Download the new "Delving Deeper" retro-clone for FREE!!!

I thought I would share some cool OSR news. The Delving Deeper retro-clone, which emulates the original "White Box" ruleset, is available to download for free! Check it out!

Check out the RPGTable Online!!!

I play D&D both face-to-face and online. I wanted to share a little bit of news about the RPGTable, which is the platform I use for online gaming. This was the second "VT" that Wizards tried to develop. They recently cancelled their involvement in it, and the company that designed it for them sort of reclaimed it.

The reason I bring it up today is that it has several features that should interest 4e players. You can import your Character Builder PC files straight into it. This works for PCs from the old offline builder as well. This obviously makes it user friendly for players, even if you no longer have a DDI account.

Most recently (like a week ago), the RPGTable guys were able to procure all of the data for 4e monsters. Like thousands and thousands of monsters. They are giving away level 1 and 2 monsters free, and the rest of the monsters are very reasonably priced. You can purchase them all at once, or break them into tiers.

They also have the 4e tile sets for sale. They give you the Essentials Wilderness and Dungeon sets free.

The table is free to use. You have to buy a subscription to be able to share adventures with others and to unlock other functionality. But if you just want to show up and play or run a game, you can do it for free.

What is awesome about it is that even if they shut down the 4e tools, you have access to the monsters, and you can still use your old characters. So for gamers such as myself that aren't about to shelve 4e, the RPGTable can help keep it alive. I have been using it for a couple of years now, playing with gamers all over the world. I would love for you to check it out. I actually will be running a Level 1 demo tonight. Slots are already open. All you have to do is register, import a PC, and get playing.

The table is here. The forums are here. The old WOTC VT forums are here. My online retro-gaming group is here. If anyone has any questions about it, let me know! 

A Frothsof Halloween!

Hello all. Today I wanted to put together a little grab bag of some Halloween related RPG goodies for you.

Around this time of year, it seems most DMs make an effort to run something Halloween or horror themed. I am no exception. This year, instead of running something of my own, I actually ran (and will again be running) Death Frost Doom, a Lamentations of the Flame Princess adventure. LotFP is a retro-clone, and most of the adventures have kind of a bleak, gory vibe, with the chances of PC survival being very slim. This makes these adventures ideal for one-shots, and perfectly suited for a Halloween game. I ran a conversion of this for 4e, and I am doing a B/X version over the weekend. I encourage DMs to check it out. There is basically no combat; it is very heavy on exploration and atmosphere, so it is easy to convert to any game system. I think the PDF was 5 bucks, and well worth it. Anyway, the poor 4e party I ran through it got TPK'ed, but because it happened in such an unusual, unexpected way, they still enjoyed it. That is about the highest praise you can really give a module; that it was fun even though the party was completely wiped out.
 

Here are some links I wanted to share to some blogs and sites that have some cool Halloween and horror content for RPGs:

Check out Age of Ravens series on the History of Horror RPGs! That post contains the links to the rest of this excellent series. Now, I own many of these games, but there are several that even I had never heard of. Now is the time of the year to track some of these down and give them some love.

One of the most, if not THE most prolific Horror RPG blogger's work is found at Tales of the Grotesque and Dungeonesque. He has compiled a lot of his impressive material into two free PDFs. Part one is here, and part two is here.



I know that there are many out there that focus solely on D&D as their game of choice, but even if you are not a Call of Cthulhu junkie like myself, there are several free adventures and the like on the Yog-Sothoth website. If you are kind of "stuck" and cannot decide on something to run for your players this Samhain, try converting the material, or just pilfer some ideas from it.

Finally, if you are looking to add a little Ravenloft to your Halloween game, or if you are working with Zombies and other undead this year, check my 4e Forever treatment of Strahd, and my Zombie Flavor Table.

Running a game this year? If you can share any gory details, leave a post! Have a gruesome Halloween!

Dragon 416 is Compiled! Plus Froth Does Strahd!

Quick post to say that Dragon 416 is out, and they have gone back to compiling the issues. All I can say is thanks for that! It is good to see Strahd get some 4e love, although the poor guy didn't get a stat block. I guess I will have to make him one in honor! I decided to use the 4e Forever stat block if you are wondering what the heck you are looking at.

STRAHD VON ZAROVICH

LEVEL 19 SAVAGE   XP: 4,800

MEDIUM NATURAL HUMANOID

HP: 344 (172)   MOVE: 8”, Fly: 8" in Bat and Gaseous form   INIT: +23   AP: 2

NO. APPEARING: Unique   ENC RNGE: Special   MORALE: 12

AC: 33   FORT: 31   REF: 32   WILL: 32

SENSES: Darkvision; Blindsight 10 in Bat form; Truesight 10 in Gaseous form

TRAITS:

-Aura 2: Any enemy that enters the aura takes 10 psychic and necrotic damage. A creature can take this damage more than once per round.

-Immunities: Stun, Dominate, Fear, Polymorph, Charm, Unconscious, Out of Play
-Strahd can take a complete turn both on his Initiative and his Initiative -10.
ATTACK:

-Manipulation: (Standard Action; At-Will; Close Burst 1; Each creature in burst); +22 vs WILL; 3d12+10 damage, and Strahd slides the target up to 5 squares to a space adjacent to an ally of the target. The target then must make an At-Will or unused Encounter power of Strahd's choice against the ally as a Free Action. Treat a Manipulation attack as Strahd's MBA.

