Sunday, May 31, 2020

Crowfield House Rules: Experience Bonus

This is something I'm adding to simplify the game. I'm divided between calling it an "experience bonus" or calling it a "level bonus." note 1 In 3E terms, it is a single bonus that combines the Base Attack Bonus and the Saving Throw bonuses. In older D&D terms, it's a bonus on your "to-hit" roll and your saving throws.

Here's the values I'm going with:

Class LevelFighterClericMagic UserJOAT note 2
1+1---
2+2---
3+3---
4+4+1--
5+5+2--
6+6+3+1-
7+7+4+2-
8+8+5+3-
9+9+6+4-
10+10+7+5-
11+11+8+6-
12+12+9+7-

Multi-class characters get the sum of their bonuses. For example, a character that is a 4th level cleric/2nd level fighter gets a total bonus of +3.

Historical Inspiration & Justification

Let's look at these two excerpts from Ready Ref Sheets published by Judges Guild in 1978:



If you can't see that, let me highlight the relevant bits:

Fighter levelHit Armor Class 5Save vs StoneChange from Previous
1 - 31414N/A
4 - 612122
7 - 99103 (to-hit) / 2 (save)
10 - 12782
13 - 15552 (to-hit) / 3 (save)
16+253 (to-hit only)

As you can see, between level 1 and level 15 both the "to-hit" and the "save" start at 14 and end at 5. They diverge a bit between levels 7 and 12, but the maximum divergence never exceeds 1.  When you roll a d20 a difference of 1 only matters 5% of the time, so 95% of the time it doesn't matter. In my mind, that's not worth worrying about if ignoring it will simplify game play.

The level 16+ stuff is a bit further apart.  That's because saves only have 5 "level groups" while attack rolls have 6.  I'm not worried about that for two reasons:

  1. In over 40 years of playing, I have never played/ran a game for players of that level.
  2. When Gygax revised the game from D&D to AD&D, he made the number of "level groups" the same for both saves and attack rolls.

With all that said, I figured what's the point in having separated modifiers for saves and attack rolls? Why not simplify things and go with a single number?

So that's what I'm doing.

Why +12?

That's why I'm making the rolls the same, but how did I arrive at the maximum of +12?

As you can see from the images/table above, the total "spread" for a fighter is 12 in the original rules. In other words, he needs to roll a 14 or better at first level, but at 16th level he only needs to roll a 2 or better. That means a 16th level fighter gets "+12" compared to a first level character. So that's where I topped off my table.  Though in my version a fighter achieves it at level 12 instead of level 16.  Again this aligns a bit better with AD&D and simplifies things.

Conclusion

I'm hoping that the final product is something that "feels" like playing back in the 70's but with rules that are a lot simpler. 

Does what I'm doing make sense?

What name is better? "Level Bonus"? "Experience Bonus"? I don't like "Proficiency Bonus."  Is there something even better?


Footnotes

1 Since I've started writing this, I've discovered that this is a bit like something that 5th edition of Dungeons & Dragons calls a "proficiency bonus." [back]

2 JOAT is an acronym for "Jack-of-all-Trades." It is a new character class I made to work with talents. note 3 It will be detailed in a future blog post. [back]

3 Talents are a simplified skill system I've developed for Crowfield. They are detailed in this post. [back]

Sunday, May 24, 2020

Crowfield House Rules: Saving Throws

James asked, "Have you decided what game you're going to use?"  I didn't have an answer for him, but the answer is "I will be using White Box Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game, but with a lot of house rules." It's so many house rules, in fact, that I wonder if I'm making my own OSR game.

One of the rules I'm changing is the is the rule for savings throws.

Wikipedia says that a saving throw "...is a roll of dice used to determine whether magic, poison, or various other types of attacks are effective against a character..." In other words, it gives a player a chance to avoid some sort of terrible fate, like characters in a novel do.

