The Importance of Presuppositions

In my line of work, I have to be acutely aware of presuppositions (one of the demands of doing theology). Our culture does not do a very good job of exploring or even being aware that we make them all the time. So, a definition is in order: a presupposition is a thing tacitly assumed beforehand at the beginning of a line of argument or course of action.

Let’s explore an element of D&D that is near and dear to my heart, but is widely rejected by those who play: Race-as-Class. I think part of the reason that so many people balk at the idea of Race-as-Class is that they believe it fundamentaly prevents people from playing a particular race the way they want to. Personally, I have a metal figure in my collection that is a dwarven wizard. I love the personality that exudes from the sculpt. Race-as-Class seems to dictate that I can never use that character concept in my favorite versions of the game. 

What this perspective fails to see is the presupposition that must be made in gaming worlds that have no Race-as-Class: since the mechanics of dwarf and human characters are so similar, there isn’t much actual difference between humans and dwarves.

In contrast, Race-as-Class poses siginificant mechanical differences between the two races. The culture that arises from humans as clerics, fighters, magic-users, and thieves is necessarily very different from that of Dwarves. One is mechanically diverse, the other isn’t.

Thus, when I pull out that dwarven wizard figure the machanics of Race-as-Class put far more weight on my choice of class than the versions of D&D that don’t use it. In both cases, I will essentially be playing a human character; however, while the mechanics of a dwarven wizard don’t say a lot about my character, playing a dwarven magic-user that uses the mechanics of a human magic-user says a tremendous amount about the world, the history of my character, and dwarves themselves. In order to become a magic-user, my dwarf has had to reject his culture and his people to the point that mechanically he no longer functions as a dwarf. For all intents and purposed he is a human.

In both scenerios, I come to the same basic conclusion: mechanically a dwarven magic-user/wizard is essentially a re-skinned human; however, when one looks at the necessary presuppositions that Race-as-Class demands, I get a much more interesting re-skinned human — one that I don’t think I would have arrived at without Race-as-Class.

I say all this as a preamble, because I did something quite outside my comfort zone this week. Chris Gore of Film Threat is producing a new show on his YouTube channel which seeks to bring Star Wars fans together to discuss whether or not Disney has murdered the franchise. The format is that of a court with those who are on the side of the prosecution and those who are on the defense.

I was asked to be on the first show, because so few people in the sphere of YouTube Star Wars fandom were willing to argue the defense. It was all in good fun and I think the overwhelming consensus is that my side lost the argument (not surprising, since Chris Gore’s audience is largely unhappy with Disney Star Wars). I want to explain why I was willing to be on the Defense and that has to do with presuppositions.

While the language “Disney Murdered Star Wars” is hyberbolic, there is a necesssary presupposition behind that statement: Star Wars fans are beholden to Disney for all things Star Wars. I vehemently disagree. 

The presupposition that I make is one that I believe better reflects reality: Star Wars is part of our culture. It no longer belongs to Disney or George Lucas in any way other than the legal right to produce Star Wars products. We, as the fandom have far more power than Disney thinks we do (or we do, depressingly). The Audience is a vital part of any artistic endeavor, especially when it comes to beloved franchises like Star Wars.

Very few Tolkien fans, for example, would argue that Amazon’s Rings of Power has any real place in the lore of Middle-earth. Likewise, the fans have the ability to embrace or reject anything Star Wars. As an example, few Star Wars fans acknowledge that the Star Wars Christmas Special has any real standing in Star Wars lore. Yes, it is the first appearance of Boba Fett, but does anyone argue that the Mandolorian, or any other Disney product, isn’t following the lore established in the Christmas Special? No, because the fandom doesn’t care about the Christmas Special. It does about the EU and the many ways Disney has contradicted it. Despite the fact that Disney has de-canonized the EU, it still lives on because the fans have embraced it.

The only way that Disney can murder Star Wars, in other words, is if we aid and abett them by rejecting Star Wars as a whole. As long as the fandom exists, Star Wars lives. And, if the fandom wakes up and realizes its own power and importance, we may see a day when the owners of the legal right to produce Star Wars products will listen.

Skylin (Dogfolk) Race-as-Class for BX

Icon of St. Christopher with the head of a dog

Skylin

Prime Requisite: CON
Requirements: DEX 9
Hit Dice: d8
Maximum Level: 12

It is said that during one of the great beastmen incursions, there was a cleric whose face was so disfugured that he was often mistaken for a beastman himself. He took it as a sign that he should proselytize the faith to the beastmen. Despite the seeming foolishness of the endeavor, he did mange to convert a large number of what are derogatorily known as dogfolk. They call themselves Skylin, which means "loyal ones" in their own language (a dialect of gnollish). The name is apt, since Skylin are loyal to a fault. To this day, they honor the disfigured cleric as Theophoros — "The one who carries God."

• Combat: Skylin may use any armor, shield, and weapon and use the combat and saving throw tables of fighters
• Bite: Skylin are always considered to be armed and can bite for 1d4 damage
• Dark Vision: Skylin have 60 ft. of infravison
• Tracking: Skylin are gifted trackers and have a 4 in 6 chance of tracking a quarry by scent
• Dog-like Appearance: Due to their beastman origins, Skylin have a hard time recruiting human henchman — all attempts are made at -1 reaction and human henchmen will have a -1 morale penalty
• Loyalty: Skylin characters must pledge themselves to a cause, nation, or leader before they can advance to 3rd level. Once chosen, the Skylin will never waiver from that pledge, even if it means death
• Languages: Skylin can speak common and gnollish
• Stonghold: Upon reaching 9th level, a Skylin may build a stronghold and attempt to establish a Skylin clan. The stronghold may be above or below ground.

XP Progression:
Level 2: 1,800
Level 3: 3,600
Level 4: 7,200
Level 5: 14,400
Level 6: 28,800
Level 7: 57,600
Level 8: 108,000
Level 9: 228,000
Level 10:348,000
Level 11: 468,000
Level 12: 588,000

Half-Ogre/Ogre Race-as-Class for B/X

In a wonderfully weird way to end 2020, this post exists because the cleric in my solo campaign just got polymorphed into an ogre when setting off a magical trap...

Half-ogre PC by  Timothy Truman

Requirements: STR 9, CON 9

Prime Requisite: STR

Hit Dice: 1d10

Maximum Level: 10

Armor: Any appropriate for size, plus shields

Weapons: Any

Languages: Alignment, Common, Goblin, Orc

Combat Progression: as a Fighter

Saves: as a Fighter

XP Progression: as a Fighter

Ogre Strength: +2 to Attack and Damage in Melee Combat

Stronghold: An Ogre may start building a stronghold at 2nd level

Weaknesses: -2 on all Reaction Rolls; -2 to hit Small Creatures (like Halflings and Dwarves)

After Reaching 9th Level: An Ogre will be recognized by humanoid populations as a Warlord and the Ogre will attract humanoid followers from far and wide. Ogres may only hire humanoid mercenaries. Specialists and retainers may be of any race.

Here's to better polymorphs and transformations in 2021.

Have a happy and blessed New Year.

Human Monster Stats in B/X

I was recently asked by an old buddy of mine to look at how D&D stats up humans as monsters to see what that said about the game and by implication the game world. Given my proclivities I thought it might be an interesting exercise. The first place I went was Moldvay, not only because his is my favorite version of D&D, but because I know that humanity is well represented in the Monster Section.

I decided to make a chart for easy comparison. I threw in Dwarves, Elves, and Halflings because all of them are PC classes in Basic and I included Gnomes because I like them and I thought it would be interesting.

Click to Embiggen

Hit Dice

One of the first things that jumps out to me are the Hit Dice. In Basic D&D all monster HD are d8. Therefore, most human and demi-human monsters have a higher HD than their PC counterparts. I think this is a hold-over from 0e, where all PCs had a d6 for a hit die. Interestingly, Berserkers and Elves are the only “fighting men” that retained the ‘+1’ given to the HD of that class in the original rules.

Damage

The second is the amount of Damage each type of “monster” does. Outside the Acolyte’s preference for using a mace, this suggests a universal damage die based on class where Fighters do d8, Clerics and Thieves do d6, and Magic-users do d4.