SPECIAL ATTACKS:

-Fangs: (Minor Action; At-Will; Once per turn; Melee 1; One attack; One creature); +22 vs FORT; Ongoing 20 necrotic damage (save ends)

-Minor Manipulation: (Free Action; At-Will; Once per turn; Ranged 10; One attack; One creature); +22 vs WILL; 10 psychic damage, and the target is slid up to 5 squares

-Triggered Action: Strahd makes his Manipulation attack as a Free Action when first bloodied.

SPECIAL MOVEMENT:

Once per turn as a Free Action, Strahd can shift into one of three forms: a Swarm of Bats, a Wolf, or a purplish Gas. Strahd automatically reverts to his original form after he makes an attack. In each form, Strahd gains enhanced movement abilities, listed below.

-Swarm of Bats: Strahd does not provoke Opportunity Attacks when moving away from creatures.

-Wolf: Strahd's base movement increases to 14”

-Gaseous: Strahd can teleport 4” as a Move Action.

LANGUAGES: All known   INTELLIGENCE: Very

TRAINED SKILL BONUS: +23

UNTRAINED SKILL BONUS: +14

SAVING THROW BONUS: +2   ALIGNMENT: Chaotic

4e Forever Sneak Peek: Random Flavor Tables

I thought I would drop a quick post today to show off something from the mag. As readers of my blog know, I love random tables. I take the view that random tables hone and sharpen your DMing skills. They have helped me become better at improvisation, and to be much more fearless. I also like how they can really add color and flavor to a setting or location. Sure, you can always write out a few sentences detailing the common monsters in the area, but there is something I like about this same information just being inferred by a Wandering Monster Table. 

Well, in the mag you will find random tables for all kinds of things: Reaction Tables, Wandering Monsters, and the like, as well as something else that I have really enjoyed working on, the Random Flavor Tables. The Random Flavor Tables are pretty much what they sound like; you roll on the tables every few turns, or every hex, or whenever instructed by the text, and the tables provide a little random flavor. Not a major description or anything, just a little "vibe". These things are very fun to design, and they help you brainstorm ideas, and get the creativity flowing as well. A module's text might provide the full description of an area, then prompt you to roll for a little random flavor every now and then as the PCs explore the area. In one of the mag's adventures, I am using them for Random Zombie Flavor, so I thought I would share that table with you. This table also contains major "spoilers" about some mag content.

About the Zombie Flavor Table
If at any point you need some quick Zombie flavor, use this table.

Zombie Flavor Table
-Roll 2d20 for flavor.
2. No eyes
3. One eye dangling
4. No eyes, but another Zombie is on its back, directing and “riding” it
5. Hops on one leg
6. Young child Zombie holding a doll with its head torn off
7. Zombie chews on eyeballs
8. Zombie child holding a slingshot
9. Legless Zombie dragging itself along ground
10. Zombie playing with its exposed, dried entrails
11. Zombie in rotting military outfit
12. Bird flies out of hole in its chest
13. Squirrel crawls out of hole in chest
14. Has no bottom jaw; swollen tongue dangles
15. Neck is broken and head has flopped over its back; walking backwards
16. Zombie in long flowing dress
17. Elf Zombie
18. Zombie is munching on a severed arm
19. Armless Zombie
20. Zombie wearing a fancy wide-brimmed hat
21. Zombie being dragged by a horse
22. Zombies riding in the back of a runaway carriage
23. Halfling Zombie
24. Zombie with flute stuck through the back of its head
25. Eating a dog
26. Eating a cat
27. Dwarf Zombie
28. Lots of bullet holes; large enough that you can see through them
29. Skeletal Zombie; has a small amount of tissue bunched around its neck, otherwise bones
30. Impaled on an oar; as it walks and turns, knocks other Zombies over inadvertently with the oar
31. Child Zombie eating hard candy, which falls through a hole in belly into the street; it picks it up and eats it again
32. Wears a red satin sash
33. Long, white beard
34. Gnome Zombie
35. Spits up black liquid
36. Leaves trail of a brown-white discharge
37. Fumbles with a gun and blows own head off
38. “Reading” a book; holds it upside-down
39. Worms crawl from its eyes and mouth
40. Covered in maggots

4e Spell Research!!!

 *NOTE: THE FINAL SPELL RESEARCH RULES ARE PROVIDED IN THE FIRST ISSUE OF 4E FOREVER, UP FOR FREE DL NOW**

Howdy everyone. As you might have guessed, I am busy at work on the mag, but I wanted to share some ideas that were bouncing around the old noggin over the past couple of days.

Something I like about classic editions is the idea of spell research, not only for existing spells, but also for completely new ones. It lets player have a real effect on the world and their character. I also like the thought of PCs being hard at work even when they are not actively adventuring. A Magic-User reading some flimsy parchment by the firelight, or pining for his study back home, where he has half a dozen magic items partially formulated. This stuff is just fun and flavorful to me.

So, how would this work in 4e? I do not want to make the same mistakes as they did with the rules for item creation. They focused only on mechanics; there is no flavor. There are no thoughts on how to incorporate it into the story. The end result is that the sense of the PC actually working on something is lost. There is no "feel" that the PC made any effort to accomplish anything.


There needs to be a balance. The method needs to cost an appropriate amount of time and money, not produce an overpowered spell, and of course, encourage role play. 

