Low Magic World - Casting Spells reduce Max HP

[Talamare]

How would you feel about a Low Magic scenario in which every spell you cast (including Cantrips) reduced your Maximum HP?

I'm thinking maybe 1 per spell level cast (1 for Cantrips) or 1+Spell Level Cast.
I'm also thinking that during a Long Rest you may spend 1 HD to recover 1 lost Max HP, upto your max.
(Obviously any spell like Greater Restoration wouldn't remove all Max HP lose from this.)

The idea is to severely limit and punish the use of Magic, but not outlaw it completely. It also creates an easy explanation as to why Magic isn't common. It's effects of draining your soul would be fairly well known.


I'm still a little undecided how to hand stuff like Ki Magic or Natural Magic like abilities from like the Paladin and Druid.

[nickl_2000]

How would you feel about a Low Magic scenario in which every spell you cast (including Cantrips) reduced your Maximum HP?

I'm thinking maybe 1 per spell level cast (1 for Cantrips) or 1+Spell Level Cast.
I'm also thinking that during a Long Rest you may spend 1 HD to recover 1 lost Max HP, upto your max.
(Obviously any spell like Greater Restoration wouldn't remove all Max HP lose from this.)

The idea is to severely limit and punish the use of Magic, but not outlaw it completely. It also creates an easy explanation as to why Magic isn't common. It's effects of draining your soul would be fairly well known.


I'm still a little undecided how to hand stuff like Ki Magic or Natural Magic like abilities from like the Paladin and Druid.


You are punishing those that have the least HP to begin with (casters) by taking ever more away from them. Basically this will mean that you can't play those classes

[LeonBH]

It turns HP into a casting resource. Someone will have to play the caster, and they will probably feel miserable.

[cotofpoffee]

Hello entire party of martials.

[Aett_Thorn]

You are punishing those that have the least HP to begin with (casters) by taking ever more away from them. Basically this will mean that you can't play those classes

^This. Would casting classes get anything to make up for this? I mean, only getting 1 max HP back for a whole hit dice on a short rest is just crazy. Casters cast spells. It's what they do. I get the point of wanting to limit it, but without giving casters something else to help them out, I don't get why any of the players would choose a casting class to play.

[Potato_Priest]

I also want to limit magic, but I think that people like us should probably look for a new system rather than slapping on homebrew to a game system already "balanced" around magic.

[Talamare]

You are punishing those that have the least HP to begin with (casters) by taking ever more away from them. Basically this will mean that you can't play those classes

You absolutely can play them, tho it will become a little more thought intensive. You can't blast away all your spells for every situation.
As well as you're less likely to see that everyone single person in the party has a ton of magic spell options as we currently see in most 5e games.

[LeonBH]

You absolutely can play them, tho it will become a little more thought intensive. You can't blast away all your spells for every situation.
As well as you're less likely to see that everyone single person in the party has a ton of magic spell options as we currently see in most 5e games.

If that is your intention, I think you should ban the caster classes instead of punishing them. The EK and AT, for example, already can't blast away with all their spells, just because they don't have that many spell slots.

While people can still theoretically play casters under that game, the nerf is substantial that there is no reason to play a heavily nerfed class over a martial class that did not receive any nerfs.

[NecessaryWeevil]

I think it's interesting...it makes playing a caster difficult and dangerous, yes, but the reward is being a unique and powerful character. I would expect the DM to play up the rarity of magic in the world, including making it confuse and terrify most opponents, and making anti-magic defenses pretty much unheard of.

I might be tempted to give it a try. If I were in such a campaign I'd want the DM to give enough advance warning that I didn't already have my heart set on a certain type of character. I expect we'd see few full casters, but maybe some half-casting classes that want a little magical backup from time to time. Or martials dipping caster classes for a few levels.

[Aett_Thorn]

You absolutely can play them, tho it will become a little more thought intensive. You can't blast away all your spells for every situation.
As well as you're less likely to see that everyone single person in the party has a ton of magic spell options as we currently see in most 5e games.

But then you need to balance it somehow.

Why make an Eldritch Knight or an Arcane Trickster if using your subclass makes you weaker?

Why make a Wizard over a Sorc, if the Sorc can at least contribute to social situations without needing to rely on spells to help out (and can use metamagic to twin spells and get more bang for their buck)?

Why go Ranger over Fighter, seeing how the spells are supposed to help balance them out?

[HunterOfJello]

You could make it more fun and set it up so that casting a spell requires reducing the max hp of the caster or an ally. Then the whole group has to consider whether spells are worth casting or not

[smcmike]

Yeah, I think you need a different system for this, and also that it might work better in fiction than in combat-focused games.

The current system is more or less balanced, based upon magic being basically equivalent in combat to non-magic options.

In a lot of fiction, magic is drastically more powerful than anything some idiot witha sword can do. You don’t necessarily need balance in fiction, but serious drawbacks for using magic can make it an occasional thing. This just doesn’t work very well for a dungeon crawl.

[Talamare]

If that is your intention, I think you should ban the caster classes instead of punishing them. The EK and AT, for example, already can't blast away with all their spells, just because they don't have that many spell slots.

While people can still theoretically play casters under that game, the nerf is substantial that there is no reason to play a heavily nerfed class over a martial class that did not receive any nerfs.

I know I said "Blast" but I didn't mean "Damage"
I meant literally every situation.

Enemy won't tell you something, use a myriad of mind control spells to force them to tell you
Trying to get past a sentry, use a myriad of illusion (and/or mind control spells) to easily get past them
Wall in the way? There's a spell for that

Basically, in DnD there is more or less a spell for nearly every situation.
Players know this too, which is why most players and most of the best builds involve using Magic.

[Talamare]

But then you need to balance it somehow.

Why make an Eldritch Knight or an Arcane Trickster if using your subclass makes you weaker?

Why make a Wizard over a Sorc, if the Sorc can at least contribute to social situations without needing to rely on spells to help out (and can use metamagic to twin spells and get more bang for their buck)?

Why go Ranger over Fighter, seeing how the spells are supposed to help balance them out?

Because it still makes sense for an EK to cast Shield to prevent 10-20 damage OR MORE from coming in at the cost of temporarily reducing his Maximum HP by 1?
Wizard can still contribute on knowledge checks

Did you read that I said your Maximum HP is reduced by 10 per spell level or something?
Temporarily losing 1 or 2 Max HP for a powerful effect can still be more than worth it.


I think it's interesting...it makes playing a caster difficult and dangerous, yes, but the reward is being a unique and powerful character. I would expect the DM to play up the rarity of magic in the world, including making it confuse and terrify most opponents, and making anti-magic defenses pretty much unheard of.

I might be tempted to give it a try. If I were in such a campaign I'd want the DM to give enough advance warning that I didn't already have my heart set on a certain type of character. I expect we'd see few full casters, but maybe some half-casting classes that want a little magical backup from time to time. Or martials dipping caster classes for a few levels.

Absolutely, Magic would be rare thus extremely unexpected.

As well as absolutely every one would be well aware of the situation and would plan their characters accordingly. I would definitely not surprise anyone by this.

[CantigThimble]

While people can still theoretically play casters under that game, the nerf is substantial that there is no reason to play a heavily nerfed class over a martial class that did not receive any nerfs.

I don't think this is actually the case. While the raw total power of each character is one way to measure how good the class is another method is supply and demand. This nerf is essentially a huge restriction in the supply, while the demand remains the same.

I think most people would play martials, but having just one caster in the party to throw out a few really important spells is valuable enough that it would be worthwhile. It would fundamentally change the way they would play, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it playing a caster would be no fun.

Single target damage spells and effects that can be replicated with skills are just going to be abandoned, instead the caster is just providing the handful of unique effects that are utterly irreplaceable without him.

[LeonBH]

I know I said "Blast" but I didn't mean "Damage"
I meant literally every situation.

Enemy won't tell you something, use a myriad of mind control spells to force them to tell you
Trying to get past a sentry, use a myriad of illusion (and/or mind control spells) to easily get past them
Wall in the way? There's a spell for that

Basically, in DnD there is more or less a spell for nearly every situation.
Players know this too, which is why most players and most of the best builds involve using Magic.

Right, there's a spell for that. Which is why the scariest opponents also have magic. It's just the nature of D&D.

There is already a "punishing" class in terms of using magic - the Wild Magic Sorcerer - and you can see how people receive that particular subclass.

I think if your issue is actually about magic being used to easily circumvent challenges, you need to instead provide challenges that not even magic can fix easily, instead of punishing magic that could have solved that problem easily otherwise.


I don't think this is actually the case. While the raw total power of each character is one way to measure how good the class is another method is supply and demand. This nerf is essentially a huge restriction in the supply, while the demand remains the same.

I think most people would play martials, but having just one caster in the party to throw out a few really important spells is valuable enough that it would be worthwhile. It would fundamentally change the way they would play, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it playing a caster would be no fun.

Single target damage spells and effects that can be replicated with skills are just going to be abandoned, instead the caster is just providing the handful of unique effects that are utterly irreplaceable without him.

In that case, the problem of preventing magic users from using magic to solve every single problem isn't solved. It's mitigated somewhat, but magic would still bypass many challenges.

[Honest Tiefling]

Hello entire party of martials.

Or heeeeelllo revolving door of wizards. I think it is interesting from a narrative perspective, but you aren't going to have spellcasters. At all. Or certain races, if racial magic is also affected by it. So it would effectively mean that magic is solely the domain of NPCs, if that. Basically, it's a ban of spellcasters. Question is, what are you going to do to balance that, and work around the fact that you only have four classes to work with?

[mormon_soldier]

Instead of making it reduce max HP, what do you think about having it "cast from hit points," as it were? You're still making magic more difficult to use, but it becomes less of a penalty for using magic and more of a new way to have to manage those resources. To compensate, you could get rid of spell slots and have each level of spell do a new dice of damage. If your class has access to level 4 spells, you can cast as many as you want, but you're rolling a d10 for damage every time (if a cantrip just does 1 pt, a level one spell does d4, level two a d6 etc...).

I think this would help motivate your players to both be willing to be casters while still minimizing magic use. The idea of being able to cast as many level x spells as you have hit points would be a draw to the class, but in play your players would theoretically hesitate to spend their lives so quickly.

[Breashios]

How would you feel about a Low Magic scenario in which every spell you cast (including Cantrips) reduced your Maximum HP?

I'm thinking maybe 1 per spell level cast (1 for Cantrips) or 1+Spell Level Cast.
I'm also thinking that during a Long Rest you may spend 1 HD to recover 1 lost Max HP, upto your max.
(Obviously any spell like Greater Restoration wouldn't remove all Max HP lose from this.)

The idea is to severely limit and punish the use of Magic, but not outlaw it completely. It also creates an easy explanation as to why Magic isn't common. It's effects of draining your soul would be fairly well known.

I'm still a little undecided how to hand stuff like Ki Magic or Natural Magic like abilities from like the Paladin and Druid.

