Low Magic campaigns (like The Witcher or Thief)

[Yora]

I recently started looking at 5th edition and it actually looks quite good. (Wasn't a fan of the early playtests back in the day.) I'm considering it for a new campaign I am currently playing, which at least by the standards of D&D would be fairly low magic and moderate in power. I am thinking of adventures and characters in the scale of The Witcher and Thief (maybe also Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls, at least at their lower levels.)

I've heard the game is pretty flexible in that regard. Any ideas or experiences on how to make such a campaign work well?

First thing I would do is cap PCs and NPCs both at 10th level to restrict spells to 5th level and lower. Aside from dragons and fiend, most monsters in the MM should be within the scope of a 10th level party that prepares for a hard boss fight.

The other big thing for me would be to avoid magic that provides effectively passive bonuses without really much visibly happening. What kind of impact does it have to play without enchanted weapons and armor and other protection items?
Also, I'd exclude at least the cleric and paladin classes whose magic focus on these things and magical healing. With characters able to regain hp from resting, I think healing potions should be sufficient for emergencies.

What about scrolls and wands? I've never seen them much used in all the years that I've played but they always felt a bit like magic in a can to me. Feels like pretty high utility magic to me. Would it have any impact to not have any scrolls and wands in the campaign?

[Specter]

You could go up to level 20, if you limit full castets to 6th, pallies/rangers to 3rd and EK/ATs to 1st-level spells.

[Laurefindel]

Rangers, Bards and Druids also have healing spells. It might be easier to trim their spell lists than the class list.

[Yora]

Hm, that too. But cleric in particular seems like a class primarily designed about sharing divine power with the group.

[mgshamster]

The Witcher pen and paper RPG is coming out soon.

link (https://rtalsoriangames.wordpress.com)

[Laurefindel]

Hm, that too. But cleric in particular seems like a class primarily designed about sharing divine power with the group.

That's true, but that doesn't make it incompatible with low magic. That being said, there's nothing wrong with cutting paladin and cleric off the class list.

[JellyPooga]

5ed does low, or even "no", magic remarkably well and you don't need to change much. Using the "longer long rests" varient (DMG pg.267) puts a hard limitation on spellcasting (among other things), making it uneccesary to ban or limit any Class or feature. Only regaining "long rest" abilities once a week and "short rest" abilities once per day tends to make one stingy with their use.

This has the additional effect of making "mundane" characters like Rogues and Fighters more attractive, which may or may not be your intent.

It also makes selling ones soul to multiclass as Warlock an attractive proposition for those who wish for immediate power and we all know where that road leads...

[Laurefindel]

It also makes selling ones soul to multiclass as Warlock an attractive proposition for those who wish for immediate power and we all know where that road leads...

I intend to use the long rest = 1 week variant in my next campaign for those reasons, but I never considered that about the warlock. interesting...

[JellyPooga]

I intend to use the long rest = 1 week variant in my next campaign for those reasons, but I never considered that about the warlock. interesting...

Yeah, when a Wizard or Cleric needs a solid week of downtime to recover spells, the daily allotment Warlocks get starts looking mighty tempting.

I imagine the thought of trading higher level magic for more regular use is one that's damned a lot of spellslingers under those circumstances and lends some credence to the notion of the "good guys" (Wizard Kings, High Priests) being notoriously stingy with their magic in fiction, while the "bad guys" (Evil Sorcerers and Warlocks) are more gratuitous with it.

[CaptainSarathai]

The long rest variant takes some caution, as a head's up. I really like it, it makes D&D feel very different, but those differences translate in a lot of ways.
I was playing Long Rest = 1 Week, Short Rest = 8hr night.

This slows down the fights. Generally, the party expects 2-3 fights per Short Rest, and about 6-9 fights per Long Rest. A hard fight is going to shut them down for a week.

Traditionally a long rest means not doing anything for about 8hrs. Just reading, cleaning equipment, etc. When you have 1-week long rests, you need to add action to fill the time, otherwise, you're just accelerating the time scale; "okay, you go to sleep, and wake up 1 week later."

