House Rule Balance Advice

[Axiled]

I had an idea for a campaign but it would need more than a few house rules. My other concern as that, with the house rules, it would horrible unbalance a lot of things.... so advice! May also need some help with the lore too...

Here is just a little bit of information about the lore of the place I am working on...

All magic is fueled by the gods. Divine, Arcane, Natural, all of it.
Divine is directly fueled by the gods so clerics require a deity. Druidic magic is fueled by the gods of nature.
Arcane Magic is fueled by a different set of gods. Essentially, those who use Arcane Magic will be linked to one god or another.

The gods are dying. Some may already be dead. As a result, all magical abilities are now using the residual magic left in the world to function, but it is far from reliable. Some societies collapsed due to their reliance on magical devices, which are also failing. Most wizards are now nothing more than weak old men.
___________________
How this would impact gameplay...
Each spell has a chance to fail. I was thinking starting off with a 75% chance to fail (there will be ways to change this, dont worry!). Items also have to be rolled for each day to see if they work or not.
___________________

Technology has become increasingly important. Great developments have arrived in the recent years, such as 'Magic Generators'. These generators absorb and release magic in a field around them, fueling ALL spells and magical items while they are within the field. This technology is highly sought after and kingdoms wage war for the design and technology.


I want the players to start off as citizens in a country that is at war. They would be in a small town that honestly doesnt care about the war and is completely unaffected by it. They are that unimportant. One player will be a young orphaned human child (from there, they can do what they want.... adopted, living on the streets, ect). Everyone would know each other, small town after all. The town does get attacked by quasi-real illusions; ie magic. Of course, Im not going to explain that the big tall scary army guys attacking are illusions but that they are going to be killing a lot of people. In their escape, everyone falls into a cave where they come across a shrine. The child spasms and falls unconscious. The enemy follows them down, where the party has to defend themselves now. When the child (he will have a vision from someone who claims to be in another city, who explains he is a child of the gods) wakes up, everyone feels a surge, weapons hit harder, all spells work, and the enemy leader is revealed to be another child. Upon killing him, the child in the party absorbs his soul. The surge the party felt leaves the party and they discover that the town is essentially destroyed.
________________
So for the house rules that I need to work on.

Rules on Magic
1: All magic and magical items have a set chance to fail.
a) Magic Spells start off with a 25% chance to succeed. You can sacrifice higher level spells to make them work. Between 1-3, you can sacrifice one spell slot higher to increase the chance by 50% (can do twice). Between 4-5, you must sacrifice 2 higher. 6 and up cannot be improved this way.
b) Magic items must be rolled for at the beginning of the day to see if they work that day
2)Magic generators can make a field where all spells work in the area. Of course, you turn it on, and now your sword is magical!... and so is that big orc's. Risky if you don't know what your enemy can do. Could be that that old man is a wizard!
3)Wanted to add items similar to the pearls of power, except it makes it so spells work at that level, once per day. Can be added to items as well, but once added, cant be removed (so you will need another when you get new gear)
4) Because the godchild is... well... a godchild... spells have a +5% chance to work when cast near him... (at the beginning).
5) Because technology is important, I wanted to explain that some weapons function as +1 or +2 without being magic, essentially making them reliable without a cost. And they can them be enchanted past that (of course, that +2 would still count as a +2 in cost)
6) Havent decided on spell-like abilities... since it's spell-like, I wanted to make them simply work, regardless. What do you think.
7) God Child can fuel magic near him (check next section)

God Child rules
1)Gets a stat boost (he is a god after all), once he becomes an official god child.
2)Gets stronger as he kills Children of the same god (only!). Killing the children of other gods doesn't get you anything.
3)I wanted to give the character some special abilities. As more children of the same god are killed, you get more and more abilities. This does make this character the main character. Was thinking giving the character spell-like abilities depending on what the enemy is. For example, the first enemy godchild focuses on illusions, so perhaps some daily Illusion spell-like abilities? At one point though, when enough godchild die, I wanted to give the child a 5 turn avatar mode, which would significantly boost abilities... but once again, what exactly should this mode give the child? Boost to stats? Boost to spells?
4)Gets magic points. These points can be used once a day to fuel equipment and spells (give to the mage, mage can now cast a spell with 100% success rate for each point given).
5)Allied Spells and items near the god child get higher chances to succeed (magic is fueled by the Gods). % increase increases as rival godchild die.


