how I do character backgrounds

 Image: Ilya Shichkin

Right now, I have my players choose between four classes: Hobbit, Elf, Fighter and Magic User. Normal people doesn't have levels on any class. They are "level 0" to say. 

Thieves come from a "Thief" background, while Rangers come from a "Ranger" background. Those are in addition to the class they might have. The trick is that no matter which one they choose, it doesn't actually take mechanical effect unless the PC's intelligence has any bonus. 

I am also a fan of backloading complexity, so I tell them to choose background during play, never at character creation.

Now, the long explanation:

As I explained on previous entries, Wisdom is the magical ability score, while...

Intelligence is strictly non-magical. You have a list of backgrounds that are mostly dressing, but when you have an intelligence bonus you get an extra die when performing related tasks (lockpicking, bushcraft, navigation, etc. That kind of marginal stuff). Not only that, but once per character you can retroactivelly produce an item on your inventory that is related to your background or is on the basic items list of the closest rulebook at hand. This is often the main bonus of it.

This means that, unless your intelligence goes beyond 12, your background might give you RP opportunities, or let me, as the GM, give you specific information through a different lens or influence the way that NPCs react to you; but normally it won't give you mechanical benefits. Your ability scores might grow a little bit over time (2 in 6 chance to increase one by 1 every level) but if your intelligence is low, you have little pressure to choose your background. You can even not to choose any at all.

However, if your intelligence is high, is probable that you want to get the most advantage of it. So you will probably want to see the list of OFFICIALLY APPROVED BACKGROUNDS. Notice that by design, they will never give you combat bonuses:

Thief: pick locks, sleight of hand. You get to roll 1d6 per INT bonus, with 5+ being a success.
Ranger: +1d6 per INT bonus while foraging/surprising on the forest (other terrains, like desert, mountain, urban... can be chosen instead)
Sailor: +1d6 per INT bonus on any roll related to piloting a boat.
Engineer: Allows for the Dwarven "structure knowledge" roll, and if a PC has this, you dont need to hire an engineer when you build a castle.
Sage: You can investigate yourself instead of hiring a sage for 2000gp: roll after spending significant downtime into investigation, each 5+ is a success. You can only choose a broad field of knowledge to be a sage of, but you can choose it anytime. You get an extra die if you have access to a library or similar.
Animal Trainer: As BX specialist, requires a success to advance in training every downtime
Armorer: As BX specialist. Low Int armorers can be assistants or smiths.
Alchemist: As BX specialist, a success is needed for each attempt at a potion.

You can make your own, of course, but as always, my advice is that they shouldn't be strictly better than an existent one. To narrow down the exact abilities of a background, a good measurement is to pick an existing skill and enhance it, or allow a PC to do him/herself the work of an specialist. 

Note: Only the thief and ranger backgrounds have been actually tested XD. It sounded clean in my head but now I see it written looks like a mess.

Reimagining Charisma

Tuvstarr on the field, by John Bauer

 

In my current iteration of rules, I am using only four attributes. 3d6 in order, but you have a (2 in 6) chance to increment one of them by one every level up.

Strength is roughly mixed with constitution. The score is equal to your inventory slots until you are encumbered, and each modifier adds +1 HD (which at some amount add to your attack prowess). Probably the most useful attribute score at level 1 if we get practical.

Dexterity modifiers give you either a weapon proficiency (each has its own trick) or a sneak proficency (re-roll a thief-related roll once per rest)

Wisdom score is required by certain magic items to be used, instead of a class-based cap. Positive modifiers add one spell slot each

Intelligence is strictly non-magical. You have a list of backgrounds that are mostly dressing, but when you have an intelligence bonus you get an extra die when performing related tasks (lockpicking, bushcraft, navigation, etc. That kind of marginal stuff). Not only that, but once per bonus and per expedition you can retroactivelly produce an item on your inventory that is related to your background or is on the basic items list of the closest rulebook at hand. This is often the main bonus of it.

I like this approach a lot. I like that the impact of the scores is small enough to make bonuses a nice gift, but not mandatory in order to have a competent PC; and that they help everyone to paint the concept of the character in our heads: thats what I missed out the most when I have played "attributeless" versions of the game. To the point that I have come to think that the main mission of the 3d6 in order roll was originally such: to generate a random avatar with distinct features.

Thats why I miss charisma being in the game. I don't need it at all by its traditional gaming uses: reaction rolls work IMHO much better unmodified, or modified by the character's approach. To put it roughly: violence might give you +1 versus submissive monsters and -1 versus dominant ones, the reverse may be true for kindness. Scheming-type monsters may get -1 if you show yourself in need of something, etc. And as for number of retainers, I have never had use for that. No PC ever I've played with has ever had more than one, so I couldn't care less about it. 