You need to allow them to roam around and have social interactions. Taking that week off should really feel like it slows them down. It should slow down the session. They should be sitting there RPing talks with politicians and shopkeepers, and thinking, "we're wasting time here, we need to get back out there!"
The problem is that they're going to want to be burning spells and so on, during that week. There are lots of social spells like 'Friends' and 'Disguise Self.' If you rule that they can't throw those spells during the rest, they might postpone important meetings until the end of the week, and really might decide to "sleep it off".

[JeenLeen]

I think, in 5e, you could remove full spellcasters (including warlocks) and be fine. They exist, if you like, but not as PC classes: just very rare instances. Depending on what you like, maybe forbid archetypes that can cast (e.g., Arcane Trickster) and/or half-casters like Ranger/Paladin.
Give out few magic items, as is the default in 5e. I would recommend at least a +1 weapon eventually, so they can bypass damage reduction.

If you do allow casters limit spell level, I think 3rd level is when spells get pretty powerful. Fly, for example, changes the atmosphere quite a bit. But I can't see anyone wanting to play a full caster is level 3 is the max spell level.

The longer rest option would work, but that just seems annoying to the players, for reasons stated above.

[JellyPooga]

The longer rest option would work, but that just seems annoying to the players, for reasons stated above.

I've used it as a player and it worked fine; multiple encounters in one day made for some tough decisions on resource management, sure, but the additional downtime allowed us to develop both personal projects (e.g. crafting, businesses, etc) and character (relationships, reputations and so forth).

As GM, you don't have to shove plot or random encounters down the PCs throats every rest; long or short. That doesn't change using the variant rule for longer rests; it merely changes what's possible during those rests. Letting the PCs pursue their own agendas during downtime gives them the opportunity to explore aspects of their characters they wouldn't otherwise be able to.

Believe me when I say that it's far from "annoying"! We never ran into any problems regarding wanting to use limited abilities during downtime; if anything it was a chance to purge any "spare" uses before the "reset"; if you had one spell slot left before hitting downtime, it was an incentive to do something with it instead of letting it go to waste. Sometimes, thinking of things to do with spare slots made for some of our most memorable scenes!

[Stan]

If you want really low magic, you can pick up Adventures in Middle Earth. It has all new classes with special abilities and a few magic items (on the level of Sting) but no actual spellcasting. I've been considering tweaking it slightly to get an Arthurian style game, adding a tiny bit of magic for PCs. I'd allow magic initiate but no damaging cantrips and allow the ritual magic feat, maybe a bit more.

If you don't want to go that extreme, another possibility is to make full caster classes into prestige classes. You can't start on that path until you have 3-6 levels under your belt and maybe 1-2 prerequisites such as particular skills.

[Ninjadeadbeard]

Hm.

This is an odd feeling. Being the contrarian in a "Low Magic Help" thread. The problem, generally, is that no one definition of low-magic exists, which complicates things. The other is using examples that don't quite fit, as I have been prone to do.

Yora, the examples you give are...very different. Witcher is basically a regular D&D setting. It's dark in theme, but there's a lot of high magic going around. Just because Geralt doesn't use much personally doesn't mean that Plane-jumping, monster-exploding spellcasters aren't a thing. Hell, Geralt (potentially) sleeps with at least TWO very high level spellcasters, and has another half dozen on metaphorical speed-dial. Dragonage is straight-up Warhammer, and no one calls that Low-Magic. Thief is in the same boat as Witcher. It has powerful spellcasting in it, but never really as a focus of the main character.

Elder Scrolls? The Plane of Oblivion say hello.*

Also, 5e isn't really low-magic. Spellcasters aren't Gods in comparison to martials anymore, but they can still throw insanely powerful !$%@ around like it's confetti. But that's not the issue. The issue is that most classes have some sort of access to magic or magic-like effects. Barbarians are the only class (without homebrew) that have no access to spellcasting of some variety, and even then they get a few magic-like effects via the Totem Archetype. Now, if "Everyone has a little magic but no Wishes" is low magic to you, then you're square with just banning those 9th-level spellcasters. Otherwise, I don't think 5e would fit what you want.

Now, you could do what the Adventures in Middle Earth guys did and make your own, more mundane classes to replace the magical options, but that's a ton of work. I've been toying with that idea in particular, though nothing's come of it.

