Good article on how low magic games break 3.xe? How the setting demands high magic?

[Gavinfoxx]

Where can I find a good online article about how and in what way 3e, 3.5e, and PF1 require high magic (edit: I mean all supernatural abilities that resemble spells even slightly) settings and high magic items settings to function and break down horribly in low magic games, and how and in what ways the games can't remotely handle low magic (in enemies, npc classes, wealth, player classes, item availability, etc. etc.) in any way? And how trying to run a gritty low magic game in 3e, 3.5e, pf1, 3.pf, etc is doomed to cause problems? And where the books are specifically set up to assume the setting is extremely high magic, and why the DMG was written in such a way?

I'd be fine with an epic rant rather than a full on polished article, as long as it touches all the bases. Thanks!

[Endarire]

List of Necessary Magic Items (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?187851-3-5-Lists-of-Necessary-Magic-Items)

[Gavinfoxx]

List of Necessary Magic Items (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?187851-3-5-Lists-of-Necessary-Magic-Items)


That's not at all what I meant. I meant something you send the clueless gm that wants to run a gritty low magic game with no wealth or magic items or scrolls or caster classes other than the pc's, who have their classes restricted, in 3.Xe to tell him why Everyone Is Going To Have A Bad Time. If I sent that to him, he'd say, "That's all overpowered ****." and ignore me. I want to have a good, well-reasoned, well-researched argument that points to a large amount of base assumptions made in the game.

[NigelWalmsley]

Probably the single biggest factor pushing 3e towards high magic is all the various conditions that need restoring. You can recover from HP and ability damage eventually on your own, but conditions like ability drain, level loss, petrifaction, or death all require specialized spells to remove. And that means a Cleric-equivalent, or readily available enough magic to replace one.

The better argument for magic items is to look at specific use cases. Compare 10th level Fighter with no magic gear to a CR 10 Dragon. Or even a CR 6 Dragon.

Of course, you can make something like this work. Capping advancement fairly early, carefully curating monster selection, and relying on groups of monsters make it possible to have reasonable low-magic games. But it takes effort, and D&D is not especially well-suited to delivering.

[Him]

I am am assuming the usually taboo psionics are banned as well, if not just take one of those who runs a store in between sessions, maybe a level lower , but gear out the whoo-hahhh.

But barring this, it's sorta right there in the name. Inherently magical creatures.

Dragons, fantasy, magic items and all that jazz. He wants to run low magic? Switch games, a friend once ran a early 1900's call of cuthulu where I played a bartender. Interesting enough, but never, nor would I ever really play such a game again, as it's basically designed so you can never win. Even Ravenloft in DnD people have escaped from.

No point in playing a game you can't win at or is no fun.

The GP limit per character level is a knife that should cut both ways. Thats what I think anyway.

[Goaty14]

Probably the single biggest factor pushing 3e towards high magic is all the various conditions that need restoring. You can recover from HP and ability damage eventually on your own, but conditions like ability drain, level loss, petrifaction, or death all require specialized spells to remove. And that means a Cleric-equivalent, or readily available enough magic to replace one.

Mostly this. Some monsters that pose little threat and have some debuffing abilities (say, an Allip (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/allip.htm), Chaos Beast (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/chaosBeast.htm), Cockatrice (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/cockatrice.htm), Ghosts (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/ghost.htm), Gorgon (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/gorgon.htm), etc) that are otherwise only harmful in the short term, become terrifying monsters that inflict permanent disabilities. Maybe that's what the DM wants, but in that case, I wouldn't advise putting too much effort into your characters - all it takes is one unfortunate roll and they're a goner, either literally, or disabled such that they can't safely adventure anymore.

Endaire has a good shout, just not elaborated - as you get stronger, monster abilities get increasingly OP, and players can't counter those reasonably without magic items. The bigger threats are outlined in the threat, or:
-Magic items for flight are needed because flying creatures 20' up from any melee fighter is effectively invulnerable from harm unless they packed backup thrown weapons (and even then, thrown weapons likely aren't the fighter's specialty, and they're dealing comparatively less damage)
-Magic items that prevent death effects/energy drain are needed for the reasons Nigel points out above - if not treated, they're permanent,
-Magic Weapons are needed because without them, anything incorporeal is impervious to attack.
-Initiative-boosting items are needed, because otherwise DEX-based monsters win initiative and one of your party members is dead before you can do anything about it.
-Special senses are needed for the same reason as above - an invisible monster will likely win vs anything that can't detect it.

[ShurikVch]

Sorry to barge in the discussion, but what, exactly, is "high magic" and "low magic"?
Where is the dividing line?
Also, is there some "medium magic"?


Probably the single biggest factor pushing 3e towards high magic is all the various conditions that need restoring. You can recover from HP and ability damage eventually on your own, but conditions like ability drain, level loss, petrifaction, or death all require specialized spells to remove. And that means a Cleric-equivalent, or readily available enough magic to replace one."Low magic" should cut both ways - most of those conditions shouldn't exist in a low-magic setting in the first place: how you going to get - for example - a negative level in, say, Westeros?
The exception there is death, but с'est la vie - you dead, roll a new character (E6 stays popular despite the lack of resurrection)
In the Midnight Campaign Setting, the only way for a PC to restore dead character is Reincarnate, or creation of Undead

[Gavinfoxx]

Sorry to barge in the discussion, but what, exactly, is "high magic" and "low magic"?
Where is the dividing line?
Also, is there some "medium magic"?

"Low magic" should cut both ways - most of those conditions shouldn't exist in a low-magic setting in the first place: how you going to get - for example - a negative level in, say, Westeros?
The exception there is death, but с'est la vie - you dead, roll a new character (E6 stays popular despite the lack of resurrection)
In the Midnight Campaign Setting, the only way for a PC to restore dead character is Reincarnate, or creation of Undead


Traditionally? To this kind of newbie GM? Low Magic is "play any character class in the PHB, except Monks, they're OP, and you don't ever get any wealth or magic items ever, and can never buy scrolls or get spellcasting services or minions or anything, and all the monsters remain the same".

Now, we all know that is a terrible idea, and based on several factually incorrect assumptions. What I am looking for is detailed, cited elaborations on why and how and in what ways. Oh, about 50% of the time they might notice Druid is OP and ban them too.

[Efrate]

Well for starters the DMG says items are available in a town whose gp limit they fall under. So even the hamlet of no name with gp limit 100 has 1st level potions. Maybe not many but some.

I would advise against it with 3.5 unless all your group is aware of how much magic is needed and you trust your DM a lot. Anything that's flies/burrows/swims, teleports, ambushes, is invisible, is incorporol, or has
poison/disease/curses/energy drain/ability drain/ability damage or elemental damage becomes near insurmountable. Not to mention improved grab with numbers easily high enough to just nope your chances of ever escaping. There is more but that's a short list. It is doable but takes a ton of effort, especially on the dms part.


Rant
Played too many games where even getting a +1 weapon was near impossible and DM put tons of stuff we could not interact with combatively in front of us. This usually comes with limiting classes to mundane or houseruling away most effects that do not fall in line with DMs assumptions, and creatively bypassing stuff is rule zeroed away. Even stuff as simple as dispel magicing a magic trap will be shut down. Not being able to use abilities or do stuff unless you do it the DMs way is a major turn off for me.

[Biggus]

Do you know how the other players feel about it? I only ask because I've had good fun playing things like Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay where character death is much more common than in D&D. It didn't make the game unfun for me, it just made it a different sort of game (although to be fair in WFRP you get at least one fate point when you start, which allows you to avoid otherwise certain death: if you can't persuade him to change his mind, maybe suggest he use something similar in D&D).