Armor Class

Also fascinating is the Armor Class. Basic D&D doesn’t assume or assign Ability Scores to monsters. Indeed, Moldvay suggests that DMs “may” want to roll ability scores for NPC parties. As a consequence, it can safely be expected that all of the human and demi-human “monsters” have ability scores that fall within the ±0 range of 9-12. Thus, the armor class of each entry tells us something about what armor a particular “monster” is using. The results are fascinating from both a cultural point of view and as a comparison to the rules for PC classes that these monsters emulate:

• Acolytes (AC 2) wear plate mail and shield. This reveals that the average 1st level cleric is much more likely to be a Knights Templar than a village priest. In other words, it appears that the primary role of the cleric is fighting, not necessarily praying.
• Bandits (AC 6) wear leather and shield. This suggests that Thieves actually do know how to wield a shield counter to what the rules for PCs say.
• Berserkers (AC 7) wear only leather. Due to their battle rage, Berserkers are the most monster-like entry on this list; however, from the perspective of the Tinkerer in me, this entry also suggests another option for a fighter class — one that lives by the axiom that offense is the best defense. By forgoing the ability to wear armor heavier than leather, this new fighter-type attacks as a fighter 3 levels higher and gains one extra hp per HD. Alternatively, maybe all Fighters get that 0e +1 to their HD and receive a bonus "to hit" based on their Movement Rate: 120 (40) = +2; 90 (30) = +1; 60 (30) = 0.
• Dwarves (AC 4) wear chain and shield. Notice their movement rate. Based on the movement rates of others on this list wearing plate mail, one would expect an AC of 2. This suggests that Dwarves have a base move of 90 (30) instead of 120 (40). Thus, chain is the heaviest armor they bother to train with because plate mail not only slows them to 30 (10), but prevents them from carrying any gold. Another option is suggested by the Gnome below. Maybe Dwarves fill the roll of Fighter/Thief and they have access to the same type of quiet chain that Gnomes do.
• Elves (AC 5) wear chain. Firstly, this suggests that it requires two hands to cast magic, therefore Elves don’t use shields. Secondly, look at the movement — 120 (40). Either chain mail has the same effect on movement as leather, which is contradicted by the entry on Dwarves, or all Elves have access to a special type of Elven Chain that weighs as much as leather.
• Gnomes (AC 5) wear chain. Note that gnomes have the same movement as dwarves but do not use shields like elves. This suggests that gnomes have a reason to keep both hands free like elves. Given the lower damage die (d6) suggests that gnomes fill the roll of Magic-user/Thief in the same way Elves are Fighter/Magic-users. The fact that they can wear up to chain and are not limited to leather like Bandits suggests that they, like Elves, have a special type of chain. While not light like Elven Chain, Gnomish Chain is quieter than normal chain.
• Halflings (AC 7) wear leather. The Halfling is an outlier. The AC, HD, Move, and Damage all compare unfavorably with the other entries. Given my own bias, I would be tempted to dump the Halfling as a character type; however, given that the lack of a shield has been used to justify spell casting, the Halfling may very well play the roll of Cleric/Thief despite the fact that both of those classes are allowed to use a shield (a nod to the better saving throws?)
• Mediums (AC 9) wear no armor. No surprise here; however, it does go to show that these “monster” versions of the class are considered to have ability scores of 9-12 (no implied AC bonus).
• Noble (AC 2) wear plate and shield. Again no real surprise, but it does suggest that nobles are not only expected to fight but that there is a need to.
• Normals (AC 9) wear no armor. The only real surprise here is just how incompetent at fighting normal humans are with the d4 HD, low saving throw and lowest morale of all the entries. This is especially shocking when compared to the other races. This suggests that humans are prosperous and numerous enough to have the luxury of professional armies to protect them. Given that every other entry on this list is at least as competent as a goblin or orc (and often better), there seems to be a real need for armed conflict.
• Traders (AC 6) wear leather and shield. What I find fascinating about this entry is that they are specifically described as Fighters, despite the fact that statistically they more resemble Bandits than Veterans. Does this suggest another fighter-type that forgoes both offense and defense for a variety on non-combat abilities? Or, does this simply suggest that a Thief is a fighter who gave up on fighting in order to pursue other mundane skills? Interestingly, the Saving Throw seems to suggest the former.
• Veterans (AC 2) plate and shield. No real surprise here also, other than the fact that plate mail is so common among those that society expects to fight.

Morale

Morale also tells an interesting story. Most humans have a Morale of 7, whereas most demi-humans (Halflings being the outlier again) have an 8 that increases to 10 if their leader is still alive and kicking. Rather than speaking to a level of professionalism, as is suggested by the Veteran’s Morale of 9 versus the Noble’s Morale of 8, it suggests a level of desperation. Whereas humans have a place to retreat to, most of the demi-humans do not.

Treasure Type

The story suggested by Morale is reinforced by the Treasure Types. All of the human entries (as well as the Halflings) list individual Treasure Types. If a normal Treasure Type is listed, it only exists “if encountered in the wilderness.” In contrast, there are no Individual Treasure Types for Dwarves, Elves, and Gnomes. The implication is that when one of these demi-humans is encountered they are not very far from home and hearth.

Movement Rate

I find it interesting that the Movement Rates of all these monster entires contradict the normal encumbrance rules. Moldvay has leather armor at 90 (30), and metal armor at 60 (20). These entries support the idea that both unarmored and leather should be 120 (40), chain should be 90 (30) and plate should be 60(20).

Alignment

I find it fascinating that Normal humans (most often) have a Lawful Alignment. The suggests that the Alignment System centers not on morality but where one stands with Human Civilization. The fact that most human monster entries indicate that they can be any alignment says more about the fickle nature of humanity than anything else. This concept of Alignment is confirmed by the Neutrality of Dwarves, Elves, and Gnomes. While willing to work with humans, they don’t necessarily support their Civilization. Note, that Dwarves and Gnomes seem to be split on the question, though. Once again, the outlier here is the Halfling. Like Normal humans, they are Lawful. This makes me wonder if there is more of a connection between the two than the monster entries are letting on.

Monster Descriptions

There are a couple of interesting tid-bits in the descriptions of all these entries. Almost all of them refer to leader types of up to 8th level. The exceptions are not surprising: Berserkers, Normals, and Traders. What is surprising is the levels of the various leader types. Nobles are "always 3rd level," Veterans max out at 3rd level, Bandits have leaders from other classes, and (most shockingly) Mediums have a 50% chance of being encountered with their Master — a 3rd level Magic-user! 

In contrast, Gnomes have leaders up to 4th level, Clerics up to 5th, Elves and Halflings up to 7th, and Dwarves up to 8th. 

I think this speaks to the relative youth of Human Civilization and the fact that magic is largely unknown. Both Acolyte and Medium leader types can't cast more than a 2nd level spell! And remember, 1st level Clerics in B/X can't cast at all. In other words, if a PC Magic-user wants to get ahold of a 3rd level spell, they have to go outside of Human Civilization. Gnomes (if they are Magic-user/Thieves) seem to be in the same boat. The fact that Elves can routinely fire off 4th level spells speaks to their mystery and power. This might also explain their ambivalence toward Human Civilization.

So, does this make you want to tinker, house-rule a few new classes, and play? I am certainly tempted.

Halfling as Half-Dwarf Race-as-Class

Halflings (Half-Dwarves)

Requirements: DEX 9, CON 9
Prime Requisite: STR and DEX
Hit Dice: d6
Maximum Level: 12

Hill Dwarves (sometimes known as Gnomes) have a reputation for being reclusive, but are in many ways more gregarious than their Mountain-dwelling cousins. This, in combination with their relative proximity with Humans, has resulted in not a few unions between Hill Dwarves and Humans of smaller stature. The result of these pairings is a Half-Dwarf, more commonly known as a Halfling.

Like their Human progenitors, Halflings have a wide range of appearances, though they are rarely able to grow a beard of any significant length. They usually average from about 3 to 4 feet and weigh in at 60 to 100 pounds. Due to this short height, Halflings cannot use two-handed weapons or longbows. However, they can use any other weapon or armor. They must have at least 13 in one or the other prime requisite in order to get the +5% to experience. They must also have a STR and DEX of 13 to get the +10% bonus.

Due to their unusual background, they are used to existing on the fringes of both human and dwarven society. At character creation, a player chooses three Thief abilities that the Halfling character can use. Additionally, Halflings have an uncanny ability to disappear into their surroundings. Using any kind of cover, they hide on a 1-4 on a d6. They also have keen coordination which gives them a +1 to hit with missile weapons.