In a pinch, the Long Rest Variant mentioned before is an okay idea, but I've seen players rebel over it's proposed implementation. Be aware of what sort of players you are making this campaign for. Magical healing via Cleric or Paladin is...eh. They've better things to do, honestly. Clerics got some decent combat and buff spells to throw around, and if a Paladin isn't spending every spellslot on smiting he's less than useless**. Rangers in the PHB are...weak compared to everyone else, and they need their precious spellslots to fuel their only real features. Bards are Supreme-Overlord-Tier anyway, so why bother worrying about them? In any case, healing via spells is not a great option most days.

Magic items in 5e are either non-existent or literally falling out of monster pockets, depending on the GM. There's no real WBL in this edition, so you have to use your gut when handing them out to players. Scrolls are great, if they're the kind anyone can use to cast, and potions are worth more than their weight in gold***.

And on the subject of level caps: Make it a soft cap. PCs can reach 10th, but make it clear that certain monsters, outsiders, and a few NPCs with levels will have greater or more specialized powers than the PCs at times. Just avoid an arms race and it should be fine.

TL;DR = 5e isn't what you're looking for most likely, unless you're willing to throw an enormous amount of work into fixing it for your needs.

And that's all I got. You may now heap your scorn.

*Actually they speak an incoherent babbling language of horror and madness but whatevs

**hyperbole.....mostly...

***Which sucks if you want to craft any of them in less than a week's time.

[Yora]

Also, 5e isn't really low-magic. Spellcasters aren't Gods in comparison to martials anymore, but they can still throw insanely powerful !$%@ around like it's confetti. But that's not the issue. The issue is that most classes have some sort of access to magic or magic-like effects. Barbarians are the only class (without homebrew) that have no access to spellcasting of some variety, and even then they get a few magic-like effects via the Totem Archetype. Now, if "Everyone has a little magic but no Wishes" is low magic to you, then you're square with just banning those 9th-level spellcasters. Otherwise, I don't think 5e would fit what you want.

Hence this thread: What kinds of adjustments are possible to use the system for a low magic campaign?

One draft I made for my next campaign looks like this:

Barbarian: No changes.
Druid (Shaman): Only Circle of the Land archetype. Looses Wild Shape ability, gains Bardic Inspiration, Song of Rest, and Countercharm as the Bard class.
Fighter: Only Champion and Battlemaster archetypes.
Ranger: No changes.
Rogue: Only Thief and Assassin archetypes.
Wizard (Witch): Only Divination, Enchantment, Illusion, and Transmutation archetypes. No spellbook, spells known as sorcerer.
Maximum Character Level: All PCs and NPCs can only advance to 10th level.
Multiclassing: Unrestricted.
Spellcasting: All spellcasting uses the Spell Point variant.
Spells: The spell lists for rangers, shamans, and witches will have to get some changes. No scrolls and wands.

Except for changing the spell lists the amount of work for this would be trivial, and even the spells shouldn't take more than one hour.

My image of low magic is a setting in which ordinary people don't have access to any magic, and still only very little if they are really rich. No magical technology in houses and cities, no enchanted outfits except maybe a few trinkets that keep hostile spirits away.
Having wizards and even players playing wizards doesn't seem to conflict with that to me. As long as they are rare. The number of sorcerers in the witcher books and each of the games can be counted on your fingers. They are just so prominent in the stories because they are heroes and villains. Good example would be the big siege battle at the start of The Witcher 2: It's this massive battle with thousands of soldiers on both sides, and they have to share a single sorcerer between them. And her part in the battle is only to guard the king, she doesn't do anything to support the assault. And in Thief you have one level in the Wizard's Guild, but there is not actually much active magic to see. The series has three supernatual beings, a ghost, and some zombies. That's very low magic.

[Plaguescarred]

You could also cap ability score to 18 so that only magic can give you better statistics.

I use exceptional items in my GREYHAWK camoaign to hand out useful abilities items and this limit the magic items i introduce so they can be rarer and much more poerful, which contrast a lot.

I use more consumables items such as scrolls and potions so that permanent magic items are rare (and often cursed!)

