What if mundane meant immune to magic?

[Hackulator]

What if you created a homebrew world where people were either mundane or magical, and mundanes couldn't directly be affected by or use ANY magic?

The mundane effect would be similar to AMF covering just their bodies. A mundane character can just walk through your forcecage, your fireball doesn't hurt him, BUT he doesn't know your illusion isn't real til he touches it. He doesn't dispel your magic by touching you, but your shield spell or mage armor can't block him. However, if you polymorphed into something tougher, that makes it harder for him to hurt you.

He can't receive any buff spells. He can use SOME magic items. For example, he could use a magic sword, or magic armor, but he couldn't use a belt of giant strength because that is altering him directly. Whether or not they could use activatable magic items would be an interesting question.

Would it make for an interesting world? What do you think this would do to balance? Are partial caster classes now TOTAL garbage?

[Nifft]

Can summoned monsters kill mundanes?

Can instantaneous Conjuration (Creation) effects kill mundanes?

Does healing work on mundanes, or is that too magical?

I suspect an army of magical soldiers would roll over an equally large army of unhealable, unbuffable mundanes.

[DeTess]

Setting it up the way you described would probably create some issues, as the poster above pointed out. If you want this as an added effect of a world, maybe make mundanes resistant/immune to direct magical effects that mess with their mind/soul? (essentially immune to mind-affecting, as well as some other effects). Fire balls and the like would still work on them, as would healing and many buff spells, but they do get an additional bonus over magical beings. This could be fluffed as the training that opens people u to using magical energies also allows them to be manipulated by those energies, while people without that training are naturally resistant.

[Hackulator]

Can summoned monsters kill mundanes?

Can instantaneous Conjuration (Creation) effects kill mundanes?

Does healing work on mundanes, or is that too magical?

I suspect an army of magical soldiers would roll over an equally large army of unhealable, unbuffable mundanes.

Yes

Probably no, because of rules that people always forget about.

No healing wouldn't work.

Yes probably, but what would be best for both armies would be to have a mix, with a lot of mage-killer mundanes as irregulars.

Also remember, most people are mundanes in a D&D world and I was imagining a world where this was still true, it's just now being "mundane" is something you just are, not something you chose.

[logic_error]

Can mundanes in your world use magic items? If not, they are borked.

[Nifft]

The mundane effect would be similar to AMF covering just their bodies.
Instantaneous Conjuration (Creation) spells ought to penetrate that.


Probably no, because of rules that people always forget about.
Do tell, what rules do you think would apply in a way that "people always forget about"?


No healing wouldn't work.

Yes probably, but what would be best for both armies would be to have a mix, with a lot of mage-killer mundanes as irregulars.
Why would the magical army want any non-magical soldiers?

Bard: "Hey guys you all get +4 to attack and damage, have a nice battle."

Cleric: "Hey guys you all get +2 to attack, and I'll heal you if you're wounded so we're always starting battle at full strength."

Druid: "Hey guys I'll throw some bears at them."

Wizard: "Hey guys how do you feel about haste? Great, have some haste."

The non-magical army loses every battle that is fought with caster support, because 20 Duskblades with buffs will beat 20 anti-magic Fighters without buffs.



Also remember, most people are mundanes in a D&D world and I was imagining a world where this was still true, it's just now being "mundane" is something you just are, not something you chose.
Not after the first war.

The magical side would utterly dominate, and all future children would be born with some sort of magical talent.

One or two generations after the magical army clears an area of mundanes, that area is back to standard D&D rules.

[Necroticplague]

Spellcasters still dominate. After all, the things that can affect the setting the most don't require directly casting it on anybody. Wishes, and various loops thereof, only involve things with SLAs. Even if defensive spells don't work, offensive buffs still mean a magical army is much stronger than a mundane one, in addition to being more well supplied (what with creating food and teleporting). Even if I can't Fireball you, opening a 20 foot hole below you is just as good for combat purposes. Arguably, not being able to benefit from the buffs of casters actually makes mundanes even weaker in this setting.

[DrMotives]

It won't work in D&D, you'd have to change the whole game enough that it wouldn't, mechanically, be the same game at all anymore. There was a similar system in Final Fantasy Tactics though, where every character & monster has a "faith" stat. High faith means your spells are more powerful, but you also get effected by magic more than a low-faith character. That applies to healing & buffs as well as offensive magic.

[AvatarVecna]

Part of it depends on what you mean by "immune to magic", and how it interacts with certain things. Can a mundane wield a magic item without their personalized antimagic field causing it to not give any benefit over a normal masterwork item? Can they wield a nonmagic item buffed with something like Greater Magic Weapon? If the answer to either of those is "yes", does that mean a magical could wield a similar item against them and gain benefit? If the answer to those questions aren't the same, why not? If a magical wielding a magic weapon (whether a magic item or buffed nonmagic item) can't gain benefit against a mundane with that magic weapon, do buff spells actually help magicals against mundanes?

Can summoned monsters harm mundanes? I'd probably think not, but could called creatures, which are actually present rather than "just" summoned? They can walk though a Wall Of Force, okay, can they walk through a Wall Of Stone, since it's an instantaneous conjuration? Can they be healed by healing spells? I would assume not, but that's a huge disadvantage. I'll assume it would work the same as "Remove Disease", and diseases are just gonna be rampant in the mundane world. Of course, this becomes an interesting question: if a disease isn't magical, it would be mundane, since it's alive in a scientific sense and not magic, so would Remove Disease work on nonmagical diseases at all?

Of course, this doesn't mean magicals would be at the mercy of mundanes, it would just mean that they'd go create their own world, with hookers and booze! Plane Shift away and never be bothered by those pesky mundanes again. :smalltongue:

[Goaty14]

What if mundanes were like warforged?

Magic still affects them, BUT at 1/2 effect.
-----OR
Mundanes are significantly less in number compared to magicals (instead of 1/2) and instead have innate sorcerer-like mundane things? (like ToB type stuff)

[Anymage]

In extremis, if all noncasters had an antimagic field centered on them, casters would still have an edge in both ability to affect plots (being able to resurrect others is nice, as is being able to be resurrected) and in combats when the casters take the initiative. It'd at least give muggles an edge when they could catch casters off guard, which could lead to some interesting encounter level balance as one side tries to ensure that they get the drop on each other.

What makes me not excited about this system is that when I play a fantasy setting, I want to do exciting and fantastic stuff. One "hates magic so much they project antimagic" PRC might be interesting. I'd still rather have my average noncaster have their own fantastic abilities over being muggles who also suppress fantasy stuff around them.

[Crake]

Instantaneous Conjuration (Creation) spells ought to penetrate that.


Do tell, what rules do you think would apply in a way that "people always forget about"?

I would also like to know the answer to this question.


Yes probably, but what would be best for both armies would be to have a mix, with a lot of mage-killer mundanes as irregulars.

Being immune to magic doesn't make you even close to being a mage killer, at best you're slightly better at avoiding death by magic, that's it. The mage is still buffed to oblivion, so when you try to attack them, nothing happens.


The mundane effect would be similar to AMF covering just their bodies. A mundane character can just walk through your forcecage, your fireball doesn't hurt him, BUT he doesn't know your illusion isn't real til he touches it. He doesn't dispel your magic by touching you, but your shield spell or mage armor can't block him. However, if you polymorphed into something tougher, that makes it harder for him to hurt you.

