Holmes Reviewing Moldvay D&D

Just in case you're interested and didn't see it, this is an awesome post of Dr. Holmes' (of the Holmes edition of D&D) review of the "new" Basic D&D set edited by Tom Moldvay.  B/X is still my favorite iteration of the game and it's fascinating to hear a predecessor discuss the changes that distinguish it.  If you love B/X, or just classic D&D in general, check it out.

Holmes Discusses B/X

Maps, Overland Travel and Finding the Cool Stuff

I've been fooling around with different ideas on how to run the wilderness parts of my campaign.  I have a pretty big sandbox map (23x28 3-mile hexes) and wanted to add interesting things into each of them, as a 3x3 mile hex is approximately the size of my hometown!  I don’t think I was really wrapping my head around the size of my map until I google mapped an area that is commensurate in size.  Instead of being the size of North Orange County, for instance, one side of the map to the other is the same distance as my workplace to San Diego!  That’s two hours hauling ass in the car!  Then I realized that one hex is approximately the size of my hometown and, as there are at least a couple interesting things in that place, each of my hexes should have at least one cool thing in it. 

So, characteristically, I dove right into filling my hexes with rad things, without taking into account that there are…

…644 hexes on that da** map.

So I pondered this in my tiny brain for a moment, and came up with a plan.  I decided to create a whole bunch of cool things like tribes of intelligent, vampiric rabbits and triceratops birthing grounds and keep them on a list until the PCs find ‘em.  In theory, there’s still 644 awesome things spread out on the map, but I don’t have to come up with them now, nor do I need to write them out.  The characters, after all, are usually burning horseshoes around the map, trying to get to some location ASAP.  So they’re not likely to run straight into the cool thing on a 3-mile hex.  On the other hand, if they want to slow down, they’ll be more likely to find the interesting caves or ancient alien hot-air balloons.

The trick for me will be probability tables used to determine what the characters find as they travel.  I determined three “layers” of discovery: general terrain, special features of the land, and landmarks.  Passing through a 3-mile wide area, you’re bound to get an idea of the general terrain—whether its forest, desert, swamp, or other.  You may also notice some special features—an oddly shaped hill or deep crevasse.  Finally, if you’re lucky (or unlucky), you’ll discover the special feature of the area—the aforementioned bunny encampment, for instance.  Note that this is supposing the hex is not obviously filled with a massive castle or some other easily apparent monstrosity that blind people could see on a foggy night.

I’ve yet to playtest this, but I think it’s going to do the trick for me.  Am I reinventing the wheel, though?  I know I’m not that well read in newer rule books and honestly don’t remember even being in the wilderness much as a player in my youth.  Perhaps tables like this exist already.  I’d like to see how others do it, too.  How do you handle it?

Standard Weapon Damage in Labyrinth Lord

As our Labyrinth Lord campaign evolves, I realize that we are really using the "Core" or B/X ruleset much more than the Advanced.  By that, I mean that originally we were going to be playing Advanced with some throwbacks to B/X: Advanced HD for characters, Advanced spell lists, etc.  From the B/X all we were using was race as class, basically.  Now that I look at it, though, we are really playing B/X-Core LL and making up our own additions to it.  The only thing we use from the Advanced companion is the higher HD.

More and more I see myself adding or modifying rules to be closer to OD&D, actually.  Much more is being decided by d6, for example.  Something I've been toying with for a while is switching to Standard Weapon Damage.  Mainly, I must admit, it's because I want some people to use daggers.  Haha.  That sounds stupid when I write it, but it's true.  I think they're cool and I want some dagger-love in my campaign.

Does anyone have experience with Standard Weapon Damage a la OD&D?  Positive experiences?  Negative experiences?

Character Classes and Subtypes in Labyrinth Lord

I recently had my players make back-up characters.  They had a few chuckles at that, and wondered aloud if I was planning on throwing more yellow molds at them, but I reassured them that I just wanted some new characters in case we want to do a parallel campaign or if somebody croaks naturally.

My players are awesome, especially in respect to creating interesting characters and backgrounds for me to pull storylines from, so I presented them with the following inexhaustive list of character subtypes.  The idea is for them to approach their character generation in reverse—rather than picking a class and then trying to trick out the character, come up with the character first and fit it into the class most appropriate.  We’re not talking about modifying the mechanics of the class, really, but more about not being influenced from the get-go by a preconceived notion of the class.  Though I encouraged them to come up with their own “subtype”, I offered them these as examples:

Fighter: Barbarian, Gladiator, Knight, Paladin, Ranger, Soldier, Swashbuckler.

Cleric: Priest, Witchhunter, Shaman, Druid, Witch, Warlock, Avatar.

Magic-User: Wizard, Sage, Sorcerer, Illusionist, Summoner, Alchemist, Soothsayer.

Thief: Bandit, Burglar, Scout, Ninja, Bounty Hunter, Treasure Hunter.

The subtype chosen mostly affects the way they would equip, clothe, and roleplay a character, but some subtypes would also involve modifying the class mechanics a bit.  I don’t do multi-classing, because I think it’s sort of unrealistic and clumsy.  I think each class requires one’s full attention.  Therefore, if you’re a fighter/thief, something is going to suffer; you don’t have time in life to dedicate yourself completely to thieving skills and lifestyle and extensive combat skills and training.  And I don’t really buy the “it just takes a bit longer to progress” mechanic.  If you want to be a fighter/thief in our campaign, you need to work out a mechanic and storyline in which you will have some skills of each class.  For example, the bounty hunter (or treasure hunter, for that matter) takes his base abilities from the thief class, but is a bit more rough and tumble by necessity.  Therefore, he loses Pick Pockets, Hear Noises, Climb Walls, and Hide in Shadows, but gains a fighter’s combat matrix and d6 for HD.  This way he has something of both classes, but not all.  (In our campaign there are also “fighting styles” that only pure Fighters can specialize in.)

So far, this house rule system is working pretty well, but I realize there are many ways to skin this cat.  We’ll keep fooling with it, I’m sure.  In the meantime, however, the players chose to make a Druid (mostly according the LL Advanced Edition) and a Ranger (lost fighting style specialty in return for some outdoorsy skills).

Excuses for Adventure: Optional Character Backgrounds

Why has your new PC decided to embark on a career in adventuring?  He is seriously considering delving into dark holes in the ground where he knows nasty creatures dwell.  He is embarking on a journey that will most likely include regular bouts with grave danger, wandering from one end of the continent (or dimension) to the other, etc.  There must be some sort of powerful reason…

1. Running away from a battleaxe wedding.  “I never should have asked her to go to the barn with me…”
2. Running out on a boring/laborious/unpleasant apprenticeship.  “If the master makes me warm up his coffee one more time, I swear…”
3. Running away from trouble.  “I did it like this.  I did it like that.  I did it with a wiffle-ball bat. So…”
4. Modern man lost in another dimension.  “Remember ‘Army of Darkness’?  Yeah.  All I need is a frickin’ chainsaw arm.”
5. Sent on a quest.  “The Order says I need some field experience, so you don’t happen to know where I could find the Shrine to Evil Chaos, do you?”
6. In search of the duchies.  “I like money—plain and simple.   Nasty monsters have the best bling.”
7. Revenge.  “Ever since his mother was eaten by bugbears he’s just itchin’ to go out and kill everything that lives in a cave.”
8. Ideological.  “Evil must be vanquished!”
9. Ideological.  “Do-gooders must be vanquished!”
10. Cursed.  “That evil wizard mumbled something and now I’ve got to keep moving every month before people start to get suspicious.
11. ...

Character Backgrounds and Skill Bundles

The following are some of the backgrounds that can be chosen for a PC.  Basically, rather than note down slavishly every skill you have, you will be generally good at things that are associated with your background.  If you were an academic and you want to find a book in a strange library, you’ll be twice as likely to pull it off.  You needn’t note at the outset that “Find Books in Weird Libraries” is a skill you have, it is assumed.  In play, you merely state a case to the Labyrinth Lord as to why you should be able to do something, and he or she will make a ruling.  The skills should not translate to combat bonuses, but might be useful in combat for creative players. 

All backgrounds are assumed to be “light”—you were an apprentice to the trade, or spent a good deal of your childhood practicing—rather than a full-on professional.  Obviously, at some point in time you focused on the vocation of adventurer, and the specific character class to which you belong.  That’s why these are backgrounds and not foregrounds. J

Academic

Acrobat

Alchemist

Animal Trainer

Artist

Barber

Bard

Blacksmith

Brewer

Butcher

Construction

Cook

Engineer

Fisherman

Gardener/Farmer

Gemcutter

Hobo

Hunter

Jeweler

Lumberjack

Merchant

Miner

Sage

Sailor

Specific Lore (e.g. religious history)

Magic-users on the Lost Continent

Magic is evident, but very strange and misunderstood on the Lost Continent.  Something about the land itself, the vegetation and rocks, even the soil, disturbs the logic of magic and distorts it.  Because of this, spells cast by even the most veteran mage can be twisted into something unintended and dangerous.  This, and the sad fact that power added to fallen human nature often results in even great evil, means the magic-user has earned suspicion and fear, even ostracization, sometimes before his first spell has finished being cast.

However, there are many who attempt to use the powers of magic nonetheless--for fame, riches, good, evil.  Of them, there are two types, roughly:

Natural Mage: The Natural Mage is just that, a natural.  He does not study magic, but finds himself able to control it.  He is born with a knack for it.  Because of this, he receives one extra spell per level, but always has a 10-25% chance that a given spell, when cast, will be twisted into a different outcome.  Casting spells causes the Natural Mage to grow in experience of his magic, and allows for new spells to be learned.  This happens at the rate of 1d3 new spells per experience level.

Learned Mage: The Learned Mage functions very differently from the Natural Mage, and much like the Labyrinth Lord rules spell out.  He must learn new spells from other mages, or from a spell book.  He must memorize them daily, using his spellbook.  However, his chance of spell distortion is very low, being typically 5%, depending on environmental factors.

Experience Point Variant for Labyrinth Lord

I've been using a variant method of leveling based on game sessions for the Lost Continent campaign and have been very happy with it.  I found it over at Swords Against the Outer Dark.  It is not foolproof, for sure, but it works pretty well, and fits perfectly into my "low stress" methodology.  I've house-ruled several mechanics in my campaign so far--clerical spells, magic point system, thieving skills, and several classes and races--but most have been directed toward hip-checking the game mechanics out of the way so we can play the story/game better.  My players and I love to see a cool story develop.  So letting them be the type of character they want to be, while challenging their skills as players, is where I focus.

Thanks to Shane Mangus over at "Swords" for the great idea.  (His blog has a ton of rad stuff, btw.)