My Changes to the BX/OSE Thief Class

       The three most common classes I see mentioned for change is the Magic-User, Fighter, and Thief. I have discussed ways to balance out the first two, but I left the thief off the list because I honestly did not know what to do with them. They desperately seem like they need SOMETHING, but it is hard to place a finger on exactly what it is. In most games that I have run the parties do not even have a thief and seem to get by well enough. It was not until I really started to examine the thief and look at what the class had and did not have that I discovered how I was going to change them in the future. I was not going to change a single thing about the class. 

      The class is perfect just the way it is and is quite useful to a party, but not to the point that it is an absolute necessity (like the cleric imho). Is this purely a bait and switch article that tells me that everything is just dandy with the thief and to go about your day? No. To be completely honest the thing that ruins the thief more than anything is you. Yes. You. The Game Master, for convenience’s sake or lack of rules knowledge, often makes the thief useless. The thief is generally an amazing class when the rules are used correctly and as written. Let me give some examples.

      Your characters find a treasure chest that is locked in the game full of God knows what? Many GM’s I know (I am guilty here too) allow their players to search the chest for traps using their 1 in 6 chances on the D6. This seems to be incorrect. The party’s chance of finding traps is specifically for room traps, not treasure traps. Treasure traps seem to be the sole purview of the thief class. If you are allowing the party to use their room trap feature on treasure, you are hampering the usefulness of the thief, not the class. The chest is also locked, if you allow the players to just bust it open easily (and without risk), you are reducing the viability of the thief. If the party cannot open the chest and decides to take it with them and you do not use encumbrance, you’ve reduced the effectiveness of the thief. 

     Here is another example that I constantly get incorrect. Many GMs interpret the player’s ability of “Listen at Door” to be the same thing as “Hear Noise”. Words matter greatly when interpreting these rules and “Listen at Door” is specific. You can only use this to literally listen at a door, not hear monsters approaching, or in my opinion get specifics of what is behind the door. With “Hear Noise” the wording is much broader and can be used in a variety of situations. If you are giving all your non-human PCs a 2 in 6 chance to “Hear Noise” and not “Listen at Door” then you are harming the thief, it is not that the class is bad or needs correction.

     Another example is the Open Doors skill that all PCs have 1 in 6 chances, plus there STR modifier. This is specifically for stuck doors, not locked doors. In theory ALL doors in a dungeon are considered stuck, unless noted. I often do not go with that because to me it is a bit weird. But for the longest time I allowed this to open locked doors which completely undermines the point of the Pick Lock skill. The thief can allow a party to get through a locked door much earlier then intended. Many times, in a game there is a key that needs to be found to access certain parts of the dungeon. The thief can “hack” the dungeon and skip certain parts.

     One of the primary abilities that can come in useful for a thief is moving silently. Generally, I handle sneaking with the surprise rules. Any class can try, and sneak and the enemy have a base chance of 1 or 2 on a D6 to discover they are being approached. I then consider modifiers like armor. Plate for me adds 3 to the roll so on a 1-5 on a D6 they will be discovered. Is the guard distracted? Maybe reduce the number by 1 etc. If the thief makes their Move Silently roll, they are completely silent and there is no chance of detection. If they fail, they are still moving quietly and thus the monster has a base 1 or 2 on a D6. I have seen many GMs rule that a failed Move Silent roll is an automatic discovery, and, to me, this is wrong. This is not a wholly original idea, and while I disagree with some interpretations, I got this idea from http://web.fisher.cx/robert/rpg/dnd/thief.html. 

      The thief class does not need to be changed, you need to change how you GM the game to make them useful. To me the biggest enemy of the thief is not an ogre with a magic sword, it is a GM that does not allow them to fill their niche in the party. They are certainly an accessory class (they where not in the original rules), but they still are a great class, and many creative players can do a lot with them.

I run Old School Essentials weekly and post our games to YouTube, click HERE to see.

Like my work? Follow me on Facebook here.

Shielding My Woes

Ugh…I have been wrestling with this one for a while.

The rules for shields in most D&D games are amazingly simple and amazingly awful all at the same time. I want good rules for shields that are both simple but are a bit more accurate to what shields do in combat. I will not claim to be a great military historian or a super reenactor of the period, but I was a nerd in the 2000s that played a decent amount of boffer LARPing and a shield is an amazing piece of defense. Something to me that deserves more than a simple plus one to AC. A basic human armed with a spear and shield should have a better AC then 8, especially versus missile weapons. Considering all that, the flip side is that it is simple and keeps the game flowing. Complex shield rules with parrying and variable AC depending on the size of the shield. Different bonuses with close combat with different number of opponents and/or range fire just tends to bog things down in unwanted minutia. Below is a few of the shield rules I have seen in the OSR community that I like for different reasons.

