to him. He is willing to play - he wants to play - but he is asking the DM to make a concession for him and him alone. There are many ways to make the concession without ruining the game. He is not even trying to force his beliefs on anyone else. He is trying to compromise so that he can join in the fun and asking the DM to meet him halfway. Is this how people treat friends, these days? I really am starting to feel old. Frankly, I'd rather let this guy into my campaign and make an adjustment than to play under some of the DMs posted above. After all, what if they decide at some point that I am an idiot for my beliefs and kick me out of the game.
#17 DrWorm Jul 19, 2008 12:19:14	I am surprised and saddened by the responses above. D&D is supposed to be a social game and it is supposed to be about having fun with friends. I simply cannot believe the number of 'exclude him' and 'he's an idiot' responses. You do not have to understand another person's religious beliefs or opinions to respect them. This is just elitism and intolerance. This player has a set of beliefs that are important to him. He is willing to play - he wants to play - but he is asking the DM to make a concession for him and him alone. There are many ways to make the concession without ruining the game. He is not even trying to force his beliefs on anyone else. He is trying to compromise so that he can join in the fun and asking the DM to meet him halfway. Is this how people treat friends, these days? I really am starting to feel old. Frankly, I'd rather let this guy into my campaign and make an adjustment than to play under some of the DMs posted above. After all, what if they decide at some point that I am an idiot for my beliefs and kick me out of the game. The DM has implied that he has tried to make a concession in the form of "Holy" items and such as would be granted by a god. If even this is not acceptable then he is being inflexable. He is saying I want to play, but only by my rules. VoP is an idea, but a) is not possible for 4e if that is what is being played, and b) is a bit odd for a rogue IMO. I guess exclusion is harsh, but I think the DM is justified in only flexing so much. I would allow extreme quality weapons and armor, but only to a limited extent. A +1 extreme qulaity or perhaps +2, but that is as far as I would go. Beyond that I would not offer mudane replacments for the magical gear the rest of the party is getting. Again, I still think the player is being a hypocrate by pretending to be a character in a pagan world and accepting that, but will not touch magic even if it is Holy in nature.
#18 Simonides Jul 19, 2008 18:02:18	Again, I still think the player is being a hypocrate by pretending to be a character in a pagan world and accepting that, but will not touch magic even if it is Holy in nature. But that is really not anyone's judgment to make. The player has the right to his beliefs, whatever they may be. You don't even know anything about why the player feels the way he does. The OP didn't present all of the facts. All that matters is that it makes sense to him and that he is a human being. For all you know, the guy is has his beliefs, but he really wants to play with his friends, so he went to his local religious leader/mentor and asked for an opinion. So, the guy may already be compromising. I had a friend years ago who did just that - and his mentor said that it was fine to play provided his character did not worship or show reverence to any made up gods. I don't pretend to understand anyone else's beliefs, but I have enough of a knowledge of human fallibility to realize that my beliefs might be wrong, and that someone else may have it right. The DM has implied that he has tried to make a concession in the form of "Holy" items and such as would be granted by a god. If even this is not acceptable then he is being inflexable. He is saying I want to play, but only by my rules. VoP is an idea, but a) is not possible for 4e if that is what is being played, and b) is a bit odd for a rogue IMO. I guess exclusion is harsh, but I think the DM is justified in only flexing so much. I would allow extreme quality weapons and armor, but only to a limited extent. A +1 extreme qulaity or perhaps +2, but that is as far as I would go. Beyond that I would not offer mudane replacments for the magical gear the rest of the party is getting. The trouble with the concession that the DM proposed is that it doesn't address the issue that the player has, namely: for whatever reason, he would like his character not to use any form of magic at all. He is not being inflexible, the DM failed to respond to his real issue. And the issue need not be game breaking or create that much stress. Remove one treasure parcel. Every few levels, give the character a blanket bonus to attacks/damage, AC, and other defenses, in line with the progression for magic items. It creates almost no fuss at all and lets the guy play. I just can't fathom attacking a person's personal beliefs, kicking them out of a game, and/or ruining a friendship instead of adding a +1 on a character sheet every couple of levels and putting one less treasure in a dungeon. As for the concept of the DM only flexing so far - a DM who wants players should be ready to flex pretty far for his players, provided he is not ruining the game experience for the other players. Why shouldn't a DM bend to make the game experience better for anyone at the table? "My world, my rules," DMs are missing a key facet of the point of the game.
