Category: Subsystem Design (Page 1 of 2)

Design: Saving Throws

June 10, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

I think I’ve finally figured out why I much prefer saving throws in the traditional lineup rather than any of the single saving throw or three throw systems. It came to me when I was reading a post somewhere about how some folks prefer just using ability checks instead of saving throws — that’s when it clicked.

I don’t view saving throws as simple attribute checks. The attributes are used in deciding much of the character’s capabilities, sure (though far too much in modern systems, I think). So, the attributes are what are used to help keep the character from having to make saving throws. Why should they also then be used a second time after failing the first, so to speak? The saving throws, I reckon, are what can save a PC’s carcass when their attribute-based abilities have failed. Thus, saving throws shouldn’t properly be just another check of what failed prior.

The concept comes from minis play, where individual character attributes don’t come into play, so there’s nothing inherent in the origins that would lead to simply making attribute checks instead. Saves in D&D have varied from class to class, which makes for some interesting variety when faced with the specific hazards and challenges that saving throws address, and I see no convincing reason to toss that approach out.

I’ll be using saving throws with such class variance in my systems. I’ll be using throws in the same fashion as the traditional throws — so vs specific types of effects — and I’ve also added a sixth saving throw category. I’ve wavered back and forth as to whether to allow attributes to provide bonuses to saves and have finally settled on not allowing that. Saves are class-based and can be modified by circumstance, with attributes not being a factor.

Saving Throws :

: Save vs Corruption (Death, Poison)

: Save vs Metamorphosis (Paralysis, Petrification)

: Save vs Instrument (Rods, Staves, & Wands)

: Save vs Inundation (Breath Weapon)

: Save vs Imposition (Illusions, Phantasms, Charm)

: Save vs Workings (General Spells)

Design: On Character Development II

June 1, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

I spoke about PC development here: https://osrpgtalk.net/design-on-character-development/ and this is a continuation of that.

I mentioned the four tiers I think of when I consider character development in my projects. I think a closer look at what those entail is warranted, along with the expected types of development for each. As with everything in my projects, it’s all highly malleable until it isn’t, though that “isn’t” state won’t appear until the final published versions are released into the wild (and additional feedback may change things up even after).

Beginning PCs have established themselves as exemplary in their fields of endeavor. They’re experienced, consistent, and have shown greater capacity than their peers. Thus, they’re not beginning play as “zeroes” in a “zero to hero” process. As mentioned before, they’re beginning as competent performers and develop into reknowned experts.

Ways this shows up, using the D20-based project that riffs on B/X and AD&D as a reference:

PCs have 0-lvl hp (4-6 hp) and then 1st-lvl hp added to those. Players won’t have to worry about PCs being one-shot by the most basic of foes, though tangling with an ogre still has them in peril of a quick death. A wizard PC will begin with 7 or 8 hp on average, with a fighter having 10 or 11, so a foe striking and doing a D6 damage isn’t likely to be a single-round threat to mortality. (The system also works to reduce hp bloat at higher levels, so the starting hp are a larger portion of what their max hp will end up.)
PCs begin with larger bonuses to their primary abilities. Fighters, for instance, aren’t beginning with the same chances to hit as all other PCs, they have bonuses that are noticeably better; where other classes have a +0 bonus to hit at the outset, a fighter will have a +2 to +4 bonus, depending on sub-class and which fighting ability is being considered (melle or missile). Fighters are better at fighting in every way from the outset.
The notable competence extends to many discrete abilities. PCs have a qualitative advantage in class-related abilities when compared to PCs of other classes. A sneaky PC class not only has a bonus to sneaking that other classes lack, but can move more quickly while sneaking.

Now that I’m nailing down sub-systems for playtesting, I’ve been considering exactly what sort of development happens at each tier. This has involved considering when the development needed for each tier actually happens, too –does it all happen prior to reaching that tier or during that tier? When do I expect the character to possess those capabilities? Then, do the abilities show up full-blown, that is, at full capacity and never improving, or do they also develop over time much the same as hit points?

As these are old school systems, I’m inclined to assign improvements in batches at set points instead of having them accumulate in dribbles with something new each level. So fighters begin with the ability to sweep, cleave, sunder, and such at 1st level. Those basic feats/abilities don’t accumulate here and there over time, they’re just part of the basic class abilities for fighters. When new abilities appear, those will arrive in similar bundles reflecting the regular training and experience at that point in development. The system isn’t about the details of how characters gain skills, the system is interested in how the players avail themselves of new capabilities at that point in the character’s life.

