Observations II: Daring a new perspective on ability scores ... (Design Post)

Yesterday we had the third session of testing bits and pieces of Lost Songs of the Nibelungs. It's true what they say, there are things that sound good on paper, but fall flat in the game. Ability scores in LSotN (I call them "qualities") are a good example for that. This post is about how I intend to address the flaws I saw. I'll challenge the general concept that high stats are good stats and that they need to grow with experience, so those not into LSotN might still find some meat to chew on in this post ...

Popular choices and the hard sell

This is going to be a hard sell. One could say that the principles behind ability scores are a universal scheme among almost all the role playing games out there. Regardless of how those ability scores (or what ever name the designers thought better/more distinctive) are generated, be it random or point buy or divine intervention, you'll have the general assumption that there is some sort of distinguishing scale to those stats, almost always in connection with the idea of possible growth and expansion.

So if "high" is "good" than "higher" must be "better", right? It's not far fetched to assume that those ideas are directly connected to in-game level advancement which, in turn, is (most likely) derived from our cultural conceptions of education, advertisement and achievements. "Better" in this context means "more" and/or "new", so if you advance a level it wouldn't feel like an achievement if you didn't get something for it to show.

There's nothing wrong with that, of course. "Needs" are, if you think a about it, the basic catalysts of every game. We want that new skill, more hit points, more spells and all that. It drives a player in a game to get that next advantage. There's also some importance to the illusion that there is no tangible limit to expansion.

So it's really understandable why high stats and mechanics associated with that are so popular in role playing games. It's quite natural. So natural, in fact, that tinkering with those mechanics might very well incur some people's displeasure with the proposed changes, despite the merits they might bring to the table.

But ability scores could instead ...

First of all, the problem I encountered. Ability scores in LSotN are considered pools that get drained during a game. A character could get damage to his sanity or health or, well, all of them, really. Once that damage reaches a certain point, it'll be harder to heal and even leave scars or permanent damage. Even to a point where the permanent damage lead to an unfortunate end for a character (too much damage, going insane, getting betrayed, stuff like that).

But generating ability scores kept following the good old "3d6 in a row" routine (here is the post explaining it in detail), which turned out to make book keeping that much more difficult.

It's not that the players didn't like the idea or how it affected the game, but the particulars made it cumbersome to use at the table. I think this is mostly due to the high level of abstract variety in the original results. It's too easy to loose track of what's happening, because math rears it's ugly head and smiles nasty. So yesterday I came to the conclusion that I needed to do something about that. It needs some streamlining.

I think the solution is already in the system, but instead of allowing a random generation of ability scores, every player gets a fixed set of ability scores. To allow some variety, I'd go with three sets of values. Players get to decide during character generation two high ability scores (18 each), two normal ability scores (16 each and two low ability scores (12 each). That's it.

Working with fixed numbers makes it easy to illustrate how getting them damaged affects them (since it's always the same procedures with the same numbers) and with that out of the way, the effects are more palpable during the game.

So level zero characters are all more or less of the same mold. They have the same potential. The rules for permanent damage ensure the development of individual characters over time, but the beauty of it is that those changes are always connected to what happened to the characters. It's personal, so to say, and as such easier to follow in each individual case because it forms the history of a character. It also allows for a learning curve as the mechanic is used in an organic way during play. It's a very different kind of bookkeeping, as a player not only notes the permanent damage his character gets, but also links it to how the character is affected by it and where the injury occurs. 

This is what ability scores could do in a game: they mirror what a character has experienced, translating it to solid data in the process. But it also means that ability scores will get lower and lower over time and that's the problem I was talking about earlier in the post. People want their characters to get stronger over time, not weaker.

Decreasing ability scores vs. level advancement

Although it's a hard point to sell, I believe it's the way to go. To some degree it's how it is in real life: we all have the same potential and life has a way of changing that over time. With age we get weak, collect our own little idiosyncrasies and little pains, all the small things that make individuals what they are.

But we also grow in areas. We learn things, we try to overcome our deficiencies (or not) and we fight to keep what we achieved in life. And if the system allows for the one aspect (collecting little scars over time) it needs to embrace the other aspects, too. This is where level advancement comes into play.

I'm lucky in that regard, as the advantages a character gets with level advancement are already disconnected from the ability scores. A player decides which ability score gets a +1 with level advancement and that's independent to how high that ability score is. The idea here was to keep ability scores flexible (they change a lot during play) and give some permanent values connected to advancement and the decisions a player makes for his character.

A character will be good with a sword, if the player decides so and the ability scores have some influence on that in the game, it's just not that much of an influence anymore. You keep what you learned, the body gets just weaker with age.

The Silver Horde: old and scarred, but also experienced as hell (from
Terry Pratchett's "The Last Hero", illustrated by Paul Kidby) [source*]

And the permanent damage doesn't need to be that permanent, too, as a character could regain some of it if he takes the time to heal those wounds (as described in this post).

All this forms a strong connection between system and narrative. The game changes and marks characters with what they encounter, but the players decide the directions their characters take in their journey to becoming heroes. I am quite happy with that.

The big picture and final observations

Character creation is fast and simple. A character starts as level zero, the player decides the values for his ability scores as described above. Then he rolls his bloodline (detailed post is here) which results in a (small) selection of starting skills, advantages and items. It's where a character comes from and what he could gather from his upbringing and family background. It also connects a character with the group, as he'll have a status and some family bonds with other group members. A roll of 2d6 finally determines a characters health (lower result) and his endurance (higher result). Give him or her a name and it's done.

As the story now unfolds a character gains experience and encounters difficulties. With experience he'll advance to what makes a hero. He'll learn to use magic, how to move with stealth or how to become a superior swordsman. But the things he'll encounter will form him, too, and he'll collect scars on soul and body along with the stories how they occurred. Some of those scars will stay with him for the rest of his life, some might even lead to his demise, but every so often he'll be able to overcome them if he takes the time and he could regain his former strength once more to face fate yet another season.

The system supports this struggle and a DM using the ability scores appropriately will have all the tools he needs to produce the tension that comes along with such struggles. And without much fuss, I might add.

