[PF]'Barbarian' Campaign - Ban magic, go E6, or something else?

[mistformsquirrl]

Alright so this is going to require some set up before I can even lay out precisely what I'm asking. This will also be fairly long - I apologize in advance.

I have this idea for a Pathfinder campaign I'd like to run 'someday' - probably a few months from now when life has hopefully settled down a bit. The idea boils down to this:

A barbarian clan lives in a valley at the foot of their sacred mountain - they've been there for hundreds of years and (for a primitive stone-age society) life has been good there. Now, they're being forced from their valley by encroaching hobogoblins from the east. The players play a group of up and coming heroes within this tribe that have to essentially guide the survivors on their search for a new home.

So they'd be doing more than just your average adventuring party - they'd be hunting, scavenging, scouting, finding ways around obstacles, fighting off pursuing hobogoblins as well as dealing with any sort of monsters that might find a tribe of displaced barbarians 'tasty'.

You could almost think of it like Oregon Trail meets D&D in a sense.

Anyway, here's where things start to get a little complicated:

Obviously I don't want everyone playing the Barbarian class - that would be dull for everyone involved. So I'm open to letting people play the majority of classes that exist - even some 3.5e ones that don't have a PF counterpart - provided I feel they don't clash with the theme of the campaign. (I'm even including a special proviso that I'll allow a class I otherwise said I wouldn't if you can come up with a good explanation for it that's thematically appropriate.)

The problem is magic. I don't want my barbarians being superstitious nitwits in this regard - for one that's been done to death, but for another it just doesn't make sense. (Tribes need witchdoctors and wisewomen and the like just like they need warriors and scouts after all)

The problem is... magic can eventually completely circumvent some of the daily challenges that make up this campaign. Why hunt when you can Create Food and Water? Why worry about a deep pit when you can just Fly over it or otherwise circumvent it quickly and easily... likewise there's Teleport and Raise Dead to consider which drastically alter things once they show up.

So one option is to ban problematic spells beforehand - and I may just take that route but I worry I may wind up playing whack-a-mole; and I don't want to rain on someone's parade either. (I definitely don't want to be the DM that ends up saying "Oh that new spell you just got? You can't use it because reasons.")

Another option is to just ditch magic entirely - this prevents a lot of problems; but can cause plenty of others as it means I have to be very very careful about what I send after the PCs, since their methods of dealing with it will necessarily be limited.

A third option I was thinking of was trying to adapt the E6 rules to Pathfinder (or maybe someone has already done that) - the advantage there is environmental threats retain their relevance all the way through the campaign, I never have to worry about teleportation or resurrection, and with a level 6 tops caster level I don't think Create Food and Water is going to be an issue.

The downside there of course is that it does constrict character development some once you hit level 6... so that's a factor.

A fourth option is to limit the group to one Arcane and one Divine full caster - while each is still quite capable of doing game breaking things on their own, having to worry about the entire tribe might reign them in a bit and as long as there isn't a full party of casters that *might* work. Maybe. Unfortunately that does mean it's kind of a first-come-first-served basis as to who gets to play a caster in that case, and that's... awkward.

So that brings me to my final option "Ask the playground what they think". Because I'm still very much in the planning stages for this and the better I hammer out how I'm going to handle magic and magic classes now, the better I can handle the fluff writing I'm doing at the moment; and the end result is a better campaign >.<

[Qwertystop]

E6 will definitely help.

For Create Food, you could modify it so it can still make as much food as it does, but it requires some food to start with - maybe it multiplies 1 person's worth of food, so you get more food from your hunting but it loses flavor. Alternately, make it less nutritious, so it's good in emergencies but you still start starving, just after two or three times as long.

Maybe make it so you can only do spells that do things that either seem "natural" (Call Lightning) or improve what's already there (many, many buffs) but can't just make a magic thing completely dissociated from the current situation (Fly, Summon Monster).


You could look for or make a fixed-list caster with a more fitting list?

[Urpriest]

Things like Create Food and Fly shouldn't be huge issues since these guys have the entire tribe to worry about (though since Create Water is a cantrip, in PF water itself won't be scarce...but that's a feature of the setting, really).

