While working on the new R&R document I keep noticing little errors and omissions from the first book. For example, I just realized I mention Hawks having the ability to see 80' in the dark but I failed to actually list them with Night Vision. Hah.
I don't actually have any idea how far a hawk can see in the dark in reality. I just know they are good at it. But that's a repeating theme I keep running into when doing research on animals for this game. A lot of animals have a reputation for a certain skill but finding hard data on just how good they are is not always easy. Swimming is a great example. I actually encountered instances where the same animal was described as being a good swimmer in one text but in another text it was said to NOT be a good swimmer.
So all of these descriptions are my best effort at distilling an animal's talents down to simple OSR style modifiers that must be weighed against other critters to make sense. I mean, everyone knows how agile cats are... but have you watched fossas climb trees? Makes me want to wear a "team fossa" tee shirt.
Oh... I guess that also means I'm working on a new R&R. Not sure if I posted about that yet. This is a standalone RPG. I started with basic OSR and I'm building from there. But more on that later.
Sunday, March 19, 2017
Sunday, March 12, 2017
Update on Life and Thoughts on Rabbits & Rangers
Since my last post I've been struggling with family health issues. My mom is sick. She has liver disease and diabetes and lots of complications as a result. She's doing "ok" right now, but it's always tentative and I'm in fear of the worst. So I've been a bit flighty and only sporadically productive.
I did manage to start my Dead Wizards campaign, though it was in the middle of all this personal stuff and I haven't given it the tender care it really deserves.
What I have been thinking about lately, in the creative realm, is Rabbits & Rangers. Specifically a standalone RPG. I'm quite proud of the book I created in 2016, but I've always wanted this to be a game of its own. Here's what I know right now.
• It's going to be OSR. Possibly a clone of B/X, with animalized changes.
• It'll have 100 animals instead of 50. The babirusa and pronghorn have already joined the ranks, along with a handful of others (horse, lemur, etc.).
• I hope to publish some modules/adventures for the game as well. I have a big fat list of ideas, many of which are parodies of existing modules. Last year when I playtested the rules I ran Sheep on the Borderland and Castle of Count Drake-Yulla... so those need to be written up and published for sure.
• The possibility of a Kickstarter is on the table. But right now it's only a distant notion, not the actual plan. I include this as an option in my planning because I'd like to see a nice physical book I can provide that would be a step above print-on-demand. We'll see how things shake out first.
I have no timeline for this. There's far too much work to do before I get there. It might be a summer thing or it might be a 2018 thing. I don't know yet. But it's probably going to be a thing.
I did manage to start my Dead Wizards campaign, though it was in the middle of all this personal stuff and I haven't given it the tender care it really deserves.
What I have been thinking about lately, in the creative realm, is Rabbits & Rangers. Specifically a standalone RPG. I'm quite proud of the book I created in 2016, but I've always wanted this to be a game of its own. Here's what I know right now.
• It's going to be OSR. Possibly a clone of B/X, with animalized changes.
• It'll have 100 animals instead of 50. The babirusa and pronghorn have already joined the ranks, along with a handful of others (horse, lemur, etc.).
• I hope to publish some modules/adventures for the game as well. I have a big fat list of ideas, many of which are parodies of existing modules. Last year when I playtested the rules I ran Sheep on the Borderland and Castle of Count Drake-Yulla... so those need to be written up and published for sure.
• The possibility of a Kickstarter is on the table. But right now it's only a distant notion, not the actual plan. I include this as an option in my planning because I'd like to see a nice physical book I can provide that would be a step above print-on-demand. We'll see how things shake out first.
I have no timeline for this. There's far too much work to do before I get there. It might be a summer thing or it might be a 2018 thing. I don't know yet. But it's probably going to be a thing.
Sunday, January 22, 2017
Tanith and Stuff
Warning: I say naughty words and talk
about sex in this one.
Haven't posted too much on ole G+ in
recent days. So what have I been up to, besides hitting FB with
political posts? What's the status? What's the scoop?