But I am again at a point where I have to ask myself if it's justified to call this a clone of D&D, as what sure enough started as a retro-clone strays more and more away from the original design choices that made D&D what it is today (even in all it's variety). I'm still undecided, but I will say that it's still close enough to D&D to allow some reflection about what D&D does and how taking a different perspective on something like ability scores opens up new possibilities. Taking nothing for granted makes us free to end up with informed decisions about the way we play our games and I believe that's a good thing.

*Seems also to be a very interesting blog, by the way ...

The White Whale and the Sickness (Noircana and lack of posting)

Long story short, got the flu from my nephews and wasn't able to post or read anything the last few days. But I will be back very soon....

Noircana could very well be my White Whale. I had time to think about it and it really is a lot to digest. But...

This being a crazy pet project, I still think it can be done (love Porky's enthusiasm and ideas, too, so there is that). And just when I was out on the balcony smoking a cigarette, thinking about Moby Dick and how this could be the perfect excuse, I had an idea how to frame the boardgame aspect. Life stays interesting that way.

So I'm giving this some air now to let it breathe and will be back with an example as soon as I have whipped it up (hoping for suggestions on the way...).

Noircana Boardgame Aspect (pitch)

Giving a region ability scores works. Class is a bit more difficult, mainly because harvesting and nurturing them will alter the stats of a region.

Anyway, I was thinking about this the wrong way. Or at least I was intimidated by the sheer amount of the necessary results to make this work. It should simulate some kind of evolution, after all.

Now for the frame (need to flesh this out more):

• One round covers 100 years development in a region.
• 10+1d10 rounds constitute  a turn and that's the time between cataclysms (a tabula rasa with left overs, basically).
• INT (for Mana) and WIS (for Chi) give a region Action Points to handle the opposition. They regenerate every round.
• At the beginning of every round, a region may invest in several things to "gear up" for the opposition (Class could be one of those things, but also nurturing aspects, etc.). Initiative might be a good idea here, too.
• One of the things that have to be bought, is a "die against the universe". It's the bet a region has to make. A low die (d4) would be cheap (and would leave more room to handle existing threats or create sentient beings in harmony with the region), but dangerous (could cause new opposition or catastrophes).
• Before every round, every region gets 1d4-1 opposition dice (the cataclysms before should leave some opposition before the game starts, too, I guess).
• Every opposition will have a d6 score (rolled just like for the regions, reroll 6s and doubles, triples produce 2 rerolls), targeting one of the regions ability scores (random, 1d6 decides). Apply bonuses (this will result in penalties for low oppositions and I think it could be the harvesting-rate), define by the nature of the ability score attacked (WIS could be climate or earthquakes, CON biomass, etc.).
• More than one ability score as opposition could mean several "weak" entities or just one strong (DM decides/sees what fits).
• This being about ressource management, the decisions how many points are used for the "die against the universe" and how the rest is distributed (in connection with initiative and, maybe, level) will make the game. Describing how the effects manifest will describe the world (Mana will have a magic related effect, Chi will have natural consequences).
• Now the fighting begins, with the ability scores being the targets. This is another tricky part. My core idea so far is to make a die drop chart to use with all the "bought" dice, using the interrelations between the dice to interpret the results (with higher results being more favourable, and the decisions made before minimizing the risk).
• Cooperation between regions and Adaptation (I'm thinking, giving a region the Thief Class could allow some "stealing", for example) will be part of this (same could go for the opposition, cataclysm could be unifying factors for that, like spawning leaders and/or immortals).
• Final thoughts: Opposition might be turned (a MU living in harmony with the region, for example) or destroyed, but it might also establish itself (a city could be an example for that). The summ of the abillity scores could be the size of a region (maybe creating 2 miles hexes per point), harvested regions could be (dependig on the nature of the harvesting, that is: the decreased ability score) settlements, badlands, monsters, dead woods, dungeons, etc., so the region evolves automatically and will have "traces" of the past. Catastrophes will harm land AND opposition, so so forcing them will be a gambit, but could help a region (wars, earthquakes, etc.).

Now, this is the back of the White Whale in the distance. I'll be off, trying to get a better look and - hopefully - slay the beast some day in the future*.

*This means some more digesting and playtesting, I guess.

Personal Magic Weapons

This is a little something I really liked while we played the German Midgard RPG back in the day. Everytime a character's main weapon dealt a critical hit the player had, at the end of the session, the chance to give  a small part of his soul into the weapon (and make it a personalized magic weapon). To that end the player had to roll a d100 on a table similar to this one (I changed it a bit for D&D):

d100      Effect
1-93      no effect
94-95     +1 to hit against enemy slain*
96-97     +1 to hit
98-99     +1 to damage
100       personal effect related to the incident and a re-roll** 

*Happens just the one time and against the enemy the weapon was used against when the critical hit occured. It stays fixed on that type of enemy and may only increase if a another critical hit against that type of enemy is cast (and the d100 comes up with 94 or 95).  

**The second time this happens, it increases the first effect, the third time the weapon will get a name and there is a 40% chance (minus CON) that the weapon takes a great part of the character's soul after the owners death (the effects do not vanish in that case). This chance will increase by 5% every time this comes up again.

The results stack, of course. And the magic works only if the owner is wielding it. If the owner dies and the weapon has no name yet, all powers it had are gone. If the bonuses stack to a +5 all in all, there is a 5% chance for every +1 to remain in the weapon (now usable by everyone wielding it).

I like to let the players make the roll (it's something they are looking forward to). But if you roll it as a DM, it might have some positive aspects, too (just from a narrative perspective, I guess).

It might be a good idea to involve clerics in this a bit, like encouraging some rituals or weapons cults to increase the chance to "load" the weapon with pieces of the owners soul (character smites foe with mighty 20 + cleric makes a fuss about it = +1 to +5 on d100).

It's not much, but the players liked it quite a bit. And in the long run, they might have a very personal magic weapon they can call their own. With a history and all that.

