PDA

View Full Version : What would a D&D-esque world with no arcane magic look like?



Kiero
2007-06-20, 11:18 AM
Let's imagine we've got a world that aside from one thing otherwise follows the D&D format of people with classes and whatever else. But with a key difference: there's no arcane magic at all. The only kind of magic there is comes from the gods and spirits - ie is divine.

Thus no arcane casters either; sure there might be scholars who delve into those kinds of things, but they wield no power.

How would that affect a standard game? Would it be a game you'd be interested in playing?

Telonius
2007-06-20, 11:34 AM
Before I answer, I think I'd need a little clarification. Are there Artificers, Warlocks, and Psionic characters? All three of those groupings don't technically fall under "arcane magic," but have similar effects.

Talya
2007-06-20, 11:40 AM
I assume you'd be using a divine bard variant?

Also, you'd have a lot less available equipment. Anything that needed arcane spells to create would no longer exist.

squidthingy
2007-06-20, 11:41 AM
that's middle earth without gandalf/sarumon

Kurald Galain
2007-06-20, 11:44 AM
It has some interesting consequences. For instance, there'd arguably less magical items, potions, and so forth in the world, since those tend to be made by wizards. Second, while arcane casters could be asked to perform magic for cash, divine casters tend to do things according to their faith. So churches and religious organisations would be very influential in a world like this, which likely reflects on politics.

Sure, I'd play in it. Assuming it was a well-developed world and not a wizard nerf.

Ditto
2007-06-20, 11:59 AM
I'd be leery, but it's certainly not the end of the world. It would *not* be like LOTR - that's a low-magic world altogether, divine included. Magical items would become quite rare, yes, and there'd be less research in general, and adventuring would definitely take a different bent. After the first level or three (which I think are too weak to even call adventurers some of the time... why are 4 guys with 5 HP and pointy sticks chasing artifacts?), the lack of arcane magic would be noticable. It's not an issue of missing the uberness of wizards... they just have a (broadly-defined) unique skill set (all arcane casters, that is).

Kiero
2007-06-20, 12:11 PM
Before I answer, I think I'd need a little clarification. Are there Artificers, Warlocks, and Psionic characters? All three of those groupings don't technically fall under "arcane magic," but have similar effects.

No arcane casters, no arcane-like effects. If it's not divine magic, it doesn't exist. So no to all three of those. Kind of the inverse of the original Dragonlance setting, where there were no clerics.

This is mostly a thought experiment, but it also dovetails nicely with one of my pet hates, namely magic items. Never been especially keen on mages either.

As to nerfing wizards, even if it was, what difference does it make if it's all laid out up front? Sure you might like playing them, but if they don't exist anywhere in the setting how do you lose out?

Telonius
2007-06-20, 01:07 PM
Okay. Well, first off, the Magic Domain would need to be severely tinkered with, or dropped altogether. The granted power no longer makes sense in this world.

There is no longer any cure for being turned to stone other than a Miracle spell. (Fortunately no one can cast Flesh to Stone either, but it's worth keeping in mind if you're fighting medusas).

The Blink spell no longer exists.

Magic items would still exist. The stat-boosting items would be a little harder to come by, but Druids have access to all of the spells required for making them. After a cursory glance at the Wondrous Items list, I see that a bit more than half of them have prerequisite spells that can be gotten by Druids, Rangers, Paladins, or Domain spells.

Notable exceptions:
Bag of Holding. Requires Secret Chest.
Bracers of Armor. Requires Mage Armor.
Broom of Flying. Requires Overland Flight and Permanency.
Carpet of Flying. Requires Overland Flight and Permanency.
Chime of Opening. Requires Knock.
Efficient Quiver. Requires Secret Chest.
Feather Tokens. Requires Major Creation.
Handy Haversack. Requires Secret Chest.
Horseshoes of the Zephyr. Requires Levitate.
Instant Fortress. Requires Magnificent Mansion.
Mirror of Opposition. Requires Clone.
Necklace of Fireballs. Requires Fireball.
Robe of Useful Items. Requires Fabricate.
Rope of Entanglement. Requires Animate Rope.*
Scabbard of Keen Edges. Requires Keen Edge.
Stone Horse. Requires Flesh to Stone.
Vest of Escape. Requires Knock and Grease.