I don't think it would be worth the trouble, unless everyone in your group is really excited about the idea. If they are then more power to you and them. I'd like to experience the challenge as a wizard or such. Would be interesting. If it turned out it did not work as well as you imagined, oh well, move on to something else. As long as everyone has this attitude from the start could be fun.

I'd increase full caster HD by one level, and half casters by +1 or give full casters spare "Spell Points", but they can only use one spare per real max HP reduction they take.

I'd also make the cost equal to straight spell level, just for simplicity. IF cantrips need to cost one Max HP, then oh well, they can still cast them until they run out of hp. It would kind of nerf cantrips comparatively, but there might be other suggestions to fix that or that might turn out fine in your world.

[Provo]

But then you need to balance it somehow.

Why make an Eldritch Knight or an Arcane Trickster if using your subclass makes you weaker?

Why make a Wizard over a Sorc, if the Sorc can at least contribute to social situations without needing to rely on spells to help out (and can use metamagic to twin spells and get more bang for their buck)?

Why go Ranger over Fighter, seeing how the spells are supposed to help balance them out?

Well, the OP is trying to make a low magic campaign. The rule is supposed to make people hesistant to play these classes. You don't need to balance it out. There are still plenty of people who would play these classes.

My first choice would be to go full Wizard. Then at level 5, I would gladly spend 4 hp to toss a fireball.


Suggestions to OP:
Make Hit dice restore more than 1 HP. I would say that for every HD spent, you may choose to restore current HP or Max HP but not both.

Make magic items that provide some protection from the HP loss. Magic is rare, but those who practice it will have found ways to protect themselves.

Instead of 1+spell level cost, make it spell level cost (minimum 1).

[Kane0]

Hmm, looks interesting. I'd give it a try. 1 HP per spell level you say? Are cantrips 0 cost? Can I get any back using Hit Die on a short rest?

I'd most likely be a dwarf or pick up the Tough feat at first opportunity, that should equalize the HP loss and be a nice change from the usual max casting stat + warcaster or spell sniper routine. That or lots of Restorations.

Edit: Woah, naysayers gonna naysay. Where's your sense of adventure people!?!

[CantigThimble]

In that case, the problem of preventing magic users from using magic to solve every single problem isn't solved. It's mitigated somewhat, but magic would still bypass many challenges.

The goal isn't to remove magic, its to prevent people from using magic to solve every single problem. This does that. People won't use magic to solve every single problem, just some problems that are really difficult to solve other ways.

[Thrawn4]

I think most people who critize this approach would not like to play in a low fantasy setting where magic is rare. But seeing as magic severly weakens you, this would perfectly fit the idea of rare and powerful magic. If most people do not want to suffer from a poor health (who would?), it is perfectly plausible that magic practitioners are seldom. It would emulate those novels where magic is something special.
I mean, you can have good campaigns with mundane characters (think Three Musketeers or Seven Samurai), so you really don't need a magic shop or academy.
And of course, there is multi-classing, which allows you to be a magic user who can contribute without using magic.

[DeTess]

How would you feel about a Low Magic scenario in which every spell you cast (including Cantrips) reduced your Maximum HP?

I'm thinking maybe 1 per spell level cast (1 for Cantrips) or 1+Spell Level Cast.
I'm also thinking that during a Long Rest you may spend 1 HD to recover 1 lost Max HP, upto your max.
(Obviously any spell like Greater Restoration wouldn't remove all Max HP lose from this.)

The idea is to severely limit and punish the use of Magic, but not outlaw it completely. It also creates an easy explanation as to why Magic isn't common. It's effects of draining your soul would be fairly well known.


I'm still a little undecided how to hand stuff like Ki Magic or Natural Magic like abilities from like the Paladin and Druid.

Well, how about we bring in the power of math. Let's take a 5th level wizard with 14 con. This wizard will have 32 hp at level 5. He'll also have 4 1st level spells (4 max hp), 3 2nd level spells (6 max hp) and 2 3rd level spells (6 max hp). If a wizard where to cast all of their spell slots, their max hp will be reduced to 16. That's assuming they do not cast any cantrips.

On a long rest, the wizard will get 2 HD back, so he can recover 2 max hp every day. After casting all his spells, he'd then need 8 days to fully recover, assuming he doesn't use his HD for anything else.

In other words, a level 5 wizard can only cast 1 2nd level spell per day, or two first-level spells or cantrips per day in a sustained way. This means that, unless you only have a single long adventuring day with more than a week of downtime in between, wizards (and other full casters, for that matter) just aren't viable at all.

I recommend that if you want to play a magic-light adventure, you just ban the full-casters, rather than turn them into trap choices, as I don't think anyone will enjoy playing a wizard, sorcerer, bard or warlock in your system.

[Innocent_bystan]

I'd stay away from Hp as a casting resource. What you're -probably- looking for is a way to express a sort of fatigue associated with casting spells. Why not use HD and exhaustion levels to represent that?

Let's say that every spell has an additional cost of 1HD. And, when you run out of HD, you can gain exhaustion levels to continue casting. You could balance out the higher spells by making them cost 2 HD or more. This has the upside of HD not interacting with healing / short rests at all.

I'd also give every caster a number of cantrips for free, each day. Or make them roll the HD and get that many cantrips for free.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I actually really like this idea a lot.

Enough to steal it outright.

Nyahahaha, you'll never catch me!

Ahem. I get that some people don't like it. It is notably punishing for casters, and borderline unplayable at early levels. Casting up to your limit during your first few levels becomes a perfectly pyrrhic situation where doing it again will probably kill you. At level 3, you can burn yourself out of 8 HP- enough to nearly kill an average 14 Con wizard in two days. That's horrifying.

You know what else is horrifying? Being used to a world where fireball doesn't really exist. Until a very, very spiteful person decides that it absolutely does exist. Still, I may allow some sort of scaling to the amount of maximum hit points are restored by each hit dice spent in order to keep the math from getting silly. At least upscale to 2 at level 11.

I think I'd also add a feat or two for managing these numbers. Something like Magical Adaptation: +1 Int, Wis, or Cha. Your hit dice may restore twice as many maximum hit points lost from spellcasting. You also regain a number of hit points equal to the amount of maximum hit points restored this way. And, Attunement: Regain 5 of your maximum hit points lost from spellcasting at the end of every long rest. This amount increases to 7 at level 5, 11 at level 11, and 20 at level 17.

Just a few optional tools that casters can pick up to help mitigate their losses, at the cost of improving their base competency or their other survival options. A half-caster probably only wants one, a third caster can likely skip it, and a full caster will eventually want both if they have room for them.

[Provo]

I'd stay away from Hp as a casting resource. What you're -probably- looking for is a way to express a sort of fatigue associated with casting spells. Why not use HD and exhaustion levels to represent that?

Let's say that every spell has an additional cost of 1HD. And, when you run out of HD, you can gain exhaustion levels to continue casting. You could balance out the higher spells by making them cost 2 HD or more. This has the upside of HD not interacting with healing / short rests at all.

I'd also give every caster a number of cantrips for free, each day. Or make them roll the HD and get that many cantrips for free.

^This is an interesting idea

It would wear out a caster too fast though. Maybe every cast requires a saving through (10+spell level) or you suffer exhaustion. The save is your main casting stat. Instead of Con That way it represents losing your soul and higher level casters are less hindered. You can adjust the 10+ up or down a bit to find a spot that feels right.

[DeTess]

I actually really like this idea a lot.

Enough to steal it outright.

Nyahahaha, you'll never catch me!

Ahem. I get that some people don't like it. It is notably punishing for casters, and borderline unplayable at early levels. Casting up to your limit during your first few levels becomes a perfectly pyrrhic situation where doing it again will probably kill you. At level 3, you can burn yourself out of 8 HP- enough to nearly kill an average 14 Con wizard in two days. That's horrifying.


Actually, it doesn't get better at higher levels. You could even argue that it gets worse. I originally made the example above with a level 10 wizard, which would burn herself down to 21 hp (from 62) if he casts every spell available to recover. A level 15 wizard with 14 con would go from 92 to 30 hp. A 20th level wizard would go from 122 to 33 hp. The recovery time remains about constant at 8-9 days.

[Grod_The_Giant]

You absolutely can play them, tho it will become a little more thought intensive. You can't blast away all your spells for every situation.
As well as you're less likely to see that everyone single person in the party has a ton of magic spell options as we currently see in most 5e games.
The reason that everyone winds up with a ton of magic is that... well, that's how 5e was written. All but three-four classes (Barbarian, Fighter, Rogue, and maybe Monk) get at least some of their power and versatility from spells, and even those have magic-y subclasses.

If you want to remove magic from the game, you have to put something back in to replace it-- otherwise being a Wizard (or whatever) will just feel like you're throwing your time away. Don't forget-- the rules can punish the character, but they should never punish the player, and "if you want to do (the one solitary thing your class is good at), you'll rapidly kill yourself" is definitely punishing the player.

If you're interested, I worked up a fairly comprehensive overhaul here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?543153-5e-Low-Magic-Overhaul-%28Two-new-classes-and-one-new-subclasses-included!%29). The salient point is that not only did I remove the magic-heavy options (Bard/Cleric/Druid/Paladin/Sorcerer/Wizard/Warlock), I introduced less- or no-magic alternatives (a slightly revamped spell-less Ranger, a Bard/Cleric/Paladin "Warlord" and a Wizard/Warlock "Scholar.")

[Waterdeep Merch]

Actually, it doesn't get better at higher levels. You could even argue that it gets worse. I originally made the example above with a level 10 wizard, which would burn herself down to 21 hp (from 62) if he casts every spell available to recover. A level 15 wizard with 14 con would go from 92 to 30 hp. A 20th level wizard would go from 122 to 33 hp. The recovery time remains about constant at 8-9 days.

Yeah, definitely too brutal. I'm fine with them almost wrecking themselves for overcasting, but that's too much recovery time by a long shot.

Perhaps scale it by the traditional tiers? 1 per HD for 1-4, 2 for 5-10, 3 for 11-16, and 4 for 17-20? And perhaps a slight quality of life improvement somewhere, like eventually level 1 and 2 spells stop costing maximum hit points after you become powerful enough. Perhaps at level 11, followed by a further reduction to levels 3 and 4 at level 17?

[fbelanger]

I think it is simple to banish all spells over level 4.
All full caster classes will MC after level 7.

It can be an interesting setting knowing that raise dead, greater restoration, teleport don’t exist.

[Anymage]

#1: Unless you institute Gygaxian levels of punishment for character death, this doesn't affect the player as much as you might think. If novaing burns out long term character resources, little stops me from burning out one character, only to bring up another caster when they retire or die. You need to institute long-term character drawbacks to make death like that sufficiently punitive, and things like coming in well below the average party level create death spirals and imbalance.