So, today I want to look at some ideas for 4e spell research that I think will be fun to use. Like older editions, I think PCs should be of relatively high level before being allowed to attempt creating a new spell. The DM and the PC will work together through the process; it is not just up to the PC to satisfy a few straight-forward conditions and "Voila! Spell!". Furthermore, the act of creation ideally becomes a part of the PCs story, indeed, part of the campaign's story. So, here are my ideas:

1. A PC must be of 11th level or higher to attempt to research and create a new spell.

2. The player must notify a DM of this intention upon leveling up.

3. The player and DM discuss the spell idea, and whether it should be allowed in the game. It can be a Encounter, Utility, or Daily (no At-Wills or Rituals). Now here is where some advice is in order. A player naturally will want a spell that helps their PC, and the DM should be willing for this to happen. Otherwise there is no point. However, both individuals need to be honest about the power of the spell, and the spell's flavor should ALWAYS reinforce something about the PCs personality, skills, backstory, or what have you. This will hopefully quell a player's urge to simply break the game, and will instead help the spell research become more of an exercise in role play. To further help with this, the new spell will be permanent, and will not be able to be replaced or traded out at higher levels or through retraining. This will ensure that great care and thought goes into the design of the spell.

4. The player must give up a spell in order to gain a new one. Note again that Rituals and At-Wills cannot be "traded" in this way; a player must choose a Daily, Utility, or Encounter power. A player must designate his or her highest level spell of a certain type to be replaced. For example, if a player just hitting 13th level wants to research a new Encounter power, he or she must designate their 13th level Encounter power as the spell to be replaced. They will get to use the power normally until it is replaced.

5. Researching a spell takes an entire level of play. It also costs the same amount as a magic item of the same level. So in our example the player will be paying the equivalent of a level 13 magic item. This can be paid up front, during, or even at the end of the level. A player can also "bank" gold as he or she goes.

6. The player and DM work together to emphasize the flavor and action of the research during the game. This should not feel like a restriction. A DM can just make it a point to ask the player frequently what their character is doing to research the spell. When the PCs take an extended rest, the player might talk about what their PC is reading, or what have you. When they enter a new town, the player might have their PC go check out the library. Maybe a quest derives from it; maybe some NPCs aid in some way. Who knows, let the story decide. It is just flavor, of course, but it is pleasing to me, and I think it will give the "feel" that the PC is at work on something special.When the spell is finally done, it will seem much more bad-ass.

7. When the player hits their next level (14th in our example), the old spell fades away and the new spell is put in its place. Remember that this spell is permanent and cannot be trained away or replaced by another spell.

I suggest that spell research be restricted to Arcane classes. This is really for flavor's sake. That is just my opinion though, if you wanted to re-fluff this or tweak it to be something like a Thief practicing a new move, or a Cleric being slowly "prepared" for some great power by their deity, or whatever, go for it.

I hope you like these ideas! Sometime soon I will post some ideas on item creation! I also am working on some stronghold rules, but that is kind of down the road, as the mag is taking up most of my time!

Do you have any thoughts on spell research? Any memorable experiences with it? Leave a post!

Trimming the Fat, Part 2: Shooting Skill Challenges in the Face

Today we continue to take a look at certain aspects of 4e that will be left out of my upcoming zine, 4e Forever. I want to say that these are just my opinions. If you like some of the stuff I mention, more power to you. I want everyone to play the way they like, and I am not here to diss anybody's playstyle. That said, I freaking hate Skill Challenges with a passion.

For me, it is really pretty simple. Despite the myriad long-winded defenses of skill challenges that I am sure you have read, and regardless of all the usual tidbits of advice that have been floating around since their inception, it is my opinion that Skill Challenges do irreparable harm to roleplaying. I like roleplaying to be free-form. I hate adding structure to it. I much prefer calling for checks on the fly, letting the PCs actions flow naturally, and having the possible repercussions of their failure come to me organically, rather than devising some pre-plotted outcome based on how many dice rolls a party fails. It was just a bad idea. I can respect that they were trying to add another mechanism to gain experience points outside of combat, but the whole "Three strikes, you're out", "Let's make some lists that extrapolate hypothetical skill checks, then force a few into every adventure", etc, was just a bad idea.

I realize that products like the DMG 2 and the Rules Compendium try to massage this a bit and offer alternatives, but to me that is just back-tracking on a crappy idea; polishing a turd if you will. It is too much, too late. It is kind of like when someone says, as if it is the secret of the universe, "Don't tell them they are in a Skill Challenge." I get two things from that statement. One: Skill Challenges are such a downer that alluding to the fact you are running one hurts your game. Two: you must not have a very high opinion of your players' intelligence, because any fool can tell when you are running one, whether you say so or not. "But it's different at my table." Perhaps it is, and I am happy for you if you like them. Seriously, I am. I just do not use them, and you won't see them in the magazine's adventures.

Now am I saying that PCs having to use some skills during a combat is a bad thing? Of course not. Am I saying that there shouldn't be consequences for failure? Of course not. All I am saying is that in my experience, roleplay works best when it is loose and natural, and there is no solution to Skill Challenges that I have ever read (and I have read hundreds) that works as well as simply not using them.

I hope nobody took offense! As always, I am interested in your thoughts, so leave a post!

Trimming the Fat, Part 1: Death to Sunrods!!!

This is Part 1 of a short series of blog posts about parts of 4e that I am cutting from the game for my 4e Forever mag. First thing to go: sunrods.

Oh, how I hate sunrods. They make Demi-Human vision meaningless. They make imaginative notions of light and shadow evaporate in a 20 square radius. They take a DMs attempts at moody Gothic atmosphere, and bathe them in garish fluorescence. It is as if the designers just decided that darkness was not going to play any role in 4e, unless it is from a PCs perma-invisibility build. A player saying that their character ties a sunrod to his belt is to me the equivalent of fingernails on a chalkboard. 