* Personally I'd allow the character to make one if he has Animate Objects.

Armors that no longer exist:
Arrow Deflection, Slick, Breastplate of Command, Spined Shield

Weapons that no longer exist:
Keen, Returning, Vicious, Vorpal, Wounding, Javelin of Lightning, Sword of Life Stealing, Sword of Subtlety, Trident of Warning

I think the only Staffs that will exist are Healing, Life, Necromancy, Swarming Insects, and Woodlands.

EDIT: I may have missed a bunch of items that would be disallowed, but those are the most important ones I was able to find.

Kiero
2007-06-20, 01:41 PM
There is no longer any cure for being turned to stone other than a Miracle spell. (Fortunately no one can cast Flesh to Stone either, but it's worth keeping in mind if you're fighting medusas).

Being arcane in nature, a medusa's gaze wouldn't function any more. Indeed there's a whole load of monsters - like the beholder - which would no longer exist for that reason.

Quietus
2007-06-20, 02:01 PM
As has been pointed out, it'd depend for me on whether it was a pure wizard nerf, or if it's a part of a living, breathing world. Here's the difference :

"I don't like Wizards. Because of that, I am saying that there's no arcane magic in the world, but everything else is as normal."
- This is arbitrary, and is a major change with no real reasoning behind it. Suspension of Disbelief = gone.


"Arcane spellcasting doesn't exist, because all Wizards and Sorcerers were killed thousands of years ago/the Weave collapsed/Mystra's sick of those arcane twits playing with the fabric of reality. Here's the changes that this has brought on the world."
- In this case, it's clearly a thought-out (perhaps well-thought-out) portion of your game world, and can make for interesting situations, as opposed to being an arbitrary, ineffective nerf.


In the first case, I wouldn't play because a DM who arbitrarily bans things like that is likely to do other things that make no sense, and that could just end up nerfing my characters with no real reason when they see something that they dont' like. In the second, I might be tempted, if it seems like the world is well-planned, because I loves me a good story.

Diggorian
2007-06-20, 02:20 PM
My answer: not that different.

My own homebrewed world (link below) is prefaced on arcane magic being seen as corupting, though not outright nonexistant.

Vaniel
2007-06-20, 02:35 PM
Items could still exist, if you decide that it already EXISTED but disappeared for some reason (arcane magic that is), which would probably increase the sale price of certain arcane magical items.

In the world in general (NPCs), it wouldn't really change anything, since Divine Magic wouls still exist, and people could pray, get healing, etc, from them. Society wouldn't change.

Leon
2007-06-20, 02:51 PM
Better off WHITE SPACE Why are you looking in here? WHITE SPACE

Jack Mann
2007-06-20, 02:51 PM
Hmm. Well, there would be a lot fewer monsters. No dragons, demons, or devils (all have supernatural or spell-like abilities). Most aberrations would be gone. There would be no gnomes (again, spell-like abilities). There would still be some of the weaker undead, like zombies and skeletons, but liches and vampires would be out (supernatural abilities). No more angels or archons. No drow (some would call this a good thing).

Adventures would most likely be against humanoid opponents with class levels.

Vaniel
2007-06-20, 02:56 PM
Hmm. Well, there would be a lot fewer monsters. No dragons, demons, or devils (all have supernatural or spell-like abilities). Most aberrations would be gone. There would be no gnomes (again, spell-like abilities). There would still be some of the weaker undead, like zombies and skeletons, but liches and vampires would be out (supernatural abilities). No more angels or archons. No drow (some would call this a good thing).

Adventures would most likely be against humanoid opponents with class levels.

Yes, if we consider that arcane magic NEVER existed.

If it did, and magic just got killed off, disappeared, some creatures could still easily exist.

/Vaniel

Jack Mann
2007-06-20, 02:57 PM
He said that supernatural abilities were arcane in nature, and implied that creatures that use them no longer exist.