Armour class and basic looting, Part 2

As announced, here is a short one about prices and quality. There are 6 areas that can be covered for armour: head, torso, two arms and two legs (see also part 1). Basic assumptions are all about items of good quality (3 items of good quality light armor is AC 6, etc.). I'd go for 3 kinds of quality in this:

• poor quality (pq)
• good quality (gq, being standard)
• excellent quality (eq, might be tailored, for example)

Poor quality:

This is off the shelf material or shoddy craftmanship (or both). It's generally cheaper, but you nead 2 areas covered, instead of one, to achieve the effects of good quality. It doesn't protect that well and most of the time it's not that comfortable. So, for example, some off the shelf leather trousers do the job (two legs, two areas vovered, counts as one item of good quality). Basically, when using poor quality, you need to cover the whole body with one category of armour to get the full effect of an AC (6 items).

Good Quality:

The standard. Military armour is often like that. They may be stacked. A chainmail coif (medium armour) and a medium armour helmet count as one piece heavy armour. A nice effect of this is, that armour will not only be used more consciously, but also be a little bit more realistic (without being to complex, I hope).

Excellent quality:

Often very expensive, mostly tailored. Any negative effect on encumbrance or movement is halved. Magic armour is always excellent quality.

Prices

This is going to be a little bit more expensive and starting equipment will most of the time only consist of the most basic protection available. But this being part of the game, it's no disadvantage. On the contrary, this is about looting stuff and enhancing the meaning of "normal" equipment on lower levels.

Some classic looting (Paul Jamin, Le Brenn
et sa part de butin, 1893, public domain)

The following prices are more guidelines than anything else. Local shops might be cheaper or more expensive (as the DM sees fit). And there is always the possibility for characters to go for the basic materials themselves (a nice opportunity to let them hunt for pelts or something like that) and drive down the costs. But this is how I'd do it:

Light Armour

• poor quality: 10 gp per protected area
• good quality: 30 gp per protected area
• excellent quality: 60 gp per protected area

Medium Armour

• poor quality: 90 gp per protected area
• good quality: 130 gp per protected area
• excellent quality: 200 gp per protected area

Heavy Armour

• poor quality: 300 gp per protected area
• good quality: 400 gp per protected area
• excellent quality: 600 gp per protected area

For armour with magic properties the prices are multiplied with:

10 x (Ac bonus + number of special abilities)

Have fun looting stuff!

Again, I hope it isn't too complex. Next up are some ideas about abilities and magic items. After that I should return to weapon mastery, I guess (totally chickened out to do that, but it needs to be done...).

Armour class and basic looting, Part 1

When players buy armour, they most of the time just buy the best AC they can get. They don't care that much what it looks like or who made it. The only thing important is what you're allowed to wear and what is the easiest way to get it. As far as roleplaying goes, this is a missed opportunity.

Questions like "how could a cloak influence AC" just aren't asked. Or what about trousers, arm protection and helmets? Nobody cares that much (other than as part of a whole package or it comes with magical properties, that is). I'd like to change that (in my game, at least), so here are a few ideas how to get this a little bit more flexible and relevant.

AC is only a category, not a set.

Just by looking at the unmodified numbers, it could be splitted like this:

9 - without armour.
8 to 6 - light armour*
5 to 3 - medium armour
2 to 0 - heavy armour

Those are the 4 categories characters can have anyway. And if shields are not treated as something seperate, it changes nothing.

Categories are about material.

Six areas need to be protected: head, torso, two arms, two legs (most of the time). Any three items of light armor give a character an unmodified AC of 6 (light/small shield could be one of those items). Any one piece of medium armor (as a substitute or an addition) improves your armour by one (up to AC 3). You need at least 3 items of medium armour and one item of heavy armour to get AC 2 another piece of heavy armour and you have AC 1. In conclusion, with 3 items of medium armour and 3 of heavy armour, the whole body is covered = AC 0 (taking of a helmet, for example, would be AC 1 again).This is still about unmodified AC. And it looks something like this:

• AC 8: (heavy) leather, heavy fabrics, fur and skins (one main piece)
• AC 7: (heavy) leather, heavy fabrics, fur and skins (2 pieces)
• AC 6: (heavy) leather, heavy fabrics, fur and skins (3 pieces)

• AC 5: heavy leather, furs or hide (reinforced with metal, wood or bone), also chain, banded or scale mail (at least two pieces light armour and one piece medium armour)
• AC 4: heavy leather, furs or hide (reinforced with metal, wood or bone), also chain, banded or scale mail (one piece light armour and two pieces medium armour)
• AC 3: heavy leather, furs or hide (reinforced with metal, wood or bone), also chain, banded or scale mail (three pieces medium armour)

• AC 2: mostly metal and/or bone (three pieces medium armour and one piece heavy armour)
• AC 1: mostly metal and/or bone (three pieces medium armour and two pieces heavy armour)
• AC 0: mostly metal and/or bone (three pieces medium armour and three pieces heavy armour)

So any combination of armour can get you to the AC your class is entitled to. Let's say a fighter has a fur cloak, some good leather trousers and a horned helmet (a little metal and hardened leather for the helmet). Further assume the trousers and the cloak are light armour, the helmet is medium. Even without a shirt (going for the look and all) he'd be at an AC of 5 (unmodified). Add two metal arm protectors and he is at 3 (still all style over substance...). Give this guy a breastplate, a metal helmet and some chainmail trousers and he's in full plate (AC 0).

It's the basic idea, anyway. But there is more. Two layers of light armour could count as medium armour, for instance. Or: if a character wears more items than needed to get an AC, he can loose or discard them without penalty (a helmet or a shield, etc.). Wearing not enough items would degrade items you wear up to the point the requirements are fulfilled (wearing only 4 items of heavy armour and nothing else, would mean 3 of them count as medium armour, AC would be 2, see below). Stuff like that, but:

Now loot those bodies!