If I put charisma back to add a new layer of character depth to the pcs, it has to have some mechanical effect that at least represents symbolically what charisma is. And I actually have some idea; not defined enough but I am on my way:

Charisma is an abstract combination of (in unknown quantities) purity of heart, heroism, determination, uprightness, kindness, virtue and being chosen by fate. In a way, this makes a charismatic character more "lawful" for all alignment related effects, so it will probably replace alignment if you use it (I wasn't, actually). It is what a true knight has, that makes him different from a common men at arms; or what turns a peasant girl into a saint, as opposed to her local priest.

Your charisma score will be quite obvious for good or bad to both princesses and witches and other magical beings in the world. Doing unlawful things may decrease it. Devils and other malefic imps will surely tempt you or offer temporary power so you end up "Saving Throw versus decreasing your score by 1d6"; while completing a dangerous quest for an unjustly dethroned lady, or swearing to protect her with your life will surely increase it by 1. Monsters and men alike might give a fuck about your wisdom or your intelligence, but sure they will many times treat you differently depending on your charisma.

OK BUT WHAT DO THE MODIFIERS DO? well, some or all of those:

*You get one "revive token" per charisma modifier, and they never refill. Once you fail a death save, you can spend one to roll again. Good results will bring you back no matter which kind of doom you faced, with +1 extra charisma point as a souvenir.

* If charisma can permanently add to a type of save, it would surely be versus fear, or whatever type encompasses it in the rulebook. Extensible to demoralization and maybe mind control to an extent.

* Modify if you can or can't use a certain "alignment charged" item. Lawful items will have a minimum requirement to be wielded, while chaotic ones will result in charisma loss.

* In the same way, Lawful beings may have a minimum requirement of charisma to grant you a quest (trades for XP) or other boons. Chaotic beings will be eager to help you, but they will decrease your charisma and/or other evil tradeoffs. 

* Charisma as an HP bar for "corruption" type damage. A character that falls under the dominance of a vampire may get 1d6 charisma damage: then become his thrall (and thus, an NPC) if charisma falls to zero. Working in behalf of a dark lord by decision will also bring your charisma down eventually.

* Modify the scope and power of "cleric type" spells, particularly protective or healing ones.

* Modify the reaction rolls versus Lawful-type monsters and NPCs, as well as morale rolls of everybody under your command.

* to be expanded. Not really sure on where I want to go with this but I like the color of it.

Answered prayers, by Seb McKinnon

 

 

Prime Requisites, or Ability Scores are not important

"In the OSR, ability scores are not important. They are deliberately so because it would be bad design to put too much weight on attributes you roll randomly"

This is something I read a lot on the internet, when skimming blogs and forums up and down, reading things about my favorite games. And I want to make an argument against it, because it's not really true.

They are not big in protagonismt on OD&D's "mechanical" side. Their uses on proper gameplay are but hinted; a numerical descriptor of the character so you can imagine it better, and for the GM to be used as he sees fit. But they are decisive on a crucial part: the prime requirements. 

A correct ability score can allow or veto a class. Not only that, it can put two characters of the same class at disadvantage, by allowing one to advance faster than the other: having the correct score on the correct ability allows you to progress a % faster . It's not like its a dealbreaker, but if you think about it, what's the point on it?

I guess its because it felt genre appropiate: You want to incentivize strong fighters in your game. You want to incentivize intelligent wizards. But if that is the reason, it feels like the lamest way to push that. If your low STR fighter cannot hit hard in melee and relies more on the bow, it's not too bad. But that the same low STR fighter receives less XP its a dissociated mechanic. It doesn't exist to reinforce the world or a reality, it is just an empty punishment. 

It's not really 3d6 in order if you must reduce attributes with that point buy, and get the appropiate one (providing that you can pay the amount of attributes in a 2:1 proportion) just to not play a gimped character. 

If its for being genre appropiate, I can think on much better ways. For example, allowing one re-roll, and just telling fighters that strength will help them performing their class role (even if its by a small +1 to hit). 

The ability score could also be dismissed, and, if its something needed by the class, just implement it in the class. For example, in the case of strength again, just get rid of it. Then declare "being strong" as a fighter base ability. Yes, I know its sounds so bad, but I am assuming you need strong fighters because genre fidelity.