What Other People Have Done

I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel here.  In fact, I very much want Crowfield to feel like an old-school gaming experience. So let's look at how it's been done before.

Dungeons & Dragons Method (1974)

When D&D first came out in 1974, it had five rather arbitrary categories of saving throws:

  • Death Ray or Poison
  • All Wands - Including Polymorph or Paralization
  • Stone (i.e. being turned to stone by a medusa or similar)
  • Dragon Breath
  • Staves & Spells

In my mind, these categories suck. They're all well and good for things that easily fit into one of the categories, but most situations do not. For example, let's say that Jalice accidentally triggers a trap while trying to disable it. Suddenly a huge, razor sharp blade swings across the hallway! The DM wants to give Jalice a chance to roll out of the way. What category does that fit in?

Because this method was in effect until the second half of the year 2000, this is the method used by most OSR retro-clones.

Tunnels & Trolls Method (1975)

In 1975, Ken St. Andre fixed a lot of D&D's stupidity when he wrote Tunnels & Trolls. The saving throw mechanic was one of those things he fixed.

In T&T, characters had another ability score: Luck. In essence, this ability score was that character's saving throw no matter what danger they faced. That was both the strength and weakness of this system.

If Jalice is trying to roll out of the way of a swinging scythe, surely her high Dexterity should help her. It doesn't.

If she pricked her finger on a poisoned needle trap, it seems her low Constitution score should hurt her. It doesn't.

To be fair, the D&D system had the same issues. So, this system was much better than D&D's, but it still had its problems.

The Swords & Wizardry retro-clone uses a system kind of like this.

The Fantasy Trip Method (1980)

In 1980, (the American) Steve Jackson designed what I feel to be the perfect system for saving throws. It's a lot like T&T's method, except that instead of having a separate ability score the player rolls against the most appropriate one.

So when Jalice tries to avoid the swinging blade, she rolls against her Dexterity. If she's trying to survive the poison, she rolls against her Strength (in TFT, Strength served as the Constitution score as well). If Jalice wants to resist an evil sorcerer's attempt to control her mind, she would roll against her Intelligence.

A very simple system that's intuitive. It's easy for the GM to determine what roll to ask for, and it keeps the game moving.

This system was carried over into Steve Jackson's GURPS in 1986. It was adopted into Tunnels & Trolls with its 7th Edition in 2005 and it's what Dungeons & Dragons started using in 2014 with the publication of its 5th Edition.

As far as I know, no D&D retro-clone uses this method. There's a good reason for this, too. Part of D&D's core design is that characters start off weak and grow in power. In this system your saving throw only improves if your ability scores improve.

The d20 System Method (2000)

In the year 2000, the d20 System was used to power the 3rd edition of D&D. Saving throws in this edition are essentially the same as the 1974 method, except the categories have changed:

  • Reflex
  • Fortitude
  • Will

I like these a lot. Much like the TFT method, it's fast and easy to use: Jalice tries to avoid the swinging blade with a Reflex save, she survives the poison with a Fortitude save, and she resists the evil sorcerer's mind control with a Will save. Nice and simple.

As far as I know, no retro-clone uses this system. In fact, dislike of this system by some "grognards" was one of the things that led to the OSR and retro-clone movements.

What I'm Going to Do

While I like the d20 System method, I like the one based on ability scores better. My plan is to roll saves as follows:

Roll 1d20 + ability score modifier + experience bonus - difficulty factor. 

If the result is 11 or better, the character makes the save.

I think that's simple and to the point. What do you think?

Monday, May 18, 2020

Responding to Feedback about the Giant Hex

Last week I wrote about my idea for a "giant hex." It is a single five-mile hex on the map, but it is filled with giant trees and animals, and it takes 60 miles to cross it. What's really happening is that the party is being shrunk down to 1/12th their normal size when they enter it, and returned to their normal size when they leave.

I got three comments to that post. One actual comment, and 2 messages. I wanted to explore those here.