#19 DrWorm Jul 19, 2008 18:50:54	Remove one treasure parcel. Every few levels, give the character a blanket bonus to attacks/damage, AC, and other defenses, in line with the progression for magic items. It creates almost no fuss at all and lets the guy play. I just can't fathom attacking a person's personal beliefs, kicking them out of a game, and/or ruining a friendship instead of adding a +1 on a character sheet every couple of levels and putting one less treasure in a dungeon. All well and good, but how is this justified? As the player raises in level and you give the character bonuses to make him equal with his party who all have +3 weapons of elemental damage, and +4 armor, and rings of resistance; how is his super-human ability defined? Is he just really strong? Even and 18 stretches the bounds of believablity without magical concessions. Perhaps I am being a cumugeon here, but I want some reason for this super-human being. What about when the rest of the party get ambushed and all their gear is taken? The non-magic player gets to be superman and the rest sit back and watch. I do not want to seem intollerant here, Judaism is at it heart religion that does not exclude other faiths, but it just seems like he is picking and choosing with no consistant stand. You are right I assumed we were talking about a christ based faith that the person followed, and if I am wrong I am sorry. It is the only faith base I can think of that frequently defines mysticism as wrong. Ultimatly we need much more information before any of us can make an informed opinion.
#20 jutter Jul 19, 2008 19:01:54	Stating that he can play the game that's being offered does not make one a lousy DM, a bad friend, or an anti-social person. That's simply a choice being made about how far you're willing to adjust yourself for someone else's believes. A friendship that doesn't survive that, wasn't worth the name 'friendship' in the first place. Different people draw a different line. That should be respected as well.
#21 shinkirou Jul 19, 2008 21:03:26	If he doesn't want to use magic items dont force him. He'll be a little worse off than everyone else, but thats his choice to make. Though if you want to give him something to keep up, give him a weapon made out of materials that have a natural elemental effect or something. Have a dagger made of "Cold Steel" thats naturally extremely cold and that deals frost damage, and unlike a normal frost dagger isn't magical so it cant be turned on and off, regardless of what hes attacking. If all else fails, just let him be worse than everyone else.
#22 the_ragi Jul 19, 2008 22:28:45	It strikes me as ironic how the religious guy way to fit in that game is to roleplay an atheist.
#23 Simonides Jul 20, 2008 2:12:53	All well and good, but how is this justified? As the player raises in level and you give the character bonuses to make him equal with his party who all have +3 weapons of elemental damage, and +4 armor, and rings of resistance; how is his super-human ability defined? Is he just really strong? Even and 18 stretches the bounds of believablity without magical concessions. Perhaps I am being a cumugeon here, but I want some reason for this super-human being. What about when the rest of the party get ambushed and all their gear is taken? The non-magic player gets to be superman and the rest sit back and watch. I can see how this might chafe at some who look for some realism and consistency in their games. Personally, if it weren't just bonuses to attacks, defenses, and so on; I would be concerned about justifying it myself. But bonuses to die rolls are invisible to the characters. A fighter knows his relative ability with a sword, for instance, but he doesn't know he has a +12 to hit. We never learned what attack bonus Indiana Jones had with his whip. As for adventures in which the characters lose all of their equipment, given the system math assumptions about numerical bonuses, these aren't exactly encouraged to begin with. And yes, in those situations, the character would shine a bit. Considering that he won't have any cool magical item powers to use, I don't think this is awful anyway. But it is also easy enough, in that specific situation, to come up with an excuse. For instance, the party is captured and all their gear is taken temporarily. They have to escape without it. The non-magic item character could be inflicted with a disease at the same time, perhaps due to a reaction with the food the prisoners are served or something. A creative DM can figure some way to justify a temporary condition or reduction to balance things without making it look contrived. As for those who say 'just let him play and let him be worse off', well, I am not inclined to think that would be a good idea, if only because it smacks of punishing the guy for his beliefs instead of making a minor adjustment that satisfies his beliefs and still maintains game balance.
