I Strongly Suspect I'm Mad...

But I need to refine this a bit further...

Yes, if you can make it out, it's R.E. Howard's Hyborian Age affixed to E.G. Gygax's Oerth.


Oh, come on, as if the Suloise weren't related to the Stygians?

Supplement V: ___________

The aforementioned Supplement V: Carcosa has received a great deal of censure, not least for its supposed hubris in billing itself as the "next" D&D supplement after the original four (a bit of literary whimsy and speculative fancy that I, for one, rather enjoy), but also for its macabre and bloody content. Though, it must be said, the text itself is in no way puerile or lascivious in tone and said content is exclusively contained within the descriptions of the sorcerous rituals. Which are, I must point out, designed to effect horrid and barely comprehensible things, oft-times referred to as Lovecraftian horrors, and as such the terrible demands of such rites are to be fully expected.

However, the controversy is well worn (though barely a month old...) and I doubt if it shall be settled here.

Nor do I wish to focus on it.

My thought is rather to encourage the creativity of the vast horde of gamers that flock to this "scene", as the hipsters say, and throw down a gauntlet of challenge.

Write your own Supplement V.

Now, you might say, "But I liked Carcosa!", wunderbar. Do it anyway. As an exercise in creativity if nothing else!
Others may protest, "Why should I follow that objectionable work?" In short, to make it forgotten. There is no better way to erase something than to bury it with superior work. Hate Carcosa? Grand, show us the Supplement V that should have been!
Still others cry, "I don't even play OD&D!" Hey, neither do I, and I am not holding myself aloof from this. Grab the rules, the .pdfs are easily available, read them, and then start tinkering and writing.

I want to see a string of Supplement Vs, a mad, glorious, explosion of creativity and oddities that will enrich all our games. Because, as most of you know, even if you don't use the work in toto, you can invariably steal bits of it for inclusion into your own campaign.

There it is, a challenge I suspect few will read, and fewer take up. No matter. I will at least be working on my own contribution.

Supplement V: Nefaratus

"There Must be Some Way Out of Here." Said the Cleric to the Thief

For our short discussion today, I wish to consider the case of the cleric and the thief in D&D.

The esteemed and respected cleric is, by all objective standards, a powerhouse. Having access to all types of armour, many weapons (none perhaps so mighty and prone to enchantment as the fighter's noble friend the long sword, but still fairly potent), good hit dice, spells (and a dizzying array of them to boot, considering the potential for bonus spells due to a high wisdom score and the fact that a cleric may prepare any of the spells on the cleric list, provided the character can cast that level of spell), a decent attack strength, and the ability to turn undead. (And, in some campaigns, specially granted divine powers above and beyond these enumerated.)

The skulking and furtive thief is rather less so. Having access to some, mostly weak, armour, a decent panopoly of weaponry (including that champion of blades, the resilient long sword), fair hit dice (sliding to poor if one uses the B/X or BECMI thief), and some special abilities. Said special abilities, however, require a fair amount of luck to use successfully at the low levels.

So, one can plainly see that the cleric is the more powerful, less 'balanced' (to slip into neo-jargon for a brief moment) of the two classes.

Yet, it has been this author's experience that many players will pick a thief but only a few will willingly play a cleric.

Something about being presured into being the party's medic, I am given to understand...

With the prologue now out of the way, I present some of my meandering thoughts regarding the re-working of the cleric and thief classes.

The cleric, it would seem, started it's fictional life as a vampire hunter and slowly transmogrified into the all-around holy man (woman, elf, insect, horrible eldritch monstorsity, etc.) that it is today. It can not be doubted that the typical party will need some, and often a bit more, healing, but should one player be "forced" into serving such a role? Should the DM be "forced" to weaken encounters because the party lacks healing? I, in my near infinite wisdom, say, "No". In my next game, the cleric is not the standard sort of priest, neither is the ecclesiast - a cleric subclass more oriented to spell-casting than armed combat, the standard priest is just that, a priest. A normal man (0 level) who can conduct the appropriate rituals, knows the history and stuggles of the faith he/she serves, and can possibly invoke a blessing if pressed. In short, members of the varied clerical subclasses are special because they can invoke miracles.

Wandering back on point for a moment, in the Cassandrian Campaign, clerics are the chosen warrior-prophets of their dieties. Primarily focused on destroying the damned who still haunt the earth (or, in the case of evil clerics, known as anti-clerics, commanding such wretched abominations into malignant service...) and warring against the enemies of their faith. As such, they have fewer spell casting powers than the "by the book" cleric.