Ministroni

The first commenter, Ministroni, said:

There would be some things that hint at the difference. Like morning dew drops being the size of basketballs

This is absolutely true! To be honest, though, I don't know if I would have thought about that during the natural flow of play. This is why, around my table, it's important for players to be upfront about what they're doing and why. If this is a player's line of thought, he should ask me outright. "I'm thinking that we might be shrunken, so I'm checking the dew drops in the morning to see if they're the size of basketballs."

I've played with so many players that are reluctant to do that. My only guess is that they've played with a jerk GM that would purposely try to mislead them if the GM knew why they were asking. I am not a jerk. I am my players' biggest fan.

Ministroni also said:

I hope you have a "giant ant" that lifts something far heavier than a scaled up ant could lift

That's the spirit!

Zomus Prime

This one was left as a comment on the page itself. I like it when readers do that!

I am curious though, say that they've travelled into the hex and fight a group of "giant" rats. After defeating them, one party member decides to skin them, figuring the (assumed) novelty will fetch a good price.

So, then the question becomes, what happens to the pelt? Do they instantly shrink to 1/12th size when the party picks it up? Or would it remain large, but be unaffected as the party leaves the hex such that the skinner finds a small, smelly, rat pelt sitting in their bag?

The player's assumption would be a good one. From my previous post, it should be obvious that I'm a fan of "natural treasures." A giant rat pelt would be worth maybe 300 gold! Even better would be a giant beaver pelt...

Anyway. The short answer is that the rat skin would remain at normal size (i.e., it would shrink from the player's perspective). Leaving the hex just removes the enchantment that's on the players. Because they rat didn't have any enchantment on it, there's nothing to remove.

This would be a powerful clue as to what's happening.

Big Shadow Dragon

Big Shadow Dragon is one of my players from days gone by. He says:

Why are you playing with the size of the PC's? I just don't see why you're doing it.

I'm doing it because it seems interesting. Players seem to like interesting puzzles.

If I'm ever stuck for something to do, I have the party discover a small, elongated pyramid about the size of a 3x5 index card at the base. Inside it is the corpse of a 4-inch tall humanoid, with a larger head in proportion to the rest of the body. If they look carefully there are teeny-tiny footprints leading away from it. A party will literally spend an hour of real-world time investigating it.

Why?

Because it's novel and interesting and they want to know more.

Why?

Because they're adventurers and adventurers seek out the different. Otherwise they would stay in the safety of the town like everyone else, and wait for the heroes to save the day.

Why?

Because hex after hex of "you enter a wooded hex. Which way to you go?" is dull. It's my job to make sure the sandbox contains toys for the players to play with.

That's why!

Thanks for all the comments! Keep them coming!

Monday, May 11, 2020

Honey, I Shrunk the Party

This is an idea for a hex or grid on the Crowfield map, somewhere in the Dreadwood.

The area was once the domain of a druid named Ælfride. She cast a spell of protection on her lands. Even though she is long gone, the effects of the spell remain.

The effect is quite simple. Any being (and all their gear, etc) entering the land after the spell was cast shrinks to 1/12th their size while in the region with no saving throw allowed. Thus a 6-foot tall fighter, will shrink down to 6 inches. The tricky part, though, is that the change happens gradually over the course of a quarter-mile or so. Because of this, the characters will be unaware that they're shrinking and instead think that they're entering an area filled with giant flora and fauna.

The spell reverses itself when the players leave the hex. The party suffers no ill effects, and is unaware that it happened to them.

Why is this tricky? Because until the players figure it out, it will severely mess with their mapping. The main play map of the area will be 5 miles per hex (or grid, I haven't decided yet). That means it takes about 2 hours to travel from one hex to the next. But while shrunken, 5 miles of the Giant Land will feel link 60 miles to the characters. Instead of taking 2 hours to cross, it will take 24 hours. Assuming that a party only travels for 8 hours a day, they'll spend 3 days in that hex!

