PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Looking for ideas on how to replace spellcasting for a non-magical campaign.



Arkhios
2015-11-25, 07:04 AM
Hi!
I'm new to this forum, so please, be gentle!

I've been running somewhat on/off this homebrew campaign of mine, set in a post-apocalyptic world where high-tech is ancient history and magic is so scarce that the spellcasting classes couldn't exist (at least as we know them from generic fantasy worlds).
I began this experiment on Pathfinder, using only classes that couldn't create flamboyant magical effects (such as Fireball etc.) out of thin air, and at that time only allowed martial bent classes, which did their things at the end of their blades or the like (e.g. barbarians, fighters, rogues, or gunslingers) with one oddity as the rule-breaker: Alchemist.

As 5th edition D&D (finally) was released, I felt I should try and convert this idea to 5th edition rules. Obviously some classes from Pathfinder didn't exist in any form in 5th edition and it would've been too much work to build up and balance all missing classes (namely the quite fitting gunslinger and alchemist), I decided to just drop them, and go with what we had from PHB; which left us with barbarian, fighter, and rogue, and none of them had any sufficient self-healing abilities for the long run, except maybe fighter. I decided to postpone the idea at that point.
However, when the Ranger variant that replaces spells with maneuvers and poultices was introduced I chose to give it another shot, and so far what I've gathered from my little group, it's been fun.

Now, what I'd like to do, is to explore possibilites to introduce some of the existing spellcasting classes, to the world, albeit with their spellcasting abilities replaced with something of equal value.
If you have any ideas, please do share!

I have had some ideas of my own, but I'm not entirely sure whether they're balanced, let alone of equal value to spellcasting...
The most recent idea was to replace Bard's spellcasting with a more emphasized bardic performance ability, seeing as it's currently on lower priority for the class, which is actually kind of odd for a Bard. It would improve the effects of your existing Bardic Inspirations, including both the Cutting Words (of Lore) and the Combat Inspiration (of Valor), as well as possibly, instead, bestow another effects.

So, with some holes in the design (maybe for you to fill in?):
Bardic Performance
Uses: I think it would be reasonable to have this ability to replace Bardic Inspiration, and make its functions as part of this, instead of being an optional side-feature.
Duration: Up to 10 minute (Concentration).
Description: As an action, you begin your performance which extends to 30 feet range, and can affect a total of up to 3 targets for the duration at 1st level, increased by 2 targets at 5th, 11th, and again at 17th level, up to 9 targets at 17th level and above. The targets can be either allies or enemies, depending on the effect it bestows.

In general, this ability would give Bardic Inspiration die to more than one target at with one use, and be able to tap on while the performance lasts. Taking some credence of previous editions, using different kind of instruments might provide certain penalties and benefits. Like, a bard playing a lute for this performance obviously couldn't attack for the duration, but maybe it could boost the effect somehow? And maybe give the Performance skill check a chance at being somehow related to the actual effect, too!

Any thoughts, comments, ideas, or critiques?

Flashy
2015-11-25, 07:25 AM
At first glance it seems like your biggest problem is going to be that the world you're trying to convert for doesn't really seem to allow for big flashy effects of any kind, and that's sort of built into a couple of the spellcasting classes. An evoker wizard isn't going to fit well into a minimum magic scenario very well no matter what you try, since it's sort of built into the concept. I think the best place to start is to clarify for yourself what it is about the full casters you think the game needs. Are you looking for more combat buffs, or big explosions, or weird mind altering effects, or some other class option you think your players should have access to?


Also, it's been thrown around a fair amount on the forum before but I hear that warlock refluffs to a quasi-magical gunslinger really well. Treat the eldritch blast as a revolver, fluff the invocations as some combination of grit, luck, and resolve, and prune the spell list back a bit and you've probably got something that would gel with your world pretty effectively.

EDIT: There's also the universally acclaimed Artificer of Alancia (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?367999-5e-Homebrew-The-Artificer-(of-Alancia)) homebrew, which might help fill the gap left by switching to a system without an alchemist. It might be a bit too magitech-y for your campaign, but it could be a useful starting point.

Ninja_Prawn
2015-11-25, 07:44 AM
The problem with replacing a full caster's spellcasting is that it provides the vast majority of everything that class can do. Look at all the dead levels in the wizard and cleric tables. That's an awful lot to fill.

If I were you, I would start by homebrewing new classes from the ground up - or by adding more subclasses to the four you've already got. You can find plenty of examples on these fora and I would recommend looking at Twelvetrees' 5e homebrew compendium (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?396519-D-amp-D-5e-Homebrew-Compendium) as a starting point. Also I'd allow monks. The PHB makes ki sound like magic, but there's really no need to keep that bit of fluff.

