[3.5] Low level, low magic, low wealth

[weenie]

In a month or so I'm planning to start a low.. well, pretty much everything campaign with a few friends. The game will follow the E6 rules regarding character advancement and will be a sandbox type game, but I'd like to add some other elements into the game to make it feel even more gritty.

The first step I've taken in this direction is to make all weapons and armor cost 1/10th of what they usually cost, but also give players way less money, which means that starvation is an actual threat for them, even as they level up.

Has anyone ever played E6 and has some good suggestions on how to make the game feel like a real medieval world with one or two supernatural things here and there?

[Eldariel]

I definitely like modified Wound Point/Vitality Point (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm) system in a grittier adventure; sure, it makes immediate death less likely, but it also maintains the "one hit KO" risk regardless of your HP total and enemy level.

If you want it to be really gritty, make it automatic death on reaching 0 WP and don't give VP for the first level (WP represent those). Our playgroup uses limb damage rules; that is, whenever you take WP damage, roll on a chart to see whether, and which body part takes damage (and the character suffers appropriate penalties; either give each bodypart some amount of WP or just say "It took damage, it's gone").

Also, another nice added rule we've found is that at ½ your total VP, you become Fatigued and at 0 VP, you become Exhausted (as opposed to becoming Fatigued at 0 VP like normal); this represents how bare misses and fighting fatigues you and means damage has a tangible effect on your combat capability.


Another big thing, to the other direction, is making for more different qualities of items. Basically, instead of magical base enhancements, we use different levels of craftmanship.

This means that the Hattori Hanzo sword is truly superior to your average katana of mw. quality. It also means getting such incredibly crafted weapons is extremely difficult and expensive, but just them existing gives the equipment-side a nice whirl (that's otherwise lost without magic items).

[weenie]

Oooh, the wound point system! Great idea, I'll definitely use it! The limb damage rules are nice too! Did you create the table yourself or can I find it in a book?

[Eldariel]

Oooh, the wound point system! Great idea, I'll definitely use it! The limb damage rules are nice too! Did you create the table yourself or can I find it in a book?

We're using a homebrew table. It's still crude at the moment; we're using a percentile die to figure out what happens. Gotta iron out the numbers for each.

[Doomboy911]

You could have it so a few of the monsters you kill return as ghosts. Seems like it would make it a bit more challenging and a tad realistic.

[penbed400]

To hit system based off of a d20, courtesy of the Runequest system, you could use this chart for your game.

For Melee attacks:

01-04 Right leg
05-08 Left leg
09-11 Abdomen
12 Chest
13-15 Right arm
16-18 Left arm
19-20 Head


For Ranged attacks:

01-03 Right leg
04-06 Left leg
07-10 Abdomen
11-15 Chest
16-17 Right arm
18-19 Left arm
20 Head

Then when people get wounded have them get circumstance minuses on all of the rolls that they would make as logically deduced by the damaged area. (e.g. Right leg gets a minus to Jump, Swim etc., Right arm gets a minus to sleight of hand, jump, Head gets a minus to listen, spot, etc.) Add flavor if you want, like if they get wounded in the head it was a sharp blow against the helm causing you to feel stunned. After the battle you seem to hear a quiet ringing. (-2 listen) If you wish though.

As for making it feel like more of a medieval world, make dwarves, elves, halflings rare in the area. It will make roleplaying interesting if one of the party members is one of these races. A level 1 wizard coming to town is a rare occassion and cause for much excitement. Have everything feel like myths, there is always a doubter in the corner while the man is talking of evil creatures who says that it's all just poppycock. Most encounters should be bandits, natural animals, you just want to put a touch of magic in there every now and then.

[mabriss lethe]

just remember that surprising classes are more powerful in an E6 game.
Examples

Bards: actually wind up being potentially better enchanters and illusionists than sorcerers, since they gain access to some bread n butter enchantment and illusion spells as 2nds instead of 3rds, can cast in armor, and have a moderately good BAB for that level of play.

Soulknife: the often maligned soulknife is...well... pretty nasty in E6. an assortment of free magic weapons in a low magic game? That's a pretty big advantage in the type of game you're playing. They don't get much else, but being the party jedi isn't a terrible role.

[weenie]

Ok, how about this idea then: Cure X wounds spells only heal Vitality points, but are not strong enough to heal wound points. This would make the heal skill useful and being wounded in a fight would cause actual consequences instead of just requiring the cleric to cast a few spells on you. Oh, and if wounds are not properly tended you get worse. This would get rid of the "oh no, they stabbed me! better go to sleep!" mechanic.

