Soul burn and Brain burn: Hurt in a low magic campain.

[Zanatos777]

Good point Liches would become invincible.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I think burning Charisma (mental strength) for Psions is reasonable (not saying I like the rules, or think they're balanced, but if it's fun for you and your group, go for it !)

[SurlySeraph]

I'd have psionic characters also burn Con. Keeping things consistent usually makes them more balanced.

Tangentially, though I have to agree that 1d6 Con damage per spell level is a LOT. 1 or 2 Con damage per spell level would be more balanced - and, in fact, would be a pretty good way to put the full casters back on par with the normal classes.

[The_Snark]

Just a comment for those who keep saying it makes casters useless: Do you really think that spellcasters are going to be playing like a normal spellcaster would? I suspect most PCs would be multiclassed, since having high spell levels and many spells per day is fairly useless in this setting. That doesn't make it a bad setting.

You wouldn't have a party wizard, you'd have a rogue with a couple levels of wizard, or a paladin instead of a cleric (if you have clerics, with gods gone). Characters can't rely on spells, so they don't pick a class that has to rely on spells. Those who invested a level or two in a spellcasting class have some emergency firepower/surprise capabilities.

Note- Undead spellcasters should take Cha damage rather than Con damage, to prevent liches from ruling the world.

Psions... Tricky, since mental ability damage seems appropriate, but all three stats are relied on by some psionic classes. You could vary it by class.

Wilders (and others who use Charisma as their manifesting stat) burn Wisdom, as the power they're channeling reduces their ability to comprehend the world.

Psychic warriors (and others who use Wisdom) burn Intelligence, enhancing their body at the cost of their mind as they revert to more simplistic thought patterns.

Psions (and others who use Intelligence) burn Charisma, as the power they create renders them less able to relate to the world around them.

The stats I chose could be switched around fairly easily, but here's why I chose the ones I did:

First, remember that this makes the stat an important secondary stat for psions. The best psychic warriors are now clever tacticians, the best wilders are stable people so as to better be able to restrain their power, and the best psions are forceful people, capable of imposing their will on the world around them.

Second, I looked at the effect manifesting would have. A wilder would grow less and less sane as her emotions began to grow wild. A psychic warrior would become less able to think and plan, more bestial. A psion would grow cold, distant, and inhuman.

Interesting... This actually makes for a good balancing factor between magic and psionics. On the one hand, spellcasters focus on a high Con, which gives more hit points, while manifesters have to invest in a mental stat that probably doesn't give them much. But psionics functions better in this setting inherently, because powers are augmented. A 10d6 energy ray is still only a 1st-level power, dealing 1d6 ability burn; to do that much damage with a spell, you have to use a 3rd-level spell. And of course, it's safer to try and overextend manifesting abilities than spellcasting abilities.

[Arbitrarity]

All casters who want necropolitan, say "aye"
"aye!"
"aye!"
"aye!"
"aye!"
"aye!"
"aye!"

Thank you, the poll as been done . We just need libris mortis. Oh, and if it's not allowed, everyone play ToB. Or make binders with spellcasting dips, for rapid ability heal.

Note- Undead spellcasters should take Cha damage rather than Con damage, to prevent liches from ruling the world.

Nope. Note the immunity to ability damage. Write in a clause about bypassing immunity to ability damage, then we're talking.

[Starsinger]

[

Spoiler

Show

Okay, first of all.. let me get this out of the way right now. I think this is insane, and that you were bullied by primary spell casters growing up, which has left you with this burning desire to unduly punish them.

Now that that's out.. I think if everyone else burns con, why not have psions? Of course, your soul burn fluff fails because psions don't utilize the weave.. So.. Psychic backlash?

Also... how do 0 level spells work in your system? d3 con damage, or is it free from the weave burning of doom?

[Clementx]

Nope. Note the immunity to ability damage. Write in a clause about bypassing immunity to ability damage, then we're talking.

Actually, undead are immune to ability drain and Str, Dex, or Con damage. So nothing has to be changed.

Oh, and in passing- Con damage is freaking ridiculous.

[Arbitrarity]

Drat Must be mixing it up with construct.

[Ralfarius]

1 - Isn't psionics in FR pretty extra-rare? It would be just as sensible to bar psionics.
2 - The drain is just too harsh to leave magic with any sort of practicality. If you really want to stick with it, some manner of mitigating factor should be considered; for instance, a fortitude save to lessen/negate the drain every time a spell is cast.