While E6 is an ok way to handle it, I'd go one step further and suggest that the campaign doesn't have to go past 6th level anyway. Eventually, your tribe of barbarians is going to defeat the hobgoblins and find a new home, and 6th level is a fine time to do that. If you want to continue the campaign past then, just have the plot move on to something else. The story should scale with the levels, as is proper for a level-based game.

[Jack Zander]

I'd just ban some spells. There aren't a whole lot you really need to ban, and most of them will be pretty obvious beforehand. If a new spell proves to be a problem later, let the player abuse it for the session, and then afterwards let them retrain their spell to another one. If you explain this to your players before everything starts, you won't have any hard feelings.

[Murg]

As for your idea of limiting the number of full casters in the party, I wouldn't recommend it. There's too much potential for the few full casters to upstage everyone else.

I was DMing a similar campaign and ran into the same issues. I posted a thread on it a while back:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=256683

My solution was to use E6 and limit the magic-using classes to the ones that cap out with 4th level spells (paladin, ranger, assassin, blackguard, ect). I also allowed adepts (normally an NPC class, but they can get up to 6th level spells). I'm not sure what the PF equivalent of these classes would be, as I'm not really familiar with PF...

This allowed some magic in the campaign without allowing magic to totally eclipse skill checks.

Anyway, it was my first time using E6 and it didn't really work out in the long run. There is nothing technically wrong with E6 - it does exactly what it sets out to do -- I think the problem was more with me and my expectations. I thought E6 would be a simple solution to the complex problem of quadratic caster progression, which was important for my low-magic barbarian-themed campaign.

For the first 6 levels E6 was fine, but around 6th level is when the quadratic caster progression really starts to kick in, and E6 deals with it by basically shutting down the level-up system. My players like to get rewarded for their efforts (who doesn't?) but after 6th level it seemed like they were treading water rather than making real progress. After several sessions of waning interest and discontent I finally abolished E6 and we returned to normal level-up progression -- everyone was happier. We made it to 11th level before events in Real Life put the campaign on (probably) permanent hiatus.

So if you're going to use E6 just realize what you're getting into...Like I said, E6 technically works and it succeeds in bringing some measure of balance to the game...but once you hit 6th level PC advancement will seriously plateau/stagnate so be prepared.

Limiting the caster classes available to the players helped make my first low-magic campaign a success.

So I guess my suggestion is to say to the players, "This is a low-magic campaign, so all casters are banned EXCEPT the ones on this list I am giving you." And then you give them a list of classes that have however much magic you want to have in the campaign.

Good luck!

[mistformsquirrl]

Hrm... @Urpriest - you make a fair point there. I was planning to start at first level anyway, but I'd never really considered just trying to make sure the campaign ends around 6th level... not sure why that hadn't occurred to me; but it makes good sense.

Maybe if folks want to keep going after that I can shift things in a different direction - perhaps the tribe finds a home, but now it needs protection, or allies... *think think think*

[Fouredged Sword]

How big is your clan? Feeding 12 people with magic is possible. Feeding 60 is much less so. Just don't have any NPC casters. Too many of those and survival needs become really warped.

On a related note, in 3.5 I made a setting where the dwarves all took psion for three levels and got the sustanance power. The whole society existed around the idea that only children had to eat or drink. Eating for anything other than pleasure was considered childish.

It was how I made sense of a whole city under a mountain. They only had to provide food/water for 1/10th of their population.

[Yora]

Hrm... @Urpriest - you make a fair point there. I was planning to start at first level anyway, but I'd never really considered just trying to make sure the campaign ends around 6th level... not sure why that hadn't occurred to me; but it makes good sense.

Maybe if folks want to keep going after that I can shift things in a different direction - perhaps the tribe finds a home, but now it needs protection, or allies... *think think think*
For my barbarian setting, I started by cutting away everything that is above 10th level. Even the super-powerful legendary heroes are just 10th level and PCs only would get there if the campaign is actually supposed to make them such heroes. As Urpriest said, you don't need to go E6 if the PCs never actually reach 7th level.