[NigelWalmsley]

"Low magic" should cut both ways - most of those conditions shouldn't exist in a low-magic setting in the first place: how you going to get - for example - a negative level in, say, Westeros?

Well, sure, you can do it (as noted). But it's difficult, and the system is not particularly well suited to it. Because the game assumes you'll be able to remove those conditions, lots of creatures randomly inflict them. For example, the Balor has an at-will SLA (Insanity) that applies a condition you need 7th level spells to cure. In a normal campaign that's trivial, since you are expected to have 9th level spells when fighting one. But if you're cutting magic, players might not. It's not that you can't do it, it's that it requires a level of oversight and vigilance that is often unexpected. It's not like having a "pirate campaign" or a "ninja campaign" where you can reskin things fairly easily.

[Goaty14]

Traditionally? To this kind of newbie GM? Low Magic is "play any character class in the PHB, except Monks, they're OP, and you don't ever get any wealth or magic items ever, and can never buy scrolls or get spellcasting services or minions or anything, and all the monsters remain the same".

Oh, well that still means you can have a cleric in a party to remove/buff stuff, right? You'll still suck in the long run vs monsters, but it won't be an impossible task. Though, given monks are OP, a good optimization shot at overcoming those hurdles may also be OP, so you may have to embrace losing a bunch if you can't convince him.


What I am looking for is detailed, cited elaborations on why and how and in what ways.

That's setting your standards a bit high, IMO. To start, try putting together a party, get it approved by the GM, and then explain why the party can't win a fight vs an equivalent CR monster without magic items, but can win vs an equivalent CR monster with them, and I think that'd be a solid basis of an argument. Maybe try setting up multiple such situations, so the DM doesn't conclude "Oh, well <monster> must be OP".

So, say for example
-A human vampire (CR 3) can retreat to Gaseous Form (20' perfect fly speed, DR 10/Magic) indefinitely, coming out to ambush the PCs and strike at them when they don't expect it, and is nearly invulnerable to attack. If the party cleric attempts to turn, he will only succeed on a roll of 16-20 (and thus it's not a reliable option). Unless the party wizard can deal 12 damage in one round, or 17 damage in two rounds (because Fast Healing 5), he cannot kill the vampire either.

[Gavinfoxx]

That's setting your standards a bit high, IMO. To start, try putting together a party, get it approved by the GM, and then explain why the party can't win a fight vs an equivalent CR monster without magic items, but can win vs an equivalent CR monster with them, and I think that'd be a solid basis of an argument. Maybe try setting up multiple such situations, so the DM doesn't conclude "Oh, well <monster> must be OP".

It seems odd that no one ever made such an article, though? I really expected such a thing to exist, because s***** DM's that like 3.Xe do this sort of thing all the time. Most of us who have been doing it for a while have seen it several times...

[Him]

Hmmm, tempting to run a wizard crafter, why you ask? TO CHANGE THE WORLD!

With the xp bonuses from being a level lower, you won't fall THAT far behind the party, the party will rely on you for their magic items, so they will help carry you at low level. Since no-one else has magical items, you can sell yours for a pretty penny more than listed while still producing at cost (rich people have money to burn and LOVE the rare things, universal fact). When affluent enough make sure your character gives some items away(explained later) to new adventurers. When you get wish, cast for a whole bunch of scrolls of spells you are missing.

Hehehe....

The world's rich and powerful will be at your back and call, party now has magic items, but focus on your own item mostly.

The reason why you occasionally ever give away new items to new adventurers?

So if the DM runs this campaign world again and you need to make a new character, you have an excuse to give you them some, maybe even become a reseller to overcome the lack of gold so you have an excuse to buy more.

What can I say, I do good business. Be the gun boat.

[RSGA]

Part of that is because of just how many variables there are to go into it.

Like, for instance, a goblin tribe that's short on the numbers is by the rules a CR 12 challenge and probably has to be high up on those numbers to be a 13. However, I'm not sure there's any magic level where that's actually going to be the right kind of difficult for the numbers around it.

[NigelWalmsley]

It seems odd that no one ever made such an article, though? I really expected such a thing to exist, because s***** DM's that like 3.Xe do this sort of thing all the time. Most of us who have been doing it for a while have seen it several times...

You could always write it yourself. If you're disappointed that it doesn't exist, that seems like a terrible reason to allow it to continue not existing.


Like, for instance, a goblin tribe that's short on the numbers is by the rules a CR 12 challenge and probably has to be high up on those numbers to be a 13. However, I'm not sure there's any magic level where that's actually going to be the right kind of difficult for the numbers around it.

Actually, no. CR (EL, technically) doesn't scale like that. The goblin tribe is off into "DM judgement call" territory, which is typically interpreted as "the PCs should expect to beat it without worries".

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Gavinfoxx
What I am looking for is detailed, cited elaborations on why and how and in what ways.

If this is for a specific person—and it sounds like it from your tone—do you really expect a detailed analysis will change this person’s mind?

And what would this analysis be citing, anyway?

[Efrate]

I have played with that style of dm before its not worth it. Unless you all play warlocks or DFAs and then blast everything you see from as far away as possible. Those are at will abilities that are magical so off the table presumably.

So its: No wealth. There is no treasure to be found.
No magic mart: Your only source of magic is likely(random) loot that you can never sell. If the DM even let's that go.
No crafting allowed by the party(I am assuming), with maybe an exception made for party wizard and scribe scroll.
No other casters in the entire multiverse (but monsters) who you cannot in any way be it diplomacy, calling, domination, or bargaining to aid and get ANY spellcasting services.
All "cheese" aka persistomancy, minionmancy, or optimization above DMG/PHB pre made npcs.
Core (PHB) only? Seems in line with the rest of things.

That sound about right?

If so I have played with a similar DM. Don't. It's not worth it.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[The Viscount]

Probably the single biggest factor pushing 3e towards high magic is all the various conditions that need restoring. You can recover from HP and ability damage eventually on your own, but conditions like ability drain, level loss, petrifaction, or death all require specialized spells to remove. And that means a Cleric-equivalent, or readily available enough magic to replace one.

This is the biggest factor I always point to, because it not only restricts to a high magic setting, it also requires that certain spells or spellcasters be either in the party or quickly accessible. There are any number of monster abilities that last until the victim receives a spell like Break Enchantment or Remove Curse. Many things specify one of these spells, which means that classes with alternate magic systems (incarnum, binding, even psionics) cannot help regardless of their comparative power. For example, I don't think any of these systems can replicate transmute stone to flesh.

I wouldn't necessarily say that 3.5 demands high magic so much as it assumes that high magic exists. It is possible for a DM to plan around the party and select or modify encounters carefully, it just calls on more work than normal.

[Gavinfoxx]

I have played with that style of dm before its not worth it. Unless you all play warlocks or DFAs and then blast everything you see from as far away as possible. Those are at will abilities that are magical so off the table presumably.

So its: No wealth. There is no treasure to be found.
No magic mart: Your only source of magic is likely(random) loot that you can never sell. If the DM even let's that go.
No crafting allowed by the party(I am assuming), with maybe an exception made for party wizard and scribe scroll.
No other casters in the entire multiverse (but monsters) who you cannot in any way be it diplomacy, calling, domination, or bargaining to aid and get ANY spellcasting services.
All "cheese" aka persistomancy, minionmancy, or optimization above DMG/PHB pre made npcs.
Core (PHB) only? Seems in line with the rest of things.

That sound about right?

