Tabletop RPG Catch All

For any that are interested, I'm involved in a group of local game designers and content creators who are working to build up a bit of a hub for RPG stuff happening here in Aotearoa/New Zealand.

We've got a website up, and there will be a bunch of things happening next week to kick it off: some game bundles and streams will be part of it all.

I ordered a copy of MÖRK BORG through my FLGS and it arrived this week. I can't stop gushing over how gorgeous the book is. It's by far the most stunning RPG book I've ever owned.
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/E99rEJy.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/IUefOmI.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/0iah26A.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/4yQpjYm.jpg)

If you'll indulge the element of self promotion, the KiwiRPG game bundles are now available for our Aotearoa New Zealand RPG promotion week.

KiwiRPG week drivethru bundle and KiwiRPG week itch bundle

I have a game in each, but I'm posting mainly because I thought you all might be interested in all the other stuff them.

If you want but don’t yet have Volo’s Guide to Monsters or Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes on D&D Beyond, you have about a week to buy them before they are delisted.

Hmm, so they're being superceded by a new book?

Trachalio wrote:

I ordered a copy of MÖRK BORG through my FLGS and it arrived this week. I can't stop gushing over how gorgeous the book is. It's by far the most stunning RPG book I've ever owned.

I have this one as well, and I agree - its really special and great looking.

I just cant understand the rules, at all - they are setup completely different from any other rpg I've ever read (And I've read a LOT), and I gave up last time, about half-way through, seeing how little sense the game made to me. Its like its written for people who already know the system and the setting.

After backing cy_borg, I worry its more of the same.

fenomas wrote:

Hmm, so they're being superceded by a new book?

They’re being replaced by Monsters of the Multiverse. It was available as part of a physical bundle earlier this year. Its standalone release is next week.

Razgon wrote:
Trachalio wrote:

I ordered a copy of MÖRK BORG through my FLGS and it arrived this week. I can't stop gushing over how gorgeous the book is. It's by far the most stunning RPG book I've ever owned.

I have this one as well, and I agree - its really special and great looking.

I just cant understand the rules, at all - they are setup completely different from any other rpg I've ever read (And I've read a LOT), and I gave up last time, about half-way through, seeing how little sense the game made to me. Its like its written for people who already know the system and the setting.

After backing cy_borg, I worry its more of the same.

I felt the same way after reading it, but I knew going in that it was rules lite... I just didn't realize HOW lite those rules would be. Like, I still don't quite understand how I could roll 7:7 to burn the book? It's all d6 rolls, right?

EDIT: I googled "mork borg burn book" and I realized that they do tell you when:

IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZE8a8GXgAAt2vP?format=jpg&name=small)

You never actually roll that 7:7, it's when the 7th Misery happens. No matter what you roll, that seventh Misery will always be 7:7.

I'm watching the first episode of "New Game, Who 'dis?" where they play Mork Borg and hopefully that'll help me understand it better:

kenada wrote:
fenomas wrote:

Hmm, so they're being superceded by a new book?

They’re being replaced by Monsters of the Multiverse. It was available as part of a physical bundle earlier this year. Its standalone release is next week.

Yeah, mostly the content is unchanged aside from, afaik:

- the way creature statblocks use spells has been updated more in line with the idea of them being abilities rather than "spells" per-se. (which is to say they don't treat them like PC spells anymore, which is a HUGE relief from the DM side of things, imo) They're more like other X uses per day abilities now.

- A lot of realm specific backgrounds for things like Orcs and Drow has been stripped out in favour of giving them a broader (and less racist) range of societies and such. So not ALL Dow are evil Lloth worshippers, Orcs are not specifically brutal savages simply by virtue of being orcs, etc, etc. Also the removal of realms-specific stuff is to bring them more into the idea of there being a D&D multiverse and not just focused on Faerun (which, of course, was because they have a multiverse anthology book and Spelljammer coming up next)

And I think that's pretty much it. Oh and I think revised player "monster" ancestries, too, collected from various previous books.

In other news i've been sitting down with CITY OF MIST and OMG. I think i found my ideal Pbta gateway game.

Going to be running a couple of sessions of the "Nights of Payne Town" campaign over next week for a couple of different groups to try to iron out how everything works but i am hugely impressed by the fun way you create and develop characters in that game.