You could have frequent Dead Magic zones where magic simply cannot exist.

Have you considered using Wild Magic tables sometimes to show that magic is both powerful and unstable?

[Asmotherion]

I don't get why people tend to believe that a low-magic campain automatically means casters should be striped from powerfull spells. Classes were build around balance. If you have casters with lower spells but a fully functioning Fighter for example, there is bound to be some balance issues.

A Low Magic Campain is meant to be a world were magic is rare. In some settings so rare that it's very existance is questioned, and believed to be nothing more than a legend by popular belief. A caster in such a setting is going to be the one in a million person that happens to have unlocked the ability to use magic. Maybe that's what united the PCs, the fact they are all casters?

In a Low magic campain, what you can do however is limit magic items. Common magic items either do not exist, or are re-fluffed to work on some technology (healing potions for example can be energy drinks in a modern Low Magic campain, or some medieval medicin that works due to chemistry/herbs). Uncommon magic Items are stuff of legendary power (what artifacts are in a regular campain). Anything above uncommon magic Items either does not exist, or (at DM's aproval) exists in an other plane of existance.

Monsters should also reflect the low magic setting.

People tend to confuse Low Magic Campains with Sword and Sorcery witch is a genre, and were indeed you don't expect to see a protagonist (or PC) mage, instead saving this for Vilains. In such a campain the best fix is:
A) Ban full spellcasting classes as main classes
B) At your option (and, mostly if some player wants to) still alow up to a 9 level multiclass in a full spellcastin class. This will allow Spellcasters with 9th level spell slots (for example a sorcerer 9, wizard 9 something else 2), but up to 5th level spells. Half casters also have 5th level spells, but can only cast them at 5th level. They also aquire them slower.

In my humble opinion, a low magic setting is meant to make a spellcasting party more unique, not criple them. When in a high magic campain an NPC who sees a mage cast prestidigitation to light a campfire will react along the lines of "oh, you're a mage... I didn't notice" or even "Prestidigitation huh? I onlce tried to learn this spell from a friend who's a mage, but magic is just too complicated for me to understand it..." in a low magic campain an NPC will react like "wow the fire light itself... did you do it? how did you do it? I want to learn how to do that too!" or even "YOU! I saw what you did! You comand the essance of hellfire! You're a devil! Death to the Devil!"

[Socratov]

If you want a low or no magic campaign then the following easy steps should be taken:


ban full casting classes (i.e. Cleric, Bard, Wizard, Sorcerer, Druid), but not the warlock (just change the resting mechanic for a short resting points and long rests to campsites/inns)
No magic Items*
Remove the damage resistances and immunities for nonmagic stuff, instead tailor them to special materials (in the case of the witcher: silver sword and steel sword, maybe add cold iron or something) tied to the origins of the monster. *

*You could not do 2 and 3 and allow magic weapons for the express puyrpose of overcoming non-magic resistances, but just don't any 'regular' effects and certainly not a +1 weapon (or +more). You could apply other effects to the weapons which opens up utility effects like Fragarach in the Iron Druid books (it can force someone to answer a question truthfully) or other similar boosting effects. but eliminating the higher level casters will shut down the fireworks for a lot (expecially if you limit short rest points for the warlock, which will become the new defacto wizard).

You could also disallow warlocks and eliminate all lvl 6 and above spells, But I think the mystic arcanum feature won't impact the game too much, considering they are on a long rest. Besides, the warlock is one of the worst defended classes (to the point that it takes a lot to make it a surviving character), especialy considering you have all of the other classes be martials (who have a better hitdie on average and/or better/easier AC).

[MrStabby]

Are you worried about the effect of high level spells? It is perfectly reasonable to limit them if that is the type of campaign you are wanting to run, just be clear about what you are doing in advance so that people do not build characters around an expectation of different rules.

Limiting spells to 5th level is absolutely a great way to do this.

If you do do this then casters do get some offseting advantages. Firstly and probably most importantly magic should be unexpected. Caster are less likely to learn dispel magic and counterspell, evolution would no longer favour creatures with magic resistance or elemental resistance. Thus your world should be that little more susceptible to common spells.