If so I have played with a similar DM. Don't. It's not worth it.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

That's about right, except he's 3e, NO 3.5e allowed, and has had a group 'happily' gaming with him for apparently 10 years. As near as I can figure, it's probably stockholm syndrome, because he does all those other terrible GM things to (railroading, stupid dominance games, has a year's worth of plot planned out ahead of time, nerfing of prestige classes, stealth nerfs of enchantment effects, if you want a new character, you come in at level 1, etc. etc.)

I'm trying to get a friend who's been in this game to have a good argument to this guy for why it's not a good thing, and he should make immediate changes. For what it's worth, the GM *has* been responding positively to some of my friend's arguments about being unfair, he just apparently needs to be competently called out on it.

Like, at the last fight, the Paladin almost got permanently irrevocably level drained by some vampires, and no one sees that as a bad thing, since they don't really know!

Sigh.

Is there a statistical analysis of average monster AC, saves, resistances, per hit, per round damage in 3.5e somewhere? And how some of the 'basic' magic equipment options compare to that? Something that I can point to statistical data that says, 'see this math here? THIS is why magic items are needed!' Or at least a bunch of useful case studies?

[Him]

That's about right, except he's 3e, NO 3.5e allowed, and has had a group 'happily' gaming with him for apparently 10 years. As near as I can figure, it's probably stockholm syndrome, because he does all those other terrible GM things to (railroading, stupid dominance games, has a year's worth of plot planned out ahead of time, nerfing of prestige classes, stealth nerfs of enchantment effects, if you want a new character, you come in at level 1, etc. etc.)

I'm trying to get a friend who's been in this game to have a good argument to this guy for why it's not a good thing, and he should make immediate changes. For what it's worth, the GM *has* been responding positively to some of my friend's arguments about being unfair, he just apparently needs to be competently called out on it.

Like, at the last fight, the Paladin almost got permanently irrevocably level drained by some vampires, and no one sees that as a bad thing...

Yes, energy drain, something that has been the bane of my existence.

Sounds like he is honestly being an a-hole and dumping over everyone, maybe you should run your own game.

But can you do the crafting thing?

But you are right player effort should be rewarded otherwise the most powerful person in the party would I ironically be the cleric. I would like to refer you to my archer/healer/summoner build the i ended up giving to as friend as a cohort but tweak towards undead a bit more, the summons go in and grapple while players just walk by and deliver metaphorical coup de gras. Druid would even do the summons thing better and can build towards epic wildshape stuff.

The line "the beating will continue, until moral improves" is not a way to win friends, sorry to the guy who started saying this(Someone mentioned Captain Stark, 1811, but damn near everyone agreescis from military origins), but is no way to live life or play a game.

Hard work is supposed to be rewarded, not setting a person up for a harder punking. If hard work isn't rewarded next best option is put the characters out to pasture, and start a new game.

But it ain't good when the only game in town is run by a person seem dead set on screwing you.

There is only so far you can stretch a metaphor.

[Psyren]

There is a "Big Six" 3.5 article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20070302a) that touches on this. It acknowledges that there are six categories of magic item that are the most popular in the game, and gives several reasons why - but the main reason is the last one, namely that almost all D&D players need some if not all of them in order to stay competitive with level-appropriate challenges. More specifically, it says:


Required to Play. Characters simply can’t compete against their foes without enhancing their attack rolls, Armor Class, and saving throws. Every one of the “Big Six” items directly improve your character’s ability to roll high.

For the curious, the "Big Six" are:


Magic weapon
Magic armor & shield
Ring of protection
Cloak of resistance
Amulet of natural armor
Ability-score boosters


Not every character needs everything on this list, but almost all of them want something here, if not more than one thing. Lack of access to these is one of the biggest reasons why low-magic games don't work past low levels - at least, not without a replacement of some kind, like Automatic Bonus Progression.



Is there a statistical analysis of average monster AC, saves, resistances, per hit, per round damage in 3.5e somewhere? And how some of the 'basic' magic equipment options compare to that? Something that I can point to statistical data that says, 'see this math here? THIS is why magic items are needed!' Or at least a bunch of useful case studies?

Pathfinder has this - first, the rough "Monster Statistics by CR" (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/rules-for-monsters/monster-creation/#Step_2_Target_Statistics) table from the Core Bestiary has guidelines on the AC, attack bonus, saves and hit points that monsters typically have at a given CR, and this table was greatly expanded on in Pathfinder Unchained to formulate a simple monster creation system. (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/unchained-rules/simple-monster-creation/)

All you have to do to prove your point is compare a magic-less character to the valiues in those tables, vs. a character with the expected magic items for their level of wealth. (Check out my sig for a rough guideline on the most expensive items characters should have at various level breakpoints given the "50% WBL" rule of thumb.)

[AvatarVecna]

Traditionally? To this kind of newbie GM? Low Magic is "play any character class in the PHB, except Monks, they're OP, and you don't ever get any wealth or magic items ever, and can never buy scrolls or get spellcasting services or minions or anything, and all the monsters remain the same".

Now, we all know that is a terrible idea, and based on several factually incorrect assumptions. What I am looking for is detailed, cited elaborations on why and how and in what ways. Oh, about 50% of the time they might notice Druid is OP and ban them too.

Something already existent that's so thorough...I'm not sure it's there. But as far as "monsters that become unfairly difficult to fight without any kind of magic including party casters", I'm probably gonna go with dragons. You can buy holy water to give ghosts problems, you can buy bows to give flyers problems, but dragons are just full of bull****. Dragon flies up, breath weapons the party (with frightful presence to boot), and flies away (never getting into melee range cuz 40 ft cone). Rogue/monk are unharmed from breath weapon, most anyone else just took 5d6 damage. Barbarian/Monk/Paladin aren't scared, most everyone else is probably (and is taking -2 to basically everything for effectively the rest of the fight). Repeat whenever breath weapon recharges.

Unless you're spec'd for using bows, you're probably taking -4 to attack (-2 shaken, -4 range) against AC 23, and dealing 1d8 flat against DR 5/magic. Even assuming a fighter 8 with Str 18 and a solid backup bow, who wasn't shaken and is readying to shoot the dragon when it gets in close, is looking at +10 vs AC 23, dealing 1d8+4 vs DR 5/magic. That averages 1.74 damage per attack. That's assuming no penalty from shaken, no penalty from range cuz the fighter readied. That's even taking crits into account. It'll maybe take the dragon six breaths to murder them all (17.5 4 times, 8.75 once when they get lucky? total 22.5d6 damage avg 78 vs 8d10+32 HP avg 76). 6 breaths is 5 waiting periods of 2.5 rounds so probably a 13 round combat. Each fighter is maybe looking at dealing 22 damage before they croak. So as long as you started with a party of 6 fights with Str 18/Con 18 and a backup mighty longbow giving +4 Str to damage, you might just barely squeak by with a victory!

More likely though, the dragon just gets volleyed from a distance with arrows that mostly miss and only occasionally even hurt because the party isn't full of super-buff guys with optimal bows, while slowly grinding the party down without ever entering melee. If the dragon decides to enter melee, it's 100% because the dragon feels it's getting killed faster than it's killing, and needs to correct that. Possibly by full attacking the lone survivor, possibly grappling a party member, flying them into the sky, and dropping them. That's also something it can probably just do from the get-go come to think of it (maybe something to keep it busy while its breath weapon is recharging). Yeah that makes the fight go way worse for the PCs.

[Xervous]

Rehashing a lot of prior points, magic items are assumed to be in play to enable characters like fighters, rogues, muggles etc to interact at all with the game as levels go up.

AC and saving throws assume some manner of +X is in play to keep the character on the numeric treadmill. For classes with poor saves this can become as drastic as failing on 2s without any manner of +X or build choices aimed at compensating for this (mainly a side effect of multiclassing what with the +2 for each first level of a class).