I haven't dived into Black Pudding #3
yet. I have 7 or 8 finished pages that MIGHT go in there, but they
MIGHT go into their own book. I haven't made up my mind. It's part of
a sandbox setting that would not fit in an issue. Maybe I'll dish it
out one part at a time. I don't know.
I'm doing a bit of commission work and
thinking about slowing down on it so I can focus on my own stuff. I'm
always happier when I'm doing my own thing. Call me selfish. I like
to do what I like to do and I don't like to do what I don't like to
do. And while commissions are fun and I love getting my work out
there to more eyes I sometimes feel hemmed in or dragged down when I
have several on my plate at the same time. I've never been cut out
for that kind of work like so many other great artists seem to be.
My good friend Cyd is running a Penny
Hack for us on Mondays, which is probably wrapping up soon. At that
point I will ask my cohorts to indulge me once again and dive into a
campaign that is largely inspired by mixing up Tanith Lee, Robert E.
Howard, Frank Frazetta, and Richard Corben. Some good ole S&S in
a project I've been calling Dead Wizards (or Kanebok... not sure how
it will appear yet). I ran this once before and it was nice but this
is a totally revamped version. Trying some ideas. Breaking the old
game down and working from its bones to make a new toy. If all goes
well, this will be one of my 2017 publishing projects.
And, while I'm on it, I just gotta say
Tanith Lee is fantastic. And queer as fuck, as my friend put it. I
read Death's Master when I was 14. Have you read Death's Master?
Homosexuality, attraction to cross eyed people, necrophilia, and a
sex-shifting hero. It's no wonder I was so comfortable in my 20s
drawing boobs and bits. Any inhibitions I had about whether or not
sex was an appropriate topic for fantasy were destroyed by Lee's
verbosity.
I'm currently enjoying Night's Master
(the first book of the Flat Earth series) on audio. It's been many
years since I read it. I had forgotten just how twisted it could be.
You get demon-on-mortal sex right there in part one and then a
dwarf-like demon (the Drin...sort of like duerger I think) fucks a
giant spider. Yeah.
I mean, these are not porn books. They
are not titillating. They don't get you off. These are dark, twisted
faerie tales. Lee weaves wondrous, luscious, beautiful tapestries in
her books. Each tale blends into the next, linking characters across
space and time. This is where I got my great love for mythological or
fable-like settings. IN my own broader fantasy setting, for example,
there are a set of core entities. There are 12 of them, more-or-less.
They are the gods and demons of the ancient world and they show up in
nearly all my work. The Worm Witch, mother of 100 Dooms, was in
Pan-Gea and again in a little sci-fi comic I did called Red Path. And
she has been mentioned in numerous Labyrinth Lord games I've ran.
When I run little one-offs I talk about Black Wing, the Bringer of
Death. Or Hunter-Raven, also known as Frimm, God of War and the
North. I talk of Nexus the World Tree and Sun and Moon. All of these
beings linked together in a single narrative but split across many
worlds.
This I owe to Tanith Lee's brilliant
Tales From the Flat Earth series. Dark and delightful they are
indeed.
Lots more to say about Tanith Lee's influence. But not tonight.
Saturday, January 7, 2017
Thursday, December 29, 2016
FIGHTERS!
Fighters don't
need much. Their great strength is in their lack of limitations. They
can use any weapon, wear any armor, and they have the best attack
rolls in the game.
But hey... here
are some bennies for fighters that kinda make sense to me.
Cleave or Combat Dominance: Kill
a bastard, make another attack. Limit equals level.
Attack and Attack Again: At
level 9 you get 2 attacks per round.
Weapon Focus: You
practice your ass off and gain +1 to hit and damage with a single
type of weapon.
The Vera Rule: You
can forgo the weapon focus advantage and pick an actual, single,
specific weapon item that you love oh so much and oil it and clean it
and lick it... and gain +2 to hit and damage with that specific
weapon. You MUST use a weapon for 1 full level before you can rightly
name it as your Vera... so don't lose it.
