I've Got Your Sword-Wielding Wizards Right Here!

Idea for a magic system:

Ingredients:

1. Enough non-magic-using classes that you think the campaign will be interesting. How many counts as interesting obviously depends on you and your players.
2. A spell list.

Instructions:

Only non-magic-using classes are available. When stocking treasure, increase the chances of magic scrolls being found by at least 2, maybe more, depending on just how much magic you want the PCs to have access to.

When characters find magic scrolls, they can choose to read them. If they read them, the magic spells leap from the scrolls into their heads (erasing the scroll). They now know the spell and can cast it, as with standard Vancian magic. Casting a spell memorized in this way erases the spell from memory, as with standard Vancian magic. There is a 1/6 chance that such spell scrolls are labeled so that characters can determine what the spell is before reading and memorizing the scroll. 

The number of spells that can be held in memory at one time is limited by class level. The simplest way to do this is to have the number of spells memorized be equal to or less than the class level.

Whenever the character levels up while having one or more spells memorized there is a chance (a Wisdom check, or # of currently memorized spells/20, say) that one of the memorized spells (select randomly) will "stick" and the character will be able to cast the spell indefinitely. The simplest way is to allow each "permanently memorized" spell to be cast once a day.

Ways to make this more complicated:

• Labeled scrolls may be mis-labeled
• Stipulate that spells of spell level higher than class level may not be memorized
• Stipulate that total spell LEVELS memorized must be equal to or less than class level
• Bolt on some sort of damage or sanity mechanic, or some other consequence, if memorizing more spells or spell levels than is allowed is attempted; if spell levels rather than spells are being counted, this means that memorizing an unknown spell is always a risk
• Alternately, stipulate that the only way to read a spell (and figure out what it is) without memorizing it is to read it while already having memorized the maximum number of spells currently allowed to be memorized
• Introduce costs to casting a spell, such as hit points or attribute points, which replenish at some rate
• Stipulate that how often a permanently acquired spell can be used depends on class level and spell level ratio. For example:
• A spell that is 4 or more spell levels below the character's class level is an at-will spell
• A spell that is 2 or 3 spell levels below the character's class level can be cast 3 times a day
• A spell that is within 1 spell level of the character's class level can be cast once a day
• A spell that is 2 or 3 spell levels above the character's class level can be cast 3 times a week
• A spell that is 4 or more spell levels above the character's class level can be cast once a week
• If using a system like this to determine how often a permanent spell can be cast, choose between having the frequency with which a particular acquired spell can be cast either always stay the same as it was when first acquired or increase as the character levels up
• Bring in a second spell list. The first list is for the spells that can be found. The second list is rolled on to determine permanently acquired spells. Arcane spells could be found, but Divine spells acquired, both Arcane and Divine spells could be found, but psionic powers are acquired, etc.

Fey Alignment

One more way I'm trying to make Fey Elves alien is by having the Fey, including any Elven characters, use a different alignment system. This alignment system straddles the line between D&D and AD&D conceptions of alignment: I imagine both Seelie and Unseelie courts, for example, though I haven't figured out how to flesh that out yet, besides members of different alignments generally avoiding or being somewhat antagonistic towards each other; on the other hand, these alignments definitely serve as AD&D-style roleplaying aids. What do you think?
_________________________________________________________________________________

Elves, and indeed all Fey, are not aligned along the Law-Chaos axis. They have little to do with metaphysical concepts of Order or the progress of Man’s civilization and they, being inherently of Nature, cannot engage in unnatural Necromancy or Summoning. Indeed, the Elves continue to hold the entire Fey outlook and are aligned along the Seelie-Unseelie and Trooping-Solitary axes.

Seelie Fey, including Elves, are lighthearted, fickle pranksters and change their attitudes towards other characters easily, neither holding grudges nor gratitude for long. They are generally friendly when first meeting someone and as prone to performing acts of service for no reason as to pranks and practical jokes. The Unseelie Fey, again including Elves, are generally aloof if not unfriendly to new acquaintances or strangers and not prone to spontaneous pranks or services. They hold both grudges and gratitude for a long time, if not forever.

Whether Seelie or Unseelie, Elves, as Fey, should always be roleplayed with no appreciation for Man’s ideas of proportion, whether dealing with pranks, random kindnesses, thanks or revenge. Both beneficial and malicious actions should be more than a Man would find appropriate or worth the trouble.

All Elves that join mortal parties are Solitary. Elves that travel in all-Fey parties or who settle down in forests where they establish a Fastness are Trooping. Solitary Elves must leave their parties and wonder alone for a month in order to level up. Trooping Elves must not leave their troop for any reason and most interaction with mortals must be corporate instead of individually building relationships with mortals.

Roleplaying Fey Elves

I really like the Fey Elf in the excellent Theorems and Thaumaturgy, and wanted to give players of Fey Elves a way to play them that makes them even more alien and folklore-ish. Here's some of my crack at that:
_____________________________________________________________________________________

As Mankind settles the wilderness and becomes more numerous, it is becoming harder and harder for the Immortal Fey. Mankind destroys their meeting-places and homes, fences and plows the meadows and clears the forests; Man can even kill the Fey with iron and steel weapons. It is slowly becoming clear to the Fey that they will have to adapt in order to survive.

Elves are one way in which some Fey are experimenting with adapting; the Fey have always been able to shape and change their own natures and Elves are Fey who have changed their natures to resemble those of mortal Men. Much that is typical of the Fey is lost in this transformation – perfect memories of the millenia past become faint and the ephemeral form is traded for solid flesh and a connection to the material world – yet much is retained. Elves are immune to mind-affecting spells such as Sleep and Charm as well as magical paralyzation and remain familiar enough with Faerie to identify Faerie objects such as portals or writing.

Elves have trouble grasping mortal conventions and different Elves have more or less trouble with different concepts that Men and Dwarves take for granted. Roll 1d4+1 times to determine mortal concepts an Elf is unable to grasp.

1. Distinguishing between actions under self-control as opposed to those not under control (eg. charmed or coerced)
2. Any belief or concern with what happens after death (including nothing)
3. The idea of children, parents, caring for children and legal minority
4. Differentiation between genders or sexes
5. The mortal understanding of magic as special, not-normal or not-natural
6. Daily routines such as sleeping, waking, eating based on time of day
7. The existence of status and rank among mortals (does recognize Fey courts and hierarchy
8. Religion
9. Property
10. Incongruence between thought, speech and actions

Each time an Elf levels up, roll 3d6. If the roll meets or is below the Elf's level + any Wisdom modifier then the Elf has mastered one of the conventions the Elf previously could not grasp (player's choice or randomly select).

Elves have trouble fitting in to Men’s society and are attracted to adventurers who are themselves on the fringes of society. Adventuring parties who accept an Elf into their ranks will need to supervise the Elf during interactions with Mankind, as Elves are prone to faux pas ranging from the awkward to the capitally illegal. As Elves gain more experience, they will become more accustomed to Man’s ways and will require less guidance, eventually becoming able to function, more or less, on their own among mortals. Elves are often worth the inconvenience and worry to adventuring parties, offering familiarity with Faerie and a number of abilities beyond the ken of mortals along with the headaches of associating with them.

That said, players of Elves should not feel that they must play their characters as totally unable to interact with society. Elves are still Fey and the Fey are able to interact with Man in ways generally understandable by Men; that is, Men generally understand what the Fey are doing, whether they understand their motivation or not. Players of Elves should not feel constrained to make every visit to town end with the party narrowly escaping a lynch mob; neither should they play Elves as normal mortal Men.

For example, an Elf that does not understand the idea of property is just as likely to give away valuable “possessions” as to “steal;” an Elf might begin a relationship with a store-owner by giving a fortune in gold to him when the Elf sees other characters giving the store-owner gold to buy items, expecting nothing in return. During another visit, the Elf might take items the Elf needs without paying for them, but the shop-owner will likely not mind, or will at least not make a fuss, not wanting to anger a Fey creature over an irregular situation that is, after all, at least currently resulting in a net profit. When fellow party members are present to explain and smooth things over (or cover the costs of the Elf’s actions, temporarily or permanently), these kinds of irregular relationships are even more easily established.

"What happens if I get too close to that castle?"

The following is something I wrote up a while ago, inspired by OD&D's rules for castle inhabitants and by Arthurian legend. It only applies to castles run by Chaotic Fighters and even this could be developed a bit more. Maybe you want to write up a table for Lawful Magic-Users or Chaotic Clerics?

 

Unless the party can show evidence they are allied with his allies or are too powerful to risk attacking, or can appeal to his self-interest, a Chaotic lord will exact a heavy toll (which may be more than the party has; this should probably vary by campaign, but 500-1000 gp per level sounds about right in my silver standard game) and if they will not (or cannot) pay will attack with the aim to capture the party and hold them for ransom in the lord’s dungeon (forces should probably be determined during setting creation). The lord will send a messenger to one character (NPC or other, un-captured PC) per captured party member, designated by each party member, asking for a ransom (the original toll multiplied by 2d4). The party will be stripped of all possessions (which will only be returned if 150% of the normal ransom amount is paid), separated from each other 75% of the time and imprisoned in poor conditions. Every month each PC must roll under their Con score or lose a point of Con; any character that loses all Con points dies. Once freed, Con damage is healed at a rate of 1d4 per week of rest in good conditions. If the party is captured:

1. 01-50: imprisons them for 2d4 months and then sells them to another chaotic party unless ransom is raised first
2. 51-71: imprisons them indefinitely until a ransom is paid.
3. 71-85: imprisons indefinitely, but will allow one PC to leave to raise ransom for the rest if the party suggests it
4. 86-90: imprisons for ransom indefinitely but will allow all the party, except for one hostage, to leave to raise ransom, if they suggest this
5. 91-95: after first ransom is paid, breaks word and holds for second ransom - reroll to determine new terms (which are not told to players)
6. 96-00: waits until ransom is paid and then sells the party to another chaotic party.

Other Chaotic party:

1. Magic-User, to be used for experiments
2. Cult, for sacrifice
3. Chaotic military force, to serve as slave-soldiers
4. Slave-master, to be used as gladiators
5. Slave-driver of engineering project as manual labor - roll under Con each week or lose one Con until freed or Con hits 0 and PC dies
6. Slave-trader who takes them to a city with a slave-market and sells each slave separately, splitting the party (roll 1d6)
1. Fighters as (1-3) gladiators, (4-5) soldiers, (6) manual labor
2. Thieves as (1-3) domestics, (4-5) manual labor, (6) gladiators
3. Wizards as (1-3) tutors, (4-5) domestics, (6) manual labor
4. Clerics as (1-3) tutors, (4-5) scribes, (6) domestics

Each class has a chance to be bought and freed by some friendly party, increased by membership in organizations like thieves guilds, magic academies, churches, etc. This part is especially sketchy and probably setting-dependent.

 

Using this will have a few implications for your game. For one, this could seriously change the direction of a campaign. It's hard to imagine a villain the players will hate more than a Chaotic Lord that messes with their plans, likely kills a few of their characters, separates them from their gold and quite likely goes back on his promises as well. The players will want to kill him dead and, if run correctly, will have to do a lot of work to get there. They very well may scrap the rest of their goals for the sake of revenge.

 

Additionally, a lot of this ransom stuff depends on the PCs having contacts that they can ask to ransom (or rescue; that should definitely be on the table for PCs, but I'd be hesitant to have NPCs rescue the party) them. This means either generating PCs with contacts (like Magic-User masters or church hierarchies), running the game so that PCs form relationships with NPCs that are both able and willing to ransom them, or using a "stable" system where players have multiple PCs that they use for different sessions (or two or three of these options). It won't make a lot of sense if the Chaotic Lord locks them in the dungeon and then asks who he should send the ransom demands to and is met with blank stares because the PCs don't actually know the names of anyone they haven't killed. Unless you want to let them make up contacts. That works too, actually, though I'd prefer the other three options.

 

Thoughts? Suggestions? Improvements? Your own set of tables for other types of castle lords?

Some Clerical Reputation Mechanics

I recently decided to include Clerics in my game (currently that's not the case) and, as part of figuring out how I want to do this, posted a question about creating pantheons on Google+ and got some good responses and also a few links to Alex Shroeder's blog where he outlines how he's been running deities and Clerics in his games. I found his post about reputation especially interesting. I've reworked it a little bit and present it below. Along with tracking the alignment of my players, I'm hoping to expand this system and to use it not only for Cleric PCs' religious standing but for all PCs' standings with different factions or NPCs.

Feedback appreciated.
__________________________________________________________________

Clerics begin play with a reputation rating of 1 with their deity. At the end of each session in which a Cleric has performed an act on the following table, the Cleric’s player rolls the die that corresponds to the most significant act of the Cleric that day; if the rolled result is higher than the Cleric’s current reputation score, the Cleric’s reputation score increases by one.

d4: Fulfilled intermediate tenet of faith or service related to single believer
d6: Fulfilled major tenet of faith, service related to single local congregation or saved life or body of single believer
d8: Related to single order or sect, saved lives or bodies of single local congregation
d10: Related to whole religion or a servant of the god, saved lives or bodies of entire order or sect
d12: Related to the god, saved the lives or bodies of whole religion

Losing reputation is easier and more drastic than gaining reputation. At the end of a session in which a Cleric has blatantly violated a tenet of the Cleric’s faith or done an active disservice related to the Cleric's faith, the Cleric’s player rolls the die that corresponds to the act of the highest magnitude of the Cleric’s that day. The number rolled on the die is subtracted from the Cleric’s reputation score; in this way, negative reputations are possible. 

If the Cleric has performed both reputable and disreputable acts within a single session, increase the disreputable die size by two and compare the two dice; subtract the smaller die’s sides from the larger die’s sides and roll a die with the number of sides that results, applying the result towards or against the reputation in correspondence to whether the larger die was reputable or disreputable.

For example, Kolath the Cleric of Zeus, within a single session, stole some gold from a member of the congregation of the local temple of Zeus and also helped the rest of the party fend off an army of goblins intent on killing the entire local town. The theft from the fellow follower of Zeus corresponds to the d4 and saving the town, which includes the local congregation of Zeus, corresponds to the d8. Adding two to the four sides of the d4 and subtracting the resulting six from eight leaves a d2 for Kolath's player to roll to see whether Kolath's reputation rises with Zeus or not. Unless Kolath's reputation with Zeus is already lower than 2, Zeus is so non-plussed with Kolath's theft that even saving an entire congregation is not enough to impress Zeus.

Reputation with one's deity is important because Third through Seventh Level Cleric Spells are granted to Clerics by higher powers. In order for spells of a certain level to be granted to a Cleric, the Cleric must both be of sufficient level to have spell slots of that level (like the "normal," as-written Cleric in most systems) and must have a reputation rating with the higher power of at least the same level as the spell.

Magic-User Master Spell Book Contents

Independent Magic-Users apprentice with a master who is unaffiliated with any of the large magical organizations. Most of the mechanics for such Magic-Users are in an earlier post, but this post deals with important information about the master that was not included in the previous post: level, intelligence and the contents of the master's spell book.

Master's Intelligence: 2d4+10 (12-18)

Master's Level: 2d8+4 (6-20)

Spell Book Contents

First Level Spells:

Determine spell quota by dividing INT by two (round up). This is the number of first level spells the Master's spell book will contain.

Automatically include Read Magic. Count Read Magic as the first spell towards reaching the quota (unless it is a zero-level spell in your system).

If your first level spells are divided into Offensive, Defensive and Miscellaneous spells, roll on each table in turn to select spells until the number of spells is met. Re-roll spells that are selected more than once.

If they are not divided into separate lists, roll to select spells until you have reached the quota. Re-roll spells that are selected more than once.

Second Level Spells and Higher:

Subtract one from the spell quota of the previous spell level and roll on spell list until quota is met, re-rolling spells that are selected more than once. Repeat for each spell level until the maximum spell level for the Master's level is reached or quota is lowered to zero.

Example 1:

For this first example, we'll use the LotFP (Deluxe) spell lists and Magic-User class. Note that LotFP doesn't divide first level spells into three separate lists of offensive, defensive and miscellaneous spells. Also, note that while this master is able to cast up to ninth level spells, she's only actually acquired spells up to sixth level. I'm rolling a d20 for each of these spell lists, since each of the LotFP spell lists I'm rolling on have 20 spells (higher-level spell lists have less).

Master's Intelligence: [1,1] 12

Master's Level: [6,7] 17

Quota: (12 divided by two) 6

Maximum Spell Level: 9th (but we're not going to get there)

First Level Spells:

Read Magic (automatic)

[17] Sleep

[18] Spider Climb

[20] Ventriloquism

[6] Floating Disc

[4] Enlarge

Second Level Spells:

[9] Invisibility

[1] Audible Glamor

[12] Locate Object

[3] Continual Light

[15] Phantasmal Force

Third Level Spells:

[19] Suggestion

[12] Hold Person

[11] Haste

[20] Water Breathing

Fourth Level Spells:

[1] Charm Monster

[19] Wall of Ice

[15] Protection from Normal Weapons

Fifth Level Spells:

[3] Chaos

[16] Telekinesis

Sixth Level Spell:

[11] Legend Lore

Example 2:

For this second example, we'll use John's excellent Vancian spell lists, but only roll up the contents of the spell book through spell level two, since levels 3-6 work the same as level two. Note that John's spell lists count The Arcane Cypher (read magic) as a zero level spell and split the 30 first level spells into ten offensive, ten defensive and ten miscellaneous spells (so two rolls of "1" are fine, since they are rolls on different lists).

Zero Level Spell:

The Arcane Cypher (automatic)

First Level Spells (rolling 1d10):

[1] The Charm of Appersonation (Offensive) 

[1] The Apotropaic Circle (Defensive)

[10] Tenser's Floating Disc (Miscellaneous)

[4] The Importunate Insult (Offensive)

[6] The Howling Rune (Defensive)

[3] The Call to the Unseen Servant (Miscellaneous)

Second Level Spells (rolling 1d30):

[15] The Pattern of the Immanent Sublime

[20] The Spell of Barring and Broaching

[22] The Spell of the Imponderous Bounty

[9] Leomund's Escalatory Escape

[5] Hornung's Deleterious Deflector 

Graduates of the Academies of Magic

Today's post is about Magic-Users who attended and graduated from an Academy of Magic. Like yesterday, I'm going to try to save description that isn't related to the mechanical until later; hopefully this will result in a shorter post than yesterday.

A Graduate of one of the Academies of Magic leaves his Alma Mater with a Book of First Level Spells in hand. This book contains all the first level spells that are known to the faculty at the Academy. When sufficient funds are raised, the Magic-User is allowed to buy the Book of Second Level Spells, the Book of Third Level Spells, and so forth; similar to modern university textbooks, these texts are over-priced. They are also basically huge scrolls, so the Magic-User must copy them over into his own spell book in order to be able to memorize them. (The Academies and which spells they have in their spell books are generated using this method.)

Sadly, the Academies of Magic are not solely dedicated to the understanding and use of magic; byzantine politics distract professors and students find it difficult to compete with each other for enough attention and training to fully grasp the principles of magic in a deep, exhaustive way. Because of this relatively more shallow understanding of magic, compared to apprentices of independent Magic-Users, graduates from Academies of Magic might not be able to master a spell upon first casting Read Magic upon it. Each time a graduate tries to learn a new spell, the player must roll at or below the graduate's Intelligence score or the graduate will not be able to master the spell; the graduate may not attempt to learn the spell again until a new level is gained, at which point another Intelligence check is allowed to determine whether the graduate's increased skill, knowledge and understanding have made the spell accessible to the graduate. Note that the graduate will normally roll on every spell in a Book of N Level Spells after buying it. Possession of these texts do not automatically constitute being able to use every spell within; in fact, it's unlikely.

Alumni of an Academy of Magic may pay (100 gp/hour or fraction thereof) to have "office hours" with a professor, who, so far as mechanics are concerned, may be treated as a sage but isn't limited to only serving that function; politics, role-playing, advice-giving and so forth are encouraged. If PCs bring a question or problem, along with new information of some sort, to a professor who specializes in a field related to the question or problem, there is a 1/6 chance that the professor will do the research for free out of gratitude and to encourage the PCs to bring further new information to him.

Each academy specializes in certain types of spells and magic and so graduates from each academy are able to cast certain spells more effectively than others. These will be detailed in future posts about the specific academies.

Each Academy of Magic has an extensive library which is open to all alumni free of cost. Graduates may freely research here, but they must still expend resources as normal when researching spells, since material components are used when figuring out spells. The precise value, and the mechanical benefits, of each academy vary and will be detailed in the future.

Graduates of an Academy of Magic are used to approaching magic in a workmanlike, methodical way that matches better with conducting rituals than the more thorough approach of independent Magic-Users. Still, their less complete understanding of magic keeps them from truly excelling with rituals; like independent Magic-Users, graduates of an Academy of Magic may cast rituals of one third their caster level (with the same component and time costs as well).

Independent Magic-Users

I'm going to spend the next few posts detailing the different affiliations and organizations Magic-Users can be involved with in my campaign (ignoring for the time being that I'm not currently running games).

Today's post is about independent Magic-Users, those Magic-Users who neither attended an Academy of Magic nor belong to the Order of the Green Hand, but, in much the way Gary outlines in the DMG, apprenticed with a Magic-User of at least 6th level and, having completed the apprenticeship, struck out alone to make a life for themselves. Below are the mechanics I've come up with; they necessarily include flavor to explain how they work, but I'm holding off on explaining non-mechanical flavor until another time.

Independent Magic-Users receive individualized attention and their education emphasizes exhaustive comprehension of magic. Especially intelligent independent Magic-Users have a small chance to be directed to a master who can teach them to understand magic well enough that they don't need spell books and instead permanently memorize a smaller number of spells (in the manner of the Order of Trehaen from The Majestic Wilderlands); Magic-Uses with Intelligence 17 have a 1/6 chance and those with Intelligence 18 have a 2/6 chance. Magic-Users who qualify for this are allowed to refuse.

The Magic-User automatically receives a spell book with four spells from the Magic-User's master upon completion of his apprenticeship. To determine whether, and for how long, the master will continue to aide and guide the Magic-User, roll 1d4 and add the Magic-User's Charisma bonus. Any result above zero represents the level after which the master will consider the Magic-User to be completely "on his own," when the master will no longer provide free help in usual circumstances. During each level the master continues to help his apprentice the master will send the Magic-User on a single quest.

Until the master considers the Magic-User to be on his own the master will send randomly selected spells to the Magic-User each time the Magic-User levels up. When the Magic-User gains access to a higher rank of spell slot, the master will send four spells; when the Magic-User levels but doesn't gain access to a higher spell slot, the master will send a single spell. The master will also provide guidance and advice if consulted and has a 75% chance to agree to answer questions in the manner of a sage for free.

Magic-Users who don't require spell books receive as many new spells as they have newly gained the ability to memorize (usually only one). They are allowed to choose from their master's repertoire (which, in all cases, should be determined beforehand; I haven't figured out exactly how yet, but plan to do so and include it in a future post).

All of this ends when the Magic-User passes the level rolled above; though the relationship may still be friendly and close, the Magic-User isn't getting any more free lunches. Rolling a low number, or below zero, should not necessarily be interpreted as having a poor relationship with the master; the master may simply be too busy or think too highly of the talents of the Magic-User to "coddle" him with spells and assistance.

Spells given as gifts to the Magic-User by the master are the only free spells independent Magic-Users receive; they do not automatically gain any spells just by leveling up. To acquire more spells, they must trade for them, research them or obtain them in the course of an adventure.

Because of the intense, high-caliber nature of their study of magic, independent Magic-Users automatically are able to learn any spell which they use Read Magic upon and have an appropriate spell slot for; unlike other Magic-Users, they do not need to roll to check whether they comprehend a new spell when they try to learn it.

In addition, independent Magic-Users are able to attempt to "catch" spells as they cast them, retaining them in their spell slots. Attempting this is optional and success is determined by making a save (versus Spells if you're not using S&W), modified positively by caster level and negatively by spell level. Fumbles occur on a roll of 1 for the top three spell levels.

Independent Magic-Users are, with good reason, a distrustful lot that generally keep to themselves, but they will occasionally interact with each other to trade knowledge. While a Magic-User is a certain level, he will be approached as many times as his level by other Magic-Users seeking to acquire a spell he has (once while first level, three times while third level, nine times while ninth level, and so on). The referee should roll on the lowest die that goes higher than the Magic-User's level (1d4 for first and third level, 1d10 for ninth level, and so on); this determines the level of the NPC Magic-User that approaches the Magic-User.

The PC Magic-User may propose any price in money, spells, magic items and quests for the spell in question. For most prices, the referee should make a reaction roll for the NPC; any neutral or positive result signifies acceptance of the terms. Referees should use judgment and automatically accept exactly fair offers (such as a strict trade of spells of equal level) and automatically reject only the utterly unreasonable and actually impossible offers; NPCs of the same or higher level than the PC will not accept quests. If the NPC refuses an offer, further negotiation is possible: the PC may make 1d4 further offers (which must be better than all previous offers to be considered), rolled on the reaction table as before, before the NPC walks away.

If the PC gives what the referee rules to be a "fair" (not necessarily "exactly fair," but very close) trade to an NPC of lower level the first time an offer is made, a second reaction roll should be made. If a positive reaction is rolled, the NPC has not merely congratulated himself for finding a good deal and moved on, but has noticed and appreciated that the PC made a fair offer and will seek to build a relationship of some kind with the PC. How this is done is left to the referee's option, but might include further offers of trade, sharing important information, offering to pool resources, offering charter membership to any organization the NPC starts, or applying to become a henchman.

If the referee rolls the most negative reaction on this second reaction roll, the NPC perceives the PC's fairness as weakness and pretends to pursue a relationship, as above, with the PC, scheming all the while to destroy the PC and profit thereby. This will, ultimately, result in the entire party's lives being put in danger.

Because of their deep understanding of magic, independent Magic-Users are able to research spells more effectively than other Magic-Users. For spells the referee rules are not too obscure to be discovered in this way, the Magic-User may spend time in libraries of sufficient value and size (probably double the value that gives the highest bonus to regular research in whatever rule-set you're using) researching a particular spell, hoping to piece together the formula for the spell. At the end of the period of research, the Magic-User gets a single percentile roll to have discovered the spell; the chance to have discovered the spell is the number of days spent researching divided by the level of the spell they were researching. For example, if a Magic-User spends 75 days researching a third level spell, the Magic-User will have a 25% chance to have discovered it.

Finally, in my campaigns all spells may be cast as rituals that take ten minutes per spell level to cast and cost the spell level squared multiplied by ten gp in components to cast, but rituals do not need to be memorized and do not take up spell slots (much as in The Majestic Wilderlands). Rituals approach magic without trying to understand why anything works the way it does and so do not come naturally for independent Magic-Users, but they make up for this with the depth of their understanding of magic. Independent Magic-Users may cast rituals of any level up to one third their caster level.

The DMG, Section by Section, Part 15: Character Spells – Spell Acquisition

This next section is super interesting to me, which, along with real life lately, is why I've taken such a long time to write it up. Expect some non-DMG magic posts in the near future.

Day-to-Day Acquisition of Cleric Spells

The big thing about Cleric spells, that I actually don't think I've heard about in ~3 years of following OSR blogs, is that Clerics don't get their spells directly from one source, but from three:

–1st and 2nd level spells are acquired through the Cleric's training
–3rd, 4th and 5th level spells are granted to the Cleric by supernatural servants of the Cleric's deity
–6th and 7th level spells are granted directly to the Cleric by the Cleric's deity

This is very interesting flavor, first of all, especially since the interaction with the supernatural servants is left very open ended and I think it has a lot of room for roleplaying, but the main practical ramifications of this three-tiered system seems to be that Clerics have trouble getting access to high-level spells if they haven't been acting in accordance with the desires and ethos of their deity. Basically, every time they pray for spells above 2nd level they also get chewed out and told to atone for any bad stuff they've done. DMs are supposed to keep track of concrete actions the Cleric has performed that don't line up with what the deity is all about and lay them out whenever the Cleric prays for spells. The Cleric's deity is even stricter than the supernatural servants, but both will give quests to Clerics that are difficult enough that Gary says that the Cleric will be granted the spells necessary to complete the quest. This all applies to Paladins and Rangers, at least when it comes to spells, as well, which strikes me as interesting, since it seems to be saying that Paladins can greatly displease their deities without breaking the terms of their Paladin-hood.

Gary also outlines the hardships involved in Clerics switching deities (the second time they switch deities, they'll just be struck dead).

Acquisition of Magic-User Spells

In AD&D all 1st level Magic-Users are newly "graduated" apprentices of other Magic-Users of at least 6th level. Their master, as a parting present, gives them a spell book with four spells in it: Read Magic and one defensive, one offensive and one miscellaneous spell, randomly chosen by rolling d10s. It seems that AD&D has exactly thirty 1st level spells, but since every Magic-User gets Read Magic and Nystul's Magic Aura and Tenser's Floating Disc are never given to a Magic-User by a master, a roll of 10 on one of these rolls means that the spell is chosen by the player. This is a really nice system, I think, and it's replicated and slightly tweaked in John's awesome document here. (Thanks, John! I'm planning on using your document as the foundation for spells in my games from now on. I wish you had a blog I could link to.)

Gary also hits on the effect of Intelligence on the Magic-User's ability to learn spells. First of all, Intelligence will limit the number of spells of any one level a Magic-User can know. Secondly, with the important exception of the original four spells in the spell book given to him by his master, a Magic-User has a percentage chance to be able to learn a spell that must be rolled when trying to learn a spell; if the Magic-User fails, apparently he will never be able to learn the spell.

Acquisition of Illusionists' Spells

Illusionists differ from Magic-Users in two important ways: Firstly, they don't use Read Magic, but instead use a secret language that all Illusionists know for their spells; Read Magic, or anything of the sort, is not needed. Secondly, they only have 12 1st level spells, which aren't divided into offensive, defensive and miscellaneous categories; the player simply rolls a d12 three times to determine the 1st level Illusionist's starting spells. There is no mention of whether Intelligence affects the ability of an Illusionist to learn spells, but my guess, from the way the section on Illusionists seems to imply that Illusionists work like Magic-Users in every way except for the exceptions listed, that this works the same way for Illusionists as for Magic-Users. My guess is that this is spelled out in the PHB.

Spells Beyond Those At Start

Each time a Magic-User levels up (not when they gain access to a new spell level, which was news to me) he gains a new spell, presumably of the highest spell level available to him. Gary is silent on how to determine which spell this is or what the in-game justification is (I assume that at least some of this is included in the PHB). This means that unless a Magic-User finds spells in another way, the he will always only have a number of spells equal to his level plus four.

Magic-Users, then, will be constantly seeking to find spells in other ways. The first way Gary discusses is getting spells from other Magic-Users. "Superior players will certainly cooperate; thus, spells will in all probability be exchanged between PC magic-users to some extent," Gary says, and advises the DM neither to suggest nor discourage doing this.

PC Magic-Users obtaining spells from NPC Magic-Users, however, is another matter entirely and Gary expects DMs to play the Vancian-style zero-sum game Magic-User culture to the hilt. Gary advises that PCs buying spells from NPC Magic-Users should "pay so dearly for [spells] in money, magic items, and quests that the game is hardly worth the candle." Gary assumes that the PCs will still pay for these new spells, thereby draining the PCs of excess wealth. Henchmen and hireling Magic-Users will offer only slightly better terms: if an employer proposes a trade of spells, the price will be a spell of equal value plus a bonus; if a PC compatriot of the employer proposes the trade, the price is double the value of the spell and a large bonus (from the example, it sounds like sets of three expendable items or a single magic item is a good guideline for the larger bonus). Gary does allow for the previous nature of the relationship between the PC making the request and the henchman/hireling, as well as the personality of the henchman/hireling, to modify the price of trading spells.

Gary points out that this extreme reluctance to share spells on the part of NPCs will make spells found in dungeons or through research extremely valuable to the PCs Magic-Users. He states that, "Magic-users will haunt dusty libraries and peruse musty tomes in the hopes of gleaning but a single incantation to add to their store of magic." I'm unsure whether that is a direct reference to spell research or a separate, flavorful phenomenon that Gary doesn't flesh out; my guess is that it's the former.

One mechanic I wish Gary would have included is how to handle NPCs coming to the PCs for spells; surely every other Magic-User is just as desperate for spells as the PCs, right? So why wouldn't they be coming to the PCs, willing to make unfair trades for the new spells the PCs found in their last dungeon delve? Mechanically, this would even out the zero-sum game so that the PCs don't always get the short end of the stick. This might ruin the constant leeching of money from Magic-User PCs, but it also doesn't strain my suspension of disbelief.

Brainstorming about Dragon PCs

Yesterday's DMG reading got me thinking, so I'm going to take a break from my DMG series for today and throw out some half-formed ideas for your review, specifically about running Dragons as PCs. At some point, I'd like to work them into a playable… something, but that's probably not going to happen soon. Reflections appreciated!

First off, playing a Dragon should be more challenging than playing a conventional, standard race. This should be something that a player chooses because s/he wants to make the game harder, not because s/he wants to make it easier.

Also, while I'd like to eventually figure out how to make any Dragon playable, it seems to me that the Gold Dragon is the most playable, largely because of its Polymorph ability, but because of its alignment (Lawful/Lawful Good in most sources I have access to) and its interest in humanity as well.

I really like Gary's idea to require treasure accumulation and retention, not just age, in order to level.

Motivation: Gary, in the section of the DMG I discussed yesterday, questions why a Dragon would join an adventuring party, given the difficulties involved and Dragons' tendency to be solitary and not interested in interacting with other races. I've got a few ideas about this. The first is that Dragons need treasure to level up and, especially for Lawful/Lawful Good Dragons, what better way for a young, weak Dragon to accumulate wealth than by adventuring? In addition, if we take inspiration from Pellatarrum, one path a young, weak Dragon, just starting out and without any network, might take would be disguising itself as a human and living among them for a while, building up power and a network for later in life. Finally, according to OSRIC, Gold Dragons are naturally interested in man, so it would make sense for a Gold Dragon to live among men for a time, especially since their interest in man dovetails with the other advantages of adventuring.

This is not to say that most NPC Dragons, or even most NPC Gold Dragons should spend a significant amount of time adventuring during their youth; if everyone did it, older Dragons would be more on the lookout for young Dragon adventurers! These reasons, though, I think are sufficient to justify the very occasional Dragon PC.

Dragon PCs should also have to constantly worry about detection by other Dragons. If a Dragon notices the party, there should be some chance of detection, in which case the PC's life would be sought by the NPC Dragon.

The end-game for the Dragon should have to do not so much with the creation of a stronghold (the Dragon should establish multiple lairs without many attendants) but with the creation of the Dragon's personal network and (un)diplomatic dealings with Dragons (favors, territory disputes, etc.). As the Dragon ages, perhaps other PC adventuring parties will catch its attention and it can decide whether to attempt to eradicate them or incorporate them into its network…

Most sources I've looked at have each type of dragon ranging between three different numbers of hit dice (so, 8-10 HD, for expample), as well as having a set number of hit points per hit die, that number being determined by age. Synthesizing these could result in something analogous to levels for Dragons: a Dragon starts out with the lowest number of HD available (so, 8HD for this example), with 1 hit point per die, then moves up to 9 HD, but still 1 hit point per die, then 10 HD, but only one hit point per die, then moves up to 2 hit points per die, but drops back down to 8 HD. This makes growing up as a Dragon less jumpy and more gradual.

The fact that a PC is a Dragon should be witheld from the rest of the party for as long as possible, just as a Dragon would want if adventuring with humans. This would mean staying polymorphed and refraining from using breath weapons. Depending on what class the Dragon masquerades as, the Dragon will have to hide spell-casting or fighting ability. This will add some dramatic fun and also make the Dragon harder to play. In order to facilitate this, it may be helpful to have special classes and character backgrounds that are secrets from other players (lycanthropy, or being hunted by this or that group, or secret political or religious society membership, for example) be somewhat common in the game.

Speaking of magic, Dragons should have access to Dragon magic, powerful spells that are seldom or never shared with humans and which are difficult for them to master when they are exposed to them. These spells should be rare and difficult to find, but well worth it. In addition, Dragons should not have to study spellbooks (though they may certainly pretend to), instead memorizing their spells. Possible models include the Order of the Trehaen in the Majestic Wilderlands and the spell point system at the end of Green Devil Face 4. (I'd lean towards using the Order of the Trehean model, as the GDF model feels more suited to classes for whom magic comes so naturally that it is not studied at all, like my Dryads.)

One troublesome issue is that a Dragon's strength has always been connected to the Dragon's age, and Dragons have considerable lifespans: how can a Dragon keep up with the other members of the party, or even grow/"level up" more than perhaps once during a campaign? There are a few possible ways to address the issue.

One is to have Dragon strength and growth dependent not upon both age and wealth, as Gary suggests, but instead solely upon wealth. Most Dragons take decades or even centuries to acquire enough treasure to grow to the next level, but most Dragons don't adventure, so a PC Dragon will grow more quickly than other Dragons as its hoard grows more quickly than the other Dragons' hoards.

Another possibility is to run decade-long campaigns in which time moves more quickly than in real time. The Dragon PC will slowly age and come into its own as its adventuring companions die and leave their legacy to their heirs. A variant of this option would be to take one's Dragon PC from game to game, though getting referees to allow it, especially at higher levels, might be difficult.

Another possibility is to provide some sort of time-warping mechanism for the Dragon to use. Perhaps whenever growing, the Dragon leaves for an inter-dimensional pocket where its hoard is to sleep, molt and grow and perhaps time passes much more quickly in the inter-dimensional pocket than in the normal game world; while the Dragon sleeps and grows for a few centuries, the Dragon is only absent from the game for no more than a year of game-time.

Finally, if Dragons level as they accumulate their hoards, it becomes important to figure out at what wealth levels they level up. Most OSR games I've referenced don't seem to vary hoard sizes by age, which strikes me as odd; does anyone with access to TSR editions know whether D&D or 1E or 2E varied hoard sizes by age? I know that they started doing that in 3E, because treasure depended upon Challenge Ratings, which varied with age. ACKS also varies treasure with age, so that's likely where I'll start in figuring out how much treasure must be accumulated to "level."

What are your thoughts? Would you allow something like this in your game, and if so, would you have any conditions that accompanied its inclusion? Would you be interested in playing something like this? Am I missing something? How would you improve these rudimentary building blocks for a Dragon PC?

The DMG, Section by Section, Part 8: Character Classes - The Use of Poison by Assassins, Monsters as PCs and Lycanthropy

The Use of Poisons by Assassins

Up until 9th level, Assassins use poison pretty much like everyone else. Once they hit 9th level, however, Assassins can choose to make a study of four aspects of poisons:

• injected/blood poison
• ingested poison
• contact poison and poisons that work both ingested and injected
• creating poisons and antidotes. 

In order to study poisons, the Assassin must find another Assassin of at least 12th level to study under, paying 2000-8000 gold a week; altogether, these four courses of study may take up to 32 weeks! This course of study allows the Assassin to use instantaneous poisons, poisons that take 1-4 hours to kill a victim and poisons that are administered in multiple doses so that they are undetectable, as well as create blade poisons, which evaporate completely in two days and are only effective for the first two hits. Victims of poison administered by Assassins who have completed this course of study also lose the +1 to their saving throw against poisons that they usually get when poisoned by Assassins (those poisoned by non-Assassins get a +2 to their saves).

If you think that's a lot of payout for little benefit, listen to this: the DM isn't allowed to tell the player about the availability of these options, or even hint at them! I'm extremely curious how often a player came up with the idea of having their name-level Assassin study poisons all on their own (and how often their DMs would accuse them of reading the DMG if they did ask about it!).

Altogether, I'm ambivalent about these extra poison rules; they seem pretty complicated and I partly think Gary may have been doing players a favor by instructing the DM not to tell players about them… on the other hand, why shouldn't an Assassin get to study the advanced levels of his craft, just like Magic Users?

The Monster as a Player Character

I was really disappointed with this section, in which Gary addresses what was apparently a not-uncommon request: running monsters as PCs. Gary declares a few times that, "in most cases [running monsters as PCs] was only thought of as a likely manner of game domination." His antidote for this power-gaming motive for running monsters is to explain the in-game limits monster PCs would face. Monsters would be hunted down if they wondered into a tavern to join an adventuring party, and, besides, "Men are the worst monsters." By that, Gary means that high-level characters are able to challenge even demon princes and demi-gods; high-enough level characters, with no limit to the number of magic items they can possess, leave all monsters behind in terms of the danger they pose to their enemies.

For the DM, Gary also points out that it is difficult enough to create a campaign world that is humanocentric, with the aid of humanocentric literature and science; he states that attempts to create a campaign setting which revolves around, or even is partially based on, a monster's perspective, "is destined to be shallow, incomplete, and totally unsatisfying for all parties concerned unless the creator is a Renaissance Man and all-around universal genius with a decade or two to prepare the game and milieu. Even then, how can such an effort rival one which borrows from the talents of genius and imaginative thinking which come to us from literature?"

To be fair, Gary does allow that some players will want to run monsters out of curiosity and an honest desire to experiment. He suggests letting them do so, confident that they will quickly lose interest in running those monster PCs; he states that monster PCs whose players have lost interest in them make interesting NPCs and can contribute positively to the campaign setting.

I wish Gary hadn't taken this position; I've expressed elsewhere my desire to try running a dragon character from its first age category into maturity, so I won't repeat that here. Who knows? Gary might be right and I might lose interest after trying this out for a bit; I just won't know until I've given it a shot.

Finally, Gary does partially redeem this section in my eyes in a short section in which he specifically addresses the true unattractiveness of dragons as PCs. He states that, "only time and accumulation and retention of great masses of wealth will allow any increase in level (age)." This both provides a mechanism for leveling for dragon PCs - retaining, not spending treasure - and provides an incentive for young dragons to adventure. I will have to give this further thought…

Lycanthropy

Gary stresses that lycanthropy is supposed to be undesirable in AD&D, something to be cured of rather than some sort of bonus. Lycanthropy in AD&D consists mostly of loss of control; characters have chances to change into their were-form six times a month (full, half, quarter, new, quarter and half moon - I'm not sure if 3/4 moons were left out intentionally or not) with varying chances of being able to have any control over those changes or not. Were-PCs are apt to change if they are hurt badly in combat, arguing with other party members, proximity to creature-summoning magic, etc. Lycanthropy can also cause serious mental anguish in those whose alignments are different from their were-form (which is usually the case, since they usually contracted lycanthropy fighting those of different alignment) as their alignment slowly changes to that of their were-forms. Lycanthropy is especially bad for Paladins, who lose their Paladinhood and are considered, "no longer pure enough for that honored state;" Gary even advises against allowing a redemptive quest for the ex-Paladin! Finally, no XP is gained while in lycanthrope form and there is no such thing as "leveling up:" it is impossible to be a "2nd level Werewolf," for example.

In short, lycanthropy is supposed to be incredibly inconvenient.

Gary also provides multiple cures for lycanthropy; the cheapest and easiest are only efficacious very soon after contracting lycanthropy. The most expensive option is to go to a holy/unholy place and drink holy/unholy water prepared by the clergy there and laced with wolfsbane and belladonna out of a silver chalice for a month or more. I found it puzzling that unholy sites would assist in curing lycanthropy until I realized that some lycanthropes are, I believe, lawful and good-aligned.

Finally Gary gives short profiles of lycanthrope behavior. Werebears fight evil creatures until one or the other is dead, and are likely to attack evil creatures immediately upon encountering them. Wereboars are argumentative and want to be in charge. Wererats are the only type of lycanthrope that can use weapons while in were-form; they volunteer to be at the back of the party marching order if they are in a party. Weretigers are supremely self-interested and have a fondness for cats. Werewolves seldom join adventuring parties, but when they do and are discovered, they tend to wait until the party is in combat and then turn on their comrades.

More Thoughts on Alignment and Setting

Alignment as I described it in my last post is a single axis: Law-Chaos. Good and Evil are part of this axis, instead of a separate axis; the New School conception of alignment as personality traits is not applicable. Staid traditionalist characters and free-spirited characters (the New School interpretations of Lawful and Chaotic) may support either Law or Chaos.

Most individuals, however, no matter what their personality type, will fall into the category of Neutral, neither particularly helping nor harming the cause of either Law or Chaos; in fact, most everyone is ignorant of the struggle, not taking it seriously on the few occasions when they do hear about it.

In fact, until they begin to establish themselves and discover the reality of both the forces of Law and Chaos, the PCs won't usually know about it. That's what sets Paladins, Rangers and the more devout Clerics apart from your average Fighters, Thieves, Magic-Users, most Clerics and all the other classes: they're true believers from the beginning in a grand cosmic struggle, instead of stumbling upon it in the course of amassing their personal fortune. It's why Paladins and Rangers exist, and why Clerics are sent out to fight Chaos instead of blessing crops and healing the sick on a full-time basis.

So, how to deal with alignment when the PCs don't even know about or believe in it? Well, I could just let the players decide their PCs' alignments, but that, I think, risks making this more about what color jerseys the PCs are wearing instead of which side they're actually scoring for. It also bares for my players a part of the setting that I really don't want to just tell them about. I want them to discover it along with their PCs.

It's true; I've begun keeping secrets from my players. They don't read my blog and they have no idea that Dragons run much of the world. They're just starting to get an inkling of the Cthuloid horrors continued adventuring will bring them in contact with. I think I may have mentioned the possibility of Mindflayers and they've fought a Shroom, like, once. They have no idea that Necromancy exists in my setting at all. They certainly don't realize that Carcosan rituals exist and are utilized by evil sorcerers, nor do they know why intelligent monsters have tried to kill them twice (after rolls on the Puppet-Master Machination Tables), although they are getting curious about that.

To be clear, when there have been questions about these things, I haven't refused to answer. Instead, I told my player that there were good, non-arbitrary reasons for what was happening; cause-and-effect was occurring. I told him that I thought it would be more fun for him to figure out what was going on through the course of play, but that I'd be willing to explain it to him if he preferred that. He opted to try to figure it out, at least for now.

My gut tells me to do the same thing with alignment. Tell most players not to worry about it. Slip the players of Paladins, Rangers and Clerics of certain gods secret handouts about their characters' understandings of Law and Chaos. Then come up with a scale for measuring alignment and a list of Lawful and Chaotic actions: actions which materially benefit Law or Chaos. Different classes may start out on different points along the scale (Paladins, etc., start out high on the Lawful scale, while most other classes start out near halfway or so. Thieves start closer to Chaos but still inside Neutral territory.) and I adjust their scores as they perform action on the lists in the course of their normal adventuring career. This idea, by the way, is stolen almost whole-cloth from the Judges Guild Ready Ref Sheets; the differences are that the Ready Ref sheets try to work with a double-axis alignment system, that there is no list of Lawful or Chaotic acts and that you're supposed to roll for your alignment.

Next time I'll try to flesh this out mechanically. In the meantime, how much about your settings do you keep away from your players, waiting to reveal through play? Is most everything pretty straightforward or are there definite twists that make your players sit up and take notice?

Brendan's 20 Rules Questions

Though I recently suspended the Skype campaign I've been running since 2010, I decided to answer Brendan's questions concerning how I ran my campaign and, hopefully, more or less how I'll run it again one day. In any case, it's likely to reflect the rules no matter where I'm running a table in the near future. Enjoy!

1. Ability scores generation method?

Player's choice between 3d6 down the line or making up whatever they want within ranges of 3-18. Thanks, Jeff, for that idea (and, incidentally, Brendan for bringing it to my attention).

2. How are death and dying handled?

If a major character hits 0 hp, they roll on The Table of Death, Dismemberment and Dangerous Damage. Each time they take a hit and are at 0 hp, they roll on the table again.

3. What about raising the dead?

Nope. The PCs probably couldn't afford it anyway at this stage in the game.

4. How are replacement PCs handled?

They show up, somehow, whenever the player rolls them up. Often they'll wait until the end of the session or the beginning of the next one. That's actually probably because my players usually play two characters at once so it doesn't get boring when one character dies.

5. Initiative: individual, group, or something else?

I have this really complicated initiative system that is based off of this. I'm considering replacing it with this.

6. Are there critical hits and fumbles? How do they work?

Yep. Roll a natural 20, roll on the Arduin Critical Hits table. Roll a natural 1, roll on the Arduin Critical Fumbles table. Same goes for monsters. Combat is deadly (actually, deadlier than Arduin was intended, as the tables were designed to be used with percentile dice and confirmations of criticals).

7. Do I get any benefits for wearing a helmet?

They come in very handy when you roll on the Table of Death, Dismemberment and Dangerous Damage.

8. Can I hurt my friends if I fire into melee or do something similarly silly?

Can you ever! If you fire into melee and miss, you roll to hit on another, randomly selected target. I've had characters fire into melee, miss their target, hit an ally, critically hit them and kill them.

9. Will we need to run from some encounters, or will we be able to kill everything?

Run!

10. Level-draining monsters: yes or no?

Strictly speaking, no. When the party does encounter monsters that normally drain levels, they will just drain XP instead, per Raggi's idea.

11. Are there going to be cases where a failed save results in PC death?

Yes.

12. How strictly are encumbrances and resources tracked?

Not as strictly as I'd like them to be… I at least keep my players aware of them and they calculate them. It's just harder for me to figure out how far they can go in a dungeon during a certain length of time, to do that on the fly and actually run the dungeon. Tips on this would be appreciated.

13. What's required when my PC gains a level? Training? Do I get new spells automatically? Can it happen in the middle of an adventure, or do I have to wait for down time?

PCs level up at the end of the session. No training is involved. If an MU is an apprentice, the master will send spells of the appropriate new level; otherwise the MU will have to procure them himself.

14. What do I get experience for?

Coin spent and sessions played.

15. How are traps located? Description, dice rolling, or some combination?

100% description.

16. Are retainers encouraged and how does morale work?

Retainers are encouraged but seldom used; another side-effect of allowing players to run two characters at once, I think. Morale is another item I try to include in my games but don't often succeed at. I wish Swords & Wizardry included morale rules so I didn't have to look them up in other rule-sets.

17. How do I identify magic items?

Trial and error, a spell your MU has or taking it to another wizard, probably in a city, who is willing to identify it for you for a price.

18. Can I buy magic items? Oh, come on: how about just potions?

On a roll of 1 on a d6, Shrelft the Pilgrim Peddler shows up at the beginning of the session, selling magical items that you can't get anywhere else. They are usually minor, but are more than just potions and have definitely gotten PCs out of scrapes before.

19. Can I create magic items? When and how?

Yes. According to the LotFP:WFRP rules (and, when the campaign is re-started, according to the ACKS rules).

20. What about splitting the party?

I'd rather you didn't, but it's allowed. I'll bounce back and forth between the two sub-parties. Since this is on Skype, I don't worry too much about isolating players. My players are good players and usually play as if they didn't know what was happening with the other sub-party.

My Take on Gender Differences in D&D, Part 3

Real life has been eating my energy for gaming and blogging, unfortunately. I'm going to be away from internet access for much of March, so that should cut down on my blogging as well. I put my Skype campaign on indefinite hold, which was sad, as it's been going since 2010. Hopefully I can pick it up again some time in April, with much more prep done.

Anyway, my momentum's been lost for this series, but I'm going to finish it out. First, as promised, two more points about gender differences in D&D:

Point 1: We can't seem to agree about which attribute scores to mess with. Strength seems to be something people usually agree on, but there are myriads of opinions about just about everything else (well, except for Intelligence; at least everyone seems to agree to leave that one alone). Are women more Dextrous or less dextrous than men? Do they have better Constitutions than men or worse? What about Charisma? And what is Charisma? As the definitions of Charisma have changed from Old School to New, has the applicability of Charisma bonuses based on gender changed? And should female characters receive a bonus to Wisdom, what with women's intuition and their generally higher emotional intelligence?

As you can see, this is all very confusing, and there's no way we'll reach any kind of broad consensus among gamers who are open to gender-differentiated attribute scores. What does that mean? I think it means that there's no point in trying to put forward a universal rule of gender-differentiated attribute bonuses. Do what the people sitting around your table think makes sense (within the limits already described earlier, namely, don't send the message that women aren't welcome at your table).

Point 2: One issue that Brendan pointed out in the comments to my last post in this series is that it's still sending a message to women that they are "other" or at least not normal when male characters roll 3d6 six times, straight down the line while female characters get their attributes tweaked.

My solution to that is simple: use only bonuses or penalties. Let's say, for the sake of simplicity and argument, that we decide that male characters should have a Strength advantage over female characters and female characters should have a Constitution advantage over male characters. Instead of giving female characters a +1 to CON and a -1 to STR, give female characters a -1 to STR and male characters as -1 to CON, or, the other way around, give female characters a +1 to CON and male characters a +1 to STR. Both genders get tweaked; neither gender is the mechanical default.

Finally, I promised to describe a situation in which you shouldn't ever use gender-differentiated attribute scores at your table. That situation is simply this: it makes one or more of your players uncomfortable.

See, sending messages is a complex thing. It isn't enough to simply intend well and put work into a message; the sender isn't the only variable when it comes to messages. There is also the receiver of the message, something the sender can't control.

In certain parts of the world, like the US, certain hand gestures are congratulatory or happy or simply signify greeting. The "thumbs up," the "ok" sign and the "peace" sign, especially, for this argument, with the back of the hand facing the recipient, all are happy, congenial ways to shape your fingers and gesture at someone where I currently live; all of those gestures are liable to get you punched out in other areas of the world. Sometimes it's a good idea to learn what gestures mean to your recipients before you gesture, and sometimes it's an even better idea to just leave well enough alone and keep your hands in your pockets, because you'll hurt someone's feelings and it's just not worth it.

It's possible to talk this kind of thing out with everyone in your gaming group, and discuss gender politics at length and share all our hang-ups about gender and how this or that rules tweak makes us feel as a person, as a man, as a woman. It's probably a really healthy conversation to have, actually, except that it's around a gaming table.

See, gaming is, at least the way I play, supposed to be generally lighthearted fun, an escape. While intimate, vulnerable and safe discussions about gender political theory, practice and our daily lives are great, I don't think that gaming should be sparking them on a regular basis. That would both cheapen the very valuable discussions and weigh down the airy gossamer fantasy that gaming is. Have those discussions start because of something else, something that isn't trivial and something that isn't one person imposing rules on others.

If someone at your table doesn't want gender-differentiated attribute score modifiers because of their personal hang-ups and hurts and feelings about gender, gaming isn't the time to work through them. Just go back to rolling 3d6 down the line, or however you roll in your games. It isn't worth it; just stick your hands in your pockets, don't make any well-intentioned hand gestures and enjoy yourselves together around a gaming table for a few hours.