Also worth noting that wall of force (and by extension forcecage, since it's walls are treated as walls of force) is not negated by an antimagic field, so these mundanes would be equally as trapped by a forcecage as anyone else. Based on your description of how it would work, his buffs wouldn't stop you from hitting him, but it would stop your weapon from hitting him, since you specifically said wielded weapons would not be affected by their personal AMF. So unless all the mundanes are running around punching people, there's no issue. Not to mention that your AMF doesn't stop the magic users from teleporting/flying away and just peppering you with ranged attacks from summoned creatures.

[Bavarian itP]

Not after the first war.

The magical side would utterly dominate, and all future children would be born with some sort of magical talent.

One or two generations after the magical army clears an area of mundanes, that area is back to standard D&D rules.


Who says the trait is genetic?

And why do you equal war with genocide?

[Necroticplague]

And why do you equal war with genocide?

Because how else are you supposed to occupy the resources that you're trying to conquer? You can't very well safely occupy a place when surrounded by potential enemies.

[Bohandas]

Didn't psionics use to work like this in 2e?

[Nifft]

Who says the trait is genetic? The OP implied it, here:

Also remember, most people are mundanes in a D&D world and I was imagining a world where this was still true, it's just now being "mundane" is something you just are, not something you chose. That sure sounds like genetics to me. Do you have an alternative explanation, @Bavarian itP?



And why do you equal war with genocide? Because the OP's scenario is magic-users vs. his breed of extra-worthless double-muggles.

[Hackulator]

Because the OP's scenario is magic-users vs. his breed of extra-worthless double-muggles.

Uh, no? I never said anything about a race war, that's all you bro.

[Nifft]

Yes probably, but what would be best for both armies would be to have a mix, with a lot of mage-killer mundanes as irregulars.


Uh, no? I never said anything about a race war, that's all you bro.

What did you mean by "both armies", then?

You divided the world up into two armies first, and we've been going off that since.

[Hackulator]

What did you mean by "both armies", then?

You divided the world up into two armies first, and we've been going off that since.

Dude, I didn't say anything about that in my post. YOU made the comment




I suspect an army of magical soldiers would roll over an equally large army of unhealable, unbuffable mundanes.

To which I responded. You are the one who brought up armies.

[Nifft]

Uh, no? I never said anything about a race war, that's all you bro.


Dude, I didn't say anything about that in my post. YOU made

Ayyy lamo dude-bro, let me throw down the low-down for your bro-down: unbuffable mundanes are extra-worthless in combat, and making an army of partial-casters (Duskblades, Hexblades, Rangers, Paladins, etc.) with a few full-casters to buff them (including Bards) would mean defeat for their foes.

What you asked was whether half-casters and partial-casters would be worthless, and it turned out the opposite was true: unbuffable mundanes are not worth keeping around if you have full-casters.

See, if their foes where also non-mundanes, then case the full-casters just pull out fireball instead of haste -- the mundanes never make a positive difference.

In terms of killing mages, the best mage-killer is a full-caster, or a magical Rogue who can teleport / turn invisible / sneak-attack.

An unbuffable mundane has less to offer, and will lose in comparison to any martially oriented full-caster (e.g. Cleric or Druid or gish), or in comparison to any partial-caster who is supported by a full-caster.

Full-casters are force multipliers. AMF mundanes are multiplication by zero. Guess which is larger, dude-bro?

[Boci]

Aren't most soldiers going to be 1st level (i.e. no fireball and haste?)? And under most interpretation, an army will be lucky to have 1 wizard for every 20 soldiers.

[Hackulator]

Ayyy lamo dude-bro, let me throw down the low-down for your bro-down: unbuffable mundanes are extra-worthless in combat, and making an army of partial-casters (Duskblades, Hexblades, Rangers, Paladins, etc.) with a few full-casters to buff them (including Bards) would mean defeat for their foes.

What you asked was whether half-casters and partial-casters would be worthless, and it turned out the opposite was true: unbuffable mundanes are not worth keeping around if you have full-casters.

See, if their foes where also non-mundanes, then case the full-casters just pull out fireball instead of haste -- the mundanes never make a positive difference.

In terms of killing mages, the best mage-killer is a full-caster, or a magical Rogue who can teleport / turn invisible / sneak-attack.

An unbuffable mundane has less to offer, and will lose in comparison to any martially oriented full-caster (e.g. Cleric or Druid or gish), or in comparison to any partial-caster who is supported by a full-caster.

Full-casters are force multipliers. AMF mundanes are multiplication by zero. Guess which is larger, dude-bro?

Dude what are you even babbling on about now? I can't tell if you're drunk or trolling or just super triggered by use of the word "dude" but you seem to forget what you yourself said and then respond to things you made up in your own head.

[Eldariel]

I like high level mundanes gaining high resistance/immunity to spells á la AD&D Player' Options Fighter, but without buffs and items they are worse than useless. Thus you'd need to alter the basics of the system a lot for this to function.

Monsters are still big and ridiculous and completely willing to wipe the floor with anyone not souped up with spells. And casters still have priority access to monsters and controlling them/being them.

[weckar]

I think the main problem is you'll be playing two separate games where two classes of people are effectively completely immune to each other.

[Boci]

Certainly this effects the world and players different. For the world, mundane is on balance quite with this. The general assumption is most mundaners won't really encounter beneficial magic that much. The peasant in the field, the average soldier/militiaman. For them, life would be normal, except some threats would be removed for them.

For adventurers and rich folk, yeah the trade off wouldn't be worth it, and having mundaners and magic people in the same party would be tricky, you'd probably want them all to be either one or the other.

[Crake]

Certainly this effects the world and players different. For the world, mundane is on balance quite with this. The general assumption is most mundaners won't really encounter beneficial magic that much. The peasant in the field, the average soldier/militiaman. For them, life would be normal, except some threats would be removed for them.

For adventurers and rich folk, yeah the trade off wouldn't be worth it, and having mundaners and magic people in the same party would be tricky, you'd probably want them all to be either one or the other.

Emphasis mine. Can you give me a single case where a commoner/peasant/average soldier would have even 1 threat removed from them? Generally anything that could kill them with magic could pretty much also kill them in any other way.

[Boci]

Emphasis mine. Can you give me a single case where a commoner/peasant/average soldier would have even 1 threat removed from them? Generally anything that could kill them with magic could pretty much also kill them in any other way.

How about this crazy monster known as...a dragon? It can now only kill them with natural attacks, which is a chore, why would they even bother. And even if it is sadistic, the villagers are going to run screaming in different direction. A dragon has a lot of attacks, but its still going to take a while to hunt down fleeing peasants. A dragon attack on a village of magic immune peasants is going to have far fewer casualties.

So yeah, the most iconic monster of the game for a start. Shall I go on?

[Necroticplague]

How about this crazy monster known as...a dragon? It can now only kill them with natural attacks, which is a chore, why would they even bother. And even if it is sadistic, the villagers are going to run screaming in different direction. A dragon has a lot of attacks, but its still going to take a while to hunt down fleeing peasants. A dragon attack on a village of magic immune peasants is going to have far fewer casualties.