 

Shields Shall Be Splintered

http://trollsmyth.blogspot.com/2008/05/shields-shall-be-splintered.html

First off, if you are not familiar with Trollsmyth’s blog, you should. There is a ton of great content there. You will not be disappointed. To sum up “Shields Shall Be Splintered” quickly, shields function as written in the rules but a character that has a shield may sacrifice the shield to ignore the damage of a single attack. Powerful, simple, and quite useful for PCs. This adds quite a bit of survivability to characters that use a shield.

I decided to use this rule in my games, but ONLY Fighters could use it. This was an attempt to get people to play Fighters, because in my games no one would play one (I also gave the Fighters Weapon Specialization too). It did not work in seducing people to play Fighters. I have yet to have a Fighter in my multi-year campaign. For my game this failed on two fronts, one, the rule has not been used ever, two, it was not enough to get people to play Fighters. I guess I will just have to start offering signing bonuses for playing Fighters.

 

Crawford’s Shields

Wolves of God

                One of the other sets of shield rules that I like is from the myriad Kevin Crawford’s games (I cite Wolves of God above, but there are plenty of others). In WoG, shields are divided into broad shields and heavy shields categories. Broad shields give you an instant AC 5(15) and if you have an equal or better AC it provides the usual +1 bonus. Heavy shields give you an instant AC 6(14) and if you have an equal or better AC it provides the usual +1 bonus. They also are used to bash your opponents, thus provide a +2 to damage. Shields in his game also completely protect you from shock, which is a great benefit, but does not translate into general D&D.

                I like these rules a lot. I think they make a lot of sense and make shields a bit more effective than the standard D&D plus one AC bonus. The main issue is that issue I see is that I do not see the rules coming up that often in a standard BX/OSE game. In WoG armor is much more rare and much more limited in scope. Many to most PCs in BX/OSE will have chain/plate or cannot use shields. Thus, the rules really do not change for them (accept doing more damage with a heavy shield), they are just getting the standard +1 AC bonus. Why add in all the complexity, if it really is only going to change things in the margins?

 

AD&D 2e (The rules I grew up with)

This set of rules has a lot to it, so I am just going to quote the source:

“A buckler (or target) is a very small shield that fastens on the forearm. It can be worn by crossbowmen and archers with no hindrance. Its small size enables it to protect against only one attack per melee round (of the user's choice), improving the character's Armor Class by 1 against that attack.

A small shield is carried on the forearm and gripped with the hand. Its light weight permits the user to carry other items in that hand (although he cannot use weapons). It can be used to protect against two frontal attacks of the user's choice.

The medium shield is carried in the same manner as the small shield. Its weight prevents the character from using his shield hand for other purposes. With a medium shield, a character can protect against any frontal or flank attacks.

The body shield is a massive shield reaching nearly from chin to toe. It must be firmly fastened to the forearm and the shield hand must grip it at all times. It provides a great deal of protection, improving the Armor Class of the character by 1 against melee attacks and by 2 against missile attacks, for attacks from the front or front flank sides. It is very heavy; the DM may wish to use the optional encumbrance system if he allows this shield.”

                These rules while giving an assortment of different shields each with their own pluses and minuses is far to fiddly for me personally. Tracking four different weights, four different number of opponents, different directions that the attacks are coming from, etc. Doing all of this for a 5% modifier to your percent chance to be hit seems like a lot to me. I would rather just use the base BX/OSE model with a single shield with a +1 AC bonus compared to this.

 

Overall

                I have not found a set of rules that I am completely happy with involving shields. I might be chasing something that does not exist. There are parts of me that enjoy each one of the rule sets mentioned here (some more than others), but each one has just something that does not click correct for me. How about you? Is there a system that you like that I did not mention? Do you like the plain +1 AC bonus and leave it at that? Let me know and maybe I can find something I like.

I run Old School Essentials weekly and post our games to YouTube, click HERE to see.

Like my work? Follow me on Facebook here.

Killing Save or Die Mechanics

 Hello. My name is Ryan and I do not like save or die mechanics.

 

                I know the reason why they exist. That does not mean that I must like it. The game, in general, is dangerous enough without this mechanic, so why do we need it? Does this mean that I am abandoning the principles of old-school gaming and going to convert over to 5e? No. What it does mean is that I am going to steal other people’s good ideas on the subject and apply them to my own game. I do not want the threat of death to leave my games and player death should happen, but I prefer to mar and cripple my PCs over death. At times death is letting them off too easy.