You have to look at it objectively. Human(oid)s are not unreasonable creatures. Magic sees heavy use in a fantasy setting like FR because it makes much more possible than what would be with an equal investment of physical labour and effort. Actually casting has little downside to the spellcaster.

However, if casting even the most basic spells more than four times in a span of days carried always carried a serious risk of death, who would continue practicing? It seems to me that the art itself would basically be abandoned, because the detriments greatly exceed any benefit. If no one is practicing, how would one be able to learn? Why would they even bother to cast a spell at all? They might as well take the potential time investment and put it towards alchemical development. Magic just isn't a sane choice, when a colour spray can cut your level 1 health by 1/5 or more, without a enemy even touching you.

Basically, either bar psionics or make all the drain the same across the board. Also, consider making it less monumentally harsh.

[serow]

Perhaps 1d6 non-resistable (to get around the undead/constructs/etc immunities) non-lethal damage per spell level?

Let's let the 0-th level spells be free, surely there shouldn't be a problem with PCs casting 0-th level spells.

And besides, with Touch of Healing, it might make the casters much more playable?

[malcolm]

I think you've done a good job in finding a stat that every caster needs to be aware of, CON. In my opinion it would be most reasonable to have Psionics and indeed all forms of magic act in a similar way, blow up the CON score.

I admit it sounds like an interesting and challenging way to run magic in a campaign, I am intrigued. I think the biggest problem would be a constant micro-management of the player's Hit Points, since they will constantly be shifting max HP up and down as they gain and lose CON. You might consider letting the casters keep their current HP as temporary HP when they take CON damage.

For example a wizard with 14 CON has 20 max HP at level 4, and he takes 2 CON damage. This would make his max HP drop down to 16, but I'm suggesting you could let him stay at 20, and those extra 4HP count as temporary HP so he can only be healed up to the max of 16 until he refreshes his CON score. Either way it will be a lot of book keeping, but it sounds like you are playing with reasonable and trustworthy players (unlike some of the posters here) so you should be fine.

[GryffonDurime]

Not to go against the grain, but I like this general idea.

What? Those who know me know me as a crazed spellcaster-lover. I love spellcasters. They are, by and large, the only thing I play.

But this creates an interesting setting more akin to something Tolkeinish...the magic is there, certainly. But you've got the strength to pull off something truly amazing once, maybe twice a week. The rest of the time? You've got skills. You've got swords of your own. Maybe not so much if you're burning Constitution, especially at this rate. I think it could be toned down, or changed to match the suggested psionics spread from the Snark; it's cleaner and it lets the spellcasters contribute outside of their occassional spellbursts. If not, do consider reducing the damage to 1d4 or less...1d6 per level is just a bit much.

[VerdugoExplode]

Alright, fear not, I have a solution.

After many hours of consideration I have realized that playing a caster in your campaign is tantamount to suicide. A slow and painful suicide made all the worse due to its self inflicted nature. The casters are just going to need to make several copies of their character sheets every level so the campaign will progress as follows.

DM: You see a group of monsters!

Caster(We'll call him Ed): I cast a level 3 spell! Blargh! *dies*

Random stranger: Greetings adventurers, I am Ted, the traveling wizard, I see your group needs help! I cast fireball! Blargh! *also dies*

Random stranger 2: Greetings adventurers! I am Fred, Jed etc.

This way its all the fun of playing the caster in a system that's designed to destroy even the lowliest of casters in horrific ways.

Of course if I were in his campaign I would just whip up some tome of battle awesomeness and rule the planet, seeing as how there would be zero arcane competition.

As an addendum: Doesn't Dragonlance already have an optional rule like this? Well, not this insane but similar in effect, doing subdual damage on a failed save or something to that effect? Called the curse of the magi if I recall correctly.

[The_Snark]

To everyone who keeps harping on about how full casters are unplayable and you couldn't even cast a single fireball without risking your life...

Yes! That's the point! You don't play a character who relies on spells in a fight, because those characters die. The people who did that are all dead. Any player character has to have an alternative to casting spells.

Honestly, I don't see this kind of response when people say they banned wizards, clerics, and druids from their campaign. Nor do I see it when people mention Call of Cthulu, which will drive any character who uses spells too freely insane. It's not a campaign in which you play a straight caster who can't fight. That's the setting, and the players, from what we've heard, like it. The original poster (presumably) did not spring this on the players after they'd rolled up characters, or in the middle of the game to nerf the wizards.