The beauty of it is that armour becomes an interesting part of the game. Starting equipment should just allow for the basic needs. It's not that easy to get descent armour around any corner, to be honest. Why should the smith at your village have all this stuff in stock anyway? But if you see a nifty helmet on that orc chief, it adds to your armour and you have a story to tell about it. Make the need for protection part of the game, but let the players fight for it. It's easy enough to keep track of and adjust armour on the fly. Take for instance this random pic:

Great art and it's from molybdenumgp03

Helmet? Check. Both arms protected? Check and check. Torso? Check! Now, I'd say the arms and the head are protected by medium armour, torso protected by heavy armour (but I could go either way here...). So this dame is down to AC 2 (unmodified)...

Part 2 will be about prices and quality, Part 3 should be about attributes and magic.

*Symmetry being the only reason here.

Why not to extinguish Halflings, Part 2 (introducing the Halfing Adventurer a.k.a. The Contractor)

Why not, indeed (see also Part 1). The idea behind this exercise is to find some kind of tagline or abstract to make Halfings (or any race/species, for that matter) interesting for players and an active part in any setting. Elves, for example, could be summarized like this:

"Elves are known to be immortal fairy creatures. To exist in the mortal world they have to become mortal themselves. Reasons for this are diverse and mostly, in one way or another, connected to the Unseelie Court of the Fae. Their motivations may seem alien to most mortals, but in their fight against evil forces they make formidable allies and adventurers. Becoming mortal for a given time is a strange and new experience for those beings, even though they might have existed for centuries already. When they rest, their soul visits the realm of the Fae. When they die and the body is not buried in earth connected to their realm, their soul is lost and may haunt the mortal world. In their mortal form they are a little bit smaller and fragile then humans and have pointy ears. Hair, skin and eye colour vary and may be chosen by the player."(oriented on my thoughts here)

For Halflings it's a little bit more difficult. At least if the idea has to play in an old edition of D&D. This dissolves to some degree with the 3rd edition, but for no other good reason than rules-related diversity. If one had to give an engaging abstract about Halflings in 3.0, one would still be lost (excluding, of course, setting specific sourcebooks, but I digress...). In the Rules Cyclopedia Halflings are decribed like this:

"A halfling is a short demihuman, and looks much like a human child with slightly pointed ears. A halfling stands about 3' tall and weighs about 60 pounds. Halflings rarely have beards. Halflings are outgoing but not unusually brave, seeking treasure as a way to gain the comforts of home, which they so dearly love. Halflings prefer to live in pleasant areas of fair countryside near rolling hills and gentle streams. When not working or adventuring, halflings will spend most of their time eating, drinking, talking with friends, and relaxing. Their communities are called shires, and their recognized spokesman is called a Sheriff. Halfling families live in Clans.

Halflings are woodland folk, and usually get along well with elves and dwarves. They have special abilities in the outdoors. Halflings behave similarly to fighters and dwarves. A halfling's saving throws are as good as those of dwarves. Halflings may only advance..." (Rules Cyclopedia, p. 26)

So this says... nothing. It's all pleasant, fair and gentle. They rarely have beards and like to eat and drink? Sure helps a lot to get a player in the mood. Well, they need an edge. Maybe they need a history?

Halflings, 20.000 years ago (give or take):

Most likely were the first to have some kind of agriculture and very protected, hidden settlements. So they might have been horticultural from early on, organized in small groups of families (no surprise there, I guess), staying in contact via shamans. Mostly avoided social contact to anything bigger than them and lived very reclusive, say in valleys or on islands. Easy enough, they were very good at sneaking around. Other useful tools they needed to develop were effective traps and strong bows. Domestication is also a big thing.

Being more peaceful than destructive and not abusive with magic, they did get along well with elves (good saves tend to help against tricky magic, too). Early production of tools for, say, mining (but all kind of tools are interesting, really) and a tendency to build their settlements in caves (much safer) makes for good trading contacts with dwarves. All that leads to cultural exchange and positive relations (up to protection) long before humans got there, but (also due to the higher live expectancy) to a less aggressive expansion (again, in comparison to humans).

Random legacies: now buried protective magics, decayed and misfiring near a village of your choice; ancient recipies, worth 1000 of gold pieces for collectors (drawings in a cave); ghost shaman, out to avenge the slaughter of his people, triggered by ... ; undead halfling warrior, hunting a recently resurfaced (unleashed?) ancient foe; ...

High Culture, 6.000 years ago (and for nearly 2.000 years):

The Great Travel was the beginning of a stellar cultural and technological development. With threats all around halfling communities throughout the world, spiritual spokesmen, guided by The Great Goddess*, united all Halflings for a long journey full of deprivation to an island** to form a new society. An island nation of halflings. And they thrived. Being ingenius craftsman and thaumaturgs, halflings stayed in contact with elves, dwarves and culturally higher developed civilisations all over the known world by using flying ships (manufactured with the oil of moonlight, a halfling relic, Rules Cyclopedia, p. 146, but it needs to be a lot more effective than described there, maybe an ancient version...).

Those vessels could only fly with moonlight, so halflings needed to have good night vision (maybe like elves) and very good navigation skills (by the stars and with very good maps). This high culture produced many legends, of course***. Flying vessels, highly effective missile weapons, strange machines, expensive spices (not to forget delicious food and beverages), aid given by this ancient race in epic battles, all this could give a rich background for tales, songs and legends still recited to this day. They didn't need that much protection anymore.

Of course, a world shuttering catastrophe of sorts brought destruction to this culture and most of the achievements got left behind in ruin as the world fell into anarchy. Nobody knows for sure how this happened (there were many theories, naturally) and the location of the island, with all the treasures and secrets it could hold, is lost (the old races won't talk about it either).

Random legacies:  ports on mountains and connected to dwarven settlements (lost or forgotten); a hidden salt mine with factory, heavily protected; strange artifacts, mostly cooking devices, but also (maybe) weapons of mass destruction; a halfling spa with a legendary well of restoration in a lost valley, it's in a jungle with dinosaurs and savages; finding the legendary halfing island is stuff for a campaign and should be a real scavenger hunt, many have tried and failed, mysterious halfling cultists with strange weapons protect the secrets, finding it should change the face of the world etc.,etc.; ...