I’ve been commenting on fighter development because I’ve been working on that lately to get ready for broader testing. I’ve postulated a great many abilities for the fighter class/sub-classes with an eye to paring back after receiving feedback on them. I expect that I’ve pumped up the class with more than it needs to be viable and interesting, so not all of what’s current will survive to publication. I do know that my take on the fighter won’t be (credibly) criticized as being under-powered.

First Tier

The first tier of play sets a PC up with all of the basic abilities the PC will need throughout the campaign. Fighters will have basic stunts available. Wizards will have basic casting and countering and knowledge skills. A scout will have all of the basic abilities needed for successful travel — orienteering and wayfinding and camping. No PC should have to wait for essential abilities, they should have a full toolset to work with during the first tier.

That first tier is also the time in play when a PC gains notoriety for personal ability and begins to develop bonds in play within the setting. I expect a good deal of diagetic development to happen in a campaign, and it begins right out of the gate. PCs begin building reputations and come to the attention of the movers and shakers in the world around them (for better or worse). That diagetic development is important within the campaign because the diagetic can get supported mechanically later by the system. (I figure the best way to support diagetic development is to merge it with mechanical development in some fashion.)

Second Tier

The PCs now branch out a bit and begin establishing strong bonds with a social network. The seeds of future political clout are planted. Whether the player wants the PC to primarily adventure when name level and above or to primarily administer a holding (or guild or academy or whatever). The PCs have established themselves as notable in a region and voted Most Likely to Become Movers & Shakers.

Note that diagetic ties to NPCs are not automatically scoring mechanical support. The mechanical support, I think, should be limited to few of these diagetic relationships, so players should choose carefully which to lock in mechanically. I’m also still uncertain as to what form that mechanical support should take.

A fighter, in D&D, fourth level is where the PC becomes a Hero — the fighting equivalent of four normal men. That allows for attacking multiple creatures with less than four HD each round, an ability that allows a hero to cut through mobs of basic foes. Each PC class can gain a likewise-useful ability to help deal with advancing through this tier

Third Tier

This is the tier that leads to name level (which is tenth level in these systems). It’s where I think the development should move beyond class-based abilities. It’s when players get to prepare PCs for high-level play without simply being locked into larger numbers of the same ol’ class abilities. Sure, an ability that can support class play whether the PC stays focused on adventuring or becomes a domain ruler would be welcome, so there should be one or two for each class.

Development should be able to move beyond that, though. PCs should be able to gain abilities that aren’t directly related to character class and prime the PCs for continued play at high levels. Becoming conversant with portals for travel to other planes, for example, or learning how to navigate the astral seas in specialized ships. I’m still brainstorming what can/should be available at this point; the abilities need to be useful without providing superpowers of any sort.

Fourth Tier

Well, if we’ve already developed capabilities for high-level play, what else is left? I think at this point, players should be able to fine tune their PCs. To that end, I plan to allow the deprecation of some abilities to replace them with different abilities. That may take the form of taking a reduction in capability with some class abilities to boost other abilities or to gain entirely new abilities. The breadth of capabilities possessed by a PC should be far beyond what they had at the outset.

Development of any domain/organization should be part of this stage of character play, too, of course. What’s been built needs to be maintained and improved.

I think the option to level beyond this is absolutely cooked into the process. The accumulation of hp and attack bonuses and all that ended at an earlier tier. All the development in this last tier involves reduction of some capabilities and the addition of others. I see no reason why that couldn’t continue for as long as the GM allows for it, as each new level only changes capabilities a bit without adding increased bonuses.

No Zero-to-Hero

I think it better to describe this development as “competent to expert” with “exploring new realms” on top of it. At no point should the PCs be barely competent enough to wander outside their towns and encounter the wilds of the setting. At no point should the PCs be possessed of superpowers that make them near-invincible. Building expertise and then expanding expertise makes the most sense to me.

Design: On Character Development

April 9, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

When considering the development of Player Characters, I find myself ambivalent about many elements of development. I’ll just offer general thoughts here, despite dealing with three different systems. It may be best to look at all this through the context of Dangerous Adventures, my riff on B/X and AD&D. There’s a great deal here that originated when considering how to tweak those rules to better fit my preferences, plus the underlying considerations affect the Legendary Journeys system and likely the third system, too.

• I have no interest in designing a system that allows or supports the notion of character builds. The games I play aren’t all about characters, which is an effect that approach, and optimizing a character for the entirety of its lifecycle during chargen is definitely not allowing for much in the way of diagetic development.

• With that said, I do want to offer players a way to customize a character in some small way. This may be limited to how they kit the character out and little else, yet there should be a way to differentiate characters of a like class with just a glance.