#24 Simonides Jul 20, 2008 2:18:41	It strikes me as ironic how the religious guy way to fit in that game is to roleplay an atheist. Not being religious myself, I also found that a bit funny. However, as I understand it, one of the main objections religious folk have with D&D is that it encourages them to play at worshiping gods aside from the player's actual, real life deity. Because D&D is essentially an escapist fantasy in which players imagine people they would want to be in the story, they are expressing a desire to worship a god other than their true god. Likewise with magical powers and witchcraft. It is not imagining the existence of such things, as I understand it, it is expressing a fantasy or desire to use them yourself. Again, I do not claim any knowledge or understanding, as these are not my beliefs. These are simply the things that have been explained to me over my years of DMing.
#25 hopeless Jul 20, 2008 7:03:46	One of the other players is playing a rouge. But, and here is the kicker, he is going to try to play without magic. He is very religious so divine and magic is out. Is there anything he can do to keep up with the rest of the party without this power called magic items? He does not have internet access to ask this question himself so I am asking it for him. And if you went to the DM thread you will find a similair post And yes it is the same fellow and I am the same poster. Simply point out that all magic items exist because of the permission of the god of magic so they're ALL divine whether they simulate arcane magic or not. Are you playing in the kingdoms of kalamar ? Because thats the only setting I know of where this has been applied and they went even further than this. Oh! Really? Well I guess if thats what he wants to do, let him just point out that he could just sell on the magic items rather than just let the rest of the party take his share but otherwise see where he wants to go with this.
#26 cmcf Jul 20, 2008 9:47:41	Who has the issue with magic the player or the character?
#27 zylo_drizzt Jul 21, 2008 9:03:30	It strikes me as ironic how the religious guy way to fit in that game is to roleplay an atheist. quoted for truth Who has the issue with magic the player or the character? The player has the issue magic so he has made a character that will not use magic. Have not been on for about a week. Thank you for all of the responses
#28 Zherog Jul 21, 2008 9:15:40	I had a thought on this overnight. I think you can get away in most cases using alchemy in place of magic. Just some examples: Instead of potions, he has herbs and other concoctions he uses. They cost the same as a potion, and they have the exact same effect. Instead of a +1 flaming shortsword, he spends time rubbing plants and other chemical concoctions on his blade. He soaks it in some liquid overnight. Again, these reagents cost the exact same thing as it would to buy the magic. I would make the flaming property, however, "always on" rather than something that can be turned on or off; I'd have the sheath specially treated to resist the burning property. Instead of +1 silent moves leather armor, again it's treated with alchemical agents to make the armor tougher. It's also very well oiled and maintained, thus granting the bonus to Move Silently. Basically, you'll hand-wave most of his items to say they're not magical, but rather alchemical in nature. How does the player feel about another character casting a spell on his character? For example, is he going to decline any healing from the cleric? That could be a problem...
#29 ethilrist Jul 21, 2008 10:54:26	Not being religious myself, I also found that a bit funny. However, as I understand it, one of the main objections religious folk have with D&D is that it encourages them to play at worshiping gods aside from the player's actual, real life deity. I've felt for a long time that the issue is actually that people are roleplaying characters who, when they pray for spells & divine intervention and powers and such, they get them. Guaranteed. As opposed to, say, the faithful in the real world. My interpretation of all of this: The job of the GM is to tell a story. The job of the players is to help the GM by roleplaying some of the characters in that story. The job of the game system is to help them all by (a) giving them a set of rules for stuff they don't know how to do (like, say, pick locks or use magic), and (b) keeping things consistent from one game to the next (so that a given weapon or skill or power is roughly the same throughout). Having a player who refuses to play his character as using magic is no more or less problematic than a player who refuses to play his character as a travelling serial killer, like most D&D PC's are. You will have a different story being told with this player than without him; the question is, can the story hold up with him in it? If so, great. However, don't go soft and change the game system so that he's using high-tech equipment rather than magic. It's a magical world. It's a world of fantasy. It may not be for him. His character doesn't want magic? He doesn't get magic. How does he survive? That's part of the story, innit?