#2: Most classes have some form of magic options, and most of those aren't imbalanced. Especially for the bulk of the playable experience. (Casters may pull stupidly ahead once 8th and 9th level spells come on line, but most campaigns don't spend too much time at those levels and many don't hit them at all.) Schrodinger's wizard can singlehandedly solve any problem, but lower levels and limited spell lists cut down on his options appreciably.

#3: If you want to cut back on the potential for Schrodinger's wizard, be upfront about how you'll be limiting spell availability. Give divine casters prayerbooks, too, and similarly limit their ability to learn too many spells. Casters will be able to pull off a few cool tricks, but won't have the excessive versatility that really lets them go nuts.

[Submortimer]

Suggestion: warlocks are exempt from this rule, but are highly persecuted.

That would explicitly make warlocks better spellcasters than most, but at a cost.

[Talamare]

Math
Thank you, and you're absolutely right

Which is pretty awesome someone already suggested...

I actually really like this idea a lot.

Enough to steal it outright.

Nyahahaha, you'll never catch me!

Ahem. I get that some people don't like it. It is notably punishing for casters, and borderline unplayable at early levels. Casting up to your limit during your first few levels becomes a perfectly pyrrhic situation where doing it again will probably kill you. At level 3, you can burn yourself out of 8 HP- enough to nearly kill an average 14 Con wizard in two days. That's horrifying.

You know what else is horrifying? Being used to a world where fireball doesn't really exist. Until a very, very spiteful person decides that it absolutely does exist. Still, I may allow some sort of scaling to the amount of maximum hit points are restored by each hit dice spent in order to keep the math from getting silly. At least upscale to 2 at level 11.

I think I'd also add a feat or two for managing these numbers. Something like Magical Adaptation: +1 Int, Wis, or Cha. Your hit dice may restore twice as many maximum hit points lost from spellcasting. You also regain a number of hit points equal to the amount of maximum hit points restored this way. And, Attunement: Regain 5 of your maximum hit points lost from spellcasting at the end of every long rest. This amount increases to 7 at level 5, 11 at level 11, and 20 at level 17.

Just a few optional tools that casters can pick up to help mitigate their losses, at the cost of improving their base competency or their other survival options. A half-caster probably only wants one, a third caster can likely skip it, and a full caster will eventually want both if they have room for them.
I really like the idea of adding depth by adding a feat or 2 to help mitigate the exponential costs at higher levels.
Tho the exact value it helps is a little tricky, if it's too great then there wasn't much point in adding this additional layer of complexity

Perhaps -
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to your Con modifier instead.
or
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to your Proficiency instead. (Equal to half your Proficiency?)
or
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to d6 instead.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I really like the idea of adding depth by adding a feat or 2 to help mitigate the exponential costs at higher levels.
Tho the exact value it helps is a little tricky, if it's too great then there wasn't much point in adding this additional layer of complexity

Perhaps -
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to your Con modifier instead.
or
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to your Proficiency instead. (Equal to half your Proficiency?)
or
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to d6 instead.
I'd recommend against this, actually. (Like, even more than I recommend against the system as a whole). It's... not even basically; it is a flat tax on spellcasters. Every spellcaster will take the feat, ASAP, no matter what their class or concept. (As a general rule, if an option is so good or so necessary that everyone doing a thing takes it, you should reconsider things)

[Provo]

Yeah, definitely too brutal. I'm fine with them almost wrecking themselves for overcasting, but that's too much recovery time by a long shot.

Perhaps scale it by the traditional tiers? 1 per HD for 1-4, 2 for 5-10, 3 for 11-16, and 4 for 17-20? And perhaps a slight quality of life improvement somewhere, like eventually level 1 and 2 spells stop costing maximum hit points after you become powerful enough. Perhaps at level 11, followed by a further reduction to levels 3 and 4 at level 17?

It already scales as players Total HD increases per level. If we change it to 2 per HD then that should be around a 4 day recovery at all levels. 3 per HD would be 3 day, and 4 would be 2 days to recover.

All this assumes that the player never spends HD for regular health recovery though. I would imagine 4 per HD would be the best of these options.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Thank you, and you're absolutely right

Which is pretty awesome someone already suggested...

I really like the idea of adding depth by adding a feat or 2 to help mitigate the exponential costs at higher levels.
Tho the exact value it helps is a little tricky, if it's too great then there wasn't much point in adding this additional layer of complexity

Perhaps -
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to your Con modifier instead.
or
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to your Proficiency instead. (Equal to half your Proficiency?)
or
When you spend a HD to recover Max HP lost from casting, you regain an amount equal to d6 instead.

Proficiency scaling could really work. Maybe even as the standard- 2 per HD fixes the early levels outright. At level 1 you can reset your HP by burning them all. I'd think this is ideal, since until then they'll be missing, with Con 14, a full quarter of their hit points. And if they'd taken damage that didn't kill them, they'll have to decide between healing themselves and fixing their maximum hit points.

As Randuir math'd out, you'd have an average of 122 hp at 20. Using every spell puts you at a 33, which is insanely dangerous. It really doesn't need to be more taxing than that. If you get back max hp at 6:1 thanks to proficiency scaling, you can recover all of that and have 5 HD leftover for healing yourself- which you're really going to need to survive, or save for an extra day since you only recover half your HD per day. So you can only go ham every other day if you don't want to bleed yourself to death, and that's still a dangerous situation due to how critically low your hp will get. Don't forget, healing magic will be working off the same system, so you're not likely to get much healing without putting the party cleric/druid/bard into the same predicament.

[Darth_Versity]

I'd say the idea is good but the execution is too punishing. Instead, how about a system based on non lethal damage.

'Each spell cast gives the caster an amount of mana strain equal to its level (minimum of 1). If your mana strain ever equals of exceeds your current hp, you fall unconscious. All mana strain is removed after a long rest.'

The mana strain represents a growing headache or migraine (which is a pretty good reason for most people not to cast magic in world building terms). With this, you could actually pass out by taking damage that brings your hp lower than the mana strain, so blowing a lot of spells early could be detrimental, but it's not nearly as punishing as actual hp loss because while it doesn't actually kill you (but could lead to a situation where you die).

[Talamare]

I'd recommend against this, actually. (Like, even more than I recommend against the system as a whole). It's... not even basically; it is a flat tax on spellcasters. Every spellcaster will take the feat, ASAP, no matter what their class or concept. (As a general rule, if an option is so good or so necessary that everyone doing a thing takes it, you should reconsider things)


It already scales as players Total HD increases per level. If we change it to 2 per HD then that should be around a 4 day recovery at all levels. 3 per HD would be 3 day, and 4 would be 2 days to recover.

All this assumes that the player never spends HD for regular health recovery though. I would imagine 4 per HD would be the best of these options.

My weakness for making a proposal before doing any of the work, but it's kind of how my mind operates.
Taking it at every 4 levels for breakpoints
Level, Total Cost for casting Every Spell, How many HD you recover per day, Days until you're fully recovered
1 - 2, 1/d, 2
4 - 10, 2/d, 5
8 - 27, 4/d, 7
12 - 47, 6/d, 8
16 - 62, 8/d, 8
20 - 89, 10/d, 9

I suppose it does get worse at higher levels, but it's also more difficult for Casters to use all their slots every day at higher levels.
So I suppose the additional recovery isn't really needed for fixing higher levels.

[Pex]

No! No! No! No! No!

Characters should NEVER be punished for doing what they're supposed to be doing, namely casting spells in this case.

No excuses. "Low magic", "balance", is never a sufficient reason. It is a terrible roleplaying game design. It is irrelevant to me if some published game does it. I know first hand the Star Wars RPG used to do it before the current incarnation. I played a Jedi and had to lose hit points anytime I used the Force. My character was literally killing himself. The DM agreed it was dumb. He had to give my character max hit points by fiat in order for me to be able to contribute meaningfully.

[Provo]

My weakness for making a proposal before doing any of the work, but it's kind of how my mind operates.
Taking it at every 4 levels for breakpoints
Level, Total Cost for casting Every Spell, How many HD you recover per day, Days until you're fully recovered
1 - 2, 1/d, 2
4 - 10, 2/d, 5
8 - 27, 4/d, 7
12 - 47, 6/d, 8
16 - 62, 8/d, 8
20 - 89, 10/d, 9

I suppose it does get worse at higher levels, but it's also more difficult for Casters to use all their slots every day at higher levels.
So I suppose the additional recovery isn't really needed for fixing higher levels.

It is worth noting that while it gets worse at higher levels, it seems to ramp up quickly from levels 1 to 8, then remains steadily between 8 or 9 days beyond that. I don't know if that will impact your decision making or not.

With this sustem you should rewrite the arcane recovery and natural recovery (for the Wizard and Druid respectively). Nobody needs more spells per day. They could provide some small bonus to HD recovery instead.

[2D8HP]

No idea on the "In the weeds" arithmetic/balance/crunchiness of it, but I like the basic concept.

It reminds me of the effects of spell casting in The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, Stardust, and at the end of Excalibur.

For extra genre-ific-ness you could have spell casters trying to siphon the life-force of innocents that need to be rescued, or making trades with demons for life-force, etc.

Perhaps you could tell "good" spell-casters because they're prematurely aged, and "evil" ones because they retain their youth.

You could also perhaps have extra spell slots beyond usual by expending CON.

Basic concept is a winner, it should have been that way from the start!

:smile:

[Waterdeep Merch]

Actually, further building on this- if I were to implement this system, I'd completely abolish spell slots. You can keep casting spells until it kills you.

A few spells would need to be completely removed to make this work. Namely wish and true polymorph.

[Talamare]

Actually, further building on this- if I were to implement this system, I'd completely abolish spell slots. You can keep casting spells until it kills you.

A few spells would need to be completely removed to make this work. Namely wish and true polymorph.

I'm not against the idea of casting until it kills you, but spell slot limits are still important to separate the different classes

What if instead, when you run out of spell slots, you may pay double to continue casting.

[Avonar]

I like the way Shadowrun does things, every time you use magic there is a chance that it will hurt you, the more powerful the spell the higher the chance.

Penalising all casting seems like a way to make a caster feel inferior. Wizards, sorcerors etc. have no effective way of fighting without magic, by design. They could use a dagger, for very little damage. I understand the concept but if you're doing this you need everyone to be a caster to even things out. Having this with a Barbarian in the party would lead to some players feeling useless I feel.

[Provo]

I'm not against the idea of casting until it kills you, but spell slot limits are still important to separate the different classes

What if instead, when you run out of spell slots, you may pay double to continue casting.

Good idea. It may have some interesting interactions with a warlock, but a Warlock who keeps casting at a heavy cost certainly seems thematic.

The bigger problem may be players ONLY casting their highest level spells. This could potentially break the low-magic feel.

[Jamesps]

One thing you might do is make it more punishing, but allow anyone that gets ahold of a spell book cast spells without levels in a caster class.

It'd be very Call of Cthulhu.

[Coidzor]

Low level casters are completely unplayable with this rule.