Vaniel
2007-06-20, 03:06 PM
He said that supernatural abilities were arcane in nature, and implied that creatures that use them no longer exist.

Then nevermind :smallbiggrin:

/Vaniel

Nnanji
2007-06-20, 03:13 PM
Even if arcane magic didn't exist, human nature would still include the drive to understand and manipulate the environment. I would expect an increase in technology to replace magic as the primary driver of labor saving. Similar to what happened on Earth, but perhaps with divine casters as inspiration. Engines that drive off of belief.

Of course, if humans came to believe that all power comes from external powers, then I could easily imagine a religious hegemony existing, using humans as a source of slaves/serfs.

I could even see both examples side by side, kinda like the Reluctant Swordsman series of books. The kingdom was caste oriented, with occupations being well defined and societal roles being predetermined. In that world "magicians" were the outcasts who discovered the forbidden lore of writing, and began to discover scientific principles. The goddess tasked the protaganist to discover the base of their operations and detroy them in order to preserve her world's way of life.

Fixer
2007-06-20, 03:22 PM
In a world with a lack of arcane magic the roles of bards, sages and artificers would become the core classes for Int-based characters (assuming you do not allow psionics).

Human nature is that we will invent with technology what we cannot with other tools. The truth is that the only reason magic is prevalent in D&D is because it fulfills the role of technology in our modern life. Remove arcane magic and either divine magic, psionics, or technology will fill that gap.

(Er.... what the guy above me said.... silly meetings calling me out.)

Amphimir Míriel
2007-06-20, 04:10 PM
One of my friends is developing a Campaign setting where Arcane Magic is almost unknown (being practiced only by a race of extraplanar refugees and a few locals drafted into their wizard's school).
However divine magic is common, practiced by both Clerics and Shamans (homebrewed class, replaces druids). There is also a nation with a College of Mentalists that produces psions. Psychic warriors and Wilders are not unheard off, either.

Once the campaign world is finished, it will be posted on the web. I'll let you guys know once it happens.

Cruiser1
2007-06-20, 04:35 PM
There is no longer any cure for being turned to stone other than a Miracle spell. (Fortunately no one can cast Flesh to Stone either, but it's worth keeping in mind if you're fighting medusas).
Note the 5th level Cleric spell Break Enchantment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/breakEnchantment.htm) can reverse instantaneous transmutations effects such as petrification.

Dervag
2007-06-20, 04:43 PM
In a word:

theocratic.

Indon
2007-06-20, 05:18 PM
"I don't like Wizards. Because of that, I am saying that there's no arcane magic in the world, but everything else is as normal."
- This is arbitrary, and is a major change with no real reasoning behind it. Suspension of Disbelief = gone.


Well, that's not what you tell your players. All your players need to know is, "FYI, guys, this world has no arcane magic."

How does a lack of something that doesn't exist in reality threaten suspension of belief?

Quietus
2007-06-20, 05:27 PM
Well, that's not what you tell your players. All your players need to know is, "FYI, guys, this world has no arcane magic."

How does a lack of something that doesn't exist in reality threaten suspension of belief?

Maybe I have higher standards, but if someone's making a massive change to the rules, I'd like to know why. Removing three core classes constitutes a massive change, in my opinion.

If it's a random thing, then that makes it hard to believe in this world, for me - or perhaps it's more accurate for me to say that it makes it hard to believe in that DM. If there's a reason, I can accept that.

Kiero
2007-06-20, 06:08 PM
He said that supernatural abilities were arcane in nature, and implied that creatures that use them no longer exist.

No, I said anything using abilities based on arcane magic wouldn't work. Not any supernatural abilities. If it can be done with divine magic, then it's fine.

Why would there be no vampires?

Are there no divine ways for demons to enter the Prime Material Plane?

No drow isn't a bad thing. :smalltongue:

Jack Mann
2007-06-20, 06:42 PM
Then medusas would still be able to turn people to stone. That isn't based on arcane magic.

