No magic VS low magic VS high magic : low tech VS high tec. Which one do you prefer?

SorcererV1ct0r

Magic : NO magic as the name suggests, is zero magic, like mount & blade, low magic is like Conan where magic is mostly ritualistic, dangerous and depends on the bargain with outsiders for knowledge. High magic is like D&D in certain campaings, with magical spaceships, floating cities and so on. On Netherese empire, everyone could use at least a cantrip.

Examples :

• No magic = Kingdom come Deliverance and Mount & Blade warband
• Low magic = Conan(games included) and GoT
• Mid = Gothic
• High magic = Pathfinder/D&D, mostly on Netherese and spelljammer campaign settings

ech : Low tech is like middle ages and lower. Firearms are very limited and rarely used. Mid tech is anything between industrial revolution technology to modern technology with little SCI-FI elements on it. High tech is like Star Trek, where you can travel light years in fractions of seconds, teleport, terraform planets and so on.

Examples :

Low tech = Age of decadence, mount & blade
Mid tech = Arcanum, Fallout 1/2/new vegas
High tech = Kotor 1/2

An game can be both, high tech and high tech like kotor 1/2 or low tech/low magic like mount & blade warband. Both are amazing RPG's. It is just a poll to ask about personal preferences.

---

Of course, some times the distinction between magic and tech is hard. For eg, what is the difference between SCI FI zombies to fantasy zombies? One is caused by a virus, the other, by dark magic. What is the difference between a implant which gives the power to create "thermospheres" to a scroll that teaches how to evoke fireball?

Zaxares

I voted for Low Tech/Mid Magic as that's the sort of fantasy setting I typically prefer for my campaigns, but this can vary a lot depending on what campaign I'm running. LT/MM would basically suit settings like Ravenloft and Dark Sun, where magic is a potent force, but rare enough that you don't see everyday commoners using magic.

For sci-fi settings though, I prefer High Tech/No Magic. I prefer grittier, hard sci-fi settings like the Alienverse, but then again, I'm also partial to the odd High Tech/High Magic setting. One particular favourite of mine is post-apocalyptic setting of Gamma World, which combines high tech with a relatively primitive world that also includes psionic powers (which is where the magic comes in).

Isewein

Low magic low tech actually, you might want to make that option available.

SorcererV1ct0r

Isewein wrote: »

Low magic low tech actually, you might want to make that option available.

There are a limit of 10 questions here. So I could't put everything.

Zaxares wrote: »

II prefer grittier, hard sci-fi settings like the Alienverse, but then again, I'm also partial to the odd High Tech/High Magic setting. One particular favourite of mine is post-apocalyptic setting of Gamma World, which combines high tech with a relatively primitive world that also includes psionic powers (which is where the magic comes in).

Psionics and magic are two different things IMO.

But some class fantasies can only exist on high tech/high magic environments. Like a technomancer.

ThacoBell

I also like how arcanum handled it, with generally low tech, but science has been going through somethign of a renaissance. Bonus points for the science and magic interfering with one another.

Permidion_Stark

Low tech / Low magic. Robert E. Howard's Hyboria is my favourite fantasy setting.

Balrog99

To me magic is what makes fantasy, fantasy. Some level of tech adds believability and a 'cool' factor (plus it gives gnomes something to do).

semiticgoddess

I like magic to be a supplement to the material world rather than being a powerful force that renders other things obsolete. If magic or tech is too strong, everything is made of it. It's good for there to be a balance between the magical and the mundane so it still makes sense for ordinary things to exist.

DrHappyAngry

No real preference and I'll play games in any of them if they're interesting. They all have the potential to be great settings and it's up to the writer(s) to really build them up. I do love a good low magic fantasy, just since it doesn't get done that well very often asides from Hyboria.

DragonKing

Don't care as long as the story is good, the game is fun and I can use arcane or spiritual energy as my primary way of fighting and fill people's faces full of the stuff.

Rik_Kirtaniya

Either High Magic/No Tech (or low tech at a stretch), or High Tech/No Magic. I prefer settings to be consistent to the system of progression which they follow. But yeah, it's not too important to me in my decision to play a game, I am fine with any setting as long as it is fun to play in.

SorcererV1ct0r

Rik_Kirtaniya wrote: »

Either High Magic/No Tech (or low tech at a stretch), or High Tech/No Magic. I prefer settings to be consistent to the system of progression which they follow. But yeah, it's not too important to me in my decision to play a game, I am fine with any setting as long as it is fun to play in.

No tech doesn't exist since even a neanderthal ice age spear can be considered "tech", ultra low but still tech.

I personally love high tech and high magic, like sw:kotor, where you can use force power to cause lightning storms but also can travel above lightspeed and do all types of cool stuff with force and tech. Certain archetypes like a technomancer can only exist on mid to high tech and magic since the class is all about combining technology with magic.

Zaxares

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

Psionics and magic are two different things IMO.

From a lore perspective, oh yeah, most definitely. But in terms of gameplay mechanics, they generally fulfill the same role; "mysterious powers that can produce unusual effects beyond what technology can duplicate".

SorcererV1ct0r

Zaxares wrote: »

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

Psionics and magic are two different things IMO.

From a lore perspective, oh yeah, most definitely. But in terms of gameplay mechanics, they generally fulfill the same role; "mysterious powers that can produce unusual effects beyond what technology can duplicate".

