The Whys

Got a few links with my own commentary for today. This is mostly on "why" I do certain things the way that I do them in my games. This is particularly focused on the fact that after years and years of doing so, I dislike using miniatures, battle mats, combat grids and all that jazz in my roleplaying games. In my case, this probably goes all the way back to the vector by which I came into the hobby; as a fan of fantasy fiction rather than of wargames. This is somewhat in contrast to the development of the game itself. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson certainly seem to have been fans of fantasy fiction, but their hobby was wargames, and D&D grew out of an adaptation of wargaming into a novel approach of playing the game.

Now, I don't dislike wargames, although I will admit that it's a hobby that I've only dabbled in, not embraced. However, I dislike wargames and roleplaying games mixing tropes and mechanics. Having your roleplaying game "stop" while you indulge in a mini-game that's of a completely different nature has never facilitated the kind of experience that I want, which is more like an interactive and impromptu fiction created by a group. I've always wanted the RPG experience to resemble as much as is reasonably possible, the medium that was my vector into it in the first place, namely fantasy novels, stories and occasionally movies (because of the sucess of the Conan the Barbarian movie, fantasy movies were a thing when I was a kid in the 80s. Most of them were pretty dang cheesy, but still. It was a source of inspiration, and not every 80s fantasy movie was terrible. Dragonslayer for instance is really quite good, and I've got a fond nostalgia for Willow. And more recently, of course, we've got the Lord of the Rings movies as better inspiration. Albeit still secondary to the Lord of the Rings texts.)

I recognize that most people play modern versions of the game with terrain or at least a battlemat of some kind. In part, this is because it's very difficult to run combat "correctly" without it. How do you do flanking, for instance, without a grid? I wonder if, if given better "theater of the mind" options in the base rules themselves, if more people would prefer to run their combats that way, however. I believe that they would, although naturally I can't prove it at all. Anyway, rather than attempt to describe all of the reasons that I prefer "theater of the mind" combat, and systems that enable it, I'll link to "Sly Flourish's" page that already does so quite capably. This link is especially focused on the why, although it links to a "how." This how is really only particularly useful to you if you're in a 5e milieu. Since I am not, the why is the more interesting and useful link for me.

https://slyflourish.com/tyranny_of_the_grid.html

Now, from all that I hear, 5e has been a good direction to take "3e-ish" D&D mechanics and make them both easier and more fun to use. But because I'd already accepted a much more drastic take on modifying "3e-ish" mechanics by using Microlite, or m20. There's a buttload of options in m20. Here's the big collection: https://microlite20.org/

But my specific versions are my specific versions, and are devised specifically for my own tastes and my own settings and the tone that they're supposed to represent. I am finally at a point where I think I've been convinced that there's a 5e rule that I should import. My first thought on understanding this rule is that I wasn't interested, but I've been gradually convinced over time, including by the essays linked to below, also from Sly Flourish. While some of those essays are written in a 5e context, it also shows that the subsystem works. In fact, it's a much better motivator than the old action points mechanic which Eberron thought would encourage more swashbuckling action. It didn't. This does, however, because it isn't just a mechanic, it's also a player motivator. The mechanic in question is advantage/disadvantage. And it can be used to improvise combat to become much more dynamic, interesting and fun without making it more mechanically complex. I'm really coming around to the idea that it will make combat much better.

https://slyflourish.com/improvising_combat_with_advantage.html

I talked about this in my last post, although I didn't link to it, but it's a slight iteration on the same idea.

https://slyflourish.com/cinematic_advantage.html

Anyway, I'll think about exactly how to implement in m20. I'll probably take most of the advice from the articles linked just above, but keep in mind that those are from a more typical D&D paradigm, and a specifically D&D 5e paradigm, so there may be a few things it lists which I find in context don't make sense for Dark Heritage. And I have to decide if adding advantage/disadvantage means that my Heroism points are now something that I no longer need. Sigh. Cascading effects are a minor deal with rules lite games, but occasionally they're still a thing.

But I do find it likely that this is the missing piece I was looking for to draw out interesting, swashbucklery combat more reliably.

