PDA

View Full Version : Ways to run a low magic campaign with minimal rules changes.



paigeoliver
2007-04-03, 01:37 AM
I think I have come up with the perfect way to run a low magic campaign with minimal rules changes.

All the normal core classes would still be open as usual, as would many classes from the various books (although classes like Warlock would be inappropriate).

The one single rules change is this, Magic is dangerous to the caster and takes a little something away from them every time they use it. Each and every spell caster can only cast a certain number of spell levels in their life before their spellcasting eventually kills them.

I would suggest each spellcaster having D1000 spell levels when created. They do not know this number, it is tracked by the gamemaster. Whenever they cast a spell higher level than zero their total spell levels are reduced by the level of the spell.

Once a caster runs out of spell levels they start losing hit points at the rate of one per hour and these losses are permanent and their is no way to restore them. In a day or two the caster will be dead, and if raised they will come back with only 1d100 spell levels.

If this system is used then it is very important that there not be any loopholes around the spell levels system. There should be no way to recover them, period.

Solo
2007-04-03, 01:41 AM
Would you similarly restrict the ability of fighters to deal out damage?

Say, for every 1d100 swings, they break a bone or something, and are crippled until they are healed by powerful healing spells??

melchizedek
2007-04-03, 02:00 AM
What exactly are you trying to do? If you want to make spellcasting classes almost impossible to play, just say that to your players. If you want, you can even tell them that spellcasting is incredibly dangerous, and those who cast spells don't live long. Then you would have the option of incorporating the occasional NPC spellcaster without too much of a problem.

This system would be a very strong detriment to any player who wanted to play a spellcaster. It would basically require that they be prepared to remake their character. If they simply kept remaking another spellcaster, it wouldn't solve anything.

Tellah
2007-04-03, 02:25 AM
The best way to run a low-magic campaign with minimal rules changes is to forbid your players from playing full casters. Your way is excessively complicated and doesn't solve the problem.

What happens when one of your players re-rolls wizard after his fifth-level druid dies from casting too many spells? Does the wizard get the full d1000, or do you assume he's already cast spells before? Do I have to cast a spell once to make a magic item, or once per day of creation? Why are the gods of your world intentionally tempting their clerics with deadly, dangerous magic? Why would I ever resurrect a caster - or do you really disallow your players to re-roll a new character? Are spell-like abilities exempt, or are gnomes screwed? Why are dragons so long-lived if they're naturally able to cast deadly, dangerous magic?

Or:
Only bards, rangers, and paladins can cast magic.

CharPixie
2007-04-03, 02:38 AM
A good idea, but even if you get casters to moderate, you still absolutely cripple them when they run out of intrinsic spell levels. You could have them regenerate them so that a caster could cast X spells a month.

Now, another way I have thought about but haven't done is to not have spells come back the next day, but the next week or even month. That way, you can have a slower paced RP heavy game and have casters suffer from spell exhaustion still. Very low level casters would have little to do, but they could shoot arrows, or use items very effectively.

Selv
2007-04-03, 06:06 AM
The magic system in Iron Heroes demands that its casters make Fort saves to avoid suffering strain (i.e. ability damage to all attributes). The amaunt of magic they can do without a save goes up with level. I like that it allows you to cast when you're theoretically "out of spells", at a significant risk. Also, every spell carries a caster level check and failing it results in "unexpected effects".

Og course, Iron Heroes is outright beligerant to magic, to the extent that most people playing it seem to swear off the magic dimension entirely, and a +1 sword is an artefact. I'm sad that I have yet to get into an actual game of it. So, yeah. (http://www.ptolus.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_IL)

paigeoliver
2007-04-03, 06:22 AM
When I did briefly experiment with this system the casters could cast any spell they knew as often as they wanted. Spells per day were not the limiting factor, spells per lifetime were.

The 1d1000 roll takes into account both the characters natural capacity and whatever spells they have already cast.

The idea is simply that casters CAN cast spells, but they only do it when they REALLY have to, because there is always a cost.

I had no special ruling for new characters because I have always started my 3.5 games at first level. The characters already advance faster than a speeding bullet in 3.5, so I never saw much reason to start the characters at a higher level. New first level PCs tend to quickly catch up to higher level ones.

Magic items would normally be made using ritual magic that might take many days but only counts as a single spell.


Or an alternate version that doesn't make previously healthy casters keel over and die suddenly.

Roll a D20 every time you cast a spell of 1st level or higher (you can just use the attack roll on spells that have them), and on a 1 you lose one hit point permanently.