And also a nice supernatural noir detective game will make a nice change from D&D

I maybe revisiting this topic that has already been discussed.
So I apologize in advance if it has been touched on:

The deal with OGL and SRD is you can use whatever is contained within the SRD freely. But anything outside the SRD better be completely custom or you run the risk of revoking the license (OGL)?

Also the current SRD is for 5.1 but that doesn't mean I can't based something off of 3.5 SRD still, right?

Other than that, does anyone have good resources or youtube links on creating off of SRD OGL?

WotC used to have an OGL FAQ on their website. Fortunately, it’s still available via the Internet Archive.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200713...

I haven't been following the details, but I seem to recall hearing that the OGL used by WOTC these days is actually a good deal more restrictive than the original 3.5 OGL?

Ok As far as I know, going mostly from memory...

Anything in the SRD is fair game for non-official 5e (*NOT* D&D) content. I believe it's pretty much anything within the free basic rules excluding specific lore related creatures and characters (so no Tasha's Hideous Laughter - it's just Hideous Laughter, no Tieflings, Beholders, Illithid/Mindflayers etc. But you could have Devilkin, Eyebeasts and a Squidwizard). Anything you make this way can be sold anywhere, and copyright is yours, no problemo but you cannot mention wotc or D&D AT ALL, not even the logo (which is why they all put something like "for the worlds most popular RPG", or these days most likely just a 5e logo).

The tricky part also comes in the fact that now that WotC has updated how their statblocks work, you're kinda limited to the ORIGINAL legacy versions of those statblocks in the SRD. I'm not 100% sure on the legality around using the new updated stuff (such as Mythic actions, or the new way spells are represented for some critters) but my gut feeling is they would clamp down on that. So that might mean a bit of rewording/coming up with some sort of alternative version of the same sort of thing if you wanted to use similar features.

Anything outside of the SRD, within certain limitations*, CAN be published but it needs to be through the DMs Guild, and then D&D take a 50% cut AND the rights to any content using their specific property (so if you made a new statblock for say, Elminster, they can then take that and do whatever they want with it. However if you gave Elminster a brother named Bart who's non-canon then i believe they COULDN'T use that, and rights would remain with you. I THINK. Best to assume that if you want to maintain full control over your best content, you'd want to keep clear of D&D copyright stuff specifically and go the SRD route.

*The limitations are it has to be ONLY for approved books currently released for 5e. Off the top of my head that would be : Anything Faerun/Sword Coast, Ravenloft, Eberron and the WotC owned 3rd party properties (Ravnica, Theros and Strixhaven). Also Spelljammer and Dragonlance will likely be approved shortly after they release.

You CAN'T make content for non-wotc 3rd party properties that they don't have the full rights to (so no Exandria/CR content, or Aquisitions Inc, etc, etc. And you can't specifically make 5e DMs Guild products for legacy D&D products (e.g. no Greyhawk, Planescape, etc). You can vaguely get away at referencing them a little (so you can mention a planeswalker having arrived from Sigil, for example, but you can't set an adventure there - it's a bit fuzzy)

Honestly have no clue as to using earlier SRD's for older versions of the system but you'd certainly not be able to use any actual "D&D" content for all of the above reasons, I would think. I'm sure you could still use earler SRD's to make your own ground-up 3.5 game or something if you could track down the relevant documentation. *shrug*

In other news, I played my first game of Bluebeard's Bride last saturday as part of Magpie's Curated Play program. Was a bit worried that the other players were all cis dudes but I've worked with the GM now on several projects and it turned out to be a lot of fun. Recommend giving the game a shot, but it's NOT for the faint of heart. (Feminist horror with lashings of body horror included - definitely make use of those X cards and lines & veils)

I am also HELLA into City of Mist right now. It's remarkably fun and makes a NICE change from all the fantasy nonsense!

Whoa! That looks really cool. The art style and theme really remind me of The Wolf Among Us, the Telltale adventure game about faery tale characters living among normal people in a city and trying to get by. Super cool!

The latest weird thing I discovered is Apollo 47 by the guy who made Thousand Year Old Vampire.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/m/produ...

Apollo 47 imagines a future where walking the surface of the Moon is a little bit boring. You engage in workaday astronaut activities using a simple improvisatory rules set to play in a quiet world of technobabble and the slow progression of science. If something exciting happens please stop play immediately and go do something else–you are in the wrong game.
This zero-prep game of improvisatory radio chatter can be played through just about any communications medium for any length of time.

