OSRPGtalk

Words from a grognard

Month: April 2024

Skills: baked-in or not?

April 30, 2024 / / 0 Comments

Early D&D, for establishing the idea of character classes and having that as a defining feature, also has a skill system. It’s baked into the rules here and there without being made explicit; Lucy Blumire explains it well on her site, found here: https://rpghorizon.com/posts/2020-07-11_skill-system/

All of those skills can be compiled and serve as the base for an explicit skill system, of course. I think that may be a better approach, too, instead of dropping in a skill rating in the description of something else (“there’s a 2-in-6 chance of success”). The baked in approach drops in exceptions to the general chance in descriptions not associated with the description giving the general chance, in most cases, so learning the general rule and the exceptions is a bit trickier.

I’m leaning strongly to just making an explicit skill system to explain each of the abilities in detail and all can be found together. It’s still very much old school to have explicit skills–witness Traveller–and makes it apparent how many skills are included in the original fantasy systems even if they aren’t made clear.

That exercise also helps fill out and solidify skill lists. What does each class require? Of those skills, which do all characters possess in some degree? Everybody can sneak, for example–chance to surprise others–while some characters are much better at it–some by dint of birth and upbringing and other through intensive training.

I’ve found that also breaking things down by skills used in each pillar of play is helpful. What are all the magical abilities? Which are general and which only for specialists? Same with fighting and sneaking and speaking and so forth. Doing that makes it readily apparent how the different classes stand out from each other while also showing where non-specialists also have some ability.

Adding minor miracles

April 30, 2024 / / 0 Comments

I don’t care for clerics, despite having played some truly memorable cleric PCs that are among my favorites. I’m just not fond of the general fighter-magic user vibe, without one of those being very much primary and the other very much secondary. Because of that–and other issues–I’m not including clerics in the projects.

I was involved in a reddit discussion some time ago that convinced me that it could be a good thing to include some sort of divine magic, though, especially if it weren’t entirely class-based. Something that other characters could conceivably avail themselves of. I’ve been chewing on that periodically ever since.

The other day, an approach finally clicked into place on that count. I’ve not played around with it thoroughly, yet it seems to be fully viable and fits within my preferences. I was reading another post about orisons on a blog somewhere (was trying to work out what to do with handling undead with clerics) and had an epiphany: I can use a version of orisons to accomplish it all.

Orisons as standard chants/litanies/prayers that anybody can learn. Most of the time, for most people, the orison won’t have any greater effect than soothing the person using it–no mechanical effect and no in-world effect other than that. Some characters, however, by dint of qualifying attributes, can occasionally invoke actual divine favor to accomplish mechanical effects.

I expect to use the channeling system for spellcasting to help regulate it, with the channeling rate lower than that witches and wizards can achieve. Other characters who are sensitive to divine power can assist if they also know the relevant chant. Perhaps even non-sensitive characters can do so.

The power level of orisons is also limited. They’re not a way of channeling divine wrath and striking down monsters, they’re a way of deriving a bit of favor and fortune on a basic level.

This also addresses my need for some way to handle undead without clerics. I can see a class of characters who are sensitive, have trained with many orisons that affect undead and other supernatural entities (demons, et al) and some ability to physically confront (fight) the horrors, too. The class won’t be a top notch fighter, and certainly not a powerful spellcaster. It will be useful, though, and I expect fun to play.

And the orisons will add a nice touch to the priestly class I alread have planned–friars. Those friars who are sensitive (could be most) can occasionally get a slight boost via orisons. The wandering holy helpers get another thing that sets them apart as servants of the pantheon.

On superpowers in fantasy

April 30, 2024 / / 0 Comments

I’ve mentioned before how I dislike superpowers and superhero characters in fantasy games. Reading through the 3rd edition D&D books when they released, I saw rampant superhero stuff and put them back on the shelf immediately. That was the moment that I stopped keeping up with new editions, shaking my head at far from the sort of fantasy tales I enjoyed reading the system had strayed. I recalled how Gygax had railed against the “Dungeons & Beavers” style of game run on the west coast in the early days, because of the outlandish power bloat involved.

I began play with AD&D. There were design choices in there that I looked askance at as they stretched the boundaries of what I found to be good fantasy (by which I mean “good for me”). It was until I played some B/X and learned more about OD&D that I noticed how there was already some power bloat in AD&D. Hit die sizes for character classes increased in AD&D, for example. When the D12 barbarian appeared in Unearthed Arcana, I was less than thrilled; having been unsettled by the Ranger’s 2d8 start and the fighters’ general D10, already. The early hit dice being D6 for everybody immediately felt better, though I did understand how expanding the variety available to classes helped set them apart better.

The notion that a “killing blow” was 6 points as a 0-lvl NPC would have at most 6 hp made basic damage from weapons a D6 readily understandable. Increased hit dice sizes began to whittle away at that intuitive understanding, though. Understanding bell curves in measuring capabilities can make reasonable a 6 pt strike being a killing blow on a D8, as most creatures of 1 HD would have 3-6 hp and the 6 pts of damage would still kill them. Changing the default hit dice size to a D8 wouldn’t bother me. Using D10 and then adding D12 for humans? That strains my sense of simulation.