I have heard of lots of houserules on sunrods, everything from having them sometimes fail, to having certain structures prevent them from working, and on and on, but I think it best just to go ahead and take them out behind the woodshed and shoot them.

I like ditching them for several reasons. I like resource management, and using torches and lanterns adds an extra layer of this. Torches can burn out fairly quickly, and since 4e Forever uses "turn"-based exploration (more on this another time), those suckers can be going out before you know it. I like Demi-Human vision, or powers that give you unusual vision, to mean something more than just "I don't have to be the one to put a sunrod in my belt". I like being able to design encounters where every PC on the table cannot immediately see a clear-as-day 20 square radius, without having to trick the system with a gas cloud or other convoluted crapola.

Long story short: they take away from one of the greatest aspects of D&D exploration: darkness. Cave-black, impenetrable darkness. And so they have to die.

I am always interested in readers' thoughts! Do you have an opinion on sunrods? Let it fly!

Giant Stag Beetles, Strongholds, and Other Updates

I thought I would drop a couple of minor updates. First I have a new monster for you to check out, the Giant Stag Beetle. The reason I wanted to share this one in particular is that it has some "Memorable Mechanics" in the form of extreme forced movement. Picturing these guys tossing your PCs to and fro makes me happy. You will have to wait on the mag for the fluff.

Speaking of the mag, I have made a lot of progress and I am almost done with my portion of the writing. I still cannot give a set date of release, but I think that before the end of the year is not unreasonable. It has kind of swollen in size, and has two adventures I have written, dozens of new monsters, and lots of other surprises that I will talk about more in coming days.

Please don't forget to check out the first playtest. I have gotten a lot of good feedback, so thank you for that. I have gotten to run a couple of tests of it myself and I am working on scheduling the third. I have already made a lot of tweaks based on feedback, and it has helped tremendously, so again, thank you.

Lastly, I want to hear from any armchair designers like myself that have worked on their own "stronghold" systems for 4e. I am toying with some ideas about acquiring and managing them, doing something almost identical to OD&D, keeping it fairly simple, but with the prices adjusted to 4e levels.

I am interested in any stories you might be able to share about using them in your games. Leave a post!

Let's Play Labyrinth Lord!

Hi, a quick post today just to let people know that I have a Labyrinth Lord (B/X D&D retro-clone) game on the online RPG Table, and I still have a couple of slots open!

If you ever played on the old Wizards VT, basically when they decided to drop it, the company that developed it picked it up. The great news is that it is free to play; the rules are also free to download.

We meet kind of loosely on Fridays at 8 pm EST (GMT-5). Once you have registered above, you can join the game here. Full details on the game, including character creation rules, can be found here at the online retro-game Wizards group.

Anyways, if anybody is interested in checking it out, even for a session, it would be cool! Have a great weekend!

P.S.-Don't forget to check out the 4e Forever playtest if you haven't already!

Memorable Mechanics Part 5: Poison

Hello, hello! Before I get started, I really want to thank readers for the response to the first 4e Forever playtest. That post quickly became my most viewed of all-time, and I have gotten lots of feedback. It is much appreciated! If you haven't checked it out yet, it is free to download, and I would love to hear your "two cents". I had the pleasure of running an online game with some folks and it was a sight to see 20+ PCs and henchmen take on 40 Giant Ants!

I haven't made a post in the "Memorable Mechanics" series in a while, but thought I might share some of my recent ideas regarding Poison in 4e.

In the old days, poisonous creatures were feared and dreaded. In fact, if I was playing, and I knew a creature was poisonous, I would likely yell to the party to run. Why? Well, one bite could mean death. Since that time, the history of poison in D&D has been one slow, gentle retreat from the cruelties of yore. Nowadays, there are only a few points of light in the 4e community and blogosphere that feature anything approaching save or die mechanics.

Now, I do not want to go back to insta-death from poisons, but I do want to bring a healthy fear of poison back to the game. To do that, I first wanted to differentiate between common "poison damage", and capital-letters-run-like-hell Poison. As you know from this blog series, I want to add memorable mechanics to games. Even if it goes badly for your PC, things are a lot easier to take if you died a spectacular or memorable death. I also like 4e conditions a lot; as I have mentioned before, I like the codified nature of them, how they are the same table to table. So, my thought was to come up with a "Poisoned" condition. Something not quite "save or die", but still "run like hell".

As I was thinking about bringing this idea into my 4e Forever project, I realized that if I gave EVERY Giant Snake and Centipede the ability to poison PCs, it would be too much. So I decided to make "poisoning" a daily, perhaps weekly, ability for a creature. Once they have "spent" their poison, it has to have time to build back up. The determination of whether a creature is currently "poisonous" is left to random chance, partly because I am always looking for any excuse to make a random roll. So for example, if a Giant Rattlesnake is encountered, there may be a 2 in 6 chance that it is currently poisonous.

So what is the "Poisoned" condition?

Poisoned (edit): A poisoned creature is weakened, slowed, and grants combat advantage (save ends all). If the creature is not currently bloodied, its hit points also drop to their bloodied value. On each failed saving throw, the creature's hit points drop to zero.

I am really digging this! I hope you like it too! If you have any thoughts, leave a post, and thanks again to everyone for checking out the playtest!

4e Forever Playtest!!! Check it out!

