The Evil Ones

Back in 1980, Dragon magazine presented an Anti-Palidin. These guys were stereotypical black hat NPCs. The logic behind them was a Palidin pledged themselves to a dark god. The problem with the article was it presented a way to generate an Anti-Palidin. The same idea was repeated a year later with the Drow in Fiend Folio, character stats for monsters. 

The message was "These aren't exactly monsters, they are more like characters." 

People are going to generate evil characters for a lot of reasons. Giving them a tool to do so isn't always a great idea, but the genie is out of the bag. Having evil characters in the party is problematic. How can the party hold together if half the party is trying to kill the other half? 

I never exactly had this issue for a couple of reasons. I would allow mixed-alignment characters in the party. That is the players' problem to sort out. I have found that player characters tend to moderate themselves in a party. Somehow, people find an accord: 

"Out of the goodness of my heart, and 1,000 gold pieces, I can heal you."

"For a dirty thief, you keep good friends."  

The alignment system in D&D is wonky. It doesn't really mean anything. Good player characters can do bad things and evil player characters can do good things in the right circumstances. There aren't any consequences for being good... or evil. If you want to switch, there are even rules for changing alignment that in my opinion, suck. They are geared to a particular campaign in the mind of the author of the books. They don't make sense in every setting. 

I DO have a problem with inherently evil races in D&D and it's a problem you'd never expect. 

I do voices for NPCs. This creates memorable characters, monsters, and scenarios. The downside is it also conveys tone and information that might be a mismatch for players expectations:

Kobold: "I am going to cut your boots off and wear your feet like boots!" 

10th level Paladin: "Snicker. Just you? Or both of you?" 

Kobolds: "Shit." 

Obviously, 2 Kobolds mean nothing to a 10th-level party. Against first-level characters, they represent some sort of threat, but not for battle-hardened characters. This is villain decay large writ. It is inevitable.

In some respects, using voices and tone gives my campaigns a fairytale-like vibe. What was once fearsome has become childish. Kobolds, goblins, orcs, etc. all become not threatening no matter how evil they are. Yes, you can give them some punch by cranking up the number appearing, but that has nothing to do with evil. 1,000 rats, yaks, or kobolds are dangerous to anyone. Plus rats and yaks aren't evil regardless of their numbers. 

Once the player characters hit a certain level, things like "evil" become nuanced. One example is my character, Magarven. He is a Drow PC adapted to be an NPC. He is clearly evil, but he's also an excellent dinner companion. He (probably) won't try to kill you. But he is still evil. He is gunned up like crazy, but the thought of killing isn't the first thing on his mind. 

The same thing happens to the thieves' guild that harrassed the characters at a low level. Compared to a world-ending lich, exactly how evil are they in comparison? They represent a different threat that has nothing to do with what kind of evil they are.  

I think there is an impetus to conflate evil with competence or ability. There are a lot of evil things out there that simply can't be enacted because they are not well thought out. Selfish people sabotage themselves all the time. Sure, he is a go-getter, but what the heck is he go-getting? 

Why do I let "the evil races" like kobolds not behave evilly? Why do I let players play them? 

Really it is a combination of the fairytale aspect of my gaming plus I can't really force the players or the monsters to behave a certain way, despite labels. Honor is nuanced, just because someone does something "good" doesn't mean they are out for the betterment of others. 

The Great and Power Sauron once said, "Don't kill the hobbits! Bring them to me." 

Guess what? Orcs, goblins, and every other minion of his didn't try to kill the hobbits too often. Nice of them, isn't it? No. They are all still evil, no matter how much food and drink they provide Frodo and Sam.

Evil to me means someone isn't honoring the social compact and bonds between living creatures, but it doesn't mean blindly doing so. There is also a component of self-delusion, the idea that doing evil becomes normal and the actor honestly believes that it is totally normal to do evil things. They are going to say they aren't evil at every opportunity. That is yet another violation of the social compact, although this one is oddly internalized. Add in the fact that if the villain sucks at their life and you get a bit of comedy or tragedy. 

That is good storytelling without ramming the PC's into drawing your conclusions or messages. One player might find it funny, a second finds it tragic and the third simply wants to throw dice and fists and sees no problem with whatever these villains are doing so long as justice prevails. The DM has offered a situation to be considered without forcing a particular point of view. 

The same goes for good characters. Are Palidins expected to heal downed enemies because that is what they would do to be kind? Maybe, but probably not. The players may or may not think of it or have another response based on the situation. 

Brainless creatures are much easier to play as straight-up evil. Everyone gets that you shouldn't talk to zombies or skeletons. It's all about agency and the undead have none, but your average creature does have agency. 

If there is an Assassin and a Paladin in the party, and one is good and one is evil, what of it? The players have to decide what to do. It makes no difference if I say Half-Orc and Kobold. The players are in control of their actions, just as much as I am in control of the NPCs and monsters. If I decide to do something engaging and the players decide they don't want to fight, then maybe we have Tea with the Black Dragon. 

Which is a classic, BTW. 

I Think Marvel Multiverse Role-Playing Game Taught Me To Play D&D e5

I am having a failure to campaign. I wanted to do a Star Wars campaign, but my potential players spotted the Marvel Multiverse Role-Playing Game on my shelf and dove into a rabbit hole of Super Heroes. I wanted to playtest some ideas for my module POP-001 Reverants of Revenants of the Lost Temple but got sidetracked by prototyping a new RPG. Add in the new laser, the tablesaw, and the 3d printer and I am at a loss for what to do first or now. 

So back to basics. I am going to review the games I have acquired over the last year to 18 months. I just need to pick a good one to start on. 

To get this game design bug out of my head, I want to talk about the Marvel game. 

Marvel... it is inescapable right now. We have a couple of movies and TV shows coming out at the same time that the company is kicking out all kinds of new comic books. That's a mighty big rabbit hole to live in. When my kids and friends saw the Marvel RPG, instead of playing the game we ended up watching 3 movies while digging through a box of comics and perusing the rules. 

Friends, I have wasted a day. 

I'll review the Marvel rules eventually, but I THINK I understand what changed between my D&D of the 1970s and 1980s and e5 thanks to this Marvel ruleset. 

The social purpose changed. As a historian, I like this concept. In history, historical people wanted to focus on the ills of the world, but could not effectively mesh the current massive problem with underlying social issues which were also occurring. It usually results in half measures and more problems. The idea the gaming changed on the social side is neat. 

D&D started as a tactical game; it evolved from wargaming. I have X guys and you have Y guys, let's throw some dice to see what happens. Ok? 

D&D adds special abilities and roleplay to a tabletop game, which changes that random dice dynamic. Individuals become heroes, it is important for them to have a past, present, and future and now we have Player Characters.   

When I think of a classic movie, it will be from the 40s, 50s, or 60s. Many of these were big-budget affairs that depicted massive set-piece battles but also had an undercurrent where a gang of scrappy heroes would be the solution. Or they were low-budget and had to have a gang of oddball heroes to compete with big-budget movie spectaculars. This humanized the story and was a satisfying use of characters. Nobody saw the oddball scrappies coming.  

It doesn't even have to be a war movie. Flight of the Phoenix is a movie about people literally building a plane in flight. Just like war movies, it elevates individual characters to heroes or solution-maker status.