#30 Kaganfindel Jul 21, 2008 12:43:01	Damned double post. BALEETED.
#31 Kaganfindel Jul 21, 2008 12:43:59	Have you asked him his position on being the recipient of arcane and divine spells cast by other players? The problem he presents to you as a DM is going to be a lot more pronounced if he refuses to accept healing and other magical effects cast by his teammates. Since he's not behaving in a manner that is logically consistent, it might be necessary to cover every situation you can imagine arising in the game beforehand.
#32 zylo_drizzt Jul 21, 2008 14:11:04	you know I have not asked him that but I think he would be willing to undergo this if it came from a nonmagical source but he might get healing from the cleric that will soon join. as for other effects I guess I will have to wait and see but if he does not then I guess the beneficial effects would fail to effect him.
#33 Zherog Jul 21, 2008 15:29:40	Zylo - is this a 3.5 game? If so, I strongly recommend you check out the Vow of Poverty in the Book of Exalted Deeds. It will make a lot of this discussion moot, since the character then won't be able to use magic items. Even if it's not an exact fit for his character concept, I'm sure it could be tweaked a little to fit whatever flavor he needs.
#34 zylo_drizzt Jul 21, 2008 16:48:31	Zylo - is this a 3.5 game? no, 4th
#35 lostdwarf Jul 21, 2008 16:48:53	To the OP: How old are you guys? Is this something that he is doing to keep parents happy? Many years ago, in high school, I gamed with someone who had very religious parents. They did not object to RPGs as a whole, just ones that had characters who used magic, worshiped pagan gods, etc. If on the other hand you are adults, making your own decision, that I would sit down with him and gently but firmly explain that DnD involves make believe magic. If his religion truly requires him not to participate in this, than he probably should not play. Other characters will be using magic. The cleric will probably heal his character with magic, the wizard will cast magic spells at the group's enemies, magic may teleport the whole group from one part of the game world to the next. If he really finds that his faith does not allow room for this, even in make-beleive, then he should come over and hang out on the nights when the group is doing something other than DnD. BTW: How did we handle the guy in high school? Well, we lied our asses off. We always told his parents we were playing Gamma World, or something similar. (Gamma World may have been out of print by then. Maybe it was Star Frontiers?) I'm not suggesting that you lie to adults in positions of authority if you are under 18, but I am suggesting that there probably isn't really a way for him to be involved in a DnD game, and still be 100% magic free. You and he need to do as your ethical standards direct.
#36 jage Jul 21, 2008 22:21:53	Recently had a guy in a game who's Dwarf wouldn't go near a magic item, just thinking his axe and armor were of really superior quality. As a fellow player I tried to role play into this, distracting him whenever a detect magic spell was cast, etc. OOC he obviously knew, but it gave him the roleplaying without crippling his character. Just a thought.
#37 ChaoticGood Jul 21, 2008 23:05:06	You do not have to understand another person's religious beliefs or opinions to respect them. This is just elitism and intolerance. This player has a set of beliefs that are important to him. He is willing to play - he wants to play - but he is asking the DM to make a concession for him and him alone. Whoa, someone get a doctor before that bleeding heart gets all over the carpet... Firstly, Simonides, this isn't a problem of religious intolerance. The problem is that this person is psychologically incapable of telling the difference between fantasy and reality, and thus, should NOT be playing this game in the first place. People like this were partly responsible for the original pall that was cast on this game back in the early '80s. See this link for more information, particularly the sixth paragraph. Secondly, are you really gullible enough to believe that established religions have specific rules about what you can and can not do while playing Dungeons and Dragons? In all likelihood, his religion does not "forbid" him from using fictional magic items in a fictional fantasy game... This is his own bizarre personal interpretation of his religion, not a doctrine or dogma of his faith. And like many "bizarre personal interpretations of religion," this one falls into the "ridiculous and hypocritical" category. I would advise him to talk about this with his priest (rabbi, swami, religious mentor, etc.) and get back to you. Depending on which way his church leans, either your player will get straightened out by someone with a less ridiculous view of fiction, or he will forbidden to play "that Devil's game" altogether. Either way, the problem is out of your hands. If he still insists on playing the game his way, well... Vow of Poverty hasn't been printed for 4e yet (and likely never will), but I'm sure you could adapt it somehow?