• I’m planning for four tiers of PC development: lvls 1 – 3; lvls 4 – 6; lvls 7 – 9; and lvls 10 – 12. This is, of course, an organizational notion to help me when I’m considering how the PCs develop. They begin as notable figures on a local scenehaving established themselves as capable figures that others will call on for assistance. Then they begin to surround themselves with henchmen and cronies and expand their capabilities to be helpful. They then become notable allies to have on a grander scale, with wealthy and noble persons looking to them about important matters. They finally become movers & shakers unto themselves, as important in the political realm as in the arenas of the mythic wilderness and the mythic underground.

• I’m pondering whether or not to add another tier to that stack. I can vaguely see ways to make those higher levels interesting without the PCs simply being superheroes in fantasy suits. I’ll have to be able to spend much more time on that, though, and that’ll have to wait until I get the bulk of the system(s) in working drafts.

• I want PC development to be both vertical and horizontal. The numbers shouldn’t just get larger on abilities. There’s a lot of number bloat that I’ve taken measures to limit over the years that I’ll simply design out of these systems.The DA system uses hit points, in a manner much like its inspirations do. No PC in DA will have hp numbers near what high level PCs in those systems do, as DA PCs only roll for more hp for a handful of levels. The dice rolled also help limit how many hp can accumulate.

• I want PCs to develop new abilities that expand their capabilities as they grow, though not to the point where they get something new each level. Something for each tier, OK.

• I’m also looking at allowing for some abilities to be diminished over time and new abilities developed in their place. This may be the most significant part of customizing a character that I’ll use. As PCs grow, they can shed some bonuses to abilities possessed to add a new ability. (It may be this sort of development choice that differentiates how the player approaches high-level play, whether as a domain ruler or as a hero called on for further adventuring challenges.)

• As that last point mentioned, I’m trying to hash out the details of how a player can choose to either play a domain ruler at high levels or continue on as an adventurer, primarily. The assumption of the early fantasy system designers was that PCs would advance to become rulers and raise armies for the sort of wargames the RPGs descended from. That assumption hasn’t been valid for ages.

• For all the comments about higher levels, I’m not neglecting beginning PCs. The notion that all beginning PCs are some degree of frail is problematic. When compared to 0-lvl people, sure, the PCs have at least some slight edge. When compared to what they can confront when venturing forth, though, they can seem a bit puny. I think adding a bit more competence at the outset can only help; beginning hp are higher (adding 1st lvl hp to existing 0-lvl hp) and a bit more competence (such as fighters having a better to hit bonus at the outset). No “zero to hero” development — “competent to expert” is the goal.

• One way to look at my goals is this: I want to expand the “sweet spot” of character levels in play. Many folks find play with character levels 3 to 7 preferable because the PCs are strong enough to take on a wider array of challenges at the low end and not yet too complex or powerful to enjoy at the high end. If I can expand that to lvls 1 to 9 for many of those players, I’d be satisfied. PCs that aren’t viewed as frail as the outset and not overwhelming at the higher end would be a very good thing, I think.

Some of what I’ve mentioned in here is already sketched out. Some of it is still very much in my head. There are also some elements that I have planned that I’m leery of hard coding into rules (such as gaining titles and other diagetic rewards). I’ll probably have more thoughts to spill as I work through it all.

An Early Look At DA Fighters

April 7, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

I’ve got the rough sketches of the fighting classes for Dangerous Adventures ready for comments.

The Stalwart is the straight up fighting machine. https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/DA-Class-Stalwart.pdf

The Lancer is the mounted specialist. https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/DA-Class-Lancer.pdf

The Warrior is the barbaric edition. https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/DA-Class-Warrior.pdf

The Ranger is a monster hunter. https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/DA-Class-Ranger.pdf

The Paladin hunts undead and puts them to rest. https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/DA-Class-Paladin.pdf

I’ve yet to flesh out some of the abilities and settle in on final descriptive terms. I think this is a good look at what will be going into outside playtesting, though, once the numbers and descriptions are all nailed down.

Design: Characters

April 6, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

At the heart of the player experience in RPGs is the Player Character. One can argue that the rules surrounding PCs can make or break a system, with those rules being what ties the player into the game at the table. I wouldn’t argue that notion is wrong, though it might not be the whole of the measure. The ins and outs of PCs, however, do a lot of work in a game system.

Help Define the Setting

What character classes are available for play provide a look at the setting, the game world. The archetypes and expressions of those archetypes provide information on what goes on in the setting, and what is important to how the world operates. OD&D’s three possible archetypes –fighting man, cleric, and magic user– tell us that the world has lots of fighting, religious orders that also fight, and a community of wizards who actively seek out new information and materials. These archetypes are lightly defined, leaving it to individual tables as to whether fighting men can be knights or mercenaries, light foot soldiers, heavily armored troopers, and so forth. This allows for the GM to provide guidance to players to get PCs that fit the GM’s world.