This would make combat way more lethal, but it would also make it more realistic. What do you think?

[Eldariel]

Ok, how about this idea then: Cure X wounds spells only heal Vitality points, but are not strong enough to heal wound points. This would make the heal skill useful and being wounded in a fight would cause actual consequences instead of just requiring the cleric to cast a few spells on you. Oh, and if wounds are not properly tended you get worse. This would get rid of the "oh no, they stabbed me! better go to sleep!" mechanic.

This would make combat way more lethal, but it would also make it more realistic. What do you think?

If you're gonna include Cure-spells (I thought you were going low-magic), this is a borderline must. WP system includes a variant for this; Cure-spells restore the die size in VP and the bonus in WP. But not restoring WP at all makes for a better gritty experience and means that being wounded is actually more than just few spells.

Alternatively, you could give Cure-spells an expensive material component and run them as +xd8 VP and +X WP. That'd limit their use, while still making it possible to magically restore WP.

[mabriss lethe]

a harsher healing.

Healing spells could actually work by exacting some other cost. dealing equal parts strength and dex damage to restore wound points, leaving a character, while healed of injury, weakened and in need of at least a few days of recuperation.

or something along those lines..

[Zeful]

a harsher healing.

Healing spells could actually work by exacting some other cost. dealing equal parts strength and dex damage to restore wound points, leaving a character, while healed of injury, weakened and in need of at least a few days of recuperation.

or something along those lines..

If you're going to do that, just tack the following line on to every spell that cures HP: The caster of this spell takes 1 point of non-lethal damage for every point of lethal damage healed in this manner. This damage cannot be healed through magical means, instead being cured at a rate of 1 per hour per character level.

[Myrmex]

I would get rid of full casting classes and ToB classes. They're too powerful. I would also consider greatly expanding the role of alchemy, and who can become an alchemist.

I think adept, fighter, monk, ranger, paladin, bard, barbarian, hexblade, beguiler (despite its full casting), rogue, factotum, warlock, binder, soulknife, and psychic warrior would all be fine to allow. Warlock, beguiler, & psychic warrior may be a little too obviously magical. Duskblades would also fall into the too flashy of a class category, though it really depends on how rare you want magic. Ie, can the PCs regularly do it at 1st level?

You could make it so only NPCs get casting/manifesting, and then you can pick up essentially a "domain" of spells by taking a feat, which gives you a caster level equal to your character level, and one spell per spell level you get access to. Domains would have a theme of spells that you and a player could go over in choosing. Maybe make it a 7th level feat.

[weenie]

Initially I was thinking about making magic a NPC-only thing, and more ritual-based, but my players told me they would like a bit more magic in the world, so I've adjusted it for them. The game is supposed to be fun for the whole group after all.

Which classes can be taken in game and which classes can't is still something I have to decide about. But since it is an E6 game balance shouldn't be a problem. It's more about what fits the setting and what doesn't.. So far I've decided to ban psions. All that sci-fi feel hurts what I would like to achieve.

[Johel]

The first step I've taken in this direction is to make all weapons and armor cost 1/10th of what they usually cost, but also give players way less money, which means that starvation is an actual threat for them, even as they level up.

Making the adventurers less wealthy
Now, let's just point that, by RAW, most D&D peasant/laborer/craftman aren't exactly wealthy. With between 1 and 3 sp a day, look at what they can buy in the table of basic goods and services, add the need for a roof and people don't get much to spare. If one must get a weapon, it will be a simple weapon, as those are cheap, or even a club.

The ones who make the economy turn are the nobles, the temples, the wizards, the merchants and the master craftmen. They are the ones who can afford to buy weapons and armors. Anybody else already live miserably.

Lazy Horny Misfits With Balls Of Steel
The adventurers choose this dangerous career partially because, if you survive a single mission, you get to live like a prince for weeks before you need to risk your life again. And of course, girls dig small scars, large purse, big muscles, good tales and magic strangers...
Since they won't go past the 6th level before retiring, you can bet they won't be too much of a problem for local economy. At least not more than the nobles and other elites are.