1 page contains the game
9 pages contain advice on how to play the game
13 pages contain useful prompts for operating the game
1177 pages are reproductions of NASA manuals and papers related to the Apollo missions which can, if you need it, provide prompts to spur you on. Spoiler: I never use the prompt pages and don't really expect you to do so. They just aren't necessary for play.
This book is a tremendous folly. It's ludicrous and bloated and couldn't make me happier. If you aren't joining me in hearty guffaws at something this THIS then stick with the PDF. You'll be fine.

So bizarre. I'm surprised Monster Mike didn't get a box quote on it.

Thank you for all the responses. The picture is becoming clearer.

Sadly, though I guess it isn't really that sad, it is looking like I have to do everything from scratch for what I plan to do. Unless there is some free to use and modify game mechanic dice roll system out there.

I wanted to modify the d20 system in either Pathfinder (more likely Starfinder) or D&D (most likely 3.5e). I wanted the system to do most of the heavy lifting while tweaking what sub classes do and streamlining how you gain feats. I didn't really want to got whole hog and come up with spell progression, all new monsters, etc. I probably only wanted to change less than 20% of the system.
But at least Pathfinder/Starfinder's OGL implies that it must be compatible with the Starfinder systems. You can add on or new but not even tweak some systems because it will break compatibility with Starfinder and invalidate the OGL

It will be a ton more work but I can do it so why the hell not I guess?

Mixolyde wrote:

Whoa! That looks really cool. The art style and theme really remind me of The Wolf Among Us, the Telltale adventure game about faery tale characters living among normal people in a city and trying to get by. Super cool!

The premise is actually not too far of. The players are all noir style investigators, linked with a Mythoi - powerful entities from mythology, history, fairy tales, pop culture - even concepts such as 'time' or 'the new year' which gives them supernatural abilities. It's a bit like Moon Knight in terms of the relationship between a characters Mythos (supernatural side) and Logos (their regular life)

The way you design characters is NEAT as heck. There's no actual "stats", it's pbta and key-word based. You pick a trait for your character (say, "routine", which is for your Logos) and then add a number of key phrases that go with what you want the character to do (e.g. maybe their routine is they are a detective in their day job, so they would add "sharpshooter", "relentless bloodhound tracker" and "quick on the draw".

When you make an appropriate move (say - getting a quick shot off at a fleeing target) you'd roll 2d6 and add 1 power for each tag on your character sheet that you can justify fits the situation (so with the above skills they would choose sharpshooter and quick on the draw for a +2 bonus to the roll). There's a bunch more to it but that's the general gist - it's REALLY fun.

Well, I've got 4 and a half pages of notes so far on my custom rpg system.
I feel accomplished that I've gotten out of my head and expanded upon:
environment
weather
health/injuries/wounds
the main commodities
world
gods
"races"
technology (technological setting)
transportation and shipping
some political/societal structure
what classes do (not named yet)
what subclasses do (some first pass names)

I feel good

pyxistyx wrote:
Mixolyde wrote:

Whoa! That looks really cool. The art style and theme really remind me of The Wolf Among Us, the Telltale adventure game about faery tale characters living among normal people in a city and trying to get by. Super cool!

The premise is actually not too far of. The players are all noir style investigators, linked with a Mythoi - powerful entities from mythology, history, fairy tales, pop culture - even concepts such as 'time' or 'the new year' which gives them supernatural abilities. It's a bit like Moon Knight in terms of the relationship between a characters Mythos (supernatural side) and Logos (their regular life)

The way you design characters is NEAT as heck. There's no actual "stats", it's pbta and key-word based. You pick a trait for your character (say, "routine", which is for your Logos) and then add a number of key phrases that go with what you want the character to do (e.g. maybe their routine is they are a detective in their day job, so they would add "sharpshooter", "relentless bloodhound tracker" and "quick on the draw".

When you make an appropriate move (say - getting a quick shot off at a fleeing target) you'd roll 2d6 and add 1 power for each tag on your character sheet that you can justify fits the situation (so with the above skills they would choose sharpshooter and quick on the draw for a +2 bonus to the roll). There's a bunch more to it but that's the general gist - it's REALLY fun.

That character gen system sounds really fun. Like a cross between Fate and Lady Blackbird.