So, while the system rules don’t offer much in the way of defining the setting, the GM can certainly do so by informing the players what sorts of fighters can be played and tying them into the world. The GM establishes the flavor of the world by offering horse archers, light footmen, heavy infantry houseguards, lancers, and so forth.

Tools For Play

The character classes provide players with tools to use in play. Each ability possessed by a PC is a tool the player can use in overcoming challenges. This isn’t to say that the PC abilities should be providing simple solutions to challenges –proverbial EASY buttons– but provide the type of abilities to bring to bear that such a character would. The abilities shouldn’t provide immediate answers to challenges, just tools that can be used with ingenuity in addressing those challenges.

As mentioned above, a class provides abilities available to the PC/player to use to overcome challenges in play. A class definition limits what abilities the PC is best at to those that serve their role in the setting, and thus in the game. Fighters are good at fighting to some degree, better than those PCs who aren’t fighters. The magicians wield magic, which the other classes don’t. There are sub-classes with abilities to sneak around more effective than other people, while Paladins are more effective at battling and destroying undead than everybody else. A key element is that characters are better at what their classes do than characters who belong to other classes. I look to make each class both qualitatively better and quantitatively better at their specialties than those who aren’t of the same class. That also indicates that characters of other classes can certainly do at least some of the same things –sneak around, fight undead, hunt critters– though not with the same competence as the specialists.

Consider a snoop, for example. A snoop is quite competent at breaking & entering and sneaking around in dark places to find items without being detected. So, when it comes to climbing a rope or wall, a snoop is less likely to fall –a quantitative difference– and able to also move more quickly than others –a qualitative difference. Players are able to have their PCs attempt actions outside their specialties; it’s expected as a normal part of play.

In My Projects

In my projects, I’m using character class constructs in exactly these fashions. The range of character sub-classes offer insight as to how the world operates. There is no generic fighter, for example; there are multiple sub-classes that fill roles in the societies in which they arise. There are experienced soldiers notable for their capabilities, the Stalwart. There are Troopers, the mounted cavalry. Barbarians come from less-“civilized” lands and are adept with both melee and missile weapons. Rangers are specialized hunters of monsters. Paladins hunt undead and lay them to rest.

These last two sub-classes highlight that monsters are a common issue in the setting that has to be dealt with, to the point where specialized roles have been created and there are people who step into those roles to protect the lands of the human (and human-like) peoples.

Even among those sub-classes there can be further differentiation via character kits. A mobile light infrantry skirmisher is different than a soldier of the line is different than a member of a noble’s houseguard. Different weapons, armors, approaches to combat, and different organizations they operate in can provide a myriad of ways the character is tied into the setting.

There are also Scouts of more than one type. Delvers, often derided as tomb robbers. Snoops for hire by the wealthy to spy on rivals. Hunters who know their local landscapes well and trade in furs and carcasses. Guides who know the routes connecting the settlements and lead caravans and expeditions.

There are then magicians of varied sort. Witches, who draw on primal powers and work within the weave of the natural world. Wizards, who take a more scholarly, abstracted approach to working. And Enchanters, who create illusions and draw out horrors from others’ minds.

Each of the three projects underway offer up these three classes and at least most of the sub-classes. Two of them also offer an assortment of Raconteurs, with priests, friars, bards, and other performers available to provide characters better-suited to social interactions.

I’ve already posted a draft of a Witch class (https://osrpgtalk.net/first-look-at-a-witch-class/) and have sketches of other classes underway.

Design: Exploring

April 5, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

Exploration is a staple of fantasy RPG adventuring. From the earliest rules drafts onward, exploring underground complexes has been present. Later expansion of the system added exploring wilderness to the mix, so PCs could explore the great outdoors, find a musty old dungeon, and then explore the hole in the ground. The basic play loop in the rules has always been that of “Leave Home –> Explore –> Return Home” lather, rinse, repeat. With that in mind, I’d like to look at exploration closely, with an eye on figuring out what’s important to the play experience when exploring to try to capture that in my projects.

First, of course, we’ll have to break exploration into discrete units of activity, as I don’t think dungeon exploration and wilderness exploration share enough similarities to share a unified process. There are some major differences that warrant treating them individually despire shared concerns between them. I’m also leaning into additional exploration fields (dreamscapes, faery, etc.) and expect those to also have some significant differences when compared to sneaking around in dark tunnels.