So yeah, the most iconic monster of the game for a start. Shall I go on?

Even if they can't bake things with their breath, true dragons are still casters.

[Boci]

Even if they can't bake things with their breath, true dragons are still casters.

Not all, some splat dragon give up casting, like the planar. But yeah, most dragons are caster, sure, but are they all going to have a spell to kill fleeing magic immune peasants on mass? Why?

[Grod_The_Giant]

How are monsters affected?

Overall... no, this won't help things at all. You are, in fact, preventing casters from using the most party-friendly tactic (buffing their allies) and encouraging them to buff themselves into god-killing superFighters instead. "Mundane" characters who can no longer use most magic items will suffer tremendously at the hands of monsters, as their raw numbers fall below what the game expects and as they find themselves unable to patch chassis-based weaknesses with magic items.

The magic-vs-mundane problem isn't about who will win in a head-to-head fight. That's a largely irrelevant question. The problem is that casters tend to have far more ability to affect the game world than mundanes, both in breadth (even a Sorcerer can get far more utility options than a Fighter or Barbarian) and depth (one divination is worth a thousand Gather Information checks). It's that spells bypass plot (Teleport), it's that spells replace character roles (summons), it's that spells can render monsters trivial (Shivering Touch). Magic gives options that non-casters just can't match. That a Wizard can kill a Fighter in a duel is a consequence of that, sure, but it's not the issue in actual play.

[Crake]

How about this crazy monster known as...a dragon? It can now only kill them with natural attacks, which is a chore, why would they even bother. And even if it is sadistic, the villagers are going to run screaming in different direction. A dragon has a lot of attacks, but its still going to take a while to hunt down fleeing peasants. A dragon attack on a village of magic immune peasants is going to have far fewer casualties.

So yeah, the most iconic monster of the game for a start. Shall I go on?

While a villager might be immune to the fire of the dragon's immediate breath, they'll certainly not be immune to the mundane fires the dragon's breath will ignite. Houses burned down, fields set ablaze, perhaps a commoner might survive the initial blast, but most would still die shortly thereafter as their house collapses atop them, or the field they're standing in roasts them alive. If anything, it'd be a worse way to go, since you'd die slower.

Even those who survive are now without food and shelter and will likely die from exposure or to looting bandits or hungry wildlife. The only thing their immunity saved them from was a swift death instead of a long drawn out one.

So yes, I would like you to go on, because villagers aren't saved from dragons simply due to their immunity to magic.

[awa]

I like the idea, but more as setting lore than as some kind of balancing tool. Tier 1 d&d casters left to raw break any normal setting.

The way i see it being used, mundane dont out number wizards 1 to 20 they outnumber them 1 to 100 and if 99% of mundanes are level 1 commoners than 99% of casters are level 1 adapts with a 12 in their casting stat.

Obviously even 1 high level wizards can break the setting but if we assume like ebberon that characters over say level 11 are incredibly rare it could make an interesting setting.

Enchantment is the big defensive boon a lot of things have mind control powers that are no longer viable

[Boci]

While a villager might be immune to the fire of the dragon's immediate breath, they'll certainly not be immune to the mundane fires the dragon's breath will ignite. Houses burned down, fields set ablaze, perhaps a commoner might survive the initial blast, but most would still die shortly thereafter as their house collapses atop them, or the field they're standing in roasts them alive. If anything, it'd be a worse way to go, since you'd die slower.

That's really down to the DM. Houses certainly would be an issue, but its up to the DM to decide how burning houses fall down, and they might not decide its has a as high a casualty rate as you have you have assigned it. The field though? You're really grasping at straws there (no pun intended).


Even those who survive are now without food and shelter and will likely die from exposure or to looting bandits or hungry wildlife. The only thing their immunity saved them from was a swift death instead of a long drawn out one.

That's just not true. People migrated, fled wars and other dangers, and they didn't all die a slow death.


So yes, I would like you to go on, because villagers aren't saved from dragons simply due to their immunity to magic.

They are actually. You've just got a weirdly determined notion in your head that they shouldn't, and are twisting rules and historical fact to support this notion.

[Crake]

That's really down to the DM. Houses certainly would be an issue, but its up to the DM to decide how burning houses fall down, and they might not decide its has a as high a casualty rate as you have you have assigned it. The field though? You're really grasping at straws there (no pun intended).

Have you ever seen a wildfire? If you're caught in the middle of your cane fields, or wheat fields while you're farming, and they get set on fire around you.... you're gonna die.


That's just not true. People migrated, fled wars and other dangers, and they didn't all die a slow death.

Wars are different to "a dragon just destroyed our village with absolutely no warning whatsoever". Scouts can get ahead of an invading army and give people time to leave, dragons give people no time for preparation, destroyed everything they own, and remember these are people with 1-4 hp, few skills, most likely all invested in their livelihood, and not survival skills, who have no shelter from the cold of the night, have few, if any functional weapons against wildlife. If the next town is more than a few days away, unless they band together, they're going to die. And of course, if they band together, that just makes them a super easy target for the dragon should it return.


They are actually. You've just got a weirdly determined notion in your head that they shouldn't, and are twisting rules and historical fact to support this notion.

I think you're highly overestimating the capability of a commoner to survive outside of a community

[Boci]

Have you ever seen a wildfire? If you're caught in the middle of your cane fields, or wheat fields while you're farming, and they get set on fire around you.... you're gonna die.

Alternatively, DM rules that the dragon breath weapon is more than enough to utterly incinerate the field (since its strength is more than twice a bonfire), leaving behind only ash and scorched earth, giving the peasant sore feet, but not burning alive.



I think you're highly overestimating the capability of a commoner to survive outside of a community

And you're ignoring the fact that "commoners" in the real world do sometimes have to abandon their homes and possessions on little to no notice, and yet survive. Sorry this seems to bother you.

[NichG]

Ironically, if you want to more strongly encourage mixed-unit armies with this kind of premise, make casters more powerful.

Right now, buffs dominate over direct effects when the scale of engagement increases - a bard spending one action to give a +1 to 20 soldiers is something like an effective 100 damage payout for that single action.

But lets say you take the hostile effects casters can generate and increase their radius by, say, a factor of 10. Now, your buffable troops are extremely vulnerable to caster artillery. Having a first rank of mundanes who soak artillery and make it less effective then give way for the magic-enhanced troops to step forward and do a ton of damage starts to become effective. You can't go pure mundane because then the enemy's buffed troops will still get their bonuses and outclass your mundanes; but you also can't go pure magic because then you're extremely vulnerable when exposed at range. Imagine approaching a fortification over an open field from 900ft away when 200ft radius fireballs are a thing.

[AvatarVecna]

I'm not sure why the natural attacks of the dragon are being dismissed. Take away a wyrmling white dragon's supernatural and spell-like stuff, and you're still left with a cat-sized creature that has AC 14, 22 HP, +4/+3/+3 saves, +5/+5/+5 attack routine dealing 1d4/1d3/1d3 damage, 60 ft speed, 60 ft swim speed, 30 ft burrow speed, freaking 150 ft fly speed (average maneuverability), 60 ft Blindsense, and 6 ranks each in Listen/Move Silently/Search/Spot. This is the weakest core dragon, a baby white, and even without using its magic, and it compared pretty favorably to an Eagle (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/eagle.htm) (who has a similar attack routine, half the dragon baby's speed, and a quarter of the dragon baby's health). Let's upgrade to a baby red, who has AC 16, 59 HP, +7/+5/+5 saves, a +10/+10/+10/+10/+10 attack routine dealing 1d8+3/1d6+1/1d6+1/1d4+1/1d4+1 damage, 150 ft fly speed, 60 ft blindsense, and 10 ranks in Jump/Listen/Search/Spot, among others. A red baby dragon is the superior to a tiger or lion rather than a mere eagle - and of course, this just gets even worse as it gets older.