Now the point of the campaign would be to either survive or become a god. If all the other god children on the same god are dead, that person ascends. I am hoping this creates some interesting situations. Say the players come across an evil godchild of a different god... who offers a deal with you. You ally with him and help him fight his rival, he will help you locate/defeat your rival. You have no real reason to kill him, he doesnt have reason to kill you. But say your rival turns out to be a good godchild and is helping people, what do you do? If you kill him, you get stronger, but if you leave him, a different rival may come and kill him and get stronger. There are more than a few of you after all. What if your rival is just a blind orphan? Can you just kill her in cold blood?




How does all of this sound? Is the lore interesting? Do the rules seem functional? I am worried they may unbalance things too much.

[molten_dragon]

Frankly, it sounds just terrible. I'd never want to play in a campaign like that.

First off, the spellcasting changes. One of two things is going to happen here. Either you'll give out enough increases to the chance for the spell to be successful that the rule is essentially meaningless (through the godchild thing, the magic generators, or what have you), or absolutely no one will play a spellcaster, because a 75% spell failure chance is crippling. And the burning higher level spell slots thing isn't enough to compensate. Let's say I'm a 3rd level wizard. I can burn both a first and a second level spell slot to get a 75% chance my spell goes off correctly (not even a guarantee). No thank you.

Second, the magic item changes. Like it or not, D&D is heavily magic item dependent. Magic items are part of a character's power level, and a character without them is considerably weaker than he is supposed to be. This is essentially the same crippling penalty as the spellcasting changes, it just screws everyone over equally.

These two things added together are going to make life very difficult for you, since it's going to be extremely hard to determine what's a fair challenge for the group.

And finally, this godchild thing. You're essentially giving one of your PCs a whole bunch of special abilities and extras and making the campaign focus on that specific person. That is not a good idea at all. Your players will not be happy about it. Most people don't want to be an also-ran while the DM's favorite gets to play the uber-awesome Mary Sue. There will be accusations of favoritism and jealousy. If you want to do the godchild thing, make every PC one of them, just of different gods. Otherwise, you're probably in for a very short and unhappy campaign.

[sonofzeal]

The magic part is too punitive; nobody would waste a standard action in combat for a 25% of casting a spell (which might not do much anyway; most spells have built-in failure points).

The magic item part is going to be serious headache. Without magic items, PC power is not going to scale nearly as well. Monsters will blow straight through any AC the PCs can get, and without Resistance items you shouldn't expect the heroes to make that many saves either. The contrary does not apply though - Monsters often have high AC/saves even without magic, and without magical bonuses to attack and whatnot the PCs might have trouble overcoming their defences. Basically, this rule makes monsters a whole lot more deadly, and rather harder to kill, at the same time. DANGER WILL ROBINSON!

I disagree with molten about having one PC be special, though. It can be a fun way to run a game, as long as you make the effort to include the other PCs and make them useful. In Avengers it's Black Widow who actually stops the stupid invulnerable portal thing, and she's almost certainly the least "powerful" member of the team. You can have one PC be special all you want, as long as what the others are doing matters in a significant way.

[vrigar]

Sounds like a very interesting campaign to play in and a munchkin buster at that. All those "after level 9 you are either a caster or his lackey" lot will have to adjust to a campaign where warrior types are a lot more effective at combat. Making magic unreliable means you use it differently. Have a look at the "Game of Thrones" RPG. The section on magic fits your campaign somewhat.
I agree with sonofzeal that you would have to adjust the monsters' Challenge Rating upwards because encounters are bound to be more difficult without the usual buffs.