Dungeon Exploration

Fantasy RPGs began in dungeons, so I think it fitting to begin by examining exploration of dungeons. What is that drives characters to delve in the darkness and hazard the risks of going there? Or, properly, what is it that leads players to want to have characters who adventure there? What are the game experiences that entice players to play in these imaginary spaces?

I think, at a fundamental level, is the draw of a world similar to ours and yet filled with wondrous things that ours isn’t. Many of those wondrous beings, items, or events simply don’t or can’t happen in our mundane existence and provide both relief from mundaneity and the promise and challenge of novelty. Even with the dozenth iteration of a magical fountain, the very idea of a magical fountain remains something new enough to warrant wonder.

So many of these wondrous things also involve a challenge to us as thinking creatures. How will we overcome the struggle before us to achieve our ends? Let us marshall our tools, gather our wits, and figure out an approach to surmount the odds and prevail. Can we bludgeon our way through? Slip surretitiously past it? Undermine it operations so it falls apart? Negotiate a way past? The game situation allows us to stretch our problem-solving abilities beyond the boundaries of our personal capabilities via PC abilities and belongings.

The dungeon offers us myraid ways to engage in the wonders and challenges of a fantasy setting. There are puzzles to be solved to find a hidden vault or open its portal, and clues to be found and pondered to reach a solution. Traps that can be the demise of the unwary, if warning hints are ignored or misread. Tricks to be overcome when they lead us astray and waste our time and resources. Then there are treasures, both obvious and not, that promise riches and reknown and influence, if we should be able to return home with them.

All of this while mucking about in the dark with the possibility of monstrous creatures lurching out of the shadow seeking to devour our bodies and sometimes our souls. All of the nightmares of our primoridal psyche on display in flesh and bone and dripping blood from fang and claw. We get to confront horrors and walk –or limp– away to tell the tale.

The feel of those encounters arises from few things. The PCs –and thus the players, vacariously– are in an unknown environment. Their primary sense, sight, is limited by the pervailing darkness, and other senses can be readily overwhelmed by strange scents, echoing sound, and the strange airs found in the underworld. It’s easy to get turned around and about and to lose grasp of the way back to safety.

The PCs also have limited resources. They can rely only on themselves and what they can carry with them (the best argument for encombrance rules, I say) while struggling against the dark and the horrors it contains. They’re likely to have only the water they carry to maintain hydration and foods they carry to maintain energy. The very extertion of moving around can drain them to where everything becomes more difficult. Maintaining peak performance is a challenge in itself.

It’s my opinion that the constraints of the latter limits emphasize the joys of the former. That is, the shiny wonders shine brighter when contrasted with the strain of the darkness. The challenge of design, I think, lies in balancing the two — how intrusive to make the strain of resource management balanced against the brightness of the challenges.

Wilderness Exploration

Exploring in the wilderness can be an express investigation or happen merely by moving through an area. I’ve still yet to sort the finer points of the two so I can decide if the procedures are exactly the same or if there’s some difference that is worth making apparent in the rules. The broad strokes of each are the same, though.

I find a lot of value in the approach of having Landmarks, Hidden POIs, and Secret POIs in any given hex/area of the lands being moved through. The hidden and the secret, of course, are only found by exploring as part of the move through the area. The hidden are off the natural path of travel –a road, well-worn trail, along a river or stream, or route following the base of hills (instead of trying to climb over them)– and can be found easily by leaving that path. The secret need to be sought out with greater effort, poking about in copses and hollows and all places that are impervious to casual view.

I think there are several instances that can make travel interesting. All of the things that serve to make dungeons interesting can also make wilderness interesting, with the understanding that the wilderness can provide an abundance of events and encounters and places that a dungeon is hard-pressed to match. For each magical fountain in a dungeon, the wilderness can offer up numerous magical pools, springs, ponds, streams, wells, and fountains. For each portal into the mythical underworld found in a dungeon, the wilderness can host multiple openings into the realms of faery, the elder world, alternate times, spiritworlds, and other planes; the mythic wilds are numerous and dangerous.

The wilds are full of homegrown beasties and those of all the other places that can attach to it. For every great cat protecting its territory, there can be an incursion from elsewhere or elsewhen providing a different form of danger. The machinations of faery courts can spill out into the mortal realm. Travellers from other planes with malicious intent can act against the beings that call this world home.

So, it’s possible to have a near-constant appearance of events and encounters to liven up play in the wilds. Wizard weather –powerful storms– can bring entities across the veils between worlds, ancient sites of power can erupt into action according to astral alignments, malignant spirits can inhabit fens and copses and areas around tombs and shrines to dark forces. All of the interesting parts of dungeon exploration are possible in the wilderness.