[Naanomi]

Abilities that mimic spells but are not casting would be very strong... lay on hands for example.

Of course... if you can make it to level 10, Necromancers have a class ability to not have their Max HP reducible at all...

[Kane0]

If you do end up using this make sure to let us know how it goes!

[furby076]

Look up robert jordans wheel of time rpg. It uses d20 syste, (opengl 3x), but im sure you could convert the aes sedai to 5e. Basically, they got tired (exhaustion) for casting too many spells. So they didnt cast much. On the other end, they were diplomats, had some innate abilities (did not suffer negative effects from heat/cold), and all had a well trained and fiercly loyal bodyguard that would die for them (if you managed to kill him).

[Vogie]

I can see it - basically, a "Dirty Magic" campaign - provided there are workarounds. For example, having Temp HP act as a buffer would be interesting. Things like Virtue, Heroism and False Life can stave off some of the impact. That allows the casters to build around it in some ways.

You could also make it so only spells above first level are the painful ones, to not completely ignore the very real plights of low level casters.

Another option is to pull from other RPGs and give a paradox/sanity meter for spellcasting characters, where the more spells cast takes a toll in a non-HP way, making wizards potentially insane (which explains why there's so many bad ones) or have a chance to accidentally roll themselves into oblivion, mutations, or both.

However, you're running really close to Grod's Law with the idea. All players would have to be 100% on board prior to the game start before I'd even consider it.

[Joe the Rat]

A few ideas for any direction you take this:

Interact with Hit Dice. Standard rules completely recover lowered max HP on a long rest, as well as everything else... other than Hit Dice and exhaustion. Hit Dice are your fine grain wear-down mechanic. Having to spend hit die to cover drain (or gain exhaustion) is an angle to consider.
Variable Impact. Rather than a fixed amount of loss, make it variable - with the lowest results meaning no burn. Use increasing dice sizes, or numbers of die for your cost, but subtract Proficiency Bonus from the result. As you grow in power, it gets easier to cast the little things.
Short, Long, and Extended Rest Free Casting. Assuming you are going Low Magic Heroic rather than Low Magic Gritty, bump spell slot recovery up one level. Short rest recoveries, including channel divinity and arcane recovery take 8 hours (Long rest/ "Gritty" short rest), while Long Rest recovery (spell slots for most casters) are an Extended Rest recovery (one week Downtime; allow other downtime activities to be pursued). If you run out of juice and want to cast something, or want to hold on to a spell slot, then you invoke burn.
Voluntary Spellburn. Since you are draining resources to cast, why not let them overchannel a little? Allow them to spend a little extra of whatever resource to boost numbers (spell attack bonus or save DC). Jerk mode: declare expenditures before rolls; 5e Standard: declare expenditures after rolling, but before seeing result. Zeb Cook Marvel Method: Declare intent to overspend, decide amount after roll (but before result), minimum 1 "unit"
More DCC-related theft. Strength, Dexterity, Constitution. There's some stats to burn. Watch out for shadows! Non-casting stat mental stats: It's like burning sanity!
Sorcerers suck. Sorcery points can be spend in place of _____.

[Easy_Lee]

Hey look, another punish casters thread.

Casters aren't better than martials. Each fills a different role, with martials being the primaries for both damage and solving problems without expending resources. That's a big deal. Furthermore, damage from a magic weapon is the least resisted damage type in the game, even more reliable than force or radiant damage.

There's absolutely no need to punish casters. Nor is it the slightest bit balanced to place this kind of penalty on them. How do you suppose a warlock will feel if he loses one HP every time he casts eldritch blast?

If I played in your campaign, I would be determined to find a way around that BS restriction. If I had to play a Sorcerer and subtle-cast everything, such that whatever entity could not detect that I had done it, I would do so.

Additionally, this most significantly impacts combat casters. People who can produce spell-like effects without casting a spell should be just fine. Someone might play a Bladesinger and do fine in tiers one and two, then work toward casting a big mess-up-your-campaign spell whenever he gets the chance, such as mind controlling a key NPC. Under this restriction, such tactics would be the only reasonable use for magic, and thus would be implicitly encouraged.

Food for thought.

[Arcangel4774]

Instead of making it reduce max HP, what do you think about having it "cast from hit points," as it were? You're still making magic more difficult to use, but it becomes less of a penalty for using magic and more of a new way to have to manage those resources. To compensate, you could get rid of spell slots and have each level of spell do a new dice of damage. If your class has access to level 4 spells, you can cast as many as you want, but you're rolling a d10 for damage every time (if a cantrip just does 1 pt, a level one spell does d4, level two a d6 etc...).

I think this would help motivate your players to both be willing to be casters while still minimizing magic use. The idea of being able to cast as many level x spells as you have hit points would be a draw to the class, but in play your players would theoretically hesitate to spend their lives so quickly.

I like this implementation better, although temp hp and heals may need to be curtailed somewhat.

With all inplementations i have to question what happens to spellike effects. Do eldritch and paladin smites count as spells as they expend a spell slot? Monks can use ki to cast spells like darkness, does that count as spell for the rules? If yes to both wouldnt all ki expenditure count? How about other abilites that are clearly magic but arent spells themselves.

[Dr. Cliché]

How would you feel about a Low Magic scenario in which every spell you cast (including Cantrips) reduced your Maximum HP?

I'm thinking maybe 1 per spell level cast (1 for Cantrips) or 1+Spell Level Cast.
I'm also thinking that during a Long Rest you may spend 1 HD to recover 1 lost Max HP, upto your max.
(Obviously any spell like Greater Restoration wouldn't remove all Max HP lose from this.)

The idea is to severely limit and punish the use of Magic, but not outlaw it completely. It also creates an easy explanation as to why Magic isn't common. It's effects of draining your soul would be fairly well known.

Okay, a few thoughts here:

1) Are you still planning to use spell slots? It seems like casting with blood should let you just go by maximum spell level, since you've already got a hard-limit on the number of spells you can cast. Though, in this case, it might be best if spells didn't scale in a linear manner.

At the very least, I'd have Lv6+ spells cost more. So if a Lv5 spell costs 6hp, I'd have a Lv6 spell cost 8 or 9 hp. I suggest this because these spells are generally treated differently (Wizards/Druids can't recover them, Warlocks can't use their normal spell slots for them etc.). Hence, if this system does away with spell slots, these spells should probably be harder to cast to make up for it.

Incidentally, if you do do away with spell slots, perhaps Natural Recovery could allow the caster to regain some Max hp?

2) I don't think Cantrips should cost hp to cast. The whole point of them is that they don't acquire resources. It would be like if the fighter had to lose hp just to swing his sword.

3) 1 HD for 1 Max HP is just ludicrous. You might as well just ban casters because you're basically saying that if they want to use their core class features they have to a) kill themselves or b) force the rest of the group to sit around for weeks until they can get their hp back. :smalltongue:

Off the top of my head, I'd suggest something more like:
- Recover half max hp spent (rounded up) on a Long Rest.
- Each HD spent during a short rest also recovers 1+Con Max hp.
- During a Long Rest, the caster can spend HD to recover that many Max hp.

4) Does it have to use Max hp in the first place? I ask simply because it seems like a real pain to track. I wonder if it would make more sense to just use regular hp and maybe nerf or remove most healing spells and other forms of magical healing.

It's also weird that, for example, Fiend Warlocks steal life from slain enemies - but wouldn't actually be able to use that life (since it's in the form of Temporary hp). Maybe Temporary Hp could have a 1:2 ratio - as in, you can use them in place of regular hp but you have to spend twice as many as you normally would.

5) It might be interesting if there was a way to collect life from slain enemies in some way. e.g. a 1HD goblin gives you the equivalent of 1hp that you can use to cast a future spell.

[johnbragg]

Let's look at this a different way.
You're implementing huge enormous changes to 5E. So much so but I'm questioning what exactly is it about 5e that you want to keep, rather than switch to a system that is much more designed for what you're trying to do.
Sometimes you have a lawnmower, and you want a golf cart. Technically yes with a lot of work and spending a lot of money you could rebuild that lawn mower into a golf cart.
But sometimes it's just easier to go buy a golf cart.

[CantigThimble]

Hey look, another punish casters thread.

Casters aren't better than martials. Each fills a different role, with martials being the primaries for both damage and solving problems without expending resources. That's a big deal. Furthermore, damage from a magic weapon is the least resisted damage type in the game, even more reliable than force or radiant damage.

There's absolutely no need to punish casters. Nor is it the slightest bit balanced to place this kind of penalty on them. How do you suppose a warlock will feel if he loses one HP every time he casts eldritch blast?

If I played in your campaign, I would be determined to find a way around that BS restriction. If I had to play a Sorcerer and subtle-cast everything, such that whatever entity could not detect that I had done it, I would do so.

Additionally, this most significantly impacts combat casters. People who can produce spell-like effects without casting a spell should be just fine. Someone might play a Bladesinger and do fine in tiers one and two, then work toward casting a big mess-up-your-campaign spell whenever he gets the chance, such as mind controlling a key NPC. Under this restriction, such tactics would be the only reasonable use for magic, and thus would be implicitly encouraged.

Food for thought.

...The goal isn't to 'punish casters' it's to play a setting with low magic. This would be the rule in session zero before anyone made characters.

I seriously SERIOUSLY don't understand why people think an appropriate response to a DM running a setting that doesn't include everything a player wants in a way he wants it is a justification for some BS 'rebellion'.

I once saw player who didn't like that the DM hadn't included gnomes as a PC race in his world try to collude with other player to ruin the whole campaign.

Seriously, a DM isn't taking things away from you by setting up his world differently. You never had those things to begin with until the DM runs the game and you join as a player.

[BobZan]

Create a Fatigue Pool (FP), based on Constitution or Character Level.

Based on Con, something like: Level 1, Con modifier x4 + Caster level (minimum 1) - Lv 5, Con mod x6 + Caster level - Level 11, Con mod x8 + Caster level - Level 17, Con mod x10 + Caster level.

On a short rest you can spend HD to fuel your Fatigue Pool, on a long rest you recover half FP, if you spend 1 HD you fully recover it.

When you deplete your FP you have to spend your Maximum HP on spells. You recover your caster level equivalent of Maximum HP per long rest. You can use Hit Dices as 'normal' to restore Maximum HP.

---

It's a drawback, but not so that you have to destroy the fun of playing a spellcaster in said universe.

[Aett_Thorn]

...The goal isn't to 'punish casters' it's to play a setting with low magic. This would be the rule in session zero before anyone made characters.

I seriously SERIOUSLY don't understand why people think an appropriate response to a DM running a setting that doesn't include everything a player wants in a way he wants it is a justification for some BS 'rebellion'.

I once saw player who didn't like that the DM hadn't included gnomes as a PC race in his world try to collude with other player to ruin the whole campaign.

