Low-magic in D&D, can it be done well?

[Mooncrow]

The only really successful low magic campaign I did was one based on the world of Berserk - and that one slowly transitioned into a higher magic world during the mid levels.  But the PCs were all melee characters fighting mostly humanoid creatures.

It worked well for what we wanted, but I think if I hadn't started moving away from low magic, it would have gotten pretty boring. 

[zioth]

Or, the spellcaster just casts something like Charm Person on the leader of the guard or Invisibility and not care as the villager's can't find him.

I feel like people are missing the point, or I'm not making it very well. I'm not saying the PC should fear death at the hands of the townspeople. Yes, a wizard can get out of a lot of situations (though it's not that hard to restrain a 3rd level wizard and keep him from casting spells). My point was about the social stigma. A PC who wants to live in a town and be able to interact with people can't be seen as "the evil sorcerer who will steal our souls." And if he does arrange to be seen that way, then he's going to have a very hard time of things, since thousands of people want him dead. He can try tricks like using Disguise Self to have two personas, but then he only needs one slip-up before things get even worse.

As far as fearing death goes, there's not much a wizard with no magical equipment and a short spell list can do to protect himself against an equal-leveled rogue or assassin who sneaks up on him. A huge bounty on his head is not something a wizard wants.

[veekie]

True for low level spellcasters at least, you could get rid of the first two angry mobs, but the third one in a row is going to kinda tax your abilities.

[Prime32]

The only really successful low magic campaign I did was one based on the world of Berserk - and that one slowly transitioned into a higher magic world during the mid levels.  But the PCs were all melee characters fighting mostly humanoid creatures.

It worked well for what we wanted, but I think if I hadn't started moving away from low magic, it would have gotten pretty boring.

But... doesn't Berserk also slowly transition into a higher magic world? ???

[Mooncrow]

The only really successful low magic campaign I did was one based on the world of Berserk - and that one slowly transitioned into a higher magic world during the mid levels.  But the PCs were all melee characters fighting mostly humanoid creatures.

It worked well for what we wanted, but I think if I hadn't started moving away from low magic, it would have gotten pretty boring.

But... doesn't Berserk also slowly transition into a higher magic world? ???

Exactly - but I wanted still note that for people reading that might be unfamiliar with the setting.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Back in 1e and 2e, "Low Magic" had a digit rating.
(-1) meant 8th level spells max, every spell level delayed by 1
(-2) meant 7th level spells max, every spell level delayed by 2
... etc

If you stop near there, you're talking about Tier 1s topping out at 7th level spells.
Call it minus one point eight.  Starts about the same, then loses CL.
This should be totally do-able.

And you get to break 2 of Caelic's Commandments 
 

[Lycanthromancer]

Uh... The only people getting burned at the stake are non-casters that people have been led to believe are casters. The reason why this is? If it really WAS a spellcaster past level 2, those people in that mob are probably not going to walk out of there alive.

Assuming poor DMing and uncooperative players, yes. The wizard will cast Fireball and kill the whole crowd.

Wait, so if I kill the people trying to kill me, it's being an uncooperative player?

[ksbsnowowl]

Back in 1e and 2e, "Low Magic" had a digit rating.
(-1) meant 8th level spells max, every spell level delayed by 1
(-2) meant 7th level spells max, every spell level delayed by 2
... etc

If you stop near there, you're talking about Tier 1s topping out at 7th level spells.
Call it minus one point eight.  Starts about the same, then loses CL.
This should be totally do-able.

And you get to break 2 of Caelic's Commandments 
 

So if I'm understanding that 2e rule, a -1 low magic setting had a Wizard who started play with 0-level spells (via normally first level slots), and didn't get 1st level spells until Wizard 3 (then 2nd levels at Wiz 5, etc).

In a -2 low magic setting Wizards started with no spells, got 0-level spells at Wizard 3, and got first level spells at Wizard 5?

[veekie]

Uh... The only people getting burned at the stake are non-casters that people have been led to believe are casters. The reason why this is? If it really WAS a spellcaster past level 2, those people in that mob are probably not going to walk out of there alive.

Assuming poor DMing and uncooperative players, yes. The wizard will cast Fireball and kill the whole crowd.

Wait, so if I kill the people trying to kill me, it's being an uncooperative player?

I think it means that firstly, a bad DM would thrust players into such a situation not knowing the likely outcome and secondly, an uncooperative player would see nothing wrong with mass homicide.