The same aspects of dungeon exploration that create tension and highlight the satisfaction of encountering the challenges also appear in wilderness play. Expeditions are limited in the supplies they can transport, so decisions about what gear to carry come to play. Gathering supplies from the surroundings is a choice, balanced against the time it takes to do so; that extra time means extra exposure to the elements and the hazards of travel, with an extra day on the trail possibly leading to catastrophe. Spending extra time in a haunted wood with malicious spirits is a recipe for distress, at the least. PCs unable to find rest and recovery are then easier pickings for hostile forces later along the trail.

There is the darkness of night to negotiate, complete with the creatures that prefer darkness. Daylight brings respite from the dark, though with a different roster of dangers and choices possible to keep the characters successful in their travels.

Faery Exploration

Then there are the otherworldly spaces to explore. These can offer different challenges and change up the procedures for maintaining supply. Hunting in Faery can be quite different than hunting in a typical forest. Gathering plants much the same. Players can find that simply maintaining food and water supplies can be more difficult in a different plane/world.

Time can be variable, with a foray in another world resulting in much time elapsing in the PCs’ home world, or spend days wandering in another place only to return an hour later to where they left. The geography of another world can vary as the characters move about. The players may have to figure out how to return to the home world with the opening between worlds closing behind them. Getting drawn into another world when having a deadline into the home world is problematic and increases the challenge for players.

The elements of exploration are generally similar from one environment to the next. The differences are likely enough to warrant procedures for each to help them feel different in play. I think that finding the basic demands of managing resources a bit different in each context will be a way to provide a contrast in flavor, as will the details of the nature of what’s encountered.

First Look at a Witch Class

March 5, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

I’ve roughed out a Witch class for the DA project. The class will be quite similar when it appears as an LJ class.

I’d love to hear ideas on more powers for Witches to be able to develop, as the list I have seems a bit short. I’ll be basing the spell descriptions and lists on those powers.

Feedback on the abilities described also welcome…shoot, feedback on all of it is welcome, at this point. I think I’ve conveyed the gist of the class reasonably well and I’d like to know how it comes off to you.

https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/DA-Class-Witch.pdf

Design: Travel Navigation

January 29, 2026 / TAFL / 0 Comments

I’ve been wrestling with how to make travel the equivalent of dungeon exploration in activity (my bespoke system is entitled “Legendary Journeys,” after all). I think I cracked that nut.

It’s typical to have a navigation check when parties are wandering in the countryside. Their fearless leader checks to see if they’ve wandered off course during the day and are lost. Well, what if we change that up a bit?

Suppose the navigation roll does two different things. First, it slows the party by some amount, measured in time or movement points or whatever your system uses to measure progress when traveling. Assume the party gets it sorted out by discovering the error and getting headed in the correct direction from where they are. This, I think, can offer that “wandering in the wilderness” feeling without the wholesale “getting lost” condition.

What it also does, secondly, is provide an opportunity for the party to find/stumble upon Points of Interest they would otherwise have missed. So, if we make the navigation check a bit more difficult so the party wanders a bit more often, they can find a lot more stuff to eat their faces…er, explore.

Each time the party travels through the hex, the navigation check can result in the party traipsing along a different path and finding something new. If we want to, we can restructure the navigation roll to reflect that each trip through is likely to be a bit different which allows for new discoveries. Indeed, we can structure things so each trip through a hex is just different enough that new discoveries are possible.

That would provide more possible interaction and greater interest in travel situations. The wilderness and travel should just be something to endure before getting to the good stuff at the destination. Traveling should be an adventure of itself. It should be possible to have the journey to a location to be more involved than what happens at the location, which upends the usual circumstances of play.

Update:

I’ve been stewing on this topic for a long time, wanting to end with a sub-system that offers up travel-as-adventure instead of travel-to-reach-adventure. What I wrote above is just a part of that. Yes, offering variation in trips through a given wilderness space increase the chances of discovering new points of interest. That, of itself, doesn’t make a wilderness trek feel like a dungeon foray, though.

What that doesn’t offer is all of the interaction that can be expected in a dungeon setting. The tricks and traps and puzzles we find in dungeons are generally missing in the traditional wilderness travel rules. I think that’s a element we have to introduce to bring wilderness adventure up to the same level as dungeon adventure.

Providing more chances to find POI is just the beginning. Having multiple small dungeons to be found during travel doesn’t provide the same flavor as full-size dungeons. I think we need to have our encounter tables expanded to include more, plus add in pre-planned material for any given trip.

