Parzival
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Is a little Stir Crazy this year...
Posts: 214
|
Post by Parzival on Jun 21, 2021 15:39:54 GMT -6
“…cantrips”
Okay, these or something like them would indeed be in my Companion set. I like the idea of “minor magics” that wizards can do with comparative ease, to impress the yokels, confound the annoying, unnerve the doubters, and gain a little advantage here or there. I loved the cantrip concept when it first appeared in Dragon, and was thoroughly disappointed that BECMI didn’t pick it up.
Also, I would add some of the “missing” spells from AD&D, like enlarge and unseen servant, among others.
And I’d introduce some way of acquiring a familiar, but go far beyond a spell— maybe make it be a minor quest, and allow the player to suggest unique creatures. (A DM/GM allowed this for me in another system, and my wizard selected a chameleon as the familiar’s animal form. We took some liberties with the reality of the color change ability (it’s actually not camouflage), but it made for a fun and useful companion critter!)
Honestly, I’d want these all in the Basic game, or at least the Expert expansion, but since in the premise of the OP those are done and accounted for…
|
|
|
|
Post by thomden on Jun 21, 2021 15:51:04 GMT -6
“…cantrips” Okay, these or something like them would indeed be in my Companion set. I like the idea of “minor magics” that wizards can do with comparative ease, to impress the yokels, confound the annoying, unnerve the doubters, and gain a little advantage here or there. I loved the cantrip concept when it first appeared in Dragon, Cantrips belong in the Basic set, but I agree. I loved the idea when I first read them in Dragon too. I don't recall anyone not liking them, but no doubt there are some who don't as everything has detractors to some degree. Low level M-Uers suck so badly they need something to do. Cantrips give them at least a little bit of utility. |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Jun 22, 2021 0:23:23 GMT -6
I think domain gaming was the big flop as far as B/X was concerned - apart from one or two anecdotes over the years I have never heard of any group that really got into this, and as such my Companion would focus more on the personal heroics shenanigans of high-level characters than their stronghold management or mass combat. Agreed. Putting domain info into BECMI was almost a step backwards in game evolution. I think that a lot of RPGers at the early part of D&D did domain play because that's where it started, not because they really wanted to play that way. I can see that when one is used to a style of play which involves life-or-death struggles and adventures in wilderness and dungeons, among other places, “sitting at home and building a castle” has about as much appeal as oatmeal dumped on a juicy steak. In fact, looking at domain-level play from my Real Life Viewpoint now ... I used to love lecturing and could have gone doing that on forever, but when I reluctantly allowed myself to be promoted to programme leader all joy was sucked out of life and I retired that character! Now I'm more-or-less an NPC.  |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Jun 22, 2021 0:53:37 GMT -6
The Companion Expansion was sort of like the Advanced book for LL. It just added classes and races, and monsters and treasure. But in a very unsatisfying way. Just a book of AD&D to D&D conversions, if you will. I think just converting stuff from AD&D is the "danger" with any B/X expansion. I put that in quotations because I don't see anything inherently wrong with that, but B/X was created out of OD&D and represents a parallel line of evolution to AD&D - it's not a precursor, and AD&D is not an expansion. So if I were to crib from any edition, it'd be OD&D. Off the top of my head, assuming I didn't go beyond the LBBs, supplements, and Strategic Review that would mean: - Additional classes, suitably re-written to fit B/X - including race-as-class for new PC races like half-elves and half-orcs. I wouldn't add race-as-class options, so no elven fighter-thieves, for example. Just one each, maybe the half-elf could be a fighter/cleric, the half-orc a fighter/assassin (just for example).
- Additional spells, including missing low-level ones presented as examples of "researched" non-standard spells.
- Additional monsters, including demons.
- Additional magic items, especially artefacts.
- Psionics, but only if I could come up with a system I actually found fun.
I'd like to stick to the B/X format, so that would mean something along the lines of the Basic dungeon chapter and the Expert wilderness one at the end of the book - and, seeing as I believe the implied OD&D setting to consist of the triad of Underworld, Wilderness, and Realm, for the Companion I would throw in a settlement design chapter building on the framework in Expert. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Jun 29, 2021 5:45:46 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 29, 2021 8:59:36 GMT -6
No worries. If it floats your boat, that's great! As I stated when I saw that years ago, I recall it not doing much for me- it kind of covered everything that Frank's set did, in slightly different ways. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2021 8:49:44 GMT -6
The Companion Expansion was sort of like the Advanced book for LL. It just added classes and races, and monsters and treasure. But in a very unsatisfying way. Just a book of AD&D to D&D conversions, if you will. I think just converting stuff from AD&D is the "danger" with any B/X expansion. I put that in quotations because I don't see anything inherently wrong with that, but B/X was created out of OD&D and represents a parallel line of evolution to AD&D - it's not a precursor, and AD&D is not an expansion. So if I were to crib from any edition, it'd be OD&D. Off the top of my head, assuming I didn't go beyond the LBBs, supplements, and Strategic Review that would mean: - Additional classes, suitably re-written to fit B/X - including race-as-class for new PC races like half-elves and half-orcs. I wouldn't add race-as-class options, so no elven fighter-thieves, for example. Just one each, maybe the half-elf could be a fighter/cleric, the half-orc a fighter/assassin (just for example).
- Additional spells, including missing low-level ones presented as examples of "researched" non-standard spells.
- Additional monsters, including demons.
- Additional magic items, especially artefacts.
- Psionics, but only if I could come up with a system I actually found fun.
I'd like to stick to the B/X format, so that would mean something along the lines of the Basic dungeon chapter and the Expert wilderness one at the end of the book - and, seeing as I believe the implied OD&D setting to consist of the triad of Underworld, Wilderness, and Realm, for the Companion I would throw in a settlement design chapter building on the framework in Expert. I feel the same way. Any Basic line should "evolve" down a different path from AD&D, otherwise there's no point to not just using AD&D. You can take the core ideas and expand them in completely different ways from either AD&D or BECMI and get a "differently complex" game. I have some ideas I'd like to expand on later, but taking the idea of giving the M-U additional goodies, you can say "Okay, other editions went with Cantrips, but what's something of a similar power but flavored differently we can do here?" One quick idea - and I'm just spitballing here - is doing something with Familiars. Minor supernatural followers or helpers who get stronger and assume different forms and abilities as the M-U levels up. Maybe early on they're weak and can only walk - something like a frog or a cat. Maybe later they can fight - like a wild boar or a mountain lion, and higher levels can swim or fly, and even magically speak so as to convey messages. This is hardly a new or unique idea, but it's got a flavor that sets it apart from cantrips or more spell lists. |
|
aramis
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 149 
|
Post by aramis on Jul 7, 2021 18:17:56 GMT -6
B/X goes through level 14, right? I would have toasted our fine work and called it a day. I hardly every go over level 10 anyway.  Excepting Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling, yes, but... Fighter and Thief can be extrapolated higher easily, while cleric and wizard spells don't easily extrapolate further, and don't match the Moldvay edition tables nor the AD&D ones. |
|