The reasons why weapons are expansive :
Few blacksmiths can produce good weapons, most focus on tools, nails, iron shoes and other basic iron commodities. The smiths who can produce good weapons can afford to ask high wages.
Few people have a need for a sword or something specifically designed to kill. This means the few smiths who can produce it have to make sure they make a descent living out of what few sales they got.
It's like the Ferrari : most people dreams to drive one but few people have a practical need for one and very few cars are actually produced.

A World Of Steel or the consequences of cheap weaponry
A society where most people can afford a longsword the way today people can afford a laptop, that's going to be a VERY militaristic society.
By RAW, a long sword cost 15 gp. That's 100% of the pay a unskilled laborer gets in 5 months. Since that laborer won't be able to actually spare 100% of his pay, we can say he will need years to buy a sword.
If the sword cost 10 times less, our laborer can have it after a few months. So, basically, the whole city is well-equipped and the city watch wears full-plate armors.
Why would armors and weapons be so cheap, suddenly ? Maybe iron is everywhere and the local lords are hiring a lot of smiths to produce thousands of weapons and armors.
Why is so many military equipment necessary in a society where 85% of the population need to tend the fields so that everyone can be fed ? Maybe there are so many monsters that everyone MUST be armed to have a chance at survival.

If that's the justification, then you have a very sparsely populated world, with fortified cities being major beacons of civilization and having few regular communications with each other, as traveling is dangerous. Each village is a small fort and people live in constant fear...which make adventurers all the more necessary...or not. How can a 5th level fighter shine in a world where every single 1st level warrior is wearing banded mail armor instead of studded leather ?

[Myrmex]

Initially I was thinking about making magic a NPC-only thing, and more ritual-based, but my players told me they would like a bit more magic in the world, so I've adjusted it for them. The game is supposed to be fun for the whole group after all.

Which classes can be taken in game and which classes can't is still something I have to decide about. But since it is an E6 game balance shouldn't be a problem. It's more about what fits the setting and what doesn't.. So far I've decided to ban psions. All that sci-fi feel hurts what I would like to achieve.

Low magic items E6 means a greater dependency on spellcasters, not less.

[Androgeus]

[U] How can a 5th level fighter shine in a world where every single 1st level warrior is wearing banded mail armor instead of studded leather ?

using the extra money he earned in his adventuring to buy some polish?

[weenie]

Low magic items E6 means a greater dependency on spellcasters, not less.

Actually it means that there won't be any potions and scrolls around and.. that's pretty much it. Magic items are rare in E6 as is, this modification won't make that much difference. And since I intend to nerf healing big time there aren't many things that a spellcaster could do which can't be replicated mundanely with some extra cash.

As for the whole economy thing, "adventuring" isn't an actual occupation in the world I'm building. There are no tombs filled with undead and gold and forest bandits don't drop loot when they are killed. The PCs will be playing above-average people, not superheroes.

And Longswords should cost 1.5 gp. Actually they should cost even less. In feudal Europe you could buy a sword for a barrel of barely. If you do the math with the information on this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/wealthAndMoney.htm#coins) page, you'll see that things make sense. Some other prices will have to be recalculated as well of course, because I'm pretty sure anyone would take 100 goats instead of a chainshirt, or a cow over a tent, or two oxes instead of a 10ft chain..

[Reinboom]

And Longswords should cost 1.5 gp. Actually they should cost even less. In feudal Europe you could buy a sword for a barrel of barely. If you do the math with the information on this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/wealthAndMoney.htm#coins) page, you'll see that things make sense. Some other prices will have to be recalculated as well of course, because I'm pretty sure anyone would take 100 goats instead of a chainshirt, or a cow over a tent, or two oxes instead of a 10ft chain..

Currency does weird things to values.
I payed about 20$ for my couch/love-seat set (flea markets, <3), and would probably refuse to pay much more.
This is less than a D&D book. This is also 5 cheap meals. Or 40 very cheap meals. Or 80 absurdly cheap meals.
I'm going out of my way to get a SNES game for 140$, and that's after haggling someone down.

Even in the days of yore, you will get exchange rates that... exchange oddly.
Though, that said, it's more of the issue of finding someone with 100 goats.
Also, that yes, there are some things in D&D's pricing that are just weird.

[weenie]

Oh, and I have another question. Should sneak attacks still work as normal if you use Vitality points?

[Eldariel]

Oh, and I have another question. Should sneak attacks still work as normal if you use Vitality points?

It could work as normal. The WP rules suggest you drop the SA dice when dealing WP damage, but honestly, if you want a gritty game, a level 5 Rogue should be able to one-shot things on Criticals.