Another method is what I am doing at the moment: I don't do XP increases for anyone: the prime attribute must be useful by itself, or not exist. Strength already powers up your attacks, so it is a good thing to have by itself. So, I allow characters to increase their prime requisites during the game: every level up, roll 1d20: if you roll equal or over your desired prime requisite, you can raise it by +1. 

This makes fighters a little more strong, mages a little more intelligent, hobbits a little more dexterous. I could probably extend this to any chosen ability instead of choosing the prime requisite, but as the specific abilities are what help the characters to fill their class roles, they would naturally gravitate towards STR, INT and DEX, probably.

Instead of using requisites as a dissociated punishment, I use them as an associated reward (that still creates the genre appropiate tropes). I feel that its also nicer for a fighter to feel he might get that precious +1 someday than to accept that it is gone from his hands in the very moment the character is created.

But enough with prime requisites, I want to go further. In OD&D at least the scores were not so important beyond that. I cannot talk about AD&D because I am not familiar with it. But B/X's strength modifiers are TERRIFYING

When talking about damage output in D&D, a +1 to damage is roughly equal in power to a +2 to hit. This means that every strength modifier you get, your fighter is getting a +3 to hit. 
And this means that a level 1 fighter with +1 strenght is attacking as a fighter as high as 8 levels higher than him.

It's not that its bad, but it is certainly a lot for a game in which ability scores do not really matter.

Imagine being that special guy who rolls a +2 or a +3. 

Constitution can also be a very desequilibrating attribute, but also Dexterity with the AC and Missile fire adjustments. Both are great examples on how a great roll or a couple of them can put your character several levels above their capabilities. 

Wisdom, Intelligence and Charisma are not as decisive, I guess, though it can be because I dont usually feature much hirelings in my games and players do not seem to care about getting more than one or two, though I can see how a maxed out charisma can be exploited through encounter checks. There is not much more to add but for encouraging you, dear reader: should you be thinking on implementing a houserule (such as relying on "roll under" ability checks for something) and the idea of putting too much weight on the scores is holding you back, don't hold. They are already heavier than they look. 

 

Avoid the balance

twitter: pixelartjourney

I've realized that I am really averse to game balance. I can understand the importance of it in some kind of games (computer or strategy games, for example, need all their factions to be balanced so they all remain viable) but I think that its a concept that is erroneously ported to tabletop rpgs causing only confusion and evil. 

I love unbalance in character creation. There is a dogma in the OSR that you cannot put too much mechanical weight on ability scores, because they are randomly generated. But that is not really aligned to B/X at all! 

A simple +1 in strength is +1 to hit AND damage! if we consider the classic conversion of every damage +1 becoming a +2 to-hit bonus, this means that a slightly stronger level 1 fighter hits as hard as a level 4 one. And that is just a +1. Providing you sell your INT or WIS to increase your prime attribute to +1, you will then be in disadvantage to the guy who rolled that +1 and did the same to reach +2 or +3

What about dexterity? it modifies both ranged to hit and AC. Getting a good dexterity sure makes a difference; so does a good constitution. Even rolling your first HD for hit points can make for a big difference: 1d8 hp can make you a 1 hp loser or a 8 hp guy that can withstand carelessly a sword thrust. 

The very "starting money" roll can decide if you start with the best armor in the game or just a shield. 

I like when some characters are stronger than others. Its okay. I think that the perceived importance of balance is that it allows everyone to have something to contribute equally at the table. But this is actually a mirage. The labor of GMs and games is not to give every character equal power: that would not even be possible, if we get deeper into that: Who's got more power? the character that can fight very well or the one that has a red hat? Well, you can say that fighting is more important, but that really depends on the setting. Maybe the campaign has no perspective of fights, but instead features a tribe of minotaurs that are hypnotized everytime they see something red. We cannot know. 

And that is ok too.

You can balance the thief vs the fighter, but for it to be meaningful, you have to make a campaign where there is as much important fights as there are locked doors to be picked. And, at that point, that presumed balance is shown to be a mantained illusion.

I made this houserules sometime ago, where all classes are dismantled and the weight is put on the ability scores, and they work. A high roll in constitution at the start makes you as capable of a level X fighter, both in attack bonus and health. A high roll in dexterity makes you a very competent thief. The only thing that remained tied to level was saves and XP necessary to level up. And some of the lowest rollers were just normal fighters and thieves and wizards. And everybody was ok with it. It is true that attributes could be raised over time with a roll-under mechanic, so the highest attributes were harder to raise, but that is more about a feeling of justice than about balance. 