Shift in Tone
2007-06-20, 09:59 PM
No arcane casters, no arcane-like effects. If it's not divine magic, it doesn't exist. So no to all three of those. Kind of the inverse of the original Dragonlance setting, where there were no clerics.

This is mostly a thought experiment, but it also dovetails nicely with one of my pet hates, namely magic items. Never been especially keen on mages either.

As to nerfing wizards, even if it was, what difference does it make if it's all laid out up front? Sure you might like playing them, but if they don't exist anywhere in the setting how do you lose out?

There is a time period in the Dragonlance setting where there was no magic of any kind Arcane or Divine. It made the game really interesting when they would come up to fights and go "Oh no we have no healing lets think about this". I left magic items in but regulated them very closley. A potion here or there nad the odd magic weapon every now and then. It really made the people be creative with thier characters instead of the buffs and enchantments they get.

RAGE KING!
2007-06-20, 10:06 PM
Sh'yeah I'd play it. It would be really different sure, and i wouldn't like having weapons with no magical buffs, but i never really play arcane classes anyways, and being able to play barbarians:smallfurious: and fighters:smallmad: without having to worry about broken wizards would be great.

Gavin Sage
2007-06-20, 10:58 PM
Umm techincally speaking, if arcane magic did not exist then neither does divine. Its all the same effect but from different sources. Note how say Dispel Magic works on both types, and Antimagic Field suppresses divine right along with arcance. Or how spells appear on both lists, especially with domains.

You could still create a world with no arcane casters and be fairly practical though. It would have to be a very low-magic campaign, since you have no routine way of creating a lot of items. Those items could still exist, they simply have to have more RP-centric explanations to them. That Bag of Holding is the Sack of St. Oreas, who was blessed with it to feed 100 children during the... you get the idea. Items would be rare and special and even at high level your character might only have a few, and be less powerful as a consequence. Creatures Spell-Like Abilities can be treated the same way, they are divine powers not bestow upon mortals. Some care would have to be taken with what creatures appear, but in fitting with a low-magic theme it would be appropriate too. The PCs will spend most of the time fighting more mundane foes.

And on a side note Dragonlance is something of a bad example. When there were no clerics in the Age of Despair, divine magic still existed just mortals couldn't tap into it. However it was still there, and items like the Blue Crystal Staff existed. And after the Chaos War there was the new magic for most of it. The only time there was really no magic, is the latter end of the War of Souls. And after that it all comes back.

Steelwraith
2007-06-20, 11:15 PM
In a word:

theocratic.

Now take this idea and run with it. Religious orders would rule the world... they have the casters, all magic items would be created by them, all spell effects placed by them, etc. Imagine the epic battles this could create as followers of different gods fought with each other for supremacy.

purple gelatinous cube o' Doom
2007-06-21, 12:48 AM
Think middle ages.

Kiero
2007-06-21, 03:48 AM
Umm techincally speaking, if arcane magic did not exist then neither does divine. Its all the same effect but from different sources. Note how say Dispel Magic works on both types, and Antimagic Field suppresses divine right along with arcance. Or how spells appear on both lists, especially with domains.

That makes no sense, indeed you've just contradicted yourself. Whether or not you can get the same effects is irrelvant, what is key is sources. If you remove one source, but not the other, you remove one kind of magic, but the other remains perfectly intact.


You could still create a world with no arcane casters and be fairly practical though. It would have to be a very low-magic campaign, since you have no routine way of creating a lot of items. Those items could still exist, they simply have to have more RP-centric explanations to them. That Bag of Holding is the Sack of St. Oreas, who was blessed with it to feed 100 children during the... you get the idea. Items would be rare and special and even at high level your character might only have a few, and be less powerful as a consequence. Creatures Spell-Like Abilities can be treated the same way, they are divine powers not bestow upon mortals. Some care would have to be taken with what creatures appear, but in fitting with a low-magic theme it would be appropriate too. The PCs will spend most of the time fighting more mundane foes.

Why is low-magic items "low magic"? Surely the fact that there are still a fair few casters around means the magic levels are at least medium?