Labels:
B/X,
D&D,
Fighters,
GMing,
House Rules,
Labyrinth Lord,
OSR
CLERICS!
Ye olde cleric
suffers from but one underlying problem. It is a class that screams
out for religious specificity but it is generic as hell. Are we
seriously to believe that priests of Kindheart the Good have the
exact same restrictions and spell lists as priests of Cutheart the
Wicked? I don't think so.

Like the thief,
the cleric has has its fair share of debate and house rules over the
years. And this is another example, in my opinion, where the Second
Edition of the game really seemed to address the problem and kinda
got it right. If you haven't read the 2e description of the Priest in
a while you should check it out. The whole thing about spheres of
influence is a bit fiddly for me and kinda restrains things but it's
a valiant effort to make priests more interesting to play (for the
record, the “cleric” is the generic priest class of 2e... the
good old class we all know and love).
I'm not breaking
new ground here. But this is how I handle clerics and how I'll be
handling them moving forward. The stuff I'm rattling on about below
is not always clearly defined. This is because each campaign may have
a totally different set of gods or a different way of interacting
with divinity, if at all. If the thief is a specialist who is
self-determined, the cleric is a specialist who is utterly
constrained in their choices once they make the choice to follow a
path of worship and service to a higher power. Those constraints
should be tailored to suit the campaign if you want the reveal a
fuller range of the cleric's great potential as a character class.
Anyhow... this is
what I do...
PRAYER ROLL: Clerics
have to pray for spells. I allow them to choose any spell from their
list without preparing them ahead of time. Instead, they pray in the
heat of the moment for miracles! This is a huge benefit. It turns
your spell list into a Swiss Army knife, though you still have the
same number of spell slots.
The
catch is you have to pray for the power in order to cast it. So the
player rolls a d6 and on a result of 1 the gods are deaf, ambivalent,
or downright snobbish and refuse to grant the power. The spell does
not work.
I
fooled around with fiddly rules that would account for falling out of
favor, changing the die type up or down. But in the end I think that
sort of thing works best if left entirely up to DM fiat. If the
cleric is acting obviously out of alignment with their god, then the
DM could change the failure range to 1-2 on a d6 until the cleric
atones and corrects their behavior.
In
the first campaign I ran using this rule I had a situation or two in
which the cleric was in very good favor and I either waived the
prayer roll for one or two spells or I had the player roll a d8
instead. But those rules are not codified and I don't think they
should be.
SPECIFICITY:
If I'm running a one-shot at a con or something like that I'll just
use the cleric as-written (with the prayer roll). But when I'm doing
a campaign or I have more time for prep I want deity-specific
clerics. What makes the priestess of Jeff the God of Chairs
functionally different from the priest of Bonan the God of Beheading?
If there's no functional difference then the religions become all
color... kind of meaningless in game terms.
So
I'll usually do one or two or all of the things below in order to
define a cleric of god X vs. a cleric of god Y.
- Change the turn undead power to something else. Maybe it doesn't make as much sense for a priest of the god of machines to turn undead. Instead, maybe they control golems and automatons using the same rules. In my home campaign, the clerics of Frimm the War God can summon the spirits of slain warriors to fight with them instead of turning undead.
- Change the banned weapons. It makes sense to limit weapons and armor if it seems like the god in question would care about those things. So play with that idea. I have one cleric sub-class who worship an evil deity that only allows them to tote specially cursed ritual daggers. Another sub-class worshiping a god of tricks and thievery may only pack small weapons that are easily hidden.
- Limit the spell list. This one seems simple but can lead to more work than you expect. Depending on how vast your cleric spell list is, you might find it hard to come up with appropriate spells in the right numbers. You might have to... invent new spells! I heartily encourage you to do so. After all, doesn't it make sense that Jibber the God of Babbling has a handful of spells related to talking? And why would a priestess of Rikki the God of Mongooses have any interest in turning sticks into snakes?
