|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 27, 2010 23:15:27 GMT -6
I'm curious about what you're drawing from Dragon Strike. It's a game I've toyed with getting a used copy of at some point as I have a weakness for dungeon crawl boardgames.
Does the GAX system draw anything from Dragon Strike or is it just inspiration for the setting/campaign your developing?
GAX has given me some inspiration for this rules hack of Prince Valiant that I've been playing around with for a few years.
Nice work here. I like what you did building on codeman's ideas.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 26, 2010 10:46:07 GMT -6
I just posted on my blog some maps I made a few years ago for a proposed Gamma World campaign. It wasn't set on Earth but was rather on a colony world where things had collapsed following a nuclear confrontation. The campaign was going to be an exploratory one where the characters were looking for the mythical utopia of Green Paradise. I had all sorts of ideas for stuff they'd run into along the way. The campaign was going to contain homages to classic sixties and seventies sci-fi films like: Logans Run, Zardoz, The Omega Man, original series Star Trek (particularly the episode "Space Seed" which introduced Khan), and the Mad Max films. Maps here: castledragonscar.blogspot.com/2010/04/heres-two-maps-i-made-while-back-for.html
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 25, 2010 23:35:26 GMT -6
Here's a list of what I'm playing around with for this OD&D Science Fantasy campaign. I'm still working on a few others races like Titans (similar to 1/2 Giants or 4E's Goliaths), Wolf People, and some sort of elemental race. I'll post those as I figure them out. Looking at the Monster Manual has helped give me ideas (as it always does).
The standard races are all still totally playable as well but here are the non-standard ones:
PLAYABLE RACES
Ancients • Able to see into the ethereal plane (50 ft. range). • Prophetic dreams and visions. • +5% Bonus to Psionic Abilities. • +1 to Hit and Damage when engaged in Hand to Hand combat.
Androids • +1 bonus to Hit Dice. • Immune to aging, sleep, charm, poison, and disease. • No unconsciousness at O HP. Able to function until killed at –lvl HP.
Cat People (still not sure if this works. . .) • Bite and Claw attacks (1D4) • Detect invisible opponents at a base of 30% and with a +5% bonus every two levels. • Only -2 to hit invisible opponents. • +1 bonus to Dexterity.
Devas • Able to see into the astral plane (50 ft. range). • +1 Bonus vs. Infernals and infernal associated creatures. • Immune to fear (and fear creating magical spells) • Able to generate create Light once per day for a number of rounds equal to 3 + the Deva’s level.
Dhamphir (1/2 Vampires) • Bite attack for 1D6 damage. They gain Temporary Hit Points equal to ½ of the damage they do up to their current Hit Points level. • Able to transform into a wolf or bat. • Double damage from silver weapons and fire.
Infernals • They possess a limited form of telepathy (send and receive thoughts only). Range: within sight. • Immune to Fire and Cold damage. • Able to create Darkness once per day for a number of rounds equal to 3 + plus the Infernal’s level.
Lizard People • +1 to AC due to thick hide. • Immune to poisons. • Poisonous bite (1D4 Damage). Save vs. poison or bite deals double damage.
Merfolk • Able to breath underwater and swim at 24”. • AC 7 natural armor class (may be improved by Dexterity bonuses and armor). • They speak the language of Dolphins and Whales. • They receive a +1 Bonus to their Constitution.
Shadow Folk (Drow) • Infravision (100 ft. range) • Able to move silently (even in armor). • +2 bonus to all saving throws vs. magic. • Shadow Armor receives an automatic +1 to its AC.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 16, 2010 10:20:13 GMT -6
Arminath:
Actually, I was sort of thinking that I might get away from the standard associations we have with many of the standard demi-human races by re-naming them.
Drow/Dark Elves=Shadow Folk Elves=Forest Folk Dwarves=Mountain Folk Halflings=River Folk
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 15, 2010 9:55:50 GMT -6
I totally understand the "drow fatigue" thing, but I don't feel quite the same way as I've largely been unaware of it.
No one in any D&D game I've ever played has ever played a Drow, and I've never read one of Salvatore's books. My primary interface with them has been through the AD&D G,D,Q series of modules.
I'd agree that even the Fiend Folio presentation of them is pretty overpowered. They make great baddies in my opinion, but I'm not totally opposed to them as a PC race as long as they've been pruned down to a manageable level.
Munchkinism is not what I had in mind and its largely outside my experience as my group is pretty cooperative and not really interested in power gaming.
Anyway, I can see that they are a toy that many players might abuse.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 14, 2010 23:21:24 GMT -6
I'm not sure but here's a stab at the race abilities for Elves and Halflings. I might be leaving something out but I think these are the important ones.
Elves • Infravision (60 ft. range). • Find secret and hidden doors (1-4 on a D6). • +1 to hit when using a sword or bow. • +1 to hit vs. Orcs. • Racial benefits when acting as Thieves. • They speak the languages of orcs, hobgoblins, and gnolls in addition to their usual tongues.