[molten_dragon]

I disagree with molten about having one PC be special, though. It can be a fun way to run a game, as long as you make the effort to include the other PCs and make them useful. In Avengers it's Black Widow who actually stops the stupid invulnerable portal thing, and she's almost certainly the least "powerful" member of the team. You can have one PC be special all you want, as long as what the others are doing matters in a significant way.

There's a chance it could go alright, but I think it's a pretty slim chance. I just don't think it's worth the risk.

[molten_dragon]

All those "after level 9 you are either a caster or his lackey" lot will have to adjust to a campaign where warrior types are a lot more effective at combat.

Except that really isn't true. Without their magic items, warrior types will be badly crippled in this campaign as well.

[sonofzeal]

There's a chance it could go alright, but I think it's a pretty slim chance. I just don't think it's worth the risk.
Well, the gap he's suggesting isn't that huge. Ability score boost and a couple SLAs? Even a +2-all-stats wouldn't make the others useless.

The danger is if the players think it's favoritism of some kind. How you assign the God-child is going to be important. Either let the players decide amongst themselves, or assign it randomly. But as long as it's all upfront and honest and open, I don't see that much harm.

[Khedrac]

Just a couple of thoughts

Given the lack of magic in the campaign and how that throws off higher level play you might want to look at E6.

Expect no-one to play a spell-caster. Consider how many players of arcane casters will ever play with even a 5% ASF - it's just not worth it even then. Yes it is only one in 20, but 1 in 20 of the spells you are absolutely relying on to work will fail and people (at least in my experience) won't risk it.

The "godchild" idea could work given OK players if they are all aware of it in advance. I will probably help if there is not much the child can actually do - so that the other players' characters are critical not spectators.

[PersonMan]

There's a chance it could go alright, but I think it's a pretty slim chance. I just don't think it's worth the risk.

I have a solution.

Ask your players if the idea of a campaign where one person plays a god-child, explaining what this entails of course as well as setting info related to this, and the rest aren't sounds good. Base your decision on their feedback. We won't be playing the campaign, they will.

[Reluctance]

The danger is if the players think it's favoritism of some kind. How you assign the God-child is going to be important. Either let the players decide amongst themselves, or assign it randomly. But as long as it's all upfront and honest and open, I don't see that much harm.

It's not just a question of power. It's a question of spotlight. One player will be more central to the plot, and most players don't like playing second fiddle. You have to make very sure everybody is on board with this sort of game, and be willing to scrap it if they aren't. Bored players ether become disruptive, or leave.

It might work if the god-child is an NPC. Since you'd have a walking magic generator, the rules for PC spellcasters and items could be used as normal, as would things for NPCs in conflict with the party. They'd then have to protect it, but a council of advisers trying to direct a being of destiny at least gives the players a sense of focus and control. Just remember not to let the god-child go down any of the classic DMPC pitfalls.

[molten_dragon]

Well, the gap he's suggesting isn't that huge. Ability score boost and a couple SLAs? Even a +2-all-stats wouldn't make the others useless.

It sounds pretty big to me. Stat boosts, gets stronger as he kills other godchildren, spell-like abilities that get more powerful as he kills other godchildren, an 'avatar mode' (not sure exactly what he means, I'm assuming he's basing it on The Last Airbender, in which case it would be quite powerful). Those sound like fairly powerful abilities to me.

Of course maybe the OP is thinking of making them weaker.

Like I said though, ultimately, it's his decision, but to me, it sounds like a really bad idea.

[NichG]

I'd watch out more for book-keeping issues than balance issues personally. You can always just use more difficult/less difficult encounters if your PCs are trivially stomping stuff or having a hard time. The CR system is worthless anyhow since optimization skill controls the party's power much more than level, so its not like you're losing anything there really.

But rolling each day for each magic item to see if it works? That just strikes me as tedious.