CaptainCrowbar wrote:

I haven't been following the details, but I seem to recall hearing that the OGL used by WOTC these days is actually a good deal more restrictive than the original 3.5 OGL?

You’re thinking of the GSL, which was incredibly restrictive. 5e went back to the OGL for its SRD. It’s the same license that was used for the 3e SRD. As pyxistyx notes, it’s also possible to publish content on the DM’s Guild (but that is subject to its own limits and restrictions).

As long as you stick to open content (from the 3e SRD, 5e SRD, or other games’ open content declarations), you can mix and match things as you see fit. That’s what a lot of retroclones do, and that’s what I’m doing in my homebrew system. It uses Old-School Essentials as a base, but it also pulls from the 3e, 5e, and PF2. As long as I stick to content that is identified as “open game content”, I’m in the clear.

Sometimes you run into a situation where a game has a mechanic you use that’s not open game content. In that case, you have to clone it from other sources. That’s why some systems have such lengthy section 15 declarations (where you list all OGL sources you used). If you can’t find a source that allows you to use the name, then you have to give it a new name. For example, beholders in Old-School Essentials are called “eye tyrants” because “beholder” is designated as product identity in the 3.5e SRD.

pyxistyx wrote:

Honestly have no clue as to using earlier SRD's for older versions of the system but you'd certainly not be able to use any actual "D&D" content for all of the above reasons, I would think. I'm sure you could still use earler SRD's to make your own ground-up 3.5 game or something if you could track down the relevant documentation. *shrug*

The OGL doesn’t have a termination clause, so it’s still usable (take a look at Pathfinder 2e, Old-School Essentials, or a myriad of other systems still using it). That was one of the “problems” the GSL tried to fix.


For those who want them, the 3.5e SRD and d20 Modern SRD are available via the Wayback Machine. Unfortunately, direct download links are no longer available since WotC got rid of their old content in their last website redesign. One advantage of using the original documents is if you used an only copy of the SRD, you’d have to include it in your section 15 declaration. (I personally prefer not to do that because websites can go offline.)

3.5e SRD: https://web.archive.org/web/20060912...
d20 Modern SRD: https://web.archive.org/web/20060919...

fangblackbone wrote:

I wanted to modify the d20 system in either Pathfinder (more likely Starfinder) or D&D (most likely 3.5e). I wanted the system to do most of the heavy lifting while tweaking what sub classes do and streamlining how you gain feats. I didn't really want to got whole hog and come up with spell progression, all new monsters, etc. I probably only wanted to change less than 20% of the system.

You should be able to do this. Pathfinder and Starfinder are both very permissive when it comes to open game content. For the most part, the only thing you can’t use is setting information (proper nouns, etc).

But at least Pathfinder/Starfinder's OGL implies that it must be compatible with the Starfinder systems. You can add on or new but not even tweak some systems because it will break compatibility with Starfinder and invalidate the OGL :(

Are you looking at the compatibility license or the actual OGL in the books? You don’t have to accept the former to use the latter (especially since the compatibility license is for commercial publishers). This is what the Pathfinder 2e Core Rulebook says about open game content and product identity:

Core Rulebook, page 638 wrote:

Product Identity: The following items are hereby identified as Product Identity, as defined in the Open Game License version 1.0a, Section 1(e), and are not Open Game Content: All trademarks, registered trademarks, proper nouns (characters, deities, locations, etc., as well as all adjectives, names, titles, and descriptive terms derived from proper nouns), Chapter 8 (with the exception of domains), artworks, characters, dialogue, locations, organizations, plots, storylines, and trade dress. (Elements that have previously been designated as Open Game Content, or are exclusively derived from previous Open Game Content, or that are in the public domain are not included in this declaration.)

Open Game Content: Except for material designated as Product Identity or External Tools (see above), the game mechanics of this Paizo game product are Open Game Content, as defined in the Open Game License version 1.0a, Section 1(d). No portion of this work other than the material designated as Open Game Content may be reproduced in any form without written permission.

Note that section 7 spells out how you are allowed to reference product identity. Without a license allowing you to do so, you are not allowed to reference Starfinder or Pathfinder. You’d need to refer to them euphemistically (like how games sometimes refer to D&D as the world’s oldest role-playing game). But you can do whatever it is you want. Paizo also has a community license that lets you use some of their IP, but your work has to remain non-commercial.