- Set requirements for the cleric that aren't related to spells or combat. A cleric is not a priest of the temple required to be in attendance day in and day out but they ARE a representative of the god abroad. So they MUST show people what their god is all about. That might require proselytizing, preaching, and cajoling for new converts. Or they might belong to a secret order and might actually hide the fact that they are a cleric at all. They might merely be required to spend x turns per day making a sacrifice or reading a sacred text. If you feel like you've given the cleric a few too many bennies in other areas you can hit them hard with daily requirements and restrictions on behavior. See the classic paladin class or maybe even the cavalier for examples of that. Of course it CAN get silly if you go too far... a cleric of Jeff the God of Chairs should not be required to sit in every chair they find... right? Hmmm....
I guess the trick is to play an intuitive balancing game with the
cleric if you're going to make each one god-specific. Personally, I
TRY to keep the standard cleric XP table intact no matter what I do.
So all clerics advance at the same rate and have the same number of
spells. Then I just try to make sure each one's special strengths are
balanced against the others. You don't have to do it that way, but
that's what I choose.
And ain't that the great thing about screwing around with this game?
Labels:
B/X,
classes,
clerics,
D&D,
GMing,
House Rules,
Labyrinth Lord,
OSR
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
THIEVES!
Disclaimer: This is not the first time
I've talked about thieves nor is this topic a rarity in the OSR
community. It seems there is something about the good ole thief that
begs for attention.
So the B/X thief sucks. In fact, all
the versions of the thief sucked. Somebody didn't want a first level
thief to be any good at sneaking around and stealing things. Oh sure,
the XP is cheap, but those 15% and 20% skill ranks are not going to
make anyone swoon.

But my flavor is basic. And thus
Labyrinth Lord. So naturally I house rule it.
I'm a bit of a stickler for keeping as
much of the original intact as possible and adding as few new things
as necessary. For the thief, I added more than I normally would. But
the thief is the original skills-based class so why not indulge a
little?
Here are the two rules I apply to
Labyrinth Lord and B/X thieves. The first rule actually applies to
ALL old school thieves, in my games at least.
ONE: The General Rule of Thief
Skills is Skills Bypass Risk
When the thief makes a skill roll they
are attempting to do the task so well that there's no possibility of
failure.
If Dirty Durk the thief rolls a 5
against his crappy 20% Move Silently skill guess what? He makes no
noise. At all. Nothing can POSSIBLY hear him.
But if Dirty Durk fails that roll what
does that tell us? He failed to avoid risk. He wasn't successful at
using his skill. He wasn't SILENT. It doesn't mean he was actually
heard. What you should do then is follow the normal protocol you
would follow for any other class. Maybe make a hear noise check for
monsters or just wing that mother. Whatever works for Nadia the
Scarlet Mage in this case also works for Dirty Durk.
Don't be a dick and say “You failed
your Move Silently roll. The trolls heard you coming down the
corridor like a falling piano.” Unless, maybe, Dirty Durk rolled a
100 or something like that.
TWO: I Give Thieves Bennies
I have a short list of thief
specialties. I will let thieves pick 2 to start with and 1 at every
odd level (3, 5, 7, etc.). It makes each thief different in
significant ways by giving the player meaningful choices. It makes
thieves sexier... as other games figured out (DCC, Lamentations,
etc.).
Here are the thief's specialties. Some
may be selected multiple times (stacking). Also note that I do use
the elegant Advantage/Disadvantage system from 5e. In case you have
been living under a rock, this is just shorthand for rolling twice
and keeping the better or worse roll, depending.
Acrobat:
Dex
check to do stunts or leaps and avoid being slowed down by terrain or
being pinned.
Arcane:
Can
cast Read
Magic
once
per day in order to read and cast spells from arcane scrolls. Must
pass a saving throw vs. Spells to successfully cast. Stacking adds
one more casting of Read
Magic.
Assassin:
Backstab
damage is increased by x1. Stack for additional x1 each.
Blades:
Damage
with daggers and knives is increased to d6. Can stack one time to
gain Advantage on dagger and knife damage.
Fast
Talker: Advantage
on Reaction Rolls.