A far easier thing to do would be to say something like 'outside of any field generator, all effects and spell access are at a level penalty'. If an item's caster level is zero, that item is deactivated. The level penalty would also apply against spellcasting progression, so if you were a 5th level Wizard and the penalty was 3, you could only cast 1st level spells while at that level of magic access. Then make it so that magic sources reduce that penalty. So being near the God-Child gives you 1 level back. Being near a generator gives you all of your levels back.

The tricky bit is choosing the level penalty so that it isn't crushing at low levels and trivial at high levels. I was going to say something like a 50% reduction, but that leaves magic items always on. Alternately, do 50% reduction and magic items don't work without a boost period, but with a boost they simply work. Its still likely to discourage people playing casters, of course, but in some sense thats fine so long as you're clear about it.

These rules are definitely going to be off-putting to the players though, since they're universally punitive compared to baseline D&D. It might be good to have an upside too. Having all the PCs be 'god-children' would be one such upside; then rather than 'all your magic sucks' its 'your magic is bad, but its better than everyone elses in the world'. Alternately, maybe the weakening of the gods is also causing a weakening of certain strictures they put on humanity, allowing people to gain a stat-up every 2 levels instead of every 4 levels, or a feat every 2 levels instead of every 3 or something. Basically just an interesting mechanical alteration that engages players rather than making them feel constrained.

[Tokiko Mima]

Here's an idea. How about instead of a flat chance magic doesn't work (which sucks because it means your time was wasted) how about having magic work differently?

For example, what if you rolled a d10 or three and looked on a table with the different magical schools (abj, conj, ench, univ, etc) listed. Then you could have the dice indicate that only those spells with matching schools worked for a given duration (a single combat encounter, an hour, a day, or whatever you choose.) This way a spell caster can still function if they diversify their spell selection. You can keep in the rules about spending spell slots to cast spells that aren't in the currently active schools.

I'd also rethink rolling for individual magic items on a per day basis. It will be too tedious and bookwork intensive to be worth it, and most players are not going to recalculate their stats when, for example, their +6 dex item goes out. The most I would do is have each player roll each day for all their magic items, and I'd recommend against even that. The best way is to have magic items with an activated effect (like wands) fall under the same rules as spellcasting, and items with a permanent static bonus (e.g. +2 to AC/hit) just work all the time. You're going to have to go through a bunch of magic items to catagorize them though, which is more work for you.

[eggs]

I normally like low-powered games, but this just sounds frustrating.

Between the magic failure and the groundwork set out for favoritism, this isn't a game I'd show up for.

I'd recommend skipping D&D in favor of a game that doesn't use magic as a core assumption.

[ericgrau]

D&D is heavily reliant on magic so this has the potential to completely unbalance the entire system. It might be tolerable for levels 1-7 though, as long as nobody plays a caster.

Another issue is that the workarounds make such a dramatic difference that it invites intentional abuse as if that's simply part of the way the world works. For example I'd carry multiple scrolls of the same spell, roll for each, and sweet that one works I'll use that one later if we need it. I'd probably dip only 1 level of caster for the scroll use. Casting spells as 1 slot level higher would be the only feasible way to ever cast. If the campaign starts at high level then I might play a caster who does this with crowd control spells (like web) and haste, so I'm not losing too much. Wouldn't give much explanation on how I survived low level, but oh well.

You might as well say "Hey, what would my campaign be like if I took away all the dungeons, and the dragons. I'd like the players to fight other humans in open grassy fields." That would be less unbalancing and more fun at least, though that's not saying much.

[Quellian-dyrae]

The magic items, as noted above, make book-keeping really difficult. I'd probably replace it with magic items only being able to be activated, say, once per day for five minutes at a time, with a god-child able to grant additional activations. I'd probably also give some scaling bonuses with level, and simply remove the number-boosting magic items entirely. That keeps the numbers working and makes the magic items a bit more special.

For magic, I agree that these rules just ensure that no one plays a caster. Probably the way to make sure the rule matters, is have everyone gestalt as a caster and non-caster class. Say they don't actually gain their spells until that "surge of power" thing (maybe proximity to the god child gave them magic, or maybe they always had the potential but with magic fading, didn't really get the chance to realize it). This way the limits on magic are felt throughout the party, but no one is rendered useless because of it, and having god-child blessings or a magic generator gives a substantial power up.

