My son and I
have been gaming on and off recently, occasionally testing the waters
of intro roleplaying games between
Pokemon card game duels and
an occasional board game. We’ve enjoyed
Hero Kids, though
each adventure requires a good deal of prep, whether I’m printing
and adapting an existing scenario or devising my own (with the
requisite maps). We’ve also tried the forgotten
Pokemon Jr.
Adventure Game – a wonderfully simple yet entertaining
intro roleplaying game experience that capitalizes on the popular
Japanese license – which I’m enjoying for its very basic,
read-aloud scripted scenes and simple combat system printed on the
various Pokemon cards. Both games still hold some potential for
several more play sessions, especially if I can wean everyone off
Hero Kids’ maps. At some point, though, I’d like to
transition to something a bit more mainstream that also caters to my
own gaming urges. So I’m re-evaluating my current views regarding
Basic/Expert Dungeons & Dragons, as many of you know,
my preferred version of D&D and, despite my general
explorations of the Old School Renaissance, my preferred OSR game.
I’m looking to make it more comprehensible for a seven year-old and
provide a more heroic (read” less-deadly”) experience for
characters.
I’ve already
established a few house rules to help make characters, particularly
low-level ones, more hardy and decided on a few mechanics to make the
game more intuitive for gamemaster and young players. Players roll
4d6 and keep the highest three for ability scores, assigning them as
they like. They use the same rolling scheme to determine starting
gold pieces (though I’m tempted by the idea of pre-determined
equipment kits for simplicity’s sake). I’m using Ascending Armor
Class (AAC), which requires me to figure out combat bonuses by class
and level based off the “Character Attacks” table and rework the
“Monster Attacks” table to reflect a flat combat bonus (pretty
much +1 for each hit die up to 9); though once that’s done, it’s
far more intuitive during the game. Despite my urge to streamline
everything, I’m sticking with the standard five saving throws
instead of condensing them into one; averaging scores at the
different levels for each class just seemed like too much work; my
current
B/X character sheet has spaces for five saving throws
anyway.
Aside from
relying on my good judgment as a player and game designer, I’m also
integrating some elements I’ve encountered in my sojourns among the
numerous OSR games I’ve seen, some of which I’ve casually perused
and others I’ve scrutinized in more detail. Among many other
influences on the roleplaying game hobby, OSR games have explored a
host of alternate approaches to classic game mechanics. One of the
core elements I’m changing based on OSR conventions is AAC and the
resulting reliance on a “combat bonus” instead of a chart
referencing character/monster level with the target’s armor class.
I’ve examined some other issues before at Hobby Games Recce: how
OSR games overall have
influenced my preferences for B/X D&D,
how to integrate
skill mechanics, making
spellcasters more effective
(particularly at lower levels), and how to make
shields more effective in combat. After some consideration I’m house-ruling my
B/X game with some additional adjustments:
Starting Hit Points: I adjusted starting hit points to
increase character survival rates at lower levels. Each character
begins with the maximum hit points as if rolled on one die level
higher than their class hit die plus any ability score adjustment;
i.e., a fighter who normally rolls 1d8 for hit points starts with 10
hit points (the max on a 1d10) plus any adjustments. Upon gaining a
new level, characters roll their usual hit die to increase their hit
points.
 |
| Shields should matter. |
Shields:
I’m tackling two issues with shields...the meager +1 bonus to
Ascending Armor Class they offer, and the notion of “sundering”
shields to negate hits. I decided to allow for small shields like
bucklers giving a +1 bonus and larger shields, like the traditional
knight’s heater shield, providing a +2 bonus. The larger shields
would also cost more, probably twice the 10 gold piece cost of the
standard small shield. While I don’t care much for encumbrance
rules, I’m considering penalizing characters with large shields by
requiring an entire round to drop or re-arm themselves with it or
simply making them lose a round if they fumble a combat roll
(essentially knocking them off balance from the larger shield). I’m
still debating whether to allow characters to destroy or “sunder”
their shield to negate all damage from one attack. This gives players
another option during combat other than just sucking up damage; it
also means they need to spend more gold pieces on a new shield if
they want to regain that protection.
Skill System: I’ve
waffled over various mechanics to resolve “skill”
uses...essentially anything someone wants to attempt not covered by
other rulings (like thief skills, clerics turning undead, folks
looking for secret doors, etc.). I’m not a fan of “roll under”
systems like ability score checks. I considered giving everyone a 1
in 6 chance of succeeding at anything – essentially requiring them
to roll a 6 – yet factoring in ability score modifiers; that didn’t
seem to have the granularity I’d like. So I settled on a 2d6 roll
on a table similar in spread to the “Monster Reactions”
table: 2: exceptional failure; 3-5 simple failure, 6-8 marginal
success, 9-11 clear success, and 12 extraordinary success. All rolls
adjusted by the relevant ability score modifier. Once again, this
skews toward character success, though with some gradations to liven
up results.
 |
| I want my spellcasters to feel like this. |
Spells: I’ve dithered over ways to make spell-casting
more effective at lower levels. Part of the overall limitation comes
from magic users only having one spell to cast each day at first
level, a huge limitation given their prohibitions against armor and
most weapons. So I changed two elements: the number of spells magic
users and clerics start with, and the number of times they can cast
spells each day. I decided spellcasters begin the game with a number
of spells equal to the usual number of spells at first level plus
their Intelligence/Willpower ability bonus. For example, a
first-level magic user with an Intelligence of 16 (+2) would begin
the game knowing 3 spells (all at first level). Afterwords characters
gain new spells at the normal rate. They may use spells any number of
times each day, but must roll on the “Ability-Based Task Success”
table each time they cast them; this may result in the spell failing
outright or giving varying degrees of success (such as “marginal,”
which minimizes any impact, or “extraordinary,” which maximizes
its effect). One aspect of
Hero Kids I particularly like is
how magic has no limitations on it. The game gives spellcaster
characters a magical ranged attack and a few other effects they can
use at will throughout each adventure. In our
Hero Kids games
the magic user feels just as important as the fighter; I want to port
that to my
D&D game.
I’m resisting
using the advantage/disadvantage die mechanic introduced in
D&D
fifth edition, just as I am resisting defaulting to that latest
iteration of
D&D for our core game rules. Although it’s
the most popular roleplaying game today and enjoys a vast community
of players, I prefer having control over something with which I have
greater familiarity; I don’t have time to read my
D&D
fifth edition intro box rules, nor do I want to invest in the core
rulebooks. Like many gamers before him, my son’s initial foray into
D&D – however you define it, with whichever edition –
will contain enough iconic elements that he can, should he choose,
move on to enjoy whichever version he encounters in the future...or
any other roleplaying game that catches his interest.
Comments....
Want
to share your opinion?
Start a civilized discussion? Share a link to this blog entry on
Google+ and tag me (+Peter Schweighofer) to comment.