It's low-magic. Personally, I like it; it gives magic a much more dramatic feeling. Increasing the power of spells would also give players a reason to take a couple levels of wizard or sorcerer, but I like the idea behind it, and the potentially lethal execution.

Edit- And you know, it would work nicely in a Fritz Leiber-inspired setting, too.

[Khanderas]

To everyone who keeps harping on about how full casters are unplayable and you couldn't even cast a single fireball without risking your life...

Yes! That's the point! You don't play a character who relies on spells in a fight, because those characters die. The people who did that are all dead. Any player character has to have an alternative to casting spells.

Honestly, I don't see this kind of response when people say they banned wizards, clerics, and druids from their campaign. Nor do I see it when people mention Call of Cthulu, which will drive any character who uses spells too freely insane. It's not a campaign in which you play a straight caster who can't fight. That's the setting, and the players, from what we've heard, like it. The original poster (presumably) did not spring this on the players after they'd rolled up characters, or in the middle of the game to nerf the wizards.

It's low-magic. Personally, I like it; it gives magic a much more dramatic feeling. Increasing the power of spells would also give players a reason to take a couple levels of wizard or sorcerer, but I like the idea behind it, and the potentially lethal execution.

Edit- And you know, it would work nicely in a Fritz Leiber-inspired setting, too.

I was going to write that, but you did it better.

The point here is that magic is hard, dependency on magic items is all but nullified and even casters can do something else. Magic is a hidden, powerful bonus and wont ever be a necessity (since the DR no longer take +1 or the such into account anymore).

[DruchiiConversion]

I quite like it.

But some things need changing. Like you say, casters aren't going to use their spells in normal battle. That would just be stupidity, they'd die every time. So what ARE they going to do in battle? With a d4 hit dice, half BAB and no proficiencies, not much.

So simply buff up the Wizard/Sorcerer/etc to Cleric levels - d8 hit dice, 3/4BAB. Then you've got a secondary combat character who can occasionally pull out something truly amazing at great cost to himself. Sounds a little like Gandalf to me.

[Neon Knight]

To everyone who keeps harping on about how full casters are unplayable and you couldn't even cast a single fireball without risking your life...

Yes! That's the point! You don't play a character who relies on spells in a fight, because those characters die. The people who did that are all dead. Any player character has to have an alternative to casting spells.

Honestly, I don't see this kind of response when people say they banned wizards, clerics, and druids from their campaign. Nor do I see it when people mention Call of Cthulu, which will drive any character who uses spells too freely insane. It's not a campaign in which you play a straight caster who can't fight. That's the setting, and the players, from what we've heard, like it. The original poster (presumably) did not spring this on the players after they'd rolled up characters, or in the middle of the game to nerf the wizards.

It's low-magic. Personally, I like it; it gives magic a much more dramatic feeling. Increasing the power of spells would also give players a reason to take a couple levels of wizard or sorcerer, but I like the idea behind it, and the potentially lethal execution.

Edit- And you know, it would work nicely in a Fritz Leiber-inspired setting, too.

This isn't comparable to CoC because in CoC, you are supposed to die or go insane. That's practically the point of the game. No one minds if their character goes insane because if he didn't go insane casting spells, he'd probably get eaten by a Shoggoth or something. Death or insanity is a matter of when, not if.

If he'd just banned spellcasters, I wouldn't have a problem with it. If spellcasters attempt to employ their abilities, they drastically reduce their chances of survival. This change feels as if he's not trying to make a low magic setting, it feels like he's trying to actively punish anyone who has an interest playing a spellcaster.

This is DnD, not Paranoia. Most people expect a reasonably high chance of survival so long as they do everything right. They probably expect combat with some moderate frequency, seeing as how the system is based off of roughly 4 encounters a day. Under this set of expectations, this alterations appear insane. I don't know, maybe he only has a battle once a week. That might give someone enough time to fully recover. It would still be psycho to cast even the weakest of spells.

This not low magic; this is effectively no magic, with the caveat that anyone who does try to spellcast will be punished. Only a suicidal fool would try to cast spells under these conditions.

I don't mind spellcasters having a cost to their spellcasting, but the magnitude of this particular burden is too great to be reasonably borne.