Sam K
2007-04-03, 08:13 AM
Personally, for a low magic campaign, I would make a skill roll for every spell cast (either use concentration, or maybe giving characters a 'casting value', like with BAB), and if you fail, something bad happends. Your caster told the laws of time and space to sit down and shut up, and time-space just said "or else what?" Trick is, make spell failure based on the spell level, so a lvl 1 spell may just fizzle, or cause you to lose an extra level 1 spell slot, but a level 9 spell would have cataclysmic results.
This way, casters can still use their magic freely, but they have to balance it with the risks. Also, never allow anyone to take 10 on a roll (bending reality is ALWAYS risky): suddenly using magical healing is not quite as safe anymore, nor is pre-combat buffing.

Jayabalard
2007-04-03, 08:15 AM
Would you similarly restrict the ability of fighters to deal out damage?

Say, for every 1d100 swings, they break a bone or something, and are crippled until they are healed by powerful healing spells??that really doesn't have anything to do with having a low magic use world, now does it?

Since people can swing swords, there's no believable fluff reason to have a limitation on the number of sword swings in a lifetime... but since magic is totally a fantasy construct, you can add any fluff restrictions that you want on it and it doesn't really affect it's believability.

It's not a horrible rule, and it does add in the flavor that using magic exacts a terrible price on the caster; perhaps the BBEG finds a way around partially around that limitation by striking a deal with a demon.

Personally, I think that the following is a better ways to have a low magic campaign:
-Have all castings classes act as 1/2 caster level, so a level 10 cleric casts spells as a level 5 cleric, but otherwise is the same. Level 1 full casters can cast their level 0 spells as if they were 1st level, but don't get their level 1 spells until 2nd level. This limits spell progression to 5th level spells, so only the most powerful clerics (level 20+) can raise the dead, only the most powerful wizards can teleport, etc.
-Highly restrict magic items, and magic item creation.
-Stick mostly with non-magical opponents; any monsters that are highly magical would be rare

You can further restrict this by increasing the arcane spell failure chance, even when not wearing armor, or by requiring a spellcraft check for each spell cast so that there's a chance for spells to fail even before they're cast.

spotmarkedx
2007-04-03, 10:32 AM
paigeoliver, you failed to answer a number of Tellah's very excellent questions. let me remind you:

Do I have to cast a spell once to make a magic item, or once per day of creation? Why are the gods of your world intentionally tempting their clerics with deadly, dangerous magic? ... Are spell-like abilities exempt, or are gnomes screwed? Why are dragons so long-lived if they're naturally able to cast deadly, dangerous magic?

I take it that you are of course removing pretty much all magic items from the world, yes? Because of the world dynamic, there would be a deficiency of people that would dare to become spellcasters. Then there would be the high rate of fatality of casters that actually make it to crafting level. How many of those do you think are going to spend some of their precious essence on a longsword +1? Or a potion of cure light wounds? I could see wand crafting (50 spells for the price of one or a few, depending how you answer Tellah's crafting questions) or other items that duplicate spell abilities.

But each of those will be carefully hoarded. A wand with a few spell charges left would be a precious treasure, not something the party would see for quite a few levels.

And let's not even get into the higher levels. Do you think many spellcasters make it to the level necessary to craft rings or the like? etc. etc.

No overall, I think the idea of a permanent pool of irreplacable spell points is pretty bad and will should have far-reaching effects on a lot of varied parts of the gameplay (i.e. magic items, supernatural abilities, etc.) Another thing to consider. You are effectively either trying to box players from casting spells. How are you going to deal with A> monsters, especially higher CR ones that pretty much require magic support to deal with. B> healing. If you have no party healers, you are increasing your chances of TPK if things turn sour due to chance die rolls. C> what happens if you roll really badly for a character that has limited spellcasting. I can just see it. Your eighth level ranger character casts cure light wounds for the third time in his life to stop your friend from bleeding to death and keels over because the GM rolled really poorly. Too bad. Make a new (apparently 1st level) character.

So. What I would personally change to try to keep a similar flavour, leaving a spellcaster neutered but playable, and allowing the idea of magic item crafting reasonably feasable:
Spellcasting also costs hitpoints (1 hp:1 spell level ratio). These hit points may not be magically healed. They must be recovered by natural healing. No exceptions. Because you are taking hp damage while casting your spell, a concentration check is required (per normal concentration rules). This adds a little spell failure as well as some MAD for spellcasters, who all now need Con for both hit points as well as bonus on the concentration check.