A possible new rule...

Although Fantasy Hack and Dark Heritage 2 have diverged, and I'm not really making updates to Fantasy Hack anymore, I am still making minor tweaks to the rules of Dark Heritage 2. I'm a little unsure how to proceed if I ever decide I want to use Fantasy Hack instead of Dark Heritage 2 again; probably just use Dark Heritage 2, update the races, and maybe a few of the appendixes to be the same as the current iteration of Dark Heritage. There are two rules tweaks that I've either already implemented in one case or am seriously entertaining implementing in the other, thanks to the convincing videos provided by Dungeon Craft below. Dungeon Craft is a curious guy, who plays 5e, but who uses a lot of old school paradigms and old school themed house rules in his game. Naturally, as a player of m20, which is based off of d20, my game is somewhat different, but then again, I'm perfectly happy to adopt a houserule from any system whatsoever, if it works better than what I'm already doing. 

The first change is to initiative, and the Dungeon Craft guy proposes a number of scenarios all the way from "there is no initiative at all" to team iniative, to just straight, static DEX score as your initiative. I'm leaning more towards team initiative with a d6 (in fact, I'm actually updated the document to include that as of its latest revision, but I might yet tweak it a bit more after further thought). Anyway, I'll let you watch the following video and decide for yourself what you think would work best for your game, however.

The second change I'm considering doesn't replace anything that I'm currently doing. I have the same problem with "griddy" combat that he refers to, but I dislike representational combat at all, and lean heavily towards "narrative" combat. I don't need miniatures, terrain, battle mats, or any other physical representation for combat, nor do I want to explicitly encourage it with rules that make that seem more likely to be used than not. Now, this doesn't mean that I think those things are bad, or that you shouldn't use them. Although I will admit that I like to draw perhaps a harder, brighter line than most between role-playing games and tactical miniatures games. I do, however, want to make sure that any games I dabble with are perfectly and comfortably usable without them, although if you wish to, you certainly could.

This video talks about replacing a rule from 3e on (flanking) that I don't use in my m20 game with a 5e rule for advantage. In other words, it adds a rule, but as he says, it's a rule that I think encourages the game to play out much more like how I'd like it to play out. And the advantage of advantage (ahem) is that it's incredibly simple to implement.

Anyway, I'm fairly certain that I'll be adopting these two systems into the game. As I think about and write up the text that explains my use of cinematic advantage, I'll also revisit my initiative system and make sure that I'm happy with the implementation of it that I have.

History of m20

I was poking around a bit while waiting for roadside assistance to come unlock my daughter's car so the keys could get picked up out of the passenger seat (long story and not very interesting; don't ask) yesterday, and re-read some of my older blog posts.  I thought one was ripe for some updating, which explained my history (at the time) of using m20.  Let me start with the ordered list that I originally had and then add some new line items at the bottom.