#38 DrWorm Jul 22, 2008 0:32:25	I would advise him to talk about this with his priest (rabbi, swami, religious mentor, etc.) First I think you are being way harsh. Second the idea of telling every Rabbi I have ever met that I play D&D (and a few youth pastors as well) cracks me up. The answers would range from "So?" to "Can I get in on that?"
#39 trismagestus Jul 22, 2008 19:28:56	First I think you are being way harsh. Second the idea of telling every Rabbi I have ever met that I play D&D (and a few youth pastors as well) cracks me up. The answers would range from "So?" to "Can I get in on that?" What's that got to do with the quote? He's saying that if you have a problem with fictional magic, whether it's in games, books, movies or wherever, then perhaps you should talk to a religious mentor about the issue, and see if it is really a problem or if that's just your personal interpretation. Telling everyone that you play DnD isn't the issue.
#40 DrWorm Jul 23, 2008 11:00:05	What's that got to do with the quote? He's saying that if you have a problem with fictional magic, whether it's in games, books, movies or wherever, then perhaps you should talk to a religious mentor about the issue, and see if it is really a problem or if that's just your personal interpretation. Telling everyone that you play DnD isn't the issue. You misunderstood. I was simply reinforcing the idea that most religious mentors I have ever met would not have a problem with playing a fantasy roleplaying game. My experience is that it would almost be such a non-issue that they would wonder why you are asking. I was not suggesting telling everyone that you play.
#41 trismagestus Jul 23, 2008 22:23:01	You misunderstood. I was simply reinforcing the idea that most religious mentors I have ever met would not have a problem with playing a fantasy roleplaying game. My experience is that it would almost be such a non-issue that they would wonder why you are asking. I was not suggesting telling everyone that you play. Fair enough. But advising the player to ask his religious mentor about the church's view on roleplaying might correct some misconceptions the player has (or it may confirm them, depending on the church). Just because most people are reasonable about such things, doesn't mean that others aren't confused. So... yeah. He should ask his church about whether fictional magic is bad, or a 'real' threat to his conscience.
#42 Malicea Jul 23, 2008 22:43:48	But that is really not anyone's judgment to make. The player has the right to his beliefs, whatever they may be. You don't even know anything about why the player feels the way he does. The OP didn't present all of the facts. All that matters is that it makes sense to him and that he is a human being. For all you know, the guy is has his beliefs, but he really wants to play with his friends, so he went to his local religious leader/mentor and asked for an opinion. So, the guy may already be compromising. I had a friend years ago who did just that - and his mentor said that it was fine to play provided his character did not worship or show reverence to any made up gods. I don't pretend to understand anyone else's beliefs, but I have enough of a knowledge of human fallibility to realize that my beliefs might be wrong, and that someone else may have it right. Beliefs come with the social consequences of holding such beliefs. It sounds pretty and inclusive to talk about accomodating all of such, but then terrorism arises from belief as well, doesn't it? Reasonable attempts may be made to accomodate beliefs but a line has to be drawn somewhere. I don't think you can make the point to say we should all try to accept everyone's beliefs in everything, all the time. The point is that he chooses to interpret his beliefs in this way, and one social consequence of that might be that he just can't play D&D with that group.
#43 ChaoticGood Jul 24, 2008 2:49:09	I was simply reinforcing the idea that most religious mentors I have ever met would not have a problem with playing a fantasy roleplaying game. My experience is that it would almost be such a non-issue that they would wonder why you are asking. And that's exactly why I suggested that he talk to his religious mentor. In all likelihood, that person will set him straight about the difference between actual occult practices and purely fictional gameplay elements.
#44 dirtyfrank Jul 24, 2008 12:04:58	Zylo_Drizzt I have got an idea on how to get around some of the magic. Take items from star wars, d20 modern, and d20 future and revamp them for your D&D campaign. Try to make the items so that they increase in power as your friend's character grows in level. You should only need to give him a few items and you can call these items artifacts. Its just an idea.
