Low Magic Classess

[Gwin Thornspear]

I have designed three classess that can be utilized in a low or no magic setting. I have always been disappointed by how hard it is to play D&D in a setting like Westeros or Middle Earth, without heavily modifying how the setting works or limiting players to Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue. While these three classess are obviously geared towards a setting with very little magic, I tried to design them so they could function in a standard D&D game as well, in case somebody wanted to play a regular joe in a world of magic.

The three class options are:

The Orator (a non-magical Bard with a smidge of Paladin) https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8pg2b...=ygjehoc9&dl=0

The Sage (a non-magical Cleric/Wizard)
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qgz9g...=dvibt4n0&dl=0

The Scout (a non-magical Ranger) https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/hrm8z...=6u3rbywj&dl=0

I haven't actually got around to doing a lot of playtesting with these classess yet, so thoughts and opinions are greatly appreciated.

[rel]

I like the sage, it feels very appropriate for low magic settings. The amount of healing available seems rather high, but that might just reflect my lack of familiarity with modern 5e.

[Gwin Thornspear]

I like the sage, it feels very appropriate for low magic settings. The amount of healing available seems rather high, but that might just reflect my lack of familiarity with modern 5e.

I tried to have it mirror the Clerics healing capabilities, so at lower levels it roughly keeps pace with the Cure Wounds, and then at 11th level I gave them Medicinal Efficiency to compete with the Heal spell.

One thing I was noticing though was while they could keep pace with a Clerics healing they would blow through their resources much faster than a Cleric, so I gave them stuff like short rest recovery, healing reserve, and more healing if you spend 1 minute healing someone.

Of course I kind of eyeballed all this, so if you wanted to reduce the healing you could give them less dice, or give them a different 11th level feature or something like that.

Thanks for your interest in the classes.

[Deepbluediver]

I'm not sure exactly what you expect, OP. Those are very specific settings you mentioned, with their own rules and story and world building. Specifically a sort-of low-magic Conanesque type of story.
Meanwhile, mainstream D&D is a high-magic fantasy kitchen sink. To my mind, it's kinda like complaining that you can't play a D&D-modern character in a standard fantasy campaign and equip them with an AK-47. You're trying to mesh 2 inherently very different things. It's like putting tomato sauce on your PBJ sandwich. These are two things that taste great apart, but just don't work together.



If you insist on using a D&D ruleset in other, lower-power games, the best I can recommend is a version of D&D I once read about that was called, tentatively, "E6". And this was because at it's core, it had a very simple premise- all PCs are capped at 6th level. It means that, in general, your players never become plane-bestriding demigods in a world of cardboard. It keeps the magic under control, more or less, and that a horde of commoners or some other low-level monster is and will always be a threat. It means that mundane weapons and items are effective and important even when your players are at max-level.
There are other ways you can restrict player choice, such as limiting certain classes to race (only children-of-the-forest can be druids, etc), juxtaposing standard ability-arrays with the tier list (i.e. wizards get lower stats than fighters), or banning certain spells, but at the end of the day if you want to play in a particular world you need to play by that world's rules. And if D&D isn't that world, then you gotta be ready for some different kinds of interactions.


Edit: Just to be clear, I think E6 can make for a good game- someone once asked me how I might run a Percy Jackson & the Olympians* setting in D&D, and this was the solution I hit upon. It's all about making your story match your ruleset.
*it's a YA fantasy series, like Harry Potter, kinda

[Gwin Thornspear]

I'm not sure exactly what you expect, OP. Those are very specific settings you mentioned, with their own rules and story and world building. Specifically a sort-of low-magic Conanesque type of story.
Meanwhile, mainstream D&D is a high-magic fantasy kitchen sink. To my mind, it's kinda like complaining that you can't play a D&D-modern character in a standard fantasy campaign and equip them with an AK-47. You're trying to mesh 2 inherently very different things. It's like putting tomato sauce on your PBJ sandwich. These are two things that taste great apart, but just don't work together.



If you insist on using a D&D ruleset in other, lower-power games, the best I can recommend is a version of D&D I once read about that was called, tentatively, "E6". And this was because at it's core, it had a very simple premise- all PCs are capped at 6th level. It means that, in general, your players never become plane-bestriding demigods in a world of cardboard. It keeps the magic under control, more or less, and that a horde of commoners or some other low-level monster is and will always be a threat. It means that mundane weapons and items are effective and important even when your players are at max-level.
There are other ways you can restrict player choice, such as limiting certain classes to race (only children-of-the-forest can be druids, etc), juxtaposing standard ability-arrays with the tier list (i.e. wizards get lower stats than fighters), or banning certain spells, but at the end of the day if you want to play in a particular world you need to play by that world's rules. And if D&D isn't that world, then you gotta be ready for some different kinds of interactions.