Think middle ages.

Yeah...aside from the fact that they had no magic of any stripe.

Imrix.
2007-06-21, 04:05 AM
Divine Metacheese would be a LOT more common...

Jack Mann
2007-06-21, 04:14 AM
Oh, just noticed your question about demons.

Most demons have spell-like abilities. Most of them have sorcerer/wizard spell-like abilities. If one of their spell-like abilities is on more than one list, it's treated as the sorcerer/wizard version. If it isn't on that list, then it's treated as cleric, druid, bard, paladin, or ranger, in that order.

So, you see, unlike the medusa's petrifying gaze (which has nothing to do with spellcasting, and is neither arcane nor divine), spell-like abilities generally are arcane.

The only core demons that would be allowed, therefore, would be the bebelith and the retriever.

With devils, you have chain devils, hellcats and lemures. The rest have spell-like abilities.

Some creatures with spell-like abilities might be allowed, since they have abilities that can be found on one of the divine lists. However, none of the demons or devils with spell-like abilities lacks at least one that doesn't appear on the cleric, druid, ranger or paladin lists.

Indeed, these are worse than the eye rays of the beholder. The beholder's eye rays are supernatural abilities. Though they have the same effects as spells, they work somewhat differently. Spell-like abilities, on the other hand, work much more like actual spells.

Thoughtbot360
2007-06-21, 04:38 AM
You could also make it part of the story: maybe wizards are demonized by the church (not unlike B.A.D.D. demonized D&D) because they don't like the threat to their hegemony presented by any other casters out there (Druids exist alongside -or as- clerics to gods of nature, so they are held in at least, better esteem). Wizards are outcasts, Sorcerers are unfairly branded as monsters and executed/exiled, and Bards' magic is so abstract or easy to convince people that it is really divine in nature (Healing spells backed by Glibness = win. See, you're really a paladin or ranger with a better talent for singing than fighting :smallwink: !)

Anyway, wizards hide their identities and are mostly NPCs (you might even could nerf them or design a new class and still call them "Wizards". Like how Miko is really a Paladin, although she is one of Azure city's "Samurai," offically.) They might have something to do with the story, some important clues pertaining to the BBEG or whatever the focus of the campaign is. They become kind of secluded, mysterious figures.

Kiero
2007-06-21, 04:38 AM
Some creatures with spell-like abilities might be allowed, since they have abilities that can be found on one of the divine lists. However, none of the demons or devils with spell-like abilities lacks at least one that doesn't appear on the cleric, druid, ranger or paladin lists.

If they lose some powers, but retain others, not really a problem.

On a tangent, what kind of party makeup would we be likely to see? Would be be Druid, some Clerics and maybe a Rogue if there were locks to pick? Or would we see a bit more variety than that? Does it make the warrior classes more viable, or less?


You could also make it part of the story: maybe wizards are demonized by the church (not unlike B.A.D.D. demonized D&D) because they don't like the threat to their hegemony presented by any other casters out there (Druids exist alongside -or as- clerics to gods of nature, so they are held in at least, better esteem). Wizards are outcasts, Sorcerers are unfairly branded as monsters and executed/exiled, and Bards' magic is so abstract or easy to convince people that it is really divine in nature (Healing spells backed by Glibness = win. See, you're really a paladin or ranger with a better talent for singing than fighting :smallwink: !)

Anyway, wizards hide their identities and are mostly NPCs (you might even could nerf them or design a new class and still call them "Wizards". Like how Miko is really a Paladin, although she is one of Azure city's "Samurai," offically.)

If you wanted to do that in a game of your own, no problem. For the purposes of this thought experiment though, "no arcane" means exactly that. They don't exist, they've never existed, there's no "hidden" arcane casters.

Jack Mann
2007-06-21, 04:56 AM
Ah, I see. I suppose I can see where that would be more of an option with a demon or devil, who have relatively few spell-like abilities to change, than with the beholder. Though, as I said, the beholder actually isn't arcane at all, anymore than the medusa is.