Seriously, a DM isn't taking things away from you by setting up his world differently. You never had those things to begin with until the DM runs the game and you join as a player.

The OP asked for feedback on his system, and he is getting it. Other people who have played this edition are saying that this completely punishes certain classes, which may be the goal, but it also means that you then restrict options for your players, who may see this system as very harsh. Considering that one of many reasons that people play a game like D&D is because of magic, creating a system where casting a spell hurts you may severely restrict the fun. It might not, but it might, and that is good to know going into it.

Certainly, these issues SHOULD be discussed in a Session 0, but if not, this is going to create a lot of angst.

Also, I like how you say that the goal isn't to punish casters, but from the OP itself:


The idea is to severely limit and punish the use of Magic

The OP specifically states that one of the goals is to punish the use of magic. Forgive us for actually thinking that might be a goal.

[CantigThimble]

There is a difference between punishing the use of magic in general and punishing a player who uses magic. If you set up these rules and then someone picks a caster the DM has not punished that player. That player has made their choice knowing the rules. Punishing the use of magic is a tool for making a setting, punishing a player for using magic is something quite different. One is reasonable, the other is tyrannical.

The responses I see to these kinds of theoretical setting rules strikes me as nonsensical. People respond as if their DM sprung these rules on them out of the blue, not as if someone offered them a seat at a game where this would be the case.

IMO the appropriate responses are:
A) "I don't want to play in your game if those are the rules. This is why I don't think it would be fun."
B) "I would be willing to play in your game under those rules, but only with certain tweaks or changes."
C) "I would be willing to play with those rules as is, here is how I, as a player would respond to those in game."

The response I don't understand is: "How could you do this to me, you monster?"

[Elminster298]

#1: Unless you institute Gygaxian levels of punishment for character death, this doesn't affect the player as much as you might think. If novaing burns out long term character resources, little stops me from burning out one character, only to bring up another caster when they retire or die. You need to institute long-term character drawbacks to make death like that sufficiently punitive, and things like coming in well below the average party level create death spirals and imbalance.

#2: Most classes have some form of magic options, and most of those aren't imbalanced. Especially for the bulk of the playable experience. (Casters may pull stupidly ahead once 8th and 9th level spells come on line, but most campaigns don't spend too much time at those levels and many don't hit them at all.) Schrodinger's wizard can singlehandedly solve any problem, but lower levels and limited spell lists cut down on his options appreciably.

#3: If you want to cut back on the potential for Schrodinger's wizard, be upfront about how you'll be limiting spell availability. Give divine casters prayerbooks, too, and similarly limit their ability to learn too many spells. Casters will be able to pull off a few cool tricks, but won't have the excessive versatility that really lets them go nuts.

This is the "pile of dead bards" game plan and would be how I played in this world. Oh, magic is rare? How do you explain the trail of dead mages leading to the BBEG's lair? In all seriousness though, I would never play in a game such as this unless it was a simple one shot adventure. If you don't like magic just ban it entirely. Stop trying to make yourself feel better because "the players chose not to use magic" instead of just admitting you are a bad DM who can't handle the game as it was designed.

[opaopajr]

Very strong setting limitation. Could be fun. What's the overall aesthetic and cosmological explanation?

[Easy_Lee]

There is a difference between punishing the use of magic in general and punishing a player who uses magic.

In practice, no there isn't. It has the exact same effect on players regardless of whether it's universal or targeted. Furthermore, this affects players more than it affects the world. An in-game wizard might not hesitate to cast five spells to save his own life. But the player who will often cast that many spells per combat is quickly crippled.

This is a bad, bad idea. In this case, it has nothing to do with intent and everything to do with outcome.

[Pex]

...The goal isn't to 'punish casters' it's to play a setting with low magic. This would be the rule in session zero before anyone made characters.

I seriously SERIOUSLY don't understand why people think an appropriate response to a DM running a setting that doesn't include everything a player wants in a way he wants it is a justification for some BS 'rebellion'.

I once saw player who didn't like that the DM hadn't included gnomes as a PC race in his world try to collude with other player to ruin the whole campaign.

Seriously, a DM isn't taking things away from you by setting up his world differently. You never had those things to begin with until the DM runs the game and you join as a player.

If the goal is low magic then just play a game without spellcasters or make it mandatory that anyone wanting to play a spellcaster has to multiclass two levels in a non-spellcaster class for every level in a spellcaster class or play a different game system altogether that doesn't have magic intrinsic to its being as it is to D&D. If you hate/just don't want player characters casting spells, don't let them then punish them for the audacity of doing so. Play something else.

If you must use the 5E system fortunately the work has been done for you via the Middle Earth adaptation. No spellcasters, viable natural healing methods, and ways to incorporate special items as part of lore via feats and class abilities for world building flavor. You don't have to play Middle Earth with the rules. You can ignore the abstraction on Journeys and Rests and just roleplay traveling as you normally do with normal Rest rules.

[Dr. Cliché]

Out of interest, what about banning all the full casters (including Warlock)? This way, the only magic is on classes like Arcane Tricksters and Rangers (which have few spell slots and low-level spells, relative to their character levels).

[Easy_Lee]

Out of interest, what about banning all the full casters (including Warlock)? This way, the only magic is on classes like Arcane Tricksters and Rangers (which have few spell slots and low-level spells, relative to their character levels).

I'm sure four elements and shadow monks would just love to lose HP for casting their spells. Meanwhile sun soul monks would be just fine since their magical spell-like effects aren't actually spells.

Magic is integral to D&D. It's a universal force just like gravity. Punish it and you tear the world apart.

[strangebloke]

DnD, particuarly 5e, isn't a good setting for low magic. All but three of the base classes are at least half casters, and Barbarians, Rogues, and Fighters can all get access to spells through their subclass choices. Additionally, things like the Samurai or the Storm Herald or the Mastermind all have abilities that are functionally magical. Quite a few races (tiefling, high elf) get casting by default. A large portion of the MM has creatures whose existence necessitates the presence of magic. Fully half of the DMG is magic item tables.

'Low magic' 5e is just 5e without 75% of its content. That's the most balanced way to do this, but it kind of sucks. You could also just not have nearly any NPC spellcasters, and have no/few magic items. That would make things feel pretty dank.

Anyway, if I wanted to do try a 'fix', I'd do it this way:

Every time a spell is cast, roll 1d10 - Spell Level + Spellcasting Mod. If they roll a 2 or lower, the spell backfires and they take 4*spell level nonlethal damage. If they roll a 10 or higher, they get to maximize the damage -or- apply disadvantage to a save.

Fail chance:


spell level
SP atrr: 16
SP atrr: 18
SP atrr: 20


1
0%
0%
0%


2
10%
0%
0%


3
20%
10%
0%


4
30%
20%
10%


5
40%
30%
20%


6
50%
40%
30%


7
60%
50%
40%


8
70%
60%
50%


9
80%
70%
60%




Remotely balanced? No. But better than yours. Casters are going to be wary of using their highest level slots, but their low-level ones get slightly improved in return. Casters get hit hard by tier 4 with this system, but, well, they were kind of ridiculous in tier 4 anyway.

[Dr. Cliché]

I'm sure four elements and shadow monks would just love to lose HP for casting their spells. Meanwhile sun soul monks would be just fine since their magical spell-like effects aren't actually spells.

I don't understand your argument.

How does banning full casters cause monks to lose hp when they cast spells? :smallconfused:

[LeonBH]

I don't understand your argument.

How does banning full casters cause monks to lose hp when they cast spells? :smallconfused:

Because the Way of the Elements monk can cast spells.

[Flashy]

With the hitpoint loss on cantrip casting are (non-clerics) getting a new feature to scale their damage?

Around the point where everyone else was picking up extra attack, bonus sneak attack dice, etc I’d start to feel particularly singled out as a wizard who was still making one shortbow attack every round, forever.


I’m also not sure about the idea that this is supposed to make magic feel rare and powerful. Rare, sure, but the spells are still going to be essentially balanced for their tiers of play. Magic solves problems but it’s hardly a cure-all in default 5e.

[GlenSmash!]

If you must use the 5E system fortunately the work has been done for you via the Middle Earth adaptation. No spellcasters, viable natural healing methods, and ways to incorporate special items as part of lore via feats and class abilities for world building flavor. You don't have to play Middle Earth with the rules. You can ignore the abstraction on Journeys and Rests and just roleplay traveling as you normally do with normal Rest rules.

Indeed. Adventures in Middle-Earth did this quite well. And it could be adapted to other settings easily enough.

[Dr. Cliché]

Because the Way of the Elements monk can cast spells.

Yeah, but my suggestion was to do this instead of making casters spend hp to cast spells.

[lperkins2]

So, here's a thought for discouraging spellcasting in a more balanced way.

To start with, leave cantrips alone. Making the wizard use a bow for his every-round attack just turns into a 1-2 point to-hit and damage penalty for playing a wizard, which isn't particularly interesting. If you are set on limiting cantrips too, let full casters use their casting stat for attacks with simple ranged weapons.

For the actual changes:

1. Cut the number of spell slots down, probably about in half. This is a common suggestion for balancing casters with the 15 minute adventuring day anyway, and doesn't have too big of consequences for groups running 2-3 encounters per day instead of 6-8. Alternatively, use the spellpoint system and cut the number of available spell points in half.

2. Let casters learn spells up to twice the level they normally could, so a level 1 character can know up to level 2 spells, a level 3 can know up to level 4 spells, and so on.

3. Let the characters pay for extra spell slots of any level, either at 1 point per slot level or following the sorcery point table. The cost is taken out of the characters maximum HP, and is permanent (or at least very long lasting, on the order of weeks to recover). Let damage-sharing spells split the max-HP damage between characters too.

4. Classify this sort of spell slot creation as dark/blood magic and outlaw it in civilized lands.

All in all, it slightly reduces the power of casters, which is somewhat needed if you are running short adventuring days, while giving them the option for an oh-.... button to get out of bad situations. The mostly likely scenario for seeing it used would probably be the party paying life in order to upcast invisibility or similar and run away.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I did a bit of white room testing with a few players. I utilized the proficiency bonus HD restore, the feats idea, the absence of spell slots, and toyed with a few levels in a handful of thought exercises and combats. What I'm led to believe-

* Players with magic will rarely use it. Or they will, and they'll wind up dead if there's any sort of regular combat.

* Playing a healer is a terrible idea. Clerics are particularly bad unless played on the back line. You'll either need the healer feat or plenty of healing potions. In lieu of that, expect players to avoid combat as much as possible or take tons of long rests.

* No one with any system mastery or understanding of these rules will play a full caster except as an exotic challenge. This, at least, was by design.

* It doesn't balance the power of spells, at all. Part of this was the abolishment of spell slots, but even without it, a fireball is still a fireball. Greater invisibility still wrecks face. Mirror image is still busted good.

* A party that has any reason to rely on their caster, either because it's completely necessary or because magic is the easiest and safest method, will be taking even more rests than usual. If the party doesn't short rest after nearly every combat where magic was used, they risk losing their casters to HP drain.