Magic weapons to penetrate DR. 2h fighting is already favored by the system under normal assumptions. Inability to penetrate DR cripples high attack quantity martials and draws out most fights to long slogs.

Immunities. Nasty long term effects or instant loss effects crop up over the levels. The game assumes you have options for negating or mitigating them. A high level dragon can grapple the magic item lacking party one by one and drop them from high up with little to no counter play. Freedom of movement prevents the hysterical >+40 grapple from demolishing the party in this case (and +1 weapons let them actually damage it)

Movement, mainly flight. Dude with a sword can only hit what he can reach and boy are there a lot of things in the monster manual that can fly. We’re not talking about numbers. This is a yes/no can I play the game? Special senses are related to this, more situational but still very helpful.

Lacking magic items, the already inaccurate CR values become heavily distorted as parties depending on their composition may have numerous members be fully unable to interact with the monsters in a meaningful positive manner.

[ShurikVch]

There is a "Big Six" 3.5 article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20070302a) that touches on this. It acknowledges that there are six categories of magic item that are the most popular in the game, and gives several reasons why - but the main reason is the last one, namely that almost all D&D players need some if not all of them in order to stay competitive with level-appropriate challenges. More specifically, it says:
Required to Play. Characters simply can’t compete against their foes without enhancing their attack rolls, Armor Class, and saving throws. Every one of the “Big Six” items directly improve your character’s ability to roll high.

For the curious, the "Big Six" are:


Magic weapon
Magic armor & shield
Ring of protection
Cloak of resistance
Amulet of natural armor
Ability-score boosters


Not every character needs everything on this list, but almost all of them want something here, if not more than one thing. Lack of access to these is one of the biggest reasons why low-magic games don't work past low levels - at least, not without a replacement of some kind, like Automatic Bonus Progression.And some more info about the Midnight Campaign Setting:

Contraband: ...
This category nominally includes magic items as well, although anything but a one-use item or an item low on charges would be nearly priceless. On the other hand, since the dark god's servants seem to be able to find magic items at their whim, possessing such an item can end up having a heavy price, indeed.
Item Cost: Magic items do not have a cost in Midnight, as they are invaluable and are rarely traded, especially for gold. Costs are given for new items to calculate how much XP it costs to create them and to show their value relative to the amount of total wealth a character of a given level should possess (see DMG).
Magic item creation differs from the standard rules because of the setting's unique economic system. The lack of a common currency means that materials and supplies cannot simply be purchased, and finding someone who will admit that he can craft magic items is difficult as well.



Hmmm, tempting to run a wizard crafter, why you ask? TO CHANGE THE WORLD!In the Midnight it would be a problem:
Punishable by death
...
—Possession of an enchanted item
—Casting of spells or other uses of magic

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Gavinfoxx
That's about right, except he's 3e, NO 3.5e allowed, and has had a group 'happily' gaming with him for apparently 10 years. As near as I can figure, it's probably stockholm syndrome, because he does all those other terrible GM things [too]....

If this is his table’s preferred playstyle, and if you dislike it so violently—

—why are you trying to change it? You don’t seem to be a player yourself, so I’m not sure what your stake is here.


Originally Posted by Gavinfoxx
…has a year's worth of plot planned out ahead of time….

On its own I don’t see this as a bad thing. Unless you’re running a complete sandbox, it’s not a terrible idea to have some sense of where the story will be going.

.

[Goaty14]

Since it's 3e, then at the cost of playing an Exalted Good character, you could pick up the Vow of Poverty feat -- y'know -- because you wouldn't have many magic items to write home about anyways. It's not a full fix, and most people know that VoP is trash compared to having normal items, but I think it's decent mitigation in this situation

[Gnaeus]

In the Midnight it would be a problem:

I would ask, if they can’t cast spells or use magic items, how are they even going to find you, let alone kill you. I mean a ring of invisibility overland flying wizard with protection from missiles is level 9. But I’m sure given what he said about DM there’s a way.

This has been said in a different way by others (Xervous), but one of the things the tier system measures is item dependency. From Tier 1s who can operate at a high % of effectiveness without any WBL to tier 3s who are mostly ok with random loot down to tier 5s who need very specific items to do their jobs well. Low mag takes balance issues and dials them up to 11.

[Aotrs Commander]

If this is his table’s preferred playstyle, and if you dislike it so violently—

—why are you trying to change it? You don’t seem to be a player yourself, so I’m not sure what your stake is here.

I have to concur. If you aren't playing in this game (and aren't intending to), then it's kinda of not your place to say they're having badwrongfun. And, to be honest, the best way of changing their minds if you ARE planning to join the game is to ste-up and run a normal campaign yourself, rather than try to coerse someone else into changing the group's playstyle for you.

(Come to that, not every person is compatible with every table. I sure as hell am aware that a lot of people wouldn't be happy at my table just as much as I know I'd be unhappy at theirs.)



I would also point out that if the group stems back from AD&D you COULDN'T fix level-drain outside of Wish, so if they're in that mindset of playing "AD&D but Better," they may just be used to that.




On its own I don’t see this as a bad thing. Unless you’re running a complete sandbox, it’s not a terrible idea to have some sense of where the story will be going.

I mean, if you run an adventure path, you're tactily planning, like, about three year's worth in advance (at least by the count of my own group's approximate 6-month per book on crica two hours a week sessions,) so I again agree, there's nothing wrong with that inherently. Some DMs (myself, for example) are prep heavy and have no interest (and no fun) in running sandboxes. And even if you can persuade a DM to run a game they don't like, I can't think of a much faster way to have a bad time, save maybe for "...and we're using FATAL."

[D+1]

Where can I find a good online article about how and in what way 3e, 3.5e, and PF1 require high magic (edit: I mean all supernatural abilities that resemble spells even slightly) settings and high magic items settings to function and break down horribly in low magic games, and how and in what ways the games can't remotely handle low magic (in enemies, npc classes, wealth, player classes, item availability, etc. etc.) in any way? And how trying to run a gritty low magic game in 3e, 3.5e, pf1, 3.pf, etc is doomed to cause problems? And where the books are specifically set up to assume the setting is extremely high magic, and why the DMG was written in such a way?

I'd be fine with an epic rant rather than a full on polished article, as long as it touches all the bases. Thanks!You're coming at this from the wrong angle (and I'd disagree that the game demands "high" magic, but you don't actually provide definitions of what you think "high/low" means in terms of magic so I'm using my own perceptions in that regard). If you as a player know that YOU will not enjoy such a game, and have voiced your opinion on that to the DM for various reasons but the DM won't listen to you, JUST DON'T F'N PLAY IN THAT GAME. You don't need to be the game police sent on a mission to arrest the newb DM and try him in gaming court with you playing the part of righteous prosecutor with indisputable written evidence of why he's wrong. How about:

"Newb DM, I've been at this longer than you have. All my experience and things which I have read indicate to me that the kind of campaign you want to run just won't work with 3E rules in the way that you want it to, or think that it does. 3E rules are in fact designed from the ground up to have EXPECTED LEVELS of magic and money. Not "high" or "low", just expected valuations at a given level that a character should have a certain amount of magic and gear/money. If you just cavalierly ignore that the game tends not to work because the game is NUMERICALLY BASED on those expectations as much as it can be. But far more importantly - that isn't the kind of game I want to play in. Run a more normal game with normal amounts of magic and other rewards to be found and I will play because I know that kind of game works FOR ME. I just don't have any desire to be a guinea pig in your experiment in running a "low" magic game because I don't have any faith that you are familiar enough with the mechanics of the game to understand how to make that kind of game actually work. So, can't we just have a NORMAL game?"