As for how this would affect party balance, it would tend to make the warrior types less viable for two reasons. First, they lose the arcane buffs that wizards can cast on them. Second, it means that clerics and druids are much more common, and they were already better melee combatants than the "pure warrior" types.

Remember, wizards don't win by being in competition with fighters. They don't do damage very well. Sure, they can use save-or-dies, but that's a relatively small part of their schtick. Largely, they do well by making things easier for their side, by buffing up the meatshield (whether fighter or cleric), debuffing the enemies, and controlling the battlefield. It's the cleric and druid (combined with the fighter's own crippling lack of mobility and low will save) that make the fighter obsolete at higher levels, not the power of the wizard.

As well, one could expect the churches and druid circles to hold much more sway here. While this could mean added in-game restrictions on the cleric or druid's activities, it also means they would have much more influence in the society, providing even more reason to play them.

Dervag
2007-06-21, 06:36 AM
So, you see, unlike the medusa's petrifying gaze (which has nothing to do with spellcasting, and is neither arcane nor divine), spell-like abilities generally are arcane.

The only core demons that would be allowed, therefore, would be the bebelith and the retriever.Or you could, y'know, strip the spell-like abilities out of them and leave the demons in place. Demons can function without their spell-like abilities; they're just less powerful.

Kiero
2007-06-21, 07:04 AM
Or you could, y'know, strip the spell-like abilities out of them and leave the demons in place. Demons can function without their spell-like abilities; they're just less powerful.

That too. Are they able to manifest on the Prime Material Plane all by themselves, or do they require an arcane caster to open the way?

Kurald Galain
2007-06-21, 07:14 AM
It wouldn't be much of a stretch to allow the cultist followers of the dark god, other kinds of divine casters, to unleash demons upon the world.

Ethdred
2007-06-21, 08:41 AM
There is also a nation with a College of Mentalists that produces psions.

Any other Alan Partridge fans find this hilarious?

Dan_Hemmens
2007-06-21, 09:49 AM
My only partially sarcastic answer is:

Removing arcane magic from a D&D setting would undo all of the sweeping changes which the existence of arcane magic should have brought to the medieval setting but didn't.

nagora
2007-06-21, 09:59 AM
Hmm. Well, there would be a lot fewer monsters. No dragons, demons, or devils (all have supernatural or spell-like abilities). Most aberrations would be gone. There would be no gnomes (again, spell-like abilities). There would still be some of the weaker undead, like zombies and skeletons, but liches and vampires would be out (supernatural abilities). No more angels or archons. No drow (some would call this a good thing).

Adventures would most likely be against humanoid opponents with class levels.

Demons, devils, angels and archons at least could still exist as "divine" in the broad sense. Maybe vampires and the undead generally too, depending on what the source of their animation is in the game world (ie, is there a god of the undead?).

Also, "Spell-like" is not "spells". I know this is yet another point that 3rd edition has become confused about but until "like" is removed I think the DM would be justified in allowing such powers.

Dragons would simply revert to their 1st edition status of big monsters without the possibility to cast spells.

It's certainly an interesting idea.

I_Got_This_Name
2007-06-21, 02:07 PM
Demons, devils, angels and archons at least could still exist as "divine" in the broad sense. Maybe vampires and the undead generally too, depending on what the source of their animation is in the game world (ie, is there a god of the undead?).

Also, "Spell-like" is not "spells". I know this is yet another point that 3rd edition has become confused about but until "like" is removed I think the DM would be justified in allowing such powers.

Dragons would simply revert to their 1st edition status of big monsters without the possibility to cast spells.

It's certainly an interesting idea.

All it really takes is some minor retooling; just declare the outsider/undead SLAs Divine, and possibly replace spells that clerics and druids have no way of getting. Or don't; those monsters can very well have unique abilities.

Dragons? Promote them to divine messenger/just below quasi-deity status, and replace their Sorcerer casting with Favored Soul. Those with domain access keep it.