It will be a ton more work but I can do it so why the hell not I guess?

I started off just doing a hack for my homebrew system, but now it’s taken on a life of its own. Why the hell not indeed.

I started off just doing a hack for my homebrew system, but now it’s taken on a life of its own. Why the hell not indeed.

You are not kidding!
I got so into the weeds very quickly with "is damage: level * d6, level * d6 + mainstat, or mainstat *d6?"
Question begat questions begat questions...

Thank you for the clarification on compatibility license vs OGL. So it sounds like I can use replace HP with a wounds system in Starfinder and base the rest on what is in the SRD with no issues? I do intend to make money off it in some way so that doesn't require the compatibility license either, right?

We should DM or email and compare notes sometime. Or is there a table top discord or the like that you frequent?

fangblackbone wrote:

I got so into the weeds very quickly with "is damage: level * d6, level * d6 + mainstat, or mainstat *d6?"
Question begat questions begat questions...

I think I’m on the fourth iteration of my skill system. Technically, I’m going into my fifth, but it builds on the fourth’s mechanics.

Thank you for the clarification on compatibility license vs OGL. So it sounds like I can use replace HP with a wounds system in Starfinder and base the rest on what is in the SRD with no issues? I do intend to make money off it in some way so that doesn't require the compatibility license either, right?

Right. You’d only need the compatibility license if you wanted to advertise that your work was compatible with Starfinder. If you’re just using it as a base then going from there, you just need to make sure you’re following the terms laid out in the OGL.

We should DM or email and compare notes sometime.

I am easily provoked into talking about my game, so I’d be happy to discuss over DM or whatever.

Or is there a table top discord or the like that you frequent?

Alas, no. Most of my tabletop RPG discussion happens over on EN World. My ideas have been informed through a continual process of learning re: RPG theory. The system is mostly for my own consumption (while following the OGL in the event I do share it), so I work on it through iteration with my players. It’s currently a mess of random notes in Scrivener with a few things laid out that my players need.

I guess you've given me the courage to go first. I am very protective of what I'm doing and more than likely overly so as if someone was going to steal my ideas. The reality is that while my system is uniquely mine, I am sure they have come up to varying degrees in the past 40 years of RPGs.

I love the Dark Sun setting. I am not even halfway up to speed on Starfinder, but it intrigues me as well.
Neither of those settings seem to be nearly as popular as fantasy so I decided to incorporate horror as that seems fun and a viable way to grip players beyond kill more goblins.

The environment is more harsh than Dark Sun in a few key aspects. Turbulent and high winds at moderate altitudes make rapid air travel and commerce prohibitive. Both are available closer to the ground but speeds are no higher than 150 mph.

Rain pollution and corrosive wetlands have rendered metals rare and treasured. Many surface dwellers scavenge for metal as an unregulated and sometimes lucrative profession.

The real side effect of a lack of metal is that they have been replaced by ceramics and bamboo like wood. So the technology is there that is still practical at a much larger scale. So a vehicle that has the power of a compact sedan would be the size of a large diesel pickup.

The main sources of freshwater other than ice at the poles are collections of city sized sink holes. These are interconnected with caves that other than a few arteries, are mostly undiscovered. Some of the arteries have been expanded by the denizens of the towns and cities that have cropped up in the sink holes.

The gods are detached and are neither good nor evil. They trend neutral to evil with the evil ones really more into vices than desire to corrupt or annihilate the world.

The class system stemmed from my experience with 3e and the Pathfinder video game. The idea is that to streamline all the feats and dependencies, classes would be mostly themes and sublclasses would be what determined what feats/trees you were awarded and would dictate whether you fought in close, medium or ranged combat.

Ideas of classes would be mechanic, wildling or savant and subclasses would be fighter, scout, caster, or summoner. So a mechanic with fighter would be a power fist brawler, scout would have traps and drones, caster would lob cannon balls or launch spring loaded spikes, and summoner would be a trapassin on steroids. Likewise a wildling fighter could either be a berserker or wild shape, scout would be akin to a ranger, caster would be your shaman or druid, and summoner would have animal pets. I am tempted to make subclasses have options so that you don't completely lose the theory crafting of Pathfinder. I just don't want it to become about optimal combat theory crafting rather than adventuring, like I encountered playing Pathfinder.