First of all, they do not possess spell casting powers at first level, a cleric's spell progression starts at second level (I simply and easily "move the chart down", i.e.: read the first line as pertaining to second levl clerics and so on), these miracle-workers must prove themselves to their gods. Secondly, a high wisdom score does not grant any bonus spells. Such powers must be earned, and as a result of this decision, I no longer need to worry about the players of magic-users complaining that they should get bonus spells for a high intelligence score... Thirdly, a cleric (including the ecclesiast and the shaman, but excluding the druid) must retain a prayer book detailing the varied miracles that they are able to invoke. Analogous to a magic-user's spell book, this prayer book (in the case of the shaman, this is usually a collection of fetishes, inscribed bracelets, or the like) allows the cleric to prepare their spells. This limits the cleric to a select number of spells, allowing the customisation of different faiths but avoiding the creation of thousands of different spell lists. These three things limit the spell-casting power of the cleric, but also free them from the burden of having to be the healer as the DM may not alot any healing spells to them.

The thief is a rather different problem. One that I am, as yet, unsure of the correct course of action. I do not want to strengthen their combat abilities as they strike me as less of a direct combatant than any other class. I am tempted to improve the chances of success at thieving abilities at lower levels, but what then? What is there for high level thieves? And yet, I like the class and want it to thrive in its odd little niche...

More thoughts later.

Shards of the Malachite Throne III

The Cassandrian Campaign, part II

Weapon proficiencies, as was vaguely mentioned last time, will be our starting topic for the day. In this field we venture towards simplicity and a mild concession to stories of old. In short, as much as it might seem we loathe brevity, any character can be proficient in any weapon. Background and career should, obviously, form a strong tendency towards certain weapons for certain folks, but if a player really wants their magic-user to be proficient in the two-handed sword, that weapon can be selected. That being said, it is still faintly foolish to do so, given the attack capabilities and hit points of a magic-user. The only bar to the selection of weaponry is in the matter of size. Penguins, for example, are simply unable to become proficient in the aforementioned two-handed sword because it is near six feet in length, whereas they are but three to four. Though it is possible for a penguin to become proficient with and wield the broad sword in two hands (calling it a two-handed sword), said weapon uses the broad sword's statistics. Another factor coming into play is that the philosophies, creeds, and religions of the milieu forbid or encourage the use of certain weapons and a clerical character will be penalized for going against their beliefs should they use a banned weapon (but, such a character may be proficient in such a weapon, if, for example, the character was in the military prior to hearing the call of faith). More details on the nature of these creeds and the weapons forbidden or encouraged will be presented later, once we have determined what they are.

Our next topic of dispute is that of multi-classing. This subject has never failed to cause disagreement, and we see no reason that such strife will stop now. Nevertheless, the rules for the Cassandrian Campaign are as follows:

Any character, regardless of race, may multi-class in any two available classes of different categories, provided all normal prerequisites are met. (i.e.: A player wishing their elf PC to be a multi-class barbarian-shaman, classes available to the elven race, must meet all the requirements for the barbarian and shaman classes. Said character could not, however, be a multi-class barbarian-ranger as those classes both belong to the 'fighter' category. Yes, this does mean humans can multi-class under these rules.) All earned experience points must be divided equally between the two classes.

Single classed characters must meet the normal minimums for their chosen class, but gain a +1 to their prime requisite (though this may not cause the attribute in question to exceed their racial maximum) to represent their greater focus.

Dual classing, as presented in the PHB, will not be an option.

Racial abilities generally remain the same as printed, though elves do not receive the bonus to hit with bow or sword (not typically using such weapons in their jungle homes) and humans receive a +10% bonus to all earned experience points.

More will be discussed next time, as some thought is needed to martial it into coherency.

Shards of the Malachite Throne II

The Cassandrian Campaign

The following will be a varied assortment of house-rules, tweaks, and general set-up for the next AD&D game I run. Proceed, worthy reader, at your own risk...

Set in and among the battered successor states of the once-mighty Cassandrian Empire and its dark rival, the Satrapies of Pyrithia. Whilst the Cassandrian states are a motley collection of sometimes warring kingdoms, most of Pyrithia has been consumed by some terrible magic unleashed in the last days of conflict, leaving behind only the Smoking Plains and the sinister Theocracy of Suthrek, whose vile sorcerer-priests scheme endlessly to gain dominion over the world.

Classes will consist of the following classes and sub-classes:

FIGHTER
Barbarian (revised)
Cavalier (revised)
Paladin
Ranger

CLERIC (revised)
Druid
Ecclesiast (new)
Shaman (new

MAGIC-USER
Illusionist (revised)
Necromancer (new)

THIEF
Assassin (revised)
Monk (revised)
Rake (new)

Those classes left un-noted remain the same as presented in the First Edition PHB, those noted as revised will have several alterations made from their official descriptions which I will detail in further installments, those noted as new are of mine own make and will be presented in their entirety in the future. For now, it is sufficient to say that the barbarian and cavalier will be strongly revised from their UA appearances, the cleric will have slightly lesser spell-casting prowess, more akin to that of the BECMI cleric, the ecclesiast is a less combat, more spell-casting oriented version of the cleric, the shaman is a tribal spell-caster, capable of both cures and curses and knowledgeable in the ways of the wild, the illusionist will see revisions in the types and kinds of magical items they might use and be overall lifted to the more valued level that their harsh entry requirements would seem to indicate, the necromancer is normally a wicked sort of magic-user, given to the raising of the dead, either to extort some secret knowledge or to command their rotting corpses to fight on his behalf, the assassin will see certain tweaks of a yet undefined nature, the monk will receive a full overhaul, again making its worth more in line with its prerequisites, and the rake is a minor spell-caster, chiefly of the enchantment and divinatory nature, confidence trickster and opportunist.