                I saw an alternative rule that I am tending to lean towards that is still extremely deadly, but also not a binary result. When someone has a save or die mechanic (i.e. poison, death ray, etc) they take the creatures hit dice in damage. Example: the character is struck with a death ray from an Eye of Terror (Beholder). The character fails their save and would take 11d8 points of damage. Odds are the character will still die, but there is always the chance that the damage roll is low. In addition, if the character fails the save, takes damage and lives, they will have an appropriate permanent effect. In the example above I might have the death ray destroy part of the character’s health and they take 1d3 CON loss.

                You could have a character that fails a save against a medusa gaze and live. They then might have some calcification of the joints and they lose 10’ of movement and are just slower the rest of their career. That effect could in theory be removed with a Stone to Flesh spell which would in theory cure them if they were turned into a statue too. This also is the same with poison. A character can fail a save and take huge amounts of damage, but if Neutralize Poison is used, they instantly regain that hit point loss.

                Lastly, I use a Death & Dismemberment chart for my characters because again, I like to mar and injure the characters. I would skip this step though in the case of a save or die mechanic. If you hit zero, from a failed save, it is lights out. This adds another level of danger and still makes those save or die mechanics scary, but not cheap.

                I do not judge people who use the mechanic and like it. It is certainly a preference. I think it is a little more acceptable at lower levels, but as you put time into a character the thought of losing it to one bad die roll tends to sting more. Might just be me?

I run Old School Essentials weekly and post our games to YouTube, click HERE to see.

Like my work? Follow me on Facebook here.

Why Rolling to Cast is a Bad Idea

               This article is really in response to Professor Dungeon Master and his video(s) where he professes to like random results for casting spells. Let me be clear here first, I love the Dungeon Craft YouTube videos and I love the FB group. I have stolen many of the Professor’s ideas and agree with him about 90% of the time, but I must break from him on this subject. This video also runs in complete opposition to the magic system that is used in Dungeon Crawl Classics. I love DCC’s style and I think their approach is wild. I like many of their adventures, but I will not be running any straight DCC anytime soon. The game, for me, is a bit too random. Though if that is your thing, more power to you.

DCCs art is rad.

                I brief synopsis of what I call “random” casting (or rolling to cast) is when a wizard/cleric casts a spell the player rolls a d20 to see if it is successful or not. Spells in this type of setting are not automatic (though I would argue that they are not automatic in classic D&D either). Depending on the d20 roll you can have about four outcomes. The spell goes off normally, the spell fails, the spell critically succeeds, the spell critically fails. The other bonus to this system is that spells can be cast an unlimited amount of times, but there is always a chance that the spell will backfire. I am sure that I am underselling the system a bit, but I think this is an accurate rough outline of how this system works.

Here is the video with his house rules. I agree with many, but not "Roll to Cast".

                Here are some of the reasons that I think this is not the best system to use. These opinions are coming from a classic D&D OSE/OSR perspective, so please keep that in mind.

1 – It is already tough being a low-level caster

                I have been running OSE/OSR now hardcore for about the last years and the biggest pile of dead heroes that I have is wizards. In my opinion they have the highest bar to cross as far as gaining levels, with the least going for them. They have bad ACs, they cannot use weapons, they have low hit points, and the list keeps going. The one thing they do have is a spell that possibly can turn the tide of battle once a day. Clerics are similar in that they have earn an entire level before even getting a spell and (odds are) that spell will be crucial in keeping another character alive. I just do not see the reason for having the one thing that makes both the classes unique fail or go catastrophically horrible. Why would people then really want to play these classes? The wizard sits back biding his moment and does little in the combats of the night. The Ogre rounds the corner, the party looks at towards the wizard and the wizard grins. He chants his magic as his eyes glow and casts Sleep. He then rolls a 1 and puts his entire party to Sleep and gets his head caved in by the Ogre. Fun times. They get one thing, let that thing be reliable.

2 – Unlimited casting is not a good option either

                I can hear the comments now, just allow the casters to cast unlimited spells with a risk and that solves everything. I am currently playing in a Microlite20 game where my character can cast not unlimited, but quite a few spells compared to his OSE counterpart. I can drop Sleep like it is nobody’s business. This makes fights boring for the other party members. Since I can cast it roughly 10 times, we can navigate most of a dungeon without many combats. I go out of my way to not cast it because I want other party members have a chance to shine. When you can cast that many spells at low level, even with the chance of failure, it can reduce the dramatic tension of a session a lot. Combat, Sleep, Bash, Next, Combat, Sleep, Bash, Next, Etc. Spells as a limited resource is a good thing and even plays into the fiction well. The wizard is tiring and cannot produce more magic, the cleric is desperate, and their faith is wavering. While I believe low-level casters, especially wizards, need a few more spells, unlimited spell casting just does not seem to fix this problem.

 

This supplement does have a critical system for magic if people are interested.