I believe that rather than improve with "high" magic, and contrary to your initial suggestion, 3E breaks down as levels increase. ALL D&D breaks down as levels increase. It breaks down sufficiently that what the game is/how it actually plays out is widely accepted to change and 3E in particular can be categorized along the general lines of:

Levels 1-5: Gritty fantasy
Levels 6-10: Heroic fantasy
Levels 11-15: Wuxia
Levels 16-20: Superheroes

If you don't want to play superheroes then CLEARLY D&D has broken down as levels increased. Now, that little chart there comes to us from Ryan Dancey (one time VP in charge of D&D development at WotC, responsible for saving D&D from oblivion after TSR collapsed, instituting the OGL, of course developing 3rd Edition D&D rules, later participating in the development of Pathfinder, etc.) I think we can credit him safely with some reliable analysis of how 3E works. If your newb DM wants "gritty" he's seemingly overdoing it and going right for "suffering through poverty and misery." Gritty - at least what most players would consider gritty ENOUGH - is built INTO 3E already. Just run 3E D&D NORMALLY and you'll get a "gritty" game which players will almost certainly enjoy FAR more than if you take what is already considered "gritty" and GUT IT to suck the fun out of its marrow.

E6 is almost certainly what this DM is really looking for - but it then needs to be pointed out that E6 is intended to be run NORMALLY according to the 3E rules until PC's get to level 6. Only then does it institute any changes to cut off the NORMAL tendency of 3E D&D to spiral out of control. E6 would, I think, be the compromise that would work for you to continue to play in your newb DM's game.

[Elkad]

The question is "low magic" or "almost no magic"
If the DM bans Magic Marts, hands out items and is generally stingy with them, that's fine. Yes, he has to be careful with his encounters (no shadows, unless you gave out a magic missile wand). And the players have to be smart.



So, say for example
-A human vampire (CR 3) can retreat to Gaseous Form (20' perfect fly speed, DR 10/Magic) indefinitely, coming out to ambush the PCs and strike at them when they don't expect it, and is nearly invulnerable to attack. If the party cleric attempts to turn, he will only succeed on a roll of 16-20 (and thus it's not a reliable option). Unless the party wizard can deal 12 damage in one round, or 17 damage in two rounds (because Fast Healing 5), he cannot kill the vampire either.

A spawn is CR4.

If you make a vamp out of a 1hd creature to get to CR3, it's got 1d12+0hp (7). 2 magic missiles gives you an hour to find it's lair (or run away). Or three hits with vials of holy water the DM carefully seeded in an earlier encounter. Or various other things, including the jerk DM giving you a silver club and an oil of Magic Weapon in the prior room. That jerk has been me, I've done similar to my players at low levels. I try to give them 3 ways to win, but they have to think of at least one of them. (or a Nth thing I didn't think of).

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Aotrs Commander
I mean, if you run an adventure path, you're tactily planning, like, about three year's worth in advance….

I was thinking about APs in this context, since they usually have a specific plotline that the party is meant to follow, which by definition is broadly planned out. Most DMs probably expand or modify the basic outline, but the framework is still designed to lead the party from level 1 to level 16+ along a predetermined plot.


Originally Posted by Aotrs Commander
And even if you can persuade a DM to run a game they don't like, I can't think of a much faster way to have a bad time….

Absolutely true. A DM who feels badgered or cornered into playing against his preferences will not be providing a quality game experience, and objectively there’s no reason why he should. Even if you "win" on specific points, the table as a whole ends up losing.


Originally Posted by D+1
You don't need to be the game police sent on a mission to arrest the newb DM and try him in gaming court with you playing the part of righteous prosecutor with indisputable written evidence of why he's wrong.

This. You’re not likely to change his mind by showing him an article, and your stridently crusading tone is guaranteed to not be well received.

I’m really not sure what you’re hoping to achieve here, other than group validation from the Playground that your gaming preferences are “right” and this DM is “wrong.” Hard to see how that goes anywhere productive.

If you want a detailed document explaining the level-by-level expectations for gear and abilities in 3.X, that's a great goal in itself. But trying to use that as a bludgeon to change someone's gaming style—and prove you're "right" along the way—isn't a good use of anyone's time.


Originally Posted by Goaty14
Since it's 3e, then at the cost of playing an Exalted Good character, you could pick up the Vow of Poverty feat….

In post #20 the OP specifies that no 3.5 content is allowed.

[Goaty14]

In post #20 the OP specifies that no 3.5 content is allowed.

Right, but since 3.5 isn't mentioned in the inside flap of BoED, it's 3.0 material, right?

[Psyren]

Right, but since 3.5 isn't mentioned in the inside flap of BoED, it's 3.0 material, right?

It's actually one of the first 3.5 books :smallsmile: I think only Miniatures Handbook and the core books came before it. (BoVD is 3.0.)

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Goaty14
Right, but since 3.5 isn't mentioned in the inside flap of BoED, it's 3.0 material, right?

BoED is usually included in lists of 3.5 publications.

[ShurikVch]

I would ask, if they can’t cast spells or use magic items, how are they even going to find you, let alone kill you. I mean a ring of invisibility overland flying wizard with protection from missiles is level 9.1. Church of local dark god is exempt from the ban, since it's their deity - Izrador - who imposed it in the first place ("... some animals are more equal than others")
2. Astiraxes - local Outsiders - are feeding on magic, and able to smell a magic from a half-mile per caster level. Legates (priests of Izrador) got Astirax Companion from level 3

Game introduced new types of items - charms and herbal concoctions - magic in which is either too weak to be detected, or absent altogether (herbal concoctions are providing mostly alchemical bonuses). But otherwise - carrying or using magic is a gamble...

[Aotrs Commander]

I feel it also worth pointing out that if the DM is playing 3.0, they seem... unlikely to be a newbie DM, given that 3.0 has been out of print for fundementally 17 years.

(One of the reasons I'm spending so much time on ym hosue-rules and copying to digital is my 3.35 books - PHB/DMG in particular - are slowly starting to disintegrate!)

One feels if they have stuck with 3.0 THAT long, there is likely zero chance you're going to convince them to change at this point.

(Anymore than you could convice me to stop playing Rolemaster or 3.P (and the hideous mutant hybrid of editions that both of those rulesets comprise under my extensive keyboard...!)

[Psyren]

And some more info about the Midnight Campaign Setting:



In the Midnight it would be a problem:

My post was about typical D&D settings though. A setting like the one you describe isn't impossible to run, even at high levels, but the GM needs to be very careful about it and probably needs to go over most of the monsters/encounters (increasingly so as the party gains levels) with a fine-tooth comb to be sure that a party without much magic can handle them.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I seem to recall that this GM is touched in the head. No article you send him is going to change his ways; only running a better game and getting other players to switch to it. Also, 3e is less item dependent than 3.5 since the "replace item" spells are much longer duration. If that was the only issue it wouldn't be a big one.

[Spellweaver]

My advice is to just drop it.

3X or Pathfinder does not ''demand" high magic: The is just a Play Style.

Now sure it's a popular Play Style, I'm sure more then half of the posters would agree. But that still does not make it the only way to play the game.

You can play a low magic or gritty D&D game just fine. When you see something that is a "problem" remember that it's only a problem for you...not for everyone and not for the game.

[afroakuma]

Concurred with several others here - if you don't like this DM's game, become a DM, invite people to try it your way. The game is a social covenant; it works on the basis of having fun, and the DM being miserable is no better than the players being miserable.

I disagree that the game requires high magic to play, or even to be fun - what's important is setting expectations and finding accord around the table for what sort of game it will be, and the consequences of that. E6 is definitely a good example. Regardless, you're not here for that, I digress.