Going a bit further, I also removed all 5th level spells from the spell-lists. 9th level spellcasters would still get 5th level slot, but would have to fill them with 4th level spells or metamagic spells.

Personally, I refluffed psionics because I love spell points, but I think when playing pathfinder, it might be a good idea to only allow spontaneous spellcasters, that is oracles, sorcerers, and bards. Oracles and sorcerers still have the oomph of clerics and wizards, but they lack the versatility to switch their spells to specific situations. And I think this is actually the real problem that spellcasters cause. If they have only a limited number of tricks, it's not nearly as dissatisfactory to the other players as when the spellcasters have pretty much all the tricks they can have.

You could even do a little homebrew and use the spell-slots from the sorcerer and all the other class features of the witch. Very easily done and makes a nice class.

All the classes that get only 2 skill points per level I bumped up to 4, so they can put more ranks in skills like Climb, Swim, Survival, Acrobatics, Stealth, Perception, and Knowledge. After all, the martial PCs are supposed to do cool physical things beyond just killing people.

Purely for flavor, you should reduce the armor and weapon lists, or even make up completely new ones. Removing full-plate, half-plate, breastplate, buckler, and tower shield is a good start. For weapons, limit it to axes, spears, bows, maces and clubs, and one-handed swords, as well as some unusual ones from Ultimate Equipment (they are all for free in the PRD)

[mistformsquirrl]

Hehe, yeah, I've already got a lot of stuff worked out for the martial classes - weapons all being of the wood and stone/bone varieties, armor being no heavier than Hide* - classes are fairly limited to what I feel makes sense within the context of the campaign.

So far here's the list of classes I'm allowing thus-far:

Barbarian
Bard
Druid
Fighter (only Viking or Archer)
Ranger
Rogue (With approval)
Sorcerer
Cavalier (Beast Rider or Huntmaster only)
Oracle
Summoner
Psionics on a case-by-case basis (Will be considered magic in every way)
Dragon Shaman (from 3.5e)

-----

Druid is the only prepared caster I'm considering allowing because I feel it's thematically appropriate - especially now that I'm pretty convinced that ending the campaign around level 6 is wisest anyway (Or at least, ending the "survival" phase of the game at any rate).

I considered Witch as well, but the more I looked at it, the more I noticed a lot of it's abilities were best used by NPCs against the players rather than by players against NPCs. I may still allow it since it is thematically appropriate but it's a little more iffy than some of the others.

I'm also rather hoping that the weapon and armor limitations will make things like shields or longspears more attractive, as well as archery, especially given the relatively low level most of this will be taking place at.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Be careful. Druid can outshine 3 people combined using those classes. While being 2 levels lower. The class is simply insane. PF did a less than stellar job of closing those power level gaps. Also, was Scout brought into PF? I do not remember but the class is relatively fun to play and seems to fit thematically.

[mistformsquirrl]

Scout wasn't brought into PF... but it's a good idea and I have Complete Adventurer, so there's no reason I couldn't allow it. It certainly fits!

[ericgrau]

Easy survival checks can bypass the food problems too. I like the limited number of high level NPCs solution better, rather than banning magic. Then there's a whole tribe to worry about and any high level PC solution might not be enough.

Second if food is a serious challenge to any tribe then that tribe is having issues. It shouldn't be. Neighboring tribes and wild beasts are bigger issues. For that matter if food isn't easy to get now, how will they handle a drought or winter. Which brings me to the next point: if you want food to be a real challenge then bring in winter or some bad weather. Maybe the survival check DC in a blizzard is "lol no" and the only way to find food is to go after really big game. And after a track check that's where the combat starts. There should be dried food from the summer, but again if there aren't many high level NPCs and if the weather is bad that might not be enough.

I'd recommend to the group that one or more PCs gets skill focus (survival) and a decent wis, perhaps the druid or ranger. And don't crank up the DCs to match as a sort of feat tax; reward him and let him be a master survivalist (<gasp>, a skill focus that does something). Like I said there will be other challenges too, but don't neglect survival either.