1. I'd been running around house-ruling d20 Modern and D&D 3.5 to be used with my DARK•HERITAGE setting for years.  I'd also played with other systems, but never really settled on anything.  Until...
2. In early 2013 I belatedly discovered the Microlite system (amazingly, by then it had already been around for almost 7 years!)
3. In May of 2013, I created my own adaptation of m20 for use with DARK•HERITAGE.  I also took the two existing Star Wars iterations of m20, combined them into a single one, and added my own elements.  I think this was a great adaptation of the m20 rules to an existing setting that works well with the premise of an old-fashioned game like m20 anyway.  Even if it's just me saying so.
4. These systems underwent periodic revision and fixing of minor elements for some time.  Most of these changes were minor, but they didn't really completely settle down until 2015, at which point both the Star Wars m20 and DARK•HERITAGE m20 were considered complete.
5. Also in 2015, I was confronted with the possibility of needing to pick up where our group had left off; in a campaign that was faltering.  We ended up doing something else (Call of Cthulhu—a campaign that also ended up faltering, as it happens.)  I decided to start the CULT OF UNDEATH project; a thorough pruning and adaptation of Paizo's Carrion Crown adventure path.  For whatever reason, I decided to adapt m20 to do this.  This was the genesis of the m20 CULT OF UNDEATH game; I basically took the DARK•HERITAGE game and replaced the DARK•HERITAGE races with some that more closely resemble standard D&D.  I could, of course, simply have used an existing m20 D&D version, including the original 2006 m20, or maybe the Purest Essence.  But, for whatever reason, I wanted to do my own thing.  
6. In June of 2016, I decided to expand the CULT OF UNDEATH system into a full-blown "My D&D"—i.e., my own take on what I think the D&D system should look like to best emulate my ideal game of it.  This became, of course, FANTASY HACK.
7. By this time, The Force Awakens is already out and of course it's disappointing, although not nearly as much so as The Last Jedi was going to be.  About a quarter into 2016, I started to think that my STAR WARS REVISITED was played out.  I was very happy with the system, but less happy than I hoped to be with the setting, because it was irrevocably tied to an IP that I was more and more unhappy with.  Although this predates CULT OF UNDEATH, I did some early exploration of what it would mean to turn STAR WARS REMIXED into AD ASTRA in April of 2016, that really wasn't a full blown initiative yet, and it wasn't until March of 2017 that I really released AD ASTRA as its own stand-alone game; although by this time, with a setting that was off to a good start.
8. Almost a year ago, I had really started getting excited about developing the CULT OF UNDEATH setting more (under the draft name of TIMISCHBURG), but as I was doing so, I found I was turning repeatedly to ideas that were in DARK•HERITAGE; many of which had actually been cribbed from some other setting I'd developed before being put into DARK•HERITAGE itself.  When it became clear that the two settings were converging, I decided to make it official and bump Dark•Heritage from it's current version 4 to DH5; still a substantially similar setting in many respects, but with a substantially altered geography and more a focus on Medieval familiar pseudo-British nations rather than the pseudo-Renaissance Spanish nations that were more the protagonist race of DH4.
9. With substantial updates to both settings, I had a look at all three rulesets and harmonized and updated all of them a small amount.  This led to other ideas, and the updates were slightly more thorough than I had originally expected.  This especially applied to the two fantasy games.  I added a small section to enable FANTASY HACK in particular to serve as a fantasy Western, mostly because I'd gotten into Red Dead Redemption 2, but also because I'd had the idea of doing so a couple of years ago anyway.  It was just a small add-on appendix anyway.
10. Other than that update, though, I don't really have any additional plans for FANTASY HACK, and DARK•HERITAGE in its current format is basically the same game, except optimized for the setting (all that really means is that the monster lists differ slightly as do the player races spotlighted.  FANTASY HACK therefore is officially a "dead" although still obviously quite playable game, and the DH5 specific version of the rules is really my preferred fantasy game.  I might yet dust off FANTASY HACK sometime for a D&D game, and I've got a few random elements floating around (EBERRON REMIXED, for instance) that could be added to it, but I'd actually prefer not to and as of right now, I'm not planning to.  I have therefore two real games; DARK•HERITAGE which is fantasy and AD ASTRA which is space opera, along with their attendant settings.  Although both are 100% usable as is, I do intend to continue setting development for both; especially DARK•HERITAGE, which after the major structural change is actually less developed now than the space opera, although over the next year or so that will probably change.
11. For the heck of it, here's a picture of spaghetti western era Clint Eastwood interpreted as a fantasy character.  I could see him in the Hill Country as a fairly typical PC.  Sweet.  Onward with more development!

Anyway, stepping back, here's a copy and paste of Microlite's own description of what it is.

What is Microlite20? 

Do you remember when the gaming table was full of pizza and soda, not rulebooks, miniatures and dungeon tiles? Do you yearn for a role-playing game that doesn’t require weight training to carry all the books? Do you want to be able to hold all the rules in your head - or in your back pocket? And do you still want to use all those lovely monsters, adventures and game worlds too? So do we!! 