I am well aware that I am fighting against the standard system of 5e when trying to make non-magical classess, but its a system that I and my players are familiar with, and have fun playing. While I agree that it can be hard to run a gritty game using standard D&D, I have seen it done using modified rules at my own game table as well as in third party game supplements (Adventures in Middle-Earth, Low Fantasy Gaming, Iskloft, etc.).

My main goal with these classess is to provide additional options to someone who is happy with 5e as a system, but wants to play in there favorite fantasy setting without people flinging around fireballs. If you want to stay more grounded you might want to stay at the lower levels of these classess, but a character like Aragorn is taking on hoards of orcs all without using magic, and I think a class that reflects his nature expertise (with the Scout) is a lot more fun than just making him a high level fighter.

I also built these classess to function in standard D&D as non-magical support as well, since theres not a lot of that in regular 5e. I like playing characters (especially nobles) who get by through their wits and persuasion, instead of magic or combat ability, and found my options were pretty limited outside of Mastermind or Inquisitive Rogue.

Really I just built these classess to give people more options in general, especially if you are playing in a setting where as a DM you feel you need to limit options to match the feel of the setting.

Thanks for the input and for informing me about E6, it certainly seems like something promising to look into.

[rel]

I tried to have it mirror the Clerics healing capabilities, so at lower levels it roughly keeps pace with the Cure Wounds, and then at 11th level I gave them Medicinal Efficiency to compete with the Heal spell.

One thing I was noticing though was while they could keep pace with a Clerics healing they would blow through their resources much faster than a Cleric, so I gave them stuff like short rest recovery, healing reserve, and more healing if you spend 1 minute healing someone.

Of course I kind of eyeballed all this, so if you wanted to reduce the healing you could give them less dice, or give them a different 11th level feature or something like that.

Thanks for your interest in the classes.

It's probably fine then.

In the Orator class, you have 2 references to 'bardic inspiration' in the abilities Words of Confidence and Words of Doom. It should be 'Orator's Inspiration'.

[Gwin Thornspear]

It's probably fine then.

In the Orator class, you have 2 references to 'bardic inspiration' in the abilities Words of Confidence and Words of Doom. It should be 'Orator's Inspiration'.

Thanks for the catch, it should be fixed now.

[yisopo]

I have designed three classess that can be utilized in a low or no magic setting. I have always been disappointed by how hard it is to play D&D in a setting like Westeros or Middle Earth, without heavily modifying how the setting works or limiting players to Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue. While these three classess are obviously geared towards a setting with very little magic, I tried to design them so they could function in a standard D&D game as well, in case somebody wanted to play a regular joe in a world of magic.

The three class options are:

The Orator (a non-magical Bard with a smidge of Paladin) https://www.dropbox.com/preview/D%26...&role=personal

The Sage (a non-magical Cleric/Wizard) https://www.dropbox.com/preview/D%26...&role=personal

The Scout (a non-magical Ranger) https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/07qop...=zmurg5op&dl=0


I haven't actually got around to doing a lot of playtesting with these classess yet, so thoughts and opinions are greatly appreciated.

Hi, first of all, great work!

I was able to access only the Scout class. For the other twos it is requested an account so I didn't read them.


- Foe Slayer. I found the 20th feature very underwhelming. I would prefer to change it with something stronger.

- Exceptional Training. You can increase the attack damage since the original feature gives overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.

- In general, the Ranger is a half-caster. Removing this powerful feature, how can you compensate it? The Scout should be on a par with the Ranger...


If you are interested in more mundane classes, I'm designing The Tactician, my version of a non-magical Wizard: here.

[Gwin Thornspear]

Hi, first of all, great work!

I was able to access only the Scout class. For the other twos it is requested an account so I didn't read them.


- Foe Slayer. I found the 20th feature very underwhelming. I would prefer to change it with something stronger.

- Exceptional Training. You can increase the attack damage since the original feature gives overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.

- In general, the Ranger is a half-caster. Removing this powerful feature, how can you compensate it? The Scout should be on a par with the Ranger...


If you are interested in more mundane classes, I'm designing The Tactician, my version of a non-magical Wizard: here.

I think I have fixed the links so you should have access to the other two classess now.

Being able to do Hunters Mark twice per turn, I found roughly put the Scout on par with a fighter with 4 extra attacks, but if you feel it should be more powerful you could make Foe Slayer an 18th level feature, and make Preys Downfall the 20th level feature but also have it apply to your Hunters Mark damage.