Even though there were far fewer character choices in OD&D, Basic D&D, and e1, not all of the rules were harmonized in the mechanics. Because the mechanics were often unique to the class or monster, it was hard for the DM to determine if a scenario was a real challenge. Add in wily player characters, and really strange things happen. This mirrors the movies of the day. No one saw the ending coming and DMs didn't try to adapt to the players. They just rolled with whatever happened because as long as the players were willing to play, there were always new bad guys and challenges.   

Today, if you ask someone about a "classic movie", the answers are very different. It's Star Wars, Batman, Harry Potter, Kill Bill, The Usual Suspects, etc. 

What is different about these films from older classics? Usually, the viewer has awareness of the heroes from the get-go and the bad guy has the advantage of knowing the heroes just as well as the viewer while the heroes are unaware of their opposites' goals. 

Back in the day, D&D didn't have a Session 0. The DM designed his campaign or story in a vacuum and the players subvert this by building the plane in flight. Session 0 was a vague idea when the DM told the players about the world their characters lived in as they rolled up characters, but it occurred at the same time as Session 1. The players are adapting to the DM's world, without the DM thinking about what the characters were all about. Sure there were minor questions to be answered, but those were usually no big deal: 

"Sure you can be a paladin, an assassin, or a cleric! Any class you like is available."
"Yes, you can have full-plate armor, everyone does. It's all the rage, you are cool."
"You want a pseudo-dragon as a familiar? Awesome!" 

It was almost unseemly for the DM to try to negate a character's abilities by reshaping the previously written materials. Yeah, we have all played those games where clerics can't heal, paladins are evil, or wizards are hampered by widespread anti-magic. Those results are really horrible and DM's usually learn not to do those things. 

An excellent modern movie that depicts this idea is Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves. The DM created a scenario in a vacuum and has no idea that zero players have thieving characters. The antagonists think they know what is going on, but usually, they are wrong. The PC's subvert expectations, just like classic D&D. The link above is a post all about the idea where the PC's subvert the basic tenets of the scenario. 

It's great! Everything goes sideways for the DM because they have to cope with the fact zero people are conforming to their original idea. The plane is going down. That is ok because everyone is out there working on the wings. 

In Star Wars and in the MCU, the bad guys know exactly who the heroes are. The author/DM is now creating a checklist of tasks that are measured against the known. The prevalence of Session 0 is almost universal. The harmonized mechanics of D&D e5 make it so simple for the DM to swap out specific antagonists or scenarios to counter the heroes in a way that makes sense... at least in terms of what the DM desires. 

I personally don't like this tactic, but I see the appeal. It makes the game more superhero-like or like a video game while avoiding the trope of simply taking away the hero's abilities, tools, and gear. It is almost fair and just barely dodges railroading. Anything is preferable to taking stuff from the players or railroading, but I dislike this option of plug-and-play gaming. But I understand it.  

I think this is where the idea of DM as a storyteller became overpowering and all-consuming. It's like you are playing against the DM, which is not fun. I have always been a storytelling DM. I create a unique world for the players. BUT I am not "storytelling" in a way to prevent or pervert the player's intentions and goals. There is a difference. 

For example, pawnshops are just as common in my world as magic item shops. New players may not have thought they could find such a thing, but I am not making them shop there. They just know. Horses are also common, the players won't have trouble obtaining one but they don't have to do it. I will tell the players if they are in a kingdom or a republic or something else, which changes a lot of the dynamics of society. I will also let them know if there is a town guard, a marketplace, a city hall, a bank, and whatnot and populate them appropriately. This is the storytelling I do for them. It makes them react if they so choose, it doesn't force them to make specific choices or force them to be something.  

I think I understand e5 better now. What do you think? 

Accommodating the Unrequested

I was going to call this post, "When the players change the rules" but it isn't that at the end of the day.  I used to play in a shared world with 3 rotating DMs who also played characters. This is obviously where my love of NPCs came from as when a player stepped into the DM role, their character faded to NPC status. 

One of my co-DMs favored oddball player characters, usually a druid or illusionist but he really liked the idea of an archer. The real class was Fighter or Thief depending on the stat placement, but with a bow and always unarmored. 

And it drove me nuts. 

First, he would sink into the background trying to avoid melee. Then the player would switch to DM mode after the combat and wanted to roll a 1d20 saving throw against a crushing blow for each and every arrow fired. As a DM with a table full of characters, I have better things to do. But I couldn't stop him. He would fixate on it. 

The HAPPY archer

How annoying. 

The problem was hidden and had to do with the archery rules in AD&D. He led the pack of players as archery comes before melee in the rules. From his perspective, he was making a couple of rolls and sitting idle for far too long. Eventually, he'd run out of valid targets and his combat role was nullified. 

To spice things up for him, I addressed the problem with environmental conditions. I encouraged him to carry a ridiculous number of arrows in multiple quivers. A quiver on his back, a quiver on his horse, a pair of quivers on the pack animals, and maybe one or two more on the horses of other players. I didn't want him focused on "preserving arrows" from the start. 

A firing position

The next environmental condition I presented is, that his character would have a variety of firing positions to choose from. As an archer, I figured he'd scout good positions, stuff with either cover or concealment. This was a nod to his lack of armor and cranked up the drama by having enemy missiles strike a fence, or a door, or whatnot. This also meant he could pluck an opponent's arrow out of the barrier and send it back. 

Later, I added special rules to make him feel more engaged. He had a collection of special rules that gave him a choice of pros and cons to choose from in combat. 

While this may seem unbalancing for the rest of the party, like I was making the archer more special, it did not. What it did do is break up the whole "marching order" shenanigans into something more realistic and slightly more badass. 

Ah... Ranks.

Without options, players will often place their characters into a block with the fighters in the front and the squishy characters in the back like a giant military formation. This action made sense when OD&D was a titch away from simulating armies. It doesn't make sense in a small combat action, which is what D&D does now. It also diminishes the role of squishy characters, regulating them to a boring non-combat role, even worse than the example archer character. 

With the archer acting as overwatch, the party would naturally break up into groups, with no one "in the rear", like a real tactical unit. The front is everywhere. The melee types would form up as a small group or two with the archer lending his firepower and sweeping the battlefield. By not having every character visible from the get-go, thieves and assassins were free to blindside attackers. This often created situations where the squish wizard got to engage in front-line action by having one fighting guardian and an archer overwatch. Or placed the squishies under the direct cover of the archer, seen, but unreachable. 

It really envigorated combat. 

It allowed me, the DM, to use more enemies and track them more easily. The party told me what to do with them so I didn't have as much to track. I have a table rule that characters including monsters don't die until -10 hit points, allowing me to reuse unique enemies. And unique characters remember. The players' tactics create my tactics. 

"What are they doing?" asked the party.

"One of them is approaching you. The others are looking around for something." 

"They don't see me?" asked the archer. 

"No, they don't."  

This is all very organic. 

And it adds a nice meta, which is rare and cool. We all know the trope where the players hear the DM's dice rolls, right? Well, with the characters' tactics dictating the flow of combat, this diminishes the cause-and-effect observation of these die rolls. They are never unnoticed but somehow fall into the background. 

A good example of this is skulking characters moving silently or hiding in shadows. I roll the dice, get a result, and make a choice. There is a delay between the roll and the visible action. There is nothing better than a good move silently roll resulting in an opponent turning away from a stalking assassin. 

It also hides the obviousness of morale rolls. The enemy isn't retreating because of a die roll, they are retreating from a superior force. This can eliminate the anticlimactic "we're out of targets" situations by replacing it with "how bad do we want to chase the targets?" 

Personae Dramatis - Flameheart and Jen

I use a set of standard NPCs in all of my campaigns. These folks are bearers, guards, horsemen, and archers. They are the typical NPCs the party will hire and somewhat control. Of all of them, a couple will become henchmen and followers. These are all bog standard until the players decide to ask more of them.  

I am not a fan of arming the party with a Gandalf-style NPC. I don't mind powerful NPCs adventuring with the party, but they should not provide important information and direction for the players. The party is adventuring for its own sake, they need to be Gandalf types, not following one or more of them. 

I am not entirely against offering points of refuge or safety to a party in times of need. However, these people are NOT to travel with the party for long (if at all) or provide extra oomph in a fight on demand. Usually, they have their own fully formed plans and goals which have nothing to do with whatever the party is doing. They offer a respite from an unexpected threat to the party. 

I describe them as Personae Dramatis to set them apart from regular NPCs. They are chance encounters that provide further insight into the setting of the game, without requiring the party to follow them or buy into another plotline. They tell a story outside the one the players are experiencing. And like any good story, it offers the players entertainment, news, and most usefully, a brief respite. Tom Bombadil springs to mind. 

I am not a poet, so I swing for comedy and a bit of false tension. 

In my campaigns, Flameheart and Jen Tanner are two examples of Persona Dramatis. 

Their main traits are right in their names. Jen was a runaway from her father, the town tanner. She disliked being a social pariah at the edge of town. Tanners live at the edge of town because they use ammonia for the tanning process. The main source of social stigma is the use of urine to obtain ammonia. The second source of stigma was the incredible taxes they paid. Urine was double taxed, once in its collection and once again on its sale. This created the impression of stinking, rich tanners and evil tax men. This is the real-world source of both the phrase and the trope of evil tax men.  

Ick. I love it when real life intrudes on my RPGs. 

Flameheart was a ridiculously old red dragon, one who had sunk to eating equally old cows to survive. It was only a matter of time before someone put a lance in his chest. 

Flameheart stumbled upon Jen in her attempt to escape her dull village life. It wasn't long before the Tanner family caught up with the pair. They found the whole village guard not up to the task of rescuing Jen, who very much didn't want to be rescued. 

I will save the full story for another time. Here is how I use these Personae. 

When I present Jen and Flameheart, they are encamped near the party, causing a ruckus they are unaware of. The presence of a dragon is often a reasonable explanation for a pause in the character's adventures. 

Think of Jen and Flameheart as a mobile fortress or safe area, no matter how the reactions go. If the party goes into hiding from them, so will anyone following the party until the dragon leaves. If Jen convinces the party to stay for a time, no one will approach the party. 

In general, I don't have much cause to stat up Jen. She sometimes has a potential boyfriend in tow depending on how I feel. He also doesn't get stats, unless I decide to have him join the party. Usually, the boyfriend is very pretty and less than helpful to Jen and Flameheart and might be better off in the party.  

I have given Flameheart the following stats: 

AC: 1, HD 8 (46 hp), Att: [ 2x claw (1d6), 1x bite (4d8)], or breath weapon (special). THAC0: 12 (+7), MV: 90' (30') / 240' (80') flying, SV D8, W9, P10 B10, S12 (8), ML: special, AL: Chaotic, XP: 2000, NA unique, TT: H. 

Flameheart has the following spells:  

Level 1: Charm, Light, Sleep.
Level 2: Detect Invisibility, Invisibility, Phantasmal Force.
Level 3: Dispel Magic, Fly, Waterbreathing

Flameheart shared his horde with Jen and she always carries the following when stat'ed up: 2 Bags of Holding, Bracers of Armor (AC: 4), and Boots of Levitation.  

As mentioned before, Flameheart is extremely old. To the point of weakened health. This is reflected in his HD, attacks, hit points, and saves. He will not retreat if Jen is threatened, hence his special morale.  

He has two different breath weapons due to his age. He has difficulty breathing fire. He can breathe fire on a save vs. breath weapon. On failure of this save or when he desires it, he will emit a massive jet of obscuring smoke instead of fire. It lasts 3 rounds. This may sound like a joke, it isn't. 

While the smoke does no damage, it is a very dangerous situation. He is smart enough to follow it up with one or more spells to cause chaos. He is savvy about his limitations and can turn them into true threats. He will use his spells creatively in conjunction with his smoke to terrorize victims. He may turn invisible, charm a victim, or use Phantasmal Force in the next round. 

He has a 35% chance of being asleep when discovered. Jen mitigates the danger as she sleeps as much as a typical 22-year-old woman. Jen is smart and disarming, allowing the dragon to wake or appear unexpectedly on opponents.

From a DM's perspective, Flameheart and Jen represent a minor threat and a dangerous refuge from larger threats the party might face. If the party presents itself as needy, Jen may attempt to assist them more than providing a safe haven. Due to Jen's exposure to the tanning profession, she is very money-conscious and savvy about exploitation. 

They are always chaotic, but not necessarily evil. 

Going Off the Rails - Part Six

It's been a while since I wrote about games that went off the rails, but here is another entry. I had a basic scenario where a small town needed an army to defend against a threat. To the west, there was an army fighting but would not directly support the town or kingdom they were in because the true heir to that kingdom had been usurped. Proof of heirhood was rather simple; it was possession of a particular magic sword. The town leaders located the sword and sent the party to go get it. 

The party should have obtained the sword easily. The trouble would come when they returned it and people started making claims to it. The characters would become the protectors of the sword and ultimately kingmakers. 

Of course, this was all contingent on the party, you know, actually doing the deed. And being a typical party, they did not do the need. They fought it hard, and in a moment of weakness, I resorted to railroading. 

The gist of the situation was that the party got lost because they didn't follow the road to the town where the sword was. Lost, they saw the proper town in the distance but believed it was a different town. Somehow, they also missed finding a road to both towns by just a few hundred feet. 

Goddamn it. 

The party set up camp for the third night in a row, just out of sight of the road. I decided to throw a double whammy at them. First, I threw a storm down on them to force them out of the streambed and towards the road. That didn't work, the party made a series of herculean efforts to secure their campsite. 

The second whammy was a group of bears. Lots of them. Somehow, the party won surprise over the bears, in the dark, in a storm, and fled to the road. 

Finally, Victory! 

No.  

One of the characters cast Speak with Animals, rolled a very positive reaction and struck up a conversation with the bears instead of fighting them. Rule One of RPGs should be "Random and Railroading are immiscible." 

Here is how the conversation went. The bears were attracted by the party's pitiful fire, they wanted it. There was a negotiation for "the fire starter". The party was confused but agreed thinking they were giving the bears a bit of flint and steel. 

The bears wanted and took the person who made the fire, "The Firestarter*" was taken back to their cave. The whole party follows and piles into the bear cave all warm and cosy and lets me stew with a bunch of failed plans. 

Sometimes, you have to throw in the towel and decide what you are doing is simply not viable. I made a snap decision to let the bears join their mission and go directly to the Army to plead their case for the town. On the way they obtained horses. It was an impressive display of power, a party of mounted magic using characters guarded by bears. 

In retrospect, this was way more impressive than a sword, even a magical one.  

The party still got to become kingmakers even though the general of the army obtained the sword. Since the sword was far less impressive than a band of bear-clan warriors, it didn't help him much. He remained the general of the army, but the army wanted the support of the Bear-Clan* alongside the general. And if the Bear-Clan* said go save the town, then dammit, that was what the army was going to do. 

This occurs a lot in history, where an army follows a general but the general follows the will of the average soldier. It is weird, but true to life. Great generals don't railroad the troops. 

*Notice that "fire starter" and "bear" suddenly got capitals. This isn't a typo. I tried to make the new capitalization of the words audible and largely it worked on this party.  

A 3 Way Hook

It's Tuesday night and I am painting some Battlemechs. I like to listen to books or TV when painting. I have this funny trait that the thing I am listening to is the opposite of what I am painting.  For example, when painting mecha, I listen to fantasy books. 

While waiting for a basecoat to dry, I got wrapped up in Terry Brooks' Wizard at Large. This is the third book in the Landover series. Questor Thews, Wizard at Large attempts to transform his friend Abernathy back into a human. It seemed like the right thing to do because he was the one who turned the Scribe into a Soft-coated Wheaten Terrier. 

Things go sideways and hilarity and terror ensue. This is one of my favorite series because it incorporates 80s sensibilities into a fantasy story. Oddly, the series makes some nods to the 80s and 90s but doesn't dive in too deep. There is an odd simplicity to the stories that somehow dodges the passage of time and advances in technology that would normally break a portal fantasy story. 

This gave me a great idea for a D&D hook. Locate Object is a bunk spell, the range is far too short. If this spell would be useful, they get down on their hands and knees and do it the hard way instead of magic. Invariably, if something is far away, the characters look for a sage or high-level Wizard to help. Or a Cleric with Commune.

So here goes the three-way hook. The scenario is, the party needs an item to fulfill some objective. They don't know where it is so they hire a scribe or Wizard to do the job. The characters assume they will be given some trivia about the object and a direction to go to recover the item. 

Wrong!

The sage or Wizard does give them that information on how to find the object but decides to toot his or her horn by pulling out a scrying globe or magic mirror to show the characters exactly what the item looks like and its immediate environs. Pleased, the characters thank the sage profusely. 

And then it happens. 

The sage drops his or her magic item and it shatters. In the discharge of failing magic, the sage disappears and the item itself appears at the feet of the characters. 

Surprise! 

Now, here are the three hooks: 

A) The characters feel obligated to bring the sage back home. 
B) The characters take the item and leave, forgetting about the sage. The enraged sage escapes on their own and hunts the characters down.
C) The owner of the item brings the sage home, searching for his or her stolen possession.  

The beauty of this is the triple hook is, in no way are you pushing the players to pick a course of action. They'll do it themselves by word and deed. Also, it doesn't tie up the DM too much. The forces against the players can have many motivations and goals, so it doesn't turn into a targeted TPK. You can play it for laughs, for growth, for horror, all based on what you discover your players like. 

Imagine the look on your player's faces when they discover the sage doesn't want to go home because they accidentally found the love of their life. Or what if they ran home just days ahead of a demon horde. What if the sage stumbles home and into the party just in time to save them from themselves? 

That is so much fun. 

Happy Accident - Fiend Folio times 2!

I made a point of getting Nathan physical copies of the D&D 5e rules. He has two different groups that play and it would be dumb if they couldn't do that due to an internet outage, lost computer, or other silly problem. 

Mechanically, 5e is very different than AD&D or any version of B/X but the lore remains largely the same. Drow are Drow, Goblins are Goblins, and so on. Sure some people would like to change that for everyone but once you put an idea out there, good luck changing it. 

Wayback in 2019, I had a campaign where elves and humans were hostile to one another. I couldn't sell it and no one bought it. 

Once an idea is out there, forget about changing it. 

Anyway, I mentioned to Nathan my world's main antagonist is a Drow named Magarven. You can read all about him here. 

Nathan was put back by the mention of Drow. He thought they were new to 5e. Nope. I grabbed my copy of Fiend Folio. His jaw dropped.

"Is that a Githyanki?!?" 

Hell, yeah it is. 

That was the last I saw or thought about my copy of Fiend Folio. Somehow, that struck me funny. I forgot I even had a copy and ordered one POD from DriveThruRPG. Of course, when it arrived, Nathan tried to return my copy. 

I took some pictures and made him pick one. 

The POD copy is a soft cover, but don't let that put you off. The pages are solid and crisp, the print is excellent and the binding is nice. It is a tiny bit smaller than the original, making it a standard-size book. The price for POD was also amazing, far less than the $20 I paid for the original copy back in the day. 

I hope you can tell from the images, the POD's paper is somewhat thicker and the black is very solid. The thicker paper is nicer from the get-go. The softer black ink in the original is likely due to the age. Even though I bought my hardcover 2-3 years ago, it was printed in 1981. No book will hold up over 40+ years.

Anyway, I thought I would share this title as it keeps bringing joy to new and old players. 

Saturday Night Stock Characters

During COVID, Matt Johnson hosted a series of Collabo Dungeons. Participants selected a room and posted a description and a possible encounter on Matt's website. 

Here is what I posted in 2020. 

Location Seven. The Twins.

There are two women, twins, in the pit. They are identical in all ways save one. One woman wears a lead ring. When they become aware of the characters, they will both shout out for help. When the characters look in the pit, they will hear the following orders:

Twin with the ring: "Kill her! She's a demon!"
Twin without the ring: "Kill her! She's an idiot!"

They are both at the bottom of the pit and represent no threat to the characters in this state. They are both bloodied and bruised from the fall and each has a blackened right eye.

If the party rescues them, they will find out the following information. Twin One, the one with the ring is named Meredith. She entered the dungeon with her friends in search of treasure. She found a gold ring in area 8 and after discerning no purpose to it, put it on. She was pushed by a monster into the pit.

Twin Two, without the ring, was a doppelganger hiding in Area 8. To take on Meredith's form, she ambushed her by pushing her into the pit. Unfortunately for the monster, Meredith grabbed it's wrist as she fell and both ended up at the bottom. As the doppelganger took her form, Meredith shouted "Begone!" which the ring of wishes interpreted as a command against the monster. Since the doppelganger was in mid-transformation into Meredith, the ring fixed it in that form before turning to lead. The doppelganger is now an exact copy of Meredith.

The twins have found combat against each other to be profoundly lethal, as they mirror each other's moves perfectly, hence the matching black eyes. They will not fight each other. They will join the party to escape the dungeon.

At the time, I posted Meredith as unstated. I had envisioned Meredith as a young character, one who needed more wisdom. I supposed that she was an accursed thief or perhaps a mage. In rolling them up, I decided they were fighters. 

Them... They... In the room description, we find out how Meredith became a twin. 

I've given one of them a new name, Mercy. They have matching stats, experience and class, plus a few other surprises. In their time adventuring together, they have found a pair of Bracers of Defence, AC 4. In addition to this, they both have magic swords. These hand-and-half swords are also a matched pair like the Bracers. Each woman is vaguely annoyed that every treasure they find is a matching set. This is because they both want and value the same items. In reality, they have ignored other treasures as worthless because it wasn't what they wanted or valued.  

Meredith wields the sword Nine Lives. It is only +1 but it prevents her from being flanked or backstabbed. If someone attempts to flank or backstab her the attacker must make a saving throw versus parayzation. If the attacker fails this save, Meredith magically spins to face the attacker, negating their bonus. This can happen as many times in a combat round as there are flanking attackers. This does not allow Meredith an extra attack unless the person flees. 

Mercy wields a sword named Calico. This sword also has powerful magic. On the first swing in combat it is a +1 to attack and damage. On the next swing, it is +2. This continues until Mercy receives a +3, at which point the sword resets to +1. Mercy is a brutal fighter. She often draws Calico and makes two flourishing swings, which sets the sword to +3 from the get-go.  

The Bracers and the Swords are meant to be used by a single person, florentine style, not two different people. The Swords' special abilities work together, making the wielder nigh unstoppable. 

The Twins have several other nasty traits. First, Meredith is the original human and is identifiable by the lead ring. This is a helpful trait, sometimes. 

Next, the ring cannot be removed by any mechanism except a wish. Grabbing at the ring will unleash woe on the thief. They must save versus death, or collapse in a seizure for 2d6 rounds. They take no damage but will be horribly sick once the seizures end.  

Heaven help the person who tries to use a tool to get the ring, like a bolt cutter or knife to cut the ring (or finger) off. They will also need to save vs. death. If they succeed, they merely have the seizures described above. If they fail, they burst into flames for 1d6 points of damage per round AND have 1d6 rounds of seizures. Unless someone helps them, they will burn for the entire duration of the seizure. 

The third dangerous trait is Mercy only uses that name in Meredith's presence. In Meredith's absence, she reverts to using "Meredith". Since she is an exact copy of Meredith (except the ring) and knows everything she does. This can cause chaos for a party. Or a lover. Mercy does this to assume Meredith's place as if they were the same person. She does not intend harm to the people she fools, she only wants her rightful place the original woman. 

For this reason, the real and original Meredith is unperturbed by Mercy's behavior and ignores it. She will honor Mercy's promises in her stead and will easily forgive and forget other's missteps regarding Mercy's unseemly behavior. Mercy's adoption of Meredith's place is confusing, not malicious. They are effectively the same person and have the same goals and desires, but do not intend to share anything. 

Mercy and Meredith are pseudo-cursed to stay together. Since they are a matched pair, they always assume the other will be there for them. Separated, they suffer shortcomings from this expectation. Together, they are far more powerful and successful. 

Occasionally, circumstances cause them to come to blows. They will only slap, punch, and kick as their blows land on each other unerringly. They will not use weapons on one another as it would be instantly fatal. This quirk can foil charms, illusions, and other mind-altering magic as they see each other as the same person and will be resistant to interpreted self-harm. 

Content Preview - August 2024

I am back from hiatus and led with a post about the laser I purchased. My intention for the laser is to come up with new and unique content to support my gaming habits. I have no intention of transitioning to "Laser Dude", but the laser will help me transition to new types of content. Models and such. 

Here is a content preview which is my guidepost: 

As you can see, there is a lot of game content there. On the right is Dungeonland hiding under B1 and L1, a trio of favorites. On the other side of the image are the DragonLance modules. I would expect to see a couple of module reviews soon.  

Next to these are two Battletech products. My game plan is to alternate Mech Monday with Module Monday, so I don't burn out on one type of content. This will also drive me to do some painting. I hear some people actually paint models and figurines. I figured I'd give it a try and see if it's as rewarding as I hear. 

If you take black and white pictures,
painting skills don't matter.

Since I lost all of my game books, I have been carefully replacing the best of the best. I was mad at the loss of my D&D 3.x books. I took a step back and rather than replace them with difficult to find, out of print books, I figured I'd dive into Pathfinder. 3.x was my favorite generic ruleset as it was a toolkit for every 'verse. Yes, it's D&D but it can also be Star Wars, Farscape, Top Secret, or anything else you'd care to do. It's a very nice set. 

This isn't say my B/X content will disappear. I am hoping to get a weekly game going using the modules and my OSE sets to supplement content. 

As I figure out how to use this laser, I can squeeze laser content into my gaming and modeling posts. It seems reasonable. I have also signed up to be an affiliate for Creality company so there is an aspect or two monetization here. If I am able to crank out some nice gaming products and accessories, I would be happy to sell them to you. 

There is another aspect of monetization here. If you look to the right, you can see a small image of a game and a massive image of a bottle of wine. Unless something interesting happens, that large image will disappear. These types of links don't perform at all. 

I am formulating an idea for that space. Future you will see a bottle of wine in that space, but it won't be an ad. It will be something else. 

I hope you join me on this new adventure. 

Another Character Class Idea - The Monomachos

(This is a bonus post, one I wrote back in September of 2022. I found it unposted while cleaning up.) 

Stephen Donaldson is known for using 10-dollar words when a single simple word would suffice. In his Mordant's Need series, the villain's right-hand man is The Monomach. He is one part warrior, one part assassin. 

Now I thought I knew what "monomach" meant, but it turns out I was totally wrong. I had thought it was related to nobility or being a monarch, making this guy "The Assassin King".  

Nope. 

It's Greek. "Monomachos" or "he who fights alone". A gladiator. That is not as cool as "The Assassin King" but makes so much more sense in context. I'd like to introduce one to a campaign. I posted as much a few years ago when I last read the series. I had a couple of ideas that I have refined over time. 

A Monomachos is like a fighter, but nothing like a regular Fighter, Elf, Dwarf, Cleric, Paladin, or Knight. They live for the fight, not for sustained warfare. 

In Donaldson's books, the Monomach is clearly evil because he assassinates people for the joy of it. When I first wrote about the character, I had a limited view of that type of character. If you didn't read that story, think of Darth Maul from The Phantom Menace without all the chattiness. Maul showed lust for fighting, maybe killing, but not for general mayhem.  

As a villain, a Monomachos only has one purpose... to cause death and terror before dying. But do they have to be the villain? 

Well, it certainly makes things easy if they are all villains. But they are not all villains.  

It was relatively easy to come up with superhero examples. Black Widow, Hawkeye, Daredevil, The Hulk, and so on come across as heroes who live for the thrill of the fight. To a lesser extent, you could add Tony Stark and Spider-Man to the list, but then also remove the MCU Black Widow because she was starting to believe the fight was too much of a bother. Hawkeye was also heading that way, only to be replaced by Kate Bishop which allowed him to leave the hero act behind. Baymax would be an interesting and scary addition to that list because he follows his programming as if it were a joy. 

Oddly, the Punisher is not a Monomachos as he has a different purpose for what he is doing. Fighting and aggression are not really his "thing". He is sorting criminal corpses into their proper circle of hell. It's a completely different purpose. He doesn't have to fight, just kill. 

So what about non-superheroes? 

Well, the list is short. Peter Pan, The Three Musketeers, Starbuck from Battlestar Galactica, Legolas, and Glimly. And my brain screeches to a halt there. I guess I could name more, but that is good enough. 

The surprising people from those two lists are Spider-Man and Peter Pan because they are characters who are loved by children. It doesn't mean their drives are kid-friendly. Parker is driven to take risks and engage in violence at great personal cost. Peter Pan is slightly more disturbing. He switches sides if the fight is too easy. He kills Hook and then forgets there was a Captain Hook to kill. Both do it for the same reasons, the drive to excel with their given skill set, that are in parallel with their personal goals. 

So what commonality do these people have if we take away alignment? 

Each person is an improviser. They may use traditional weapons but are fully capable of using a brick, a candlestick, and a doorknob if necessary. They are not subject to outside influences, such as social norms and certain types of magic. Being a bit of a sociopath helps. Oddly, this deviated personality may cause them to be in more control of their feelings and desires, leading them away from wasteful fights. If the fight isn't a challenge, why do it? 

Poor or malformed social skills are a hallmark of every character listed. 

None of these characters are especially good at ordinary, everyday skills. Peter Pan and Kate Bishop can't cook. Hawkeye tends to zone out at key moments and Bruce Banner retreats from the world. Stark is made of neuroses, everything from germaphobia to being a dick even when he means to help. 

In-game, what sort of traits would these characters have? 

They should be able to use any sort of weapon and armor, even if they don't personally like specific armor and weapon types. They can also use improvised weapons. It's not their first, best option but if there is a lot of rubble around, it's better than bruising your knuckles. 

Next, they should have some unique combat skills. 

The Monomachos should rarely be surprised in combat. Perhaps only a 1 in 6 chance and this is separate from the rest of the party's roll. They are itching for a fight in every situation. If the party is surprised and The Monomachos is not surprised, they move with the enemy. This could spoil their surprise round as there is one opposing person moving as they do. The enemy had to waste their surprise round to address the Monomachos. 

Their third combat ability is to refuse contact. If the Monomachos has the initiative and makes a successful attack roll, they may either proceed to the damage roll OR spoil their attacker's next roll. This also allows them to turn and face another opponent. This prevents them from being flanked, it does not permit them an extra attack. 

Fourth, they defy outside influences. They have trait that they can't utilize magic weapons to full effect. No bonuses, but the weapon still counts as magic to inflict damage. This is because they only rely on their own skills, not the assistance of a magic weapon. Of course, if the magic weapon has a secondary power or effect that is magical, like detecting evil or light, they can use that to the fullest. It's the assistive nature that they won't do. 

Armor is different, they do receive bonuses as they can't undo or refuse its basic nature to protect.  

Cursed weapons should fear the Monomachos character. These types of people aren't subject to outside influences, therefore a cursed weapon should be just as ineffective as a positive magic weapon. A cursed weapon should try to escape their clutches because the Momomachos may choose to sacrifice a weapon to win. Intelligent things fear destruction. 

I wanted something like this when I created my Swashbuckler character class but in play testing it was impractical. Based on this new character type, I will rewrite that document. 

To recap the character: 

Surprised only on a 1 in 6. They move and attack during their opponent's surprise round if not surprised themselves. 
Can use all weapons and armor, but receive no magical bonuses for weapons.
They are immune to cursed weapons.
They can also use improvised weapons if only to save their knuckles.  
Foil attacks on a hit and turn to face other opponents instead of dealing damage. 

Let me know what you think in the comments, especially if you have already purchased my Swashbuckler class. 

Simple Improvements - Power to the Archer

I like archer characters. Over the weekend, I had a chance to binge-watch a couple of episodes of Hawkeye and a few of The Arrow. Both shows are obviously based on bow combat. 

In virtually all RPGs, archers are limited to how many arrows they have. Once the quiver is empty, they aren't an archer anymore. They lose the deadly ability to strike at a distance. 

I wrote about making fighting men and spell casters more powerful without adding die rolls or wildly different mechanics. Archers can be similarly empowered. 

Looking at the first Avengers movie, Hawkeye doesn't miss so much as not hit his target. 

Loki is a trickster and should have seen this coming. Now let's look at Hawkeye missing a target. 

This time Hawkeye misses because something got in his way. He didn't see it coming and lost an arrow because of it. His second shot is also a miss because Quicksilver threw him down and the arrow was knocked out of reach. Then there is a third attempt, the one I want to simulate. Quicksilver simply disappears, leaving Hawkeye with no target. Technically, that is his third miss. 

This last miss is easy to simulate. When a shooter ATTEMPTS a shot, sometimes the target moves in such a way that the archer can't follow. In this case, the miss means the archer never loosed an arrow. This is actually a very powerful thing for someone with a bow. In not loosing the arrow, they keep it for later. Since running out of arrows will put the archer out of action, not losing an arrow in every round of combat is powerful. 

(Good lord, my spell checker hates the difference between loosing and losing.) 

A DM could declare that on certain missed rolls the archer has released the arrow and on others, they retained the arrow and didn't shoot. Since 1 is odd, I would rule that every odd-number missed attack means the archer really did let the arrow fly and it's gone. On every even-numbered missed attack, they didn't let it go. They kept it. 

I have a simple rule for collecting arrows after combat. If the characters have fled the battle, they lost all of the arrows they shot. If they keep the battlefield, then they can look for them. Even better, if the enemy was shooting, they could possibly recover those, too. 

If a player shoots x number of arrows, I select a die with fewer sides than the arrows fired, hopefully within one. If an opponent was also using arrows, I have PC archer roll a second of the same die. They may end up with more arrows than they started. This is in addition to whatever is taken as treasure. 

You can also amuse yourself with the possibility that two archers keep missing each other until each has to resort to picking up the arrow just fired at them. This is more likely to happen with spears and javelins, which is why the Romans used pilums. Pilums have a soft tip that bends to prevent it from being thrown back. It seems to be a 400 BC solution to a much older problem.  

Let me know what you think in the comments. 

Random Encounters/Making Memories

Tonight, Jen and Catherine are at a Stevie Nicks concert leaving me and Nathan to fend for ourselves for dinner.  Nate and I picked a local favorite and got to talking... about D&D. 

This only sometimes happens. He plays e5 while I am into AD&D e1 or OSE. They seem wildly different, to me anyway. But tonight proved that wrong. 

Halfway through dinner, Nathan realized he planned a D&D session with his friends. He looked rather glum about it. I said I was envious because I have very little time to game. 

The problem was he didn't know what to do for tonight's session. I asked him about the past sessions and he filled me on the problems first. They are 4 sessions into this campaign and they skipped a planned Session 0. Nathan was forced to cob together a very basic idea into a full-fledged campaign due to a lack of planning. 

Here is the gist of that idea: The players have found a cursed town. There are a couple of levels to the curse. A dragon is rampaging around the edge of town, but cannot enter due to a spell cast by a witch. The witch stole the dragon's eggs and placed them around the perimeter of the town to protect the town from a threat, a non-dragon threat. The hag was killed by the dragon mid-cast, so the spell is partially broken.  

Currently, the spell is supposed to protect the town from a threat. Thus far, this averted threat is limited to the rampaging dragon. The spell should be fixed on and powered by the maturing dragon eggs, but unfortunately, it is wavering. When a person touches the edge of the spell, say by entering or leaving the town, their memory becomes corrupted. The corruption is like amnesia, people forget personal facts but don't lose skills or abilities usually. 

Two characters have already been corrupted and lost the knowledge of a spell and resources. The mage forget the spell is in their spell books and are surprised every time they see it. The other character has forgotten he is rich. This is being played for laughs. 

Nathan, dressed to impress.

That's it. Nathan didn't define the threat to the town and threw the characters right in the middle of the mess without a plan to get them out. Worse, the players are fighting a bone construct for one of the eggs. Nathan has no idea why he introduced this combat. The players are hell-bent on destroying the egg for unknown reasons. The last session ended in the middle of that battle. 

Memory... funny thing that is. 

I parsed out the whole situation, problems and all. 

Here is what we came up with as a solution. The hag, a witch, was the town shaman. Unfortunately, she was fated to die young but didn't know when. As the appointed day came close, she bargained with the dragon for its eggs. She would cast a spell on the eggs, to protect the town from bad weather and disease in her absence while also protecting the eggs as they matured. People who found the eggs would be afflicted with memory loss about the eggs and would not harm or steal them.  

Problem one is solved, we know why stuff is happening. That's important. 

Next, time to tackle some other issues. Nathan starts every session with a synopsis of what happened in the last session. He simply reads from a notebook. Tonight, he decided that will change. Instead, he will hand out notes to all of the players. Once they have the notes, he will absentmindedly flip through his notebook as if looking for the notes he just handed out. 

Queue the laughs. He'll ask someone to read the synopsis for him.

Oddly, there will be no mention of the combat with the bone construct. Instead, the players will find themselves in an ancient and desecrated graveyard at the edge of town. It says that right there in the game notes. The graves have been pillaged for something. In the dark, a shambling bone creature will disrupt their investigations. The bone construct was made by a previous shaman with the intent to protect the town in their absence. As long as the party doesn't attack, it will not attack them. It needs them alive to protect the town. 

It seems all of the players are suffering from memory loss. They didn't fight a bone construct, they are about to fight a bone construct. Maybe. When they return to the town proper, fight or not, they will find some of the NPCs have changed. These will be subtle changes, maybe someone needed to step out for a while and a friend took over. 

Now for the real fun. One of the PCs wears a wedding band. The same player inquired about having it turned into a ring of wishes in the prior sessions. This was an off-handed comment, a part of their character background. They would wish their spouse back to life if they could. Obviously, they recently saw the Dungeons and Dragons movie. 

A week from now, Nathan will be armed with a letter from a sage explaining how exceedingly rare rings of wishes are and that it would be virtually impossible for this particular ring to be one of wishes. Of course, no player character asked a sage about this. But here is a letter like they did. 

How did that happen? Who paid for it? It appears to be the guy who can't remember he is rich. 

The path is now clear, the party needs to become the protector of the town and eggs while the spell casters try to correct the malfunctioning spell or end the spell by finding another shaman. It would be helpful not to be eaten by the dragon while doing this, but it's starting to look like one of the PCs or NPCs will become a dragon snack. 

That's fine by Nathan. Not only is he counting on it, he has a friend scheduled to show up with a brand-new character, and prepped and practiced to act as if he has been there since the beginning. 

It's amazing how a chance dinner-time meal can turn into a campaign session. 

My Very Own Appendix N

As my friends and I entered high school, we really diverged in our interests and reading habits. Ryan read Douglas Adams and the Robotech series. Michelle read Doctor Who. I read all of the fantasy stuff like the Dragonlance series. 

This would have been around '84 to 1986. 

Almost every game session started with The Great Book and Mix Tape swap. In that spirit, I'll share a mix for you: The Great '86. This one year was amazing for music. (Editing note: You don't need a Google Music account, you can simply go on Youtube and listen with this link.) 

Anyway, back to the books. In swapping books, I lost more books than I will ever own. I also read more than you can imagine. Many of these books were yellow, pages dogeared and in some cases missing covers. 

I've been feeling nostalgic lately and picked up a Dragonlance book at Barnes and Noble. I am only 100 pages in and it fills me with both wonder and nostalgia. Clearly, I read it nearly 40 years ago. All of the details are gone, but it is strangely familiar.

I think I'll add this series to the review list, Dragons of Autumn Twilight is pretty cool and clearly made an impression on me because I freely stole ideas from it. 

This is the odd part, decades ago things moved with glacial slowness. I had this book from a used bookstore before I ever saw the Dragonlance Modules. I had no idea it was related to D&D until I saw DL-1 in about 1990. Bookstores were wacky like that. 

Since I ran down this memory hole, I've also returned to watching Doctor Who. The whole D&D gang watched the show, the old-school stuff. It was shown out of order, the local PBS station only honored the serial order, so at least you could see a whole story. But we had no idea what was happening in the larger Doctor Who story as they would happily skip from Doctor to Doctor, willy-nilly. 

I didn't care. It sort of matched the way I read the novels. Here is a silly bit. I had to go back to 2017 to pick up where I left off. The Master became Missy and slightly more and less diabolical. I was vaguely aware that Jodie Whittaker took over as The Doctor and I wondered how that would work. 

The transition reminded me of the novels I had read in the 80s. Remember, I mentioned that many of the books I read had no covers? The Doctor Who novels featured the image of The Doctor appearing in the story, so if you are missing the cover and the first couple of pages, you have no idea which Doctor features in the story. 

I thought that Whittaker was pretty great until I reached the episode, "Fugitive of the Judoon". In that story, The Doctor really shines. The series owes its success (and failures) to the author. The Doctor and the actor who brings these stories to the screen has be spot-on in translation from mere words on the page to funny, scary, and amazing stories to life. 

In a strange collision of real life, check out The Other Side Blog. He is doing an A to Z of Doctor. Totally love it. 

Tired Thoughts on Tired OGL

I love posts that start with the Chaos Star

The OGL has attained the maximum cultural entropy. Even my wife has a passing familiarity with OGL, which is impressive as she is a nurse and doesn't do "nerd stuff". She's still pretty hot that our children's collective initials are NPC. 

Anyway, I took on this new project to write a campaign setting. And then I busted my shoulder, leaving me to do everything with one hand tied behind my back... literally. Now that I have the immobilizer off, I can start moving and thinking again. 

Here is the long and short of my thoughts on the OGL. 

I have 6 products on DriveThruRPG: 

1. Kobold’s Folly Mini Setting
2. Compass Rose Inn Mini Setting
3. The Hex Pack
4. Swashbuckler Character Class for D&D and AD&D
5. Zero to Hero: Uncommon Heroes
6. Character Sheet for AD&D

Three of these products have nothing to do with D&D, the OGL or SRD: Kobold’s Folly and Compass Rose Inn Mini Settings plus The Hex Pack. I can ignore these. 

The other three are directly tied to D&D. They are nothing without the original game. If push comes to they are either going to be withdrawn or go to "OGL version whatever". I have some decisions to make, I guess. The Swashbuckler Character class really needs to be burned to the ground and remade or dumped in the historical stupidity bin. I'm ok with either. I'd like to rework Zero to Hero into OSE, so I need to wait and see what Old Games Essentials does. The character sheet is a historical snapshot that assumes the use of a couple of books, I am not sure if it needs to be connected to the SDR or OGL because it is literally nothing but an image of a collection of words and numbers that are very context specific to a certain version of a D&D game.  

I have come to the conclusion that I need to abandon D&D and ignore three of my products linked to the SRD and OGL while reworking the other three into something that doesn't remotely touch the works of Wizards of the Coast. 

I have decided to come up with a completely new game system. One of my own devising. In the best case, I am the next WotC. The worst-case scenario is no one uses it. 

What I know now: 

• I have the basic idea of a game system. 
• Playtesting has started.
• It will be called "Zero to Hero", which I am 99.9% is not a copyrightable name. That's cool, I'll deal with it if I can. 
  EDIT - No, No, this is no longer correct. I think I will call it "The Hearts System". 
• My first book, "Zero to Hero: Uncommon Commoners" will be worked into this somehow. I don't know how. 
• I will press on with my new campaign setting and tool it to work with "Zero to Hero". 
  
• I need to come up with a better naming convention because if I find too many things referencing "Zero to Hero" I will have to change the name. 

So here we are. 

This is a cross-post with my Ko-Fi project. 

#CharacterCreationChallenge - Ruleset D&D 3.5 - Fel Sorcerer

One of my favorite tools is the RedBlade character generator for 3.5. This tool is amazingly simple to use. I was able to cook up a Sorcerer in just a few minutes. The output is in HTML, which makes it easy to post online.

In just a few minutes, I was able to cook up Fel the Sorcerer, a Half-Elf. The software knows exactly how a character is built, so I don't have to track skill points or feats or even languages. It is a thing of beauty. 

Fel

CHARACTER NAME

PLAYER

CAMPAIGN

6 Sorcerer

Half-Elf

Neutral Evil

CLASS AND LEVEL

RACE

ALIGNMENT

EXPERIENCE POINTS

ABILITY NAME

ABILITY SCORE

ABILITY MODIFIER

TOTAL

WOUNDS/CURRENT HP

NONLETHAL DAMAGE

SPEED

STR strength

11

+0

HP hit points

14

30ft.

DEX dexterity

15

+2

AC armor class

14

=

10

+

1

+

0

+

2

+

0

+

0

+

1

+

0

CON constitution

10

+0

TOTAL

BASE

ARMOR BONUS

SHIELD BONUS

DEX MODIFIER

SIZE MODIFIER

NATURAL ARMOR

DEFLECT MODIFIER

MISC MODIFIER

DAMAGE REDUCTION

INT intelligence

14

+2

TOUCH armor class

13

FLAT-FOOTED armor class

12

SKILLS   SKILL NAME KEY ABILITY SKILL MODIFIER ABILITY MODIFIER RANKS MISC MODIFIER   (cc)Appraise¤§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Balance¤ dex 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   Bluff¤§ cha 6 = 2 + 4 + 0   (cc)Climb¤ str 0 = 0 + 0 + 0   Concentration¤§ con 4 = 0 + 4 + 0   Craft¤§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   Decipher Script§ int 4 = 2 + 2 + 0   (cc)Diplomacy¤§ cha 6 = 2 + 4 + 0   (cc)Disable Device§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Disguise¤§ cha 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Escape Artist¤ dex 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Forgery¤§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Gather Information¤§ cha 6 = 2 + 4 + 0   (cc)Handle Animal§ cha 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Heal¤§ wis 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Hide¤ dex 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Intimidate¤§ cha 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Jump¤ str 0 = 0 + 0 + 0   Knowledge (arcana)§ int 4 = 2 + 2 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (architecture & engineering)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (dungeoneering)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (geography)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (history)§ int 3 = 2 + 1 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (local)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (nature)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (nobility and royalty)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (religion)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Knowledge (the planes)§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0

WIS wisdom

14

+2

TOTAL

DEX MODIFIER

MISC MODIFIER

CHA charisma

15

+2

INITIATIVE modifier

+6

=

2

+

4

SAVING THROWS

TOTAL

BASE SAVE

ABILITY MODIFIER

MAGIC MODIFIER

MISC MODIFIER

TEMP. MODIFIER

FORT constitution

2

=

2

+

0

+

0

+

0

+

REFLEX dexterity

4

=

2

+

2

+

0

+

0

+

WILL wisdom

7

=

5

+

2

+

0

+

0

+

BASE ATTACK BONUS

3

SPELL RESISTANCE

0

GRAPPLE modifier

3

=

3

+

0

+

0

+

0

TOTAL

BASE ATT BONUS

STRENGTH MODIFIER

SIZE MODIFIER

MISC MODIFIER

ATTACK

ATTACK

DAMAGE

CRITICAL

Defending Spear +1

4

1d8+1

20/x3

RANGE

TYPE

NOTES

20

6lb, Med, twohanded wielding,

ATTACK

ATTACK

DAMAGE

CRITICAL

RANGE

TYPE

NOTES

(cc) crossclass skill ¤ can be used untrained § apply armor penalty

POSSESSIONS   SKILLS ITEM PG. LB. ITEM PG. LB. Defending Spear +1   6 Backpack (empty)   2 Bedroll   5 Bracers of armor +1   0 5 x Candle   0 2 x Case, map or scroll   0 Crowbar   5 Dart   0 2 x Flask   0 Flint and steel   0 Hammer   2 Ink (1 oz. vial)   0 Inkpen   0 7 x Parchment (sheet)   0 Pouch, belt   3 Ring of Protection +1   0 Rope, hemp (50 ft.)   10 Sealing wax   1 Silver Dagger (masterwork)   1 Tent   10 5 x Torch   5                       SKILL NAME KEY ABILITY SKILL MODIFIER ABILITY MODIFIER RANKS MISC MODIFIER   (cc)Listen¤§ wis 3 = 2 + 1 + 0   (cc)Move Silently¤ dex 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Open Lock§ dex 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Perform¤§ cha 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   Profession§ wis 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Ride¤§ dex 3 = 2 + 1 + 0   (cc)Search¤§ int 3 = 2 + 1 + 0   (cc)Sense Motive¤§ wis 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Sleight of Hand§ dex 3 = 2 + 1 + 0   (cc)Speak Language§ int 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   Spellcraft§ int 4 = 2 + 2 + 0   (cc)Spot¤§ wis 4 = 2 + 2 + 0   (cc)Survival¤§ wis 3 = 2 + 1 + 0   (cc)Swim¤§ str 1 = 0 + 1 + 0   (cc)Tumble dex 2 = 2 + 0 + 0   (cc)Use Magic Device§ cha 3 = 2 + 1 + 0         =   +   +           =   +   +           =   +   +           =   +   +           =   +   +

1-38lb. 39-76lb. 77-115lb. 115lb. 230lb. 575lb.   PLATINUM 134   GOLD 5 LIGHT LOAD MEDIUM LOAD HEAVY LOAD LIFT OVER HEAD EQUALS MAX LOAD LIFT OFF GROUND 2x MAX LOAD PUSH OR DRAG 5x MAX LOAD SILVER 2 COPPER 4

FEATS, LANGUAGES & ABILITIES         Feats Sorcerer abilities     Brew Potion Summon Familiar     Combat-Casting       Improved Initiative Half-Elf abilities     Simple Weapon Proficiency Low-light vision       Elven Blood     Languages Immunity to sleep spells     Halfling +2 save vs enchantments     Goblin       Common       Elven

Sorcerer spells
Spell Save DC	LEVEL	SPELLS PER DAY	BONUS SPELLS
12	0	6	0
13	1st	6	+1
14	2nd	5	+1
15	3rd	3	0
-	4th	-	-
-	5th	-	-
-	6th	-	-
-	7th	-	-
-	8th	-	-
-	9th	-	-
Acid Splash
Arcane Mark
Detect Magic
Mage Hand
Open/Close
Prestidigitation
Read Magic
Level 1
Identify
Mage Armor
Magic Weapon
Sleep
Level 2
Daylight
Scorching Ray
Level 3
Stinking Cloud

ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
Silver Dagger (masterwork)			4	1d4	19-20/x2
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES
10		1lb, Med,
ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES
ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
Dart			3	1d4	20/x2
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES
20		0lb, Med,
ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES
ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES
ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES
ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES
ATTACK			ATTACK	DAMAGE	CRITICAL
RANGE	TYPE	NOTES