For the god child, it is a potentially serious imbalance between the players. If your players are all cool with that, then it's not a problem. If it would cause issues, there are some ways to deal with it. To the ideas presented above (NPC god child, everyone a god child, etc), I'd add letting the god child replace the "caster" side of the gestalt. Don't make it a full caster class itself though (I'd figure something along the lines of a bard, decent casting and potent support abilities). This makes sure the other PCs get their share of the spotlight, because while the god child has more plot focus and unique powers, they're the ones with the really potent magic, but reliant on the god child to use it reliably.

Or, you could combine the god child class with the NPC god child idea, for a classic good DMPC; the god child gets that plot focus, but it remains more of a support character, primarily empowering the PCs who are the ones who actually accomplish great deeds. If you do it this way, you could basically just say the god child doesn't get XP and level up normally; each time another child or the same god is killed, it gains a level.

[Tokiko Mima]

For magic, I agree that these rules just ensure that no one plays a caster. Probably the way to make sure the rule matters, is have everyone gestalt as a caster and non-caster class. Say they don't actually gain their spells until that "surge of power" thing (maybe proximity to the god child gave them magic, or maybe they always had the potential but with magic fading, didn't really get the chance to realize it). This way the limits on magic are felt throughout the party, but no one is rendered useless because of it, and having god-child blessings or a magic generator gives a substantial power up.

For the god child, it is a potentially serious imbalance between the players. If your players are all cool with that, then it's not a problem. If it would cause issues, there are some ways to deal with it. To the ideas presented above (NPC god child, everyone a god child, etc), I'd add letting the god child replace the "caster" side of the gestalt. Don't make it a full caster class itself though (I'd figure something along the lines of a bard, decent casting and potent support abilities). This makes sure the other PCs get their share of the spotlight, because while the god child has more plot focus and unique powers, they're the ones with the really potent magic, but reliant on the god child to use it reliably.

I second this idea of a non-caster//caster class gestalt, with god-child levels counting as a caster class. Great idea! :smallsmile:

[Tegannie]

I second this idea of a non-caster//caster class gestalt, with god-child levels counting as a caster class. Great idea! :smallsmile:


I third this idea.

What would turn me off is how the god-child gains power. Like you mentioned, this may lead to some "interesting situations", including having to kill good children of the same god. I think this would lead to all of the powerful god-children (and eventually, the gods once they've ascended) having to be evil, including the PC. (I'm imagining a Hunger Games-type scenario with a bunch of teenagers going around killing each other.)

I would suggest having a way so good children of the same god be able to work together to gain strength. Maybe their souls/beings combine into a stronger person and neither one has to die. (Although that may lead to some interesting personality changes...)

[mootoall]

Just by the by, the "God-child" things sounds an awful lot like giving the Half-Celestial/Half-Fiend templates for free, except they gain extra SLAs by plot rather than by HD.

[Wookie-ranger]

In short:
I would not play in that game. Ever. Ever.


Long story:
D&D is about magic. In all its forms. That's why it is called fantasy and not alternate-historical-realistic-recreation. Without magic you have a bunch of people that get better and better at hitting each other with sticks of varying degrees of sharpness.
IMHO you are trying to limit the power (tier) of casters. But all it does is make them Tier1 25% of the rounds and Tier 1.000.000 the other 75%.
Without magic a wizard is little more then a commoner (without the chickens).
It creates too much randomness, too much for the players (and the DM) to predict. This is what the game mechanics are about: how much you know about your character. Can he beat AC 30 at level 1; not really. At level 20; probably. Can you cast Teleport at level 2 not really, can you at level 17, definably.
With this predictability you (as the DM) know how powerful the PCs are. and the PCs know how easy/hard a fight is going to be.
How are you going to design a dungeon for a party of level 15 if all there spells could fail miserable? or they could all succeed?