Grey Watcher
2015-11-25, 08:10 AM
Some friends of mine and I have been running a low-magic campaign for a few months now and honestly, it's worked very well with just 5e RAW. I'll post some more details when I'm at a computer and not my phone, buy you really can create a viable party using just Fighters, Rogues, Barbarians, and Monks (even with banning Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, and the Way of the Four Elements).

Arkhios
2015-11-25, 08:55 AM
At first glance it seems like your biggest problem is going to be that the world you're trying to convert for doesn't really seem to allow for big flashy effects of any kind, and that's sort of built into a couple of the spellcasting classes.

Agreed, this is why I decided to narrow down a bit what I'm aiming for. Some of the full casters have more than just their spells to give for the game. Especially Bard...


I think the best place to start is to clarify for yourself what it is about the full casters you think the game needs. Are you looking for more combat buffs, or big explosions, or weird mind altering effects, or some other class option you think your players should have access to?

...from which we come to what I wish to apply. I think the world might need someone to bolster the vigor and someone to look for spiritual guidance, even if none actual divine entities existed. A morale booster class, and maybe a shamanistic class. A totem warrior barbarian does some of it, sure, but a real "shaman", without spells but something else would be nice. Which leaves me to think that Bard would qualify for the Morale Booster, and Druid might work for the Shaman. Only would have to figure out a way to change the spells for something else. And wild shape from druid is a bit too magical as well, so something to replace it as well.


Also, it's been thrown around a fair amount on the forum before but I hear that warlock refluffs to a quasi-magical gunslinger really well. Treat the eldritch blast as a revolver, fluff the invocations as some combination of grit, luck, and resolve, and prune the spell list back a bit and you've probably got something that would gel with your world pretty effectively.

It sure is nice idea, but a bit too outlandish and alien to my tastes. Considering that DMG already has rules for firearms, I've decided to forget the gunslinger as a class and allow everyone proficiency to wield them, to a certain degree. Besides, now that everyone, not just melee, get their attack ability score for damage too, it wouldn't bring much new to have a gunslinger on its own. A Battle Master fighter with firearms would do the trick really well.


EDIT: There's also the universally acclaimed Artificer of Alancia homebrew, which might help fill the gap left by switching to a system without an alchemist. It might be a bit too magitech-y for your campaign, but it could be a useful starting point.

That's... an interesting one. I do have allowed Warforged into the game, as well as created rules for prosthetics; serious trauma may cause you lose limbs and such, so... I might add that Artificer, indeed. Plus I'm a big fan of Eberron, so what's there not to like :)

On the matter of Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster, I've decided to allow them for Warforged only. Trying to re-fluff the few spells they get access to feel like the effects were created by advanced technology, rather than magic.

Oh, and I decided to exclude evocation and conjuration spells from their lists, with a few exceptions. An Eldritch Knight might create a fiery blast with built-in technology, thus I allowed Fire Bolt cantrip, for example, even though it's from evocation school.


If I were you, I would start by homebrewing new classes from the ground up - or by adding more subclasses to the four you've already got. -- Also I'd allow monks. The PHB makes ki sound like magic, but there's really no need to keep that bit of fluff.

I'm aware of the troubles what tinkering with the huge chunk of classes' core might bring up, but still, I think it's worth a try. I've actually already tinkered a bit with some of the first classes to better fit the fantasy of each classes in their respective places of the world. With the Totem Warrior Path, for instance, I added a few more totems to choose from, (and all before SCAG was released mind you!).

Thanks for seconding a thought I've had for some time now. I suppose I could allow monks too, and indeed restrict them from using certain archetypes. Ki is quasi-magical in nature, but not too much so, and could be coped with.

Arkhios
2015-11-26, 09:11 AM
Not sure if I should begin a new thread concerning the matter at hand or continue here.

I'm thinking of delving deeper into the spell-less bard variant, and despite it's definitely going to be a massive change in the core of the class, I'd like to focus on the idea rather than try to avoid the issue.

What I've cobbled up so far is as follows:

Spellcasting (including cantrips) and Bardic Inspiration re-designed to what I think more closely resembles the idea of a class focused on Performance and its effects on the audience. The following concept might be somewhat quasi-magical (hey, look what I learned! A new word, which I'm blatantly repeating - and for a reason! :D), but it should be fine for what I had in mind in the first place.