In the main, looking for material with which to browbeat a person running a game you don't even play in, with the hope of forcing them to surrender to running a game they do not enjoy, is unproductive and hostile.

[Mordante]

I am am assuming the usually taboo psionics are banned as well, if not just take one of those who runs a store in between sessions, maybe a level lower , but gear out the whoo-hahhh.

But barring this, it's sorta right there in the name. Inherently magical creatures.

Dragons, fantasy, magic items and all that jazz. He wants to run low magic? Switch games, a friend once ran a early 1900's call of cuthulu where I played a bartender. Interesting enough, but never, nor would I ever really play such a game again, as it's basically designed so you can never win. Even Ravenloft in DnD people have escaped from.

No point in playing a game you can't win at or is no fun.

The GP limit per character level is a knife that should cut both ways. Thats what I think anyway.

Playing a roleplaying game is not about winning IMHO

[Psyren]

Low-magic 3.5/PF is doable as long as you either:

(a) restrict the challenges the group will face somehow (e.g. E6/P6)
(b) Scale the PCs so they keep up mathematically without needing magic items (e.g. Automatic Bonus Progression, Grod's Christmas Tree.)

If you restrict access to magic items without doing one of the above, your game is highly likely to struggle as levels increase.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Most problems are readily fixable by understanding what important functions were relegated to magic (and eventually it was a buttload of them). However: it is important to realize that as you level up HP just becomes a problem. You can create level appropriate encounters by using class level and scaling up encounters through means other than monster advancement, but at high levels the HP pools are so big combat becomes long and slow.

The biggest obstacle to high magic is eventually the designers got a bit lazy and just slapped solutions to every problem in magic, because it was so ubiquitous, but with some creativity and patience you can run a solid low magic game.

[King of Nowhere]

I'd say low magic games can work, if the DM does a good job of it.

that means a lot of houseruling to make it feasible, and a lot of preparation from the party to overcome obstacles.

invisible monster? either that does not exhist, or there are some tricks about it. maybe a bag of flour can be used almost as effectively as dust of apparition.
flying monsters? well, you are supposed to have a trained pegasus to ride. and a spare one in case the first get killed.
incorporeal monster? you don't have a magic weapon to hit it, but maybe there is some alchemical substance that you can use to a similar effect. or maybe it just takes a first level spell from a cleric, and you are supposed to get at least that much.
energy drain? insainity? poison? other debuffs that need high level spells to fix? either they aren't really permanent in this campaign, or they can be fixed by mundane medicine or low level magic.
giant monster grabbed you? that's what a team is for. when you face a giant scorpion or something, one of you has to take one for the team and spend the fight grappled, trusting that his loial teammates will kill the monster before the monster kills him.
monster modifiers are too high because you are supposed to have magic boosts? of course you need to take that into account when setting up an encounter

and so on. As long as you think of all the ways the game breaks as "stuff that I have to houserule to fix", the game can work with low magic.

in fact, I'd like to try a low magic campaign. one where your answer to any problem is not "I have a spell for it" nor "i have an item that makes me immune", but you have to get creative with less resources. I would like sometimes to have some monster i cannot really hurt and having to figure out something to about it.

but of course you need a good DM for it, one who knows what he's doing. most important, one who is willing to recognize a problem and fix it when needed.
I think all too often people lamenting bad experiences here are because many DM are doing it poorly. many DM doing low magic do it because they want to control the party better.

going back to the op, i understand that your DM is fresh. I can't say if he's good, if he will try to avoid the problems, or if he's eager to jump on the chance to inflict bad stuff on a party that cannot defend itself.

If it is the first case, you could give this a try. In the second case, you should try to coach him out of that attitude, or change DM.

[Gavinfoxx]

going back to the op, i understand that your DM is fresh. I can't say if he's good, if he will try to avoid the problems, or if he's eager to jump on the chance to inflict bad stuff on a party that cannot defend itself.

He's been DMing for about 15 years... and he thinks he's good at it.

[MeimuHakurei]

I'd say low magic games can work, if the DM does a good job of it.

that means a lot of houseruling to make it feasible, and a lot of preparation from the party to overcome obstacles.

<changes>

That still warrants an article like OP requests - on what kind of obstacles having less resources will present and how low tier classes in particular are dependent on magic doodads, with extra bits on solutions for those wanting to get by without.

[Zarrgon]

He's been DMing for about 15 years... and he thinks he's good at it.

Well does his low magic game break or fall apart and become unplayable? Or does his group somehow work?

[Gavinfoxx]

Well does his low magic game break or fall apart and become unplayable? Or does his group somehow work?

From what I hear from the other group, it mostly falls apart? No interesting fights, no dungeon crawls, lots of hamfisted scripted dm fiat,, lots of non interactive cutscenes, characters screwed over arbitrarily and permanently with startling regularity, he doesn't understand that the player characters are supposed to feel like heroes, etc. He regularly runs curbstomp (against the players) battles...

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Gavinfoxx
He's been DMing for about 15 years….

If he’s been running games this long, showing him a stack of threads from the internet will not change his mind.

You need to make like the snow queen and let it go. He's not going to change just because someone outside his game says so.


Originally Posted by Gavinfoxx
From what I hear from the other group….

You’re not experiencing this firsthand, you’re hearing from someone who doesn’t like this DM.

If things are as bad as this other person claims, then this other person should leave the group. But it’s not on you to fix this group.

.

[Batcathat]

From what I hear from the other group, it mostly falls apart? No interesting fights, no dungeon crawls, lots of hamfisted scripted dm fiat,, lots of non interactive cutscenes, characters screwed over arbitrarily and permanently with startling regularity, he doesn't understand that the player characters are supposed to feel like heroes, etc. He regularly runs curbstomp (against the players) battles...

These doesn't seem like problems that would be fixed with more magic though. So whether the magic level makes things worse or not, it seems like a rather insignificant problem compared to all of the above.

[Buufreak]

From what I hear from the other group, it mostly falls apart? No interesting fights, no dungeon crawls, lots of hamfisted scripted dm fiat,, lots of non interactive cutscenes, characters screwed over arbitrarily and permanently with startling regularity, he doesn't understand that the player characters are supposed to feel like heroes, etc. He regularly runs curbstomp (against the players) battles...



You’re not experiencing this firsthand

Sit in. Play a game or 3. Form an opinion of your own. If he has been doing it this way this long, and it is truth and not just rumor and spite, then bail. Simply bail. You won't change him. It's the only way to deal with it.

[King of Nowhere]

From what I hear from the other group, it mostly falls apart? No interesting fights, no dungeon crawls, lots of hamfisted scripted dm fiat,, lots of non interactive cutscenes, characters screwed over arbitrarily and permanently with startling regularity, he doesn't understand that the player characters are supposed to feel like heroes, etc. He regularly runs curbstomp (against the players) battles...

then why the hell those other players keep playing with him? why do they let him dm?


If he’s been running games this long, showing him a stack of threads from the internet will not change his mind.

You need to make like the snow queen and let it go. He's not going to change just because someone outside his game says so.



These doesn't seem like problems that would be fixed with more magic though. So whether the magic level makes things worse or not, it seems like a rather insignificant problem compared to all of the above.

Seconded those two.
Low magic does not break the game. Bad DMing do.

[Yahzi Coyote]

Magic items do not have a cost in Midnight, as they are invaluable and are rarely traded, especially for gold
I really, really, really hate that.

IRL, entire countries have been sold for gold. Gold is just a medium of exchange: how hard would you work for this item? There is always an answer, especially for a sword that is 10% sharper than usual.

