Space Dwarfs!

Dwarfs

After turning the shoggoths against the Elder Race and winning their freedom, the Primordial Ones extended dominion over the entire planet. Eventually the needs of their antediluvian science demanded resources not to be found on Abbith, and they cast their covetous gaze towards the stars. The Primordial Ones created the Dwarfs to withstand the rigors of space and harvest the resources of the galaxy. For generations they were launched in rockets towards all observable asteroids, exo-planets , and other stellar phenomena. These forge ships contained clusters of dwarfs in stasis that would awake on impact and be genetically driven to seek out resources, extract them, and use the forge ship to send the riches back to Abbith (though not the dwarfs, who were considered expendable.) Designed to single-mindedly exploit the resources of anything they landed on, the dwarfs were physically bred for hard labor and wired to obliterate whatever stood in the way.

This of course led to the destruction of the Primordial Ones, when a fleet of forge ships programmed to return to Abbith filled with the mineral wealth of alien planets, was instead filled with the centipede shock troops of the Yekubians. The vanguard of a much larger invasion force, bent on the destruction of whatever arrogant race sent the psychotic dwarf ships to the planet Yekub.

After the destruction of their makers, hundreds of thousands of Dwarfs were suddenly cut off from the genetic signal amplifiers that gave them purpose. Some were aboard ships bound for distant stars, others in the middle of complex mining operations or plundering the ruins of destroyed civilizations. While others still were locked in genocidal battles with alien species.

Over the millennia, these isolated groups have formed their own societies with unique cultures and ambitions. Dwarfs may be found throughout the galaxy, some still packed into forge ships bound for an unsuspecting planet. Others have built advanced spacefaring civilizations of their own, and seek out the remaining dwarfs to bring them into the fold. While still others toil away in isolation, unable to shake the basic single minded purpose of death and extraction that is after all, in their blood.

Dwarfs are short and stocky, with overly large heads and tiny hands.  They tend to have hirsute faces, but lack any hair over the rest of the body. They have no sex, and are incapable of breeding. They can live for thousands of years, although typically environmental or mental factors lead to early deaths.

I surrender to the Thief.

Philosophically, I really like the idea of D&D only having three classes. I also really don't like the problems that the thief introduces into D&D. Such as encouraging other classes not to attempt thief like actions, and the inclusion of a skill system. However, I find that players seem to like having more character classes to choose from. I keep trying to convince them that the Fighting-Man and Magic-User are all that is required to portray any character concept, but I am perhaps, not convincing enough. I was also reared in AD&D 2nd Edition, and the proliferation of snowflakes is hard to avoid. 
So, I surrender to the Thief. 

There are two types of Thieves. The Supplement I Thief, who is physically weak, but mechanically apt, and in command of preternatural or magical powers that allow hiding in shadows , climbing walls, and backstabbing. And the Rogue of later editions, who uses her Dexterity as a lightly armed fighter. 

Thief

Prime Req: DEX

HD: d4

Attack: as magic user

Save: as thief

XP: As thief

The thief uses Dyson's 2d6 Thief skill system: https://rpgcharacters.wordpress.com/2009/08/01/d6-and-2d6-thiefin-for-basic-dungeons-dragons/

The Thief has preternatural affinities  that allow them to perform almost magical physical feats while still remaining flabby and weak. In addition to the skills and abilities of the Thief found in Swords & Wizardry the Thief has the following power: 

Legerdemain: The thief relies not only on knowledge and skill to perform his abilities, but taps into a shadowy power. Once a day per level, they automatically succeed in any thief skill check.

Rogue

Prime Req; DEX and CHA (+5% for each)

HD: d8

Attack: as fighter

Save: As thief

XP: As fighter

Swashbuckler: When wearing light or no armor, and wielding 1 handed weapons, or 1 handed weapon and buckler, the rogue adds her DEX bonus to hit in melee.

Nimble: When wearing light or no armor the rogue may immediately leave melee combat when using the withdraw maneuver . (Alternately , does not provoke a free attack when leaving melee)

May use the Fighter Parry maneuver.

Dastardly: Starting at third level, the Rogue may use the following thief abilities as if they were a thief of three levels lower: Climb Walls, Hide in Shadows, Move Silently , and Back stab.