I think of the wilderness in a fantasy game setting as wild, in the sense that the kinds of things and situations found in folk tales/fairy tales are not only possible, they’re not uncommon. Spend much time traipsing about in the wild and you will encounter weirdness of some sort — fairies come through the Hedge, elder beasts from the Greenwood, people from other worlds, weather anomalies, malevolent spirits, enchanted pools, ancient shrines radiating power, and on and on. These are the things that can provide the same flavor in the wilds that a variety of rooms and chambers provide in a dungeon, especially when many of them invite direct interaction with the PCs.

To that end, I think the encounter rules have to provide as many opportunities for something to interact with as a party could expect to have in a dungeon. That’s not to say that every ten-minute turn of travel should include a check or reaching a new “room.” It does mean that there should be fairly regular instances of interesting things to do, whether measured by hour-long turns or opportunities per hex or in some other fashion. A trip should be filled with chances to engage with the unusual and interesting bits of the setting.

As there are many folks who approach dungeon settings as the Mythic Underworld, I think it just as useful to approach at least parts of the wilderness as the Mythic Wilds. Stretches of forest or swamp or plains that feel as if they have an interest in the PCs traveling through and aren’t taking kindly to the intrusion. I’ve already been thinking of the Little Gods, spirits of the place, that can take notice of travelers; this extends that to the entirety of a locale taking notice. An increase in encounters with hostile critters, say, with those critters being the most dangerous in the locale. Those critters trailing the party and causing issues. The party getting slowed repeatedly by fresh obstacles the terrain throws up in the way. Stopping for rest breaks or camping resulting in getting constantly harried by denizens of the forest that make rest impossible.

Even locales that aren’t Mythic Wilds can offer similar experiences. The lands immediately surrounding an ancient barrow that holds a malevolent golem possessed and animated by the spirit of a long-ago tyrant and warlord. Hauntings a-plenty, undead clawing out of the ground and shambling after the PCs, shadows flitting about out of direct sunlight and chilling the PCs to the bone. The PCs can figure out what’s at the area’s heart and try to put an end to it, though that just may result in the golem escaping it’s chambers and roaming the wilds to create yet more havoc.

Encounter tables should provide for much more in the way of flavor and challenge. I can see each area having designation of danger that affects the results on tables, or specific tables for each such area. As I mentioned previously, I also think the regular addition of pre-planned POI can make a major difference. Even if it’s a drop-in selected from a list of possible drop-ins, knowing that on a given stretch of travel something a bit more involved is going to crop up that’s already prepped makes GMing a trip a bit easier, and the players will get regular doses of more substantial and demanding play. Prepping a handful of events/encounters/sites for a given stretch of wilds in advance can go a long way to filling out travel in an interesting fashion.

Planning a trip thus gains quite a bit of flavor. Planning a route now involves deciding what known stretches of dangerous ground it might be better to avoid, though at the expnse of taking more time to reach the destination. PCs can try to find good sources about what to expect along the way and prepare for it. Planning a trip becomes the equivalent of planning a dungeon foray, as does the actual experience of it. An exercise in survival becomes an exercise in adventure.

Design: Surprise

November 27, 2025 / TAFL / 0 Comments

Surprise is one of the bits of system that didn’t hold up under scrutiny and is worthy of a post on its own, I think. There’s a whole lot of tinkering going on with how surprise operates, beginning with how it feels and including what purpose it serves in the system.

Let’s begin with a look at how it plays out in RAW. I’ve long wondered why groups get surprised one-third of the time upon encountering another group or monster. Reading through all of the OG materials has offered no reasoning to support that rate, so this appears to be one of the things that has been perpetuated simply because of tradition. I decided that I’m not down with that; one-third of the time is simply more than I can sustain disbelief for–it just doesn’t serve my fantasy to have competent adventurers getting flummoxed by running into beasties that often.

To that end, I’ve moved to lesser chances, closer to 25% of the time. If I recall correctly, the odds are about 27%, using the dice roll I’ve landed on. I’m using the 2D6 roll that I’ve pressed into service for some other purposes.

I’m also all for PCs being able to bump the odds in their favor, whether decreasing the chance of being surprised or increasing the chance of surprising others. How the players play should matter and this is but another way their choices matter mechanically and fictionally.

How long surprise lasts has also not survived its viewing under the microscope. The initial measure being provided by the die roll, with a surprise result of 1 or 2 resulting in a matching number of suprise segments was an elegant way to find out long surprise would last. Two segments of surprise are also referred to as “full surprise,” which illustrates that two segments was the longest surprise would last, originally. Then, with the accretion of further rules, notions such as creatures that could surprise more frequently changed how many segments could be notched in that fashion. Tossing in the use of dice of a larger size — D8 or D10 — for surprise checks in some situations, and figuring out how long surprise lasts becomes muddled.