I am absolutely simplifying and combining stats but having "substats" for puzzles and challenges only, not combat. For example fitness is a combination of dex and str which are its sub stats. Strength is for events where you need to push or pull. Dex is for puzzles that need reflexes or nimbleness. No MAD!!!

I am also doing a wounds and injuries system instead of traditional HP. And I have some twists on that as well. The idea has come from battle scenes in Excalibur and 13th Warrior where fights are more about weathering combat, wearing down your foes and sapping their will to fight.

Thanks for sharing! I guess it would only be fair to share what I’m doing. Also, apologies for the length.

The elevator pitch is that it’s Moldvay Basic drifted to Story Now. (Edit: Or, rather, I want to run a hexcrawl without having to do the work of preparing a hexcrawl.) I have a setting I put together, but I am still working through the implications of that on setting-centric play. One thing I know is I have to avoid fixing any ideas in place because those are things that people playing the game should decide for themselves. For example, that means no settlements would be detailed or even political factions beyond very high level descriptions that people could use for input. I’ll include more on what I have in my campaign currently since I think some of that will probably survive the revision into the setting framework (but not all of it).

The system itself started from a retroclone of Worlds Without Number I did (because the book is dense and hard to read/use) and has been shedding mechanics as I look for OGL replacements and better ideas. Players’ characters still have classes and most of the basic D&D features. This is one of my requirements for the system because I want it to feel like D&D (not just in terms of aesthetic but mechanics). Otherwise, I’d be better off using The Perilous Wilds for Dungeon World. I have made some concessions to modernity. The saving throw categories are the standard Fortitude, Reflex, and Will; though they are deployed a bit differently. You add a different modifier depending on the effect.

  • Charisma: charms and effects that undermine your sense of self.
  • Intelligence: compulsions, illusory patterns, phantasms, and mind-affecting effects.
  • Wisdom: magical effects.
  • Strength: paralysis, petrification, restraints, and forced movement.
  • Dexterity: projectiles, area effects.
  • Constitution: poisons, physical effects.

The classes themselves are a bit powered up compared to Moldvay Basic. My players don’t like dealing with retainers (a requirement if you have a small group in B/X). I took the classes from WWN as a base, turned them into groups for the B/X classes, then reworked the WWN stuff out so I could actually release it. You can see a handful of them here.* Groups define shared mechanics for classes. Some classes are hybrids (like the bard), so they get mechanics from multiple groups. The skill speciality stuff is scheduled to change in the near future.

Characters also have ancestries and backgrounds. These are expansions from B/X. I don’t like race as class. I understand why it was done (to keep the game simple), but I don’t have any interest in supporting it (especially since humans aren’t even an option in my game). Character creation is 3d6 in order, but with a twist. Each ancestry has a descriptor (such as “Clever” or “Genius”) that is associated with a table. Each table has a different distribution of physical or mental categories associated with it. You roll on the table to determine which category you get for your bonus stat, which you pick and set to +1 (no ability scores, only modifiers). Backgrounds give you a free skill point then two rolls on an associated table for additional skill points. They will probably give skill specialties, but that is subject to change.

The basic adventuring loop is the players set two personal goals at the start of the session. The group also has a mission it sets for itself at the end of the session. We do a recap, then we play to find out what happens. At the end of the session, players say whether they completed their goals (they decide not the referee). If completed one or both, they get XP (same either way). If they helped someone complete a goal, they get XP for each goal they helped. They also get XP if the group consensus is they completed their mission. They then decide on a new mission or to keep their existing one.

Outside of combat, which is a a hybrid of Moldvay Basic and 5e, players make all rolls. My system uses conflict resolution, so the player sets the stakes, then we roll to see what happens. To do that, the player makes a skill check by rolling 3d6 plus their skill (ranging from −1 to +4) and appropriate ability modifier (ranging from −3 to +3). The target numbers are fixed: 9−/10–14/15+ for failure, partial success, and complete success. I use 3d6 because I want a non-uniform distribution, and 2d6 didn’t support the range of modifiers.

