Are monsters logical in a non-magic world?

[KeyIXTheHermit]

Our group is currently on hiatus, and we won't be playing again until at least October, and possibly not until next year, depending on how things go. So, this is giving me lots of time to plan and plot and put together a game world that really fits into our way of thinking. Since my wife and I are in lockstep in what we want, we work together to build our world.

Some things we've already got figured out. For example, we want a world where characters do not walk around dressed in tin cans. We want a world more like Frazetta fantasy art (like the movie Fire & Ice, for example). To make this happen, we have made two kinds of armor: non-metal and metal. There are three parts of armor that are useful: chest plate and armguards/gauntlets. Non-metal armor is worth 2 points in the chest and 1 point for each armguard. Metal armor is worth 4 points for the chest, 2 points for the each armguard. Rogues and Assassins are limited to 2 points of armor, Barbarians are limited to 4 points. If they want to wear more for greater protection, they can, but not only does it penalize certain class skills, but it also penalizes To-Hit rolls, because they aren't used to moving in the heavy armor.

As a result, Barbarians will usually only wear the armguards (4 points) and forgo the chest piece. You can make a Rogue character like Teegra by just giving her non-metal armguards.

It would be better if we had a game that used a defense rating so that characters could dodge and weave and outfight their opponents, but C&C is just so fast and easy, and we have so many books for it, that we'd just prefer to use it. Yeah, Savage Worlds would probably fit our setting better, but C&C is just so darn playable!

The problem we're having, though, is working magic into our world. We want a world where magic is rare, is usually just "smoke and mirrors," is normally done by evil characters only, and uses herbs and oils and stuff. A good example of a Wizard we might have in our game would be the Wizards from the first two Sinbad movies, although even Tom Baker's Koura is a little too magical for our tastes.

We're considering removing all magical types except Illusionists. Since Illusionist now have the ability to cast healing spells, they would make a great one-type Wizard, and with many of the spells based on having mental effects, that works very well with how we see Wizards (there would be no Wizards, Clerics, or Druids, and Illusionists would be called Wizards).

My question is, this is still a world with Orcs, Elves, Dragons, Fairies, Basilisks, Vampires, Hydras, Giant Economy Size Spiders, Medusas, Dryads, and especially Rabbits. Does it seem logical that such things would exist in a world where magic is so rare as to be virtually non-existent? Or does the removal of magic almost require the removal of monstrous beings?

One mid-range option might be to disallow non-human PC's, I suppose. It might be that these other beings have access to greater magic than humans can have. Elves are almost always shown as being highly magical beings, so making them not allowed as PC's, but still existing as NPC's, could still allow some magic but keep it out of PC hands.

The only other option would be to do away with most monsters and monster races almost entirely. Monsters would be a rare, final battle at the end of an adventure, which would be far more low fantasy and deal with humans. This is workable, but, of course, may not work well with C&C, which is far more fantastical in setup.

I don't recall any Wizards in Beowulf, though, and he fought both Trolls and Dragons. So, I'm not sure where the line works best. Any thoughts on the matter?

Note: Another problem is our group likes non-humans. Everyone wants to be a cat-man or cat-girl, or a Half-Troll, or some other special snowflake. Disallowing non-human PC's would really be a downer, even though most of the creatures they like to play aren't typically highly magical.

[Dracyian]

I don't think you have to remove demi human races for a low magic campaign. I'm a huge Tolkien and LotR fan and the movies had little magic and the books themselves also had little magic. So if you world ended up having qualites and characteristics similar to that of Middle Earth I think you would get the effect it sounds like you are looking for. Magic was rare, powerful and far between only 5 wizards in the world and only powerful elves creating magic like effects few and far between. So I guess what I'm trying to say is look to Tolkien for some further inspiration for your world and I think it will come out just fine once you get it all figured out. Looking at the two towers you essentially have a human melee ranger, an elvish ranged ranger and dwarven fighter tearing it up across the world.

What you may want to do is look at bringing in higher stats and making it harder to get hit and faster to heal [i.e. Aragorn after he falls off the cliff] in balance of a lack of magic in the party. So some higher stats and awesome relics will help balance it out. Also another suggestion house rule the random enocunters and combat situations your players are going to find themselves in because it sounds like healing is going to be much harder to find you may want a world that has less random encounters and focus on making what combat the players are involved with iconic.