Other spell-likes? Case-by-case basis. In general, though, spell-likes are treated as neither arcane nor divine (Psionics are SLAs, too, as are Warlock invocations, and some shadow Mysteries, and Utterances, and none of those count as Arcane or Divine for purpose of satisfying prerequisites. Granted, these are out in this world, but it could easily mean no societies have access to non-divine magic), so monsters with SLAs could easily be retooled as divine things.

Those who are inherently very Arcane, or inherently very Psionic (Illithid), might have to go. However, if you go back into the myths, a lot of the time Arcane and Divine magic weren't too heavily differentiated, so a lot of the arcane monsters, if there even are any, can be made into divine monsters.

Now, what would the world look like? Clerics and Druids would have the most magical power, and an incentive to convert that into temporal power.

A standard party might consist of Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Rogue or even Cleric, Cleric, Druid, Rogue. In the first party, everyone fills their normal roles, with the Druid handling the I Win spells, and holding the heal wand when the cleric can't. In the second party, the clerics fight on the front line, the druid fights on the front line in between casting I Win spells, and the Rogue handles locks, traps, and the like.

In a game with no/few traps, the group might even go as far as Cleric, Cleric, Druid, Druid.

If the Tome of Battle is open (it is an alternate somewhat magical system, but its abilities are Supernatural at most. Those might go away if the idea is "people can't do anything supernatural without help from the gods," or the Swordsage might become more priestly. It's closer to the Monk, as it is, than any PHB class. The Crusader already is divinely-themed), the Fighter might be able to be replaced with a Warblade (no Supernatural maneuvers), or Crusader (a few Supernatural maneuvers and a divine theme), or even Swordsage, although in that case his brute strength will be on par with an unbuffed cleric.

Otherwise, you're looking at Clerics and Druids as far as the eye can see. Would certainly make an interesting group; a group of clergy from mutually-distrusting faiths, forced by circumstance to work together.

Telonius
2007-06-21, 02:37 PM
All right, practical issues... Since Bags of Holding and other such items no longer exist, adventurers will need to get pack animals or a bunch of nodwicks to carry all of their stuff. I would expect teamsters' and travellers' guilds to be much more important. So would horses, carts, and other mundane means of transportation.

Knight_Of_Twilight
2007-06-21, 03:47 PM
It could be fun- I'd go all out. Make the gods cruel and unmerciful- their followers forced to take on their image, and do their bidding for a smidgen of their power.

Then, the only option for mortals is to depend on muscle, wit, speed and guile, to make their own path in a world owned by gods...

But thats just me. ^^

bosssmiley
2007-06-21, 03:59 PM
My only partially sarcastic answer is:

Removing arcane magic from a D&D setting would undo all of the sweeping changes which the existence of arcane magic should have brought to the medieval setting but didn't.

Lulz. I think... :smallconfused:

Quick answer to the OP's question: IMO D&D without arcane magic would look a lot like David Gemmell's Drenai series ("Legend", "Waylander", "Quest for Lost Heroes", etc.).

Sure there'd be some divine magic (the Source vs the Spirit IIRC), also some spirit/demon magic (the Nadir shamans spring to mind here). There'd still be magic items (Snaga, the crystal tomb). There'd be divination (the blind seers). There'd still be other planes and some limited planar travel (the prehistoric land of the tattooed men, the spirit realm, the Dark Road, etc.), but the whole mindset would be a lot more 'Conan' or 'Lankhmar' than it would be 'FR' or 'Eberron':

Arcane magic: "I cast quickened so-and-so spell, followed up by empowered such-and-such spell, the latter also being enhanced by my greater metamagic rod of extend spell."

No arcane magic: "There are ancient mysteries here utterly beyond our ken. We can, if careful, walk this path; but there will be great peril however lightly we tread. Heed the words of the old seer and don't stray from the path."

Shift in Tone
2007-06-21, 06:43 PM
When I ran my forementioned Dragonlance game, I left all thje monsters with spell like abilities alone. It really made it daunting when you know a forest dwelling creature can still whip charm this or entagle that out on you. I felt it gave the creatures that sense of awe or fear that they were ment to have. Anything that they recieved from dieties or caster levels were stripped though. It takes control though to not overpower the players though.
With magic items I left them alone. Magic items were rare in Dragonlance and with magic gone mages were hording that stuff left and right. So it gave alot more meaning when a rogue found a +1 dagger or the gnome got a ring of Speak with animals. It also encouraged creative use of everything they had because they could not make or purchase any others.

