Ideas on Magic

[Sizzlefoot]

I'm going to be honest: I'm not really a fan of the magic in the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Greyhawk, etc. In my opinion, magic should be subtler and much less common. Sure, in the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and many other settings, it's stated that magic is rare, but then why is it that almost every adventuring party in existence has at least one magic-using member? If you use magic to often, it ceases to be, well, magical.

[Paleomancer]

I'm going to be honest: I'm not really a fan of the magic in the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Greyhawk, etc. In my opinion, magic should be subtler and much less common. Sure, in the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and many other settings, it's stated that magic is rare, but then why is it that almost every adventuring party in existence has at least one magic-using member? If you use magic to often, it ceases to be, well, magical.

I apologize in advance, but I'm not entirely clear on what is your question or concern, aside from a dislike of frequent use or wide prevalence of magic in D&D. Is this for a campaign? Or just curiosity on your end?

[Goaty14]

Soo... you're looking for a setting that expresses low magic more thoroughly, or are you looking for existing options to make an existing setting low magic...?

[Edenbeast]

Sure, in the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and many other settings, it's stated that magic is rare, but then why is it that almost every adventuring party in existence has at least one magic-using member?

I'm not really sure what your point is, but I can try to answer your question. It's in part related to the game system: at level 1 players can chose to start off as cleric or wizard, or another magic user, besides fighters or rogues, etc. Another reason is the classic image of a fantasy adventuring party: containing a cleric, fighter, rogue, and wizard. Also, to many players the ability to cast spells of some sort sounds attractive in a fantasy setting. If magic is available, then why not use it? In many game systems the PC's are seen as the heroes of the story to whom magic came naturally in some way, while to the mundane people magic is something from songs and legends.

You mention D&D settings only, so I assume that this is the system you play (mainly). D&D in general is high magic, with the players being the heroes. The system is build towards that and offers limited options to make it low magic (imho). If you are unsatisfied with that premise, then you could look into systems that are specifically build toward low-magic, gritty adventures. I have only experience with Warhammer Fantasy Role-play (WFRP) 2nd edition, and Dark Heresy, where there is still some magic, but there are actual risks to using it. I also played Call of Cthulhu, where the players are just ordinary people drawn into a magic/fantastical realm. I'm sure others here have better suggestions. To be honest I actually enjoy playing in the high magic worlds of Pathfinder and D&D.

In terms of making D&D low magic, I think experienced folks here can point you toward home-brew stuff. In my opinion the alternatives from the DMG don't help too much in reducing magic. Maybe it makes the world a bit grittier and harder, but then I always found that WFRP does this better.

[Xuc Xac]

Sure, in the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and many other settings, it's stated that magic is rare, but then why is it that almost every adventuring party in existence has at least one magic-using member?

In the real world, spies with super high tech gadgets and a broad range of combat, technical, social, and language skills that would let them fulfill multiple vastly different mission roles in any country on Earth are so rare that they probably don't even exist because it's a waste of resources to put that much into one guy. And yet, every James Bond movie features one or more of them in the main roles.

In the Marvel Cinematic Universe, superheroes are rare. So far there have been a few dozen in a world with a population of 7 or 8 billion. And yet, every Marvel movie features at least a handful of superheroes in it.

There is less than one professional soccer player per square mile when you consider the Earth as a whole, but if you watch a game on TV, you'll see dozens of them in the same stadium together.

It's a matter of focus. In most D&D settings, magic is supposed to be rare, but you play the rare people that run into it regularly.

Plus, there are many popular settings where magic isn't rare.

[Goaty14]

You could totally run a campaign wherein none of the PCs can use magic, but it just becomes harder to resolve common fantasy problems.

The 15th level barbarian is at 1/115 HP? Guess we'll have to wait a couple of weeks to heal him again...

The fabled city is all the way over there? Alright chums, start calculating rations.

[LordWarGod]

I'm going to be honest: I'm not really a fan of the magic in the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Greyhawk, etc. In my opinion, magic should be subtler and much less common. Sure, in the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and many other settings, it's stated that magic is rare, but then why is it that almost every adventuring party in existence has at least one magic-using member? If you use magic to often, it ceases to be, well, magical.

I think it's likely for game design purposes that they ignore logic and consistency.