And I say all this as a man who personally does not like spellcasting.

Kay, I'm done with that. Now, on to the main point. Psionic people should suffer no soul burn because their power does not come from the Weave. It comes from themselves. So, you should probably just ban psionics, or alter their fluff.

[Bender]

I would play in a setting like that. Probably some levels in bard or sorcerer, but always multiclassed and never as primary class.

For psionics I vote for the same treatment as wizards: con. For augmenting spells, they could take subdual damage on top of that.

I don't think a Lich would exist in a very low magic setting, since they rely on very high magic, so no problem there.

just a few questions out of interest: how do you handle supernatural and spell-like abilities. For example, bardic music could be very powerful in this setting. Or a gnome's spell-like abilities...
And what about material components: nobody knows about them, so how do PC's acquire them? Same goes for materials for crafting (which might of course be completely impossible, imagine being able to brew a potion of cure light wounds and selling it to kings for 1000's of gold pieces)
Wizards: they study in wizard schools; there are no wizard schools... I'd only allow sorcerers or similar, since they can learn it themselves.

[leperkhaun]

honestly i dont think it play in this campagin. ehhhh, i think the point was to not play a caster, bieng able to do one super thing (weeeee i get 2 fireballs a week) twice a week is......... then doing other stuff subpar the rest of the week.

Time for the VoP Monk.

Anyway my concern would be this. How do you deal with creatures with damage reduction?

[Bender]

Time for the VoP Monk.

That thought occurred to me as well

[Azerian Kelimon]

Man, this is bad. Really bad. As everyone said, banning magic at least makes your intentions clear. This system, however, fools people into thinking they still can play casters, which is not such the case.


And, for this apocalyptic FR, lemme bring Azerian Kelrain, my ECL 100 swordsage and other things, as a level 19 swordy. And lemme prep my step of the dancing moth stance, time stands still, girallon windmill flesh rip, and raging mongoose. And now, if I win init, I leave everyone in shame. At level 5, I'll be stronger than ol' Elminster. If you go this way, you'll also have to ban the nonmagical blade magic of ToB, truenaming, and more. This isn't good.


If you are hellbent on a system like this, make it this way. You can cast a number of spell per day, and a number of those spells go per level, as in, you can cast 1 level 9 spell per day without drawbacks at level 18, nd 6 1st level spells, 4 3rd level spells, and so on and so forth. You can also cast as much as you want, but after you pass the selected number, you take special penalties. First spell over the mark, 1 con damage. Second spell, 1d3. Third one, 1d6. Fourth one, 1 level drain. Fifth one, death. This way, casters are limited, while still a potentially useful force.

[Indon]

Personally, I would just use the spell point variant (which gives casters a pool of points like psionicists), then cut the points substancially, like 2/3'rds or something.

[leperkhaun]

honestly i dont think it play in this campagin. ehhhh, i think the point was to not play a caster, bieng able to do one super thing (weeeee i get 2 fireballs a week) twice a week is......... then doing other stuff subpar the rest of the week.

Time for the VoP Monk.

Anyway my concern would be this. How do you deal with creatures with damage reduction?

[Riffington]

Wow. There sure are a bunch of people who don't get this concept at all.
Why would Vow of Poverty give bonuses in a game where there are no magic items anyway? How could a lich (a giant magical energy leech) live in a world where there is no magic to sustain it? I don't actually want answers to those questions - instead answer this.

Suppose you (the reader) met some visiting aliens who offered you the power of any 5th level D&D class. They're leaving and have no plans to give anyone else such an offer this century.
You can have astounding rogue skills and the ability to stab anyone so that he'll die immediately. You can have the ability to box or shoot better than an olympian, and take four bullets to the head before going down (these other options allow only two). Or you can have the ability to spellcast -but will have the flu for a day or two afterwards. Wizard isn't such a bad choice (though Bard might be better).

[Kyeudo]

Or you can have the ability to spellcast -but will have the flu for a day or two afterwards. Wizard isn't such a bad choice (though Bard might be better).

1d6 Con damage isn't the flu. It's like being poisoned with Large Scorpian Venom, and it gets worse from there.

[Azerian Kelimon]

I agree. 1d6 CON damage is more like bubonic plague for us. We prbably recove 1 con per week, also.