I would rather only have one spell per level per day; or even just one spell per day.

If you REALLY want to include that rule (i say, don't; please don't) make it so that the first spell you cast 100% and each spell there after has -10% cumulative.
But to be honest, I would still not play in that game.


PS: I hope i didn't sound too harsh, but you asked for opinions, and this is mine.
I always value if someone tries to improve on the game, even if the outcome is not always perfect. If no one ever tries we would still play race=class right?

[crazyhedgewizrd]

With the god child, just have an essence pool which acts as the magic point system.
Special abilities cost essence to use, So like flight could cost 1 point of essence per min or dragons breath for 5 points each time.
each point of essence gives a spell a (50/spell level)% of working better.

Ways to increase essence
1)Is by killing god children and absorbing their essence.
2)Rituals.
3)By aging.
4)By been given it by other god children.

Could also make it that god childern can imbue mundanes with essence to make them god childern, so that they can be harested later.

At the end of it you could just have you need this much and become a full fledge god.

Make magic item with no change of failure, they have already been imbued with magic. Have the failure change in the process of making the items and increase the cost in buying them.
ps to much bookkeeping involed in this game

[vrigar]

In short:
D&D is about magic.
No it isn't. If a fighter facing off a dragon if a daily activity for you I guess it wouldn't count as fantasy but for me it does. You can have fantasy creatures in fantasy settings doing fantastic things without magic - or better yet with very little magic for flavor.
Melee types can fight pretty well without magic and all the DM has to do is to adjust the CR of the encounter accordingly (since the original CR assumes some magic buffs). Despite the focus it gets (sadly) D&D is not all about combat and magic based characters can still thrive in such a campaign and have their specific use (a door which can only be opened by magic will allow a 1st level wizard but block a 20th level fighter, arcane orders can provide information and assistance to their members etc).

[Craft (Cheese)]

I think what he meant is if you want to do a really, really low-magic campaign like this, you're better off using a different game system than attempting to hack D&D to fit your needs.

[vrigar]

I think what he meant is if you want to do a really, really low-magic campaign like this, you're better off using a different game system than attempting to hack D&D to fit your needs.
True but if I understand correctly the idea is eventually to introduce magic back into the campaign and they can't switch systems in the middle of the campaign.

[Amoren]

I'm not sure if someone else has suggested this, but.

1) Make it so spells aren't expended when they make the failure chance due to there being low magic. They're not expending any of their own magical, and it makes it less crippling. Alternatively, make it so that magic (at least at the start of the game) doesn't have any maximum slots or usages per day. If someone knows the spell they may attempt to cast it, since they're trying to scavenge up energy from their environment rather than expending any of their supplies/those loaned by a God.

2) Make all of the PCs God Children. Start off with one being revealed, and then make the others the children of a different God who are revealed later. It would be a coincidence that 4+ god children of different Gods just happened to be around the same town, but it could be revealed that this was a ploy by one of the dying Gods to recreate a pantheon after their own death. With this you could even give more bonuses to the entire party at large, like granting them divine ranks as their deeds spread or they absorb the power of their siblings.

[Pilo]

Regarding difficulties with magic, you may be interested by the Midnight settings.

I don't like your houserules though, children of a LG god, will hardly kill each other in order to get more power and if they do, how can they still be LG? So it means that the next pantheon will not have any good gods. I think that if killing a god-child of any god give you more power, then it may become more interesting for good characters. If not, evil god-child will just be too powerful.

If spell-like abilities works just fine, then the matter of caster being too powerful will change to SLA users (incarnum classes, warlock, ...) and ToB classes are too powerful.

If magic items don't work all the time, what is the point of making them as a wizard or warlock as no one will want to buy them? Will you honnestly spend 300gp for a potion of cure moderate wounds that will only have 25% chances to work? I won't.