Nope. Mechanic wise they are extremely different and can produce extremely different things. In Dark Sun, there are some guys who managed to combine both but are very rare and few in between. Just like a grenade launcher is extremely different than a wand of fireballs.

Adam_en_tium

It's really a difficult question !!!
Every option could be good as long as the writers manage to drag you into it.

But ultimately I love space stories, I love the idea of a techno-Shaman kind of character.
I wish I could go to the Moon or to Mars. Well it won't happen, maybe our children's children...

Zaxares

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

Nope. Mechanic wise they are extremely different and can produce extremely different things. In Dark Sun, there are some guys who managed to combine both but are very rare and few in between. Just like a grenade launcher is extremely different than a wand of fireballs.

Ehh, I dunno about that. From a gameplay perspective, having a Mage who specializes in AoE damage and crowd control spells and a "biochemist" who shoots grenades that are filled with explosives/knockout gas/sticky goo is functionally fulfilling the same role in a party. It's just that in D&D, the designers were careful not to give psionics too much of the same abilities as mages in order to prevent role overlap. In a different setting, you could have a pyrokineticist who "agitates molecules using psionic energy until they explode" that more or less chucks fireballs around, just using psionics instead of magic. That's what I meant in my original post about psionics (or the Force) fulfilling the role of magic in science-fiction settings; a mysterious power that has no (known) explanation in science.

SorcererV1ct0r

Zaxares wrote: »

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

Nope. Mechanic wise they are extremely different and can produce extremely different things. In Dark Sun, there are some guys who managed to combine both but are very rare and few in between. Just like a grenade launcher is extremely different than a wand of fireballs.

Ehh, I dunno about that. From a gameplay perspective,

An RPG game is not just "gameplay perspective". RPG's are "what if" games. For eg, if someone developed firearms, cannons and grenades in a high fantasy setting, how mages and most mage guilds would react to then losing monopoly over the access to destructive power? How nobles in Neverwinter would react to that? Seeing an weapon that a lv 0 commoner can use and kill an higher level wizard or knight? How this new weapon will change the story? How Barbarian tribes and cities in Icewind dale would react? How it would impact Thay? This questions are far more interesting than how much DPS the weapon will deal.

The game and the lore in consistence and one affecting other, is what makes good RPG's to shine.

And even for a pure gameplay perspective, using psionics against mindlayers is near impsosible. Using an fireball in a anti magical field or against a nishruu, impossible. But the grenade launcher doesn't have the mechanical weaknesses of psionics and magic. But the big problem is the ammo management.

ThacoBell

@SorcererV1ct0r "An RPG game is not just "gameplay perspective"."

Talking about specific aspects is fine. There's no reason to shoehorn every single conceivable piece of a game into every discussion of it.

SorcererV1ct0r

ThacoBell wrote: »

@SorcererV1ct0r "An RPG game is not just "gameplay perspective"."

Talking about specific aspects is fine. There's no reason to shoehorn every single conceivable piece of a game into every discussion of it.

But my point is that even if they are similar in the "ludo" part, RPG's aren't only "ludo". Ideally, the "ludo" part of an RPG is a "game" representation of the lore.

ThacoBell

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

ThacoBell wrote: »

@SorcererV1ct0r "An RPG game is not just "gameplay perspective"."

Talking about specific aspects is fine. There's no reason to shoehorn every single conceivable piece of a game into every discussion of it.

But my point is that even if they are similar in the "ludo" part, RPG's aren't only "ludo". Ideally, the "ludo" part of an RPG is a "game" representation of the lore.

But Zaxares' comment was specifically about the "ludo" part. Everything else you tried to shoehorn had zero bearing on his argument.

SorcererV1ct0r

ThacoBell wrote: »

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

ThacoBell wrote: »

@SorcererV1ct0r "An RPG game is not just "gameplay perspective"."

Talking about specific aspects is fine. There's no reason to shoehorn every single conceivable piece of a game into every discussion of it.

But my point is that even if they are similar in the "ludo" part, RPG's aren't only "ludo". Ideally, the "ludo" part of an RPG is a "game" representation of the lore.

But Zaxares' comment was specifically about the "ludo" part. Everything else you tried to shoehorn had zero bearing on his argument.

I know, I just mentioned that we should only look to the ludo part and that even in the ludo part, they have differences. For eg, an grenade launcher would be far more effective than a fireball vs a Nishruu. Against a mindflayer, an spell would be far more effective than psionics and so on.

ThacoBell

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

ThacoBell wrote: »

SorcererV1ct0r wrote: »

ThacoBell wrote: »

@SorcererV1ct0r "An RPG game is not just "gameplay perspective"."

Talking about specific aspects is fine. There's no reason to shoehorn every single conceivable piece of a game into every discussion of it.

But my point is that even if they are similar in the "ludo" part, RPG's aren't only "ludo". Ideally, the "ludo" part of an RPG is a "game" representation of the lore.

But Zaxares' comment was specifically about the "ludo" part. Everything else you tried to shoehorn had zero bearing on his argument.

I know, I just mentioned that we should only look to the ludo part and that even in the ludo part, they have differences. For eg, an grenade launcher would be far more effective than a fireball vs a Nishruu. Against a mindflayer, an spell would be far more effective than psionics and so on.

That's a separate discussion.

BelleSorciere

I'm fine with any level of tech and I like high magic so picked high tech/high magic