[Boci]

I'm not sure why the natural attacks of the dragon are being dismissed. Take away a wyrmling white dragon's supernatural and spell-like stuff, and you're still left with a cat-sized creature that has AC 14, 22 HP, +4/+3/+3 saves, +5/+5/+5 attack routine dealing 1d4/1d3/1d3 damage, 60 ft speed, 60 ft swim speed, 30 ft burrow speed, freaking 150 ft fly speed (average maneuverability), 60 ft Blindsense, and 6 ranks each in Listen/Move Silently/Search/Spot. This is the weakest core dragon, a baby white, and even without using its magic, and it compared pretty favorably to an Eagle (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/eagle.htm) (who has a similar attack routine, half the dragon baby's speed, and a quarter of the dragon baby's health). Let's upgrade to a baby red, who has AC 16, 59 HP, +7/+5/+5 saves, a +10/+10/+10/+10/+10 attack routine dealing 1d8+3/1d6+1/1d6+1/1d4+1/1d4+1 damage, 150 ft fly speed, 60 ft blindsense, and 10 ranks in Jump/Listen/Search/Spot, among others. A red baby dragon is the superior to a tiger or lion rather than a mere eagle - and of course, this just gets even worse as it gets older.

Because in the Hobbit when Smaug attacked places he used his fiery breath, because showing him land and and start killing the villagers one by one would have made him seem petty, and as such its not something we usually imagine dragons doing. Even if the dragon in question is sadistically persistent enough for that, that's still only 5 dead peasant a round, assuming the dragon gets to full attack, which is won't always against fleeing peasants. They're still die, not more should survive.

Basically, whilst magic immune peasants can still be killed, its more a chore. So its a question of just how motivated these powerful monsters are to kill peasants. If they really want to, it will happen, magic immune or no. But if its just more "I like being evil and collatoral damage is a nice plus, I'm not going to try that hard to kill them", then magic immunity should spare quite a few.

[awa]

edit ninja
I think what he saying is the dragon cant just swoop down and kill 100 people with a blast of fire. Any commoner he catches he can kill no problem, but is he going to waste the time to hunt down each individual commoner when their all fleeing for the hills.

[Barstro]

What if you created a homebrew world where people were either mundane or magical, and mundanes couldn't directly be affected by or use ANY magic?

This is a scenario I've contemplated in the past. I think it would have to be more akin to a high SR, but friendly magic can still take effect.

Just a thought. I've never even tried to put it into practice.

[Kayblis]

Alternatively, DM rules that the dragon breath weapon is more than enough to utterly incinerate the field (since its strength is more than twice a bonfire), leaving behind only ash and scorched earth, giving the peasant sore feet, but not burning alive.
Instead of going "the GM overrules this, the GM overrules that", how about discussing what would ACTUALLY happen? Do you really think a fire breath would incinerate a wheat patch to ash and harmlessly leave the rest of the wheat right next to it untouched? Who's grasping at straws here? And if you want to say "it's just a chore to do it", going to war is a chore to anyone. Gathering a mountain of gold is a chore even to immortal beings. Going on a field trip slaughtering commoners seems more fun than counting your coins for the millionth time(you even get some more coins in the process). "A chore" is relative, we're talking about beings that don't have much better to do and live for millenia. Your whole argument is "a dragon wouldn't go kill a village because I think it would be kinda tedious", which is grasping at straws from the very start.


And you're ignoring the fact that "commoners" in the real world do sometimes have to abandon their homes and possessions on little to no notice, and yet survive. Sorry this seems to bother you.
"Commoners" in the real world don't have to deal with monster-infested woods and mountains. Bears are bad, Dire Bears are worse. Wolves just want to eat, but a local tribe of goblins sees great pleasure in killing an unprotected band of refugees. Giant vermin, Owlbears, living plants... there's way more danger in the D&D world to a commoner than your usual real-life forest. I'd like to point out that, in medieval times, going deep into the woods with little to no protection, skills or tools was basically a death sentence to a common man, never mind the elderly and children. Remember they can't go "oh, I'll just take those 3 knives and some flint and then some water" amidst a dragon attack.

[Crake]

edit ninja
I think what he saying is the dragon cant just swoop down and kill 100 people with a blast of fire. Any commoner he catches he can kill no problem, but is he going to waste the time to hunt down each individual commoner when their all fleeing for the hills.

Dragons of large enough size can quite literally crush people to death as they land on them, and have tail sweep attacks that hit a huge area without having to go about killing people one by one.


Tail Sweep (Ex)
This special attack allows a dragon of at least Gargantuan size to sweep with its tail as a standard action. The sweep affects a half-circle with a radius of 30 feet (or 40 feet for a Colossal dragon), extending from an intersection on the edge of the dragon’s space in any direction. Creatures within the swept area are affected if they are four or more size categories smaller than the dragon. A tail sweep automatically deals the indicated damage plus 1½ times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). Affected creatures can attempt Reflex saves to take half damage (DC equal to that of the dragon’s breath weapon).

You're looking at usually around 2d6+15 damage usually, with a reflex save for half, most commoners will be dead within a single sweep, reflex save or not.


Crush (Ex)
This special attack allows a flying or jumping dragon of at least Huge size to land on opponents as a standard action, using its whole body to crush them. Crush attacks are effective only against opponents three or more size categories smaller than the dragon (though it can attempt normal overrun or grapple attacks against larger opponents).

And the crush does even more damage.

[Boci]

Instead of going "the GM overrules this, the GM overrules that", how about discussing what would ACTUALLY happen? Do you really think a fire breath would incinerate a wheat patch to ash and harmlessly leave the rest of the wheat right next to it untouched?

Yes? That's how it always happens in my expirience. When PCs get hit by a breath, they take the damage, and that's it. They typically don't take burning field damage the next round, any effect beyond the initial fire damage are, for the purpose of the immediate scene, cosmetic. Building will catch fire sure, fields less so.


"Commoners" in the real world don't have to deal with monster-infested woods and mountains. Bears are bad, Dire Bears are worse. Wolves just want to eat, but a local tribe of goblins sees great pleasure in killing an unprotected band of refugees. Giant vermin, Owlbears, living plants... there's way more danger in the D&D world to a commoner than your usual real-life forest. I'd like to point out that, in medieval times, going deep into the woods with little to no protection, skills or tools was basically a death sentence to a common man, never mind the elderly and children. Remember they can't go "oh, I'll just take those 3 knives and some flint and then some water" amidst a dragon attack.

Yeah, if they run into such encounters, they are screwed. But usually that's not a grantee. PCs taking 21 days to travel even unsafe territory typically don't get 21 random encounters.