Forgery:
Copy
any normal document or mimic handwriting with Dex check. Attempt to
copy arcane spell scroll by making a save vs. Spells minus the spell
level per spell to be copied. Takes 1 week per spell per spell level.
Failing a roll with a 1 indicates some nasty mojo and ill luck to
follow.
Goon:
Advantage
on hit point rolls at each new level.
Knife
Thrower: Range
on thrown knife, dagger, or shuriken is doubled. Stack for +1 to hit.
Lucky:
Advantage
on two rolls per day. Stack for additional Advantage roll.
Misdirection:
Sleight-of-hand
tricks with cards, coins, rabbits. Can confuse 1d6 onlookers on
failed save vs. Spells, causing them to lose an action. Can confuse
opponent in combat on failed save vs. Spells, allowing backstab
damage on hit (once).
Skill
Focus: Advantage
on one thief skill. Stack for more skills.
Slippery:
AC
is improved by 2 for one round if employing defense only. Stacking
improves by 1.
Spider
Climber: Can
climb across horizontal surfaces such as ceilings same as any other
wall. Also, Advantage on climbing rolls.
Thug:
Knock
out target on blunt weapon backstab. Save vs. Paralysis negates.
Knockout time = margin of the failed save times thief level.
Ventriloquism:
Throw
voice up to level x 10'.
Labels:
B/X,
House Rules,
Labyrinth Lord,
OSR,
RPG,
thieves
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
Love
![]() |
OK Ookla... play it cool... |
OSR games are mostly about exploration,
combat, and acquiring treasure. Mostly. And let's be honest. People
who enjoy playing Labyrinth Lord are pretty much in it for the
adventure, not the realism. And they damn sure aren't there for love.
But it could be loads of fun to inject
some romance into the game, right? I mean we joke about it all the
time. My players are constantly running these little background arcs
in-character in which they have crushes on NPCs and even other PCs.
It is usually played up for comedy.
But in the last post I mentioned the
Big Nasty Table of Messy Stuff. On that table could be a simple line
such as “You are madly in love.”
You get that result, and there's a
sub-table. Maybe it has stuff like “In love with noble or
princess.” or “Your love interest is a paid killer.” or “You
are mad for a wizard but too scared to reveal it.”
I would allow such a player to opt out
of the sub-table and choose to be in love with an even scarier
person: a fellow PC. By choosing a PC to be in love with they would
earn maybe 500 bonus XP. Not a bad thing for a starting character. If
you're a thief, you're nearly halfway to level 2 already!
Of course, you gotta check your
context. What kind of players do you have? If you're gaming with all
kids, it's a crush. Puppy love. “Oooo... you LIKE him.”. If it's
all adults it can be more than that. If it's a mix of adults and
kids, don't use romance at all. I would substitute something
deliberately funny like “You are in love with beer.”
And how might a lovestruck PC act? You could KISS it (keep it simple stupid). When the player acts toward their love interest in a way that seems less than charitable ("Eh, I let her get eaten by the grue while I try to find a way out.") you could require the PC to pass a saving throw vs. Spells. On a failed roll, their actions cannot go against the other character. If they are in trouble, the PC has to help.
Yeah. So now I'm probably going to
write some of these ideas up for Black Pudding. And do the Big Nasty
Table of Messy Stuff.
This is what happens when I have a week
off from work.
Character Perks
When running Labyrinth Lord or B/X I like to allow players to choose one thing
that is special about their new PC. This could be a special item,
contact, spell, power, knowledge, or just about anything else they
can dream up. I don't quantify the quality. We haggle over it. I have
in mind the kind of limit I want. It should be something that I don't
think would break my game. They tell me in words what they want and
they make suggestions on how it should work, mechanically. I consider
it, make any necessary tweaks to the mechanics, and roll with it.
This has a few awesome benefits. First,
it gives players a really fast buy-in to their new PC. But
it isn't oppressive. It doesn't require a backstory novella, just a
single line or two about one thing. That single line or two gives me
windows into the new PCs' world that I can use in building the
campaign. And if one of them dies, so what? That tidbit of
information that helped guide the campaign is still valid. It still
stands. We don't have to abandon it because the character to which it
was originally attached is no more. If there was a kingdom of rat
people beneath the city before the PC died those rat people are still
there.