You may (say, as a move action) draw hitpoints from a helpless or willing (sentient) target to power your spell at a worse ratio (I'd go with 3hp:1 spell level as the ratio). This is not a mystical drawing, this requires the use of a knife or the like. Drawing from a helpless target is an evil act, no matter your intentions. This gives you leeway to have the evil wizard fight you in his lair, powering his spells with dominated slaves/helpless sacrafices chained to altars, etc. I think this is a good way to give your climatic battles a more cinematic feel as you fight your way through the evil wizard's minions, the screams of anguish pushing you to greater intensity as he is slowly flaying his sacrafice alive to power his incatations to harm you...

As an alternate, you could lower the ratio of drawing hit points from the helpless/willing target down to 1:1 but make it a permanent draw. Then you can have interesting roleplaying situations like: "I am willing to raise your ally from the grave, but I cannot countenance spending what power I have left in this frail body for an unbeliever. If you wish him back, you as a group must power the spell..." or "I'm sorry, your majesty. We stopped the evil necromancer before he was able to kill your daughter in his ritual, but she is permanently in a coma...(i.e. @ -1 hp from magic drain) ...perhaps you could have your court mages cast a health enhancing spell to bring her to consciousness each day?"

Those are my thoughts, anyway. As you have it written, I don't think I'd have much fun. If you don't want player casters, ban full casters from PC use, don't force them to play russian roulette everytime they want to cast.

Gamebird
2007-04-03, 11:26 AM
Here's your problem:
The characters already advance faster than a speeding bullet in 3.5...

The fix is to give out 1/2 or 1/10th the xp you'd normally give out. Make sure your players know this when they start. Tell them the game will go from 1st to 5th level, maybe 7th. And that level progression will be very, very slow.

This doesn't introduce any new, weird rules you have to keep track of. However, it does limit PC spell casters to low level spells and not being able to cast very many of them. You'll have to crank down the standard loot per encounter to match the level progression rate.

This sort of change will also remove most troublesome prestige class cheese combos and the "weirder" powers that the core classes get as they get higher level. It allows the PCs to match a low magic campaign setting with minimal rule changes.

Mewtarthio
2007-04-03, 02:15 PM
I think spotmarkedx's comparison to Russian Roulette is very apt here. Don't make them die randomly and unexpectedly due to a poor magic roll. Give them notable consequences for magic overuse, such as:

Fortitude saves to avoid ability burn (not damage or drain: Burn cannot be healed magically and only goes away with time)
The blood casting system described by spotmarkedx (for something a little less painful, there's the Tainted Sorceror (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/taint.htm#taintedSorcerer)prestige class which only suffers damage when casting a spell that would otherwise use material components)
The Sanity (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/sanity.htm#castingSpells) variant, in which casting spells is detrimental to your mental stability (you may wish to only implement sanity loss from casting spells, rather than the other sources)
Etc...The point is that the player should never suddenly hear the words, "Whoops! You've cast too much! You die now!" out of the blue. The player should know how much more casting he can take before Bad Things start to happen.

Jayabalard
2007-04-03, 02:42 PM
The point is that the player should never suddenly hear the words, "Whoops! You've cast too much! You die now!" out of the blue. The player should know how much more casting he can take before Bad Things start to happen.Yes and No...

a player should get a warning before they drop dead, but there is a certain appeal to a system where you don't necessarily know how much longer you can keep casting before you start running into those warning signs. If you don't know that you're reaching your limit until right as you start in on the BBEG, that means that you may have to toss your strategy so you don't kill yourself.

Maybe some combination would work, an unknown finite number of spells that you can cast before bad things start happening, but that pool recharges over time (at an unknown rate).

That's starting to get kind of complicated though.

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-03, 03:03 PM
It's the unknown quality of the limit that makes this system tick, I'd say. So long as the players KNOW that risk is there, they're going to be saving spells for really important things. It's like forcing Sanity checks for casting. Or the old 2d ed. rules where certain spells had a good chance of permanently aging or killing you. You definitely won't be casting those every combat; you'll save them for the BBEG. But if you know exactly what your limits are, you'll minmax things to stay within them.

On the other hand, the risk also has to be immediate enough to really seem...risky. I'd much prefer a system that recharges slowly (say 1d4 spell levels/day) but has a much lower cap (say, 20+int mod spell levels.) So your wizard can safely cast 1 or 2 level 9 spells, but the next day he doesn't know how much he can safely cast. It forces caution immediately, rather than "well I need to be careful or someday in 5 years I might die."

Also, reduce the penalty. It's no fun to have a point where your character can't use his class features lest he die. I'd make it so that when you have no more spell levels left, the spell fails, you take a chunk of primary casting stat damage, and fall unconscious. So you'll get better, but this is something you do NOT want happening during an important battle. If you want to get really complicated, make a short table of "the spell goes haywire!" effects that will hurt your party as well.