Halflings use the same saving throws as Dwarves, sharing the hardiness of that side of their ancestry. They also fight as a Dwarf. Further, a Halfling character will speak the common tongue, dwarvish, halfling, gnomish, goblin, and kobold.

Reaching 9th Level: When a Halfling reaches level 9, he has the option of creating a stronghold, which can be either above or below ground. The stronghold will attract Dwarves and Halflings from far and wide. A Halfling ruler is able to hire Dwarven and Halfling soldiers or mercenaries, but may only hire members of other races for other tasks, such as human alchemists or elves for spell casting.

Level Progression
1…0
2…1900
3…3800
4…7600
5…15,200
6…30,400
7…60,000
8…120,000
9…250,000
10…380,000
11…510,000
12…640,000

World Building using 5e Classes

One of my favorite poetic forms is the haiku. While tempting to see it as a very simple style of poetry where one need only come up with seventeen syllables and be done with it, writing a haiku is much more difficult than it seems. The goal is to capture a singular moment in time without allegory, simile or analogy. The skill and creativity to write a truly brilliant haiku is much greater than one might be led to believe.

Thus, I have always seen limitations as powerful creative tools. This explains my love of random tables. They severely limit my initial input as to what happens in an encounter, but open up a huge amount of possibilities when I am forced to rationally explain why that particular encounter happened when and where it did. This has consistently led to an enriching of my campaign worlds beyond what normally would have been possible if I had used my own input on encounters instead of a random table.

This leads me to today’s post — a thought experiment using limitations. Specifically, limiting the number of classes available to players in a 5e campaign and then building out a campaign world based on those classes available.

Since my favorite edition of D&D is B/X and B/X has four basic classes, I decided to use that as a benchmark. I then divided up the twelve available 5e classes into four groups:

• Barbarians, Fighters, Rangers
• Bards, Monks, Rogues
• Clerics, Druids, Paladins
• Sorcerers, Warlocks, Wizards

I then asked my children to pick one class from each category to come up with this list of four available classes:

• Ranger
• Rogue
• Cleric
• Sorcerer

Two interesting patterns emerge from this group of four classes:

First, the Cleric is the exception when it comes to magic. Rangers, Rogues with the Arcane Trickster Archetype and Sorcerers all use spontaneous casting from a list of known spells. Clerics, on the other hand, prepare spells from the cleric spell list and have access to ritual casting.

Second, there is no class that truly represents a standing army. Rangers are skirmish fighters. While rogues can emulate the sense of a disciplined army or coordinated fighting with their Sneak Attack, their limitations with both weapons and armor as well as their focus on dexterity and stealth suggest an army far more used to spying than to fighting toe-to-toe battles on a regular basis.

The campaign world that emerges from these patterns is one that is primarily focused inward because what outside threats exist can be kept in check by rangers and rogues. Thus, the driving force of most adventures is going to be political intrigue between factions that exist within the campaign world.

These factions are suggested by the various damage types available to sorcerers from the Draconic Bloodline:

• Acid (with Black and Copper clans)
• Cold (with Silver and White clans)
• Fire (with Copper, Gold, and Red clans)
• Lightening (with Blue and Bronze clans)
• Poison (with the Green clan)

This nicely fits into a five point pattern similar to the Asian Elemental System of Wu Xing which creates a nicely complex but balanced system where each faction has an enemy and and ally. Given that the Poison faction has only one clan (and thus has their power base consolidated) and has a specialty so convenient to the art of assassination, it makes sense to understand this faction as the current royal clan (and gives me permission to use names like the Jade Throne).

What emerges from all this is a Far East-flavored, Middle Kingdom-esque campaign world where the aristocracy are descended from dragons, magic is seen as a sign of the elite and most martial weapons are highly regulated and only used by a special class within the ruling elites — rangers.

Clerics represent an outside (Western-esque) influence both culturally and magically. They would be rare and, given that their magic can be used by those outside the aristocracy, possibly illegal in various parts of the campaign world. Due to the fractious nature of the Fire faction, I could see the Gold and/or Copper clans being the most tolerant of these new ideas and magics.

Thus, the four classes can be understood in context of the campaign world in the following ways:

Rangers are akin to a samurai class. They are far more concerned about outside threats than an average citizen, but still suffer from a myopic view inward as evidenced by the Beast Master Archetype which is more about show and prestige of the animal companions (where more exotic and well-trained companions are more prestigious).

Rogues represent the default class of the average citizen. Thieves’ Cant is a kind of trade language and a (not so full proof way) to communicate under the noses of the aristocracy. The Thief Archetype represents your basic thug. The Assassin Archetype represents a basic soldier or city guard. The Arcane Trickster represents a low-born aristocrat, a dilettante that likes to slum it with the peasantry, or an aristocratic spy that keeps the ruling class informed about the rumblings and rebellions amongst the hoi polloi.

Sorcerers generally represent the upper echelon of the aristocracy. Those of the Dragon Bloodline are those that have the most royal blood running through their veins. Sorcerers who use Wild Magic are the exception. They are generally low-born who have enough dragon blood to manifest magic but not enough to control it and manifest it the same way as those who have the Dragon Bloodline. These sorcerers are generally looked down upon and seen as dangerous by both the ruling class and the peasantry.

Clerics and their followers are the most outward-looking citizens of the empire. Their magic and world-view is heavily influenced by foreign culture and ideas. Due to their focus on and care of the lower classes, they are seen as a threat by most of the aristocracy but are mostly tolerated in the lands controlled by certain Fire clans. Their existence hints at a greater (most likely undead) outside threat than the Empire has faced in generations.

Gamer ADD: Toward an Old-School version of 5e

As I mentioned in my last Saintly Saturday post, my Gamer ADD-addled brain is busy editing the 5e SRD to reflect my own old-school proclivities. At the end of the day, though, I am not all that interested in editing it beyond the bounds of what could be called 5e D&D or to tie it so closely to a game world as to effectively create a new D&D-esque game with a little 5e sprinkled on top.

An (excellent) example would be Mithgarthr. For all intents and purposes it is 5e D&D; however, there are enough world-specific races and classes and unique mechanics that it deserves to be its own game. As much as I admire the folks at Mithgarthr Entertainment for producing a version of 5e that I’ve been sore tempted to buy in hardcover (something WotC has never even come close to doing), my goal is to produce something both far more generic and compatible.

In other words, what I want is a version of 5e that can be easily used regardless of what campaign world the end user wants for the their game table and that can be used (with very little effort) in conjunction with the 5e rules as written. I use the caveat “with very little effort” because, in order to scratch my curmudgeonly old-school itch, there will necessarily be some alterations to classes that will deviate slightly from the rules as written.

Speaking of classes, I will pick up on an idea I first posited here — there will be only three classes:

1. Clerics (using the rules for Paladins)
2. Fighters
3. Magic-users (using the rules for Warlocks)

Additionally, I will only use ideas/spells/powers from the SRD to describe these three classes. Thus, there is no need for detailing different oaths, archetypes or patrons. This will simplify the typesetting and presentation of each class immensely.

For those who are wondering why only three classes, there are two main thrusts to my thinking:

Firstly, 0e only had these three classes. By sticking to that pattern, it gives this modern version of D&D an old-school feel.

Secondly (and possibly even more importantly), all of the other classes are redundant:

• Barbarians and Rangers are fighters with specific backgrounds and tactical proclivities that don’t really need any mechanics to express.
• Bards are entertainers and there is an entertainer background. Thus, one could be a bard in any class and thus a specific class with specific mechanics aren’t all that necessary.
• Druids, Clerics and Paladins are really all the same class with slightly different foci. Using a bit of background and role-playing choices, one can easily emulate all three with one set of mechanics (the Paladin Class being my choice because it is the one that most closely resembles the cleric of older editions of the game)
• Sorcerers, Warlocks and Wizards are also really the same class that primarily differ on where magic comes from. That can easily be explained through special effects and world-building concepts. Especially since Cantrips in 5e can be cast at will, there is very little mechanically difference between these classes.
• Rogues have always been the skill-heavy class. 5e gives access to all kinds of interesting skills and proficiencies through backgrounds. One can choose an appropriate background with any class and function as a thief-like character.
• Monks have always felt a bit out of place in D&D because they have a definitive Wuxia feel to them that is a bit alien to the average high-fantasy D&D campaign world. At the same time, they don’t really do Wuxia justice. If one really wanted to do a Wuxia-style game using a 5e D&D chassis, backgrounds would be a much better way to build that world than relying on the Monk class.