Scattered, but still around (4.000 years ago til recent history):

So the world fell into some kind of dark age for about 500 years. Everyone struggled tried to rebuild, failed, the usual. Halflings (and here is a surprise) were an integral part of this process. This is only reasonable, because in this fictional history they got some essential talents to make this happen:

• Due to their (extensive) travels they had not only the best maps of the then known world, but also the diplomatic connections to elves, dwarves and most of the civilised human empires.
• The need to reestablish civilisation is obvious. In a barbaric world they are just prey (and might have been on occasion in the last 4000 years). In a civilised world they fit in the cracks and find the comfort they got used to.
• Their island nation (and most of their achievements with it) might have been lost, but some of the knowledge and devices must have been still around. Again with the need to protect them.

Now we have a picture of the halflings nature. If they are able to achieve a protected home base, they thrive to the benefit of all civilised nations. In realising this, they need to be capable to get there, too. So they are diplomatic, civilised, nifty craftsmen and experienced travellers.

They might not be great warriors, but they are great adventurers, infiltraters and thieves (which is a harsh word and they wouldn't call themselves that, maybe specialists?) with an attitude towards "if it's not protected good enougth, it might as well be useful..." and a good sense for business. Altruistic by nature, they have no problem with helping others to help themselves.

They oppose evil and destructive forces that threaten civilisation. Traditionally they go on adventures only to use their talents, earn some experience and get the gold they need to settle down for good as fast as possible (usually to open a business of sorts). Any halfling going further than needed will feel the social pressure (and here are the level restrictions...).

Random legacies: elite academies, education is key; highly organized bands of adventurers; excellent craftsmen from brewers to trap-builders, many a wizard contracted a halfling architect to protect his dungeon; famous diplomats and thaumaturgs; many attempts to restore the legendary island nation; ...

The halfling in the Rules Cyclopedia (p. 27), art by Terry Dykstra

The Halfling Adventurer (aka The Contractor)

This is mostly the halfling as written in the Rules Cyclopedia. The changes are either house rules I already presented somewhere or stuff I wrote about in this post (nightvision, special advantage, skill mastery, etc.). It plays out like this:

Prime Requisites: Dexterity and Charisma (or Luck)
Experience Bonus: 5% for DEX or CHA higher than 12, 10% for DEX and CHA higher than 12
Hit Dice: 1d6 per level up to 9th level.
Maximum Level: 9 (I decided to give them one more level, saves stay the same for 9th level)
Armour: any up to banded mail, no plate mail, no suit armor, shilds permitted
Weapon: restricted by size
Combat Progression: as demi-human
Weapon Mastery: as demi-humans (optional rule: 1d6)
Special Ablities:

• Skill Mastery (yeah, this includes backstabbing, but only for ranged weapons)
• 5 skills (acrobatics, sabotage, sleight of hand, stealth, 1 craft or social skill (players choice))
• Nightvision (like elves in my game and in contradiction to the Rules Cyclopedia where elves got infravision)
• Use magic scroll (from the beginning, alternative rule: mana is used to activate scroll)
• +2 AC bonus against Enemies bigger than medium sized
• Special Advantage: Civilised, d% roll vs. ([3 x Charisma/Luck] + [2 x Lvl]); usable in any kind of social interaction, when successful, the interaction plays out in favour for the halfling (this is mostly instead of a passive reaction modifier)

New xp value to reach level 2: 2100 xp

Again, a very long post with a lot of stuff in it. I hope this presents the halfling in a somewhat different light and has a few new ideas to ponder on. For me at least halflings are now way more play- and usable without being too far away from the original. Now I have to do this for the dwarves...

* Name as per setting.
** In size much like Japan, maybe.
*** I'm thinking Atlantis here.

Let's loot the Mystic for fun and profit (Part 1)

The Mystic, as introduced in the Rules Cyclopedia, is far too special to be of any use in a campaign. I had my take on a Monk about a year ago, but that's not what this is about. Parts of the subsystems used for the Mystic are ripe for looting and that's what I intend to do here...*

The Mystics acrobatic ability is an easy one to steal!

This subsystem in itself is pretty flawed. A Mystic can do Jumps and Flips, move over difficult terrain without penalty and stuff like that, but he gets a -20% xp-penalty for something that should be possible with any character in any game. Plus: it's in addition to the skill system presented in the RC, which is making it kind of redundant. But here is the interesting part (quoting Rules Cyclopedia, p. 30):

"The mystic's chance to perform any of these
actions successfully is calculated this way: Three
times the mystic's Dexterity score plus two times
the mystic's experience level equals the mystic's
percentile chance to perform the action. 

Acrobatics Check =
d% roll vs. ([3 x Dex] + [2 x Lvl])"

It made me thinking. Using it for specific actions is not working (with a skill system, etc.), but describing it as some kind of special advantage a character has might just do fine for flavour. Now it looks like this:

Special Advantage =
d% roll vs. ([3 x significant attribute] + [2 x Lvl])
+ 100 xp to base value of chosen class (using this again)

Example?

A player in my group wanted to play a fighter of noble heritage. With this subsystem it turned out to be:

Noble Heritage =
d% roll vs. ([3 x Charisma] + [2 x Lvl])
xp needed to reach level 2 = 2100 (2000 xp as fighter + 100 xp)

With level 3 and 15 CHA he had a 51% chance to use his noble heritage in the game, be it to intimidate officials, to get informations from other nobles or whatever he and the DM think fits in a given situation. One time he demanded a fair duell, because the group was outnumbered and he saw a chance to appeal to the honour of the bandits leader.

It's not much, but I figured it gives players one more tool to interact with the game world and adds a little flavour without taking too much space...

*I realized I'm going to need this for a post about halflings in the (very) near future. It's short enough and I will reference it quite often.

Die Hard 0e (or: Exhausted Characters in Combat)

Another part of my houserules for the gentle reader to consider.

And another Hackmaster 4e relic

Arguably the best tools for a DM help him describing the situation the characters are in and happen to work by just looking at what's already there. I like my games as gritty and dirty as your next favourite Die Hard movie and I like giving my players the feeling they can shine in the most desparate situations without throwing encounter after encounter at them. So, I thought, an element of exhaution, like the rules for Fatigue in Hackmaster, would do just fine in my game.