It may be a good idea to allow witch for enemies but not PCs as a thematic thing. It's not like it's terribly unfair when druid and oracle are available.

[Qwertystop]

Easy survival checks can bypass the food problems too.


Well, yeah. The survival check is an abstraction of "hunting non-dangerous game and/or finding edible non-animate plants."

[Waker]

You could use Spirit Shaman from Complete Divine in place of Druid. Same spells, but no animal companion or wildshape, plus built-in fluff for tribal settings.

You might also consider banning the traditional magic system and going for ritual magic. Instead of having one guy reshaping reality, the group does a ceremony that produces an effect. That would be better for buffs, divination and things like that. Come up with a list of rituals and say the party can take them in place of feats. Alternatively you could have a separate access method, like choose a ritual to learn every three or four levels. Perhaps making the Heal skill do something could replace curative magic.

[Feralventas]

-The tribe values practical, down-to-earth abilities; if you can't hunt, fight, and provide benefit for the tribe with your own two hands. Relying too much on magic is seen as a sign of weakness in a shaman or spirit guide. Mechanically this means that players aren't allowed to take more than 2 caster levels per 1 non-caster level. Possibly 1 to 1 ratio if you really want to keep magic as minimal.

-The Shaman folks are aware that magic could very easily solve things, but that their culture and way of life, harsh though it may be, is also what lead them to become who they are. They withhold magical solutions to every problem, suggesting mundane methods whenever possible, so as to preserve their society.

-Magic is learned slowly, and the rites of passage delay actual development of spiritual power, as the spirit must first grow in experience. As per the 1st restriction, but with a fluff requirement. May get complaints using this one due to reliance on Wisdom or Charisma, stating that if that stat goes up clearly so has their worldy or metaphysical understanding.

[Greenish]

-The tribe values practical, down-to-earth abilities; if you can't hunt, fight, and provide benefit for the tribe with your own two hands. Relying too much on magic is seen as a sign of weakness in a shaman or spirit guide. Mechanically this means that players aren't allowed to take more than 2 caster levels per 1 non-caster level. Possibly 1 to 1 ratio if you really want to keep magic as minimal.But with their good chassis (d8 hd, medium BAB, 4+int skills, two good saves), spirit shaman and druid are going to be better at hunting, fighting, and providing benefits for the tribe with their own two hands than, well, basically any NPC class, without using magic, so there's some cognitive dissonance between the fluff and those rules.

[Edit]: For that matter, there should be a wilderness variant of the warrior class. Maybe only give it proficiency with simple weapons, bows, and light armour, and boost the skill points to 4+int and add stuff like survival and spot on the skill list.

[ericgrau]

Well barbarians already get survival and listen.

[Greenish]

Well barbarians already get survival and listen.But barbarian isn't an NPC class, even if it gets used as one every time WotC needs to stat up random unimportant warriors outside urban setting. /pet peeve

[ericgrau]

Oh, I see what you're going for. That sounds more like expert to me but an additional full BAB NPC class could help the setting.

[Greenish]

Oh, I see what you're going for. That sounds more like expert to me but an additional NPC class could help the setting.Mmn, expert could do it (what can't it do?), but still, I jotted down this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=276059).

[Yora]

Another thing: I would make the Minor Magic and Major Magic talents unavailable to rogues. Similar, make ranger completely spell-less. With the skirmisher archetype for example.

[Surfing HalfOrc]

"By the Book" 1st Edition D&D had DMs only allowing magic users to learn spells they found or otherwise gained through adventuring. As the DM, you salt the game with the spells you want the players to have, not necessarily the spells they want.

If your Barbarian tribe is near a wizard's long since destroyed stronghold, the PC wizards can find or otherwise obtain the spells of the long gone wizard. Otherwise, they only get the spells that you give them as the story develops.

3.x D&D/Pathfinder tends to treat spells like a video game: You get whatever spell you select from the menu. But tabletop gaming means your spells are limited by the DM and the story your want to tell. Limiting the spells to what "Our Heroes" find keeps game breaking spells from taking over. A good Role-Player will find ways to make the spells you give him work.

Not sure if this helps. I was just tossing ideas out there...