And if you want to say "it's just a chore to do it", going to war is a chore to anyone. Gathering a mountain of gold is a chore even to immortal beings. Going on a field trip slaughtering commoners seems more fun than counting your coins for the millionth time(you even get some more coins in the process). "A chore" is relative, we're talking about beings that don't have much better to do and live for millenia. Your whole argument is "a dragon wouldn't go kill a village because I think it would be kinda tedious", which is grasping at straws from the very start.

There's not a great archetype of dragon looting peasant corpses for pocket change, so inventing here in this thread, comes off as a little contrived. What I would interept as the reason for a dragon attack on a village is because they get off on the fear they cause, which is done by the first flyby. Landing is just an unnecessary effort with not much improved reward.

Gathering treasure is a choreyes, but its one dragons enjoy, or a even compelled to do, plus its one with lasting effects. By contrast, killing peasants is probably going to lose its appeal after the 10th ones is shattered the same as the first 9.

[Crake]

Yes? That's how it always happens in my expirience. When PCs get hit by a breath, they take the damage, and that's it. They typically don't take burning field damage the next round, any effect beyond the initial fire damage are, for the purpose of the immediate scene, cosmetic. Building will catch fire sure, fields less so.

Have you ever fought a dragon out in a cotton field, or a wheat field? Or are you talking like, grass.

[Boci]

Have you ever fought a dragon out in a cotton field, or a wheat field? Or are you talking like, grass.

I don't have a handy list of all the terrain I've fought or used a dragon in, but I can tell you that damage from ongoing burning is something I have never encountered outside a building. Maybe you have. In any case, it doesn't seem unreasonable for a DM to rule that a dragon's fire breath completely incinerates cotton or wheat. Plus, that's only red dragons. There's 4 other types of "common" evil dragons, none of which would have this issue.

[Crake]

I don't have a handy list of all the terrain I've fought or used a dragon in, but I can tell you that damage from ongoing burning is something I have never encountered outside a building. Maybe you have. In any case, it doesn't seem unreasonable for a DM to rule that a dragon's fire breath completely incinerates cotton or wheat. Plus, that's only red dragons. There's 4 other types of "common" evil dragons, none of which would have this issue.

two of those dragons have line breath weapons which is just about as tedious as going around and killing people one by one anyway, so it doesn't really change much, they'll be hunting people done one by one anyway (blue and black), the other lives in a climate where the destruction of all your property and shelter practically spells death anyway (white) so the only one left is green, which if it's killing a village, it's probably because it got too close to it's lair, in which case it's probably gonna hunt down every last villager anyway.

The whole point of this was the fact that there's nothing about being immune to magic that stops any creature in particular from killing you. Just because they can't use magic, most of them can still easily murder people anyway, so they have no added survivability, but then they lose access to magical healing and aid in general.

[Boci]

Well, if you want to believe that, go ahead and enjoy your type of game. I play mine with different assumptions.

[Sagetim]

Didn't psionics use to work like this in 2e?

Yeah, kind of. Psionics in 1st and 2nd edition (and as a hold over in 3.0) was kind of ridiculous. In 2nd edition, it was at it's most ridiculous, where you had things like psionic attack and defense modes, and rounds of mental combat happening at something like 10 times the speed of regular combat. In any case, the psionic attack and defense modes are what you're talking about.

They were laid out in a table, with each attack mode having a bonus, penalty, or neutral against particular defense modes...and then at the bottom of the table was 'non-psionic' where they got like, a +8 or +9 against most of the attack modes. Except Psychic Crush...the one that causes your head to explode.

Also, in 3.5 there is an ECL +2 race called Karsites in the Tome of Magic. They have spell resistance, and an inability to cast spells. They also get some racial bonuses, martial and all armor prof, and when they resist a spell they eat it and heal. Do bear in mind that this doesn't leave them powerless, far from it. Their favored class is Binder, and they can use pretty much anything Other than magic (Binding, Shadowcasting, Truenaming, Psionics, Incarnum and even warlock shenanigans*).

I think there's a tendency to forget that spells aren't the only game in town anymore, so losing access to them doesn't render you entirely disadvantaged. It Does make things less convenient though, as divine magic is best at healing, unless you start capturing prisoners for the purpose of giving them a weapon and fight clubbing them to get healing maneuvers to go off from them.

edit: *I forgot to mention maneuver users, which karsites can also be, because most of them are extraordinary abilities, and even the ones that are supernatural abilities can be used just fine, because supernatural abilities aren't spells and thus aren't affected by the whole 'cannot cast spells' thing.

[Telonius]

Mundanes being completely immune to magic? My first thought: it would play like a very squishy golem, except without the natural armor and piles of HP. Very high casualty, very dangerous. A caster could still fly, cast Protection from Arrows, and plunk away at you with a non-masterwork crossbow, killing you with impunity. Versus other mundanes, it would be a game of "who wins initiative."

[JKTrickster]

I feel like everyone who claimed an Army of Duskblades buffed with Bards/Clerics/Spellcasters would beat an Army of Immune-To-Magic Mundanes didn't actually read the prompt.

The prompt clearly says that they would ignore the effect of buff spells on the opponent they were fighting. So all the buffs in the world (Haste/Bonus to Hit/Bonus to Damage/etc.) wouldn't matter at all. They don't get placed into that calculation ever.

So uh yeah, at the very least the Army example was a bad comparison because they wouldn't be any stronger. Not from using Buffs at least.


But no, this would still not work probably. I also think the harms outweighs the benefits.

[Necroticplague]

The prompt clearly says that they would ignore the effect of buff spells on the opponent they were fighting. So all the buffs in the world (Haste/Bonus to Hit/Bonus to Damage/etc.) wouldn't matter at all. They don't get placed into that calculation ever.

The Polymorph example at least indicates that some buffs would work. Thus, my earlier post, where I assume that defensive buffs wouldn't work, but offensive ones would (since offensive buffs affect the caster, not the one who gets hit).

[Hackulator]

The Polymorph example at least indicates that some buffs would work. Thus, my earlier post, where I assume that defensive buffs wouldn't work, but offensive ones would (since offensive buffs affect the caster, not the one who gets hit).

This is mostly what I meant yes. If haste makes you faster, you're faster, the fact that the other guy ignores magic doesn't change that. However, if you have mage armor up, he can go right through that.

In straight up fights, people using magic would be better, clearly. However, mundanes would always be at least some sort of threat to magical creatures, whereas in current D&D at high levels that just are not.

[Sagetim]

I feel like everyone who claimed an Army of Duskblades buffed with Bards/Clerics/Spellcasters would beat an Army of Immune-To-Magic Mundanes didn't actually read the prompt.

The prompt clearly says that they would ignore the effect of buff spells on the opponent they were fighting. So all the buffs in the world (Haste/Bonus to Hit/Bonus to Damage/etc.) wouldn't matter at all. They don't get placed into that calculation ever.

So uh yeah, at the very least the Army example was a bad comparison because they wouldn't be any stronger. Not from using Buffs at least.


But no, this would still not work probably. I also think the harms outweighs the benefits.

Sounds like a situation that favors Maneuver users to an extreme. Since most of their stuff is extraordinary instead of magical or supernatural, it doesn't fall under the 'automatic immunity', and non-supernatural stances would still work just fine for buffs, so a handful of maneuver users could probably tear up that mundane army just fine, possibly better than normal since no one has magical buffs.