I hope that all makes sense two beers and half a bottle of wine into the evening after a not fun day of work and a masonic meeting may have made my brain a little useless

[KeyIXTheHermit]

Good points. And LotR is a good reference point, and one that I often forget.

My reference points are primarily the works of Roy Thomas, Gerry Conway, and Marv Wolfman, but, as you pointed out, LotR as written is a Low Magic world, as well.

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

It's up to you, but removing monsters might paint you into a corner later on, when it comes to your CK repertoire.

Magic can still be rare now, but maybe it was more prominent in the past, thus spawning all the wondrous variety in the world.

[Arduin]

My question is, this is still a world with Orcs, Elves, Dragons, Fairies, Basilisks, Vampires, Hydras, Giant Economy Size Spiders, Medusas, Dryads, and especially Rabbits. Does it seem logical that such things would exist in a world where magic is so rare as to be virtually non-existent? Or does the removal of magic almost require the removal of monstrous beings?

Look at the stories from ancient Greece. The heroes (PC's) were not magical but their opponents were fantastic "magical" monsters often as not. See also the original Conan stories. Only evil or "npc" good guys were able to use spells and such.

[Rigon]

If you wanted to house rule a defense bonus you could. Fighting types get a bonus equal to 1/2 their level to AC, rogue types get a bonus equal to 1/3 their level, and scholarly types get a bonus equal to 1/4 their level. Easy to remember and does away with a reliance on armor.

As far as having monsters in a low/non magical world, you can make up any reason why they exist, from mutations to long lost magic, to curses, to the gods. There doesn't have to be magic for monsters to be around.

R-

[serleran]

As far as having monsters in a low/non magical world, you can make up any reason why they exist, from mutations to long lost magic, to curses, to the gods. There doesn't have to be magic for monsters to be around.

In fact it makes them more monstrous. And dangerous. Especially those with an immunity or resistance to the mundane. It forces more creative play than reliance on the standby solutions.

It is the very foundation for true horror.

[Captain_K]

Only humans and PC classes have tech and society to battle the evils of non-humanoids who do not do tech nor functional/cooperative societies.. these "monsters" have magic.. its "evil" like all monsters... having said that.. your world your game your flavor, logic is nice and we all live in it, so societies should have something to hold together or the plot has holes and its less fun for PCs.

Warning from experience: As a former player in a "unique" world setting where the CK had highly restrictive/customized rules of what he wanted what he felt was his world I felt forced to accept his rules. So did others. It was fine for a while but most of the players did NOT agree and thus some of the fun, some of what the PLAYERS wanted to bring to the game was lost. In the end, less folks showed, the game died and the world so hard wrought died too.

The Lesson Learned by Myself: The "world" I try to run tries to use a set of rules all players can find something to love in it... any race, any class, any culture, any book setting works. We have tin can dwarves next to bouncing unarmored Illusionist/Monks from a travelling Grecian Circus all thrown together in one world and in some cases stretch realities... but then, it is a fantasy game. So if each PC can play what they want, I can also hit them with any monster or NPC I want... I do restrict things, but usually locally in an adventure, in a region, in an "alternate reality" reached only by a magic gate, or for a particular PC who wants such restrictions for their character. These kinds of rules are essential when we take turns CKing and each CK has a totally different style, world view and way to want to run things.. overlapping spheres of influence and cultural diversity.. just like history.. leave the Norse lands and travel to Crete and you have different weapons, armor, languages, monsters, magic, traditions... its great when you can make it work MORE depth and detail and greater "unique" rules/behavior exist when they exist with their opposition in view.

Warning to you: Make sure all your players are really in, in for the long run or you might find all your, and your wife's, work gathering dust sooner than you wish.

[Lurker]

...

Warning from experience: As a former player in a "unique" world setting where the CK had highly restrictive/customized rules of what he wanted what he felt was his world I felt forced to accept his rules. So did others. It was fine for a while but most of the players did NOT agree and thus some of the fun, some of what the PLAYERS wanted to bring to the game was lost. In the end, less folks showed, the game died and the world so hard wrought died too.