Conclusion

                As I said in the beginning, I do not want this to come off as an attack on Dungeon Craft. I love the channel and respect the Professor. This is just one professor sharing his opinion on the subject as well. I would highly encourage you to check out Dungeon Craft as a YouTube station and a FB book group, you will not regret it. I also want to state that I like DCC and Goodman games. I own several products. I encourage people to buy DCC, because even though I do not run it, I have farmed it for many ideas and their adventure modules are some of the best in print now.

This is one of my favorite of his videos and rings so true.

I have previous blog posts on my thoughts on Wizards and possible ways to improve them at low levels. Check them out HERE and HERE.

Like my work? Follow me on Facebook here.

3 Inexpensive Game Products That I Love

               I am frugal with my RPG dollars and you can see that these products meet that requirement. I love that we are in a time now when lots of price range options are around for RPGs. I hope you like these products and get lots of game time in with them. These are all products that I have personally used and enjoyed. They are a bit different in terms of theme, but each will give you things you can pull from for any campaign.

Machinations of the Space Princess

                This game to me radiates “cool”. It is self-described as “Sexy, Sleazy Swords & Sci-Fi” which really does fit the bill. I just like the overall theme of the game and the ruleset that goes along with it. The game comes with a BX-like rule system that has a bunch bells and whistles attached to give it a more space/sci-fi flair. The vibe the game is going for is much more Star Wars and Flash Gordon and less The Expanse or Traveller. It has all the neat robots, psionics, lasers, monsters, and cackling villains you could ever want for a setting like this. 
               
               It has an awesome Game Master’s section about GMing in general, and how to get the tone of the game just right. You get a section with a huge D100 chart of plot hooks, and tons of other random charts for creating space systems, planets, and creatures. These are like a much lighter version of version of Kevin Crawford’s Stars Without Number charts, with a HUGE amount of pulp sci-fi action. The tail end of the book has a short, but great starting adventure “The Siege of Proxima Bar” and after that is a metric ton of options and add-ons for the game. If you are into any Sci-Fi game, especially one that is using OSR mechanics like BX/OSE, this is a great product. You can easily port a lot of the content to another game, and the art is evocative of the genre. This is usually my most important factor in liking a game product, can I pull stuff from it for other games. With this game it is certainly the case.

You can find Machinations of the Space Princess here.

A Single, Small Cut

                I have previously posted about A Single, Small Cut but it was not one of my more popular posts, so I am going to rant about it again because I love it. It is an adventure made for Lamentations of the Flame Princess, but is compatible with pretty much any OSR system. It is a micro-adventure weighing in at only 8 pages, but is perfect for two avenues. One, it is one of the best one-shots you can get for the price, and I have personally run it at least a dozen times and never had a group not like it. Two, it is a great start to a campaign if you wanted to go that route. The features and backstory that it introduces is fun and interesting and any GM worth their salt can make a game that revolves around the premise. It comes with a great layout/map of an old, medieval church which I have used in other games. The adventure is also perfectly suited to about a 4 hour timeslot for a convention, or a local games day. All of this, and it is only $2. Everyone should have this book in their collection.

            I am trying to avoid spoilers in this review, but if you want more details on the book see my link below. I go into a full description of how I actually use the module at the table and what pre-gens I use for the events. This makes it simple to jump right into the action and get to playing. I cannot stress enough that I have run this for roughly 100 people and to my knowledge, everyone has come out happy.

You can find A Single, Small Cut here.

Want to see how I run this at my table click here.

Morgansfort

                Morgansfort is a modern sandbox adventure for Basic Fantasy. Basic Fantasy is easily compatible with any OSR system. The book is very inexpensive for what you get. I ran a weekly year-long campaign using BX with this book. The book provides good details on Morgansfort itself, the areas surrounding it, and three separate dungeon complexes within reach of the fort for the beginning party to explore. It heavily reminds me of Keep on the Borderlands, but it is filled out a bit more, with more areas to explore beyond a single cave network. I certainly have plans to use this again in the future, but a lot of my current players played in my previous games and the plot is ruined for them. A few more years when they all graduate, I am going to bust this one out again. The PDF is free, and the print copy is at cost because the designer does not want to make money on the project.

             This was one of the best campaigns I ever ran and my students still talk about it to this day. This gives you an amazing base to build upon, and Basic Fantasy has plenty of other cheap products to add to this adventure. You could expand this way beyond low levels, but keep Morgansfort as your home base. I think it is infinitely expandable and for the price is a steal. 

The physical copy of Morgansfort can be found here for under $4.

DriveThruRPG is currently having GM's Day Sale click HERE to see the deals.

I run Old School Essentials weekly and post our games to YouTube, click HERE to see.