[the_david]

In the real world, spies with super high tech gadgets and a broad range of combat, technical, social, and language skills that would let them fulfill multiple vastly different mission roles in any country on Earth are so rare that they probably don't even exist because it's a waste of resources to put that much into one guy. And yet, every James Bond movie features one or more of them in the main roles.

In the Marvel Cinematic Universe, superheroes are rare. So far there have been a few dozen in a world with a population of 7 or 8 billion. And yet, every Marvel movie features at least a handful of superheroes in it.

There is less than one professional soccer player per square mile when you consider the Earth as a whole, but if you watch a game on TV, you'll see dozens of them in the same stadium together.

It's a matter of focus. In most D&D settings, magic is supposed to be rare, but you play the rare people that run into it regularly.

Plus, there are many popular settings where magic isn't rare.

And then there's the fact that it's not much fun to play a commoner. (Unless you want to enter the Survivor prestige class early.) Any important NPC isn't likely to have levels in a NPC class.

When people say that D&D is high magic, they mean that a 6th level wizard can do what Gandalf can do. There's not much you can change about that, except for maybe switching to e6. The fact still is that a lot of people like to kill a lich every now and then.

I'm a bit intrigued by the idea of a low magic campaign using D&D or Pathfinder. If all the spellcasters are either party members or villains, doesn't that insinuate that magic is evil? And how would you create such a setting?

[Mechalich]

'High-magic' is a highly generalized term that means different things. In particular, it is important to break this down on at least two different axis: frequency and power.

High-magic can mean that magic is powerful and abundant - as it is in the Forgotten Realms. It can also mean that magic is powerful but rare, limited to handful of figures scattered across the world - as it is in Conan. Further it can mean that magic is abundant but weak, with magic representing mostly minor parlor tricks or trivial conveniences largely incapable of broad-scale influence - ASOIAF closely matches this, especially at the start, there's lots of magic users, but until the dragons show up, their power is tightly constrained.

D&D, generally, and especially in d20 versions, is an extremely high-magic universe. Even E6 is high-magic, with spellcasters being less common but low-level effects still widely present (and many 1st level D&D spells are shockingly powerful). This is not uncommon in literature, there are plenty of worlds that are high magic in modern fantasy: Wheel of Time, Stormlight Archive, Code Alera, and others are all flooded with magic.

Beyond this, there's the question of whether or not magic should be 'mysterious,' 'mystical,' and 'subtle.' Magic being bizarre and mysterious is different from whether magic is powerful or common. You can have a setting where magic is almost incomprehensible and extremely subtle while still being incredibly powerful - as in the Cthulhu Mythos - exactly how to summon an elder evil is unclear, the results of doing so are not. At the same time you can have a setting where magic is equally subtle and confusing, and not capable of doing very much, such as a world in which fortune telling, séances, and other occultism produce results.

Magic that is 'mysterious and subtle' has a problem in game-design though. Players expect game rules to work consistently, if you do an effect it should have an expected result, with the result usually being determined probabilistically. This makes inherently inconsistent things difficult to portray. The options are basically randomness or fiat. The first has all sorts of problems - people hate wild mages. Even though the results may balance out mathematically people are generally risk-averse and the possibility of random chance producing a result the completely derails the storyline ruins game planning. Fiat, of course, has all the usual problems. This is just one of those things that doesn't work as well in a multiplayer game as it does in a single-author narrative.

[jqavins]

I see two issues. One is setting descriptions that say "magic is rare" for settings that include magic item shops and a ready supply of mages for hire.

The other is high magic settings used where, as a matter of taste, one would prefer a low magic setting.

When both of these occur at the same time, you've been promised the low magic setting you want only to have that promise broken, I can well understand being annoyed.

As others have said, even when magic truly is rare, parties will include mages unless it is super-duper-rare, because PCs are some of the few, extraordinary people. That tends to be forgotten in other contexts as well. PCs are expected to have primary ability scores for their classes of 16 or better, often 18, when those scores are extremely rare among the general population who's abilities are straight 3d6. To have, for instance, an 18 strength and a 14 (or higher) constitution makes you better (in those two stats) than over 99.9% of the population, yet it's what we expect of PC fighters. If only one in a thousand people can cast spells then we should expect one or more in most parties of PCs.

