i have to run a no magic game, should i use d&d or pathfinder?

>>50500012
You should definitely use the game called "Caster edition" which requires magic to work for a no-magic game, of course.

>3.PF
>Without magic
I guess, if you don't use the monster manual like at all and only throw humanoid martials at your party I guess

4e is the only d&d that really works in a low/no magic setting, since you can limit classes to martial only and not have any "missing pieces".

So either that, or some non-D&D game.

Although, if you and your friends only play 3.PF anyway, you may as well keep doing that. If you didn't find anything that turned you off already, there's a good chance no-magic won't either.

>>50500012
use GURPS

>>50500012
5e should be okay. Just try to promote someone taking Battle Master fighter, with Rally for healing.

It will really shine at lower levels.

>>50500012
haveyoutriednotpla...jpg

>>50500012
Use AD&D 1E or 2E, I prefer 1E more though.

>>50500084
Careful grandpa, those cheeto stains show up more on that gray neckbeard.

>>50500012
D&D and Pathfinder weren't meant to do that sort of thing, and it's a bad idea to try and force them to do it.

>>50500012
ASoIaF rpg might be good

File: riot wizard.jpg (68KB, 700x434px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 700x434px

>>50500536

5e works fine without magic. You won't have much in-combat healing or area-effect stuff, but that's perfectly fine. Those aren't things that Conan or Bilbo can do.

In 4e, you can have a party "without magic" that works pretty much the same as a party where every character knows magic. Which may be missing the point of a low-magic game. I actually like 4e, but I wouldn't recommend it for low-anything.

>>50500733
>You won't have much in-combat healing or area-effect stuff, but that's perfectly fine.

5e combat healing is really, really important to mitigate the effect of lucky hits at low levels.

>Those aren't things that Conan or Bilbo can do.

You may make the same argument for any of the D&Ds. May as well play OSR then.

>In 4e, you can have a party "without magic" that works pretty much the same as a party where every character knows magic.

You won't have access to elemental/psychic/radiant/necrotic/whatever damage types, you won't know rituals, you won't have the utility of wizard cantrips and arcane utility powers, effects like flight, dominate, etc.

It works pretty friggin different from a party with magic, is what I'm trying to say.

File: idiocy.jpg (35KB, 203x260px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 203x260px

>>50500012
You should not use Pathfinder for anything that could be described as "low magic."

If you absolutely MUST for whatever reason, do not under any circumstances use the CR system or monster statblocks as they are. That shit is built under the assumption that you have at least one caster and the entire party has magic weapons and items that buff ability scores, and it still functions poorly as a guideline. If you do not rebuild it from the ground up or use custom monsters I guarantee you will accidentally ram a spiky owlbear dick up your players' collective nonmagical asses at some point.

The only way to maybe avoid this is to use 3rd party rules like Dreamscarred Press to get Initiators. It's the Pathfinder equivalent of the Book of Nine Swords, but it will also overshadow the non-Initiating classes. You either go all or none with Initiators, otherwise people get left behind. Having said this, though, they'll still need magic items to deal with the standard monsters unless you put in the work to tailor threats to the party.

Don't do this to yourself.

>>50500012
Keep in mind that D&D 3.5 is balanced upon the assumption that players have their welth by level (aka fuckton of magical bling). If you take it alway, the capacity of players will fall greatly, and you need to be careful with TPK.

>>50502997
>tfw I found at least 5 GMs who didn't understand that even after hours of explaining and kept getting mad everytime we got TPKed "ruining" his precious story

>>50500012
Not DnD. Maybe 5e if you must, but I really wouldn't.

Try something else. SoS or Dogs in the Vineyard or something, I don't really play no-magic games.

You can certainly run 5e with no magic. I run it low magic, more swords and sorcery type.

Magic exists, but it's usually dangerous and associated with terrible, terrible outcomes. I told my PCs that if they chose a magic class that they might be treated as though they are witches or conscripted into the court of a leader who wishes to manipulate them.

But there's no ubiquitousness of magic like you might find in Forgotten Realms. I run a setting closer to Witcher or Conan in style.

>>50500012
>should i use d&d or pathfinder?
No.

>>50500733
>Which may be missing the point of a low-magic game.
What do you think the point is? I thought it was just to not have magic.

>>50500012
Burning Wheel.