How to implement Exhaustion in an D&D game (a proposal)

Take half your Con as Endurance. In a fight you loose one point per round, with a critical hit you loose as much Endurance as you've lost hp. If you play with skills, you may allow players with a related skill to have their full Con as Endurance (alternatively you could give only fighters full Con or whatever tickles your fancy). Ten minutes of resting and breathing hard after a fight regenerates all but one point of your Endurance. This is cumulative until you have a full rest.

What happens if you hit zero endurance?

With zero Endurance a character counts as Exhausted. He is last in initiative and (playing with Rules Cyclpedia) his Weapon Mastery is down to Basic. MUs have to make an Int-check when casting or the spell (mana, whatever) is lost. Every round after that gives a cumulative -1 to AC, to-hit and check until it reaches the characters negative Endurance value. After that the character goes down, breathing hard and only able to crawl.

Monsters and Endurance

As easy as: 4 + Monsters HD as written (example (Goblin): 4 + 1 HD-1 = 4 Endurance)

Next up: Die Hard 0e (or: Exhausted Characters and Skills)

There is a lot more to say about Endurance in a game, but this is another post entirely...

Choleric Thief meets fat Wizard

As an optional rule my players may roll during character creation (but AFTER choosing a class) on the following table (it's inspired by an Arduin table, but I tinkered a little bit with it):

Character Aspects (1d20)

1-2    Thin (-1 to Strength)
3-4    Choleric (-1 to Wisdom, +1 to Constitution)
5-6    Melancholic (+1 to Intelligence)
7-8    Nimble (+1 to Dexterity)
9-12   Normal
13-14  Serene (+1 to Wisdom)
15-16  Vivid (+1 to Luck/Charisma)
17-18  Brawny (+1 to Strength)
19-20  Fat (+1 Constitution, -1 Dexterity)

If I need some characteristics for NPCs fast, I use this table too. It doesn't change a lot, but it can give a character some depth if the player is willing. Ask the thin dwarf, he'll tell you...

"Initiative!" Part 1 (Basics)

This is a little subsystem for Initiative I cooked up with my players. It introduces Player-Coop and flexible Combat Moves to D&D without being too complex. It's a rather long post with a lot of stuff in it, so for your compensation:

"Roll for initiative, fools!"*

Initiative is trouble

Despite the fact that there are several ways to handle Initiative in D&D, most of them (if not all of them) are derived from the idea of fighting battles with miniatures. That's not bad at all and you can play it very fast and simple by rolling a d6 for every side and be done with it. Or you may have individual Ini, too, all with amour restrictions, weapon speed and whatnot. Regardless how you play it, I always felt something missing. There is no tension and no narrative aspect provided in those rules.

What? It's all right there, man!

True, you have the freedom to play the game (and combat especially) all the way you want. But that's not the point. I would like to have a simple system that considers the rules but gives the players a little something to think outside the box and to cooperate. Not the usual hack-and-getting-hacked-at routine.

Initiative fast and furious?

This is how we do it. Take an ability (we take Luck but you might also take DEX, I have my reasons, though), divide it by 6 (round up) and you have the number of d6 you might use for your Initiative. Add AC (descending AC, I might add), DEX bonus, Level of Weapon Mastery (we play Rules Cyclopedia, after all) and any relevant bonuses from magic.

(Luck/6)d6 + AC + DEX bonus + Level Weapon Mastery + Magic bonuses (if any)

Combat Moves and Player Coop

Every natural 6 and rolled doubles are worth a Combat Move, triplets are worth 2 Combat Moves and so forth. Furthermore you get an extra d6 for any rolled 6. For Coop you may compare you results with another player to get more Combat Moves. Example:

Player 1 (Fighter, Luck 15): 2 5 6 1 (bonus d6)
Player 2 (Magic User, Luck 5**): 5
Player 3 (Thief, Luck 12): 3 6 3 (bonus d6)
Player 4 (Cleric, Luck 9): 2 5
Player 5 (Fighter, Luck 13): 2 5 5

Let's say Fighter and Thief fight together in this combat. They would have 4 Combat Moves to share in this encounter (two doubles and two sixes). The other team (MU, Cleric and the second fighter) would have 4 Combat Moves to share (one quadruplet and one double).

So what is a Combat Move? A player might spend one Combat Move per attack to aid his allies or to put more hurt on his enemies. It's an additional attack roll vs. the enemies AC and success means a +1d4 for any one combat related coefficient that round (it may be the enemies AC, his Fatigue, a damage roll, etc.***). Succeeding with two Combat Moves in a row fixes the result from the first roll for the fight.

Example:
The Fighter in the Fighter/Thief combo decides to spent his first Combat Move to reduce the AC of the orc chief (a tough SOB with an AC of 2) they fight against. He succeeds, rolls 3 on his 1d4 and reduces the orcs AC to 5 for this round. Even if his following attack fails, the Thief has a better chance to hit the orc, too! In the second round the fighter again spends his Combat Move on reducing the orcs AC and is, again, successful. So, for the rest of the encounter the orc chiefs AC stays reduced to 5.

Reasons for different Class Combos

This is the icing on the cake. When different Classes work together, it effects the fight:

• Fighter and Thief: The pro and the sneaky bastard. The number of Combat Moves they achieve is the number of sneak attacks a Thief may bring into the fight.
• Thief and Thief: They fight dirty. The number of Combat Moves divided by 2 is a bonus to damage rolls.
• Cleric and any number of Followers: Faith United. The number of achieved Combat Moves divided by the number of coop members is a to hit bonus. They scream their gods name a lot.
• Any number of Fighters: Professional hacking. Double their Fatigue and their number of Combat Moves.
• The Wizard: The brain. Add the MUs INT modifier to the achieved Combat Moves.