Variable Arcana
2007-04-03, 05:38 PM
The best way to run a low-magic campaign with minimal rules changes is to forbid your players from playing full casters. Your way is excessively complicated and doesn't solve the problem.
Exactly. . . . . . . . . . .

CharPixie
2007-04-03, 05:48 PM
I think it's an interesting idea, though. But in D&D, mages, especially at higher levels, really only have their spells as options.

Of course, it being a hidden number, you can fudge it a lot.

It still doesn't solve the whole anti-climatic, sudden "now if you cast magic you'll die" problem. Most sane characters would think about retiring; 50 spell levels isn't a lot to work with, and at level-up you might gain at most 10 with Toughness. Casters will be saving their spells for absolute do or die moments, and sitting on their behinds the rest of the time.

Talya
2007-04-03, 05:53 PM
if you did this, you'd need to raise wizard/sorceror BAB's to 3/4, and their hit dice to 1d6, at the bare minimum, so they had something else to fall back on when they didn't cast.

And how will you deal with magical abilities that are not spells and have no spell levels? Shapeshifting druids are just as powerful as ever...

NullAshton
2007-04-03, 05:58 PM
You could use my hypothesized system. Have spell slots recharge by (Level Squared minus half caster level), with a minimum number of days equal to the spell level.

It would be a lot less harsh than "If you cast too many spells, you die", but higher level spells would literally be once in a blue moon.

To do: Find some way to scale it better throughout the levels.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-03, 05:59 PM
I think I have come up with the perfect way to run a low magic campaign with minimal rules changes.

All the normal core classes would still be open as usual, as would many classes from the various books (although classes like Warlock would be inappropriate).You've got this backwards. In a low-magic world, Wizards, Sorcerers, Clerics, and Druids are all vastly out of place, whereas the Warlock fits in pretty well. Go that round and you should be fine. Just make sure you've got Adepts and Magewrights around to craft basics.

Alternatively, use a different system in a D&D type setting. Plenty of things could work, from Iron Heroes to Serenity. But just tacking extra rules onto the existing super-high-magic classes isn't going to fix much.

Miles Invictus
2007-04-03, 06:25 PM
One way to do it would be to give spellcasting progression equivalent to the Bard. The problem there, though, is that you'll have a lot of dead levels.

Kel_Arath
2007-04-03, 07:16 PM
that is soooo... not even going to say it? why would anyone even play a spellcaster knowing that they could randomly start dying and be boned at some part of their life "hmmm... to be effective i have to kill myself.. yay?"

chillax scro's

clericwithnogod
2007-04-04, 03:48 AM
You could have everyone limited to one level in Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, and level of "+1 level of existing" in prestige classes (when advancing those classes) for every level of a non-casting class they have. Leave Bards and Adepts (and maybe Duskblades and Hexblades) the same, thus having classes where you are taking the "easy" path to magic, while great arcane and divine casters are rare and ancient and attain their power over a long period of time.

This would make the casting abilities of the Ranger and Paladin (as well as limited list prestige classes) stand out much more. Depending on whether you want low power or both low power and low quantity, allowing or requiring the non-casting variants of Ranger and Paladin and removing some or all of the limited list prestige classes would cut down on magic further.

This also would make elves and other long lived races more magical as their longer lifespan would result in more great wizards. I'd consider adding some sort of longevity or immortality feat (which is the kind of thing that doesn't have great in-game impact if it only applies to aging) to account for the rare, powerful, ancient mage - with a prerequisite of a certain CON and three levels in Racial Paragon maybe.

EDIT: You could include the Divine Bard to get some more healing into the game. Prestige classes granting alternating casting levels or non-casting levels would count as non-casting classes on levels where they didn't add "+1 level of existing" to Wizard, Sorceror, Druid and/or Cleric.

Matthew
2007-04-07, 05:34 PM
Nice idea, but I am afraid I do not think it is the best way to approach this problem. The thing is, it is a systemic problem and it needs to be handled systematically, like in Conan D20.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-07, 05:57 PM
If you really want a game that's that different from D&D, why not just actually play a different game than D&D?

Matthew
2007-04-07, 06:00 PM
I don't think that is quite what he is after. As I understand it, he is looking for an easy way to make a low magic D&D Campaign viable and still use all the Base Classes.

Lord Tataraus
2007-04-08, 12:45 AM
How about you use the spell points variant in UA, but with lower points per level? Or implement the Curse of the Magi in the Dragonlance Campaign Setting After three failed fort saves your out. Both of these are just as limiting, with the Curse of the Magi a more tamed down version of what you have. With your system, what if the DM rolls extremely low? Say about 50 or so? or even less? Then the character will keel over in a couple of days.