So using larger die sizes was something that never felt right (for human characters of any stripe). The same with hit point totals at higher levels–that always felt like we were playing superheroes, only wearing cloaks and tunics instead of masks and capes. One of the reasons I’ve decided to work the projects I have is to create systems without superpowers being designed in.

This extends to class abilities, too. I read a take on thieves just the other day where thief could do some class ability action and then be able to use a power that the defeated monster possessed for a while after. Um…a thief gets the ability to spit acid or paralyze foes just because they succeeded at some thiefly ability during a fight? No…just, no. I don’t find that sort of thing fitting into my fantasy. Same with some of the abilities that have cropped up to boost fighters in relation to MUs–they begin OK yet at higher levels become ridiculous.

So a light touch with extraordinary abilities is what I’m attempting, all the while including abilities beyond what normal people can do.

A bit more on attributes

April 30, 2024 / / 0 Comments

I’m still conflicted on attribute bonuses and effects.

On the one hand, I want a reasonable simulation wherein higher attributes gain bonuses and the PC can mechanically do something extra or something extra well. This makes having attributes useful and differentiating character abilities, which makes the tools players have available via characters different in one more regard.

On the other hand, I want players to not get bonuses on a whole slew of abilities/actions in play. I can think of systems where I’d find that just peachy; the flavors I’m going for with the current projects are not where that would be fine.

The question then remains “How do attribute modifiers appear in the rules?”

I’m now looking at all the ways attributes affect mechanics. Saving throws, damage bonuses, defensive bonuses, accuracy bonuses, reaction modifiers, yadayadayada. I think that allowing the attribute bonuses to affect some of the possible mechanics–player choice?–and not all of the mechanics and abilities tied to the attributes may be the way to go.

So, a PC with a high strength isn’t going to get a bonus for opening doors AND bending bars AND inflicting weapon damage AND carrying copious amounts of treasure AND a bonus to a saving throw AND…you get the point. That notable strength bonus might only apply to part of the list.

Another thought is to use the bonus in discrete units; eg., a +3 bonus can appear as a +1 on one thing and a +2 on another. I find this line of thought really interesting, as I could expand the range of bonus ratings available and still have no single bonus outlandishly powerful. A player could roll a character with a +5 Strength, for instance, and that would appear as bonuses to three different abilities associated with strength. I find that quite an attractive option, though I’ve not played with it in my head long enough to be fully confident in its desirability.

I’m trying to keep my balance on the line of designing in enough customization of a PC to be helpful in differentiating characters via more than just loadout and characterization (for those folks who enjoy that sort of thing) and keeping power bloat under control from the outset of play. There’s a small range of bonus ratings that clearly fit what I want to see, so finding a nice way to expand that range without moving into superheroics is tricky.

Thoughts on low hit points

April 1, 2024 / / 0 Comments

I’ve been reading through old volumes of The Dragon magazine. It’s been interesting to read all the takes on game design that appear in the pages, whether from Gygax or one of the other TSR people. An article I read yesterday, by Len Lakofka, I believe, was about low hp and zero hp, offering an alternative approach to using them.

The first part of his take that I found interesting involved when hp totals dropped to 2 or 1. He advocated for penalties to PC actions at that point, reflecting the obviously wounded status. I found that quite interesting, as it addresses the criticism of “full capabilities until dead” that applies to the RAW. Now, I’m going to assume that every PC began play with more than 2 hp, so dropping to 2 reflects a loss of foundational hp, a decrease in inherent capabilities on part of the PC. Yes, even those MUs! I know so many tables award hd maximum at 1st level and others mandate at least upper half of the die range (so 3 on a d4), so dropping to two hp would be wounded status for even a PC MU.

The next takeaway involved dropping to 0 hp or lower. He offered a table with percentages for all the options; that seems to be overkill to me. The basic idea that a PC has to check for death or incapacitation is good. It’s not instant death, yet things don’t look good for the PCs (instant death arrives if hp drop to -5 or -6). Even if still alive after dropping to 0 to -4 hp, the PC will have to make another check in a few rounds to stay alive, repeat until receiving care, healing naturally, or dying. And if the PC lives through all that, there are chances for scars and maiming (losing body parts). Woot! Adding history and characterization to PCs!

I’ve been evaluating different systems for limiting hit points of late as part of finalizing playtest materials. From the E6 approach to static hp/level to reduced hd sizes and more. One thing I’ve decided makes a good deal of sense is to have all PCs have basic hp for 0-lvl and their PC hd then adding to that base. So, I’d have a base of 5 hp for simply being a healthy, active person and then adding hp for experience levels.

This works well with the idea of reduced hp leading to penalties due to wounding. A PC gets damage to where those foundational hp are disappearing? Yeah, there’s penalties involved. Time to get out of Dodge and live to fight another day. Then, if getting incapacitated and dropping unconscious, the PC has a solid chance to die if not receiving care soon enough. That strikes me as being deadly enough to drive caution on behalf of players while allowing PCs a bit of room to get knocked out of a fight and still live.

I think coupling limited hp due to class and the idea of foundational, 0-lvl hp can make for a reasonably demanding playstyle. Couple that with the penalties, incapacitation, and maiming rules and it can be a nail-biting good time.

© 2025 OSRPGtalk

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