#45 Simonides Jul 26, 2008 9:54:03	Beliefs come with the social consequences of holding such beliefs. It sounds pretty and inclusive to talk about accomodating all of such, but then terrorism arises from belief as well, doesn't it? Reasonable attempts may be made to accomodate beliefs but a line has to be drawn somewhere. I don't think you can make the point to say we should all try to accept everyone's beliefs in everything, all the time. The point is that he chooses to interpret his beliefs in this way, and one social consequence of that might be that he just can't play D&D with that group. You know... I don't often resort to throwing around the names of a logic fallacy as part of an argument. In fact, this is the first time I am going to do this. I have been strawmanned. I did not suggest you absolutely always have to accept every belief all the time. I certainly did not suggest that you should game with terrorists, and I certainly don't see how adjusting the rules to allow a player into your game would enable terrorism. We are talking about a game. A game played between friends and fellow human beings. A game played for fun. If your idea of fun is turning friends away because you don't share their beliefs and you'd much rather fight about it than make a compromise, or because you think you understand his beliefs better than he does, or because you think your own beliefs are superior, or because it is your duty to enforce the social consequences of other people's beliefs, or because you believe the rules have some sort of platonic reality and should not be altered for something so trivial as making people happy, so be it. Me? I like to play D&D with my friends and I like to include as many of my friends as possible. Anyway, I have said my piece and I will bow out of further conversation about this topic. Happy gaming, all.
#46 cal-vigu Jul 26, 2008 17:38:04	One of the other players is playing a rouge. But, and here is the kicker, he is going to try to play without magic. He is very religious so divine and magic is out. Is there anything he can do to keep up with the rest of the party without this power called magic items? He does not have internet access to ask this question himself so I am asking it for him. And if you went to the DM thread you will find a similair post And yes it is the same fellow and I am the same poster. So, you're the DM? How do the other players in the group feel about this - and the possible ramifications of adjusting things to this player's restrictions? More than anything else - I think thats an important question. The other responses have run a wide range; some involving adding/redefining some magical items as hi-tech devices, others suggesting that the player get mundane bonuses that equal the "magical" bonuses the others would get. Plus, there are the questions about how does this player will feel about his character possibly receiving "magical" spell effects (such as clerical healing). Is the idea that changes will be made that affect the entire game, and thus *all* the players? (such as introducing hi-tech items or just mundane items that are equal to "magical" item, and whether or not they can cast beneficial "magic" on him)? Are there going to be other difficulties about other things in the game - such as the physical violence to other living beings (ie: killing monsters and evil NPCs), or looting dead bodies, or venturing into burial crypts of minions of an evil deity? (I say this not knowing if those things might not also be conflicting with his belief) Or will the game be structured in such a way to avoid all such possible restrictions? (because thats certainly a possible course to take) I guess it comes down to this: is this about everyone in your group willingly accepting and accommodating changes to your game to include this player? (one would hope this is the scenario - even better if this is a new game starting up from ground zero) Or, is this a case where this player is going to need changes to the game that will ranckle the other players, causing disharmony? If everybody is on-board with these adjustments - it still sounds like you'll need to sit down and brainstorm a bit, think of what all things need to change, and how to deal with possible future conflicts with his faith that might come up. Things like being receptive to beneficial "magical" effects, etc. Its certainly doable - but I think there's a bunch more to consider than just "magic items." Here's my contribution to "non-magical" bonuses: perhaps his character has access to a whole "holistic" approach to mind/body/health and fighting. A fairly obscure, perhaps secret life-path that involves a very special and particular diet, training and meditation regimen, and as well as unique ways of un-armed and weapon fighting that grant him a more equal footing with the other, more traditional "magically enhanced" characters and items. ...of course, you might have to deal with one of the other characters asking "Hey - can he teach MY character some of that? If I could master that AND use my magic stuff, I'd be invincible!" ;)