When we played the Street Gang game, there was characters that were terribly unbalanced with others in combat, as there were some who picked a lot of useless skills (it was part of the fun). But balance, as everything does, also tends to sprout itself from its opposite. In an imbalanced party, balance appears very quickly: For example, the one that tends to fight better, also tends to fight more, thus, putting him or herself at risk much more than the ones that fight worse. This makes him much more likely to die fighting than a non-combatant in the long run.

In the same way, a thief is much more likely to be caught pick-pocketing than a character that doesn't know how to pickpocket in the first place: the skill is a skill and a curse, because an adventurer party is not composed by isolated peoples: it is ideally a group in which everyone pools their abilities together. There is balance in asking the tank to lead the way, or in refusing to accept a part in a plan if you feel that you don't have enough HP, skill, etc to succeed at it; and you propose a different approach instead.

Merry wasn't balanced at all with Legolas, yet both of them played an equally important part in their adventure. Legolas killed a lot of people in the battle of the Pelennor Fields, yet the one kill that Merry achieves alongside Eowen is the one we all remember better. It is not about giving your PCs the same firepower, be it real firepower, magic or thieving firepower. It is about putting them on an equally compelling situation and giving them the freedom to act as they see fit, inside their capabilities. You cannot fight the orcs as well as an elf archer? well, maybe you can try to negotiate with the ents. You don't need levels on anything for that! 

The worst kind of balance is like in 4e/5e and other modern games, when the balance is done blatantly around combat. I understand that you do that in a game that is solely about combat, but D&D is much more than that. You can argue that it is about retrieving treasure. But beyind that, it is about living adventures in a strange fantasy world. By balancing around combat, you are letting combat swallow the whole.

I remember some idea I had for running Searchers of the Unknown. I didn't knew why I liked it then, but I know why now. That game has no classes (just one: adventurer) or attributes whatsoever: the only difference among characters was the amount of HP rolled and your name. I devised some d6 table like this:

6: You start with 4000 XP (level 3). You are also cursed. The first time you get a natural 20 you will miss the roll instead.

5: You are a veteran: start with 2000 XP (level 2)

3-4: You start as normal

1-2: You are a kid: start with 1000 negative XP. You need to get those to get to level 1, and you have -2 hp until then. In exchange, you can once per life turn any roll into a success. 

I never ran SotU in the end, but it gives you an idea on how a little imbalance can be used to create nice dynamics on a game. What does it give that a character is more powerful than the rest? they are a team after all. Somebody being stronger is beneficial to every single one of them, because they can have powerful Aragorn who leads them and assumes greater risks in behalf of everyone. And at the same time, the same high capacity of their member can take the PCs into places too dangerous believing that their tank can carry them, until the tank dies or is wounded and they must carry their body back to the surface, through a zone that is 2 levels beyond them.

Note that the automatic success and the curse will only function once: they are secondary: ornamental complements to the real reason: this creates much more interesting in-game dynamics, assigns natural roles and draws much more potent images in the player's mind than just "you are 4 very similar fighters". 

If, for the contrary, they have a weakling on the group, they can still play around it searching for non-combat approaches, interacting with the game world, taking risks and try to improve with time, and even use their one-time roll in an epic moment, representing the victory of their raw innoncence. Because thats how a good "imbalance" is done: limiting an aspect of the character, but not in a way that stripes the game of the fun. If possible, do the opposite. 

2d6 under ability score: A system sketch

Expanding from the last entry, and opposed to all the other previous entries, in this one I devise a system without levels, classes, hit dice, etc. But the weight falls over the ability scores, and uses 2d6 for resolutions. But there are no +mods involved, only the scores themselves.

A good curve seems to be to roll 2d4 at the start to generate the scores. 6s are meant to be greater than average; and anything over 7 carries implicit superheroic feats. Saves are rolled with 2d6 under relevant stats, with only super-heroic characters able to stastically save more often than not.

The basic combat rules are that you roll 2d6 to attack, everything that exceeds the monster's AC is damage dealt. Longer weapons attack first. Over this premise, I explain some uses of each attribute:

STRENGHT: 

-When you attack with a heavy weapon, and roll your strenght or less, you can re-roll the smaller die.

-When you have strenght 7 or higher, you get a save vs death when at 0 hp

-The score is also the amount of big things you can carry

DEXTERITY

-Spend a turn aiming with a bow and roll 2d6: If under this score, you add +2 when shooting after.

-If you use a light weapon and roll less than your dexterity, you can diss your roll but get +1 AC this turn.

-You roll a save to catch or flee from a monster with higher dexterity. It doesn't have to roll anything, only the one with lowest score does.

-Over 7 you can perform acrobacy feats.

