Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Kenneth Gauck
    Guest

    My Idea of Low Magic

    This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

    - ------=_NextPart_000_00D2_01BE5D19.20E819C0
    Content-Type: text/plain;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    I have noticed a difference between two kinds of so-called "low magic". =
    On the one hand, there is the frequency of magic (how plentiful it is in =
    the campaign) and on the other its intensity (levels and power). =20

    By considering both extensive and intensive measures of magic, I think =
    we have a better tool for analysing the materials we get and our own =
    campaigns. Here are some thoughts.

    I use published materials mostly for plot and situation. I tend to =
    change the encounters and the treasures. Some permenant items can be =
    given charges, or limted uses/day. The standard ring of invisibility =
    acts at the will of the user. Imagine one that has charges, or can only =
    be used once per day. Or consider a ring that purifies water and has no =
    other functions. A Rod of Flailing with no bonuses to attack-- its just =
    a magically concealed weapon.

    Select magic items for adversaries which are just as useful in the hands =
    of the adversaries as it will be in the hands of the players. A healing =
    poition that is captured from an opponant's dead body is a DM error, =
    unless surprise was involved.

    Kenneth Gauck
    c558382@earthlink.net




    - ------=_NextPart_000_00D2_01BE5D19.20E819C0
    Content-Type: text/html;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable






    I have noticed a difference between two kinds of =
    so-called=20
    "low magic".  On the one hand, there is the frequency of =
    magic=20
    (how plentiful it is in the campaign) and on the other its intensity =
    (levels and=20
    power). 
     
    By considering both extensive and intensive measures =
    of magic,=20
    I think we have a better tool for analysing the materials we get and our =
    own=20
    campaigns.  Here are some thoughts.
     
    I use published materials mostly for plot and =
    situation. =20
    I tend to change the encounters and the treasures.  Some permenant =
    items=20
    can be given charges, or limted uses/day.    The standard =
    ring of=20
    invisibility acts at the will of the user.  Imagine one that has =
    charges,=20
    or can only be used once per day.  Or consider a ring that purifies =
    water=20
    and has no other functions.  A Rod of Flailing with no bonuses to =
    attack--=20
    its just a magically concealed weapon.
     
    Select magic items for adversaries which are just as =
    useful in=20
    the hands of the adversaries as it will be in the hands of the =
    players.  A=20
    healing poition that is captured from an opponant's dead body is a DM =
    error,=20
    unless surprise was involved.
     
    Kenneth =
    Gauckc558382@earthlink.net
     
     

    - ------=_NextPart_000_00D2_01BE5D19.20E819C0--

  2. #2
    brandes
    Guest

    My Idea of Low Magic

    This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

    - ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01BE5D26.32F1CB40
    Content-Type: text/plain;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    From: Kenneth Gauck
    =20
    =20
    I have noticed a difference between two kinds of so-called "low =
    magic". On the one hand, there is the frequency of magic (how plentiful =
    it is in the campaign) and on the other its intensity (levels and =
    power). =20
    =20
    By considering both extensive and intensive measures of magic, I =
    think we have a better tool for analysing the materials we get and our =
    own campaigns. Here are some thoughts.
    =20
    I use published materials mostly for plot and situation. I tend to =
    change the encounters and the treasures. Some permenant items can be =
    given charges, or limted uses/day. The standard ring of invisibility =
    acts at the will of the user. Imagine one that has charges, or can only =
    be used once per day. Or consider a ring that purifies water and has no =
    other functions. A Rod of Flailing with no bonuses to attack-- its just =
    a magically concealed weapon.
    =20
    Since it has been under discussion (under a different tangency that I =
    plead "nolo contendere" to starting), I would add that I really like =
    this method of controlling magic. I do the same, to a lesser extent. =
    This is the best way to keep your favorite BR (or was that FR?) campaign =
    from getting out of hand magic-wise. The absolute worst magical item =
    (from the DM's standpoint, not the PC's) was the Flame Blade that dealt =
    an extra d6 fire damage when ignited. I thought (silly me) that I was =
    toning things down (all the other DMs out there are ROTFLOL at me just =
    now.) Confession is the first step towards rehabilitation. Um, right. =
    What was I saying? Oh, yes. The first magic that the party received: =
    rings that had no known power except that they adjusted themselves to =
    fit any finger, from halfling-size to giant-size. The PC's loved them, =
    by which I mean they loved selling them . . . but that's another story. =
    I, ah, curtailed the powers of such hideous magicks as the Cloak and =
    Boots of Elvenkind (now they just grant Thief HS & MS at 15%). =
    Advice/Comments/Whatever welcome, as always (not that I could stop =
    you!).