* It's a lot of book keeping. I don't mind casters being more complex, so I don't see this as an issue.

* Narratively, it's pretty great. Magic has this 'forbidden power' feel, a temptation that can spell your own doom should you not respect it.

Overall, I think it's just too harsh, and the negative aspects it reflects on the players are so undesirable as to harm the positive ones.

I am, however, still looking to see if there's some method of making magic a touch more dangerous without negatively impacting play. I think making save DC's after every spell is too much rolling and a bit too much chaos. I'm thinking of testing lperkins2's recommendation of cutting slots in half, then allowing overcasting by the max HP reduction mechanic. I might also nix the idea of max HP being healed through HD and instead just let them all come back on a long rest. Less upkeep, less problematic.

[Naanomi]

I think I’d play a Paladin in this system... healing hands is great when healing Magic sucks, lots of HP if I do need to use a spell, smites for a use of spell-slots that won’t burn my HP...

[Sigreid]

See if you can find the d20 grim tales magic rules online. I think it will do what you want without making magic totally impossible for life and limb risking adventurers.

[ChampionWiggles]

How would you feel about a Low Magic scenario in which every spell you cast (including Cantrips) reduced your Maximum HP?

I'm thinking maybe 1 per spell level cast (1 for Cantrips) or 1+Spell Level Cast.
I'm also thinking that during a Long Rest you may spend 1 HD to recover 1 lost Max HP, upto your max.
(Obviously any spell like Greater Restoration wouldn't remove all Max HP lose from this.)

The idea is to severely limit and punish the use of Magic, but not outlaw it completely. It also creates an easy explanation as to why Magic isn't common. It's effects of draining your soul would be fairly well known.


I'm still a little undecided how to hand stuff like Ki Magic or Natural Magic like abilities from like the Paladin and Druid.

Like others have said, having such a world seems like a good way to have a party of martial characters. I get the thought process, I do, because yea magic does seem like the "cure all" or "get-out-of-jail" free card, but I think people forget that magic is the solution if:
a) The spell caster decides to have learned the spell that solves this particular situation and/or prepped it.
b) They decided they want to use a spell slot in lieu of a skill check (and therefore have less spell slots for later)
c) The NPC or whatever fails the save DC for this spell to work (and if they pass, it usually ends poorly for the caster, unless they used Subtle Spell)

If you're insistent on going with this, these are my suggestions:

1) Don't have it affect cantrips. Yea, they're magic, but they're the bread and butter and "Go-to" option for full casters when they don't have spell slots or want to use them and cantrips are designed to scale the same as the other features with martials, so having cantrips reduce the maximum HP of already low HP classes just punishes them too hard. That'd be like having the Fighter take damage whenever they used a standard attack.
2) Only have the HP reduction happen if the magic is successful. It's already frustrating enough as a caster to waste a spell slot and have your attack roll miss or the target pass the save DC and nothing happen. Now they'll lose max HP AND have wasted their action? Insult to injury (literally).
3) Low magic setting implies low magic item finding, which means less +X weapons for martials. Those are another way to help martial classes overcome high AC opponents, along with resistances and immunities. It just means you'll have to be a lot more conscious of what encounters you throw at them. Speaking of magic weapons, how would wands work? Would they just reduce the HP of whoever is using them?
4) Using a HD to restore a single max HP is just too debilitating, especially at higher levels when they start throwing out high level spells. It's also taking one of the primary mechanics used for healing in the game and re purposing it for even MORE resource management. With the limit on magic, it also severely limits the means for healing (and almost would require multiple people taking the "Healer" feat). On top of that, core rules state that you recover half your HD per long rest. Others have suggested using a separate resource pool for this mechanic and that's the better way to go.
5) Don't start at lvl 1. Casters will have 7-10 HP roughly at lvl 1 and then they'll start cutting themselves in order to contribute, since low level casters can't do much to begin with. I'd suggest starting at lvl 5 or you're going to have dead casters very quick (which might happen anyways).
6) Don't have it affect spells that are cast as rituals.

[Kane0]

Ooh, what about the optional Honor/Sanity stats? A soellscaster has a sanity score which is reduced as they cast and restored as they rest. Certain casters like warlocks and necromancers might be able to use honor instead of sanity to reflect their standing in society.

[Flashy]

Ooh, what about the optional Honor/Sanity stats? A soellscaster has a sanity score which is reduced as they cast and restored as they rest. Certain casters like warlocks and necromancers might be able to use honor instead of sanity to reflect their standing in society.

This is truly clever and might work really well with the right set of supporting systems.

[Knaight]

I have no problems with the idea; I don't particularly like the implementation. The big thing is how this messes with the short and long rest mechanics and the way pacing is built into the game. A cleaner solution would be to have the Max HP fully recover on long rests, have short rests allow HD for Max HP swaps, and then just use variant rules that extend rest times.

I'd also be inclined to scale Max HP costs to the level of the spell, and use that instead of spell slots. For one thing there's the matter of how using two resources for one mechanic is just finicky. For another, it really emphasizes the idea of mages being dangerous. It might cost them, but if they need to go nova they can go nova, lobbing the nastiest spell they have over and over.

This is also one of those cases where there is almost certainly a game better suited for what you're trying to do than D&D. It's really not made for low fantasy, and while incentives towards magical rarity are a good thing for low fantasy it still leaves some fundamental problems, starting with how the spell selection is just fundamentally wrong.


Additionally, this most significantly impacts combat casters. People who can produce spell-like effects without casting a spell should be just fine. Someone might play a Bladesinger and do fine in tiers one and two, then work toward casting a big mess-up-your-campaign spell whenever he gets the chance, such as mind controlling a key NPC. Under this restriction, such tactics would be the only reasonable use for magic, and thus would be implicitly encouraged.

Food for thought.
Making spells expensive makes it more likely that people will cast spells when it's highly effective, yes. This is what's commonly known as "the point". Magic is rare, powerful, and dangerous, and thus something like mind controlling an influential NPC fits the genre perfectly. It also works better than it normally would, where enemy mages likely to detect it are thin on the ground, and enemy mages able to break the control are even thinner.

[Jama7301]

There's a balance point where this is a suuuuuuuuper interesting campaign that I'd love to play a Sorcerer or Warlock in. What's a bummer is that I don't know what that point would be, or where it would capture the feeling properly.

[RickAllison]

I will put out that this seems like a perfect way to get more Moon Druids. They have combat Wild Shapes to be less reliant on their hit points and cantrips and that is the real killer here for most mages; if cantrips didn't carry the penalty, then it could be a reasonable choice. Moon druids can cast spells when they need to, and fight as animals when they don't.

[Dr. Cliché]

This is also one of those cases where there is almost certainly a game better suited for what you're trying to do than D&D. It's really not made for low fantasy, and while incentives towards magical rarity are a good thing for low fantasy it still leaves some fundamental problems, starting with how the spell selection is just fundamentally wrong.

I don't know about spell selection, but the general tone of most D&D spells definitely doesn't seem right for a low-magic world.

I'd expect most to be along the lines of the Warlock or Necromancy spells (Arms of Hadar, Hunger of Hadar, Shadow of Moil etc.). You're giving your life to cast them, after all.

I certainly wouldn't want to eat a Goodberry in this world. :smalleek:


I will put out that this seems like a perfect way to get more Moon Druids. They have combat Wild Shapes to be less reliant on their hit points and cantrips and that is the real killer here for most mages; if cantrips didn't carry the penalty, then it could be a reasonable choice. Moon druids can cast spells when they need to, and fight as animals when they don't.

They also break the system at lv18, since they can Wild Shape, cast spells (reducing the max hp of their current beast shape), and then when they run out of hp they just Wild Shape into something else and get a new poll of hp to cast spells with.

Plus, at lv20 they can do this at will.

[Knaight]

I don't know about spell selection, but the general tone of most D&D spells definitely doesn't seem right for a low-magic world.
The selection of available spells are what I'm talking about with spell selection - the tone is off, the power level is off, the tendency towards rapid combat casting and really quick rituals is off, etc.


They also break the system at lv18, since they can Wild Shape, cast spells (reducing the max hp of their current beast shape), and then when they run out of hp they just Wild Shape into something else and get a new poll of hp to cast spells with.

Plus, at lv20 they can do this at will.
The system would need to account for that - Max HP reduction persisting between forms would be one way of doing that. Renaming it Mystic Wear, having it accumulate when casting, and preventing healing over HP-Mystic Wear.

[Psikerlord]

I think you could use hp to limit spell casting, but it might be too severe a penalty. It's hard to say - if there are only a handful of casters in the world, it's probably ok. The reduction in frequency in casting is balanced by the extreme rarity - no-one else will be able to do what the party wizard can do.

It might be more interesting to look at other variants however. Exhaustion levels are quite severe. I wouldnt make them auto apply when casting a spell, but perhaps a Con check or suffer a level of exhaustion. Or a level check (on a d12?). Or an escalating chance starting at 1, add 1 for each spell, etc.

Or make an Int check every time you cast. If fail, roll on a madness table or other weird effects table. Somethign like wild magic but happens more frequently. I personally very much prefer magic to be somewhat unpredictable.

Another idea might be to simply remove the "game breaking" spells - delete teleport, raise dead, detect lies, and so on. Those spells become NPC related plot devices only, or dont exist at all.

I would also recommend removing cantrips from all classes. Half casters will be fine without them. Full casters might need better weapons available to them, and light armour, to balance out the loss of basic attack magic spam.

[Coidzor]

...The goal isn't to 'punish casters' it's to play a setting with low magic.

If that is OP's goal, then they're not accomplishing it with this set of rules.


This would be the rule in session zero before anyone made characters.

Just ban casters then.


Seriously, a DM isn't taking things away from you by setting up his world differently.

You're literally being dishonest by banning classes without explicitly stating that you're banning them if this is how you go about it.


You never had those things to begin with until the DM runs the game and you join as a player.

This is incorrect.

[Honest Tiefling]

I seriously SERIOUSLY don't understand why people think an appropriate response to a DM running a setting that doesn't include everything a player wants in a way he wants it is a justification for some BS 'rebellion'.

I didn't think anyone was advocating that? I think many people are suggesting ways it might be broken because that's what hypothetical PCs might do.


I once saw player who didn't like that the DM hadn't included gnomes as a PC race in his world try to collude with other player to ruin the whole campaign.

Other people behaving like jerks doesn't mean the idea is valid or invalid. Else no one should be allowed near fireworks.


Seriously, a DM isn't taking things away from you by setting up his world differently. You never had those things to begin with until the DM runs the game and you join as a player.

Well technically true, I don't think this is a good mindset to get into. Firstly, the character creation minigame is still a part of the game. Limiting options willy-nilly is NOT a good idea just because you're the DM. I don't think that you should never limit options, but definitely work with players to achieve a good balance. A different approach can be fun, but it needs to not be done at the expense of the player's fun. Without compromise, you just can't run a game of DnD.