#47 the_ubbergeek Jul 27, 2008 2:23:22	It may be better to have a serious talk with him about things as I said in that other thread, but... How about Psionic? it's stereotyped, 'hatin'ed as 'science-fiction import', and quite different in feel, so... (as much as coming from the self and not directly from a god or powerfull entity, also)
#48 stealthmarmot Jul 27, 2008 17:14:00	Let me get this straight, the OP is saying this guy is religious in REAL LIFE so he won't let his completly fantasy character use magic, including magic items. Yet his character will most likely be travelling with either a wizard, who probably uses magic to cut his eggs, or a cleric who worships a god that in this world would easily be considered heretical. Also depending on edition, he might be travelling with a divine knight (paladin), a raging chaotic berserker (barbarian), a druid (need I say more), a spellcaster whose great grandaddy engaged in fornication with a DRAGON (sorcerer), or someone who made a pact WITH DEMONS for POWER (warlock). And he himself is playing a rogue, a class whose entire premise is lying, cheating, backstabbing, poking in the tender areas, and sneaking around picking pockets! But no, him using magic items, THERES where he draws the line. This is fantasy! His character is going to be at a major disadvantage from everyone else because of this apparant desire to be Christian in a game where Christianity doesn't exist! Or maybe he is a Mac Glick: http://dndorks.com/comics/8%2f15%2f2005.aspx
#49 maulorn Jul 27, 2008 17:29:32	The whole DnD = paganism thing has always been retarded to me. I live in a small baptist town that is very narrow minded and though they may see DnD as paganism they will surely worship the pagan holidays such as Christmas. Why not let him bring his beliefs to his character...he doesnt have to worship one of the gods in the game...he could worship the one he holds dear...Would he have a problem roleplaying in the confines of his belief instead of being a atheist. On a side note...are you planning on having Dinosaurs in your campaign or is stuff concerning religion, demonism, etc going to be taboo and avoided?
#50 dirtyfrank Jul 27, 2008 17:45:17	And he himself is playing a rogue, a class whose entire premise is lying, cheating, backstabbing, poking in the tender areas, and sneaking around picking pockets! This is only with the evil or unaligned rogues. A good rogue does things like take from the rich and give to the poor (charity?), or spy on evil to unmask it. A good rogue is the hidden hero like batman. People may know he is around but don't see him or know his identity. I seriously think that a weapon like a light saber should end up in the campaign some how. Zylo_Drizzt could make it do damage like a short sword. Take Cal-ViGu's holistic approach so that the rouge becomes one with his weapon. The weapon could then sort of become more powerful as the rouge becomes more powerful. Such as it is = to a +1 weapon when the rogue is lvls 1-5, = to +2 when rouge is lvls 5-10, = to +3 when rogue is lvls 11-15 etc. The bonuses could be explained as part of the rouges training. It could act like a magical weapon in many ways, even though it is technology, and the weapon becomes more powerful as the rogue becomes more powerful as a sign of training and attuning ones self to his weapon. With this approach the rogue only needs one weapon throughout the whole campaign rather then finding some rare and exotic item in every dungeon. The light saber could have come through a portal that was connected to the Far Realm. Now the rogue needs the skills acrobatics, stealthy, insight, diplomacy, and perception. Now he would need psyonic powers and he would be set.
#51 mooncalf Aug 04, 2008 16:30:55	I don't really see a problem with the situation. He doesn't want his character to have or use magic items. Fair enough. More stuff for the other party members, while he'll get money and treasure instead. Yes, it will put him at a disadvantage later on, but that's his problem. He's made his bed, now he sleeps in it. And if the rest of the party has a problem with the guy who can't do his part because he's inefficient, then that's something they can deal with as they see fit. Personally, I don't see any reason to invent "nonmagic magic items" that he can have, for two reasons. First of all, I hate when the DM ganks the rules just to make concessions for someone who just has to have special treatment. It's not fair to the others. I never stand for it when I DM. Equal rules for all. Second, it ruins the whole idea. What's the point of forsaking magic items if you then rack up piles of them with "really non-magical" stickers over them? Magic has always, to my eyes, been an integral part of D&D. It's there on every level. There are plenty of other RPGs where there is no magic, or where magic is a much lesser part. Those are excellent for exploring a non-magic adventure. D&D, not so much, because magic is almost expected. But if a player wants to play like that, he can. It's easy, just don't use magic items. That doesn't mean you have to make up special rules to compensate for his self-inflicted limitation. Besides, if he wants to play his character without magical items, isn't it a bit rude to then try to foist pseudo-magical items on him?