My players handbook, must be one of the older versions, because it doesn't actually include having magical attacks under Exceptional Training. I have added that part of the ability to the document.

As for the spellcasting of Rangers, obviously the hunters mark feature replaces the spell, but features like Roving, Watchful, Ambush, and Natural Anti-Venom are meant to replace casting adding either to utility or combat capability. Its a little tough to balance, because I find that core Ranger doesn't actually get that many useful class abilities outside of spellcasting, so while the Ranger is probably somewhat more powerful in actual damage dealt, the Scout has a lot more skill utility and opportunity to strike first in combat. That being said it can be hard to compete with spellcasting at the best of times, and I understand your rationale on this.

Thanks for the input, and I will definetlly take a look at the Tactician.

[yisopo]

I think I have fixed the links so you should have access to the other two classess now.

I confirm I can read them now. I will take a look.

As for the spellcasting of Rangers, obviously the hunters mark feature replaces the spell, but features like Roving, Watchful, Ambush, and Natural Anti-Venom are meant to replace casting adding either to utility or combat capability. Its a little tough to balance, because I find that core Ranger doesn't actually get that many useful class abilities outside of spellcasting, so while the Ranger is probably somewhat more powerful in actual damage dealt, the Scout has a lot more skill utility and opportunity to strike first in combat. That being said it can be hard to compete with spellcasting at the best of times, and I understand your rationale on this.

Yes, spellcasting is probably the best feature of the game, so as you said it is very difficult to compete with it.

What you get with your class: ignoring difficult terrain, +10 feet speed, climbing and swimming speed, bonus to initiative, no surprised, advantage on attack rolls against creatures that have not yet acted, advantage on saving throws against poison, and have resistance to poison damage.

They are strong and solid features, but... What you don't get with your class: Guidance (Druidic Warrior prerequisite), Thorn Whip (Druidic Warrior prerequisite), Absorb Elements, Entangle, Goodberry, Aid, Silence, Spike Growth, Protection from Energy, Revivify, Stoneskin, ....

I don't have specific suggestions here, but only a very general one. Roving, Watchful, Ambush, and Natural Anti-Venom are here in order to replace casting power/flexibility, but the highest level of them (Natural Anti-Venom) is a level-9 feature. Maybe you need some level-10+ features too?

[Gwin Thornspear]

I confirm I can read them now. I will take a look.


Yes, spellcasting is probably the best feature of the game, so as you said it is very difficult to compete with it.

What you get with your class: ignoring difficult terrain, +10 feet speed, climbing and swimming speed, bonus to initiative, no surprised, advantage on attack rolls against creatures that have not yet acted, advantage on saving throws against poison, and have resistance to poison damage.

They are strong and solid features, but... What you don't get with your class: Guidance (Druidic Warrior prerequisite), Thorn Whip (Druidic Warrior prerequisite), Absorb Elements, Entangle, Goodberry, Aid, Silence, Spike Growth, Protection from Energy, Revivify, Stoneskin, ....



I don't have specific suggestions here, but only a very general one. Roving, Watchful, Ambush, and Natural Anti-Venom are here in order to replace casting power/flexibility, but the highest level of them (Natural Anti-Venom) is a level-9 feature. Maybe you need some level-10+ features too?

You do also get Unflagging at 13th (con save proficiency), and Feral Senses at 17th level (I moved it down a level to put Preys Downfall at 18th). Those give you class features where the Ranger usually would just get spell progression instead, but I could see giving them another feature at 15th and 19th level to compensate for the spell slot lost at those levels. Thanks for the advice. i have been updating these documents as I playtest them and get advice so this is very helpful.

[rel]

Since the aim of these classes is to provide options beyond barbarian, fighter and rogue to play in a low magic game, how they balance up to casters seems less relevant.

If you're using this homebrew, you've probably already banned or heavily nerfed the casting classes anyway.

Balance between the new classes and fighter, barbarian, and rogue is what's important.

[yisopo]

Thanks for the advice. i have been updating these documents as I playtest them and get advice so this is very helpful.

Glad my advice was even minimally helpful. :-)

[Gwin Thornspear]

Since the aim of these classes is to provide options beyond barbarian, fighter and rogue to play in a low magic game, how they balance up to casters seems less relevant.

If you're using this homebrew, you've probably already banned or heavily nerfed the casting classes anyway.

Balance between the new classes and fighter, barbarian, and rogue is what's important.

True, this is primarily an option for people playing in low magic settings so it is more important that they balance up to the martials. That being said I do want to try and make it viable in a standard D&D game as well (which I am discovering is really hard to do).