[TuggyNE]

2) Make all of the PCs God Children. Start off with one being revealed, and then make the others the children of a different God who are revealed later. It would be a coincidence that 4+ god children of different Gods just happened to be around the same town, but it could be revealed that this was a ploy by one of the dying Gods to recreate a pantheon after their own death. With this you could even give more bonuses to the entire party at large, like granting them divine ranks as their deeds spread or they absorb the power of their siblings.

Yes, this. Instead of making a single PC super-special-awesome, make them all special! That tends to have much lower consequences OOC, and it can make for an exciting game.

[Eldest]

I'm going to (third? Forth?) agree with the idea of having all the players be gestalt, with one class being a magical class or the God-Child class.

[Wookie-ranger]

No it isn't. If a fighter facing off a dragon if a daily activity for you I guess it wouldn't count as fantasy but for me it does. You can have fantasy creatures in fantasy settings doing fantastic things without magic - or better yet with very little magic for flavor.
Melee types can fight pretty well without magic and all the DM has to do is to adjust the CR of the encounter accordingly (since the original CR assumes some magic buffs). Despite the focus it gets (sadly) D&D is not all about combat and magic based characters can still thrive in such a campaign and have their specific use (a door which can only be opened by magic will allow a 1st level wizard but block a 20th level fighter, arcane orders can provide information and assistance to their members etc).
Bold mine
Exactly my point. D&D is assuming magic exists and is used by the PCs and enemies alike.
D&D is about magic. This is not so much an opinion as it is a fact. YES, you CAN play mundanes, and you can adjust the setting and encounters to that. You can even have a lot of fun doing so. However, if you try to play a no-magic (very-low magic) group trough a normal D&D adventure you are going to be in a world of (magical) hurt.
I am not saying that you (or anyone else) is playing D&D 'wrong'. That is impossible, you can play it anyway you like to, its your game after all. You can house rule the hell out of it if you want (even literally) but after a while too many 'house rules' will result in a complete Homebrew system that has little in common with the original RAW D&D. You can still have fun playing your game, and if you do thumbs up good job you have shown great creativity and created something that you like to play with your friends. But you are not really playing D&D anymore. Call it homebrew D20, D&D Modern, D&D Future, or something, but it ain't RAW D&D.

If you open the PHB most of it will be spells, If you open the DMG much of it is concerned about planes/magic items/etc, more then 2/3 of all books published by WotC (concerning D&D) are at mainly about magic (in various forms and extends).
Look at the Tier system. Are there any melee classes in the top tiers? no. are there any full caster classes in the lowest Tiers? no. There is a very good reason for that. Magic=win; by Level 20 a full caster has so many 'I-Win' buttons that its not even funny. Quadratic vs linear power progression and all that.

BTW:
Are we talking about the same D&D dragons? Because they have DR/magic. A mundane sword is about as useful as a toothpick. Dragons can fly and as far as I know D&D does not have mundane jet-packs. Dragons can breath fire/acid/cold/etc and as far as I know there is very little mundane protection from those (unless you find a way to carry about a brick wall). This does not even include all the spells that Dragons can cast.

I am not saying that ALL Fantasy is only magic. Not at all! But this is about D&D not medieval sagas.

[eggs]

Regarding difficulties with magic, you may be interested by the Midnight settings.
This isn't a bad suggestion at all.

[Tyndmyr]

How does all of this sound? Is the lore interesting? Do the rules seem functional? I am worried they may unbalance things too much.

They sound tiresome. I honestly didn't finish reading the lore. The whole gods = magic, gods failing => magic failing...I've seen this all before. It's not particularly new.

Worse, it's not particularly fun. I start out at a 75% failure rate, and things are failing and getting worse? Wee. So, 75% of the time, I'm accomplishing nothing. If I want to play without high magic, I'll play a game that does that. If I want to do nothing...I'll stay home and nap instead of showing up to a game.

Edit: Oh, I have a special hatred for the god-child thing. It's...basically a giant mary/marty sue issue, and having all your plot wrapped around one PC s never good. What if that player quits playing? What if the PC dies? What sort of crazy fiat will you have to do to make your plot continue then? It leads to bad places...