There are only sixteen skills: Brawl, Command, Connect, Convince, Exert, Heal, Invoke, Know, Perform, Ride, Shoot, Sneak, Study, Strike, Survive, Tinker. Three of them are used primarily in combat (you get a base attack bonus from your class, but you also add your weapon skill to attack rolls). Invoke is used with magic. I am adapting B/X spells to use Invoke-based skill checks when they would otherwise negate the conflict (e.g., for find traps, you roll Invoke (WIS)). All skills have specialities associated with them along with specialities you get from your background and class. You must have a speciality to use a skill. Otherwise, the skill does nothing (this is still a WIP). There are also extraordinary uses of skills (an idea still being developed). You learn new specialities by doing stuff in-game (in the fiction).

The game makes heavy use of hex maps, so exploration is important. This is something I still need to work out how it will fit with the creative agenda. It will use a modified version of this exploration procedure. Exploration is still conflicts, so PCs roll and that determines e.g., whether they get lost. I have an encoded procedure for handling event checks. I roll 3d6, and on a partial success use the first die to check the event table or on a complete success use it to check the wandering monsters table. There is a heavy use of generative elements. I also encode weather this way using the first event roll of the day. Events could evolve as I further integrate the conflict resolution mechanics. I will have to see how things play out. One thing not in that document is event checks are modified by the current danger level. This also matters for making camp (and privation is better handled than in that document, being further integrated into the stress system).

I also have a replacement encumbrance system. It is slot-based. You can see an old draft here. The idea is you have a list of items on your character sheet, and that visually shows your load. No math. This is inspired by other games, particularly Torchbearer (but streamlined). When we first adopted it, my players engaged with it in ways I’ve never seen them engage other encumbrance systems, so I’d consider that a win. I’ll probably be dropping the armors in that document. I don’t think armor check penalty carries its weight nor the added detail of extra armors. Needs to revision before our next session.

We’ve been iterating on the system for our last four sessions or so. Last session, the skill system really clicked. That’s what made me consider the shift in creative agenda. My hex key map has ~285 hexes. I only have twelve hexes keyed, and most of those are only a couple of sentences. That has proven not to be a problem in practice, so if I can, I want to lean into that. Being able to just pick a location and start doing a hexcrawl would awesome. No need for massive preparation, which is the bane of hexcrawling.


This is an introductory text that will probably change.

The peoples of Entira returned to the surface a thousand years ago after spending ages sequestered beneath it. They had been hiding from the fiends and celestials who came to their world and tried to subjugate them. However, something had happened. Their historical foes were gone, and it was safe once more to return to the surface, or so people thought.

It did not take long before people started learning that things were a bit different than what they had learned from their stories. Some differences were benign: the sun rises and sets in the north. Others were not. The stars in the sky are gone. The night is black as pitch, and the creatures that have adapted prey upon those foolish enough to travel without adequate protection. And there are even worse things.

It turns out that the fiends and celestials are not completely gone. They inhabit alien wastelands and venture out occasionally to collect new specimens for their endeavors. The areas cast in permanent shadow, known as shadelands, are even worse. In the shadelands lurk fungal horrors that can take over your mind and twist your form to whatever ends they might have.

If you can avoid the dangers, the world is not such a bad place. While stagnant compared to the before times, new civilizations have risen and fallen in the last thousand years. Magic is practiced more actively than it ever had been before, and there is plenty of places to go for those looking for adventure. While the landscape had mostly reverted back to nature, old ruins can still be found with fantastic treasures waiting to be discovered.

The basic premise of the setting is that it takes place in the future on an Alderson disk. The fiends and celestials came after humanity had established a galaxy-spanning empire. Humanity fought back, and it ultimately lost. As a backup plan, they built an Alderson disk and accelerated it to relativistic speeds. Unfortunately, the fiends and celestials also found. Even worse, the universe died. Due to time dilation, the death of the universe has not yet caught up with the disk. However, the stars in the sky are gone. The world outside is dangerous, especially at night. There are horrible things lurking in the shadelands, and various fiends and celestials still walk the earth. Note that neither are things you should ever want to meet. The celestials’ conception of good is utterly alien and usually ends poorly for those who encounter them.

The party met a rogue horsehead celestial early in the campaign, but it was unusually respectful of them. Normally, a horsehead celestial sings and makes thralls of mortals. They have four heads (all horse-shaped) and four wings covered in eyes. Once I get the faction procedure written up, I will be creating the celestial’s cult as a minor faction, so it can do stuff (think sort of like factions in BitD or a threat map in Apocalypse World 2e).