The fact that suddenly SA goes perfectly with Criticals makes all kinds of sense too; critical-heavy builds just scream Rogue to me. Alternatively, you could state the SA damage is always dealt straight to WP (to represent hitting a vulnerable spot), but is only 1 instead of 1d6, or something like that.


I dunno, a thousand ways you can deal with that. The ones the rules on the site suggest is functional, but probably not optimal; I've found the rules on SRD are good guidelines but there's still untapped potential available.

[Volkov]

Eliminate any monster that can provide so much as standard treasure from your game's continuity. Which means yes, no dragons, no demons, no giants, no angels, no medusas, no beholders, no mind flayers, no githyanki, and did I say no Dragons? That should keep them poor.

[The_Werebear]

During an E6 campaign I ran, we continuously messed with the rules to try and get a more realistic feel. By the end, we ended up using Armor as DR, WP/VP, upped the damage on crossbows and bows, and gave several types of weapons armor penetration.

That's probably a bit much, but I recommend the Armor as DR and WP/VP for sure. Also, you will probably need to justify why magic hasn't changed the world moreso than most DND campaigns. Rarity of Mages is a good one, but the one I ended up using was that most mages (save for the very, VERY powerful and rich who could afford good publicity) were seen as dangerous and unpredictable witches.

[Volkov]

Don't forget to ban wizards and pretty much all undead. Undead require lots of magic and their creation requires a good deal of money, and wizards need lots of money to afford their starter stuff and their training..

[SurlySeraph]

I would get rid of full casting classes and ToB classes. They're too powerful. I would also consider greatly expanding the role of alchemy, and who can become an alchemist.

I agree on alchemy, but full casters aren't that powerful at E6 levels. Sure they can be optimized for deadly tricks that are hard to avoid (Sleep with a really high DC, Sudden Maximized Fireball with caster level increases, etc.), but most of them are quite limited and/or once or twice per day. I would definitely be careful with ToB classes, since they're very powerful at first level, especially Crusaders. Things get more balanced after a couple levels, but a 1st-level Crusader can be damn near invincible.


Eliminate any monster that can provide so much as standard treasure from your game's continuity. Which means yes, no dragons, no demons, no giants, no angels, no medusas, no beholders, no mind flayers, no githyanki, and did I say no Dragons? That should keep them poor.

Or just don't give them the money. "It's a beholder! It has no arms! Why would it be carrying around anything you can use?" :smallbiggrin:


Don't forget to ban wizards and pretty much all undead. Undead require lots of magic and their creation requires a good deal of money, and wizards need lots of money to afford their starter stuff and their training..

Well, I've always been partial to low-level wizards who are basically starving artists. They can afford their spellbook and material components, barely. Food? Not unless someone hires them, and how many people are going to pay for a luxury like magic in a backwater town like this?

[Eldariel]

Eliminate any monster that can provide so much as standard treasure from your game's continuity. Which means yes, no dragons, no demons, no giants, no angels, no medusas, no beholders, no mind flayers, no githyanki, and did I say no Dragons? That should keep them poor.

Without Bags of Holding/Handy Haversacks, even simple carrying capacity + decently active bandits should see to only a small part of a Dragon's hoard making it out with the PCs. Silver pieces are heavy.

[ocdscale]

Without Bags of Holding/Handy Haversacks, even simple carrying capacity + decently active bandits should see to only a small part of a Dragon's hoard making it out with the PCs. Silver pieces are heavy.

I'm reminded of the dragon in NWN2 (Was it 2? Was it even a NWN game? Similar enough I recall...) that had a horde so large that you simply couldn't take all the gold with you, you had to have your servants send an armed caravan or something.

(Ignoring the fact that up until then, gold pieces had no weight).

[weenie]

Oh, and another thing. I've decided to make dragons dumb. They're just great fire/acid/electricity breathing monsters, not ancient wise gold piling supersmart casters.

And I pretty much agree with SurlySeraph regarding the full caster dilemma. Sure they are moderately useful, but what noble is desperate or brave enough to actually hire one?

And there won't be many real monsters around. It's more of a people vs people vs people with green skin world.

[Myrmex]

Actually it means that there won't be any potions and scrolls around and.. that's pretty much it. Magic items are rare in E6 as is, this modification won't make that much difference. And since I intend to nerf healing big time there aren't many things that a spellcaster could do which can't be replicated mundanely with some extra cash.