    There was a letter in the Dragon Magazine Forum some time back (a series =
    of letters actually) debating the whole limited uses & charges issue. =
    Not sure what number, but they were really good letters.

    Brandes


    - ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01BE5D26.32F1CB40
    Content-Type: text/html;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable










    From: Kenneth Gauck <c558382@earthlink.net>
    I have noticed a difference between two kinds of =
    so-called=20
    "low magic".  On the one hand, there is the frequency =
    of=20
    magic (how plentiful it is in the campaign) and on the other its =
    intensity=20
    (levels and power). 
     
    By considering both extensive and intensive =
    measures of=20
    magic, I think we have a better tool for analysing the materials we =
    get and=20
    our own campaigns.  Here are some thoughts.
     
    I use published materials mostly for plot and=20
    situation.  I tend to change the encounters and the =
    treasures. =20
    Some permenant items can be given charges, or limted=20
    uses/day.    The standard ring of invisibility acts =
    at the=20
    will of the user.  Imagine one that has charges, or can only be =
    used=20
    once per day.  Or consider a ring that purifies water and has =
    no other=20
    functions.  A Rod of Flailing with no bonuses to attack-- its =
    just a=20
    magically concealed weapon.
     
    Since it has been under discussion =
    (under a=20
    different tangency that I plead "nolo contendere" to =
    starting), I=20
    would add that I really like this method of controlling magic.  I =
    do the=20
    same, to a lesser extent.  This is the best way to keep your =
    favorite BR=20
    (or was that FR?) campaign from getting out of hand magic-wise.  =
    The=20
    absolute worst magical item (from the DM's standpoint, not the PC's) was =
    the=20
    Flame Blade that dealt an extra d6 fire damage when ignited.  I =
    thought=20
    (silly me) that I was toning things down (all the other DMs out there =
    are=20
    ROTFLOL at me just now.)  Confession is the first step towards=20
    rehabilitation.  Um, right.  What was I saying?  Oh, =
    yes. =20
    The first magic that the party received:  rings that had no known =
    power=20
    except that they adjusted themselves to fit any finger, from =
    halfling-size to=20
    giant-size.  The PC's loved them, by which I mean they loved =
    selling them .=20
    . . but that's another story.  I, ah, curtailed the powers of such =
    hideous=20
    magicks as the Cloak and Boots of Elvenkind (now they just grant Thief =
    HS &=20
    MS at 15%).  Advice/Comments/Whatever welcome, as always (not that =
    I could=20
    stop you!).
     
    There was a letter in the Dragon =
    Magazine Forum=20
    some time back (a series of letters actually) debating the whole limited =
    uses=20
    & charges issue.  Not sure what number, but they were really =
    good=20
    letters.
     
    Brandes

     

    - ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01BE5D26.32F1CB40--

  3. #3
    Shadewulf@aol.co
    Guest

    My Idea of Low Magic

    I tend to agree with Kenneth here. The description for low magic is
    particularly succinct. This is my preferred style, and my players have learned
    to enjoy this as well. For which I am thankful.

    Shadewulf

  4. #4
    prtr02@scorpion.nspco.co
    Guest

    My Idea of Low Magic

    - ----------
    X-Sun-Data-Type: text
    X-Sun-Data-Description: text
    X-Sun-Data-Name: text
    X-Sun-Encoding-Info: uuencode
    X-Sun-Content-Lines: 71

    begin 600 text
    M"BTM+2TM($)E9VEN($EN8VQU9&5D($UE

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. new design idea
    By Arjan in forum Birthright.net support
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-17-2009, 12:37 AM
  2. [BIRTHRIGHT] Magic items idea
    By Green Knight in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-25-2005, 02:40 PM
  3. Magic items idea
    By Lee in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-25-2005, 02:20 PM
  4. OCP - Idea submission
    By simong@mech.uwa.edu.au in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-26-1998, 02:48 AM
  5. Here`s an idea
    By ANOLESEN in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-20-1998, 01:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.