* Since this sprang out of a discussion of the OGL, note the section 15 declarations at the end (and ignore the fact I forgot to declare what is open game content). In particular, note that I pull from several systems.

originally started working on it for the purpose of supporting “campaign as science experience”, but I found what worked really well for us was using minimal prep.

Edit: Also forgot to mention that characters gain feats, but they’re intentionally not math-boosting feats. My players like character customization, otherwise I’d be inclined not to include them due to the amount of work involved creating them.

fangblackbone wrote:

I am very protective of what I'm doing and more than likely overly so as if someone was going to steal my ideas. The reality is that while my system is uniquely mine, I am sure they have come up to varying degrees in the past 40 years of RPGs.

Just had a comment on this particular bit.

Nobody is going to steal your RPG design ideas. Or, if they take an idea you had and do their own thing with it, that won't take anything away from your ideas and design anyway.

My attitude here is that: there are an infinite number of ideas, but only a few people have the stubbornness to actually turn their ideas into a decent game. It's that game design work that matters, not the original idea.

Nobody is going to steal your RPG design ideas. Or, if they take an idea you had and do their own thing with it, that won't take anything away from your ideas and design anyway.

I know. Its all in my head. It wouldn't matter if they took everything because the implementations would end up different. Like you said. The side effect would also be the bonus that someone implemented my ideas!

I don't know why I am so protective of it anyways. I'm not that way with video game ideas and design. I talk at length on these boards freely, hoping someone will use it or build off it.

My system while I am aware of the "hit points" system in LotRO, is not inspired by it. (at least consciously)
Going along with what I said about fights being more about wearing your opponents down and sapping their will to fight, my system uses stamina instead of health on top of the wounds/injury system. The wrinkle is balancing regeneration per round and action costs. I know it sounds tricky where the resource that keeps you alive also fuels your actions but I like the opportunities it affords for role playing where a player can "find a fifth gear" to turn the tide at the end of the battle. Another option rife for legendary status is a last ditch effort to take a foe down with you leaving you defenseless.

So fitness and its substats dex and str increase stamina. And if I do my own system, you will gain much smaller amounts per level so that we don't delve into the complexity of BAB and 5+ attacks per round. If I do leverage d20, the subclass you choose at level up will determine how much stamina you get along the traditional lines. (fighter gains 8, scout gains 6, and caster/summoner gain 4 or 5...)

So for concerns about using your hit points to fuel your abilities, actions will only cost 1-2 stamina and if you choose to defend for a round (I'll probably allow for a swift non combat action) you gain the full 2 stamina regen at the end of your turn.

Spells will also cost 1 stamina but also 1 of another resource, focus. (there will be minor casts that only take 1 focus and no stamina hit) Focus I am thinking will be fixed and does not regen in combat to mirror spell slots from d20. Higher levels with the caster subclass will offer more spells and spell effects along the lines of a kineticist. Accuity is the stat that comprises the substats int and wis which govern book smarts and street smarts for puzzle/challenge purposes. Taking the caster subclass at level up will increase accuity which grants the spells and effects.

The basic adventuring loop is the players set two personal goals at the start of the session. The group also has a mission it sets for itself at the end of the session. We do a recap, then we play to find out what happens. At the end of the session, players say whether they completed their goals

I LOVE this. It has totally inspired me to add player set goals for puzzle challenge solving.
What really excites me about this is the collaboration/plan for a solution such that if the group fails in some part, they can adapt and award themselves unintended XP and take away an even better experience!

It can be as simple as player A is the nimblest and wants to attempt climbing up a ledge. Player A fails a role. Player B uses their high wisdom to note that Player C could use their strength hoist Player A to get them further up the ledge. The stories could be endless and more fun whether the party succeeds or continues to fail and has the patience for more involved solutions. (Player D ties a rope to their axe who gets Player A to throw from the shoulders from Player C who then hoists themselves up, allows Player A to climb up and then Player B and D are pulled up by player C, you get the idea)

edit: oh and I am going to incorporate this into combat where the DM can award bonus xp during or after combat for unique strategy, clever maneuvers, or even failures (you are not going to try that again any time soon, lesson learned so hence XP earned)

Been thinking of resuming our Mutants & Masterminds campaign, possibly with 3rd edition, but I only own 1st and 2nd editions.

Here's the article I wrote to introduce players to the campaign world. (Yes, the campaign really did start back in 2004.)