And if I received such an offer, I'd just screw the fine print of the offer and go swordsage. Bam, top physical condition, excellent swordsmaster, can ignite my weapon on fire, can cloak myself in shadows, can...etc. And making me sick by using my powers is not an option, since I'd need to be fit and healthy to use 'em anyway. Touché, BardicDuelist says.

[Starsinger]

Here.. let me clarify my objections... 1d6 con damage per spell level. So Colorspray is 1-6 con damage. One con damage is fine, SIX?! Who would pay 6 con damage for a low level spell? And it just gets worse. 2-12? What on earth would possess someone to pay up to 12 con for a second level spell? Then there are third level.. 3-18 con! That means, if you aren't a dwarf, you're most likely dead.

I also agree that it's awfully jerky. I mean... let's say you only dip in sorcerer. How important is that truestrike or whatever spell to you? Is it so important that you're willing to risk 6 con for it? It'd be better to ban spell casters instead of this. Example: I'm upset because spell casters suck in FF1 (On the NES). I'm not upset because I can't play spell caster in Halo because it's not an option. It was never there, to tempt me.

[Yodaman23]

I would play in a setting like that. Probably some levels in bard or sorcerer, but always multiclassed and never as primary class.

For psionics I vote for the same treatment as wizards: con. For augmenting spells, they could take subdual damage on top of that.

I don't think a Lich would exist in a very low magic setting, since they rely on very high magic, so no problem there.

just a few questions out of interest: how do you handle supernatural and spell-like abilities. For example, bardic music could be very powerful in this setting. Or a gnome's spell-like abilities...
And what about material components: nobody knows about them, so how do PC's acquire them? Same goes for materials for crafting (which might of course be completely impossible, imagine being able to brew a potion of cure light wounds and selling it to kings for 1000's of gold pieces)
Wizards: they study in wizard schools; there are no wizard schools... I'd only allow sorcerers or similar, since they can learn it themselves.

I am likeing how more people are getting this, particularly snarky. Thanks for the feedback peoples.
Spell like and supernatural don't work until you master your "flow". Which is learning how to regulate your internal energies. Its hard to do and unlikely that many characters will but when a character does they are unbeatable.

There are no liches, no undead. They are magic creatures, no soul = no magic to hold them.

Material componants are negligiable in this system, just soul energy.
Magic Items can't hold a charge for more then 24 hours so its pretty much single use only.
Wizards have to self teach themselves, which offers a strange, oh how the mighty have fallen aspect to them. It created a strange relationship between the wizard and sorcerer of the party.

[Daimbert]

It seems to me like it would solve all of the issues in this thread (the "What do I do about Psionics?" as well as the "Oh my God! Why would anyone play a pure spellcaster?") by keeping the levels as is and simply basing it off of hitpoints. So your second level spell could take up to 12 of your hitpoints away if you cast it. Why I think this works:

1) It makes sense for all types of casters. Burns your soul? That HURTS, weakens you, and certainly distracts you from defending yourself. Psionics? It blasts your brain, which HURTS, weakens you, and distracts you from defending yourself. Wisdom based? HURTS, weakens, distracts. It makes sense for everyone since HP basically just reflects some sort of damage that can kill you ... and this is indeed something that can kill you. You can't replace CON hits with any other stat for Psionics since from what people are saying here CON going to 0 = death, but that isn't true for any other stat.

2) It preserves the "protect the caster" attitude: if the caster is burning off HP to cast spells, someone hitting them is not going to be conducive to the survival of the party.

3) It seems to make spellcasting still fairly limited, since major and powerful spells could leave a caster close to death. And it even preserves the idea of sacrifice, since in some cases a caster might take the chance to cast a powerful spell.

4) It allows for pure or mostly pure casters, since it will take longer to kill (especially at higher levels) them than CON drain does.

5) Healing magic becomes a transfer of HP, which seems quite neat [grin].

6) It would allow for lichs and undead ... after all, they have HP as well and so they'd be limited in any spellcasting they wanted to do as well.

If you don't think it's severe enough of a restriction, you can add to it, but it seems okay to me. HP seems to be your best consistent option that preserves everything you're trying to achieve.

[Nasrudith]

Perhaps it should be 1d4 con damage per level instead. Upward progression would be severely limited with casters if at say level 8 their highest level spells would fall under the category of "only use for heroic self sacrifice ". Then again that may not be a problem if level 6 is the equivalent of epic in the campaign.