I run a low-magic game, but that's because 9th level is considered super-heroic. RIght now my 6-player 4th level party owns exactly 1 magic weapon, an amulet of +1 armor, a few potions, and a scroll or two. (To be fair they used up the wands of Scorching Ray I gave them pretty quickly). I've actually been bugging them to buy magic items but they are cheapskates.

[ShurikVch]

I really, really, really hate that.

IRL, entire countries have been sold for gold. Gold is just a medium of exchange: how hard would you work for this item? There is always an answer, especially for a sword that is 10% sharper than usual.

I run a low-magic game, but that's because 9th level is considered super-heroic. RIght now my 6-player 4th level party owns exactly 1 magic weapon, an amulet of +1 armor, a few potions, and a scroll or two. (To be fair they used up the wands of Scorching Ray I gave them pretty quickly). I've actually been bugging them to buy magic items but they are cheapskates.This line is related to the Midnight's unique economical situation
You see, Midnight is a world of magical post-apocalypse; death of starvation is easily possible; what good is gold, if you can't eat it?
Let me quote the relevant chapter:
Units of Worth
In standard d20 games, items have costs in gold pieces (gp). Characters are assumed to acquire and consume gold at specific rates, usually in the form of weapons taken from their foes, as well as coins, gems, objects of art, or even magical items, all of which can be resold. In Midnight, only the first and last from this list are of any value, and possessing either can have a character branded as a criminal.
Midnight therefore uses a different standard when calculating the worth of items: value points (vp). Since the cultures of Midnight largely exist on a subsistence basis and food is the first thing necessary for survival, a week’s worth of rations makes an appropriate standard of measurement: 1 vp is equivalent to a week’s worth of poor-to-common food for one person, which makes its baseline value equivalent to about a gold piece. The way that value points and gold pieces differ, however, is that value points are subject to a multiplier determined by regional worth.
Midnight uses the term worth when calculating an object’s availability and therefore trade value. Highly available items have little worth. Conversely, difficult to find items and dangerous or rare services have high worth to those who desire them.

Types of Goods
All goods in MIDNIGHT are separated into one of five categories, each of which may have a different worth in any given region:
Baubles: These include coins, gems, jewelry, and other objects of art that have no practical use and therefore little worth.
Food: This category includes fresh water, fodder for animals, and anything that will keep a family fed; meat is usually traded “on the hoof” so it doesn’t have to be carried or kept fresh.
Raw Materials: Ore, wood, hemp, wool, hides, furs, and anything else that must be processed before it becomes a finished good or is an essential ingredient to some finished product. Beasts of burden are considered raw materials as well. Unskilled labor generally has the same multiplier as raw materials in any given region.
Finished Goods: Metal tools, barrels, spun cloth, simple watercraft or carts, rope, leatherwork, or anything else the production of which is either skill-intensive, labor-intensive, or requires specialized equipment. It is assumed that anyone raised in the Last Age has learned simple sewing, carving, construction, and food preparation skills simply in order to survive, so the results of such activities are not considered finished goods. This category also includes padded, leather, and hide armor, as well as all simple weapons other than crossbows, maces, and morningstars. Skilled labor generally has the same worth as finished goods in any given region.
Contraband: This is a catchall category that includes anything banned by the Shadow, most noticeably weapons, armor, charms, and books or scrolls. Contraband also includes any items used by orcs, legates, and collaborators, but illegal for citizens to possess, like trained war mounts or watercraft that carry more than a handful of passengers. This category nominally includes magic items as well, although anything but a one-use item or an item low on charges would be nearly priceless. On the other hand, since the dark god’s servants seem to be able to find magic items at their whim, possessing such an item can end up having a heavy price, indeed.
As you can see, gold considered "baubles". Only 3 regions in the world (Central Erenland, Southern Erenland, and Caraheen) are accepting "baubles" at all - and it's at greatly reduced prices (50%, 10%, and 1% respectively); for the rest of the world, gold is completely worthless

And magical items are all fall into the "contraband" category; even "regular" smuggling is punishable by enslavement; "possession of an enchanted item" is a death sentence...

[Max Caysey]

Where can I find a good online article about how and in what way 3e, 3.5e, and PF1 require high magic (edit: I mean all supernatural abilities that resemble spells even slightly) settings and high magic items settings to function and break down horribly in low magic games, and how and in what ways the games can't remotely handle low magic (in enemies, npc classes, wealth, player classes, item availability, etc. etc.) in any way? And how trying to run a gritty low magic game in 3e, 3.5e, pf1, 3.pf, etc is doomed to cause problems? And where the books are specifically set up to assume the setting is extremely high magic, and why the DMG was written in such a way?

I'd be fine with an epic rant rather than a full on polished article, as long as it touches all the bases. Thanks!

It does not break down because the lack of high powered magic, if the entire setting is run that way. It might assume access to a certain amount of magic at a given point, and since weapons primarilly gets their attributes from magic, after aquiring a masterwork version of your preferred weapon you are pretty much set until end game.

However, there is nothing inherently that makes the game break down, if both PC and NPC allike are treated to the same limitaions or "live" in the same gritty, dark setting. We have multiple campaigs going on at the moment. One of them is a severly low op, low magic game. Its very fun, even though if differs quite a lot from our normal optimization/high magic settings. But skills, and mundane equipment all of a suddon becomes fun again.

I'm sorry this was not what you was looking for, but I protest that your premise is simply wrong...

[Xervous]

As is the pattern with many railroading, player abusing GMs I wouldn’t be surprised if low magic was a part of a larger effort to deny player agency options that can break the narrative.

[The Insanity]

Playing a roleplaying game is not about winning IMHO
Having fun is winning.

[Quertus]

If you see someone eating an ice cream cone from the bottom, it is perfectly reasonable to mention that they are designed to be eaten from the top. Can you successfully eat an ice cream cone from the bottom? Sure. In fact, it's delicious fun… if you know how to do it. But it takes a lot more skill and effort. I don't recommend it for your casual ice cream consumption.

It's the same with 3e. Sure, you can very carefully design a balanced low-wealth game. Or, sure, you can just say, "**** you, this is hard mode" to your players (the option I'd be more likely to take, tbh). Or several other possibilities.

It's technically not "low wealth" that breaks 3e. 3e was designed with a specific balance in mind, and that includes certain built-in assumptions about wealth. Change those, and you change the balance - usually, in the case of "low wealth", for the worse. So, in fact, it's not even "low wealth + incompetent noob GM" that causes problems. No, it's "low wealth + anything short of excellent GM balancing effort & skills" that is likely to result in disaster.

So, the OP is not in the wrong here. If you see someone about to attempt to eat an ice cream cone upside down it's perfectly reasonable to ask, "are you sure?", and show them the design specs for right-side-up consumption. Or even - especially if they're trying to shove one upside down down your own throat - the more assertive, "do you have a permit for that?". Because the simple truth is, most GMs cannot handle "low wealth" in a way that produces "fun".

(EDIT: I haven't had the energy to go "full rant mode". If I get the energy, I may post a "how foolish GMs can fail at creating fun low-wealth settings" rant. No guarantees.)