Halflings • Saving throws vs. magic receives a +4 bonus. • Deadly accuracy with missiles (+1 to hit; +3 with Sling). • They gain racial bonuses when acting as thieves.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 14, 2010 23:14:20 GMT -6
arminath,
What's the distinction between 'dark elves' in your campaign and drow? What sort of abilities do 'dark elves' have?
Here was my proposal for an OD&D Drow/ Dark Elf (which I was referring to in my game as the Shadow Folk):
Drow (this is pretty much as per the Fiend Folio) • Infravision (100 ft. range) • Able to move silently (even in armor). • +2 bonus to all saving throws vs. magic. • Drow-made Armor receives an automatic +1 to its AC.
That's it. They DO NOT receive the regular Elf abilities on top of these.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 14, 2010 13:24:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 14, 2010 13:22:26 GMT -6
In the Monsters as Playable Races thread people had some pretty strong reactions to the idea of Drow as a playable race. I personally don't feel that way, but I am curious as to how our community here feels about everybody's favorite denizens of the underdark.
In later editions it was a given that Drow would be a playable race, but what about in the editions we like?
Do you think they work better as monsters? Why?
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 14, 2010 13:12:02 GMT -6
I never featured the Drow in my games except when we played the AD&D G, D, Q series back when I was twelve. I've never read any book featuring Drizzt, but I think Gary's description of the Drow in the Fiend Folio is pretty nifty. Maybe that's why the idea seems less of a D&D cliche to me.
Anyway. . .if we want to continue debating about the Drow we should probable do that in another thread.
Anybody got some good ideas for alternate playable races?
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 12, 2010 14:25:13 GMT -6
In Pendragon Axes are effective against shields.
In OD&D try this if an Axe hits someone with a shield:
Roll a 1 on a 1D6 and the shield is broken (and the target still takes 1/2 damage).
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 12, 2010 13:54:33 GMT -6
capheind wrote: What about a Fighter/Fighting-man turned into a quasi-lich as an experiment by a wizard seeking the secret to life after death. Constantly having to manually force your body to keep itself alive as you seek a way to bring it back from the dead. I forget to reply that I though that this idea was both very cool and seriously f***ed up.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 12, 2010 13:48:27 GMT -6
One more:
Androids • +1 bonus to Hit Dice. • Immune to aging, sleep, charm, poison, and disease. • No unconsciousness at O HP. Able to function until "killed" at –lvl HP.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 12, 2010 13:44:49 GMT -6
Maybe we can turn this thread into a place where we can all contribute guidelines for playing specific "monster" races in OD&D?
So post if you got 'em.
Kesher: I dig those rules for skeletons.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 12, 2010 13:37:34 GMT -6
How about some Drow:
Drow (this is pretty much as per the Fiend Folio) • Infravision (100 ft. range) • Able to move silently (even in armor). • +2 bonus to all saving throws vs. magic. • Drow-made Armor receives an automatic +1 to its AC.
and some Bird People:
Avians • Able to fly at a speed of 15” • Ability to speak with any winged birds. • Enhanced vision. Avians can see great distances.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 11, 2010 21:49:59 GMT -6
How about this for Lizard People?
Lizard People * +1 to AC due to thick hide. * Immune to poisons. * Poisonous bite (1D4 Damage). Save vs. poison or bite deals double damage.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 9, 2010 14:27:52 GMT -6
I know that in OD&D the rules say that you can play any race with the approval of the referee.
It seems to me that this sort of thing is exactly the strength of OD&D. Now I know this could produce a rather "gonzo" type of game (which may not be to everybody's taste), but my thought is the next time I run my game I should just hand the players the Monster Manual and say "Well here are all the races you can play." If that's too extreme then work out a list you feel comfortable with. If you don't want PC Lichs--take them off the list.
The rest is a negotiation between the player and the referee.
As a general guideline follow the admonition that you start weaker and get stronger over time.
Also, keep any mechanical bonuses to +1.
So why not have a party comprised of a Mind Flayer, A Half-Vampire, a Lizardman, and a Sahuagin?
So what races have you allowed?
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Apr 9, 2010 11:19:00 GMT -6
Here are my stats:
Lvl 1 Magic User/English Professor
STR:12 INT:15 WIS:13 DEX:7 CON:9 CHR:12
AC: 10 HP: 4
Spells:
Magic Mechanical Pencil Cloud of Chalk Dust
Equipment:
Notebook Battered Copy of The Gods of Mars AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide by Gary Gygax Backpack filled with ungraded essays. Waterskin filled with Sprite or Orange Crush
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Mar 17, 2010 9:32:42 GMT -6
Jason--I'm with you in feeling that way about mapping. In more recent years I've come to see the benefits of mapping especially after reading James M's accounts of his Dwimmermount sessions, but I still don't know if I can really make it work at my table.
It has happened more than once where I've been describing a space to my players and they've totally imagined it differently than I've imagined it. To some degree, I feel like that's probably my fault and the fault of my description. I sometimes feel like I'd have to micromanage the mapping in order that I don't screw up what I'm conveying to them.