The enemy

So the players choose their coop, roll for Initiative and count their Combat Moves. But what are they up against? As a DM you only need the HD/level of the Monsters in the encounter. Add 30 to it and compare it to the individual Ini-values of the players. HD/level also indicate the number of Combat Moves a creature has. It may look something like that:


Player 1 (Fighter): 2 5 6 1 =
14 + AC 0 + 1 DEX + 1 (Basic Weapon Mastery)  vs.  6 HD Orc Chief + 30 = 36

To compare Initiative, just substract the players Ini from 30 + HD of the enemy.

36 - 16 = 20

The whole fight would look like this:

First Coop, 4 Combat Moves, 4 Sneak Attacks for the thief.
Player 1 (Fighter): 2 5 6 1 /

16 vs. 20 (6 HD orc chief)

Player 3 (Thief): 3 6 3 /

19 (AC 3, +3 DEX, Basic Weapon Mastery) vs. 17 (6 HD orc chief)

Second Coop, 4 Combat Moves, +2 to hit for the fighter, +1 for the rest.
Player 2 (Magic User): 5 /

14 (AC 8, +1 DEX, Basic Weapon Mastery) vs. 18 (2 HD orc)

Player 4 (Cleric): 2 5 /

9 (AC 0, Skilled Weapon Mastery) vs. 23 (2 HD orc)

Player 5 (Fighter): 2 5 5 /

19 (AC 3, +2 DEX, Skilled Weapon Mastery) vs. 12 (3 HD orc bodyguard)

Changing Coops or establishing a Coop during fights is -4 to Initiative. A round is 6 seconds and you might either attack, cast or move (which includes standing up, etc.). That's it. For this encounter the Thief and the fighter in the second Coop are the fastest, the orcs are next in line, then the rest of the group. Repeat.

It's actually a pretty fast system and easy to keep track of in a combat. But the nice thing is, my players adapted it instantly and the fights are much more intense due to Combat Moves and Player Coop. Opinions? Questions?

* A clip from A Fistful of Dollars.
** Because he sacrificed 8 points to save his ass in another fight. See here.
*** The players are free to decide on the effect, but it's always 1d4.

Kicking it (my take on the Monk class in D&D)

This is an idea I had two years ago (give or take). In my current RC campaign I don't allow the Mystic class. It doesn' fit into the setting. But if I were to do an asia themed setting, I would probably build a new class (or several) for that. Most of all, because everything you need is already in the core rules. You don't need new subsystems to run a new class (at least they shouldn't be the main thing). This post over at the Vaults of Pandius made me realize a simple truth: Wuxia is totally doable with the Magic User spell list!

Every spell in the list might be used to describe a mystic ability displayed as a kung fu move. You put some flavour into spell names and spell descriptions, the spell effects stay as they are. You might just take the MU as written and have your monk right there!

She uses Fly, for sure!

This is how I would do the Monk, though*:

• casts and progresses like a Magic User
• movement rate and AC progress like the special abilities for the Mystic suggest
• Prime Requisite should be Wisdom, not Intelligence
• 1d6 HP per level
• saves like the MU
• may use any weapon, but no armour

The Monk

Prime Requisites: Dexterity and Wisdom
Experience Bonus: 5% for DEX or WIS higher than 12, 10% for DEX and WIS higher than 12
Hit Dice: 1d6 per level up to 9th level. Starting with 10th level, +2 hit points per level, and Constitution adjustments no longer apply.

Maximum Level: 36 (and might go for immortality)
Armour: None, no shilds permitted
Weapon: Any
Combat Progression: like Cleric
Weapon Mastery: normal
Special Ablities: MU spells, AC bonus, increased Movement

Monk Experience Table

Level         XP   AC  Movement     Wuxia/level
                                  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9
  1            0    9     120'    1
  2        2.500    8     130'    2
  3        5.000    7     140'    2   1
  4       10.000    6     150'    2   2  
  5       20.000    5     160'    2   2   1
  6       40.000    4     170'    2   2   2  
  7       80.000    3     180'    3   2   2   1
  8      160.000    2     190'    3   3   2   2  
  9      240.000    1     200'    3   3   3   2   1
 10      390.000    0     210'    3   3   3   3   2
 11      540.000   -1     220'    4   3   3   3   2   1
 12      690.000   -2     240'    4   4   4   3   2   1
 13      840.000   -3     260'    4   4   4   3   2   2
 14      990.000   -4     280'    4   4   4   4   3   2
 15    1.140.000   -5     300'    5   4   4   4   3   2   1
 16    1.290.000   -6     320'    5   5   5   4   3   2   2
 17    1.440.000   -6     320'    6   5   5   4   4   3   2
 18    1.590.000   -6     320'    6   5   5   4   4   3   2   1
 19    1.740.000   -6     320'    6   5   5   5   4   3   2   2
 20    1.890.000   -6     320'    6   5   5   5   4   4   3   2
 21    2.040.000   -6     320'    6   5   5   5   4   4   3   2   1
 22    2.190.000   -6     320'    6   6   5   5   5   4   3   2   2
 23    2.340.000   -6     320'    6   6   6   6   5   4   3   3   2
 24    2.490.000   -6     320'    7   7   6   6   5   5   4   3   2
 25    2.640.000   -6     320'    7   7   6   6   5   5   4   4   3
 26    2.790.000   -6     320'    7   7   7   6   6   5   5   4   3
 27    2.940.000   -6     320'    7   7   7   6   6   5   5   5   4
 28    3.090.000   -6     320'    8   8   7   6   6   6   6   5   4
 29    3.240.000   -6     320'    8   8   7   7   7   6   6   5   5
 30    3.390.000   -6     320'    8   8   8   7   7   7   6   6   5
 31    3.540.000   -6     320'    8   8   8   7   7   7   7   6   6
 32    3.690.000   -6     320'    9   8   8   8   8   7   7   7   6
 33    3.840.000   -6     320'    9   9   9   8   8   8   7   7   7
 34    3.990.000   -6     320'    9   9   9   9   8   8   8   8   7
 35    4.140.000   -6     320'    9   9   9   9   9   9   8   8   8
 36    4.390.000   -6     320'    9   9   9   9   9   9   9   9   9

Known Wuxia is like known spells for MUs.