[ShurikVch]

Note: Westeros was made a D&D campaign setting in the Dragon #307; it includes Ranger of the Night's Watch PrC, stats for some important characters, monster equivalency table, and even the interview with George R.R. Martin "A Song of Dice & Fire"

Sidebar "Magic in Westeros" give three possible options:
No Magic At All: Core non-magical classes only; 25% of usual WBL
Restricted Magic: Magic is available only up to certain level (usually 4th); 50% of usual WBL
Just Play D&D: Self-explanatory; everything is available, but encounters including monsters and equipment which we wouldn't see in the series

The only listed monsters with supernatural abilities are Dragons and Wights; the only NPC with any magic are Melisandre (Cleric 9, Fire and Law domains), Stannis (Paladin 10), and Daenerys (Sorcerer 6)

[NigelWalmsley]

Playing a roleplaying game is not about winning IMHO

I don't think that's really true. Obviously you don't win a game of D&D in the same sense that you win a game of Hearthstone or Age of Empires, but there are definitely things you could reasonably call "winning" that are reasonably common for people to want. Players typically have goals they want their characters to accomplish, and it's reasonable to describe "you avenge your father's murder" or "you unlock the secrets of immortality" as "winning". Certainly, in a game that is not designed to last for as long as the participants want, that's the sort of thing that typically comes right before the end credits. Players also care about things like "succeeding in the tactical minigame" or "building powerful characters" that you could reasonably call "winning", or at least something in the same spirit.

[nijineko]

Having fun is winning.

Winning is fun for the majority of winners out there....


Regarding the original post: D&D is supposed to be high magic because it was designed to be so by Gygax and Arneson. The original game was based on that concept, so was Basic and Advanced, BECMI,1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3.5, 4th, and even 5th retains some elements of it from the historical content that was retained or brought back into the game. It's part of the base assumptions of the game.

Almost all the D&D settings were built around these assumptions: Greyhawk is high-magic and high-tech and high-psionics, Forgotten Realms is high magic and medium tech and medium psionics, Dragonlance is high-magic, Dark Sun is high-psionics, Planescape is high-magic, Spelljammer is high-magic, Eberron is medium-magic and medium psionics and medium magi-tech.... and so on. There are a few low-magic settings, Birthright and Red Steel come to mind, among others. My list is not complete and is "off the cuff from memory."

Technically speaking, if anyone is not playing D&D high magic (depending on specific setting), they are "playing it wrong".

On the other hand, the developers of D&D have long encouraged people to make the game their own (it's even written into the DMG in several editions), so playing it non-high-magic could also be considered a valid play method per those statements, even if it doesn't match the original intent or design philosophy.

So in the end, play it your way, but make sure your players are on-board and actually want to play that way.

[ShurikVch]

Almost all the D&D settings were built around these assumptions: Greyhawk is high-magic and high-tech and high-psionics, Forgotten Realms is high magic and medium tech and medium psionics, Dragonlance is high-magic, Dark Sun is high-psionics, Planescape is high-magic, Spelljammer is high-magic, Eberron is medium-magic and medium psionics and medium magi-tech.... and so on. There are a few low-magic settings, Birthright and Red Steel come to mind, among others. My list is not complete and is "off the cuff from memory."Also: "Hollow World" and "Masque of the Red Death"

[hamishspence]

No magic can lead to the game "breaking" a bit (against the players, leading to TPKs) even in the absence of any monsters with spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities, or spellcasting.

Specifically, Swarms (Diminutive ones). Unless you have a vast number of lighted lanterns to throw at, say, Locust swarms, they will kill the party if encountered in any large number.

There's probably other "nonmagical monsters out there" that are going to be extremely dangerous to parties of their level or so.

[Aotrs Commander]

No magic can lead to the game "breaking" a bit (against the players, leading to TPKs) even in the absence of any monsters with spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities, or spellcasting.

Specifically, Swarms (Diminutive ones). Unless you have a vast number of lighted lanterns to throw at, say, Locust swarms, they will kill the party if encountered in any large number.

There's probably other "nonmagical monsters out there" that are going to be extremely dangerous to parties of their level or so.

I mean, diminuitive swarms at the level they are rated at (absurdly low) can break the game like that even with high magic, if you happen not to be explicly prepared for them; but the differences between a bottom-level party with next-to-no reasources and a higher-level party with virtually no magic resources are largely acaemic, I suppose; the high level party's death will just be more drawn out.

Seriously, spider swarms are VASTLY more dangerous to a party than rat swarms, which ar supposed to be a CR 1 higher. It's ludicrous. (And Paizo managed to roll a natural 1 on their handling of it as well, and didn't even remember to port across all the rules 3.5 had for fighting them, because 3.5 out those rules in stupid places, but really, they should have done a better job there, considering they managed to improve the vast majority of everything else unilaterally.)

[crankykobold]

then why the hell those other players keep playing with him? why do they let him dm?




I noticed the OP location as central Kentucky. My guess is he lives in a rural area , like I do. If that's true then the choices of who to play D&D with are pretty limited.

[Buufreak]

I noticed the OP location as central Kentucky. My guess is he lives in a rural area , like I do. If that's true then the choices of who to play D&D with are pretty limited.

This. My options are friends from college (10 at most, and we've all scattered since so getting together is nigh impossible) or online gaming.

[Eladrinblade]

Where can I find a good online article about how and in what way 3e, 3.5e, and PF1 require high magic (edit: I mean all supernatural abilities that resemble spells even slightly) settings and high magic items settings to function and break down horribly in low magic games, and how and in what ways the games can't remotely handle low magic (in enemies, npc classes, wealth, player classes, item availability, etc. etc.) in any way? And how trying to run a gritty low magic game in 3e, 3.5e, pf1, 3.pf, etc is doomed to cause problems? And where the books are specifically set up to assume the setting is extremely high magic, and why the DMG was written in such a way?

I'd be fine with an epic rant rather than a full on polished article, as long as it touches all the bases. Thanks!

Tell him he wants to run fantasycraft, not D&D.

[SpyOne]

Regarding the original post: D&D is supposed to be high magic because it was designed to be so by Gygax and Arneson. The original game was based on that concept, so was Basic and Advanced, BECMI,1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3.5, 4th, and even 5th retains some elements of it from the historical content that was retained or brought back into the game. It's part of the base assumptions of the game.

I think there has been magic inflation over the decades.
Years ago playing 1e, if someone brought up the possibility of a +5 weapon, the DM would point out the number of gods weilding a plain old +3, and suggest that if someone were to aquire a +5 that god would appear and say, "You want to trade." And then point out that that sentence didn't end in a question mark.

A common complaint leveled against the Forgotten Realms is the number of high level NPCs, which certainly suggests that a lot of people's impression of Greyhawk was that there weren't a lot of them. That if the PCs were getting near the level cap, they just might be the only living people of their level.

Still, it is undeniable that the rules were built with an expectation that powerful magic is commonly available. And if the rules assume Walmart has a Magic Weapons section next to the garden center, removing that will necessitate other changes.

If such an article exists, I can think of two places to look for it.
1) Rich mentioned in his worldbuilding stuff that he had brought up on the old forums a desire for a low magic setting, and the responses led him to consider using d20 Modern instead of D&D as the base rules. Sadly, I am not aware of any success getting the old forums back online, so that thread is effectively gone.

2) Monte Cook created Iron Heroes, where spellcasting is super rare and magic items virtually nonexistent. He may have written about that process.

Lastly, add one more voice saying "if he's been doing this for ten years, you are unlikely to change him. If his players are (mostly) happy, you are unlikely to change him. If he's as bad as your friend says, offering his players a better game will cause them to jump ship, and the loss of players may cause him to change. But don't be shocked to find that 9 out of 10 players actually like how he does it, and your friend might be ... presenting things from his perspective, which doesn't match completely with the facts.

[icefractal]

A lot about that game description sounds bad, but honestly low-magic is probably the least of it. It's not like a GM can't railroad and fiat things with magic around.

I'd say that low-magic can work, IF:
1) The players know it going in, and can make characters with that in mind.
2) Ignore the printed CR, you need to determine it yourself by eyeballing and experimentation.

But those two are also true about running a high-op game, so it's obviously not impossible.