Secondly, it messes with balance, since the baseline game assumes some forms of magic/magical items. Unless alchemy is a big thing, you aren't going to have potions. If a DM doesn't really explain how the gameplay is going to benefit from this change, I'd be leery because I'd be concerned about a lack of care given to the game.

I don't think a DM should never limit magic, but if they can't come up with a good explanation in terms of flavor AND gameplay as to how this will be interesting, I'm really not going to be interested in the game. If you are playing with friends, I suggest trying to sell them on it rather then pulling out the 'I'm the DM' card.

[johnbragg]

Seriously, a DM isn't taking things away from you by setting up his world differently. You never had those things to begin with until the DM runs the game and you join as a player.



This is incorrect.

Coidzor might not be as diplomatic as he could be here, but he's right. When you say to the player "We're going to play D&D 5th edition except..." then you're starting with everything in the PHB as a baseline. And, in this case, you're taking away full casters, and significantly weakening half-casters and archetypes like eldritch knight and arcane trickster etc.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to run a low magic campaign. But trying to do it with a system that assumes a high magic setting is not a good idea--there's too much to change and rebalance. Play a game that isn't balanced around magic being part of everything. 5th edition has the Middle Earth RPG, if you're willing to buy another PHB and DMG. If you don't want to spend a ton of money on new books, I'm sure there's something on DrivethruRPG that would do the job--Conan RPGs, Game of Thrones got adapted, other Middle Earth games, Low Fantasy Gaming, I'm sure there are retroclones that are more adapted to low-magic games.

If you want to mod the system that heavily, maybe use 3rd edition--balance isn't an issue if you're nuking the caster classes. No casters, no caster supremacy. Magic is only available through Incantations, a skill-based system that's on the SRD. (You'll want to rewrite the monsters that use magic, but you're going to have to do that anyway.)

[johnbragg]

I seriously SERIOUSLY don't understand why people think an appropriate response to a DM running a setting that doesn't include everything a player wants in a way he wants it is a justification for some BS 'rebellion'.



I didn't think anyone was advocating that? I think many people are suggesting ways it might be broken because that's what hypothetical PCs might do.

There were people on the thread whose reaction was to figure out exactly what caster or pseudo-caster class or subclass to pick to evade the spirit of the low-magic setting by figuring out how to cast while negating or evading the HP penalties. They reacted to "DM arbitrarily screwing casters" by "let me upset the DM's plan for the sake of upsetting the DM's plan"

CantigThimble is right, the right reaction if you dislike the setting/houserules that much is not to play.

[Honest Tiefling]

There were people on the thread whose reaction was to figure out exactly what caster or pseudo-caster class or subclass to pick to evade the spirit of the low-magic setting by figuring out how to cast while negating or evading the HP penalties. They reacted to "DM arbitrarily screwing casters" by "let me upset the DM's plan for the sake of upsetting the DM's plan"

I didn't get that impression, I think people are just trying to point out builds that would be viable options and interesting ramifications, such as paladins being a primary source of healing. I think others are pointing out flaws, such as the necromancer wizard that need to be considered. I think the former doesn't seem to be 'upsetting the DM' if it's legal by the rules the DM presented.


CantigThimble is right, the right reaction if you dislike the setting/houserules that much is not to play.

Hey, the option is to discuss the issue with the DM is also a valid option. They might be willing to be more flexible or try to explain the reasons behind it.

[leon666]

Not sure if it's already been suggested, but how about it's not guaranteed max hp loss for casting and instead it's a % chance to lose it per spell based on the spell level?

This way its still a real risk for higher level spells and more costly, but lower lever characters are less punished and later on the wizard really has to consider his spell choices when casting make mid level spells more viable in most situations.

[Pex]

There were people on the thread whose reaction was to figure out exactly what caster or pseudo-caster class or subclass to pick to evade the spirit of the low-magic setting by figuring out how to cast while negating or evading the HP penalties. They reacted to "DM arbitrarily screwing casters" by "let me upset the DM's plan for the sake of upsetting the DM's plan"

CantigThimble is right, the right reaction if you dislike the setting/houserules that much is not to play.

Sometimes it's the setting/house rules that shouldn't be played. What is fun for the DM may not be fun for anyone else. If several people are telling you your idea doesn't work/is not fun/causes problems, then maybe it's because the idea really doesn't work/is not fun/causes problems and should be abandoned instead of clinging to the idea. Perhaps there's a better way to achieve the goal. Not always, but sometimes the better way could be play a different game system. However, even accepting D&D rules are to be played there can be less obstructive means to achieve the goal than the original proposed idea.

[Talamare]

Quoted and Responded to people mostly in the 3rd page.
Note, I mostly responded to people who I could give a simple reply to since I don't have time at the moment to go indepth.
I did read your posts Strange, Waterdeep, and Champion, but I feel they deserve a more dedicated reply.
Oh, and Thank you Cantig for the replies. You said quite a few things that were on my mind.

Very strong setting limitation. Could be fun. What's the overall aesthetic and cosmological explanation?

Plenty of thematic worlds have Magic costing a great deal. I could google a list on Tropes, but I'm sure you understand.

In practice, no there isn't. It has the exact same effect on players regardless of whether it's universal or targeted. Furthermore, this affects players more than it affects the world. An in-game wizard might not hesitate to cast five spells to save his own life. But the player who will often cast that many spells per combat is quickly crippled.

This is a bad, bad idea. In this case, it has nothing to do with intent and everything to do with outcome.

In game Wizards would be an insanely rare sight, and that's a critique on how the DM is DMing a fanciful encounter on your exaggerated imagination.

Altho you're right that spamming combat magic would be discouraged. I did consider a way to potentially get around this, including not making Cantrips free. However there are so many incredibly powerful Cantrips in the game that it doesn't seem like an options for a Low Magic World; and no I'm not talking about Damage Cantrips.


If the goal is low magic then just play a game without spellcasters or make it mandatory that anyone wanting to play a spellcaster has to multiclass two levels in a non-spellcaster class for every level in a spellcaster class
That seems kinda of confusing and a little 'forceful'



I'm sure four elements and shadow monks would just love to lose HP for casting their spells. Meanwhile sun soul monks would be just fine since their magical spell-like effects aren't actually spells.

I think I’d play a Paladin in this system... healing hands is great when healing Magic sucks, lots of HP if I do need to use a spell, smites for a use of spell-slots that won’t burn my HP...
I didn't list every Magic like ability, but I did mention that Magic Like abilities wouldn't be exempted. Tho exactly how to 'tax' those abilities is a tricky subject


There's a balance point where this is a suuuuuuuuper interesting campaign that I'd love to play a Sorcerer or Warlock in. What's a bummer is that I don't know what that point would be, or where it would capture the feeling properly.
I'm definitely feeling this


Just ban casters then. You're literally being dishonest by banning classes without explicitly stating that you're banning them if this is how you go about it.
There is no dishonesty, and banning them is such a massive exaggeration.
Magic is rare because it comes at a cost, but if you're willing to bear the burden you have access to great powers.



Hey look, another punish casters thread.
Casters aren't better than martials. Each fills a different role, with martials being the primaries for both damage and solving problems without expending resources.
This isn't a punish caster thread for the goal of punishing casters.
This is a thread with the idea to create a low magic world.
Now I'll be the first to admit that this type of game would not be suitable for a Combat Heavy Adventure, and if that is your home games then I do not recommend it for you.
However if your home games are often quite intrigue heavy then Martials will find themselves with little to do or having to be quite elaborate in their RP while a Caster will blast past any interaction with Magic.

[Jerrykhor]

Its oversimplification to group adventurers into Martials and Casters, there are many who are in between those two. And why would you assume that casters would simply spam magic to solve problems? I could say martials who have a big hammer would see every problem as a nail.

My main concern (other than balance), is that if all magic would cost HP, every class that has magic would feel like a blood mage.

In general, I love magic and thus I am biased, never understood why some people always want to try that 'low magic' crap.:smallyuk:

[cotofpoffee]

The problem I see is that all you'll get is a party built in a way that evades the issue altogether. If it's a combat-heavy game, you'll get a lot of fighting classes. If it's a intrigue game everyone will be a Rogue. People will simply see your list of changes and think "Well, casting seems dangerous. Lets play a class that doesn't cast."

And the setting doesn't make sense either. A place where magic is so dangerous to use would simply not use it as it is. It's just not efficient to do so when you can handle things without magic.

I see only two ways a setting like this could work. Either you compensate the loss of hp with something so that it is actually worth using magic. Or you don't change magic at all and simply change how NPCs treat it. A setting where people view magic as dangerous and treat it as a crime can be enough if you want a low magic setting, no hp loss necessary.

[Jerrykhor]

One effect I can foresee is that your players won't have a balanced party. Everyone would just stick to the classes with the least magic (barb, fighter, rogue).

And what about the other stuff? Less magic users would logically mean less magic items too, so would potions, scrolls, and magic trinkets be very rare? That would make for a boring game.

[Knaight]

One effect I can foresee is that your players won't have a balanced party. Everyone would just stick to the classes with the least magic (barb, fighter, rogue).
Low magic party has fewer magicians. News at 11.


And what about the other stuff? Less magic users would logically mean less magic items too, so would potions, scrolls, and magic trinkets be very rare? That would make for a boring game.
It would make for a boring game for some people, most notably those who find settings boring if they aren't coated in magical bling. This setting is clearly not for those people - and speaking for some of the rest of us, the total absence or extreme rarity of magic items is necessary for a lot of fun settings. The easy availability of big magic is necessary for other fun settings.

[Dr. Cliché]

The selection of available spells are what I'm talking about with spell selection - the tone is off, the power level is off, the tendency towards rapid combat casting and really quick rituals is off, etc.

Agreed.



The system would need to account for that - Max HP reduction persisting between forms would be one way of doing that. Renaming it Mystic Wear, having it accumulate when casting, and preventing healing over HP-Mystic Wear.

See, on the same subject, Wild Shape doesn't seem right either. In a world where magic is cast using your own life, I can't see turning into an animal as being so quick, clean or easy. It seems like something that would be much more difficult and with far more risks. Also more icky.

[Knaight]

See, on the same subject, Wild Shape doesn't seem right either. In a world where magic is cast using your own life, I can't see turning into an animal as being so quick, clean or easy. It seems like something that would be much more difficult and with far more risks. Also more icky.

No argument here - six second shapeshifting just feels wrong, particularly if it's a controlled power and not a werewolf curse. The system balance side can be dealt with relatively easily, the thematics of the effortless shapeshifter are just off.

[Kane0]

Expanding on my previous idea:

- Use optional sanity score.
- When you cast a spell you reduce your sanity score by half the level of the spell (minimum 1).
- When you take a short or long rest you recover lost sanity equal to your proficiency bonus. Optionally all sanity is restored after a long rest.
- When your sanity reaches 0 you suffer an indefinite madness (as per DMG), you cannot recover sanity by resting and are unable to cast spells until your sanity is restored to full.