Like my work? Follow me on Facebook here. 

               

Why I Made the Switch to Death & Dismemberment

                Death and how it is played out is always a funny and contentious topic for people playing RPGs. Many people want to stick to the letter of the law in the rulebooks, and many others think that harsher rulesets spoil people’s fun. There is no correct answer to this little problem, but there is a correct answer for your particular table. In the past few years I have experimented with several types of systems regarding death in my Old-School Essentials games. We really need to ask, “What purpose does death serve in the game?” Death is a mechanic, just like AC, so why is it needed? We could just as easily have characters always get knocked out, and come back to the game right after the fight. Is it to “punish” the bad players for making stupid decisions? I’ve found that many players play the game extremely smart, but bad luck can kill a character, so is that fair? If a character can go down in combat and get back up with no consequences whatsoever, do they have a motivation to play in a reasonable manner? Answering the question of “why” we have the mechanic in our game can give us an idea of what type of mechanic to use.

The first thing that I did for a while was go back to my 2e roots and allow characters to go to -10 hit points before death. I had them bleed out at a rate of 1 hit point per round unless bandaged. The pros to this system are that it can create some form of desperation on the battle field as a companion is bleeding on the floor. Since the range is so big though, 10 points, I often found that people would say, “Don’t worry, I’m only at -2 I’ve got like 7 more rounds.” This kills suspense and is basically an abuse of the mechanics, but it is hard to avoid. Overall the system felt a little too generous and players could abuse it only really having to worry about death with an unlucky critical roll.

Next I swung the opposite direction and just had players who hit 0 hit points rolled a save vs death. If they succeeded they were knocked out, if they failed, they died. This certainly created a lot of death in the game. I was averaging 1.5 PC deaths per session. This definitely created a sense of caution in my players, but almost to the point of stagnation. Players would endlessly debate options because everyone knew they were a single roll away from death and PC reset. Life was cheap and so were the characters that my players were creating. This also gave an advantage to classes like the Dwarf who have a great Death Save versus other classes. Dwarves were downright unkillable, especially the one who got a Ring of Protection.

This caused me to really think about what I wanted out of the death mechanic and I decided that I wanted the death mechanic to serve as a PC clock. The PCs start the game fresh as a daisy, but as the clock ticks, they gain scars, injuries, and possibly death. I decided to use Goblin Punch Death and Dismemberment v.23 as my go to death mechanic. This has some of the best features of the previous two systems, and eliminates a lot of the things I did not like about them too. The other great thing is that it is compatible with almost any OSR system.

For those that are not familiar with Death & Dismemberment rules, characters who reach 0 hit points are not automatically dead. Up until that point they are taking superficial damage, once they hit 0 hit points they are taking massive hits. They now run the risk of losing limbs, becoming blind, gaining massive scars, etc. This also can lead to some cool moments, I had a character battling several enemies, and he lost the use of his shield arm, had a concussion, but still battled on. Characters don’t want to go below 0 because major injury can happen, so the fear is still there, but death is not assured. They still might bleed out over the floor, but the time frame is much quicker and desperate. I now have some heroes with some great war stories, and the wounds to show for it. Over time their characters are becoming richer, but also are becoming more mangled and might have to retire. My players love this system compared to the previous versions I have used and it is right for my table.

I would highly suggest taking a look at the death mechanic that you are using and does it do what you want it to do? What do you want out of a possible PC death? Do you want it to be more dramatic? More cut and dry? Or for it to have lasting consequences. I prefer the latter, but I believe there are situations where all 3 are viable.

Goblin Punch blog can be found here and has lots of great content.


Like my work? Follow me on Facebook here. I recently added a Donations Button for people who want to support the blog with a one-time donation. For those not satisfied with a one-time donation, please consider joining my Patreon. The button is above too.

The Fight Over Fighters

               I was on a discussion not too long ago in a discord forum and the conversation came up that plain Fighters are often not used in B/X OSR games. The main argument is that almost any other class is better in most ways compared to the Fighter, especially the Dwarf. The critics may have a point especially at lower level. There is very little difference in a low level Fighter and a low level Cleric when it comes to combat. The Dwarf is more survivable than the plain Fighter and is at least his equal in combat. The Cleric actually levels faster than the Fighter and gains spell access and better abilities to combat undead. The Dwarf does have to get more XP than the Fighter, but it is not that much more for great saves and a whole host of abilities.

               In my most recent campaign I notices two things: One, my longstanding players always chose Dwarf over Fighter when making a martial character, and Two, players who did play Fighters often died when others did not. Is this exact science? No. This is just my limited experience with a limited amount of people. If you then use the Old School Essentials Advance Fantasy Genre Rules with Rangers, Paladins, Barbarians, etc. the Fighter really starts to lose its luster. Discussion then went on to, “How can we make the Fighter better/appealing?” I am compiling here some of the ideas tossed about in the forum, already used by other systems, or ideas that I came up with to make the Fighter a competitive choice for players.  