Here are a couple of examples from the
last campaign I ran.
-A PC witch who as actually three
witches. The Strange Sisters. The player's idea was that the sisters
would always be holding hands and would act as one. So he still got
one attack per round, casting one spell per round, moving at the
normal rate, and so on. In fact, in hindsight the “benefit”
didn't really confer any benefits. It was just cool. Like gaming with
the three witches from DC comics.
Now, near the end of the campaign the
Strange Sisters died. I believe they were crushed by a giant worm, if
I remember. BUT... I decided that their trinity should have an impact
and I tweaked things until it was revealed that one of the sisters –
the eldest – lived. Sure, she was a bit flummoxed that that her
sisters were gone but she was still around. With a catch... I didn't
tell the player this at first, but the witch had essentially cheated
death and was living on borrowed time. Each time she was hit with any
attack from that moment forward she would have to save vs. Death or
die.
-A PC with a weird luck power. I can't
remember exactly how it worked. But basically he had a 50/50 chance
of getting “lucky” in a given situation once per day. That
allowed him to enact his luck power when he knew his chances were
crap. It really didn't come up very often in the campaign, but it was
cool.
-A PC with a cloak of fireflies. Sort
of. He was surrounded by glowing bugs that acted as a soft light and
could potentially have some other benefits. Again, those didn't
really come up very much. But they added ambiance.
Arguably, you could do things like the
bug cloak as mere color and have no mechanical benefit from it. I
could describe my elf PC as being razor thin and having glowing
eyes... but that's not going to get me a Light spell.
But I like letting the players be
creative and also granting them some minor benefits from it. Of
course, the context of the campaign matters too. If its low fantasy
then I would limit these special perks to mundane things. You gotta
think contextually.
All of this mental masturbation leads
me to consider how to use other interactions in the game besides
magic and combat. What I mean is, perhaps prices can be paid up front
for special bennies. Complication tables, natch. You want to levitate
at will because you're an awesome level 1 wizard? Roll a couple of
times on the Big Nasty Table of Messy Stuff.
Which leads me to romance...
Hit Point Tracking Bubbles
The more games I run the more I learn
about my own needs as a GM. One tool that I started using a few years
ago and that has become indispensable to me is the hit point tracker,
or hit point bubbles.
I want to say that I saw hit point
bubbles many years ago in a module. But I honestly can't remember if
that's true or not. I know that the adventures written for BasicFantasy RPG use hit point boxes and it is probable that I picked up
the idea when I first started perusing the OSR in 2012 by checking
out BFRPG materials. In any case, I used hit point trackers in my
first module Howler and in every adventure since. And I use them at
the table in any game I run.
The idea is simple. If the monster has
5 hit points you make 5 boxes, bubbles or some other mark. If a PC
deals 2 points of damage you check off 2 bubbles. It's fast and easy
and you can keep talking while doing it. There's no math involved, no
drain on your brain even for a second.
Use a pencil, not a pen. Because trolls
heal, right?
Here's an example of some hit point
bubbles in one of the one-page dungeons for Black Pudding #1.
![]() |
The Vexx is vexed! |
You can also use the bubbles to remind
you of events that might happen as a creature is wounded. Remember
the “bloodied” condition from 4e? You can love or hate 4e but
this concept is fantastic and truly useful. When a creature's hit
points are reduced by 50% (bloodied) something special happens. They
go all raging or they run or whatever.
![]() |
The Vexx is getting scared... |
This idea has proven so useful to me I
started applying it wherever resource tracking is involved. I used
bubbles on my one-shot and con game character sheets to keep track of
spells, torches, or whatever else is needed. I didn't use them for PC
hit points, but I definitely might start doing that.
Anything that keeps a game flowing and
reduces downtime is a win. Ticking off some bubbles, to me, is far
less mentally taxing than subtracting or adding numbers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)