***NOTE: THE FIRST ISSUE OF 4E FOREVER IS NOW UP FOR FREE DOWNLOAD**

I am very happy to be able to share with you a short playtest of some material from my upcoming FREE zine, 4e Forever. It includes the new stat block! Please check it out and follow the instructions if you can! You should be able to finish it in one session. Even if you cannot playtest the material, I would still like to hear your thoughts. Oh, and there's a new Savage in there too!

4e Forever Playtest 1





*EDIT 8/9- I made some small edits and have re-upped it. I clarified some rules questions I had received regarding henchman initiative, savages, skills, etc, as well as made a few edits to the stat block to help its readability, something else I had some comments on. Please keep the comments coming! Thanks! 

The Hybrid Stat Block: Special Attacks

Welcome to the final installment of my series on my new hybrid stat block for 4e monsters. This is basically an alternate stat block for 4e that incorporates classic edition statistics, and it will be used in my upcoming zine, 4e Forever. Today we look at the way the stat block presents powers.

I love the clarity of the 4e stat block. I love the way powers are basically coded so that anyone can understand them. On the flip side, I also love the more conversational, narrative tone that classic edition monsters were presented with. It might seem that these two approaches are too incongruous to work together. However, I think they can, given a few considerations.

As readers of my blog have noticed in previews of my monster design, I am all about an "attack routine". I like multi-attacks as a fix to 4e's lack of high-level encounter balance, and I LOVE me some old-school Claw/Claw/Bite action, so it should come as no surprise that my 4e Forever monsters typically have a go-to attack routine consisting of multiple attacks. Simultaneously, I have also previewed and shown how I am working with variable encounter levels, and groups of the same monster. Both of these things make my new monsters very, very, easy for DMs to run, something that I am hoping will help speed up combat (along with Morale). You do not have to worry about multiple sets of statistics and a bunch of little powers here and there, hiding, spread out amongst 3 to 4 different monster types.

Since the monsters are easier to run, and since the DM is only having to look at one, perhaps two, different stat blocks for the entire encounter, I can afford to be slightly more conversational in tone with the powers. In other words, the simplicity of running the monster encounter groups allows for a more relaxed power presentation, without adding any extra prep time or difficulty to the DMs job. Now, I don't mean to make it sound too "loose", because it isn't. When I reveal the stat block later this week, you will see what I mean.

Now let's take a quick trip down memory lane. In 1e monster statistics, you have a couple of listings that I really wanted to include in my new block: Special Attacks, and Special Defenses. I decided to put a monster's primary attack routine under the listing "Attack". This listing also includes a creatures "basic attack", as its basic attack tends to be included in its primary attack routine. I also kept the "Traits" listing, used exactly the same way as it is in late 4e. Then, if needed, there are three other possible listings underneath "Attack". "Special Attacks" is used if a creature has any other attacks besides its primary attack routine and basic attacks; it also can include situational bonuses or tweaks to the primary attack routine. "Special Defenses" is used if a creature has a purely defensive power, i.e. one that does not include an attack. Finally, "Special Movement" is listed if a creature has a special power that is purely movement related.



This ends up looking and feeling very intuitive. I must say, I am quite happy with it. I still am a step or two away from revealing the complete block, however. This is because I am putting together a free playtest of some new material! This PDF will include a copy of the new 4e Forever stat block, along with three new monsters! Some basic rules (Morale, Henchmen), will be provided as well. I am trying to get it done as quickly as possible, and hopefully some of you gamers out there can run the monsters, using the variable encounter ranges, and let me know how it goes. More on this to follow! In the meantime, leave a post and let me know what you think!

The Hybrid Stat Block: Alignment

Today we continue taking a look at my ideas for a classic edition/4th edition stat block for my upcoming 4e Forever project. We are getting very close to the end of the series. I have found it helpful to talk about my ideas here, and I feel it has been a good way to not only show some of the stats that will be listed, but also the philosophy behind including/excluding things. Today we tackle alignment.

Lots of folks love the way 1e did alignment, and lots of folks hate it. 9 alignments always felt like a lot to me, and I was never completely sold on the whole punishment thing for PCs that deviated from alignment. 4e simplified it considerably, but still ended up feeling a bit like "damaged goods" to me. For creature alignment in 4e Forever, my choice was easy: take it back to OD&D.

In the Men and Magic book in the OD&D set, alignment is handled in a pure, straightforward, non-mechanical manner. "It is...necessary to determine the stance the character will take: Law, Neutrality, or Chaos." Me likey. There is no other explanation, no in-depth analysis, no forced punishments. Just Law, Neutrality, and Chaos. It seems to me so much more grand to think in terms of law and order, entropy and chaos, rather than tired old good and evil. If you go back to Chainmail, Gygax states that, "It is impossible to draw a distinct line between 'good' and 'evil' fantastic figures." I wholeheartedly agree. I could speculate on why this later changed; maybe people playing supposedly chivalric knights that steal from the poor? Who knows? All I know is that it eventually went sour, at least in my opinion. By Eldritch Wizardry, Gygax was already showing signs of the (needless) complications to come.


Anyways, in Men and Magic it was pure. That is what I want. At first, I was tempted to not provide alignments at all, but I actually quite like the OD&D alignments, and they help provide a little old-school flavor. So there we have it!

Love it? Hate it? Please share any thoughts!

The Hybrid Stat Block: Hit Points

We continue our look at the 4e Forever monster stat block today with some changes I am making to hit points. We are not going back to hit dice, so don't panic. The basic concept of hit points isn't changing, and they are still listed just like they are on the 4e stat block. However, the formula for calculating monster hit points has changed.