1 - Make the Fighter utterly dominate in fighting.

                This idea I know from Lamentations of the Flame Princess in that Fighters are the only class that gets better at fighting. This, to me, is the most extreme of the ways to make the Fighters better, but it certainly makes them distinct. Fighters are the only class that gets a to-hit bonus as they level up, this includes classes like Elf and Dwarf. At first level everyone gets a +1 to hit, and after that only the Fighter increases. You could do it the LotFP way and just give Fighters a +1 per level, or follow the standard progression chart in the OSE/BX books. This still makes every class special, because they all have their different perks, but fighting ends up being the Fighter’s perk.

                To me this works well within the LotFP ideology of play, and the fact that it focus on a lot of non-combat dangers. When combat comes, the Fighters are dominant, but combat is a bit rarer and more lethal. LotFP also tends to focus on lower level play, which I think supports this method a bit more. A 4^th level Fighter with a +4 versus a 4^th level Dwarf with a +1 while different, is not extremely different. A 9^th level Fighter with a +9 versus a 9^th level Dwarf with a +1 is a very big difference, especially when you consider the creatures you might face at that level. As mentioned above, this is a bit of an extreme method, but I promise you will get Fighters in your party if you use this system. If you are using the expanded classes from Advance Fantasy Genre Rules this becomes even more tricky, but still possible.

Devastating Opponents 

2 – Hit Die based weapon damage

                The first game I know of to use this is Dungeon World. The idea is that whatever die you use for Hit Dice is the die you use for damage regardless of weapon/attack. The rationale is that a Fighter with a dagger will likely deal more damage than a Wizard with a dagger. Different people use this rule in different ways and it is really up to the DM how they want to implement it in their game. Many people leave the idea of weapon restrictions out the door and allow Wizards and Clerics to use whatever, but the weapons do less damage. I have seen some DMs allow characters to use “oversize” weapons like polearms or two-handed swords and do one die type higher.

                This has the advantage of allowing Fighters to use flavorful weapons without losing effectiveness. This generally increases the damage that Fighters do at range with that solid D8 damage. This also increases the chance of a Fighter gaining a magical weapon. Many campaigns that I have run and played the characters get a magical weapon that is less than ideal for a Fighter. Something like a +2 dagger which in many parties would go to the Thief or Wizard, but Fighters now have a D8+2 damage dagger. That is pretty nice. The biggest issue that generally surfaces with this approach is the Thief. The Thief goes down to a D4 damage and that just does not feel right. I have heard many people homebrew further and allow the Thief to do a D6 damage while still retaining the D4 hit die. Also, this does not solve any problems realistically if you are using the Advance Fantasy Genre Rules, as Paladins, Barbarians, etc still get that D8 damage and appear more appealing than the Fighter.

Not a bad damage die.

3 - Weapon Specialization

                This is the simplest and easiest to add to the existing material by allowing the Fighter class to specialize in one weapon. This rule has various incarnations in lots of different version of (A)D&D, and I am not 100% certain where it first surfaced, possibly BECMI. I am in no way advocating an entire skill system with Weapon and Non-Weapon Proficiencies because I find that too cumbersome. A simple system though that is for Fighters, and only Fighters, can be a solid addition. This distinguishes the Fighter from the other classes, and gives it that advantage that makes them feel a bit more complete.

                This can be accomplished in several ways, the simplest I have seen is having the Fighter pick a weapon at level 1, that cannot be changed later, and get a +1/+1 non-magical modifier with that weapon. Voila, you are done. You might not think it is much, but when you have a character that already has a high STR adding an additional +1/+1 it really starts to stack. This begins to make the Fighter a combat master. Personally, I allow Fighters to specialize and get a +1/+2. It is a holdover from (A)D&D 2^nd Edition which I played so much in my youth and it makes it extra tempting. For those that are feeling brave you can add something for Fighters down the line like slightly expanding Weapon Specialization. I have not tried yet giving Fighters an additional Specialization at 5^th level, and then an extra attack with a Specialized weapon at 10^th. The original BX books talk about giving extra attacks at some point, but it is vague as to when to do it.

Pick one!

4 – Superior Protection

                So far we have only discussed making the Fighter better at killing things, what if we focused on making them a bit tougher. I have discussed in previous articles how I like the rule “Shields Shall be Splintered” from Trollsmyth. In general, this rule allows a character with a shield to sacrifice the shield in order to take no damage from a single attack. In my games I only allow Fighters to use this option. This has come in handy on numerous occasions and sets them apart from the other martial characters. This allows them to hang out in the front of group and take a beating playing up to that tough character mantra that they are often saddled with. This also allows Fighters to exist that do not roll super well on their Hit Die. They know for a fact, they can at least take one shot before they go down.