/shrug
If someone said "low magic setting, but you can be a wizard", I'd definitely go with wizard. Being a bozo with a pointy stick is pretty lame when the guy next to you can fly and turn invisible.


Don't forget to ban wizards and pretty much all undead. Undead require lots of magic and their creation requires a good deal of money, and wizards need lots of money to afford their starter stuff and their training..

There are plenty of non-wizard ways undead are created. You should read through the MM descriptions of some of the undead.


Without Bags of Holding/Handy Haversacks, even simple carrying capacity + decently active bandits should see to only a small part of a Dragon's hoard making it out with the PCs. Silver pieces are heavy.

You can kill a dragon, but can't handle bandits?

[Eldariel]

You can kill a dragon, but can't handle bandits?

You can handle bandits, but you can't efficiently carry the whole hoard with you and the rest is like to have disappeared by the time you get back there.

[Emmerask]

/shrug
If someone said "low magic setting, but you can be a wizard", I'd definitely go with wizard. Being a bozo with a pointy stick is pretty lame when the guy next to you can fly and turn invisible.


True in a low magic campaign wizards/clerics etc are completly overpowered and more they just don´t really fit the setting.
You really should consider banning them or modify them heavily...

Half the normal Spellprogression could work for example though something would need to be done about running out of spells then perhaps giving them medium bab in return?

[Myrmex]

You can handle bandits, but you can't efficiently carry the whole hoard with you and the rest is like to have disappeared by the time you get back there.

Shrink item + phantom steed = 100 miles/day carrying 120 tons of things.


[edit]
I am currently in a low level campaign, and hauling crap around is a chore. I just got 3rd level spells, so I'm a little excited.

[Emmerask]

Shrink item + phantom steed = 100 miles/day carrying 120 tons of things.

That´s not really what I would want to see in a low magic campaign :smallfrown: but yes if normal spellcasters are allowed thats likely to happen

[Myrmex]

That´s not really what I would want to see in a low magic campaign :smallfrown: but yes if normal spellcasters are allowed thats likely to happen

That's why low magic campaigns should not have any full casters.

[weenie]

That's why low magic campaigns should not have any full casters.

Tricks like this one really are a problem.. But couldn't they be avoided by limiting the spells a wizard can learn? If a sorcerer however pulls it off by spending his precious spells known on those two spells.. Well, then he deserves to be able to pull off a trick or two.

[Eldariel]

You know, since it's low-magic and all and scrolls are more rare, it may be worthwhile to just fill the world with spontaneous casters instead. Take Wizards, Clerics, Druid, Archivists, Artificers and company, throw them to the trashcan and instead use Sorcerers, Favored Souls, Spirit Shamans and so on. They really fit a low-magic world better.

Though I guess Wizard without Collegiate Wizard or Scroll access would be pretty much the same as a Sorcerer and as such not that big a problem, and Archivist would be ok by the same token. Cleric, Druid and Artificer would be bloody insane tho. Extra Spell works nicely with E6 anyways.

[weenie]

Hmmm, spontaneous casters only is a great idea! Are there any Int or Wis based spontaneous casters that I could suggest to my players should they want to play one?

The good thing about spontaneous casters is that they don't need to learn magic it comes naturally to them. So favored souls can truly be the chosen of the gods, and sorcerers can be ordinary people with incredible powers. It adds a bit of mystery as to why some people are gifted with magic, while others aren't.

[Myrmex]

Beguiler is an int based spontaneous caster. I don't believe there are any wisdom focused ones. Psychic warrior is a solid gish that is wisdom based.

Letting someone play a wizard could work if you keep tight control of the scrolls they get access to, and if you prohibit them from researching new spells. That would make them more likely to learn things that are more combat oriented.

I don't think clerics get quite as many utility spells, but I'm pretty sure druids though. I rarely play divine characters, though.

[crazedloon]

well an idea I had for a very low magic world had only 1 kind of caster and that was a modified spellthief who had no spell list however could steal spells from 0-9 from creatures if they had SLA or spells and add them to their list of know. However they were rare and far between. The Druids were replaced with totamists and clerics with refluffed dragon shamans. The overtly magic classes such as swordsage did not exist but Warblades did but only as high level guards and lord.