[Snowbluff]

It would make for a garbage world for the same reason we don't have psionic duels anymore. Having whole portions of the game NOT interacting with whole other portions of the game is just bad. Nothing will work right.

Not to mention that a lot of stuff in 3.5 demands magic.

[Hackulator]

Sounds like a situation that favors Maneuver users to an extreme. Since most of their stuff is extraordinary instead of magical or supernatural, it doesn't fall under the 'automatic immunity', and non-supernatural stances would still work just fine for buffs, so a handful of maneuver users could probably tear up that mundane army just fine, possibly better than normal since no one has magical buffs.

The maneuver users would be probably be mundanes in this paradigm. Well, at least Crusaders and Warblades. In fact, I am pretty sure Crusader healing is technically extraordinary, so theoretically mundanes could get healing that way. In fact, an army of mundane ToB characters with only extraordinary maneuvers would e pretty amazing.

[Random Sanity]

edit ninja
I think what he saying is the dragon cant just swoop down and kill 100 people with a blast of fire. Any commoner he catches he can kill no problem, but is he going to waste the time to hunt down each individual commoner when their all fleeing for the hills.

Depends how much ketchup he has handy.

[Boci]

Hmmm, the dragons crush and tail sweep ability certain work again magic immune peasants. The size is a bit limiting though. The gargantuan requirement means only wyrm+ black and white dragons can pull it off, blue and green need to be ancient+, though red only needs to be old.

I'm amused by the idea of a huge dragon over estimating its size and going to crush a group of human commoners and ending up awkwardly crowd surfing on them. Embarrassed, it then flies away, leaving behind the crowd cheering for an encore and the town is saved.

[Elkad]

Way back in 1e I played a Barbarian. Right out of Dragon #63 (IIRC).
I believe that was the first appearance of the 9d6b3 method of stat rolling, and I took full advantage of it. Starting stats were 18/80 str, 17 dex, 18 con, and his mentals were all in the 14 range.
He converted to the Unearthed Arcana version when that came out, gaining him some other abilities (namely his attacks counted as magic), but he still shunned most magic items.
Played him to 19th level (on the terrible Barbarian XP table, even wizards were in their mid-20s with the same XP).

He owned exactly 2 magic items. A tribal charm that gave him Protection from Evil at CL1. His shaman gave it to him at L1, and he just called it his "good juju", and refused to admit it was magical. That was it until 14th level or so.

Eventually he came upon an artifact Two-Handed sword +6 that raised his Strength to 25 (the 1e cap, +7 to hit, +14 damage) while wielded, and Enlarged him to the size of a Storm Giant. He carried it for many years before he used it, and even then it was used rarely, as it was reserved for God Killing.

He would use wishes and tomes to raise stats, as those "aren't magic items you keep". Every scrap of his wealth went to that. Even at the 10-Wishes-per-stat-point at the higher limits, he kept spending all his money on them to raise his Con (and eventually other stats). Every pool of water was potentially magic, he'd dive in. Every dropped ring or weapon was snatched up (coming to blows with other party members if necessary) so he could shout "I wish I was Tougher!", only to be thrown down in disgust when it didn't work. Every bottle and lamp was uncorked, rubbed, and otherwise abused in search of the same.

He did have a few items of non-standard gear that compared to powerful magic items. The DM realized he needed them, and put in custom drops.

One was a suit of full plate made out of futuristic materials that counted as light armor, while granting 10pts of AC and half-damage from all blows, fire, or lightning.

His pride and joy was a non-magic spear made out of an exotic homebrew material called Carbonium. The next form of carbon after diamond. No to-hit bonus, but Mono-molecular, so got a big damage bonus for sharpness. Completely anti-magic, so no spell would affect it (impossible to enchant also). Immune to all energy. Same hardness as adamantium/diamond, but if pushed beyond that, it turned flexible, which meant it was effectively unbreakable. I lost it to Tiamat once. She tried to destroy it, got annoyed, and tied it in a Gordian Knot instead. The best she could manage on short notice. It's conjectured that if a couple infinitely strong gods got in a tug-of-war with it, they could eventually break it, but they would have to stretch it a very long way. All the individual carbon atoms in the molecule would have to line up single file, which meant stretching it a light-year or so. (Thanks DungeonMaster Jim, still my very favorite dropped item ever!)

I've still got the character sheet around here in a box somewhere. He had a massive amount of hitpoints (300ish, in a world where fighters might have 150 and Wizards had trouble hitting the 60hp limit for immunity to PW:Kill), thanks to double con bonus on Barbarians and an eventual 25 con. AC was decent, with 10pts from armor and a doubled dex bonus. Barbarian save bonuses meant he needed a 2 on basically everything. Protection from Evil kept him from being mind controlled, though at CL1 it was easy to suppress with a Dispel, and it happened a few times.

But still, compared to 25th level Wizards spamming Shapechange and combat Wishes, the Druid with King Kong (Isle of Dread) charmed and Animal Growth-ed, the Deva Paladin with the Lightsaber Psionic Spirit Blade, and various other very PO characters, he was still probably the weakest member of a party of 8. He never flew. He never owned a missile weapon other than hand axes. But making him immune to magic would have made him weaker, not stronger.

Super fun though.

[Crake]

Hmmm, the dragons crush and tail sweep ability certain work again magic immune peasants. The size is a bit limiting though. The gargantuan requirement means only wyrm+ black and white dragons can pull it off, blue and green need to be ancient+, though red only needs to be old.

I'm amused by the idea of a huge dragon over estimating its size and going to crush a group of human commoners and ending up awkwardly crowd surfing on them. Embarrassed, it then flies away, leaving behind the crowd cheering for an encore and the town is saved.

Yeah, it's not like dragons have access to size altering magic or anything :smalltongue:

[Sagetim]

Sounds like fun times Elkad (also that stat rolling method sounds ridiculous). Oh, hey, Snowbluff's avatar stopped bugging out.

Anyway, to get back to the thread's topic: Even if you had 'mundane' maneuver users and 'magicals' in the same world, they wouldn't really have a compelling reason to kill eachother. Like, are they still humans, elves, whatever in a world full of actual monsters trying to murder and eat you? They'd probably band together for survival and not really think much of it unless one of the religions (mind you, would clerics count as magicals? I think they would, given the discussion so far) went around spreading the idea that magicals couldn't be trusted and needed to be genocided for your spiritual safety or something. And that seems highly unlikely when clerics would probably be encouraging regular people to become magical enough for them to affect with spells like remove disease, cure wounds, and so on, so that they would buy into the whole religion thing.

Which kind of brings me to a question: In this world of mundanes and magicals, would being religious, or 'religious enough' cause someone to lose magical immunity and become 'magical' to the point that they could be affected by spells?

Does superstitious count?

[Hackulator]

Sounds like fun times Elkad (also that stat rolling method sounds ridiculous). Oh, hey, Snowbluff's avatar stopped bugging out.