Kiero
2007-06-21, 07:00 PM
Lulz. I think... :smallconfused:

Quick answer to the OP's question: IMO D&D without arcane magic would look a lot like David Gemmell's Drenai series ("Legend", "Waylander", "Quest for Lost Heroes", etc.).

Sure there'd be some divine magic (the Source vs the Spirit IIRC), also some spirit/demon magic (the Nadir shamans spring to mind here). There'd still be magic items (Snaga, the crystal tomb). There'd be divination (the blind seers). There'd still be other planes and some limited planar travel (the prehistoric land of the tattooed men, the spirit realm, the Dark Road, etc.), but the whole mindset would be a lot more 'Conan' or 'Lankhmar' than it would be 'FR' or 'Eberron':

Arcane magic: "I cast quickened so-and-so spell, followed up by empowered such-and-such spell, the latter also being enhanced by my greater metamagic rod of extend spell."

No arcane magic: "There are ancient mysteries here utterly beyond our ken. We can, if careful, walk this path; but there will be great peril however lightly we tread. Heed the words of the old seer and don't stray from the path."

So the high fantasy goes, to be replaced with something more like Sword and Sorcery? Neat.

I'm reminded of Bill King's Sword and Sorcery Toolkit (http://www.swordandsorcery.org/toolkit.htm) for the OGL. Though in his case divine vanished and only the sorceror (nerfed a lot) remained.

Dan_Hemmens
2007-06-22, 08:52 AM
Lulz. I think... :smallconfused:


Lulz? I don't follow you.

Meat Shield
2007-06-22, 09:20 AM
I actually created a homebrew world for this a few years ago. My rationale was that everything was normal (ie, Forgotten Realms-like) until about 500 years ago. Then suddenly all the arcane magic stopped working or was severely nerfed.

For there I started thinking of who and what is changed. My first thought was the elves - they're screwed. They become long lived, low strength humanoids. Gnomes also feel the pinch.

Who wins? Orcs, goblinoids, and every other non-magical entry in the MM.

There were cases of working arcane magic, but every caster was essentially 5-6 levels lower than he otherwise would have been. Artifacts still worked at lower power, but a +3 sword wouldn't be anything other than a nice sword. A +4 sword might give a +1.

The reason I came up with for all this was that the world was naturally non-magical. In the pre-history, the good gods saw that the forces of evil were much stronger physically, and the other races were in trouble unless they had some help. The good gods then seeded the planet with a substance that changed the area around it into a 'magic amplifier' or some other term I can't remember now. And since the gods distributed it evenly around the world, a +1 sword was a +1 sword everywhere.

Then a powerful arch-lich found the secret, and over a couple hundred years, created a dark ceremony to all at once collect all the magic dust from around the world and gather it to himself. So overnight, the forces of good lost their magic and the main BBEG had it all. Not to mention that if you had more of the dust in high concentration, it increased your own magic so he was more powerful than ever.

The lich would occasionally give out small vials of the stuff to trusted lieutenants so they could cast magic while under the influence of the dust (this would allow the PCs to occasionally have working magic).

Never actually got to run a campaign in the world, but I think it would have been fun.

Sylian
2007-06-22, 10:34 AM
I don't see why it shouldn't work. Clerics and other divine spellcasters would have more power, since there will be no powerful wizards to challenge them. There will probably be wars between religions.

Fixer
2007-06-22, 10:45 AM
It would look a lot like Chicago.

(I just felt I had to say this for some reason.)

Matthew
2007-06-26, 03:49 PM
Dragons would simply revert to their 1st edition status of big monsters without the possibility to cast spells.
A sizeable percentage of (A)D&D 1.x Dragons could cast spells, the exact percentage depended on the type.