Thus, the original three classes married to a robust background system can easily emulate all the other classes found in 5e.

Holmes & Cook: Monk Redux (Saintly Saturday)

Today is the Feast of St. Quadratus of Nicomedia. He was from a rich family and spared no expense helping fellow Christians imprisoned for their faith during the reign of Emperor Decius (A.D. 249-251). When Decius sent his proconsul Perennius to persecute the Christians in Nicomedia, Quadrates voluntarily appeared before him. The saint wanted to encourage those in prison by demonstrating his courage in the face of certain torture and death.

These, of course, followed. In the end, a fire was lit under an iron grate in order to burn Quadratus to death. After the iron was red hot, the saint voluntarily laid down as if he were crawling into bed, unharmed by the heat and fire. Out of sheer frustration, the proconsul had the saint beheaded.

This past week I posted about a possible “Western” version of the monk for my Holmes + Cook thought experiment using the Turning mechanic as a means of fitting the concept into the idea of a cleric subclass. It produced some really interesting comments.

One theme was to make the monk a “buffing” class and the bard was cited as an example. While I think this is quite an excellent idea, my Holmes + Cook thought experiment already has a buff-type class. My suggested version of the Paladin is as a leader-type that has a floating bonus that can be added to various party members. Thus, to have the monk do the same through Turning would be to blur the lines between the two.

That being said, the story of St. Quadratus is a clear example of the type of miracles that inspired the cleric spell Resist Fire and suggests that JB’s idea that the monk be an “inward channeling” character might be a very interesting way to go. In other words, instead of buffing others (like my Holmesian Paladin), the monk uses faith to push himself beyond normal physical boundaries.

Here is a list of cleric spells from Cook that could possibly fit the bill:

• Cure Light Wounds (1st level)
• Remove Fear (1st level)
• Resist Cold (1st level)
• Resist Fire (2nd level)
• Silence 15’r (2nd level) — in a nod to the idea of Cadfael and Friar Tuck having thief skills
• Cure Disease (3rd level)
• Remove Curse (3rd level)
• Striking (3rd level)

As I have pointed out before, both Holmes and Cook have eight different types of targets for a cleric’s Turn Undead ability. Above is a list of eight special effects. The question is, what order of difficulty should each of these effects have in terms of the Turning mechanic?

If one were to duplicate the Turn Table exactly as it appears in Cook and replace each undead type with a spell effect from the above list, I would propose the following (from easiest to most difficult):

1. Remove Fear
2. Resist Cold
3. Cure Light Wounds
4. Silence
5. Resist Fire
6. Striking
7. Cure Disease
8. Remove Curse

This way all the first level spell effects are available immediately, with the most useful/powerful (Cure Light Wounds) being the hardest to accomplish. The most powerful 3rd level spell (Remove Curse, in my opinion) would be available at 5th level (approximately when 3rd and 4th level spells become available to a cleric at 6th level).

I would place some kind of limit on how many times each of these abilities can to used over the course of an adventure. Once per encounter? A set number of times per day/ per adventure?
Otherwise, a monk at 11+ level would be able to do all of these abilities at will and that seems way too much to me.

Since these Turning abilities are spell-like abilities, I would remove the spell-casting abilities of the monk, but leave their fighting ability alone.

Thoughts?

Holmes & Cook: Monk

The last subclass that I have to muse about in my Holmes & Cook thought experiment is the monk. Holmes categorizes the monk as a subclass of the cleric. Given my reasoning behind using the Turning mechanism to re-skin the druid, this leads me down the path of trying to marry the mechanic with the concept of “monk.”

This is where I will be departing quite radically from the traditional view of the monk as wuxia in D&D. When one uses the word monk, there are two archetypes that stand above all others: Shaolin and Benedictine. Understandably, D&D opted for the former because the latter, being a non-martial contemplative, doesn’t really fit with the whole dungeon delving schtick of Dungeons and Dragons. While it isn’t a perfect fit, at least a Shaolin is trained to fight.

Given my own proclivities, however, and the concept of the cleric being so heavily influenced by Christian archetypes in earlier versions of D&D such as Holmes, I have a hard time seeing a Shaolin monk as a subclass of the Christian-influenced cleric. Indeed, when AD&D was published, the monk was completely divorced from the cleric class. My friends and I always classified it as a subclass of the thief. Thus, I am much more inclined to lean toward a fantasy version of the Benedictine.

The first thing to decide is what effect a western-style monk might have access to. If one breaks down the Benedictine Rule to its fundamentals they are work and pray. The first deals with the mundane while the second asks for the miraculous. One thing I know that monks are praying for all the time is health. Therefore, I am going to explore the possibility of healing as the basis of a monk' s Turning mechanic.

In Cook there are six healing-type spells: Cure Light Wounds, Cure Disease, Remove Curse, Cure Serious Wounds, Neutralize Poison and Raise Dead. Since tying healing to Turning is going to be quite powerful, I am willing to eliminate Raise Dead with the justification that a monk’s Turning ability only works on the living. This leaves us with five special effects.

Both Holmes and Cook have eight target types in their Turn Tables. Thus, there needs to be an additional three healing effects. Since Cure Light Wounds uses a d8, the three other categories can use small die types: d2, d4 and d6.

Thus the Turning categories of the monk might look like this:

• Cure 1d2 hp
• Cure 1d4 hp
• Cure 1d6 hp
• Cure 1d8 hp
• Cure Disease
• Remove Curse
• Cure 2d8
• Neutralize Poison

Once per encounter, a monk could attempt to effect 2d6 targets with a Turn. A success means affecting all targets with the effect. A ’T’ means an automatic success and a ‘D’ means a maximum effect.

As I stated before, this is quite powerful, much more so than being able to Turn undead. Thus, a monk would have to give up some other mechanic(s) to balance out the class. There are two that are obviously available: combat ability and spell-casting.

Thus, we have four options:

1. Monks fight as Magic-users (no armor, limited weapons)
2. Monks cast as fighters (no spell casting)
3. Monks fight as thieves (leather armor and limited weapons) AND cast as fighters
4. Monks fight as Magic-users AND cast as fighters

I think Option 4 would make this class largely unplayable. Basically, the class would be a heal-bot that could offer nothing much else during an adventure, especially during combat. Option 1 would blur the line between magic-user and cleric in an interesting way, but I think it would be too powerful. This leaves us with deciding on the fighting ability of the monk: fight like a cleric or like a thief.

I am sore tempted to go with Option 2 for playability reasons. With no spells, the monk becomes a glorified medic. Limiting their ability to jump into combat in a meaningful way would make me think twice about playing it, whereas being a legitimate second-line fighter that allows clerics to freely use utility spells without worrying about healing sounds like a lot of fun.

Thoughts?

The Holmesian Druid Revisited

My last post on a Holmesian Druid got some very interesting responses that I have been meaning to respond to, but I have been laid up in bed for the last several days feeling rather awful and was in no shape to either write or even think straight enough to give a decent response.

Since I want to address several points from those comments and since I have ignored my blog for the last several days, I thought that the discussion deserved its own post.

Firstly, whenever I post stuff with the Holmes+Cook tag I am continuing a long standing thought experiment about what my version of D&D would have looked like if the only sources I had were Holmes and Cook where Holmes had precedence over Cook (in a reversal of what it says in Cook). Therefore, when I try and figure out how to do a subclass in this context, I am largely confining myself to these two rulesets as written and my own proclivities.

Secondly, I am an old-school Champions player. I actually played editions 1-3, still own editions 2 & 3 and, in general, it is the RPG system I have played more than any other outside of all the various versions of D&D. One of the basic (and brilliant) assumptions of Champions is that the powers of superheroes are too numerous to try and make an RPG work. Therefore, all powers are described strictly as mechanics. This leaves players the freedom to skin those mechanics however they want. An 8d6 energy blast can be a ray gun, a sonic blast, dragon breath or whatever you fancy. Therefore, when I look at RPGs, I tend to disassociate mechanics from their descriptors.

Thirdly, I am a Christian. In Holmes, there are several implicit Christian ideas. This encourages me to do what I already love to do: look at RPGs through the lens of Christianity and to use both Scripture and the history of the Church to find ideas that can be applied to RPGs.

When I look at the mechanics of the four classes in D&D here is what I find:

• Fighters are good at combat. Therefore, subclasses ought to specialize in certain aspects of combat at the cost of other aspects of combat.
• Magic-users are good at spell-casting. Therefore, subclasses ought to specialize in certain types of magics at the cost of being good at other types of magic.
• Thieves are good at mundane aspects of the game. They get extra chances at surprise and opening doors, for example. Therefore, subclasses ought to specialize in certain aspects of the mundane at the cost of others.
• Clerics are mechanically the most complex of the classes because they are okay at combat and okay at spell casting. The one mechanic that differentiates them from any other class is Turning. Therefore, subclasses ought be able to use the Turning mechanic for different special effects at the cost of affecting the undead.

Thus, the idea that a cleric channels the divine, life-giving force of God to repel and dispel the undead is a special effect — a way to skin the mechanic of Turning. The mechanic itself merely suggests that the cleric can affect 2d6 creatures of a certain type.

Thus, when I look at the druid, I do not see a paleolithic pagan that had some import in the pre-Roman Celtic world. I see someone like Daniel, several of the martyrs or the likes of St. Francis of Assisi who could look in face of fierce animals and either make friendly, have them go on their way or even become life-long companions. The mechanic of Turning is a great way to express this, because not all Christians who went into the arena avoided death by lion, etc.

St. Ignatius the God-bearer
depicted getting mauled by lions in his icon

As Scott Anderson suggested, the special effect could involve being able to have a conversation with the animals where the level of success could indicate how involved or detailed that conversation could get up to where ‘D’ indicates that the animal could function as a henchman.

In other words, the mechanic of Turning allows for cleric subclasses to express a plethora of special effects that emulate various miracles of the saints. We just have to decide which miracles are appropriate and which types of targets are applicable.

I will add that, like many of the commenters on my last post, I don’t have a lot of love for the druid class as presented in D&D in all of its forms. I have played a druid exactly once and I just remember being frustrated at every turn. Thus, one of the things that I keep in mind when I create or re-skin a character class is whether or not I would want to play one. A druid that uses the Turning mechanic to interact with animals is a druid I would play.

Holmes & Cook: Druid

Since I am in the frame of mind to do so, I have been meditating upon how to fulfill the promise of this paragraph from Holmes:

There are a number of other character types which are detailed in ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS. There are sub-classes of the four basic classes. They are: paladins and rangers (fighting men), illusionists and witches (magic-users), monks and druids (clerics), and assassins (thieves).

The most challenging of these (given my own prejudices and predilections) is the druid. Traditionally, the druid forgoes the cleric Turning ability and heavier armor in order to excel at nature-based skills and magic. Given that my only source material for creating a druid class for my version of Holmes & Cook is, well, Holmes and Cook, that approach really doesn’t lead me anywhere. There are no real mechanics about nature skills nor are there that many spells that could be described as nature magic.

This leaves me with an extant mechanic that normally is never associated with druids: Turning.

While this may seem odd, given the context of Holmes, where the druid is clearly labelled as a type of cleric and Turning is clearly a cleric-based mechanic, it actually make more sense in my head to go down this path rather than the one historically taken by D&D.

Therefore, the question becomes what exactly will the Turning ability represent in the case of a druid?

Given the whole nature schtick that is normally associated with the class, it occurred to me that the Turning ability of a druid could be associated with animals in the same way that it is associated with the undead with clerics.

Thus, a druid could use the Turning table to represent their ability to scare off or make friends with animals of various HD. A result of ‘D’ could then indicate the ability to take on an animal as a henchmen, rather than just being friendly.

Otherwise they function exactly like clerics.

Holmes & Cook: Illusionist (Saintly Saturday)

Today is the feast of the Martyrs Eutropius and Cleonicus who were betrayed to the Governor Asclepiodotus of Amasia (northern Turkey) during the reign of Diocletian (A.D. 284-305). They were tortured and crucified. Both of them were kinsmen of the Great Martyr Theodore the Recruit who had been martyred under the previous governor.

This last fascinating piece of information has me meditating on such things as legacies, mantels and traditions of what has come before. In context of RPGs, my first was Holmes Basic D&D. Recently, this reality has hit home because I’ve been watching Matt Finch run Swords & Wizardry Complete on YouTube. 

          

One interesting quirk about the Complete edition of S&W is that it offers up several different ways to do initiative, one of which emulates Holmes. Fascinatingly, it is this version that Matt uses when running his games. I’ve always wanted to try it out, and I’ve got to admit that it is a lot more elegant that I ever imaged.

This got me reminiscing about my own meditations on Holmes and the thought experiment I had about using it in conjunction with Cook’s Expert D&D. Specifically, this quote:

There are a number of other character types which are detailed in ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS. There are sub-classes of the four basic classes. They are: paladins and rangers (fighting men), illusionists and witches (magic-users), monks and druids (clerics), and assassins (thieves).

I’ve postulated an Assassin class (which still needs work), a Paladin class, a Ranger class and a Witch class (reskinned as an Alchemist). Since my last post reskinned magic in terms of language I decided to see what would happen if I used some of the principles I postulated there to come up with a spell list for a Holmesian Illusionist class.

The principles I used look like this:

• All the spells come from either Holmes or Cook no new spells
• I took all the spells (from both the magic-user and cleric lists) that could be understood as illusion magic and moved them one spell level down. For example, Mirror Image (a 2nd level magic-user spell) becomes a 1st level Illusionist spell.
• I then filled out the rest of the spell list with mostly utility spells, moving most to be one spell level higher. For example, Floating Disc (a 1st level magic-user spell) becomes a 2nd level Illusionist spell.
• I went half-way in-between clerics (8 spells per spell level) and magic-users (12 spells per spell level) to give the illusionist spell list 10 spells per spell level.

Finally, there weren’t enough spells to justify a 6th level spell list, so I limited the Illusionist to 5 spell levels:

1st Level

1. Audible Glamer
2. Charm Person
3. Dancing Lights
4. Detect Illusion
5. Invisibility
6. Light
7. Magic Mouth
8. Mirror Image
9. Phantasmal Force
10. Read Magic

2nd Level

1. Cause Fear
2. Dispel Illusion
3. Floating Disc
4. Hold Portal
5. Invisible 10’r.
6. Shield
7. Silence 15’r.
8. Sleep
9. Snake Charm
10. Suggestion

3rd Level

1. Charm Monster
2. Confusion
3. Continual Light
4. Detect Illusion
5. ESP
6. Hallucinatory Terrain
7. Invisibility 10’r.
8. Levitate
9. Massmorph
10. Wizard Lock

4th Level

1. Clairvoyance
2. Dispel Magic
3. Feeblemind
4. Fly
5. Haste
6. Hold Person
7. Infravision
8. Magic Jar
9. Protection from Normal Missiles
10. Water Breathing

5th Level

1. Cloudkill
2. Dimension Door
3. Geas
4. Hold Monster
5. Invisible Stalker
6. Projected Image
7. Remove Curse
8. Telekinesis
9. Teleport
10. Wizard Eye

Spell progression would look like this:

Level…Spells Slots per Spell Level
1st…1
2nd…2
3rd…2…1
4th…2…2
5th…2…2…1
6th…3…2…2
7th…3…2…2…1
8th…3…3…2…2
9th…3…3…3…2…1
10th…4…3…3…2…2
11th…4…3…3…3…2
12th…4…4…3…3…3
13th…5…4…4…3…3
14th…5…4…4…4…3

Otherwise, they function as magic-users.

Zero-Level Characters for SWCL

For those not already aware, Swords & Wizardry Continual Light dropped earlier this week. While I have a few quibbles (like the fact that there are monsters who can surprise on a 1-3 on a d6 and Thieves can backstab surprised opponents but there are no rules for surprise in the combat section), I really like this ruleset. It elegantly boils down D&D to its essence with as few rules as possible and still presents an immensely satisfying game.

I think my favorite part of the entire ruleset is the way it handles Optional Classes like the Ranger and the Monk. They play exactly like one of the four core classes: Fighter, Cleric, Magic-user or Thief, with an extra ability tacked on. The price a player pays for this ability is a slower level progression. Since experience is handled by the number of sessions played, the optional classes simply add an extra session to each level. Brilliant!

What I love the most about the way SWCL handles these Optional Classes is that it provides a very simple way to create world-specific classes that add a lot of color to the campaign without a lot of a lot of mechanics: take one of the four core classes, tack on a special ability and you are good to go!

Thus inspired, I decided to take the rough idea of zero-level characters that I mused about in my last post and applied the mechanical elegance of SWLC to produce a supplement that provides players and referees of SWLC a way to use zero-level characters to bring some life, depth and background to the characters that inhabit their campaigns.

Art by Joyce Maureira

You can download it here.

Saintly Saturday: St. Cosmas the Composer and Melodist

Today is the feast of St. Cosmas the Composer and Melodist who was not only a contemporary of St. John of Damascus (a famous 7th-8th century saint who wrote against iconoclasm) but was an adopted member of the family. He was elected bishop in the 8th century to a coastal city in Palestine. He was also an excellent hymnographer. Among his many compositions are two Canons that are still sung in the Orthodox Church today: the Canon of the Cross and the Canon for the Nativity of Christ.

Earlier this week, when I looked ahead to see who the saint was for today, I was left with a very tough question: What to do with a hymnographer? It is a reminder that D&D (and most RPGs, for that matter) don’t really have a place for someone like St. Cosmas. Yes, the argument can be made that he represents a Christian version of a Bard, but, not only do I not really like virtually any iteration of that class, I don’t think any version can easily be re-skinned to fit a St. Cosmas.

This leads me to a bit of Gamer ADD I have been suffering from lately. I’ve been distracted by Warhammer Fantasy RPG, the Mithgarthr “retro-clone” of 5e and Swords & Wizardry Continual Light. While absorbing so much awesome, my brain came up with an interesting challenge that I think answers the “problem” of St. Cosmas better than simply calling him a Bard:

Knowing what I know today in October 2017, what if I suddenly found myself back in the late 80s at the beginning of the end for TSR when my friends and I started drifting away from D&D? What would I do to modify D&D to make it enticing enough for my friends and I to continue to play realizing that I would have no access to the huge library of .pdfs and books that I have now? What resources could I use?

The first thing that came to mind is the idea of a 0-level character. Not only do I love this idea, but my friends probably would have as well because we reveled in the challenge of low-level play. I owned the 1st edition of Warhammer Fantasy RPG and it has an awesome list of careers that a potential 0-level character could come from.

Secondly, my friends did like the idea of the proficiency system that was being developed in books like Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures. Why not take some of the skills from the Thief class, some of the skills from WFRP and use them in the broad sense suggested by both WFRP and 5e where each characteristic gets several skills associated with it?

Finally, this all has to exist on a random table that also allows for some customization. Therefore, each career would have the ability to move around some ability scores and a choice of skills to specialize in.

Here is a rough draft of what that might look like (Roll a d12):

1. Alchemists’ Apprentice Skills: Craft, Medicine, Open Locks; Characteristic: INT
2. Entertainer Skills: Blather, Perform, Sleight of Hand; Characteristic: CHA
3. Herbalist Skills: Lore, Medicine, Sleight of Hand; Characteristic: WIS
4. Initiate Skills: Blather, Etiquette, Read Languages; Characteristic: CHA
5. Laborer Skills: Craft, Consume Alcohol, Open Locks; Characteristic: DEX
6. Outlaw Skills: Climb Walls, Intimidate, Stealth; Characteristic: STR
7. Rat-Catcher Skills: Animal Handling, Hunt, Swim; Characteristic: CON
8. Sailor Skills: Climb Walls, Navigate, Swim; Characteristic: STR
9. Scribe Skills: Lore, Read Languages, Stealth; Characteristic: INT
10. Soldier Skills: Consume Alcohol, Intimidate, Hear Noise; Characteristic: DEX
11. Squire Skills: Animal Handling, Etiquette, Perform; Characteristic: CON
12. Woodsman Skills: Hear Noise, Hunt, Navigate; Characteristic: WIS

Skills: Players can try to justify doing anything under the pretense of a skill. PCs can automatically succeed at the DM’s discretion. Any character can use any skill at a base success rate of 1 in 6. Each career offers three skills that can be specialized in. The player prioritizes these specializations at character creation. At 0-level these three skills have a base success rate of 9+, 12+ and 15+ on a d20. As a character gains levels, these chances improve by 1 per level (8+, 11+, 14+ at 1st level). A roll of ‘1’ always fails

Each specialization is associated with a characteristic. The bonus or penalty of that characteristic can be applied to a roll with a specialization (but not to the generic 1 in 6 chance):

STR: Climb Walls, Intimidate, Swim
INT: Craft, Lore, Read Languages
WIS: Hear Noise, Medicine, Navigate
CON: Animal Handling, Consume Alcohol, Hunt
DEX: Open Locks, Sleight of Hand, Stealth
CHA: Blather, Etiquette, Permform

Characteristic: Each career can rearrange their starting characteristics (rolled in order) by taking the highestt roll and switching with the Characteristic associated with the career. For example: an Initiate with STR 10, INT 7, WIS 15, DEX 17, CON 10, CHA 8 can switch out their DEX and CHA scores so that the characteristics look like this: STR 10, INT 7, WIS 15, DEX 8, CON 10, CHA 17
Once a character reaches 1st level and chooses a class, these characteristics may be further adjusted according to the rules in Basic D&D.

Each PC would fight as a 0-level human with d4 hit points. 1st-level would be attained after one adventure.

Saintly Saturday: St. Mammas the Martyr

Today is the Feast of St. Mammas the Martyr. He was from Gangra of Paphlagonia, which is the north-central part of modern-day Turkey. His parents (Sts. Theodotus and Rufina) were both Christian and thrown in jail during the third century persecutions. His mother was pregnant and gave birth in prison just prior to her martyrdom. Having survived this ordeal, St. Mamas was adopted by a rich Christian widow by the name of Ammia. Therefore, he grew up in the faith.

He was arrested at the age of 15 and after being tortured was rescued by an angel and sent to the wilderness. There, he built a church and attracted many wild animals as his companions. When his whereabouts were discovered, soldiers were sent to arrest him. Knowing his martyrdom was soon at hand, he voluntarily showed up at the gates of Caesaria with a lion that had been his constant companion in the wilderness.

He was tortured and eventually mortally wounded by a trident.

Note how this icon depicts St. Mammas
holding a lamb while riding the lion,
which calls to mind this passage from Isaiah: 

The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, 

and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, 

and the calf and the lion and the fatling together,

and a little child shall lead them (11:6)

St. Mammas is a reminder that despite the popular depiction of environmental issues as outside the purview of Christianity and of nature-oriented classes as essentially pagan, one of the core missions of the Church is the sanctification of all creation. Therefore, classes like the Druid need not be understood as the pagan counterpart to the Christian cleric. Indeed, (as much as I personally don’t like the class), it makes more sense to me to have the Druid class operate under the umbrella of a fantasy version of Christianity. Arcane magic is a more natural fit for depicting the pagan counterpart of the divine magic of the Church.

It also serves as a reminder that even this can be re-skinned in Christian clothing:

Beast Master

Requirements: None
Prime Requisite: STR and WIS
Hit Dice: 1d6
Maximum Level: 14
Beast Masters are those gifted with a special relationship with animals. They can Speak With Animals at will, are able to identify flora and fauna on a 1-3 on a d6, have a +2 to all reaction rolls with normal animals, may take animals as henchman and have a special animal companion. This companion is an intelligent and loyal creature that always has 1/2 the HD of the beast master, can always understand the beast master and provides a +1 to all saving throws to the beast master as long as it is within 30 ft. Should the animal companion ever be killed, the beast master immediately loses a number of hit points equal to that of the companion and it cannot be replaced until the beast master gains a level.

Beast Masters fight and save as fighters, may wear chain or lighter armor may use any weapon except for two-handed melee weapons and can cast spells as a Druid of 5 levels lower.

Level…XP Needed
1…0
2…2050
3…4100
4…8200
5…16,400
6…32,800
7…65,000
8…130,000
9…250,000
10…370,000
11…490,000
12…610,000
13…730,000
14…850,000

SF + SWL Mash-Up Part 4

Classes

For those who have been following this series of posts, it is possible to intuit that there will be only three classes: Cleric, Fighter, and Magic-user. For the purposes of making this feel more like a sci-fi RPG, these three classes will be re-skinned and re-named:

Warrior

Adventurers from battlefields from across the galaxy both primitive and technological.

Hit Points: 7hp at 1st lvl, 14 at 2nd lvl and 21 at 3rd lvl.
Basic Action Bonus (BAB): +7 at 1st level, +8 at 2nd level and +9 at 3rd level.
Equipment: Warriors start with any melee weapon and any gun as well as one type of armor and one type of shield.
Special Abilities: Warriors get one attack per level each round.

Crusader

Crusaders are men and women who use their faith to beat back the creatures of the Outer Darkness that now blight the space lanes.

Hit Points: 6hp at 1st lvl, 12hpt at 2nd lvl, 18hp at 3rd lvl
Basic Action Bonus (BAB): +6, +7 at 3rd lvl
Equipment: Crusaders begin the game with either a sonic sword or a sonic pistol as well as one type of armor and one type of shield.
Special Abilities:

Banish: Crusaders have the ability to banish creatures from the Outer Darkness, causing them to flee. When attempting to banish, make an action roll. On a success, all creatures of the targeted type are banished and will flee for 3d6 rounds, or will cower helplessly if they can’t flee. On a critical success, the targeted creatures are destroyed.

Starting at 2nd level, Crusaders may choose one of the following abilities to use on an adventure and may change their choice between adventures:

Cure Wounds: Touch a target and make an action roll. On a success, the target heals 1d6+1 hp.

Detect Evil: Spend 10 minutes in prayer or meditation. For 60 minutes, the Crusader can detect evil creatures, enchantments, intentions, thoughts, or auras at a range of 120 feet.

Spiritual Protection: Spend 10 minutes in prayer or meditation. For the next 2 hours the Crusader has an additional Defense of -2 against all attacks from evil creatures.

At 3rd level, Crusaders may choose two of these abilities.

Mind Mage

Enigmatic students of the arcane who have developed mental powers.

Hit Points: 5 at 1st lvl, 10 at 2nd lvl, and 15 at 3rd lvl
Base Action Bonus: +5
Equipment: Mind Mages begin the game with a laser sword or a laser pistol as well as one type of shield.
Special Abilities:

Mental Powers: Mind Mages are trained in mental powers. At 1st level, a Mind Mage chooses one power off of List A. At 2nd level a Mind Mage chooses a second power off of List A. At 3rd level a Mind Mage chooses a third power from List A and one power from List B. All powers require a successful action roll to use immediately or 10 minutes of careful mental preparation without an action roll.

List A

Allure
Range: 20’ area per level Duration: Instantaneous
When used, all intelligent creatures within range will have a friendly disposition to the Mind Mage.

Metamorphosis
Range: self Duration: 1 hour
The Mind Mage can change their appearance. This change is largely cosmetic, seeming to be up to 1 foot taller or shorter, fatter or thinner; however, the Mind Mage must still look humanoid.

Mental Blast
Range: Line of Sight Duration: Instantaneous
The Mind Mage does 1d6+1 damage. The target gets no defense except for anything that helps against mental attacks. The Mind Mage does not suffer any range penalties.

Screen
Range: Self Duration: 20 minutes
The Mind Mage has an additional -4 Defense vs. ranged attacks and -2 Defense vs. melee attacks.

Telekinesis
Range: 10’ per level Duration: Instantaneous
The Mind Mage may move a 1 pound object 1 foot per level. This may also be used as an attack. On a successful action roll, the target loses their next action.

List B

Chameleon
Range: self Duration: Until removed or an attack is made
The Mind Mage blends into the background and cannot be seen. The Mind Mage cannot be attacked unless an approximate location is known, and then all attacks are made at -4. If the Mind Mage makes an attack, the chameleon effect is ended. Otherwise it lasts until removed by the Mind Mage.

Levitate
Range: self Duration: 1 hour + 10 mins per level
The Mind Mage can move vertically up to 20 feet per round.

Panic
Range: 60’ Duration: 3d6 rounds
All creatures of the targeted type within range are panicked and will flee for the duration, or will cower helplessly if they can’t flee. Creatures of the Outer Darkness are immune to this effect.

Saintly Saturday: The Holy Schemamonk Silvanus of the Kiev Caves

Today is the feast of the Holy Schemamonk Silvanus of the Kiev Caves. He was an ascetic in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The monastery of the Kiev Caves (also known as Kiev Pecharsk Lavra) was founded in the eleventh century and today looks like this:

Anyone itching to make a mega-dungeon with the classic
trope of an abandoned monastery with caves beneath?

Photo by Falin - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

A Schemamonk is one who takes on the Great Schema, which is a type of extreme ascetic monasticism. They wear a special vestment which looks like this:

Don't you just  want this guy in your campaign world?

Orthodox Christian nuns with the Great Schema

Interestingly, there is an example of a miracle performed through St. Silvans that looks an awful lot like a Hold Person spell. There was a group of robbers that had come to the monastery to do mischief. St. Silvans saw them sneaking through the garden and through his prayers they were held fast and unable to move. Only after they repented did the monk set them free. I see this as further evidence that the original Cleric Spell List was mostly inspired by Christian miracles.

***
For those interested, here is the monk class re-imagined as a Western, Christian analog class for B/X and Labyrinth Lord. I use this as a class available to players in my Lost Colonies campaign.

Red Monk

Prime Requisite: STR, WIS, DEX and CON
Hit Dice: 1d6
Maximum Level: 14
Class Damage Die: d6 (For those who use it)
Requirements: Must be Lawful

In Wilderness areas at the edge of Istenite Civilization is a militant order of monastics that is popularly known as the Red Monks, due to their use of a red wolf hook in their heraldry as well as their reddish-brown robes. Through ascetic practices of prayer and fasting, red monks seek to hone their bodies into living weapons to fight against evil in order to make The Wilderness safe for Civilization.

Red Monks fight and save as Fighters. The are limited to leather armor or lighter as well as shields. [For those who don’t use the class damage die, they may use crossbows, hand axes, polearms, spears, swords and staff.]

In addition, they have the following abilities:

• At 1st level: A Red Monk is at +1 AC while able to freely move and wearing leather armor or lighter and are trained in Unarmed Fighting. They may use a 1d2-1/1d2-1/1d4-1 attack routine when not using a weapon.
• At 2nd level: Red Monks are at +1 AC and +1 Saves vs. Chaotic creatures
• At 3rd level: A Red Monk’s Unarmed attack routine increases to 1d3-1/1d3-1/1d6-1.
• At 4th level: A Red Monk becomes immune to all forms of fear, including magical fear.
• At 5th level: A Red Monk’s Unarmed attack routine increases to 1d3-1/1d3-1/1d8-1.
• At 6th level: A Red Monk becomes immune to all forms of disease, including magical diseases.
• At 7th level: A Red Monk is at +2 AC while able to freely move and wearing leather armor or lighter. A Red Monk’s Unarmed attack routine increases to 1d4-1/1d4-1/1d8-1.
• At 8th level: A Red Monk becomes immune to all poisons, including magical poisons.
• At 9th level: A Red Monk’s Unarmed attack routine increases to 1d4-1/1d4-1/1d10-1.
• At 13th level: A Red Monk is at +3 AC while able to freely move and wearing leather armor or lighter

Red monks must have at least 13 in all prime requisites in order to get the +5% to experience. They must also have a STR and WIS of 16 to get the +10% bonus.

Reaching 9th Level: A Red Monk may build a fortified church.

0 XP ..... Level 1
2,450 ..... Level 2
4,900 ..... Level 3
9,800 ..... Level 4
19,600 .... Level 5
39,200 .... Level 6
80,000 .... Level 7
160,000 .... Level 8
280,000 .... Level 9
400,000 .... Level 10
520,000 .... Level 11
640,000 .... Level 12
760,000 .... Level 13
880,000 .... Level 14

Meditating on 5e: LBBs + LBBs

One of the things I really like about 5e is the whole concept of Backgrounds. It immediately adds flavor to a character and gives a good Referee hooks for adventures. In a way, it reminds me a lot of one of my favorite mini-games of all time: the character creation in Classic Traveller. There is an assumption that your character comes from somewhere and that background defines who you are and what you can do. It also implies the kinds of connections your character has and what influence those connections have.

Another reason I like the Background system of 5e is that it mitigates the need for the Rogue/Thief class. Since various backgrounds grant characters skills that normally are filled by the thief, the class has become redundant. This got me thinking about what other classes might be made redundant and I came to an interesting conclusion: it is possible to get rid of all of the classes except for the original three and express them all with Backgrounds.

This, of course, necessitates doing something with the 5e skill system, which I have said before is not something that is necessary to interpret as a pure skill system. I propose that these “skills” are actually broad Areas Of Expertise (AOE). Rather than telling players what their character can’t do (as I would argue a traditional skill system does, even the Thief skills from early editions of D&D), these suggest to players what their characters can do.

Here is the difference: a skill system defines what each skill is and then tells players when they can’t do something (when they fail a roll or fail to have the proper skill). An AOE, as I envision it, is a means for a player to argue that their character should succeed at a particular task.

For example: a character with Survival finds himself on a ship needing to lash down the sails in preparation for a storm. The player can then come up with some story from their character’s previous life that would justify saying Survival allows his character to succeed:

There was this time during a bad rainstorm that Bessie got caught in a gulley underneath a fallen tree branch. I’m gonna use the same knots that we used to pull that branch up to lash down the sails.

If the story or the reasoning is sound, no dice need to be rolled and yet another layer is added to the history of the character.

I am thinking of giving every character four AOEs: two based on their character class and two based on their backgrounds. This allows me to break up the skills of 5e into three categories: Class Skills, Non-Class Skills and Tool Skills.

Each class would have four skills that are not available to the other two classes:

• Cleric: Insight, Medicine, Persuasion, Religion
• Fighter: Athletics, Animal Handling, Intimidation, Perception
• Magic-user: Arcana, History, Investigation, Nature

This leaves six skills and nine tool skills that are only available through a background. Thus, it would make sense to have nine backgrounds that would allow a character access to two Non-Class Skills and one Tool Skill as well as one extra Class Skill. I named these nine Backgrounds after various classes that have popped up in D&D throughout the years:

• Assassin: Poison (Tool Skill), Deception & Stealth (Non-Class Skills), Investigation (Class Skill)
• Barbarian: Gaming (Tool Skill), Performance & Survival (Non-Class Skills), Insight (Class Skill)
• Bard: Instrument (Tool Skill), Acrobatics & Performance (Non-Class Skills), History (Class Skill)
• Druid: Herbalism (Tool Skill), Deception & Sleight of Hand (Non-Class Skills), Animal Handling (Class Skill)
• Illusionist: Forgery (Tool Skill), Acrobatics & Deception (Non-Class Skills), Persuasion (Class Skill)
• Monk: Navigation (Tool Skill), Acrobatics & Sleight of Hand (Non-Class Skills), Athletics (Class Skill)
• Paladin: Artisan (Tool Skill), Performance & Survival (Non-Class Skills), Religion (Class Skill)
• Ranger: Disguise (Tool Skill), Stealth & Survival (Non-Class Skills), Nature (Class Skill)
• Thief: Thieves’ Tools (Tool Skill), Stealth & Sleight of Hand (Non-Class Skills), Intimidation (Class Skill)

Note: This leaves three skills that are class specific: Medicine (Cleric), Perception (Fighter) and Arcana (Magic-user).

Also note: All of these categories are intended to be very broad, and thus while some AOEs don’t seem to fit, they can easily be explained by moving slightly beyond the old D&D class title. For example: Deception and Sleight of Hand don’t seem to go with Druid very well; however, if you understand the Druid to be akin to a faith-healer, hedge-mage or veterinarian these things begin to make sense. Deception can be useful when someone who needs to hear good news in a time of disease and epidemic. Sleight of Hand can be used to describe a surgeon’s hands as well as a pick-pocket’s.

To round things off, each background would come with it a type of contact that a character could reach out to in times of need.

If one wanted to go full-on Classic Traveller, it would be a simple matter to create a table to randomize both the Background (a d10 where a ‘0’ represents Player/Referee choice) as well as the skills. A d6 can be used to determine two skills at once with the following pattern where A, B, C and D represent the four skills associated with a Class or a Background:

1: A + B
2: A + C
3: A + D
4: B + C
5: B + D
6: C + D

This would result in some really weird combinations that would force players to be creative, so I would love to use it myself, but I expect most players would prefer to just choose.

Killer Wabbits!

Yet of those that chew the cud or have the hoof cloven you shall not eat these: The camel, the hare, and the rock badger, because they chew the cud but do not part the hoof, are unclean for you. — Deuteronomy 14:7

Recently, this blog post about killer medieval rabbits was pointed out to me and Gamer ADD immediately kicked in. I wanted a PC class for this ASAP:

When I did a little on-line research, I found out there is, in fact, a 5e character race called Rabbitfolk. Unfortunately, they look like they just walked out of Wonderland (art by Tony DiTerlizzi):

All he is missing is a watch

I am after a race that looks like a humanoid version of General Woundwort from Watership Down:

As such, I decided to start from scratch and came up with the following race-as-class for Labyrinth Lord:

Hyrax

Requirements: CON 9
Prime Requisite: STR
Hit Dice: d6
Maximum Level: 14

Hyraxes* are a humanoid race that resemble man-sized, bipedal rabbits. Fierce warriors, xenophobic and highly territorial, they guard their wilderness domains with a level of violence most humans find shocking. Though their numbers are small, there are some hyraxes that do see value in cooperating with other races; however, they often find themselves ostracized from their own community and forced to become adventurers. This is the most common background of a hyrax PC.

Hyraxes are osteoderms, having a layer of bony scales beneath their thick hides. As a consequence, their base AC is 5 and any damage die from a non-magical attack is reduced by 1 (attacks from creatures with 5HD or more are considered to be magical for this purpose). This protection increases at higher levels. At 7th level their base AC is 3 and damage dice are reduced by 2. At 13th level their base AC is 1 and damage dice are reduced by 3. These bonuses may stack with magic and magic items (such as a Ring of Protection), but not armor (even magical armor). As a consequence, hyraxes never wear armor.

The base move for a Hyrax is 90’; however, they have the ability to jump 10’ either vertically or horizontally.

As protectors of their wilderness domains, hyraxes are excellent at identifying plants and animals on a roll of 1-3 on a d6. They also get a +2 to all reaction rolls with normal animals. In addition, they may take animals as henchmen.

Hyraxes fight and save as fighters, can use any weapon and may use shields (though some might find doing so a sign of cowardice). They speak their own dialect of Common.

Level…XP Requirement
1…0
2…2600
3…5200
4…10,400
5…20,800
6…41,600
7…85,000
8…170,000
9…390,000
10…510,000
11…630,000
12…750,000
13…870,000
14…990,000

*I realize that a hyrax is a real animal that is more closely related to the elephant than a rabbit, but not only does the name sound cool, but it is sometimes used in Scripture to mean coney.

Sorcerer Class for BX/LL

This is a class I created for BX/LL using the Custom Class rules from the ACKS Player’s Companion (which is one of my top five OSR purchases ever). I don’t have any intention of using it in any of my campaigns, although I do like the idea of the class. Rather, this was created in order to give me a reference point for re-imagining Vancian magic and the mechanics behind a BX/LL magic-user, which will be a later post. The Sorcerer works more as a utility spell caster than a combat spell caster.

Sorcerer

Requirements: None
Prime Requisite: CHA
Hit Dice: 1d4
Max Level: 14
Armor Allowed: any; no shields
Weapons Allowed: bows, crossbows, daggers, pole arms, quarterstaff

Sorcerers are natural spell casters who do not memorize spells in the way that magic-users do. Rather, they have a limited number of spells that they can cast with rituals. These rituals take 1 turn and may be used at various intervals depending upon the level of the spell:

• 1st: at will
• 2nd: 1/hour
• 3rd: once per 8 hours
• 4th: 1/day
• 5th: 1/week
• 6th: 1/month

Sorcerers know only a limited number of spells, as shown on the following table:

Level…Spells Known per Spell Level
1st…1
2nd…3
3rd…3…1
4th…4…2
5th…4…2…1
6th…4…3…2
7th…4…3…2…1
8th…4…4…2…2
9th…4…4…2…2…1
10th…4…4…3…2…2
11th…4…4…3…2…2…1
12th…4…4…4…3…2…1
13th…4…4…4…3…3…2
14th…5…4…4…4…3…2

These spells may be chosen by the player, but once chosen they cannot be changed.

Level Progression
1…0
2…1200
3…2400
4…4800
5…9600
6…19,200
7…40,000
8…80,000
9…180,000
10…280,000
11…380,000
12…480,000
13…580,000
14…680,000

Sorcerers fight and save as Thieves.