                I do put a few restrictions on this so that it does not get silly. One, Fighters can only carry one shield at a time. They cannot spam shields though they can get other people to carry extra for them. Two, this rule is only allowed with “proper” shields. Basically the Fighter cannot do this with makeshift items like “I hold the Goblin corpse out in front of me like a shield to block the attacks.” I generally will give them the AC bonus, but they cannot use the specialized rule. They need a shield created by an expert to take advantage.

Shields often break in combat.

                Overall these are just a few ways you can make some adjustments to have people want to play Fighters in OSE/BX. I would not recommend using all of them combined together, but find what works for you and your table. The Fighter is a classic, and one of the three original classes which I think has been expanded now in 5^th edition to around 13 now. We need our old friend to stand out, and be the expert martial warrior.

I went ahead and created a Facebook group for the blog, if you are interested the link is here.

Fate, Evil Eye, Honor and Major Virtues in Arabian Fantasy Setting

Fate

          Fate plays a major theme in Arabian Fantasy and should be included in games trying to emulate that feel.

The Lamp is a great example of Fate.

          When a character is faced with a situation that death is probable (DM’s discretion) the player may ask Fate to intervene. The player rolls a d20 on the roll of a 20, Fate will intercede in favor of the PC (description below), on the roll of a 1 Fate turns on the PC (description below). Each time this is used for a PC the chance of Fate turning increases by 1. Once Fate has turned on the PC, and if they survive, the number is dropped back to 1.

Fate’s Actions

          Fate does not guarantee anything, only tips the balance slightly one way or the other, the majority of action is still on the PC. Fate will give the PCs a fighting chance, but she promises nothing.

          As an example, if a player was to ask Fate to intervene on behalf of their PC who is falling off a cliff. If Fate decides to help, the PC might quickly see a root that is sticking out that they can attempt to grab, but they still must grab the root. If Fate was to go against them, they might find out not only is there a cliff, but there is a tiger at the bottom as well.

          Another example, if the PC broke into the palace to rescue the sultan from the evil vizier and is completely surrounded by guards, and is unarmed. The chance of survival is slim, but if Fate decides to help the PC the guards might decide to capture them, instead of killing them outright. If Fate turns against the PC, they might twist their ankle while moving away, thus making escape even more unlikely.

Beautiful Mosaic

The Major Virtues of the Setting

Honor

          In the Great Empire honor plays a role in that people are expected to speak truthfully and maintain an overall quality of honesty in all that they do. Honor is an umbrella term that covers several aspects of life including; fulfilling commitments, carrying out ones duty to the creator, kingdom, and family in that order, showing respect to all that show it towards you, and avoiding favoritism, falsehoods, and deceptions.

          Under this is also the concepts of fidelity in marriage and the fulfillment of the marriage contracts. Contracts can only be done between two willing adults, and the concept of a forced marriage is one that is without honor.

Optional Rule: If a DM decides to add Honor as a major component of their campaign it is recommended that they add a new saving throw for honor. Anytime a character’s honor is questioned, or if a situation calls for people believe one side over another, an honor check can be made. All PCs honor starts at 16 and decreases by 2 every time their saving throws naturally goes down. This saving throw is modified by a person’s CHA bonus.

Justice

          Justice is seen in many different lights throughout the Empire, but all in the setting believe in upholding some form of Justice. With the city-dwellers this is often in the form of legal codes and courts of law. While with the desert people the thoughts of justice are often more personal and a series of debts are usually formed between different peoples and clans over disputes. Bringing justice to a situation is bringing one closer to the Creator, who is all just.

         Covered under justice is also the tenants of being kind and forgiveness. It is expected that one of the faithful will forgive those that have wronged them, because the Creator has forgiven all men and women for their sins, thus the expectation is the same. The punishments for crimes are expected to be in proportion to the crime itself, with exceptions to be made for leniency in some circumstances.

         This also extends to animals with which should be shown “a compassion and mercy beyond all things.” It is expected that animals will be housed appropriately, not be overloaded, not beaten or tortured, not separated from their offspring at an early age, and slaughtering done in the least painful ways possible.  

Modesty/Humility

          “Without modesty, there is no faith,” is one of the more famous maxims the Prophet ever spoke. Interpretations of this maxim have varied quite a lot over time and in different parts of the Empire. Some interpret the ideas as modesty in the public world as well as the private world between the faithful and the Creator. Those on the more conservative end believe that both men and women should be covered when in public head to toe. The more progressive amongst the faithful believe you must come to the Creator in a modest fashion, but in worldly affairs it does not matter. Most of the faithful fall somewhere in the middle with both sexes having token veils worn about the face or even as a decoration in a sash.