Recently, I posted about how I am experimenting with different ways to derive certain statistics. It is a push towards simplicity. I have also mentioned a few times that many of the encounters in my upcoming project are with variable numbers of the same monster, much like the wandering monster tables of yesteryear. Partly because of this, I have dropped some of the roles from monsters. I retain Minion, Solo, Standard, Elite, and Savage, but drop the rest. It isn't that roles are bad, they just really didn't fit my project mechanically or aesthetically. In the process, I had finally realized the obvious: the way 4e does hit points is really annoying.

4e has different formulas for different types of monsters. This makes perfect sense for Solos, Minions, Standards, and Elites, because these categories are based on the overall ratios of hit points. However, Brutes, Skirmishers, and the rest have hit points based more on flavor. Weak little Artillery guy in the periphery of the fight? Fewer hit points. Big tough Soldier? More hit points. Makes sense. It also makes it a nightmare to calculate hit points. Heck, I'm not even giving Constitution scores to monsters in the first place!

It was with all of these things in mind that I came up with the formula for hit points. Overall, it gives monsters a tad fewer hit points. Of the 4e monster roles, only Lurkers and Artillery would average fewer. Everything ends up about "Controller" level. It isn't a huge difference, but I do think that this will still help a titch with combat speed at high levels (something I have gone to great lengths in this project to address). The early playtesting has shown that the monster difficulty will not suffer as a result. But the most important thing is that it's easy. That's the real point of it. With this formula, you do not even need to look in the DMG (or whatever source you use).

The 4e Forever formula for a Standard monster's hit points is (Level x 8) + 20. Elites and Savages have twice that. Solos vary and can have 4 to 5 times the hit points of a Standard. Minions of course have 1 hit point.

Check it out the next time you are making monsters. The slightly lower hit points should help a touch with slow combat, and they are a lot easier to calculate. Leave a post and let me know what you think!

The Hybrid Stat Block: Move

We continue today looking at my ideas for a new "hybrid" monster stat block for 4e. These will eventually appear in my upcoming fanzine, and they are basically combinations of old Oe/1e/B/X stats with those of 4e. Today we look at how the stat block will note monster movement.

As you are no doubt aware, 4e stats simply say "Speed", followed by a number. This number is the base amount of squares a creature can move (unless immobilized, running, etc) with its "move action". Squares correspond to a grid, where a 1" by 1" square is equal to a 5 foot by 5 foot area. Land speed is typically listed first, followed by things like Fly: 8 and the like. So you could say that for a creature with Speed 5, that its base speed is 25 feet.

B/X was completely different. It usually gave two speeds, both listed in feet. One was the "turn" movement, basically how far a PC could be expected to get in an underground area in ten minutes, provided they were moving cautiously, etc. Then, one-third of this number was like your "encounter" speed. This was the distance you could typically move and still be able to attack in combat. So you would see 120' (40'). I actually like this, and think it is a good houserule for 1e to just go back to this.

Finally, in 1e, things got a little bizarre. The speed was listed in inches, like 9". But this could mean more than one thing. It was tens of feet underground, tens of yards in the "wilderness". We won't get into segments versus rounds versus turns right now, it is too early in the morning.

So, as you know, my fanzine incorporates a lot of my ideas on bringing old-school flavor into 4e. I am not just looking for ways to tweak the way 4e plays; I'm also looking for simple ways to bring an old-school look into 4e. So some changes are more cosmetic than anything. Like what I am doing with movement in the stat block.

It is one of those great coincidences that even though movement was not handled the same way in 1e that it is in 4e, the rates of movement in 1e were still noted in terms of inches, even if inches weren't always actually being represented. 4e literally DOES use inches. At the same time, I really like to change terms where possible, if it means adding a little old-school flavor to the mix.

So, putting it all together, instead of the stats saying Speed 6, like in 4e, my 4e Forever version will say Move: 6". This will look like 1e, but will not really mean the same thing. Move: 6" in 4e of course still means your speed is 30 feet/6 squares/6 inches. If a creature has a fly speed or what have you, it might read Move: 4", Fly: 10".

I know to many people this might look like an almost pointless change. It really does not change the mechanics of 4e at all. But to me, it is significant in that the look and feel of the statistic reflects older editions. Taken together with all of the other little changes I am making, it really helps reinforce the vibe that I am going for.

So what do you think about it? I'd love to hear your opinion, so leave a post!

The Hybrid Stat Block: Intelligence

Recently I have been sharing some of my ideas for a new 4e stat block that I am working on to use in my upcoming free fanzine.  It will mix the way that the old OD&D/1e stats were presented with that of 4e. We looked at simplifying monster creation in general with easy, smooth ways to determine and present skill and initiative mods. We followed that with a look at the classic No. Appearing statistic, and how old-school random encounters can work in 4e. We have looked at Morale in the past, and you will certainly see Morale scores in the stats. Today, we look at Intelligence.

I've mentioned before what a complete bore I find determining monster ability scores, so when I say "Intelligence" I do not mean to suggest I will be giving an Intelligence score. Instead it is used somewhat like it was in 1e. If you look at the picture of our friend, the Brain Mole, you see that for Intelligence, a numerical value is not given, just a term; in this case, "Animal".

In the explanatory notes in the beginning of the 1e Monster Manual, it provides Intelligence scores and corresponding terms, such as "Genius". Now for me, looking at bringing this back into the game, I immediately know that I do not want as many different terms as 1e has. There are 11 possible Intelligence ratings. That is way too many (but not quite "Mythus" territory). Still, I have a definite want to use the Intelligence stat, for a couple of reasons.