I'd like to design or play in a setting with rare-but-powerful high magic. The problem is that when the party will have a caster or two because PCs are extraordinary people, and the villains will have or be casters because a) they're also extraordinary and b) they have to be a challenge for the party that has them, it's hard to express "You guys see and use this every day, but it really is rare, honest." Not having magic shops etc. is a start, but it's not enough.

If all the spellcasters are either party members or villains, doesn't that insinuate that magic is evil?

No. If magic is possessed equally by villians (evil) and party members (presumably good) then it does not.

[Vogie]

I'm going to be honest: I'm not really a fan of the magic in the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Greyhawk, etc. In my opinion, magic should be subtler and much less common. Sure, in the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and many other settings, it's stated that magic is rare, but then why is it that almost every adventuring party in existence has at least one magic-using member? If you use magic to often, it ceases to be, well, magical.

I'm not really a fan of martial prowess in Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Greyhawk, etc. In my opinion, martial prowess should be subtler and much less common. Why is it that almost every adventuring party in existence has at least one non-magic-using member? If magic exists, why would people in those worlds actively avoid it, and instead put themselves into stupid situations where they're charging towards an enemy (who can level a building by themselves) while wearing a metal can and shaking a sharp stick? If your characters have to deny their own reality that often, it ceases to be realistic.

Let's be serious... if you were making a team of special operatives in todays world, would you just have one person with any technology? Would we expect a SWAT team to include a UFC Fighter, and less than half of the team have any ammunition-driven ranged weapons? Of course not.

[Anymage]

My issue with D&D magic is that it's more reliable and predictable than mundane abilities. Swing a sword, shoot a bow, or use a skill, you have to roll for it. Cast a spell, it just happens. Which may be acceptable if you go full Vance and say that spells are essentially rare lost technology of some forgotten golden age, but that's not how wizards play at any table I've ever seen and other caster types completely break that assumption.

Of course, while I could mention elements I'd like in a magic system and other games have generally focused on those. (Overwhelmingly: Supernatural abilities should generally require a roll, unless their whole point is to enhance the roll for a mundane ability to a preternatural degree. And characters should only have a limited number of supernatural abilities - bought with XP if the system works that way, sorcerelike/fixed list caster in a D&D system.) Backfitting D&D to move away from the old model of spellcasting from the original Gygax and Arneson era is easier said than done, though.

[Paleomancer]

So it’s more the lack of consistency between how the games function mechanically versus the setting fluff? That makes your complaint make much more sense to me, and it is a valid point. Previous posters have addressed the conflict between mechanics and fluff, the latter often being sacrificed to the former. It’s kinda hard to avoid this; yonder fighters and rogues will get their aorta punctured many times, and without magic, it strains credibility that normal humans could heal life-threatening injuries repeatedly. Magic fixes this problem, along with travel, communications, and protections. One can play this game, but then you need some system to replace it, and in-game downtime is implicitly necessary (as are spare characters - expect a lot of even high-level characters to die under base D&D rules). Plus it is only reasonable that if it is useful, people will seek it out.

As it is a fantasy world, you also have to account for magical creatures. D&D assumes magic creatures are common, and most are more vulnerable to magic than martial prowess. Some creatures, like Dragons, owe their very existence to supernatural power (by size alone, huge/gargantuan/colossal dragons/giants are egregiously violating the square-cube law in a way that, absent magic, should injure ot kill them outright before PCs ever find them). Obviously there’s compartmentalization of magic A/B/C going on there, but a magic-poor universe either limits the presence of supernatural creatures or insists that magic A is different from magic B, and then why haven’t smart humanoids figured out how to tap that?

One possibility to restore balance is to state that in your version of the setting, magic has some hefty costs. For example, (and you may already know of it) the Discworld fantasy series has magic treated as the equivalent of nuclear radiation: very potent when used well, but unreliable, uncontrollable, and very dangerous (mundane technology is a great deal safer and anyone can use it). As such, even Disc wizards prefer not to use magic, and creatures that depend on magic to survive or even exist (noble dragons, the world turtle, elves) have to be careful they don’t ingest too much (never explained what happens, but presumably they implode or something nasty in that order). In the Conan stories, magic is very dangerous, tapping into the power of dread beings that are some combination of alien, eldritch, divine, or profane, and is an inherently corrupting force for mortals.