The Lesson Learned by Myself: The "world" I try to run tries to use a set of rules all players can find something to love in it... any race, any class, any culture, any book setting works. We have tin can dwarves next to bouncing unarmored Illusionist/Monks from a travelling Grecian Circus all thrown together in one world and in some cases stretch realities... but then, it is a fantasy game. So if each PC can play what they want, I can also hit them with any monster or NPC I want... I do restrict things, but usually locally in an adventure, in a region, in an "alternate reality" reached only by a magic gate, or for a particular PC who wants such restrictions for their character. ...

Warning to you: Make sure all your players are really in, in for the long run or you might find all your, and your wife's, work gathering dust sooner than you wish.

I second that warning, but from the other end of the spectrum ...

Back in the day when I ran games a lot for my friends at my first duty station (good lord, way tooooo many years ago) I tended to run the world with a little more historic / a touch less magic feel than the average game world. I didn't disallow the normal races and classes, but anything else had to have a good logical reason to exist and had to have a great argument by the player who wanted to run the abnormal race/class. Even then most of the time I tempered their idea and toned it down.

Another guy wanted to run his world, and it was a no holds barred, everything goes world. In almost every game we all had to suspend the reality check and just believe what ever he decided was the norm for that day. And that changed from game to game. It was to the point that you just expected everything/everyone to be abnormal and wasn't surprised when the local farmer had some sort of long lost uber powerful magic cursed item, and every knight had some sort of ring that made them as powerful a magic user as our mage.

It goes with out saying that everyone, after being used to my world, rebelled at the chaos of his setting. It actually surprised him and hurt his feelings with the rebellion. He loved the setting and the chaos. No matter what we told him, he couldn't turn off his love for adding in the unexpected abnormal. Soon, fewer guys want to play etc etc etc. It took some quick talking by me to convince them not to quit, and keep the game going. We varied the games adding a supers game (or robotech I can't remember which) every other week. And I used him as an "advisor" for the big bad guys. That ended up wring out very well. It gave the party the more normal feeling it liked, but let him be creative but contained his chaos, and gave me someone I could mine for ideas on the big bad guy that deserved to be more than normal.

With that, I'd warn that it is a good idea, before changing the 'norm' of a world, talk to your players and see what they want and enjoy. and also, don't go to any one extreme. Remember, everyone should be enjoying the game etc etc etc. See what the players like and want, and be willing to add in some stuff that you may not at first think fits, but use it like a good spice ... a little salt and pepper tastes good, to much and you rune the soup.

[KeyIXTheHermit]

If you wanted to house rule a defense bonus you could. Fighting types get a bonus equal to 1/2 their level to AC, rogue types get a bonus equal to 1/3 their level, and scholarly types get a bonus equal to 1/4 their level. Easy to remember and does away with a reliance on armor.

I'm gonna derail my own thread here.

That sounds like a good idea, I'm gonna bounce it off the Missus and see what she thinks.

We had previously come up with the idea of using the same value as the BtH as also a Defensive Value, to a maximum of 10 (since armor stops at about 8). We then wanted to use the "armor absorbs damage instead of blocks it" and "armor value reduced by damage to armor) rules in the CKG.

We had it all planned out but things going on stopped us from being able to playtest it. The Missus and I were going to just try it out in a combat map between the two of us, but she had issues with monster AC's, because they couldn't be reconfigured the way PC AC's could be.

After spending some time reading, she ultimately decided that she'd rather stick with the standard AC rules so that the game stays properly balanced, but maybe just change "how we see armor in our minds," which is what we've done.

Anyway, so that's why we came up with this idea. We do like the idea of a defensive value, though. I just wish that it could be more easily applied to monsters as well as players.

[Rigon]

Keep in mind, that monsters are monsters and don't necessarily have to follow the same rules as the PCs. Their ACs could come from thick hide, preternatural quickness, magical nature, etc.

I tinkered with a defensive bonus when I was doing a Wheel of Time RPG adaptation a while ago. I've never playtested it, so not sure if you would want to tinker with the numbers, but a Def Bonus equal to BTH just seems a little fast to me, that's why I like the fraction of the level better.

R-