[weenie]

I just had another idea I wanted to run by some other gamers before trying it out in a campaign. Called shots. I was inspired by the whole wound points damage = boy part damage suggestion by Eldariel and came up with this mechanic:

When someone announces a called shot, apply a penalty(still have to figure out this one.. suggestions?) to their attack roll. If they hit and deal vitality point damage, things go normally, but if they deal wound point damage, you don't roll on the table, instead they automatically hit the portion of the body they were aiming for.

Oh, and for rogues I've decided to make sneak attack go directly to wound damage, but instead of 1d6 they get a static 1 damage. The damage increases as normal(except it's 1 and not 1d6).

So? Do you think it would work well?

[pres_man]

arcane caster = bard
divine caster = adept (with turning and armor proficiency)

Limit the spellcasting those classes and that should keep things pretty low magic in feel.

[Volkov]

arcane caster = bard
divine caster = adept (with turning and armor proficiency)

Limit the spellcasting those classes and that should keep things pretty low magic in feel.

Go father, limit spellcasting to tertiary casters, such as Paladins or Rangers. Oh and No true dragons. No Magical beasts, no Undead, no magic dependant constructs, no elementals, no outsiders. These are all high magic creatures. Technology based constructs are fine. But in a medieval setting, they are somewhat out of place. I know I repeated myself, but this is an important point. To replace dragons, use dinosaurs, and up their hit dice and stats.

[weenie]

All valid suggestions, but how about the called shot and sneak attack rules? :smallsmile:

[Myrmex]

All valid suggestions, but how about the called shot and sneak attack rules? :smallsmile:

Called shots are dangerous. Once you hit a certain amount of +hit, you automatically hit things. In E6, the players will see the other end of it- an ogre that aims for the head is going to hit in a much more brutal fashion than if it had sunk its attack bonus into power attack.

You also run into the danger of casters making called touch attacks. I'm not sure if you want the caster to put up true strike in round one followed by a head shot with melf's acid arrow or scorching ray on round two.

With that said, called shots can make non-casters more competitive. Take, for instance, the common criticism of archers- there's no power attack function to trade attack for damage. Power attack is useful so far as that you can kill something in one or two rounds instead of 2 or 3 rounds, but outside of that, HP damage doesn't do anything. A creature at 1 out of 1,000,000 HP is still just as dangerous as it was when it has a million HP.

If, instead, non-casters can turn to hit bonuses into crippling attacks, fighter can pose a more immediate threat.

I would be more worried, however, about how this will effect the PCs. A natural 20 called shot is bound to happen on a PC. Do you want the PCs to have a chance of randomly dying at any time? If you do, then called shots are probably a good idea.

[The_Werebear]

All valid suggestions, but how about the called shot and sneak attack rules? :smallsmile:

The 1 point to wound makes Rogues actually less effective considering that most things will have at least 10 WP. What I suggest is simply cutting the sneak attack damage to a d4 rather than a d6

[weenie]

The 1 point to wound makes Rogues actually less effective considering that most things will have at least 10 WP. What I suggest is simply cutting the sneak attack damage to a d4 rather than a d6

That's true, but since wound point damage gives penalties to the use of a body part, that suddenly becomes pretty strong. Most people will also have only Wound points, so a lvl 3 rogue should easily be able to deal around 5 dmg per sneak attack, which means that they will be seriously injured and if he hits the right spot, they will die on the spot. 1d4 SA would mean, that they would die no matter what the rogue would hit, but then again that would make TWF rogues serious melee monsters. Perhaps I could combine some sort of additional rule about facing, so that when a person is flanked he can deny one of the flanker all bonuses, but would lose his dexterity against the other one? Then 1d4 SA would be acceptable.

And I'm completely fine with my players dying. I've already explained to them, that combat will be seriously lethal, and they have no problem with that.

[The_Werebear]

That's true, but since wound point damage gives penalties to the use of a body part, that suddenly becomes pretty strong. Most people will also have only Wound points, so a lvl 3 rogue should easily be able to deal around 5 dmg per sneak attack, which means that they will be seriously injured and if he hits the right spot, they will die on the spot. 1d4 SA would mean, that they would die no matter what the rogue would hit, but then again that would make TWF rogues serious melee monsters. Perhaps I could combine some sort of additional rule about facing, so that when a person is flanked he can deny one of the flanker all bonuses, but would lose his dexterity against the other one? Then 1d4 SA would be acceptable.

And I'm completely fine with my players dying. I've already explained to them, that combat will be seriously lethal, and they have no problem with that.