Standard PC races are: human, elf, dwarf, half elf, half orc, and penguin (found in Fight On!, issue 2).

Optional PC races are: half dwarf (more commonly known as 'derro') and orc, but due to these races foul habits and dire reputations, they should not normally be allowed. However, some players enjoy the unusual and enjoyment can be had even when the odds are stacked heavily against the PC.

Humans are found throughout the successor states and provide the bulk of the population. Those hailing from Suthrek will be of paler skin and more inclined to partake of the sorcerous arts.

Elves are found scattered in small, tribal, bands on the multiplicity of islands that comprise the Isles of Jade, directly south of the bulk of the successor states.

Half elves are typically found in the port cities of humanity, but some dwell in the tribes of their elven parent.

Dwarves once toiled in the mighty Norholt Mountains, but the devastaions that created the Smoking Plains afflicted the proud dwarven workshops as well. Earthquake and poisonous vapours - vapours that even affected the stout dwarves - levelled workshop after workshop, causing the dwarven people to flee to the lesser, but more stable, Elcanthran Peaks.

Half orcs are a questionable assortment of dubious characters. No one origin can detail their spawning and, in many cases, it is best not to ask...

Penguins are a chaotic race of waterfowl tricksters, included mainly because it amuses me, but partially because, having once read of them, it was impossible not to use them.

Next time: Weapon proficiencies, their care and feeding. Also multi-classing, racial traits, and the like.

Rules Philosophising, Part I

In this series of posts, I plan on warbling forth regarding various and sundry elements of the rules of A/D&D.

Though done to near death by many thousands of others, I can, no doubt, provide a startling level of illumination and clarity to the many facets I plan on babbling about. After all, my insight is matched only by my brevity and simple vocabulary.

Today's topic is the attribute bonus. Not those applied to the attribute, but those derived from it (i.e.: the to hit and damage modifier gained from a high strength score). Perusing the earliest versions of this great game, we can see that attribute bonuses are a tad thin on the ground. A high prime requisite would provide a bonus to earned experience points, a high constitution a minimal bonus to hit points, high dexterity an equally microscopic bonus to hit with missles, and our old and dear friend charisma determined the amount and loyalty of hirelings and whether or not a witch, upon capturing the PC, would turn him into a swine, or keep him enchanted as a lover. Not, perhaps, always vital to know, but something that should have been retained if only to prevent the concept of 'charisma is the dump stat'.

Flipping forward a half dozen odd years, to the Moldvay Basic set, we find a plethora of bonuses, many of them quite substantial. The PC's prime requisite still gives a bonus to earned experience points, but now virtually all attributes provide some other perk to the character. Whether it be additional languages, bonuses to hit, bonuses to saving throws, what-have-you. And these are no mere +1, but +1, +2, and +3! Only poor, abused, charisma is left in the cold, with only the amount and loyalty of retainers and a 'reaction modifier' left to it. And the words of old are gone, leaving us fearfully aware of a probable porcine fate.

AD&D's attribute bonuses are of much the same nature as the Moldvay rules, a tad higher in some cases, with better bells and whistles (save, once more, shivering and arthritic charisma) and the desire for higher and higher attributes (and their accompanying bonuses) was well founded at this point. Second edition, with the addition of the "Skills and Powers" books, fed the desire, enabling players to 'split' attributes, concentrating on the 'half' of the statistic that provided better bonuses (or, at least, so I saw).

And in the Third Edition bonuses are enshrined, not as mild perks, the rewards of good fortune with the dice, but as a needed part of how good a character is in her class (especially in regards to the spell-casting classes). Gone is the bonus to earned experience points (though given Third's advancement scheme, this makes no difference), but the remains are titantic in their importance to a PCs success. (Witness thus the abundance of "stat raisers" and such items.) Charisma, it must be said, is given a slight boost, but only for certain "builds", for most it remains even less useful than before as henchmen/hirelings/retainers seem excised from the rules (replaced by the feat-generated cohort).

So, where then, does this leave us?

I am, I fear, unsure. I would like to recapture the spirit, it seems, of the original rules and ratchet down the power of and perceived need for bonuses, but I am uncertain as to how to best go about this task.

A multiplicity of options will eventually be posted here.

Until then,

Good gaming.