          Humility is one of the most important virtues in the Empire. By remaining modest and respectful to others one can retain their humility. At the DM’s discretion a PC that has been particularly egregious in their lack of humility is asking to be struck by the Evil Eye (see below).

          This is usually dictated by certain patterns of speech and action, and common ways to remain humble. Claiming that they are “so rich I can buy the entire city,” is not considered humble about one’s riches. On the other hand saying, “The Creator has blessed my house so much, I might very well be able to purchase a city. All praise to him,” is remaining humble in the face of one’s success. Bragging about being “the best thief in the entire Empire,” is far from an act of humility. Though claiming, “My master trained me to be the very best pick pocket this city has seen in a generation,” is a different matter. In a successful battle one should not gloat over the dead, but bow the head in reverence to the creator for the victory.

Optional Rule: The Evil Eye is a curse placed upon those that are not humble in the face of all that is given to them. While under the effects of the Evil Eye people have a tendency to dislike the person and they suffer a -2 penalty on all reaction checks, and can never achieve a status beyond “indifferent/uninterested”.  If the seek out a local religious figure and do penance for their lack of humility (usually a quest) the curse will be lifted. If the PC chooses to ignore the curse and continue with their ways, the curse will increase and now include a -2 penalty to all d20 rolls, until they find a holy person capable of casting the Quest spell, and undertake a quest that lasts no less than 101 days and helps the faithful in some manner.

Piety plays a major roll in the setting.

Piety

          Being faithful is the charge of every person in the Empire. One is expected to follow the tenants of their faith and be consistent with those beliefs. Making sure that one makes time each day for religious observances and that one attempts to attend religious festivals and holidays is also held in high regard. Welcoming new members into the faith is also considered the highest marks of piety, though none should be forced to join or stay within the faith.

          One is expected as part of their piety to practice generosity with the gifts that they were given. Miserliness is highly discouraged and taking care of one’s neighbors and kin is just as much a part of faith as it is civic life. Helping those that are in need is considered a better act than praying in a mosque daily. Encouragement of the arts and sciences also falls under the term piety because with these often the community at large is enhanced, and the Creator’s bounty can be shared with more people.

Tolerance is also falls under piety and the beliefs and practices of all should be respected, as long as they do not violate other’s existence and freedom. While no particular faith is required in the Empire, those who have no faith in anything is often looked at quite oddly. Faithful tend to understand possibly believing in something else, but no belief whatsoever is often seems questionable.

Family

         One’s family should be one’s largest obligation, beyond that of the faith and the Empire. The faith is often considered one large family, and many of the rules that apply to families apply to all the faithful. One must respect and obey one’s elders and in turn the elders are expected to protect and care for those younger than themselves. General respects given to elders are not entering a room before them, not arguing with them, allowing their opinions first during meetings, and keeping a level head when in their presence.

         Guests are considered actual family while staying with a person. All rights and responsibilities are passed onto a guest as soon as they complete the Ritual of Salt (see below). Guest are usually given a feast on their first night in a home with an overabundance of foods and sweets. As the days go on the foods will become much simpler and the guest is expected to give a gift upon leaving the household. The general rule is that a guest should not stay for more than 3 nights without then becoming an active member of the household. Helping with the family business or chores and helping financially, if possible.

Ali Baba's maid before she stabs the Bandit Leader, he should have eaten the salt!

Optional Rule: Pact of Salt is a time honored tradition in the Empire. As soon as a guest arrives they are given food and drink, often fruits, cheeses, and coffee. Usually the salt is put into the coffee and that creates the Pact of Salt. This means that for as long as the person is staying under the roof of the host, the guest will do them no harm. The host, in turn, is also promising to provide for the guest and will not do the guest any harm while under their roof. It cannot be stressed enough how meaningful this a pact is to people, and the lengths people will go to avoid consuming salt, if they plan to do someone harm in their house.

          This is shown in the tale of Ali Baba where the Bandit Leader is disguised as a merchant and is trying to kill Ali Baba. When he comes to Ali’s home, he offers to feed the “Merchant” and he refuses stating he cannot eat salt due to dietary restrictions. Ali Baba’s maid recognized the Bandit Leader for who he really was and killed him much to Ali’s dismay. She then explained why he was refusing to eat salt, so he could kill Ali Baba. Even a murderous Bandit Leader respected the Pact of Salt, so should the PCs.


I went ahead and created a Facebook group for the blog, if you are interested the link is here.