That's more realistic, but it opens up the can of worms that is facing

[Eldariel]

That's more realistic, but it opens up the can of worms that is facing

Though Facing is logical and not really that hard to keep a track of; as long as you've got miniatures, it's simple enough to state which way they're looking at. Unearthed Arcana has fine facing rules. And hell, the game already requires facing for e.g. flying (since turning takes X amount of movement and so on), and Tower Shields make NO sense whatsoever as they stand without facing. I say knock yourself out, leave most of the rest abstracted, but introduce rudimentary facing.

Though I think 1 point of WP damage is enough precisely because of the critical spot rules. It honestly makes Sneak Attack make sense, which is just all kinds of awesome. 1 to 1d3 seems about right; with the possible results of WP damage, that's plenty. And honestly, Sneak Attack already has pretty strict prerequisites. I don't think it's going to be a problem. Flanking is the easiest form of Sneak Attacking and if you use the Unearthed Arcana-rule of being able to ignore one opponent to deny the other flanking benefits, even that has an easy (albeit very risky) counteraction.

[Another_Poet]

Strongly agree with Johel. Making weapons & armour super cheap (a peasant can afford to gear up on 1 weeks' turnip-growing salary?) either makes the world super militaristic (and thus unlike real medieval) or unbelievable.

It sounds like what you reall want to do is make finding food a problem, but make sure that they can find weapons. Two ways to do that.

THE FAMINE. Everything is normal PHB prices, but people will not sell you food. You'll give me 100 gp for this loa fof bread? Haha, no thanks. I can't eat gold pieces my friend. And if I was willing to sell you this bread, wouldn't you worry it's made with 80% sawdust to 20% flour? Get lost, bumpkin. This fine loaf of bread si only 20% sawdust. (People will share a meal if the PCs save their daughter/put out the fire/kill the goblins but food in general can't be bought.)

FIXED STARTING GEAR. All PC's can get as much in weapons/armour/scrolls/potions as they can afford with normal starting wealth, as long as they can come up with a convincing backstory how they got that stuff. Plus they each get an adventurer's kit with rope and the like, and a set of tools relevant to their profession, 1 loaf of bread, 1 hunk of chease and 2 days' rations. They don't get to keep leftover starting wealth as coinage. They each start with 5 silver pieces, and money is hard to come by (reduced treasure). Thus, they start off equipped properly but both new weapons and food are harsd to get.

[weenie]

Well, I'm making battle equipment cheaper, but I'm not making it that cheap. A chain shirt would still cost you 10 gp. That's how much a small cottage would cost. Seriously, swords and simple armor weren't really all that expensive back in the old days. The problem with them was, that people didn't really know how to use them well and if a noble found a sword on you, you had to answer to where you got it and what it was for. Even nowadays people can easily afford illegal(or legal, depends on where you're from) guns, even with less than a week's pay, but they are dangerous and not all that useful in rl, so most of the population doesn't buy them. And those who do buy guns, mostly buy them for hobby or sport.

Also war is common in these parts of the world, so a sword could also be passed down through generations, since it's pretty likely that a member of the family got pulled into a battle at one time or another in his life.

[Another_Poet]

Fair enough. Your points make sense. Personally I'd stick with a famine (natural, magical, or artifically created by wars/guilds) rather than lowering the price on already inexpensive equipment in a low-resource campaign, and raising the value of money (effectively) to compensate.

[weenie]

Well, maybe I could reduce the cost of martial weapons by half instead of to 1/10th, but a dagger costing as much as two goats? I don't think so. And armor is also incredibly overpriced. I think my initial estimate is quite ok. It may not be the best approximation, but hey, it's just a game, no need to overdo it.

[Random832]

The problem with them was, that people didn't really know how to use them well and if a noble found a sword on you, you had to answer to where you got it and what it was for.

That's what weapons improvised from farming tools are for. Flail, Billhook, Kunai, Machete, Kama, etc

[weenie]

That's what weapons improvised from farming tools are for. Flail, Billhook, Kunai, Machete, Kama, etc

I agree. But I'm sure even a farmer could make himself a flail for less than 8 gp. And he'd still be stupid to carry it around in public.

[Godskook]

Even nowadays people can easily afford illegal(or legal, depends on where you're from) guns, even with less than a week's pay, but they are dangerous and not all that useful in rl, so most of the population doesn't buy them. And those who do buy guns, mostly buy them for hobby or sport.