One, I like it for nostalgic reasons. I love how some of the old stats will just say, "Intelligence: Very". I just like that kind of thing. Two, it can actually serve a purpose, and do it better than a numerical value ever did. It is an easy, clean way to give a rough idea of a monster's wits, much clearer in my opinion than just listing a score.

Still we need to get rid of some of those 11 different categories. I personally want to go as simple as possible, while keeping what I consider the essential terms that provide old-school flavor. So here are the different possible Intelligence ratings that I came up with: Animal, Low, Average, Very (gotta have my "Very"), and Supra-Genius. Those tell you all you need to know. Note that Morale will not necessarily be related to Intelligence.

I'm liking it. What do you think? If you have any thoughts, leave a post!

The Hybrid Stat Block: No. Appearing

As I continue experimenting with ideas for a 0e/1e/4e "hybrid" stat block for my upcoming zine, 4e Forever, I thought I would share some of my thought process on its design in a series of blog posts. Today I want to give you a look at how I am bringing the classic statistic "No. Appearing" to 4e.

Before I get too in-depth, I will just say I have no real qualms with the post-MM3 stat block. It works great. It is brilliant design. This isn't a condemnation of it by any stretch, I'm just trying to provide an alternate version that is more in line with the early editions. The overall goals of the new stat block are to inject old-school feel into the presentation, streamline the information for DMs, and to help reinforce "fixes" to some 4e issues, such as encounter speed, level of difficulty, creature action recovery, etc.

Many aspects of 4e design are things of beauty. I love the logic of encounter balance and difficulty. 5 Standard monsters of the same level as a 5 PC party is an encounter of the PCs level. You can, to a closer degree than any other edition I have played, judge encounter difficulty in 4e. Even in the Epic Tier, with all its imbalances, the 4e method is still "closer" than using Hit Dice or Monstermarks (from old White Dwarf mags) ever were. But what if you crave greater randomness in the number of creatures encountered? You can always use Minions for very large monster groups, but Minions are not always the best solution. The problem is compounded by other factors. Many 4e PCs are not "trained" to flee; it just isn't in their vocabulary. Fights turn into slogs. Who even wants to use a random encounter when it is going to take up most of the session? And how can you use a variable amount of monsters and maintain a semblance of balance in the first place?

Well, the most important thing to do is to use Morale. I will not go back over the details here, but I will note that it is a crucial and effective tool to use to control encounter length. By having this variable built in to the game, you can afford to be looser with the number of creatures encountered, as encounters are typically shorter.

The second thing to do is determine monster levels and "No. Appearing". This sort of ties into another point about the monster design in 4e Forever: I am not using roles. Well, I am using Minions, Standards, Elites, Savages, and Solos, but not "Skirmishers", etc. I am trying to simplify encounter groups. Most encounters will be with creatures of the same exact type, i.e. 1d6+1 Giant Vultures. Though there will be some occasional variations, such as more than one type of Giant Ant, by and large you will be looking at the same creature. I hope you give it a chance when you see it. It allows you to really emphasize the flavor of monsters, and it is a lot easier for DMs to run; there aren't a lot of minor, irritating-to-track differences between say, a bunch of Orcs. Since the magazine deals with high Paragon and Epic, which is already taxing due to so many player options, it is a practical fix with old-school flavor, which is exactly what I am going for.

So that is enough philosophy, let's look at some examples of how to integrate variable encounter groups into your 4e game. Start by determining what you would like the average difficulty level of the possible encounters to be. For these examples, I am aiming for an average encounter level of the party's level +1. That is, if I roll and get the average number of possible creatures, it will result in an encounter of the party's level +1. You can easily adjust up or down to different encounter levels. Anyways, in these examples, I will assume a party of level 20 PCs, and I will be looking for an average encounter level of 21. There are two angles I can take to get there. I can start with a possible numerical range of creatures encountered, i.e. "No. Appearing", or I can start with creature level and go from there. Let's look at both ways.

For the first example, we will start from a numerical range of creatures, i.e. "No. Appearing". I decide I want a fairly large number of Standard creatures, 7-12 (1d6+6). The average there is 9.5 creatures, but always round the fractions of the "No. Appearing" average down; so, in this case I round down to 9. Assuming 5 PCs, I am looking at an XP target of 16,000 for a Level 21 encounter. So, I divide the XP amount by the average number of possible creatures (9). I get 1777 XP per monster, or Level 17 monsters. So the average encounter is about "9.5" Level 17 monsters. The potential encounter levels vary from Level 18 (with 7 Level 17 creatures) to close to Level 22 (with 12 Level 17 creatures). It should be clear by looking at this that the larger the static modifier in the "No. Appearing" roll, the more "stable" the range of possible encounter levels. If we instead take 2d8 creatures (9 creatures average), we still end up working with the same level of creature (17), but the encounter level range is from 11 (if they encounter only 2 Level 17 creatures) to 23 (if they encounter all 16 creatures).