[JackPhoenix]

Low magic party has fewer magicians. News at 11.

It's not just that. It's that it makes 3/4 of player's options unviable. That's not a good thing.

While I understand the want to play in a low-magic setting, putting penalties on most player options and leaving everything else as it is is a bad solution. If you really want to stick with 5e, you should rather be ready for heavy homebrewing, to change most of those options from ground up. Adventures in Middle Earth are a good example, so is for examplethis homebrew (https://img.fireden.net/tg/image/1501/28/1501288762259.pdf) derived from it. It's easier to have the low-magic feel if there aren't wizards, clerics and whatever at all.

[opaopajr]

Plenty of thematic worlds have Magic costing a great deal. I could google a list on Tropes, but I'm sure you understand.

Oh yes, I do understand! :smallcool:

But I want you to sell me a setting world rationale. Just like Adventures in Middle Earth, or Plane Shift Kaladesh, we have a range of setting restriction approaches. But it's the coolness of the world that sells me.

And the closer we can tie the world together with mechanics representing the desired aesthetics, the closer you get to that spark of inspiring interest. :smallsmile:

So, what desird setting did you have in mind to invoke such aesthetics? What sort of atmosphere are you seeking in order to inspire people to play? The 5e chassis likely can handle it. But this is the moment to take the exercise from the abstract notion to the thumbnail sketch. :smallcool:

[Dr. Cliché]

Plenty of thematic worlds have Magic costing a great deal. I could google a list on Tropes, but I'm sure you understand.

I understand absolutely.However, I think the issue here though is that you're basically fighting against the world itself.

D&D is a high-magic world, with the classes, magic and extensive spell lists based on that fact. So, if you want to suddenly make it low-magic, you're basically invalidating an awful lot of classes, subclasses and lore, not to mention the general feel of the world.

Put simply, might it not be better to look for a different system? One which is either already low-magic or could be more easily converted to such?


To anyone who knows the system better than me - would World of Darkness be any good for a low-magic world?

Or maybe GURPS?

[Naanomi]

This will end up as a labor-intensive project in the end. Is a barbarian’s Totem Powers too ‘magical’ for the flavor you want? Any use of Ki, which is sometimes described as magical in nature? A paladin’s aura effects? The bond between a beastmaster and his pet? The hypnotic powers of an enchanter?

You will have to evaluate every single class and many racial abilities to decide if it ‘crosses the line’, then adapt a way to use your system to punish it when it doesn’t necessarily fit the model of ‘casting a spell’

[johnbragg]

I understand absolutely.However, I think the issue here though is that you're basically fighting against the world itself.

D&D is a high-magic world, with the classes, magic and extensive spell lists based on that fact. So, if you want to suddenly make it low-magic, you're basically invalidating an awful lot of classes, subclasses and lore, not to mention the general feel of the world.

Put simply, might it not be better to look for a different system? One which is either already low-magic or could be more easily converted to such?

To anyone who knows the system better than me - would World of Darkness be any good for a low-magic world?

Or maybe GURPS?

Or, frankly, 3X with spell-less variant PAladins and Rangers and Bards, with magic only available through special rituals (Incantations, check the SRD) that require Knowledge skill checks. Or AD&D or BECMI without casters.

I still don't know from OP what it is about 5E that he wants to KEEP. What is tying him to the 5E system for this? Monster Manual? The short rest/long rest/HD pool mechanic?

OP says he wants casters, but basically wants them to suffer for being casters. That makes being a full-time caster a miserable choice.

[Pex]

This isn't a punish caster thread for the goal of punishing casters.
This is a thread with the idea to create a low magic world.
Now I'll be the first to admit that this type of game would not be suitable for a Combat Heavy Adventure, and if that is your home games then I do not recommend it for you.
However if your home games are often quite intrigue heavy then Martials will find themselves with little to do or having to be quite elaborate in their RP while a Caster will blast past any interaction with Magic.

There are ways to create a low magic world better than make PCs kill themselves for the audacity of casting a spell.

Instead of how you are to do it, why are you doing it? What do you mean by "low magic world". At what point is it that you don't mind some magic but it eventually reaches a point where you would say "No way, ain't going happen, I hate that". When you define that point then you can determine what house rules or game parameter restrictions are needed.

However, if the point where you would say "No way, ain't going happen, I hate that" is the concept of casting a spell how dare a PC do it so lose hit points and die, then what you really want is a no magic at all world.

[johnbragg]

There are ways to create a low magic world better than make PCs kill themselves for the audacity of casting a spell.


Even that is a worthy objective for a campaign world. Heroism and sacrifice to save the world and all that jazz. But what is the caster doing at the table for the first 95% of the campaign before he casts Kamikaze the BBEG?

In a low magic setting, you can't have the PCs kill themselves to save the world more than once.

But the OP, and most of the replies, aren't even doing this. They're creating mechanics for the caster classes to be low on health if they use their abilities in most of the campaign, and so they're more likely to die in some random encounter or miniboss fight or something.

[Knaight]

Put simply, might it not be better to look for a different system? One which is either already low-magic or could be more easily converted to such?

To anyone who knows the system better than me - would World of Darkness be any good for a low-magic world?

Or maybe GURPS?

Both would work if you could stomach their mechanics. WoD is just pretty bad mechanically, GURPS is fine for what it is but what it is is a crunch-fest almost at the D&D 3e level, and thus likely to be disliked by 5e players.

Personally I'd just use Desolation. D&D doesn't live particularly high on any of my system lists for any setting, but it's place on the low fantasy list is only marginally better than its place on the space opera list.

[RickAllison]

Both would work if you could stomach their mechanics. WoD is just pretty bad mechanically, GURPS is fine for what it is but what it is is a crunch-fest almost at the D&D 3e level, and thus likely to be disliked by 5e players.

Personally I'd just use Desolation. D&D doesn't live particularly high on any of my system lists for any setting, but it's place on the low fantasy list is only marginally better than its place on the space opera list.

I haven't looked at the book itself, but Genesys from FFG might be good. I'm looking to use it for my low-Magic setting. I like that one because the Morality mechanic for the Force and Destiny variant of the system happens to fit perfectly with how magic works in my setting, with continued use pushing them into oblivion.

[Vogie]

Oh yes, I do understand! :smallcool:

But I want you to sell me a setting world rationale. Just like Adventures in Middle Earth, or Plane Shift Kaladesh, we have a range of setting restriction approaches. But it's the coolness of the world that sells me.

And the closer we can tie the world together with mechanics representing the desired aesthetics, the closer you get to that spark of inspiring interest. :smallsmile:

So, what desird setting did you have in mind to invoke such aesthetics? What sort of atmosphere are you seeking in order to inspire people to play? The 5e chassis likely can handle it. But this is the moment to take the exercise from the abstract notion to the thumbnail sketch. :smallcool:

If I were to use this, I would put it in a post-apocalyptic world where complicated magic has basically been largely obliterated.

Cantrips still exist, called referred to as knacks, but any spellcasting 1st level or above is actually done by activating implements, which items that still have magic left inside them. These items act as foci for that specific spell, such as a bracelet or amulet made with a fragment of a shield for Shield, a wand for magic missile, an unlit torch for fire spells, et cetera.

However, any spells cast this way are essentially radioactive, and whenever a spell of level 1 or higher is cast, the caster rolls a d20. On a 20 (can be adjusted with the caster's crit modifier), the spell causes no damage to the caster. Otherwise, it deals damage to the caster that scales up with the level of the spell cast so higher level spells are much more dangerous than lower ones.

I would probably use other post-apoc tropes, such as gritty realism and low amounts of ammunition available, so I would expect and encourage most players to have some amount of multiclassing, the more creative the better!

[Jama7301]

I wonder how pulling stuff from Dark Sun would work for this...

[Vykryl]

I don't have any help from a rules perspective. If you want some fluff guidelines then read John H Carol's novels. Magic (of most kinds) in his world eats at the caster. Every spell cast increases the daily caloric needs of the caster. Powerful spells result in exhaustion. It's not a low magic world however, people will sacrifice anything nearly for personal power. Wizards often use charged focuses to help reduce the strain on their bodies. They also keep themselves in top physical shape to reduce the effects casting has on their bodies.

I believe the first books in each series are available for free on kindle. They are not Sword of Truth deep but are still good solid reads and fun stories.

[johnbragg]

You're bound and determined to do this, so I'll make a suggestion.

Circle Magic. Using circle magic allows you to share the backlash damage with willing (and sometimes unwilling) participants.

So the PC caster shares the pain with his higher-HP buddies. The BBEG actually has a reason to have a bunch of cultists and apprentices, and has an actual mechanical reason to kidnap innocents to use as HP batteries.

[Vogie]

You're bound and determined to do this, so I'll make a suggestion.

Circle Magic. Using circle magic allows you to share the backlash damage with willing (and sometimes unwilling) participants.

So the PC caster shares the pain with his higher-HP buddies. The BBEG actually has a reason to have a bunch of cultists and apprentices, and has an actual mechanical reason to kidnap innocents to use as HP batteries.

Actually, I really like this suggestion. Maybe piggyback off of the existing Ritual Spells, and make it so that when a spell is cast as a ritual either the pain is avoided entirely, or either divided between the group or targeted toward a certain person or thing.

[Sigreid]

I really think this is what you are looking for. At least magic wise. https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10609.phtml

[opaopajr]

If I were to use this, I would put it in a post-apocalyptic world where complicated magic has basically been largely obliterated.

Cantrips still exist, called referred to as knacks, but any spellcasting 1st level or above is actually done by activating implements, which items that still have magic left inside them. These items act as foci for that specific spell, such as a bracelet or amulet made with a fragment of a shield for Shield, a wand for magic missile, an unlit torch for fire spells, et cetera.

However, any spells cast this way are essentially radioactive, and whenever a spell of level 1 or higher is cast, the caster rolls a d20. On a 20 (can be adjusted with the caster's crit modifier), the spell causes no damage to the caster. Otherwise, it deals damage to the caster that scales up with the level of the spell cast so higher level spells are much more dangerous than lower ones.

I would probably use other post-apoc tropes, such as gritty realism and low amounts of ammunition available, so I would expect and encourage most players to have some amount of multiclassing, the more creative the better!

Interesting! I like it so far. Perhaps, like proper thumbnails, do a few more variations and then select your favorite! Good job!

I was thinking of an old video game, Paladin's Quest by Enix, where you only had HP and casted spells using your own HP. Spells had varying HP costs due to their power, were created by a mixture of "the eight elements," and improved over time from usage and learning these elements.

That's part of the fun of exercises like this. You create a world and mechanics and seek to harmonize them into something intriguing! :smallcool:

So this mechanic has promise... but I next need a premise to draw me in. :smallwink: