I’ve been way out-of-pocket with blogging as the baby date gets closer (super excited and terrified), and I haven’t actually been gaming to boot. Doesn’t mean I’m not thinking about stuff occasionally, though. For example, this was something I drafted up a while back, meant to flesh out more, and now am just going to post as-is, cause why not?
I was thinking about how to handle power armor in gonzo science fantasy games within the bounds of D&D-like rules. I know some people have touched on this before — pretty sure Dungeon of Signs had some sort of power armor on the HMS Apollyon — but I was thinking about how I would codify it for myself in the event that I ever ran my ASE DCC campaign or something along those lines.
In my last post, I struggled a bit to determine the DC for “encumbrance as encounter,” or a Weariness check as I dubbed it. I got a lot of positive feedback on the post, but Noah pretty fairly pointed out that there’s still a lot of work getting in the way of the fun in documenting encumbrance as suggested. I agree, and at the time I was thinking that a highly customized character sheet was really the only good way to make it simple. I essentially repeated the sentiment to Harley and expressed the additional difficulties I was having thinking how to incorporate it with DCC specifically, given the armor check penalty already incorporated in those rules. I had a few different thoughts on tweaks and revisions I could make to fit it into DCC, and how a sheet would look that would make it less difficult to track in any D&D-ish system.
Until tonight, when I realized that DCC’s armor check penalty not only didn’t need to be modified, but that it actually could be the key to really simplifying this for any D&D-like game, and not requiring a major character sheet overhaul. Here’s what I’ve got …
In my previous Advanced Dungeon Crawl Classics (ADCC) post, I looked at a simple method for adding warrior subclasses to the rules. This led to some discussion on G+ of doing the same for the other classes. There’s some obvious room with the demihumans to do so, though it should probably be limited so humans remain unique in their variety. Personally, I feel that wizards are already strongly distinguished by patrons (and potentially the Arcane Affinity spell). Clerics are obviously distinguished by alignment (which I previouslyexpandedupon), but I can imagine a scenario where clerics could be further distinguished by deity or type of service.
Thieves are also distinguished by alignment in the rules as written, though I believe it makes more sense to allow a thief to simply choose a path at 1st level. This effectively creates three thief subclasses in the rules and also provides a straightforward manner for adding more — new paths. Along those lines, I present a first crack at a new thief skill set, the Path of the Bard.
As I mentioned over on G+, my wife and I are expecting our first child this June, and her first trimester wasn’t the easiest going for her. Compound that with my new position at work (started in August) starting to ramp up and the result is a lack of blogging.
That’s Advanced Dungeon Crawl Classics (ADCC) – credit for the acronym goes to Ryan Colby.
A while back I posted my take on the Ranger for DCC, inspired by Crawl! Fanzine #6, which also featured DCC versions of the paladin, bard, and gnome. I’ve actually had someone just start playing a ranger in my game, and I’m already seeing some problems. I’m not sure that the problems are with my own design (though they could be). The thing is, the ranger as a separate class is really dependent on the style of play to have value at the table. If there’s lots of dungeon crawling going on and the monsters don’t fit the favored enemy, then the class seems like it kind of sucks compared to the others.
More than that, though, DCC has really brought me around to seeing the simple elegance of the four basic classes for humans (it’s also really brought me around on race as class, as I’ve mentioned before). And it occurred to me last Friday morning, as I was pouring my coffee and about to leave for work, that there’s a simpler way to add rangers, paladins, barbarians and the like to DCC with more mechanics than just role-playing but less than a separate class. And that way is through my most favorite of DCC rules, the Mighty Deed of Arms.
The PCs have stumbled across a castle in their travels. Who lives there? What are they up to? Well, I took a slightly different approach with this, and I thought the best ideas for what they are up to might come from the judge just thinking about what certain combinations of results below mean. For example, an overcrowded ruin might be home to a military force in need of a makeshift shelter. Interested to see if anyone finds these helpful or if there should be a bit more to this entry.
Originally posted by Brianna Heine on the other (now defunct) version of this site.
So it’s already been a longer post than I intended it to be. In fact with all the suggestions for systems it has become very obvious that I lack the resources to purchase every game that might work for my ultimate goal. I want to thank all of you for your suggestions. Your interest in this project is very appreciated.
So I’m going to finish this post discussing the last 2 systems I have access to.
One of the interesting side effects of the DCC Funnel method of character creation is that it is possible for a single player to have more than one character survive to the end. Different judges handle this in different ways; some make their players choose a single character to level up, others allow the player to have multiple leveled adventurers. I initially went with the latter option, but I’ve found that it can get a bit unwieldy in practice when several players have two 2nd level characters. I’m now considering an option somewhere between the two: henchman PCs, aka apprentices.