Now let's look at starting with the monster level as opposed to "No. Appearing". I still want to hit my Level 21 target, but this time I decide on using Level 20 monsters. I take 16,000 (XP budget for a level 21) and divide it by the XP for a single Standard of 20th Level (2800). I get something like 5.7 creatures as our target number for the average number of creatures encountered. Unlike above, where we used the average of the possible "No. Appearing", the number of creatures here is rounded up to the nearest whole number, i.e. 6. So now, knowing what we want the average number of creatures encountered to be (6), we can decide on a "No. Appearing" expression. Let's try a "No. Appearing" of 1d10+1. Yes, this is actually a 6.5 creature average, but just as we did in the first example, we again round fractions of the "No. Appearing" average down; so, this expression gives us our target of 6 creatures. So, putting it all together, the mean (average) encounter is around Level 21 (6 Level 20 creatures, times 2800 XP apiece, divided by 5 PCs=3360, or a Level 21 encounter), while the low end (2 Level 20 creatures) is a Level 14 encounter, and the high end (11 Level 20 creatures) is a tough Level 24 encounter. That is a pretty big swing. I like it!

So that is my system, at least up to this point. I can anticipate providing another statistic that notes the possible encounter level range of a "No. Appearing" roll for monsters for a group of 5 PCs. Something like "Enc Lvl: 9-12; 11 avg". We'll see; I am open to ideas!

If you end up rolling a low number of creatures, hey it was a quick combat. If you roll up a lot, there is still a good chance the encounter will end quickly thanks to Morale (although the PCs may get severely roughed up). Now, if you are wanting to deal with a huge amount of monsters, say 20+, you will likely want to look at using Minions, or combinations of Minions and other monsters. There is a level-imposed limit to the accuracy of PCs and monsters, and if you go too far in either direction then it will become too easy or too hard to hit each other. Anyway, if it all works as planned (and playtesting has been positive), encounter length won't be a waking nightmare anymore. You can also help PCs mitigate some of the swingier difficulty with henchmen, which the magazine assumes are being used.

And that's how I am using "No. Appearing" on the stat block. This is made possible by Morale, adjusting monster levels, and using henchmen. When you put it all together, it is an attempt to use "No. Appearing" to bring old-school flavor to 4e stat block, loosen the balance a bit, and shorten encounter time. I hope I did a good job explaining it! I have tried to rephrase it several times for clarity.

I am interested in thoughts and opinions so please leave a post! I will be back soon with Part 2. I also want to say thanks to Dndblogs for including my site! It is a very cool group of 4e blogs to follow. I check it out daily, so take a look if you have never seen it before.

Frothsof 4e Errata!

So I thought I would point out a couple of bits of "Errata". I have edited some posts based on ongoing playtesting. These are mostly minor changes but I wanted to point it out to anyone using or getting ready to use the rules.

-Henchmen are now attracted to PCs starting at level 8 (as opposed to 6), and never total in number to more than a quarter of the PC's level. This used to be 1/3.

-I have edited the Reaction Tables. The chance of a monster being initially unfriendly or hostile has increased slightly.

-The biggest changes have been to the Giant Crab preview. The grab still does not allow for escape attempts, but it now automatically ends at the end of the Crab's next turn. Of course, this means it has a chance to continually "refresh" the grab, but for some PCs, particularly those with high Reflex scores, the possibility of escape is there. I have also lowered the damage expressions slightly based on the number of these it will be possible to encounter. The AC was lowered to the standard number for its level, and its attack bonus verses grabbed creatures was lowered. It is still very nasty, but it did get "nerfed".

-I have added some extra information to the No. Appearing post, providing information on the formulas being used to balance the random numbers of creatures encountered.

The Hybrid Stat Block: A New Way to Determine a Monster's Skill and Initiative Modifiers

So I thought I would make a post to elaborate on something I mentioned in a previous blog regarding a new technique for determining monster skill and initiative modifiers. This came about as I was working on some monsters for my upcoming zine, 4e Forever. I am doing some work on a new stat block; it combines some pieces of 4e's stat block with the old monster listings of 1e and before.

I really like how the old 1e stats do not typically provide ability scores for monsters. You get Special Defenses, etc, but not Charisma scores for every critter the PCs stumble on. As I was jotting down the Charisma and Constitution scores of Giant Aardvarks, it really became clear that the 4e standard of providing ability scores, half-level bonuses, and listed skills was not only tedious to generate, but also fairly pointless. Very little of that information would ever actually be used in a given encounter. That is when I thought of a different method of generating the numbers you need. It is simple, intuitive, and I write this in hopes you will try it and enjoy it as much as I have.

Basically, you take the updated Skill DCs of the monster's level. Specifically, the Moderate and Hard DCs. Take those numbers and subtract 10. Those are the numbers you will now use the rest of the way. If a monster is of standard speed, intuition, etc, then its initiative modifier is the Mod DC-10. If it is a very quick or perceptive-"feeling" monster, use the Hard DC-10. For skills, a Hard DC-10 is the modifier for a trained skill. For untrained, use the Mod DC-10. Do not add half their level or anything to these; you are good to go. Both of these numbers are just listed on a stat block like so:

Trained Skill Mod-
Untrained Skill Mod-

The DM has the freedom to rule on the fly regarding monster skills; you do not have to write out their skills ahead of time. This prevents the DM from having to do a lot of extra work on monsters that may never even come up in the game. Instead you can use common sense to adjudicate on the fly. For example, the Giant Eagle likely is quite perceptive, so let it use the Trained Skill Mod if its Perception is needed. The Giant Spider is a sneaky creature, so let it use a Trained Mod for Stealth. A DM can decide that a creature is so inept at a skill that it cannot even attempt a check.

I have really enjoyed using this method. The stat block (I will preview when it is done) is cleaner, there are no superfluous numbers and stats I will never use, and it is a lot easier and more fun to generate creatures without having to contemplate a Giant Worm's Dexterity.

I hope you like it! As always leave a post with any comments or thoughts!