So, let's assume that there are roughly equal amount of Musical Instruments as there are Cantrips available for the Bard to choose from and to become trained with:

Each cantrip "slot" could be translated to a focused training in each Musical Instrument that the bard has become proficient with.
For example, at 1st level, the Bard's Class Table tells us that bard would know 3 Cantrips. What if, instead, he's got focused training in 3 separate Instruments?
And this Focused Training (dubbed so, for now) would eventually dictate the types of special Bardic Performances gained at certain levels (these levels being equal to when the bard would normally gain another spell level and and gain access to learn a new spell of that level). Obviously the train of thought here is, that the Performances would emulate the effects of the spells in a way that could be, reasonably, seen as if channeled through an instrument.

As a matter of fact, I think all performing done without instruments (singing, dancing, mimicing, poetry, oratory, whatever you figure) could be translated to the very basic performance which every bard learn, being equal to the current effects of Bardic Inspiration, and their added functions from Colleges at 3rd level. The spells converted to bardic performances, would, however count as his or her specialization with the given instruments with he has got special training in.

I've got no examples on the spells as performances, at least not yet, but I'm fairly sure it can be done.

Any comments on this? Any ideas of possible Performances?

Bruno Carvalho
2015-11-26, 09:19 AM
Why not just reflavor spellcasting as "digging artifacts from the past" and boom?

Fireball? Thats a grenade, whom you can Mcguiverly craft a few each day. Charm Person? thats a solar-powered mind-influencing gadget whose batery runs out after a few uses. Cure Light Wounds? Your good ol' medkit, but only a trained medic may use it. No rules change, no rebalance needed, and we're all set to go.

Arkhios
2015-11-26, 10:00 AM
Why not just reflavor spellcasting as "digging artifacts from the past" and boom?

Fireball? Thats a grenade, whom you can Mcguiverly craft a few each day. Charm Person? thats a solar-powered mind-influencing gadget whose batery runs out after a few uses. Cure Light Wounds? Your good ol' medkit, but only a trained medic may use it. No rules change, no rebalance needed, and we're all set to go.

While I acknowledge re-flavoring is a good way to sort things out, the very Unearthed Arcana article (from WotC, no less) about Modifying Classes gave us all a few examples on how to re-design certain features of a class, I took it as an encouragement to try the same. Why should a spellcasting worth of 9-spell levels be any different than half-caster spellcasting, such as ranger's? It's a class feature as any other, and by that fact alone, it should be equally tinkerable. I feel that the simple spell re-flavoring is just lazy and not very creative. No offense meant.

Edit: Actually, that spell-reflavoring could make sense if I decided to allow a wizard with the artificer tradition. Wizards get about everything their class stands for from their spells, so that could work. But I think I'll pass nevertheless.

And I'm not trying to create a Bardic Performance equivalent for each spell on the bard spell list, but capture similar spells into separate concepts, that could be chosen at levels when you would get more spells known.

Think of it as if creating a new class, with bard as the general idea.

cooldes
2015-11-28, 02:31 AM
I personally think that to achieve a no magic campaign, you'd have to just tell the PCs no full casters. so they can't pick Druid, Wizard, Cleric, Sorcerer, Bard, Warlock.

Next, the easy part is if they pick the martial classes. (fighter, rogue, monk, barbarian)

if they want to be a Half caster(ranger, Paladin), then i'd work with them on how and what to trade for magic.
Wizards has an article here
https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/modifying-classes
(^scroll down to the first example, "Ranger with no spells")

this shows ways to and how to exchange spells for other things in certain classes.

Arkhios
2015-11-29, 02:48 AM
I personally think that to achieve a no magic campaign, you'd have to just tell the PCs no full casters. so they can't pick Druid, Wizard, Cleric, Sorcerer, Bard, Warlock.

Next, the easy part is if they pick the martial classes. (fighter, rogue, monk, barbarian)

if they want to be a Half caster(ranger, Paladin), then i'd work with them on how and what to trade for magic.
Wizards has an article here
https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/modifying-classes
(^scroll down to the first example, "Ranger with no spells")

this shows ways to and how to exchange spells for other things in certain classes.

Umm... this is what I did in the first place? No news here. All of the above makes me wonder did you even read my original post thorougly.

I want to add bard for its other core features. Spellcasting and all related features are the ones I'd wish to modify.
That article you referenced is the whole point of this idea. And again, I don't see why everybody is trying to avoid the discussion of replacing a class feature (case in point: modifying a class). What does it matter if it is half or full-caster's spellcasting? It's still a separate class feature - a building block - which I want to change. The ranger variant is only an example... It's not exclusively for half-casters.

The bard is a lot more than his spells. They're only a fraction - maybe one fourth - of the class.