In situations where magic users have a lynch mob stigma, the problem is that your only solutions are to flee, or kill them all. The latter makes the player specifically the kind of bad guy that the lynch mobs are attacking.

[snakeman830]

Or said character could easily direct them to someone else, which is usually what happens.

[zioth]

Uh... The only people getting burned at the stake are non-casters that people have been led to believe are casters. The reason why this is? If it really WAS a spellcaster past level 2, those people in that mob are probably not going to walk out of there alive.

Assuming poor DMing and uncooperative players, yes. The wizard will cast Fireball and kill the whole crowd.

Wait, so if I kill the people trying to kill me, it's being an uncooperative player?

I think it means that firstly, a bad DM would thrust players into such a situation not knowing the likely outcome and secondly, an uncooperative player would see nothing wrong with mass homicide.

In situations where magic users have a lynch mob stigma, the problem is that your only solutions are to flee, or kill them all. The latter makes the player specifically the kind of bad guy that the lynch mobs are attacking.

Or the third solution, which is most appropriate for a low-magic campaign -- don't get the lynch mob after you in the first place. Use magic sparingly and subtly. That's why I suggested such a stigma as a way to give a campaign a low-magic  feel.

[Mnemnosyne]

If my character is evil and a lynch mob comes after her, and she has the power, she's going to blow them up just because.

If my character is good and a lynch mob comes after her, and she has the power, she'll try to reason with them but if they don't listen, they get fried, because while I may have the power, next time it may be some innocent low-level caster that can't defend themselves well enough, and murdering someone simply because they have an ability you don't is unquestionably Evil, meaning the mob is behaving in an Evil manner and I'm justified in killing them to protect others.

I'm not sure I can think of a situation in which the majority of my characters would do something other than flee if weak, or kill if strong.  Now, granted, in such a setting my characters would probably take the Invisible Spell feat and apply it to every single spell, since it's a +0 metamagic, but if and when there's rabble after them...

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Back in 1e and 2e, "Low Magic" had a digit rating.
(-1) meant 8th level spells max, every spell level delayed by 1
(-2) meant 7th level spells max, every spell level delayed by 2
... etc

If you stop near there, you're talking about Tier 1s topping out at 7th level spells.
Call it minus one point eight.  Starts about the same, then loses CL.
This should be totally do-able.

And you get to break 2 of Caelic's Commandments 
 

So if I'm understanding that 2e rule, a -1 low magic setting had a Wizard who started play with 0-level spells (via normally first level slots), and didn't get 1st level spells until Wizard 3 (then 2nd levels at Wiz 5, etc).

In a -2 low magic setting Wizards started with no spells, got 0-level spells at Wizard 3, and got first level spells at Wizard 5?

Exactly.

(minor backtrack ... that's how it worked in 1e. I confused a 2e houserule with absolute rules. It is easily transposed, though.)

So it's problematic at lower levels.
5/10 and 6/10 caster classes come in handy, to help pull this off in 3e.

Still ... Polymorph, Schism, Dominate, Planar Binding, and Divine Power (with all the other casting)
etc , are not exactly things that combat classes can do or equate.

[SneeR]

If my character is evil and a lynch mob comes after her, and she has the power, she's going to blow them up just because.

I'm not sure I can think of a situation in which the majority of my characters would do something other than flee if weak, or kill if strong.

There's always the fun of roleplaying something other than the extremes of that logic...
Hopefully, in such a setting, you would play a slightly more subtle character, considering that sometimes you might get someone angry that your spells can't take!

[veekie]

If my character is good and a lynch mob comes after her, and she has the power, she'll try to reason with them but if they don't listen, they get fried, because while I may have the power, next time it may be some innocent low-level caster that can't defend themselves well enough, and murdering someone simply because they have an ability you don't is unquestionably Evil, meaning the mob is behaving in an Evil manner and I'm justified in killing them to protect others.

This one depends somewhat.

Take the Wheel of Time setting, male magic-users inevitably go insane from the corruption on the power they use, so they tend to get lynched in a hurry on the basis that you better kill him while he has any morals left to keep him from vaporizing you. This is a long, slow, but inevitable process, such a character might still remain a viable PC(because the corruption timescale operates on months to years while PCs operate on days and weeks).

Or classical mythology. Magicians are invariably also priests(the requisite miracles to be qualified for sainthood also implies a saint must be a mage) or at least, contracted with a supernatural being of some sort. Thus theres a conflict of faith(see when Moses threw down with the Egyptian clerics). In this case, what you are dealing with is mutually exclusive belief systems, which deems the other party to be using  power from the 'wrong' source. Of course, this is more a matter of sanctioned vs unsanctioned power. Power from unsanctioned sources often seeks to work against the existing order after all.