Please do not extrapolate from post-industrial economic, social, and technological situations into the middle ages. Just...just don't. Things were different back then.

[weenie]

Please do not extrapolate from post-industrial economic, social, and technological situations into the middle ages. Just...just don't. Things were different back then.

They were, but my explanation still does make a valid point.

[Lapak]

Shrink item + phantom steed = 100 miles/day carrying 120 tons of things.


[edit]
I am currently in a low level campaign, and hauling crap around is a chore. I just got 3rd level spells, so I'm a little excited.Except Shrink Item affects a single item. It's not going to do a bit to help you lug 100,000 silver coins back home. It WOULD help the party pick and choose which of the particularly nice things they wish to bring home, though, even a 10' tall marble statue worth thousands of gold.

EDIT: Which is to say that it's quite possible to design a treasure hoard such as a dragon's in a way that makes it impossible for the party to retrieve all of it, while giving them the opportunity to walk away with significant wealth and increase that amount through their own cleverness.

[Myrmex]

Except Shrink Item affects a single item. It's not going to do a bit to help you lug 100,000 silver coins back home. It WOULD help the party pick and choose which of the particularly nice things they wish to bring home, though, even a 10' tall marble statue worth thousands of gold.

EDIT: Which is to say that it's quite possible to design a treasure hoard such as a dragon's in a way that makes it impossible for the party to retrieve all of it, while giving them the opportunity to walk away with significant wealth and increase that amount through their own cleverness.

Put the coins in a box and shrink the box. If you can shrink a fire, logs and all, then you can do the same with the box & the coins.

Or you just melt the coins into a lump and shrink that. A couple fire balls should do it. If you banned evocation, just build a forge. All you need is a place for hot things and some bellows.

[Johel]

Well, I'm making battle equipment cheaper, but I'm not making it that cheap. A chain shirt would still cost you 10 gp. That's how much a small cottage would cost. Seriously, swords and simple armor weren't really all that expensive back in the old days. The problem with them was, that people didn't really know how to use them well and if a noble found a sword on you, you had to answer to where you got it and what it was for. Even nowadays people can easily afford illegal(or legal, depends on where you're from) guns, even with less than a week's pay, but they are dangerous and not all that useful in rl, so most of the population doesn't buy them. And those who do buy guns, mostly buy them for hobby or sport.

Also war is common in these parts of the world, so a sword could also be passed down through generations, since it's pretty likely that a member of the family got pulled into a battle at one time or another in his life.

I honestly don't know what's the price (official or black market) for a handgun. But I can tell you that it's useless to compare what you can get with today's money with what you can get in medieval times.

First, the production of weapons wasn't high, simply because the demand for real weapons was weak. As you pointed out, only nobles and their men-at-arms were allowed to bear them. In war time, a militia could easily be equipped with spears and minimal armors but a good sword was definitely both too expansive (iron ain't cheap, back then) and useless in the hand of a mostly untrained "warrior".

Second, the price of weapons WAS high. Partially because the customers were rich and the blacksmiths knew it. But also because the skill needed to produce a weapon of quality (not talking masterwork, here) wasn't handed over to every single blacksmith. Also, unlike modern weapons, there wasn't any industrial production of weapons, which means it took days to finish a single sword. Somehow, the smith had to feed his family during these days of work and, since he wouldn't always have customers, he had to make for the unemployment period, much like today's overspecialized freelances.

Exception was in China and eastern kingdoms, where the army was more organized than the feudal hordes of Europe. In peace time, the production was similar to Europe : a few weapons for the nobles and the professional soldiers. In wartime, thousands of weapons would be produced but the overall quality would be lower and the whole production would go to the army. It would then be recycled for generations by whoever won the war and seized the loot.

From D&D perspective, a simple rule of three can show you that making weapons and armors at 1/10 of their price isn't going to work if the rest of the equipment price isn't changed to: a crownbar, a pick or a shovel would be more expansive than a sword. The former need only the most basic smithing to get a hard, reliable iron of roughly the desired shape while the latter usually needs hours of work to get just the right chemical transformation so that iron becomes a proper, light, resistant steel, then more smithing to balance the weight, then sharpening...

Now, you said "1/2 price" and that is more reasonable : at worst, the society is indeed militaristic but not much more than the medieval one was. Maybe the existance of monsters make it more likely for families to invest in a good old sword rather than in a extra cow.