Secondly you really have to use the optional rules for multiclassing. The role of wizard or any other caster is fine and can productively be multiclassed with a more martial character and remain an attractive choice for players. If you a) want to play a higher level campaign and b) want to limit spells and c) not effectively just be banning classes, then you will want to enable multiclasses.

[JellyPooga]

I don't get why people tend to believe that a low-magic campain automatically means casters should be striped from powerfull spells.

This is why I advocate the longer long rest variant; it allows players to play whatever they want, without banning anything, but it puts some hard limits on how frequently they can use their most powerful options. This not only puts limits on spellcasters, but on "mundanes" too; a Barbarian who can only Rage 2-6 times before having to take a week out has some serious thinking to do when melee starts, for example. The question "Is it worth it?" is one all characters have to face in every contest; losing HP, if nothing else, is incentive enough to try and avoid combat for combats' sake, when you aren't getting them all back after a nights rest.

Additionally, while the most powerful options available to characters are extremely limited, the lesser options, such as Cantrips, Wild Shape and Ki points, which are either at-will or refresh on a short rest (i.e. over night), get bandied around a lot more, so you still get to be a Wizard chucking Firebolts around or a Cleric casting Guidance on a regular basis, but when you do decide a fight is "worth it", that Fireball or Spirit Guardians becomes that much more significant and that's what a low-magic setting is about for me; not limiting magic so no-one can use it, but making the use of magic something to comment on or otherwise significant.

You're much less likely to toss out a casual Healing Word to revive a downed buddy when it's eating a precious precious spell slot; deciding whether you need him/her up now or whether a Spare the Dying or getting someone to use a Healers Kit will do until the combat is over can be a tough choice when your resources are more limited.

As you say, in a low-magic setting, even the use of Prestidigitation to light a fire should be noteworthy. How much more noteworthy is it, then, when the party Wizard (who is something of a rarity within the setting) busts out the big guns? Yes, longer long rests as a means to portray low-magic settings tends to impact spellcasters much more than others, but it also makes them feel awesome when they go all-out!

[Asmotherion]

This is why I advocate the longer long rest variant; it allows players to play whatever they want, without banning anything, but it puts some hard limits on how frequently they can use their most powerful options. This not only puts limits on spellcasters, but on "mundanes" too; a Barbarian who can only Rage 2-6 times before having to take a week out has some serious thinking to do when melee starts, for example. The question "Is it worth it?" is one all characters have to face in every contest; losing HP, if nothing else, is incentive enough to try and avoid combat for combats' sake, when you aren't getting them all back after a nights rest.

Additionally, while the most powerful options available to characters are extremely limited, the lesser options, such as Cantrips, Wild Shape and Ki points, which are either at-will or refresh on a short rest (i.e. over night), get bandied around a lot more, so you still get to be a Wizard chucking Firebolts around or a Cleric casting Guidance on a regular basis, but when you do decide a fight is "worth it", that Fireball or Spirit Guardians becomes that much more significant and that's what a low-magic setting is about for me; not limiting magic so no-one can use it, but making the use of magic something to comment on or otherwise significant.

You're much less likely to toss out a casual Healing Word to revive a downed buddy when it's eating a precious precious spell slot; deciding whether you need him/her up now or whether a Spare the Dying or getting someone to use a Healers Kit will do until the combat is over can be a tough choice when your resources are more limited.

As you say, in a low-magic setting, even the use of Prestidigitation to light a fire should be noteworthy. How much more noteworthy is it, then, when the party Wizard (who is something of a rarity within the setting) busts out the big guns? Yes, longer long rests as a means to portray low-magic settings tends to impact spellcasters much more than others, but it also makes them feel awesome when they go all-out!

As a matter of fact, I like your solution. Solves prety much everything. Nice job :)

[Yora]

Limiting spells to 5th level is absolutely a great way to do this.


As you say, in a low-magic setting, even the use of Prestidigitation to light a fire should be noteworthy. How much more noteworthy is it, then, when the party Wizard (who is something of a rarity within the setting) busts out the big guns? Yes, longer long rests as a means to portray low-magic settings tends to impact spellcasters much more than others, but it also makes them feel awesome when they go all-out!