It seems weird to punish players for misinterpreting a description when the characters themselves wouldn't be making those mistakes if they were in that space.
So yeah, drawing it out myelf seems easier than having to deal with that.
I've never been fond of the idea of mapping (even back in the day playing AD&D 1st edition), and I've largely done with out it. If I've got somebody at my table who's into doing it that's fine, but that isn't really the case with my players.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Mar 10, 2010 9:36:15 GMT -6
Monsters can be re-skinned relatively easily as well. Find a monster that has mechanically appropriate abilities and your Fire Beetle has become a Minion of Cthuga (or whatever).
I ran a few sessions of 4E when it came out, and I found prep to be a bit more intensive than the rules lite games I tend to prefer, but it wasn't a dealbreaker and some of the prep was actually fun (as it should be). It was more manageable than 3E (which is my least favorite edition). Losing the minis might be harder to do but you can make it work.
Mike Mearls had an interesting post on his blog where he suggested to build everything in OD&D no matter what edition you're using because you're more likely to do the crazy fun stuff and not let yourself be limited to what you think works best in a particular edition. 4E combat can be a bit of a grind but there are ways around that to.
My biggest problem is that I had only 2 players. The game seems optimized for 4-5 players. We made it work though. There are a few suggestions for how to deal with this in the DMG2.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Mar 5, 2010 5:46:45 GMT -6
The one other major exception based design that I think influenced 4E is WOTC's own Magic: The Gathering. In both cases the core rules are relatively straightforward, but the exceptions add in variation and complexity.
The MMORPG connection with 4E is often mentioned, and I agree that WOTC tried to take what was useful in games like Warcraft and bring a little of that to the table. However, I'd like to point out that lots of video games and MMOs (Warcraft in particular) are essentially based on D&D.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Feb 9, 2010 15:19:38 GMT -6
verhaden wrote:
I'm SURE somebody's already tried to strip 4E down over at EnWorld or RPG.net, but if you guys want to get into this. . .
One thing you could do is preselect/pre-build all the powers so that classes follow a simple track rather being customizable. That would be more like earlier editions: i.e. you're a Ranger you're 8th level now you get THIS new ability.
The new Gamma World game is supposed to be a stripped down version of 4E. The designers claim you can make a Gamma World character in 15 minutes. So it'll be interesting to see how they strip it down.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Feb 9, 2010 12:20:05 GMT -6
Ostensible they've introduced this line because employees at bookstores don't know what to tell customers to buy first to start playing D&D. If that's a problem they're having then this seems like a good idea.
I'll likely pick this up as I'm a bit of a sucker for boxed sets. I'm a bit disappointed it only goes to 2nd lvl, but that's still around 20 encounters in 4E which is a month of solid play if you're playing weekly.
It looks like the Essentials line will give you a D&D game with more limited classes, races, and powers but I thinks its supposed to be playable up to lvl 30 if you buy the two expansions.
They've also done something devious to attract folks who are already playing 4E: the character builds in the game are new ones that are optimized differently than what's in the core books. So there's new stuff there even if you're already playing. I'm not sure that alone will be enough to get those folks to buy the Essentials stuff.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Feb 3, 2010 10:22:53 GMT -6
Delta, I'd totally forgotten where I got that, but yes you are correct sir! They came from your house rules. Thanks by the way.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Feb 2, 2010 14:33:45 GMT -6
The Shining Trapezohedron from Lovecraft's "The Haunter of Dark." When placed in total darkness it summons the Haunter. . .
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Feb 2, 2010 14:26:01 GMT -6
In my recent S&W Whitebox game I used M&M D6 HD with the following weapons damages:
d4 Dagger, sling. d6 Hand axe, mace, spear, arrow, quarrel, short sword. d8 Sword, battle axe, morning star, flail, pole arm, lance, pike. d10 Halberd, two-handed sword._
I fretted about this quite a bit, but I ended up going with it because I kept the monster HD d6 based. It levels the playing field making Magic Users and Thieves a little sturdier in comparison to Fighting Men.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Feb 2, 2010 14:02:56 GMT -6
I have to say that this system sounds sounds pretty nifty. I'm tempted to go off and develop my own variant.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Jan 29, 2010 14:06:06 GMT -6
However, even if my dungeon environments have lots of things that are undefined, I still think it's useful to have your monsters statted out fairly specifically so they're ready to go (I often write them up with boxes for their hit points).
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Jan 29, 2010 14:01:05 GMT -6
One thing that works for me is to keep room descriptions/details fairly sparse as they can be improvised on the spot as needed. Too much detail in a dungeon can be limiting sometimes. I guess a good way to think about this might be: if you don't have to detail it--then don't. This can be applied to the campaign overall as well. Fill things in as the campaign grows.
James M's Dwimmermount campaign seems to be a good example of this approach.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Jan 28, 2010 15:26:03 GMT -6
Magic items on index cards. Awesome.
I'm going to have to use that.
|
|