Add different schools with different wuxia moves (other spell descriptions and/or spell restrictions) and you're good to go!

* For building classes I use this awesome article from breeyark.org. Check it out! 

Hacking Hackmaster Part 2 (who needs charisma anyway?)

So, a wizard enters a bar...

...and sees this stunningly beautiful woman. The player decides to have some fun with it and tries to seduce her. Normally in D&D this calls for a charisma check. But why, could one ask, doesn't he use his intelligence to impress her? He's an academic, after all. It's his thing. As a DM you could be inclined to let it roll this way. And the next thing you know, is that the barbarian at the table sees the wizard go all intellectual on the hottie, looks at his charisma score and decides to use his impressive strength to even the odds. Well, he might have a point, too. It's hard to imagine Conan display some charme on the ladies, while being all macho and muscular might do the trick just fine. Then comes the thief of the group and wants to whisper her in the ear what his dextrous fingers could do for her...

The point is: no one needs charisma, ever. You shine with what you have. You could say, everybody being famous for his charisma (in the real world, mind you) shines just through an intelligent display of his advantages. Any diplomatic endeavour in politics? You might just as well use your intelligence, wisdom or your strength (if you are a bully and like that sort of thing). Your cleric needs some henchmen?  Why not opt for wisdom? He might have it reasonably high and the kind of people he gets along with tend to like religious stuff. It's much more believable.

But where to go from there?

Some time last year all this buzz about the new Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG hit the OSR and one particular post peaked my interest (Jeff's Gameblog is all awesome, by the way, but you might know that already). It was about the features of the new game and someone in the comments wrote this wonderfull idea:

"Looks like a great houserule:

1. Add a new statistic to any classic D&D: Luck, generated normally.
2. At the beginning of each session role a die on a chart for what it effects. 

You could even include reversing effects. What if your luck will modify damage roles against you for this session?"

 Great! One cigarette on the balcony later Charisma was dumped and instead we had Luck in our game. And to make it all stick, I let the players roll a d6 before every session with the following benefits:

1.  Luck adjustment to every to hit roll
2.  Luck adjustment to Armor Class
3.  Luck adjustment for special actions*
4.  Luck adjustment for saves
5.  Luck adjustment to fatigue**
6.  Luck adjustment to damage rolls

They liked it a lot. And it gave me the opportunity to steal (er.. borrow, really) another idea from Hackmaster. Because in Hackmaster you could sacrifice 90 % of your accumulated honor to avoid certain doom. It was a perfect fit. From then on a player could spend 8 points of his luck to cheat death. It would regenerate as soon as he gets a new level. Until then he had to live with the penalty thereof. His luck had changed!

So what about the woman at the beginning who was lucky enough to be that genetically compatible (spell: beautiful). Well, your answer is right there...

Also read: Part 1

*We use that in fights, but that is a story for another post (sorry).
**Need to write something about fatigue, too.

Critical Countdown (addendum to yesterday's post)

This is like talking to myself, but in an OFFICIAL way. So this is good, right? Right. Well, I talked to myself yesterday (on the balcony, with a cigarette) about how to streamline the whole echo-thingie from yesterdays post a little bit more.

In our game, when you roll a 20 for an attack, you get maximum damage and a reroll. If you hit the 20 again (rolling 1d20 + level this time), you have yourself a critical hit! We use the Arduin critical hit table, which is something between cutting of some toes and cutting of a head for 3d6. It's not very balanced and it's on my to-do-list to make a new one.  Hackmaster has a nice critical hit table, but you have to roll 1d10.000 and there is a severity level for an attack. The higher the severity (it's a separate roll), the higher the gore factor. It's one of those nice but time consuming subsystems in Hackmaster I mentioned before. A light version of this system would suit me just fine.

And then it hit me! When using the echo rules for attacks, it would fit very nicely, I thought. Here it comes:

• Rolling a 20 for an attack = always a hit, maximum damage and echo
• Rolling 1 - 11 on 1d12 = straight damage to Endurance
• Rolling a 12 for echo = a critical hit! and third echo
• Rolling 1d10 = severity of the attack (as I see it, some severe damage, like a cut artery or internal damage)
• Every echo after that adds to the severity (if you are that lucky)

Needs testing next saturday!

For severity:

1. no fatigue left, he keeps fighting exhausted*
2. blinded, fighting blind for 1d10 rounds
3. no moral necessary, this one pissed himself and runs 1d6 rounds for his life (or pleads for mercy)
4. enemy is down in agony for 1d3 rounds (no attacks or anything, just screaming)
5. badly stunned for 1d10 turns, your mighty hit made him fly 1d3 meters
6. artery cut, bleeds out in 2d4 rounds, moral check every round, this one is messy
7. internal bleeding, he doesn't know it, but he's dead in 1d6 rounds (keeps fighting, though)
8. guts ripped out, 1 in 1d10 chance of tangling feet, dead in 1d10 rounds, won't fight, but may cast spells
9. groin attack! hacked, clubbed or pierced, it's no nice feeling, this one is down until put out of his misery
10. severe head trauma, goes down and is dead in 1d3 rounds
11. clean kill, he's dead alright
12. man, you're fast! your enemy is not only dead, you get a bonus attack, too
13. off with his head, bonus attack and every enemy in sight has to check for his morale
14. describe this fatal blow, get a bonus attack and every enemy in sight has to check for his morale
15. as 14, but you learned something, get double xp for this kill!
16. as 15, but there is more: a circumstantial bonus of +4 the next time you encounter an enemy like this
17. as 16, but you keep the circumstantial bonus against enemies such as the one you killed (and may give yourself a nickname referring to it, like "Zombieslayer" or something)
18. as 17 plus victory dance, the 1d6 echo roll after that goes to your fame**

That's it for now, folks. It scratched more topics than I imagined. Let's take it to playtesting and see if it rolls...

*We play with fatigue, but this is a subject for another post. In short: you may fight for halve your Con in rounds, after that it's a cumulative -1 on attacks and armor class every round. After a number of rounds equal to his fatigue, he is to exhausted to fight on.
** We play with that, too. More on that later on.