Capping the game at 10th level (or any other leve) still leads to the same question that many people have been pondering about back with E6 for third edition: Do you simply dial down all higher level NPCs of the setting to the maximum level or do you reduce the level for everyone equally across the board. A world with plenty of 10th level casters is a very different one than one where it is the level that only a few individual have ever reached.
Removing 6th to 9th level spells certainly changes the world already, but for low magic settings I would create environments where casters above 5th level are unique individuals.

The main issue is really what kind of clerics and wizards you might find in a common town. Whether you have higher level PCs and occasional villains or not affects the gameplay of the campaign, but has a minor impact on the setting.

[MrStabby]

This is why I advocate the longer long rest variant; it allows players to play whatever they want, without banning anything, but it puts some hard limits on how frequently they can use their most powerful options. This not only puts limits on spellcasters, but on "mundanes" too; a Barbarian who can only Rage 2-6 times before having to take a week out has some serious thinking to do when melee starts, for example. The question "Is it worth it?" is one all characters have to face in every contest; losing HP, if nothing else, is incentive enough to try and avoid combat for combats' sake, when you aren't getting them all back after a nights rest.

Additionally, while the most powerful options available to characters are extremely limited, the lesser options, such as Cantrips, Wild Shape and Ki points, which are either at-will or refresh on a short rest (i.e. over night), get bandied around a lot more, so you still get to be a Wizard chucking Firebolts around or a Cleric casting Guidance on a regular basis, but when you do decide a fight is "worth it", that Fireball or Spirit Guardians becomes that much more significant and that's what a low-magic setting is about for me; not limiting magic so no-one can use it, but making the use of magic something to comment on or otherwise significant.

You're much less likely to toss out a casual Healing Word to revive a downed buddy when it's eating a precious precious spell slot; deciding whether you need him/her up now or whether a Spare the Dying or getting someone to use a Healers Kit will do until the combat is over can be a tough choice when your resources are more limited.

As you say, in a low-magic setting, even the use of Prestidigitation to light a fire should be noteworthy. How much more noteworthy is it, then, when the party Wizard (who is something of a rarity within the setting) busts out the big guns? Yes, longer long rests as a means to portray low-magic settings tends to impact spellcasters much more than others, but it also makes them feel awesome when they go all-out!

This is a step forwards if you wan't lower magic, but there are a number of issues that it doesn't really address. For example, high level magic can make a lot of things dull. A quest to travel across the continent becomes rather dull and anticlimactic when you have teleport spells. Holding a breach in the siege is less of a challenge when you can plop down a wall. Even if these spells could only be cast once a month it is still giving magic the ability to dictate what story lines and quests are going to be fun at the table.

A low magic setting isn't about setting a new norm, at least not to me, but it is about creating the kind of campaign where high level characters can still have a good time and be challenged doing the kind of thing that would be trivialised by a high level spell.

[JellyPooga]

This is a step forwards if you wan't lower magic, but there are a number of issues that it doesn't really address. For example, high level magic can make a lot of things dull. A quest to travel across the continent becomes rather dull and anticlimactic when you have teleport spells. Holding a breach in the siege is less of a challenge when you can plop down a wall. Even if these spells could only be cast once a month it is still giving magic the ability to dictate what story lines and quests are going to be fun at the table.

A low magic setting isn't about setting a new norm, at least not to me, but it is about creating the kind of campaign where high level characters can still have a good time and be challenged doing the kind of thing that would be trivialised by a high level spell.

I'd argue that being able to trivialise several encounters a day is a very different kettle of fish to only being able to do so X many times before having to take a week off.

Take your wall example; yeah, a Wall of Force or Stone will hold a breach, but for how long? What other options ar you forgoing to plonk that wall there? Remember, it's not just after a week of adventuring that you regain your spell slots, it's after a week of rest. You aren't getting a lot of rest in a siege, so great, your spell gave the defenders some time to shore up the breach, but you aren't doing it again any time soon and who knows how long the plug in the breach will hold? You've trivialised one encounter, but what about the next one or the one after that...eventually the "mighty" Wizard will run out of spells and if he's to be of any use later on, he's going to have to stay well clear of the fighting if he's to return to top form and the city could fall in that time.