In either of these cases, the attackers are upstanding citizens in their own right, save for the bit where you are either evil, insane or heretical.

[Libertad]

In several low-magic settings (like in Ravenloft), a wizard can pass himself off as a holy man if he has the approval of the church and knows his religion.  A healing Cleric is just as likely to be burned at the stake in such a setting.

[Mnemnosyne]

Well, if there's a mechanical thing like progressive, unavoidable insanity, then it becomes more morally grey - I was presuming standard D&D mechanics, but with magic-fearing peasantry.  Although the question of whether or not it's evil to kill someone for something they haven't actually done comes up.  In such a world - assuming my character knew that this was in fact true and unavoidable (in which case I'm sure she'd be working on a way to avoid it) she'd find them justified and probably leave them alone, simply departing the town rather than being forced to fight them.

On the topic of belief systems, well...while the people may not themselves be evil, killing innocents regardless of the laws and beliefs is still evil.  If my character has harmed no one, it's still evil to attack her.  The D&D world is one of objective good and evil where there actually is some sort of universal constant that defines it, thus creating the divide between the lower planes and the upper planes and assigning alignment descriptors like [Evil] or [Good] to particular entities.  Therefore, regardless of a society's point of view, going around lynching innocent spellcasters simply because they are spellcasters remains evil.  If there is no such universal constant, and society's perception is what determines good and evil, then simply being a spellcaster is probably evil, and this doesn't really apply.

I suppose part of what I was trying to make a point of though, is that unless magic is mechanically far weaker than the rules dictate, there is no way society can drive magic users down, because even good ones have solid reasons not to allow lynch mobs to continue hurting innocent people.  Weak magic users are vastly more powerful than mundanes, and a single strong magic user is all but invincible to anyone other than another magic user.  So using 'fear of lynching' works only to keep mages and such hidden until they get high enough level to ensure mundanes can't harm them.

[veekie]

Well, I'm presuming a justifiable magic stigma, depending on the setting.
If high level magic is rare, then a mob can still take down a level 4 caster, and by doing so maintain low magic.
Magic as useful and as powerful as it is, the effect of a lynch mob level stigma would only be to reduce the magi to those who master battlemagic, the ones with only non-combat spells would be history.

So, magic being taboo would require cultural, political/religious or practical reasons.

Culture may involve history(former mageocracy, fell and then the people decided not to ever let magi rise to power again, on the basis of killing them while they're still weak) or identity(stereotypical warrior race pride, where magic is unfair and unclean, especially if foreign in origin). This depends on cultural values to enforce, and generally would be more indirect.

Politics and religion is simpler. A force in power would very much like to be the only ones who have power. Outlaw magic amongst the lower classes, or outlaw certain forms of magic. This has actual enforcement power, since doubtless the enforcement is performed by trained armed forces and has its own sanctioned magical backup.

Practical needs to be tied to the world's actual metaphysics. Does being a spellcaster make you statistically more likely to be evil, dangerous and/or insane? This is self policing, the natural law would screw the mage up more than the people ever will.

However, theres varying levels of stigma(the lynch mob being on the extreme end).
What if, instead of being assaulted, the known mage is shunned by default. People would go out of their way to ignore or bar his way, but stop short of doing violence barring a panic(like say, a child goes missing, everyone blames the wizard, and after a few rounds of beer you have a lynch mob, who's only crime is to be drunk and afraid).
This I think, would be better off than the full out kill-on-sight method, which really takes an organized force more than a mob, and require that spellcasters be sufficiently rare that the loss rate is acceptable for the society.

[wilconran13]

I'm considering a campaign with absolutely zero arcane and divine magic, allowing players only psionics, incarnum, etc. Most classes need magic items, so I'm thinking that by just saying that magic was recently removed from the world and throwing in all the magic items low magic could work. Divine magic really isn't necessarily for healing, and psionics can handle a lot of what magic can. Could also allow warlocks for some magic, since they technically don't have spells.

[SneeR]

I'm considering a campaign with absolutely zero arcane and divine magic, allowing players only psionics, incarnum, etc. Most classes need magic items, so I'm thinking that by just saying that magic was recently removed from the world and throwing in all the magic items low magic could work. Divine magic really isn't necessarily for healing, and psionics can handle a lot of what magic can. Could also allow warlocks for some magic, since they technically don't have spells.

I wouldn't mind playing in that game.