Anyway, to get back to the thread's topic: Even if you had 'mundane' maneuver users and 'magicals' in the same world, they wouldn't really have a compelling reason to kill eachother. Like, are they still humans, elves, whatever in a world full of actual monsters trying to murder and eat you? They'd probably band together for survival and not really think much of it unless one of the religions (mind you, would clerics count as magicals? I think they would, given the discussion so far) went around spreading the idea that magicals couldn't be trusted and needed to be genocided for your spiritual safety or something. And that seems highly unlikely when clerics would probably be encouraging regular people to become magical enough for them to affect with spells like remove disease, cure wounds, and so on, so that they would buy into the whole religion thing.

Which kind of brings me to a question: In this world of mundanes and magicals, would being religious, or 'religious enough' cause someone to lose magical immunity and become 'magical' to the point that they could be affected by spells?

Does superstitious count?

I mean, in general I would hope you're right, but have you been to earth? We can't even not kill each other just among humans.

However, the issue here is we're discussing how this would affect D&D, which means combat is the main part of what we will discuss.

I think the answer would likely be no to the faith question. There's no way to "encourage" someone to be more magical, if you're a mundane you're a mundane.

[Sagetim]

I mean, in general I would hope you're right, but have you been to earth? We can't even not kill each other just among humans.

However, the issue here is we're discussing how this would affect D&D, which means combat is the main part of what we will discuss.

I think the answer would likely be no to the faith question. There's no way to "encourage" someone to be more magical, if you're a mundane you're a mundane.

Well, I mean, most dnd settings seem to have a pretty good grasp of racial solidarity because of the whole 'lots of other sentients going on' thing. And the actual monsters being around and victimizing people seems like a pretty compelling reason not to lynch the guy who can set them on fire with some babble and hand waving.

[unseenmage]

So do the mundanes get to ignore the perfectly mundane things magic can just create from nothing? Like Wall of Stone, etc? Spells with Instantaneous duration that create real and lasting effects? If not they're gonna have a bad time.

As has also already been mentioned/touched upon Golems aren't that much more of a threat because of their Magic Immunity. Heck, even the souped up version on the Colossi isn't necessarily going to save them from spellcasting. It's usually the sheer size, Str score, etc of a Golem or Colossus that batters a party. That and the fact that they do not rest. Ever.

Magic can affect creatures directly sure, but it can also affect the environment. As has also been pointed out starting perfectly mundane fires is well within the purview of low level spellcasters, while high level spellcasters can just gate in creatures who have enough natural attacks to squash mundanes with the action economy.

I agree with the earlier poster who mentioned that spellcasters are force multipliers. Which means that whatever game effect you're trying to use there's probably a spell that makes it better. Severing access to such would be much more of a curse than a boon. Heck, I'm imagining a custom spell right now, a curse even, that makes someone into one of these mundane muggles. Would be a pretty awful thing to do to a PC, let alone an entire population.

This definitely sounds more like something the gods would curse a people with than something anybody would accept as a blessing.

[Boci]

Yeah, it's not like dragons have access to size altering magic or anything :smalltongue:

In some games yeah. Dragons never using any of the treasure is a long standing trope of fantasy, referenced numerous times in D&D, but yes, some DMs do like having their dragons kitted out their dragons with some of their hoard and Dracnonium even had some items specifically for that.

[Crake]

In some games yeah. Dragons never using any of the treasure is a long standing trope of fantasy, referenced numerous times in D&D, but yes, some DMs do like having their dragons kitted out their dragons with some of their hoard and Dracnonium even had some items specifically for that.

I was more referring to the spells and psionics that most dragons can use. Planar dragons not having spells is all well and good, but they're called planar dragons for a reason, they're typically on the planes, so the circles of commoners and planar dragons rarely, if ever overlap. Fang dragons are also a thing, but they don't have breath weapons either, so nobody's saved from those :smalltongue:

[Boci]

I was more referring to the spells and psionics that most dragons can use. Planar dragons not having spells is all well and good, but they're called planar dragons for a reason, they're typically on the planes, so the circles of commoners and planar dragons rarely, if ever overlap. Fang dragons are also a thing, but they don't have breath weapons either, so nobody's saved from those :smalltongue:

And what spells will they have to increase in size?

[zergling.exe]

And what spells will they have to increase in size?

I'm wondering this myself. The only spells that change size I'm aware of are enlarge person and reduce person (which are limited to humanoids only so no dice for dragons), animal growth (animal only so still no dice), righteous might (a cleric/strength spell, so unavailable to most dragons, and only blue and red for evil ones in the MM) and giant size which is a 7th or 8th level wu-jen only spell so not typically a spell dragons get access to.

So the only one they can really get is righteous might, a round/level 5th level spell, for blue and red dragons only. Other evil dragons (in the MM) have no access to size changing magic.

[Crake]

And what spells will they have to increase in size?

Since many dragons have access to cleric spells, righteous might is on their list, while psionic dragons have access to the expansion power, which could also be duplicated by magic users, or used via dorjes/power stones.


I'm wondering this myself. The only spells that change size I'm aware of are enlarge person and reduce person (which are limited to humanoids only so no dice for dragons), animal growth (animal only so still no dice), righteous might (a cleric/strength spell, so unavailable to most dragons, and only blue and red for evil ones in the MM) and giant size which is a 7th or 8th level wu-jen only spell so not typically a spell dragons get access to.

So the only one they can really get is righteous might, a round/level 5th level spell, for blue and red dragons only. Other evil dragons (in the MM) have no access to size changing magic.

Dragons without access to clerical spells can get access to righteous might via arcane disciple

[zergling.exe]

Since many dragons have access to cleric spells, righteous might is on their list, while psionic dragons have access to the expansion power, which could also be duplicated by magic users, or used via dorjes/power stones.

Isn't expansion a psychic warrior only power? Do psionic dragons get access to that list or just the wilder/psion list?

edit: For your edit: Which they can use once a day for no more than ~15 rounds without extending it.

[Boci]

I'm wondering this myself. The only spells that change size I'm aware of are enlarge person and reduce person (which are limited to humanoids only so no dice for dragons), animal growth (animal only so still no dice), righteous might (a cleric/strength spell, so unavailable to most dragons, and only blue and red for evil ones in the MM) and giant size which is a 7th or 8th level wu-jen only spell so not typically a spell dragons get access to.

So the only one they can really get is righteous might, a round/level 5th level spell, for blue and red dragons only. Other evil dragons (in the MM) have no access to size changing magic.

Plus by the time red dragons can cast 5th level spells, they're already gargantuan, it no help to them, so all that spell does is allow a blue dragon to pull it off at very old instead of ancient. I think there's a template that increase a dragons casting ability by one age catagory in return for...something, I forget, so that could help as well.


Since many dragons have access to cleric spells, righteous might is on their list, while psionic dragons have access to the expansion power, which could also be duplicated by magic users, or used via dorjes/power stones.



Dragons without access to clerical spells can get access to righteous might via arcane disciple

All of these are very game dependent. Not all DM kit their dragons out this way. This is hardly a done deal for them. And as above, righteous might is a bit late to help most.

[awa]

A much better example than dragons are things like beholders, illithids , shadows, and so on that actually rely on magic.

A beholder forced to do nothing but bite is wildly less threatening that one with all his eye beams
Maybe the warrior cant hurt the shadow but if it cant hurt him either its not a monster its flavor text

the real advantage is against mind control, a lot of monsters have at will enchantments that mundanes can now ignore. If vampires cant dominate they cant infiltrate so adventures get called right away rather then letting them become the secret rulers of a kingdom.