A high level spellcaster can turn the tide of a battle or transport his allies halfway across a continent with his magic, but using long long rests he's a depletable resource. For me, at least, that feels more like the way a spellcaster should; he can do the impossible, but must be wary of burning out too fast.

[Yora]

My rule of thumb when adjusting spell lists is to first start with removing all spells that cause teleportation, conjure stuff out of thin air, deal with extradimensional spaces, bring people back from the dead, and let players know who is a villain and what they are planning.
There are often a few short range teleportation spells that work within line of sight, which don't cause any real trouble and can be put back in, but I think it's good starting point to remove effects that feel particularly high-magic.

[RedGeomancer]

Spellcasting: All spellcasting uses the Spell Point variant.


If you're using Spell Points, you could reduce the magic level without pushing the whole campaign toward the Long Rest variant. Just have spellcasters regain only a small number of Spell Points each night (regular 8 hour Long Rest) instead of all of them. I would suggest recovering Spell Points = Class Level (where Class Level is determined by multiclassing rules) each night.

Spell Point system is also good because, while it increases flexibility, it already reduces the total number of spells available per Long Rest. (It is not possible to build a full casters spell slots out of Spell Points using chart on DMG 289.)


Maximum Character Level: All PCs and NPCs can only advance to 10th level.

Both the Long Rest discussion and the Maximum Character Level discussion get me wondering, if the goal is "low magic", why limit the non-magic classes? Using my Spell Point suggestion, you can limit casters' spell frequency, while still allowing Fighters to recharge Action Surge on a Short Rest. Similarly for Maximum Character Level. Capping at 10 is not so much "low magic" as overall "low power". It limits your fighters and rogues as well as casters, and limits the CR of adversaries you can throw at them. Which is fine as long as you (a) don't intend to throw any adult+ dragons at them, (b) expect them to talk their way out of any encounters with adult+ dragons.

I think your proposed rules are great, but I also think it might be possible to achieve what you want with more emphasis on setting. Perhaps the character is a high-level Wizard, but there are no other high-level Wizards, and *extremely* few low-level wizards. (Might still want to trash Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster, with are kind of magic-for-muggles classes.)

You could also give Wizards full caster progression *but* have it so that *all* spells have to be discovered in spell books (no 2 free per level), and just make it so that they never find anything above 5th level, unless you decide to allow a higher-level spell be discovered. In this case, finding a spell book or scroll with one 7th level spell would be the equivalent of a very rare or legendary magic item. In the meantime, they can still use high-level slots (or spell points) to upcast lower-level spells.

Obviously, this doesn't work for casters who automatically get access (prepared or spells known) from a fixed list, like Clerics (which you are dropping) or Druids (which you are retaining).

[Herobizkit]

For a more "Witcher-y" feel:

1. Remove Cleric and Wizard.
2. Druid takes over as "Cleric" in your setting.
2a) Optionally, remove Shapeshifting from the base Druid. Only Moon Druids get the gift of Shapeshifting.
3. Chop spells off the Bard.
3a) Optionally, replace Bard casting with Arcane Trickster's spell list and spell slot progression.
3b) Optionally, replace Bard spell list with Cleric + domain spells; Bard picks a domain to represent his Lore interest.
3c) Optionally, replace Bard spell list with Druid spell list.

Sorcerers and Warlocks become the fearful "insta-casters" that fling fire and pop portals on a whim.

No one to wave a holy symbol and blow up undead; no one becomes the "healerbot". :)

[MeeposFire]

Another option is to not remove the classes or limit to 10th level but instead just limit the spells known to level 5 and below but keep the spell slots. You can then use them to up cast using those slots. In addition if there are spells you think still work that are higher level you can accept those one at a time and give them out as a sort of treasure "spells of the ancients" are some such. This way you can hand out meteor swarm but withhold wish if needed. This helps keep spells that change everything out of the picture but allows spellcasters to exist and still be useful.

[DanyBallon]

Surfing on MeeposFire idea, what if instead of removing access to 5th level spell and up, you just limit the number of spell slots available per long rest to a single for each spell level, kinda like the Warlock does (but on a long rest basis)? high level spells will still be available, but since the caster has only one slots, he'll need to carefully think which spell he want to cast with each slots.

Otherwise, you can make all high level spell ritual, or special rituals that requires rare components and more than one caster to cast the spell.

[mephnick]

Surfing on MeeposFire idea, what if instead of removing access to 5th level spell and up, you just limit the number of spell slots available per long rest to a single for each spell level, kinda like the Warlock does (but on a long rest basis)? high level spells will still be available, but since the caster has only one slots, he'll need to carefully think which spell he want to cast with each slots.

Otherwise, you can make all high level spell ritual, or special rituals that requires rare components and more than one caster to cast the spell.

A lot of the design goals for low magic campaigns (like traditional e6 games etc) is that even the existence of high level magic turns the setting into a high magic campaign. The fact that teleport exists, even if only 10 people on the planet can cast it, changes the setting completely. Now your PCs can seek out people with these powers, or expect to get it themselves. Once your wizard gets teleport it doesn't matter if he's the only person on the planet that can cast it or if he can only cast it once a day, it still completely nullifies the low fantasy trope of the journey.

[DanyBallon]

A lot of the design goals for low magic campaigns (like traditional e6 games etc) is that even the existence of high level magic turns the setting into a high magic campaign. The fact that teleport exists, even if only 10 people on the planet can cast it, changes the setting completely. Now your PCs can seek out people with these powers, or expect to get it themselves. Once your wizard gets teleport it doesn't matter if he's the only person on the planet that can cast it or if he can only cast it once a day, it still completely nullifies the low fantasy trope of the journey.

I agree, but getting a wizard to cast teleport for your group, or a wizard getting his hands on a teleportation spell can be an adventure on its own.

I may be wrong but I always considered Lords of the Realm as a low-level magic setting, considering that only a few have access to high magic, and magic items are from ages begone.

Greyhawk was such a low-level magic setting as, while you could obtained high arcana, it wasn't accessible to everyone, compared to FR where magic is more common, or a high fantasy setting where everything mundane is bathed into magic.

[Herobizkit]

I agree, but getting a wizard to cast teleport for your group, or a wizard getting his hands on a teleportation spell can be an adventure on its own. ... at which point the game ceases to be low-magic as the party can then teleport anywhere they want. :)

[rbstr]

I guess it depends a bit more on what you want with low magic. Do you want fewer magics cast or magic that is less powerful? Or both? And also how much work do you want to do to re-balance stuff?

Lets say you just restrict to lvl5 spells: You made magic less powerful but there are still a bunch of slots to be spent! If you have a full caster they'll be up-casting things all over the place.
So do you restrict slots in some fashion?
Either way you have to do something to re-balance the caster classes to make up for the loss, in particular if you cut their slots. If you cut caster slots their balance goes out the window IMO.

Even the melee-oriented caster archetypes are still balanced around their slot progression.
And you have a big problem in cantrips. Those are license to vomit magic all over the place.

The long rests option is a pretty good plan as you get much less casting per unit of time and it preserves class balance.
Then dump full caster and 1/3 caster classes (these have to go because of cantrips, plus EK's warmagic is big to its combat power) but leave the 1/2 casters and you're left with quite a few less spells, no reality-warping magic, but moderately powerful effects for "oh crap" situations, and you don't have to re-balance since the part-casters are competent martial classes.

IMO in low magic settings things that are sort of subtle buff/debuff things that you can do that are kind of extensions of mundane action are preferred over flashy stuff. Hunter's Mark, bless, goodberry, viscous mockery, even smite and cure wounds are all things that are kind of less overtly magical than a fireball or an Eldritch Blast cantrip.

[DanyBallon]

... at which point the game ceases to be low-magic as the party can then teleport anywhere they want. :)

It's all a matter of what you are looking for. If you want to play in a low-magic setting, my solution is fine. If you want to restrict what your players can do, then, limiting access to high level spell is the way to go.

[Herobizkit]

If you really want to bend magic, make it so that ONLY Ritual magic is available, but make all rituals available to every class. Casters can still use their slots on a spell with a Ritual tag for instant casting.

Note: I haven't worked out any ramifications for this or what it might look like in an actual game.