This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

D&D without Wizard PCs?

Started by RPGPundit, November 26, 2016, 01:25:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Tetsubo

Quote from: Kiero;9329613.x/PF is a very different beast to B/X-derived games (and indeed to 4th edition). There is no one "D&D".

OK. I still wouldn't run a campaign without arcane caster. Than again I wouldn't run an older edition of D&D if you put a gun to my head.

Batman

Revised 3rd edition, 4th edition, and even 5th allow for varieties of play that can, quite well I may add, allow for the exclusion of things like arcane or divine casters. I have played in a game (v3.5) where no one actually picked a spell casting class (Rogue, Fighter, a Barbarian, and a Marshal I believe) and we all laughed thinking we'll be dead soon. Potions were a tad more common and we urged the Rogue to put ranks into Use Magic Device but it went pretty well. We played to 6th level or so which might have gotten worse had we went higher.
" I\'m Batman "

cranebump

Quote from: Tetsubo;933040OK. I still wouldn't run a campaign without arcane caster. Than again I wouldn't run an older edition of D&D if you put a gun to my head.

Phew!  For a minute there we all were worried about whether your stance on this had changed.:-/
"When devils will the blackest sins put on, they do suggest at first with heavenly shows..."

crkrueger

Quote from: Batman;933126Revised 3rd edition, 4th edition, and even 5th allow for varieties of play that can, quite well I may add, allow for the exclusion of things like arcane or divine casters. I have played in a game (v3.5) where no one actually picked a spell casting class (Rogue, Fighter, a Barbarian, and a Marshal I believe) and we all laughed thinking we'll be dead soon. Potions were a tad more common and we urged the Rogue to put ranks into Use Magic Device but it went pretty well. We played to 6th level or so which might have gotten worse had we went higher.

In 4th everyone's a caster anyway with their own set of Weaboo AEDU no matter what "power source". :D
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery\'s thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

Krimson

Quote from: CRKrueger;933131In 4th everyone's a caster anyway with their own set of Weaboo AEDU no matter what "power source". :D

Fighters that can do damage on a miss... I do kind of like how the At Will powers reminded Wizards that Cantrips were a thing in 1e and by combining the two you can have low level casters that can actually do something more than once. Of course Variant Human and Magical Aptitude and you too can have a built in gun.

Back to the main topic. I've played in a few 3.5e games that used the e6 rules. I even made a d20 Modern Variant. The main way I handled spells for higher levels was to use the 3.5e Option for Incantations. This could probably work here, for both arcane and divine spellcasters. So if you have no arcane spellcasters you could still have a character who is an occultist or a member of some group like the Golden Dawn who knows the fundamentals of magic, but in order to perform it elaborate rituals are needed. In some cases they may be able to open ancient tomes and read out spells from the pages. There can be some risk involved in this particularly if said tome has a title like the Ectocromiton.

This works great with healing as well. Instead of casting a spell, the fellow might have to lay on a stone slab for a few hours while acolytes pray over him. Of course there is a wait, but a generous donation could defer that. So if you want to work in local religion into the game, this is a good way to do this. By necessity, the characters will have to be on good terms with one of the local churches. Well they don't have to but they'll last longer.

Incantations could be ported easily enough to 5e or an OSR. If using 5e, I'd consider adjusting rest times. For an OSR, I don't think you have to change much. For the sake of healing, the same spells are cast but the casting time is lengthened. Characters may also have to gather components for services, or as an adventure seed.
"Anyways, I for one never felt like it had a worse \'yiff factor\' than any other system." -- RPGPundit

Tetsubo

Quote from: cranebump;933128Phew!  For a minute there we all were worried about whether your stance on this had changed.:-/

Why would you care for even one second? For the time it took to make that comment? Perhaps I should be flattered...

Xanther

Quote from: RPGPundit;932641Have you ever run a D&D campaign where you couldn't play wizard (and/or cleric) PCs? Either because the world itself didn't have it (low or no-magic), or because it was super-rare, or for some other reason inaccessible as a PC class?
Never have.  To me, it's really not very interesting fantasy RPG without magic.  If I run or play an RPG without magic it will be far future or post-apocalyptic.
 

Christopher Brady

Quote from: Xanther;933188Never have.  To me, it's really not very interesting fantasy RPG without magic.  If I run or play an RPG without magic it will be far future or post-apocalyptic.

OK, so if the players can't have magic, you assume that no one else, or not even the world, can be magical?  Because players can't be wizards, there would be no elves, dwarves, giants and trolls, flying castles or other wondrous and fantastical things?  Am I reading you correctly (and no, this isn't snark, I'm trying to pin down your reasoning.  I am not judging.)
"And now, my friends, a Dragon\'s toast!  To life\'s little blessings:  wars, plagues and all forms of evil.  Their presence keeps us alert --- and their absence makes us grateful." -T.A. Barron[/SIZE]

Xanther

Quote from: Christopher Brady;933249OK, so if the players can't have magic, you assume that no one else, or not even the world, can be magical?  Because players can't be wizards, there would be no elves, dwarves, giants and trolls, flying castles or other wondrous and fantastical things?  Am I reading you correctly (and no, this isn't snark, I'm trying to pin down your reasoning.  I am not judging.)

As a player I wouldn't play in such a campaign as I love to play magic user types.  I guess it's a corollary, but as a GM I have no interest in such, too mundane for me, and at least half my players want to play spell users.  So pretty much a no go for us even if magic is common in the world and for NPCs.  

I do prefer low to medium though.  That is spell use and effects that while handy in a tactical situation are not situated to act as technology in the larger world.  For example, few if any permanent magical spells, limited types of magic that can be put into magic items, barriers to using magic for large scale construction or infrastructure, etc.  Primarily because I like to carry the use of magic to it's logical conclusion, instead of by fiat say in a world with a permanent continual light spell that people still light their streets and homes with torches and lamps.