WISDOM (the magical stat)

-At 6, roll under it to use magical tools, detect magic and other minor magical skills 

-At 7 you can cast level 1 spells, at 8 you can cast level 2 and so on.

INTELLIGENCE (the mundane knowledge)

-At 6, you can use one set of specialist tools (Specialized kits detailed in the inventory: doctor bag, thief's tools, artificer, etc) or know an extra language.

-At 7 you can attempt to produce something you've been working on (state what it is at the moment) related to the tools you carry (poison, chemicals, a small gadget), and maybe more times per day at 8+

CONSTITUTION (which really just says how well a fighter you are, or a measure of you will to live): 

-The score is your HP. Armor adds to your AC, but some armors also add some HP.

-At 6 you always act before your opponent in combat providing there are no other substantial differences in leverage.

-At 7 you get +1 attack per round with any favored weapon

-At 8 you get +1 AC for free

-At 9 you get an extra attack regardless of weapon

CHARISMA

-I like to conceive it as a save vs manipulation, fear or some measurement of "self-integrity"

-Also the classic hireling numbers and their morale checks.

-If you use animal companions, you also use this for complex rapport with them.

-On monsters (because with this system, numeric values from monsters are also rolled like this as there is no other math) this can represent how many allies they have in an area. For example an undine with 7+ charisma might use this to command friendly animals or entangling vines in the encounter area. This is the score that a Disney Princess would max out.

Advancement rules: 

When you level up using whatever method you prefer (as there is no need for numeric levels, I'd try to avoid using them for advancement and probably use sandbox milestones) you roll 1d6 against one ability score you want to increase.

If you roll less than it, raise it by 1, to a maximum of 9 or maybe 10

If you roll equal or over than it, raise it by 1 and raise any other stat by 1 

In this way, people who rolls bad stats at creation can increase them slightly faster than the others, and there is some risk/reward between raising "dump stats" and maybe not getting what you wanted, or raising your main ability score straight.

No class, no saves, no problem: All in the Attribute Scores

An opposite approach from what I did in here is to ditch classes, level and skills and choose the other abstraction to build the system around: The ability scores.
Wisdom decides how well a cleric you are. Dexterity does that for thieves. Strenght doesn't really work for fighters, however, as there are other factors that might decide in how good a fighter you are than your bulk body power, so I'm using CON instead
The most obvious advantage on using ability scores is that it keeps the thrill of rolling a character (instead of just rolling the HP), and also allows checks by rolling under the given ability score. For a game with both clerics and wizards WIS and INT can be separated. I prefer to merge both concepts into an attribute called MAG.

When you create a character, roll 2d8 in order (yeah, that will produce below average guys) Mods, however, can't go below -1. Positive mods ALLOW you to perform certain tasks,  and you still roll under score to see how well you perform (having +2 STR is better to force doors than just +1 even if you can attempt it with just +1)

STR: Mods adds to melee damage. +1 allows for force doors, +2 allows to bend bars
DEX: Adds to missile. +1 allows for easy thieving skills like pickpockets, +2 allows for advanced thief skills like climb sheer walls. Used as a reflex save.
CHA: Your common hireling/reaction mods. Also used to save VS any soul or mind controlling effect (willpower save).

CON: This amount is literally your Hit Points, and also says how well you are as a fighter. At +1 you get an extra attack with your favored weapon, or maybe some armor. At +2 or +3 you get extra attacks regardless of weapons. Read the last articles to know more about my stubborness of claiming that Fighting Prowess is indisoluble from Having more HP. Can be used as a Fortitude save but I'd rather make that kind of things just drain HP
MAG: How much magical shit you know. Roll under this to detect magic or to get a glimpse of the otherwordly side of your surroundings.
At +1 you get a 1st level spell
At +2 you get a 2nd level spell and two 1st level spells
At +3 you get a 3rd level spell, two 2nd level spells and three 1st level spells.
Rearrange spells to fit in three level categories OR allow higher level spells to be cast using magical trinkets, magical places or other aids.



Provisional score to mod conversion:

2-8: -1
9-12: 0
13-15: +1
16-17: +2
18:+3


Evidently, in a game deprived of levels or other mechanical parts, when you "level up" you raise your ability scores (thats why I had them start low at 2d8). Maybe raising 2 points at will per level, always capped at 18.
And that is how you become a better figher/wizard/thief, not by picking it as a class.


Rolling certain distributions at the start might give you the chance of playing an ELF, DWARF or any other, like a class requirement. Then you get the darkvision or knowledge about caves; thats the only way to pick them.