[Elkad]

Sounds like fun times Elkad (also that stat rolling method sounds ridiculous).

The Dragon #63 method for the Barbarian was 9d6b3 for Strength, 8d6b3 for Con, 7d6b3 for Dex, and 3d6 for the others. Yes, I rolled well.

UA made it even worse, as a method for everyone. 9d6,8d6,7d6,6d6,5d6,4d6 (all b3 of course), with a set of rules for how you had to apply your dice for each class. Paladin had to use 9d6 on Cha, etc.

[RoboEmperor]

If mundanes were immune to magic... absolutely nothing will change.

Every single magical creature out there will splatter every single mundane in the game.

Only magical people can fight magical creatures.

End result? Nothing changed. Maybe less collateral casualties, but that's it.

[awa]

that's just objectively false their are a lot of monsters with a few magical abilities that just aren't that tough and many more that are crippled with loss of their signature special ability

without petrafication a basilisk and cockatrice are vastly weaker

a chaos beasts damage out put is lousy without corporeal instability
shadows literally cant touch you while wraiths are doing a measly d4 dam a hit (also you cant turn into a spawn)

Now the higher the level you go the less this is going to be true but a lot of low level magic monsters are one trick pony's and pcs arnt assumed to have a ton of magic gear anyways

[RoboEmperor]

that's just objectively false their are a lot of monsters with a few magical abilities that just aren't that tough and many more that are crippled with loss of their signature special ability

without petrafication a basilisk and cockatrice are vastly weaker

a chaos beasts damage out put is lousy without corporeal instability
shadows literally cant touch you while wraiths are doing a measly d4 dam a hit (also you can turn into a spawn)

Now the higher the level you go the less this is going to be true but a lot of low level magic monsters are one trick pony's and pcs arnt assumed to have a ton of magic gear anyways

I exaggerated a bit but my focus was mainly higher level monsters.

Mundane without magical gear cannot deal damage or survive higher level magical creatures.

[awa]

I might not say it so strongly but yeah the way non-magical healing works simply does not function at high level. But in the e6 range with a house rule for healing it could be an interesting aspect to a setting.

For example magic gives you tremendous power but also makes you vulnerable to being mind-controlled into cults, murdered and turned into a zombie or eaten by a shadow. So you would have certain types of monsters actively hunting potential casters.

Off the top of my head I would make it so all magic came from a far realm equivalent and thus only by opening yourself up to such fell power could you wield magic but at the same time making yourself vulnerable to beings of that realm. In such a game I would make a heavy almost exclusive use of aberrations as monsters.

(a similar setting idea could be done with fey maybe making it so iron/ steel does extra dam to magical people so casters wield bronze or Mithral if they can afford it. Tweak the spell list slightly to give it a more fey feel and you could form an interesting setting. (also these would need to be the alien fey not the good hippy faeries)

[ericgrau]

As said too many existing harmful spells are unrelated to the subject's magic immunity and have no drawback whatsoever for this benefit. Not to mention the helpful spells.

I don't think it would affect armies nor the general population that much because magic is too uncommon in most settings besides Eberron. Even magic healing is hard to get for the level 1 warrior. It's mostly a huge drawback to PCs.

It can still be a super powerful ability even if it defends against some magic and not all. RAW spell immunity is quite good, because it still lets you use healing potions and some versions are temporarily suppressible. The biggest complaint against it is the lack of in combat healing, but in combat healing isn't that great anyway. Most in combat buffs aren't that great anyway, and even the good ones aren't essential. The caster can cast something else, target someone else, or not being part of a single mass buff doesn't reduce your effectiveness that much. Out of combat healing, curing and buffing is still do-able with RAW spell immunity. Self buffing magic items still work too (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellImmunity). The 2nd biggest complaint against spell immunity is that a caster can still find ways to hurt you. Which isn't actually a problem so much as a limitation. The caster can find ways to hurt people without spell immunity too. But spell immunity will still prove beneficial several times.

So what it amounts to is a limited useful defense, far from supreme but far from useless. Once you slap broad drawbacks onto something with limited use then you start making it a terrible thing. Try smaller drawbacks instead. They can still be big drawbacks for a big ability, just not so supremely bad as you may never ever heal magically ever and so on. Though even then in a world where such an ability is common, direct and mass spells are going to become way less popular. Keep that in mind when creating the drawbacks, that having the same defense that many others have and many know about is already a huge drawback.

[RegalKain]

If you're interested in running a setting like this. I'd recommend using Pathfinder, and replace Vancian with Spheres of Power. As that would help the horrible imbalance between casters and martials. That said they are still pretty doomed. You'll need another system. Unless you do as one of the above posters do, and make it an E6 system with some pretty heavy limitations.

[StreamOfTheSky]

It won't work in D&D, you'd have to change the whole game enough that it wouldn't, mechanically, be the same game at all anymore. There was a similar system in Final Fantasy Tactics though, where every character & monster has a "faith" stat. High faith means your spells are more powerful, but you also get effected by magic more than a low-faith character. That applies to healing & buffs as well as offensive magic.

That was immediately what I thought of when I saw this thread. And in FFT, there was an "Innocent" status (or you could gain it just by dropping Faith low enough) where you were outright immune to magic. Both harmful and helpful. It is important to note that in FFT, healing items aren't considered magic and run the gamut from hp healing to status ailment removal to outright raised from the dead. So someone immune to magic isn't completely screwed. Just requires different (more expensive; expendable items vs. magic points that refill between every battle) healing methods than others.

I like the idea in general, I think mundanes should have better saves than casters and the idea of people who outright can't use or benefit from nor be adversely affected by magic is really appealing. But it's tough in D&D as is. You'd need to exempt alchemical items from being magical at all (I don't think they're considered magic, but by RAW you need to be a caster to make them, which is a problem...) and greatly expand their capabilities. And you'd have to decide if all Su abilities are left out, all are allowed to work, or some case by case basis.
Conj. (creation) spells at a minimum shouldn't be able to harm immune characters or give them status ailments. Less sure about barriers like stone walls or making difficult terrain that takes longer to walk across. Summons...ugh... I guess they should be able to hurt the immune people. And it would be unfair if the casters had *no* options at all for fighting off an immune person...

[JKTrickster]

This is mostly what I meant yes. If haste makes you faster, you're faster, the fact that the other guy ignores magic doesn't change that. However, if you have mage armor up, he can go right through that.

In straight up fights, people using magic would be better, clearly. However, mundanes would always be at least some sort of threat to magical creatures, whereas in current D&D at high levels that just are not.

But this literally makes no sense.

You said in the original post that:



The mundane effect would be similar to AMF covering just their bodies.


So the moment the Magically Buffed X touches the "mundanes" all of their spells instantly wink out of existence. None of it would matter because the instant of direct contact spreads the AMF to affect the Magically Buffed X as well.

I mean sure you can say "oh no people using magic can buff themselves, that's okay". Then that just means magic will always win.

At least this interpretation has a fair shot of winning: anything Mundanes are involved, NO ONE can use magic on themselves or each other. Only on the environment.

But then Magic Users will still win because Orb of Fire :smallbiggrin: