Pinned
main is @alicesoinions
This is a sideblog made to assemble all of my RPG-related thoughts. I'll be talking about my own projects, about random ideas I like, and about system-agnostic concepts. Focus is primarily old-school style play, with occasional forays into pretty much anything.
Feel free to use my rules or to use them as a springboard for your own ideas — though I'd love to hear what you do with them!
I am of the belief that every entry in a bestiary should provide not just a statblock, but an actual game function or a niche in the world. I'm not interested in a monster that's just some number of HD and a special ability or two but that's just another monster that wanders around waiting to be slaughtered for xp.
But of course, there's many monsters from mythology and folklore that a GM might want to include in the game that don't have an obvious niche; monsters that even in the original story were unthinking beasts with nothing more to them than being hungry.
D&D generally treats griffons as one of such creatures; they're just a flying monster to fight, with at best a writeup about the value of their eggs or their usage as mounts.
But! Looking to medieval beliefs gives us something to do with griffons besides being a plain opponent to fight.
Griffons were believed to be heated enemies of horses, and would carry them off in their huge talons for a meal.
By having griffons prioritize taking off with the party's horses rather than trying to break through uneatable metal armor, you turn griffons into a threat towards resources rather than hit points - possibly taking off with the party's mounts, supplies, or treasure.
Following from this post, ideas on how to make divinely-powered classes without the leftover Christian flavoring of clerics.
The first option would be to stick to following one god, like modern clerics, but having the class more closely stick to the themes of that god.
As an example using real-world gods for clarity, a follower of Thor would be primarily a warrior, with some thunder and lightning spells as backup. A follower of Loki would be a sneaky thief-like class, with some illusion spells to supplement their abilities.
As a way to actually implement that in gameplay, you either have a class specific to each god in the setting, or a single class with middle-of-the-road stats and a selection of 'Domains' that form the larger part of their class features, and without spells.
The second idea would be a dedicated spellcaster, but hewing more closely to how god-work is done, with inspiration from historical ideas of magic.
Instead of praying to one god for specific spells, they would have a list of deities they can do work with, picking a small selection each day, and getting a handful of spells from each. So, for example, before setting on a naval adventure, they might commune with a sea god, and get a small list of water-themed spells; before a dungeon crawl, they might pray to a god of battle and bravery, and get combat spells.
This would result in a spellcaster who is versatile on a broad level, with a wide variety of spells, but not quite able to have a tailor-made spell list the way a wizard can.
The clerics of modern D&D are weird.
Originally, clerics were clearly written as abrahamic, using Old Testament miracles and being based on the crucifix-wielding Abraham Van Helsing.
(sidenote: while many of their powers stem from jewish sources, such as things performed by Moses and the ability to make golems, D&D was also largely created by a Jehovah's Witness, so I don't think they were actually intended as jewish outside of a weird "judeo-christian" mix. blegh.)
Later clerics were written as being the faithful of any religion, with stats given for such things as greek and norse gods, as well as long lists of fictional deities specific to D&D.
Thing is, modern clerics do not actually represent pantheistic religions well. As written on modern D&D, a cleric goes to a temple building specific to their god, wars against different faiths within the same pantheon, and has a spell list filled mostly with healing and support spells, with a small sprinkle of spells themed after their god. It's basically a christian's vision of how other religions work.
I think the idea of Clerics as a class focused on healing works best as being monotheistic, with a god(dess) of good and love and wisdom and life and the like. I'd rather use a made-up deity than a real one, but overall it makes much more sense with their given game abilities.
Here's a post with some ideas on how to do classes that better represent pagan characters.
The clerics from original Dungeons & Dragons were clearly inspired by Moses, with spells such as Turn Sticks to Snakes, Insect Plague, and Part Water (they will later get Water Walk, but I think that one dates to AD&D).
Modern clerics have mostly lost these roots; most games, D&D or otherwise, either have them stick solely to healing and support spells, or give them spell variety basically on par with wizards.
I think giving clerics a few unusual spells based on specific miracles of an in-world religion could give them quite a unique character; have their spell list mostly stick to classic priestly spells, but give them a handful of weird spells; not spells on a theme, such as 'fire spells' or 'truth spells', but one-off weird things with a specific story behind them.
I think the idea of level titles is cute, but having a title for every level ends up making them nonsensical.
I like characters getting new abilities as they level up, but the way it works in most editions is too arbitrary for me. Why does every druid get wild shape at 4th level (in 3e)? What makes 4th level so special?
And those thoughts make me think, what if you only got titles on specific levels, and those came with new abilities?
Example:
Fighters become heroes starting on 4th level. They get +1 to saving throws, and can make a number of attacks per round equal to their level, if they're fighting 1 HD creatures.
At 9th level, they become Lords, and any followers they have get +1 to attack and morale, and they can reroll one saving throw per day.
Magic-Users start as Apprentices, then become Conjurers, Magicians, Warlocks, Sorcerers, and Wizards, each heralding a new spell level. Clerics similarly go from Acolytes to Deacons, Priests, Vicars, and Bishops.
Rogues become thieves at 3rd level, able to disarm magical traps, and master thieves at 10th level, able to read magic scrolls and to be invisible while still and in the shadows.
Still not really sure if I like what I did for most classes, but I think the idea itself is interesting.
A few early RPGs experimented with the idea of different classes gaining experience in different ways, such as thieves gaining experience from stealing and wizards gaining experience from casting or researching spells.
These systems often did not work out well, because they end up pulling players in different directions. But they did inspire in me an idea for a pretty unusual system.
The core of the idea is a single-player game where the player character has abilities from multiple classes, and advances in them independently.
For example, you gain fighter xp by defeating monsters (strictly defeating, not bypassing etc.); fighter levels give you attack bonuses and more hit points.
You gain thief experience with gold, each 1 gp equaling 1 xp. Thief experience gives you skill points, or makes you better at lockpicking, sneaking, and maneuvering.
You gain wizard xp by finding new spells. Wizard xp gives you more spells per day.
You gain cleric xp by doing good/holy deeds; this would in effect be a mix of 'roleplaying xp' and xp for completing story objectives (but in both cases only 'Good' ones, or ones advancing the goals of the church etc.)
This would give an overall effect similar to games such as Elder Scrolls, where you get better at things by doing things, except implemented in a more abstract manner.
Here's my rule for firing into melee:
Roll the attack twice. If both rolls hit, resolve damage as normal. If one roll hits, choose a new target at random from those involved in the melee (including the original target); if the roll would hit that target's AC, it hits.
Pretty quick to resolve, is less of a problem for experienced archers than newbies, has a decent-but-not-overwhelming chance to hit the wrong target.
I am conflicted about Vancian Magic.
On one hand, I think it works nicely as a gameplay feature for the type of game it was intended for, that being resource-driven dungeon-crawls. Making magic limited for that kind of game works very well, and giving free access to a big list of spells makes it too easy to ignore challenges.
(that said, I prefer "vancian with a concession", such as being able to convert spells into a specific generic spell, once per day casting any one spell, etc.)
On the other hand, it... really doesn't feel like magic. Why do the magic-users of this world work like this. Why can I cast fireball but not a slightly smaller fire spell? Why can't I just make a stronger version of sleep? Why can I learn so many disparate spells but there's no incentive for sticking to a theme?
My solution to all these is making magic into a lost art.
Wizards of old were able to use magic. They knew the base principles, they knew how magic worked, and could create a thousand different spells on the spot, because they knew exactly which buttons of reality to push in exactly which way.
That knowledge is now lost. Modern magic-users don't know how their spells work, they simply scavenge ancient ruins looking for pre-packaged spells, those that were used as examples in classes and the like. Effectively, they are people who know how to run programs but who can't actually code.
This, to me, is both very fitting with the standard OSR milieu of ancient ruins and unknown wilderness, and neatly ties gameplay with lore.
Unlike my usual monster articles, this one deals more with mechanics than lore.
Here's how I handle hydra heads:
As usual for OD&D, most hydras start at 30 hp, that being five d6s on 6. They get five attacks per turn, one per head, at a +0 bonus.
Those dice are both heads and hp; once a hydra has lost 6 hp, one of its heads is torn off.
Now here's how I do things different.
Once a hydra loses a head, set that d6 aside. Roll it at the end of the hydra's turn. On a 6, that hydra grows two heads back, both at 6 hp (3 if you wanna be nice).
Fire damage removes those set-aside dice and stops heads from regenerating; either one die (torch, burning arrow) or all of them (fireball).
This makes hydras very chaotic and fearsome, while keeping them easy to fun and track, without having to track individual head regeneration.
I like the idea of saving throws being by category of effect, like in old-school games, rather than by action used to avoid it. I specially like how those deal with the what but not the how — a Fortitude save against poison explicitly means you just toughed it out, but a Save Vs Poison can mean any number of things, such as noticing a poisoned needle at the last moment or it catching on something.
That said, I think five overlapping categories causes too much possible confusion, and prefer to pare them down to three:
Vs Death — saves against death itself, against deadly poison, against undead abilities (level drain paralysis etc), etc. Helps against anything that causes direct death, or with death as its source.
Vs Fire/Breath — used against firebreath, icebreath, explosions, anything akin to firebreath.
Vs Magic — used against other forms of magic, wands, staffs, charms, etc.
Mechanic-wise, I like all saves being d20+Level or d20+½Level, with DCs of 10 for Death saves, 15 for Fire saves, and 20 for Magic saves. Optionally, give classes a +2 to a specific type of save, or allow attribute modifiers.
I feel like zombies and skeletons are a bit of an underutilized space in D&D. They're the most common types of undead, but there's not much difference between them; they only differ in the state of decomposition a corpse was in before being the target of animate dead. I feel monsters are more interesting if they have a unique in-world role.
My preferred solution for this is to give each of them a different origin.
Skeletons are the classic animated undead - necromancers gather corpses and raise them as servants. In this setup, all corpses rise as skeletons, ripping themselves out from their fleshy prisons if need be. Alternatively, the skeleton keeps carrying its flesh around for a while, being slowed down by it, but it sloughs off soon enough.
Zombies are, for lack of a better word, "naturally" occurring undead. An unattended corpse left exposed to negative energy - in the depths of a dungeon, in the middle of a battlefield, in a serial killer's basement - eventually gets up as a zombie, animated on its own (possibly only moving at night, and being still during the day).
This also opens up the possibility of corpse-stitchers; people who gather corpses and graft them together, wait for them to become monstrous zombies, and unleash them on the hapless population.
It is, of course, possible to use these ideas but in swapped positions, with zombies being necromancer servants and skeletons being naturally occurring. But I like them this way.
Anyone else have any interesting ideas for these low-level undead?
(sidenote — I prefer the term 'Attribute' to 'Ability', as I feel it is more intuitive to people with a background in other games)
I am overall a bigger fan of the attribute modifier table used in most OSR games than I am of WotC's formula; but I feel it is slightly more stingy with bonuses than I'd like, and as such have made my own table, slightly more generous with +1s and +2s.
My table can be summarized as the formula (Score/3)-3; here's how it looks in a table format, compared to the commonly-used tables:
And here are the percentage chances of getting a given modifier, taking into account that WotC game use a best-3-of-4 system:
My system ends up as something of a hybrid between the two, with higher chances of bonuses than the OSR table, but still a very small chance of +3s and no chance of +4s.
I've never been a fan of 'roll stats, then assign them in any order'. To me, that only adds the worst type of randomness.
Randomness during character creation comes in two flavors - making characters more varied, or making them more powerful.
For a simple example: imagine during character creation, you rolled on a table to get a random unique power. That's interesting; it makes characters different. Powers might be overall more or less useful of course, but hopefully they are close enough in utility/power that all options are something interesting to have.
Contrast the idea of a point-buy system where you roll for how many points you get. That rarely adds anything interesting to the game; some players will simply be more fortunate than others with no counterpoint.
Rolling stats then assigning them however you want is closer to the latter than anything else. If your idea is to play a fighter, you'll assign the stats in str-con-dex-wis-int-cha order (or whatever order fits your concept), and the only thing the dice are doing is determining how strong or weak your character is.
In a roll-in-order system, characters might end with unusual combinations of stats. If you have high INT and CHA, you might make an unusually charismatic wizard, while high DEX and WIS might make a dextrous cleric or a very wise thief (or, of course, you can ignore your high stats and play an even more unusual concept).
This means roll-in-order actually makes more varied, interesting characters, that you might not play otherwise, instead of simply playing the same cookie-cutter characters over and over, with the only different being whether you've managed 14 or 15 strength this time.
All that said, I am sympathetic to the idea that someone who really wants to play a magic-user ought to be able to play a magic-user.
For that, I like the idea of allowing the player one stat swap - for example, swapping STR for INT. This might be a universal bonus, or something unique to humans.
I've never been a fan of how D&D characters start at human power, but eventually grow to having hundreds of hit points and able to tank a cannonball to the face.
(Notably, this is pretty much only a problem for D&D and its close derivatives; almost every other RPG has characters at a much narrowed band of HP values [or equivalent])
At the same time, I still wished for hit points to be randomly determined, and for them to go up as you level, just on a limited fashion.
Here's what I've come up with.
At character creation, roll dice for HP. This might be 3d6 for wizards, 4d6 for thieves, and 5d6 for fighters; or maybe 3d6 for wizards, 3d8 for thieves, 3d10 for fighters. Whichever your preference, players record the individual dice results, not just the total (so you might write down '2-4-5' and have 11 hp). Add Constitution modifiers to taste (my current preference is 'add CON to each die')
Whenever a player gains a level, they roll another die. If that result is higher than one of their old ones, they swap. So, for example, if you had 2-4-5, and roll a 4, they now have 4-4-5, with a total of 13 hp.
This means hp totals are capped per class (e.g. wizards have up to 18 before CON modifiers), and low rolls during character creation are quickly patched up.
This idea revolves around 'Chimeras' in a generalized sense, that is, as mythical hybrid animals rather than lion-goat-snakes in particular.
Let's step up the magic in chimeras a little.
Every chimera is born with two heads, and gets additional heads as it grows older. Once a chimera has four heads, it splits into two new chimeras, each with two of its old heads.
Rule-wise, you might have chimeras of different stages having 8/9/10 HD, or have a table to determine which types of head a chimera gets (each with different added abilities). You might also have an adventure with a mutated or magically-experimented-on chimera that has outlived its natural splitting stage and gotten to five heads.
A few real-world mythologies have combined gods of the dead with gods of material wealth; it's common to associate death with a world under the earth, and gold and other precious metals also come from underground. Hades is a literal classic example.
Older editions of D&D had gold-as-xp, that is, each gold piece retrieved from a dungeon translates to 1 experience point. Older editions also often had dungeons as part of a "mystical underworld", as in, not just physical underground places, but as magically antagonistic towards the players.
What if you combined these ideas?
Dungeons are mystically connected to the underworld; any old, abandoned, dark place is sympathetically bound to the afterlife. Your setting's God of the Dead, Ruler of the Underworld, is also a keeper of riches. Each coin of the underworld is suffused with his power.
Thus, when the players gain experience from looting gold, this isn't a game abstraction - they are literally stealing a little bit of power from the God of the Underworld, and becoming a little stronger in the process.
This would also neatly explain characters rising from mundane human heights to the superhuman feats high-level characters are capable of.