Maybe a picture will help:


The hex marked with the dotted triangle is the "giant hex." If the party starts at hex "A" and travels in a straight line to hex "D," the journey will start normal. As they move into the "giant hex" though, I'll say "you notice that the vegetation around you is larger than normal. After another hour it's huge... you are confronted with a dandelion as tell as a man!" As mentioned above, this one hex will take 24 hours of travel time, and I'll present every two hour block as them entering a new hex. In fact, I'll probably use a map like this to represent that one hex:


On the other hand, if the party travels from "A" to "B" to "C" to "D" then the whole trip would only take 6 hours, even though it was "longer."

From a map making perspective, this should really confuse them. "It takes 3 days to travel from A to D."

Of course, any encounters in the hex will be "giant" bees and "giant" rats, etc. From the player's point of view, they are in a weird "Land of the Giants" until they figure it out.

It's just an idea.

Follow up: The next post contains my responses to some comments that I've received about this post.

Monday, May 4, 2020

Creatures of Crowfield: Pseudo-Carrion

This week I thought I would do another creature of Crowfield. This time, though, I'm going to go through the process step by step.

Step 1: Animal Encounter Columns

"Encounter Columns" is what Traveller calls an encounter table. This is the table that the referee rolls on when a random animal encounter is needed. (By default, there is a 1:3 chance per day in the wilderness that an animal encounter will occur).

Referees have a choice of using a less detailed 1d6 table, or a more detailed 2d6 table. Because the Crowfield region is comprised of only 3 biomes (the Firelands, Dreadwood, and Tundra), I decided to go with the 2d6 encounter column format for each. We're still working on the Firelands. Here's what that looks like:

RollResult
2Scavenger (this will probably be the Sh'hemu)
3Omnivore
4Scavenger
5Omnivore
6Herbivore
7Herbivore
8Herbivore
9Carnivore
10Event
11Carnivore
12Carnivore

This week, let's roll up one of the carnivore slots. I won't know which slot it is until I make them all, as I plan to put the strongest one in the #12 spot and the weakest one in the #9 spot. Likewise, I might end up moving the sh'hemu from #2 to #4 depending what other scavenger I roll up.

Step 2: Animal Type

We know that the creature is a carnivore. This is what the book tells us about carnivores:

Animals which prey on other animals by attacking and killing them in the face of resistance are classed as carnivores. Carnivores are of five basic types: pouncers, chasers, trappers, sirens, and killers.

So now we have to determine which of those 5 sub-types this creature will be. This is determined by a 2d6 roll on the "Animal Types" table. Because the Firelands are a desert, the Terrain Type table tells us that we apply -3 modifier to this roll. I roll a 3 - 3 = 0. The table tells me that a 0 on the carnivore column is a "siren", and that only 1 is encountered at a time.

Siren: Distinct from the trapper, which creates a trap for its prey, a siren also creates a lure to draw prey to the trap. The trap is treated in much the same manner as that of the trapper, but the lure entails additional consideration. In most cases, the lure will be specific to some animal, but will be unnoticed by humans. In rare cases (throw 11+), the lure will be universal, perhaps a smell or scent, or a mirage or beautiful configuration, which will attract characters into a vulnerable position. Very rarely, the lure will be psionic in nature. Typical terran sirens are the angler fish (its mouth is the trap) and the Venus fly trap.

Ok, so we're dealing with a creature like a venus fly trap? Interesting. Thinking about what the lure could be, I think that it could be made to attract sh'hemu and look like carrion or maybe it could look like a watering hole and end up being something like the sarlacc of Tatooine. I like both of these concepts. Let's make that 2D roll to see if the lure is universal. I rolled an 8, so the lure is specific to the sh'hemu--a fake dead thing is what we're dealing with!

Note: It turns out that I misread the Terrain Type table. The animal type roll was supposed have a +3 instead of a -3. That would make the encounter 1 "pouncer" instead of 1 siren, but I'm attached to siren idea, so I'm going to go forward with it. Maybe I'll save the pouncer for another of the carnivore slots.

Step 3: Animal Attributes

Pretty much this step determines if the creature is a fish or a bird. Because fish don't survive in the desert that well, that's not even a possibility on the table.

The table includes a lot of modifiers to use depending on the planet's size and atmosphere. Because this planet is earthlike, none of those apply. If I roll a 10 or better, this creature can fly, otherwise it's earthbound like the rest of us. I'm hoping for less than a 10, because I can't envision a flying corpse. I roll a 7. No wings here.

Step 4: Animal Size

The next step is to decide how big our fake corpse is. Size also determines its hits (hit dice in D&D terms) and how much damage it does when it attacks.

The terrain type table tells us that this roll has a -3. (Yes, it's really a -3 this time, and not a +3.)

I roll a 5 - 3 = 2. The table tells us that the fake corpse weighs 6 kilograms. That's about 13 pounds. Some googling tells me that's about the size of a large Virginia Opossum. I like that, because the "playing possum" thing works well for a fake corpse. But how is this going to be a threat to a pack of sh'hemu?

The table also tells me that, in Traveller terms, the creature can take 1D/2D hits. That's not a lot. The average man can take 4D/2D. In D&D terms, I think I'm going to call that ½ HD.

The Traveller wounds inflicted would be "-1D". I'm going to translate that as -1, and 1d6-1 is mathematically equivalent to 1d4, so that's the answer.

Step 5: Weaponry

The table says carnivores get a +8 to this roll. Rolling 10 + 8 = 18, "as pike." Hmm... Something stabby that can attack at a distance. Makes me think of a stinger, like a scorpion's tail. Technically speaking, "stinger" has its own entry on the table, and I didn't roll it. But these names really fit around Traveller's combat tables, where different armor has different effectiveness against different weapons, so we're just using this for inspiration anyway. In fact the book even says that "Weapon types should always be considered to be descriptive of result rather than of strict process."

Okay. I'm picturing something scorpion-like that burrows into the sand leaving something carrion-like on the surface. When a sh-hemu gets close, it attacks with a stinger. Maybe.

Step 6: Armor

Another 2d6 roll, this time with a -1 because it's a carnivore. I roll 11 - 1 = 10. The result is "jack", which is Traveller's equivalent of leather armor. That's Armor Class 12 in D&D terms. I'll give it another +1 due to its small size, so the final AC is 13.

Step 7: Animal Speed

In Traveller Animal speed is measured as a "multiplier times ordinary speed." So a speed of 2 means twice as fast as a normal person.

For a siren, we roll 1d6-4, treating any result less than 0 as a 0. I roll a 2 - 4 = -2, means 0.

That's fine and dandy for Traveller, but for D&D we're going to add a bit more fine tuning. A siren with a speed of 0 makes perfect sense (the Venus flytrap and the sarlacc from Star Wars, for example.) But in D&D it also makes sense to have a creature that moves slower than the normal person, and that's not possible interpreting the results according to the book. I'm going to use this table I just made up to determine speed:

RollTraveller SpeedD&D SpeedD&D Equivalent
1112Normal man
019Lightly encumbered man
-116Encumbered man
-213Heavily encumbered man
-311???
-410a rock

Step 8: Animal Behavior

The next step determines how a creature will behave when the party encounters it. Will it attack, flee, or wait?

In normal Traveller play, when the encounter starts the GM would roll to see if it attacks. If it doesn't attack, the GM would then roll to see if it flees. If it doesn't flee, it just waits. In the case of herbivores, you would first check to see if it flees, then check to see if it attacks.

That's too much dice rolling for me, so I use math to turn that into a single d20 roll.

Being a "siren," changes things up, though. A siren will automatically attack if it surprises its victim.

As for fleeing, the table says to roll 1d6+3. I roll 4 + 3 = 7.

So if the fake carrion has surprise, it attacks. If it doesn't, there's a 58% chance it will run away, otherwise it will lay in wait. "Never drop the con," I guess.

Step 9: Common Sense

The checklist actually says "Apply common sense as required." Nice. Let's do that.

Ok--we have this slow, small creature that preys on a larger, faster creature. It relies on surprise, but it doesn't do enough damage to kill the creature outright. How does that work? Well, the description listed the venus fly trap as an example. It also references the "trapper" class of carnivores, which lists the spider as an example. Spiders are venomous and cast webs to entrap their prey. The Albany pitcher plant allows its prey to fall into sticky digestive juices from which it cannot escape. That gives me some ideas.

I had originally given it a +1 bonus to armor class because of its size, but I'm going to say that its slow speed cancels that out.

Step 10: The Final Result

Pseudo-Carrion

Armor Class      12
Hit Dice        ½
Move            90' (30')
Attacks          Tubule
Damage          1d4
Number Appearing1
Save            
Morale          8
Treasure    special
Intelligence    Animal (2)
Alignment        Neutral
Monster Type    Normal Animal
Terrain          Desert
% in Lair        n/a
Special Attacks  Glue Spray, Blood Drain
Special DefensesNil
Magic ResistanceNormal
Size            S (13 pounds)

Reaction (1d10):

RollReaction
automaticAttacks  
1 - 6Flees    
7 - 10      Waits    

The pseudo-carrion is a solitary creature that lives in the desert. It is about the size of an American Opossum, but resemble a large, mangy, red and white house cat, with a hairless tail.

The pseudo-carrion mainly feeds upon sh'hemu, but will gladly eat anything that falls into its trap. It "hunts" by playing dead, and emitting the stench of decaying flesh. The red blotches of fur on its body can easily be mistaken for blood. When a sh'hemu (or other prey) touches the seemingly lifeless body, the pseudo-carrion springs to life, spraying a glue-like mist in all directions. Anything within ten feet of the beast will be covered in the glue unless they make a Dex save at -2. The glue sticks instantly, rendering those affected effectively immobile.

The round after releasing the glue, the pseudo-carrion will leisurely walk to the nearest glued victim (it's immune to its own glue) and attack with its tail. The tail is a rigid tubule that will will do 1d4 hits on a successful attack. The tubule is then left in the victim, and automatically drains 1 hit of blood from the victim each round. The creature will withdraw the tubule after 2d4 rounds and waddle away, bloated.

Victims are allowed a STR save every round to free themselves from the glue. Friends can assist if they can lasso the victim with a rope or something.

There's a 10% chance that the pseudo-carrion will inject its victim with eggs during the attack. Victims with eggs will feel fine for a week, then start to suffer from weakness (-1 Str per day) for 3d6 days, at which time the baby pseudo-carrion will erupt from the victims flesh doing 3d6 damage. A Cure Disease spell will remove the eggs.

Treasure: As animals, pseudo-carrion care nothing for things that humans value. Alchemists and wizards, however, will pay 150 gold for a full glue-gland from a pseudo-carrion. A full gland is one that has not produced a glue mist in the last 24 hours. Given their skittish nature, the only way to obtain one is to kill the pseudo-carrion in a single blow before it has time to react. Skilled pseudo-carrion hunters use ranged weapons for this. Even then, there is a 30% chance that the blow will damage the gland.

Food value: Pseudo-carrion are edible, but not desirable due to their death-stench. A single pseudo-carrion produces about 2 pounds of raw, foul-smelling meat.

Conclusion

That's it. I like the process. If you like it, you can find it in Book 3: Worlds and Adventures of the original "LBB" edition of Traveller.

Does anyone else know of any "monster maker" systems? I'd love to look at more of them. I wonder if there was ever one in Dragon magazine or something.