Charming: Hirelings and specialist cost half as much. Additional +1 to reaction roll when recruiting henchmen.

Armor

(The Fighter Ibungar wearing Yebish Bone Plate) 

Simplicity in RPG rules allows for more variation and wider use of the imagination!

From my statement of intent:

“I believe that an RPG system should be as simple as possible while still having the fidelity to convince its players that metagame and in-game choices follow a predictable logic.”

“I also believe that the more one details and defines mechanics in an RPG system, the more time is spent trying to use mechanics to play, rather than using the imagination.”

With this I mind, I propose that detailed list of armor actually limit characters imagination rather than enable them, and should be abandoned in favor of a simple three category system.

In terms of mechanics, armor should be defined by the following:

1. How does it affect life outside of combat (encumbrance)?  

2. What benefit does it grant to AC?

In terms of Fiction, armor should be defined by character culture, taste, financial status, training, combat strategy, market availability etc.

In OD&D , there were three types of armor.

1. Leather

2. Chain

3. Plate

Later editions added many more types of armor with different armor classes, purportedly from some interpretation of medieval armors, but the veracity of the lists are doubtful (most famously banded mail which never existed and one of the more common Medieval European armor types brigandine is not included.) This creates the illusion of choice, players are free to choose any armor so long as it’s on this  list! Having detailed list of armor types also complicates making adjudications on nonstandard equipment. If a player wants to wear some sort of chitinous carapace, is it closer to scale mail or half-plate? The list also have a decidedly western-European bias, which works for many D&D games, but requires DMs to create new list for different milieus.

The less we mechanically differentiate various armors the more freedom we have in narrative definition. Making the categories vague, even encourages players and DMs to create setting appropriate armors. Taking a queue from the original rules, we should have three categories of armor, Light , Medium, and Heavy.

Classifying armor into three simple categories has several advantages:

1. Simplicity. Less chart usage, easier to determine enemy armor class, no “munchkin-like” cost benefit analysis when selecting armor.
2. Easier to create encumbrance rules by armor category
3. Encourages the creation of armor types that add to the narrative of the game without requiring long list of dubious armor types.

The Rules

Armor is divided into four categories

None

Light

Medium

Heavy

(Note: these rules assume an ascending armor class system.)

No Armor

Wearing no armor makes most task easier. Arcane magic can only be cast while wearing no armor.

Light Armor +3 AC

Un-encumbering and allowing almost complete freedom of movement. Wearing Light Armor generally will not penalize any actions including Thief skills.

Medium Armor +5 AC

Specifically designed to withstand blows in melee. Medium armor can be burdensome and may penalize actions taken while wearing it, such as climbing, swimming, and sneaking. Thieves can only use the disable traps and open locks skills while wearing Medium Armor. Counts as an encumbrance point (using LOTFP encumbrance system.)

Heavy Armor +7 AC

Heavy armor is a specific combat strategy. The wearer relies on the strength of the armor to deflect and stop blows. It seriously penalizes most actions taken while wearing it. Counts as two encumbrance points (using LOTFP system)

Examples of armor types:

From AD&D:

Light Armor: leather, padded, studded leather, ring mail , scale mail

Medium Armor: chain mail, splint mail, banded mail

Heavy Armor: plate mail

From Shulim:

Light Armor: leather jerkin, Yarapolkan padded gambeson, leather harness, metal helmet and bracers

Medium Armor: Adian suit of scales , Samarajyan mirror armor, Yebish bone lamellar

Heavy Armor: gilded Samarajyan plate, bronze plate, Chintck chitin armor, Yebish bone plate

The Roton

In the centuries long war against the trans-dimensional cephalopods known as the Prawn, the Yeti turned their considerable scientific knowledge from sustainable resource generation and life extension towards weapons and war. The roton is an example of Yeti technical prowess, and warfighting technique. Operating via elementary excitation of superfluid helium-4 extracted directly from the pilot, the roton is capable of vertical takeoff, hovering and rapid flight including sub orbital and space flight. Originally designed to carry two traversable tellurium beam lasers and a squad of Yeti Marines, the design was modified when direct marine assault against the prawn was found to be ineffective. The Mark II roton was fitted with mono filament laser blades on the edges of the external eigenvector rotor. The Mark II was piloted directly into the carapace of the prawn in an effort to literally rip them to shreds. Many thousands of roton were manufactured, with several pilots distinguishing themselves in the platform.

Roton Mark I and II Specifications
General Characteristics
Crew: 1, + 6 passengers
Height: 8 feet
Diameter: 20 feet
Weight: 10,000 lbs
Power plant: super fluidized helium-4 extracted from pilot Eigen vectored to external rotor.
Lift coefficient: 0.0013
Drag Area: 1.2 sqft
Performance
Maximum Speed: 400 mph
Cruise Speed: 333 mph
Stall Speed: nil (capable of hovering in place)
Range: up to the desiccation of the pilot
Ceiling: none, though the roton is not equipped for reentry into the atmosphere.
Rate of Climb: 5000 ft/min
Armament
Mark I: Two traversable tellurium beam lasers
Mark II: Laser powered mono filament blades fitted to the external rotor.
The lasers were removed in the factory, though many pilots refitted them in the field.

Thoughts on OD&D Thieves

The Thief. 

Is the Thief a specialist, weak and awkward in physical combat like a wizard? Or is the Thief a agile rogue capable of holding her own in combat like a cleric? Supplement I seems to indicate the Thief is a scholar of sorts , a specialist in legerdemain and chicanery. One who has dedicated themselves to the skills of the cutpurse, burglar, and engineering to the the exclusion of  physical training. This is reflected in the d4 hit dice, and using the same combat chart as the magic user. Gygax seems to be saying a first level Thief has less skill than a normal man in combat. Later editions of the game have a different conception of the thief, seeing them as at least equal to a cleric in physical combat, with improved hit charts and d6 hit dice. Making them more akin to a shadowy assassin or ninja than the weak and flabby scholar of Supplement I.  

So how does one square the Thief's climbing and back stab ability with the d4 hit dice and weak hit charts? There seems to be an incongruity here. Surely the ability to scale sheer walls and make precise strikes with a blade are contrary to the assumption of the physical capabilities of the Thief as indicated by hit dice and attack matrix. Unless a Thief's skill is supernatural. If the Thief's skills are magical , beyond what is possible by other classes or men then the hit dice/attack matrix are acceptable. The Thief has otherworldly powers to rely on, the practice of which, or the dedication to , somehow exclude the possibility of physical training. 

This conception of the Thief is very different than what is usually thought of the class. It has the benefit of encouraging other classes to attempt Thief like abilities ( this is in line with Old School Play, where traps should be disarmed by narrative rather than rolling, and everyone has occasion to be sneaky.) 

If the idea that the Thief is using some dark magical force to sneak, back stab, hide, and climb walls is unacceptable. I suggest bumping the Thief to the Cleric attack matrix, and rolling d6 for hit dice, This makes them the dangerous rogue of later editions, relying on agility and physical skill to adventure, be sure to adjust XP accordingly. (Suggest Median between existing Thief and Cleric XP tables.) 

RPG Statement of Intent

Statement of Intent.

RPG are games. They are supposed to be fun. 

I do not think a game is fun if there is no risk. If failure doesn't carry penalties, then achievement is shallow. 

I believe that the random number generation in RPGs ties the experience into a deep universal thing. I let the dice fall where they may and do not fudge numbers.  

I believe that an RPG system should be as simple as possible while still having the fidelity to convince its players that in-game and "metagame" choices follow a predictable logic.

I also believe that the more one details and defines mechanics in an RPG system, the more time is spent trying to use mechanics to play, rather than using the imagination.

To put it another way, I don’t want my characters looking at record sheets or rule books to figure out what to do in game. Rather they should be mentally inhabiting the imaginary space and acting in accordance with the shared fiction (their character concept/my setting).

I like to play Dungeons and Dragons. Other systems may more closely adhere to my role playing principals, (such as Dungeon World) but D&D is my first love and in its original incarnation it was almost perfect.

For me, as a DM playing with rule systems and experimenting is as much fun as creating fiction

I will break D&D and rebuild it to suit my game, but I will not do this alone. I ask my players to trust me, and in return I trust them to evaluate and critique what I do.

Hit Dice Type by Class and Damage by Hit Dice Type

Hit Dice By Class

Before Supplement I, everything in the D&D universe rolled 1d6 plus a modifier for hit dice.  At first level, the Fighting-Man had the slight potential (1d6+1 HP) to have more hit points than the magic-user (1d6 HP) or normal man (1d6 HP).  Supplement I introduced hit dice type by class; d8 for fighting-man, d6 for cleric, d4 for magic-user (and thief which was also introduced in Supplement I.) and d8 for all monsters. As already pointed out, the primary method in D&D of simulating fighting prowess is the “to hit” table, and hit points. Hit dice by class gave the fighting man a much greater potential to deliver damage in combat versus other classes and normal men, which was then increased further by the variable weapon damage option. Mr. Gygax “highly recommends” the adoption of the hit die type by class, an injunction he does not make for the other optional rules, and the system is standard in all other editions of the game.

If the hit dice by class system is adopted, then what are we to do regarding damage dice? The symmetry of 1d6 damage for most attacks and 1d6 hit points for most living things is broken. Should a first level fighter with the potential for 8 hit points plus a possible constitution modifier be able to withstand a successful attack at max damage from a weapon? If it’s wielder has an exceptional strength the potential for a killing blow exist, but exceptional strength is well exceptional , the odds when rolling 3d6 in order for ability scores  of having a damage bonus are low enough to be discounted in this scenario.

I argue that yes, in fact a first level fighting man should be able to weather a maximum damage blow from anything other than a monster or another fighter. This is fundamentally what separates a fighting man from a normal person at first level.  The most elegant way to simulate this idea is the adoption of the hit dice by class rules! Allow the fighting man to roll 1d8 for hit points and roll 1d8 for damage, while a normal man (or cleric) rolls 1d6 for hit dice, and 1d6 for damage, and a magic user (and thief)1d4/1d4. This reflects the additional training and toughness that separates a first level fighting man from a normal human, the bravery of a first level cleric wading into combat, and the weakness of magic users and thieves, who have neglected physical training in order to pursue specialization.

Rolling damage dice by class adds to the D&D system in several ways.

1. It eliminates the problems with variable weapon damage.

2. It reflects the combat prowess of the various classes in an elegant way that is both easy to remember, and is still inside the potential damage range of the variable weapon damage system. (Most fighters will use a d8/d10 weapon in the variable system, most clerics a d6, most magic users a d4.)

3. It preserves the symmetry of one successful attack by a “peer” being able to kill.  (A 1^st level fighting man could slay another 1st level fighting man in one blow, but a magic user will have lower odds of doing so, only able to kill the fighting man if he is a weak fighter with 50% or less of his potential hit points.)

The system

Supplement I. hit dice by class rules will be used.

Variable weapon damage will be abandoned in favor of damage dice by class per the following:  

	Weapon Type and Damage Dice
Class	Small	Medium	Large
Fighting Man	1d8-1	1d8	2d8+1
Cleric	1d6-1	1d6	2d6+1
MU & Thief	1d4-1	1d4	2d4+1

Notes on Table

Small Weapons - may be concealed , may be used in the off hand for a +1 to hit , may be used with a shield for a +1 to AC, minimum damage is 1.

Medium Weapons - may be used with both hands for a +1 to damage, may be used with a shield for +1 AC, may be used with a small weapon in the off hand for a +1 to hit.

Large Weapons - require both hands to use, encumbering, roll two damage dice and drop the lowest.  

No More Variable Weapon Damage!

Men & Magic list hit dice for all characters classes and monsters as a D6 and all damage including weapons and monstrous attacks as a D6. This is a neat symmetry that encapsulates the premise that any weapon or monster can kill a normal man or first level character (who has 1-6 hit points) in one successful attack.

Supplement I “Greyhawk”, complicated the situation by introducing variable hit dice by class, Mr. Gygax even  “strongly suggesting” they be adopted,  as well as an option for variable weapon damage for both PC’s and Monsters. Variable weapon damage was also offered as an option in B/X , although interestingly hit dice by class was standard. Variable weapon damage, and hit dice by class is standard in all later editions of D&D.

I propose that in a combat rule system that simulates combat with a one minute combat round (OD&D and AD&D) and uses the hit point system, (All versions of D&D) weapon damage should be abstracted and rules that model the “damage” of a particular piece of medieval weaponry are not only too granular to make sense in an abstract combat system, but contradict the entire premise of hit points. Hit dice by class however are a satisfying and logical way to reflect the difference in combat prowess and general martial ability of the various classes. Thus we must reconcile non variable weapon damage, with hit dice by class.

Variable Weapon Damage

I suspect that the variable weapon damage system was a product of two things. The first being the wider availability of various polyhedral dice by the late 70’s and the desire to roll all of them! Additionally there seems to have been an almost perverse fascination with the minutia of medieval weaponry by wargamers of the time, and Mr. Gygax in particular. The voluminous information and rule systems for pole arms are a testament to Mr. Gygax devotion to obscure 15^th century martial tools. (See AD&D, and Strategic Review)

Variable weapon damage as modeled in Supplement I, and later editions of D&D is built on the assumption that the larger the weapon the more damage it does. This is an arguable claim, best left to medieval European martial artist (worth looking into as an interesting subject but outside the scope of D&D.) D&D also assumes that when character is more experienced, or a monster has more hit die, it becomes a better fighter, with more hit points, and a better chance to land a blow. This also equates mathematically to more potential damage over the course of a combat. Why do we need two mechanics that accomplish the same thing? In fact we don’t, and using both systems simply adds more and bigger numbers in an attempt to simulate something that is arguable at best (the damage potential of weapons.) In addition, increasing the damage potential in multiple ways results in a sort of arms race, where everything needs more hit points and does more damage in order to compensate. This arms race started with Supplement I, and in subsequent editions everything has more hit points, does more damage etc…

It is critical to understand that D&D does not model individual blows with a weapon. The combat rules are very clear that a combat round is full of thrust and parries, feints, movement for position etc. Nor does D&D equate damage with physical harm. The losses of hit points up to the killing blow simply represent a deterioration of fighting capability. (As Mr. Gygax states in the 1^st Ed PHB , thinking of HP any other way leads to absurdity.)  Linking the damage dice of a weapon to the physical damage potential of the weapon is a glaring contradiction to this combat system. One could attempt to reconcile it by arguing that a big weapon has a greater impact to enemy morale etc., but again this is a rabbit hole of conjuncture that requires an expertise in medieval melee combat. No, the HP system reflects a physical blow only when the last few hit points are lost, the last d6 as it were. Why then open the game up to the contradictions and uncertainties of weapon damage variables? What does it add to the game?

What it adds is an incentive for min-maxing and “munchkinism.” Many players will peruse the weapons list, finding the item that does the most damage, and select it for no other reason than its damage potential. While this style of play is not necessarily wrong, it is not what I seek in D&D. It also begs the question of why have different weapons at all. Why not just list the one weapon that does the most damage? Why wouldn't everyone in the world capable of acquiring it carry one?

It seems clear to me that variable weapon damage should be abandoned. Modifications to the damage dice can be made to reflect the player choice of using a weapon one handed versus two handed, or carrying as shield. This gives some tactical benefit to the player for his fighting style and weapon choice. Weapons are otherwise differentiated by their actual characteristics, can they be concealed, set against a charge, used one handed and two handed etc. Ignoring the variable damage option also simplifies combat and equipment, which is in line not only with the philosophy of OD&D but also the abstract nature of dungeons and dragons one minute combat round and hit point system.

Next I will look at how to use common damage dice with hit dice by class. 

Ability Check And Skill System For OD&D

Ability Checks.

Most actions can resolved with an ability check.

Roll x number of d6 under relevant ability score

number of d6 is based on difficulty of task

Difficulty Level	Dice Roll
Very easy	1D6
Easy	2D6
Moderate	3D6
Difficult	4D6
Very difficult	5D6
Heroic	6D6

Thus a character with an ability score of 13 would only have to roll for moderate or harder task.

Thanks to the wizards at http://odd74.proboards.com/

The Slithering Secret

The Slithering Secret

A nine inch black worm native to Yuggoth, Slithering Secrets live in symbiosis with their host, feeding off psychic nightmares. Once a symbiotic state has been created, the Slithering Secret acts as a ring of protection +2. If the host rolls a 20 on a saving throw, the Slithering Secret burst forth a clutch of young (2d4). The host must make a 3d6 CON check to pass them, otherwise they find their own way out for 3d4 damage. These young die immediately after leaving the host unless they are born on Yuggoth.

The Slithering Secret cannot be ingested, it must be gently guided to it’s new home prophylactically.