As I don’t think more than three segments of surprise is reasonable — especially with a one minute round — I’ve capped surprise at that. The number of phases of surprise is also established by the dice roll for surprise.

What surprising combatants are able to do during each segment of surprise also got limited. The notion that each segment of surprise garnering a full series of attacks, without regard to the number of attacks entailed, got dropped, too. Two attacks are certainly possible, depending on circumstance; anything beyond that stretched my sensibilities past breaking. And certainly no launching multiple arrows each segment, so only one readied arrow per phase, with a phase required to ready one. I’m also considering an added bonus to having surprised the opponents when the first full round of action fires up, which returns a bit of the overwhelming advantage provided by surprise in the RAW.

This has also resulted in dropping references to segments in the surprise rules, in favor of referring to phases. This is with the understanding that I’m also dropping the use of the term “segment” entirely, at this point, because of its long association with being one-tenth of a round; rounds will be apportioned in fewer parts when the whole is reassembled (five phases per 20-second round).

The urge to allow for PC actions (player choices) to affect the odds of surprise also extends to how long surprise lasts, measured by how much activity the surprising party can do before the surprised can engage fully and player choices can quicken response when PCs are surprised. As above, the number of melee and missile attacks possible will be limited, what movement is allowed carefully meted out, and what casting or other magical work can get started and/or finished. A surprise situation, under this approach, may not happen as often, yet it provides a major advantage to one side when it does happen.

Ambush

An ambush provides a different experience of surprise. Only the party being ambushed can be surprised due to the ambushing party knowing full well when it will act. How the ambush is set up and executed will affect how much activity the ambushing side will get to do before the victims can respond. A well-planned and -executed ambush can provide a bit more time for salvos, too.

Sneak Attacks

A sneak attack is a form of ambush, just on a smaller scale, so to speak. Sneaking up behind a guard to take them out or firing a crossbow from the darkness into a sentry’s back rely on the at-least-momentary lack of awareness and engagement, as much as springing forth from hidden positions along a road when attacking a caravan does.

A Rough Draft of Surprise Rules

Surprise: Roll For doom

https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/DA-Surprise-v-0.8.pdf

DA Design: First Combat Module: Notes 1

September 28, 2025 / TAFL / 0 Comments

I’ve been playing around with the first of the alternate combat sub-systems in the Dangerous Adventures project. What began as a purely Weapon Speed & Casting Time exercise has morphed into quite a bit. It still has weapon speed and casting time involved, though they appear differently, now.

The primary problem that reared up with the system as originally envisioned involves movement. Breaking movement down by segments proved to be a bit tedious and boring in play. Even grouping segments of movement together on an ad hoc basis whenever all that would happen for those segments would be movement just wasn’t working well.

Also, the weapon speeds in the book obviously weren’t intended to be used in a strict segment count system, so those would all have to be re-figured; I couldn’t find a suitable mathematical formula to use to assign them segment counts. It’s easier to simply work up new speed ratings from scratch.

Now, beginning from scratch means that the ratings don’t have to reference segments, nor range from 1 to 10 to fit. I can break the round into any number of segments that I wish, based solely on what seems to work best for me. That means I can structure rounds around (!) any of the concepts involved in combat. With that in mind, I’ve landed on five segments/phases in a round, based on the different types of movement I want to include. I think the five-step phasing will assist GMs to work in any unusual activity, too, with the provided descriptions of movement types giving suitable examples to generalize from for rulings on the ground.

The list of movement-types: Shift/Intercept; Split-Move (& Fire); Half-Move (& Attack) [Or (Attack &) Half- Move]; Charge (& Attack); Counter-Charge (& Attack); Full Move (Advance); Full Move (Run). These movement-types should provide enough examples to provide guidance for GMs ruling on weird actions.

This is all part of the chassis for the combat system, part of the Basic rules for it. There will be Expanded rules that include abilities added for some PCs (fighters) as they increase in level and also fit both Mana Channeling & Counterspell and Magical Combat procedures. I think it’s flexible enough, at this point, to support any other combat types I may want to add (read: that I’m contemplating now).

Now, LJ has a three-phase round structure to accommodate all of the above, to one degree or another. It’s interesting (at least, for me) to see how the same basic ideas brought on two different structures. I’ll likely post about that at some point so everybody can compare the two.

https://osrpgtalk.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Five-Phase-Ordering-v-0.65.pdf