--  Greywulf 

Microlite20 is a minimalist role-playing game designed to be usable with the majority of the OGL/d20 supplements, rules and adventures with little or no advance preparation. The basic rules for character generation, combat, magic and level advancement take up a single sheet of paper, meaning it is perfect for introducing role-playing to new players, gaming oneshot adventures or tailoring into your own game system. 

History of Microlite20  

Microlite20 was designed by Robin V. Stacey (aka Greywulf) in 2006. The purpose of the rules were to strip the OGL/D20 system down to its bare minimum so that the world’s most popular fantasy system could be played quickly and without thousands of pages of rules, but still be usable with all the adventures, campaign settings, and supplements that had been published for the 3.x edition of the world’s most popular fantasy RPG. 

Amazing, one page of basic rules (coupled with the Fantasy SRD for spells and monsters) really did allow for fast-playing games with just about every adventure and supplement published for the 3.x edition. 

Microlite20 was an immediate hit with players who liked the 3.x edition of the world’s most popular fantasy RPG but did not like the complex and time-consuming (both to GM for and to play out combats) beast it had become. Microlite20 was a rules-light way to play that brought fun back to many game tables. 

The Microlite20 rules were entirely open game content. Only the names “Microlite20” and “Robin V. Stacey” were listed as product identity. Having the entire system open game content sparked a flurry of gamer creativity. Simple variant rules and basic expansions came first – for example, lists of limited spells and monsters so Microlite20 could be played without lugging the huge SRD around. However, customized rule sets and complete games based on Microlite20 soon followed.

As an interesting aside, I've been looking over the big Microlite Compendium, and although there are tons of alternate and variant m20 games included, almost none of them bothered to include anything whatsoever to explain what they are, what they're doing differently, or why you should look at them instead of just basic Microlite20.  Even the ones that included an Introduction just copied and pasted the introductory text to Microlite20.  Sigh. 

What does Western Hack need compared to Fantasy Hack or Dark•Heritage 2.0?

Let's look at this from a rules perspective first.  A western fantasy, compared to a Medieval fantasy, probably needs an alternate rules module that offers the following:

• firearms more typical of the 1850-1900 period, more or less.  This can top out with mounted stuff like a cannon or Gatling gun, although these aren't really portable weapons in the individual sense.
• Some more variation and nuance to horse-riding, varieties of horse, etc. so that there's some flavor to the horseplay in the game.

I actually think that that's about it.  Other than that, the rules for FANTASY HACK would already work quite well for facilitating WESTERN HACK.  I probably should get to that so I can focus more on a WESTERN HACK setting without feeling like the rules adjustments are hanging over my head.  But I'm a little bit intimidated by the task; I'm afraid of going too far and breaking the rules-lite paradigm in order to get rules nuance, and being unhappy with the result. Sigh.

Borrowing from the three existing Microlite cowboys & injuns game only goes so far, so I'll probably have to make up the horse rules, at least, since none of them have anything like that.  Anyway, here goes:

Firearms (replaces the black powder firearms rules from Appendix II of FANTASY HACK)

• Pistol: Short range, single shot, holds 2 rounds, damage 1d8m reload time 1 round
• Revolver: Medium range, Single shot, holds 6 rounds, damage 2d6 reload time 2 rounds
• Lever-action Rifle: Long range, single shot, holds 15 rounds, damage 2d8 reload time 3 rounds
• Sharpshooter Rifle: Far range, Single shot, holds 1 rounds, damage 2d10 reload time 1 round
• Shotgun: Medium range, single shot, holds 2 rounds, damage 2d12 reload time 2 rounds
• Gatling Gun: Long range, 6 shots per round, holds 100 rounds, damage 2d6 each reload time 4 rounds
• Cannon: Long range, Single shot, holds 1 round, damage 4d8 reload time 2 rounds

Range to be decided by the GM, not specifically "measured".  The Gatling Gun and cannons are portable, but takes a crew of two to operate properly.  It is mounted on wheels like a cannon, requires a horse, mule or ox or equally strong animal to move, and once set up cannot be moved during a particular combat unless you hitch it to an animal (although with both members of the crew operating it, it can be rotated to fire at a different angle, although doing so takes an entire round to do.)  A single person can use this weapon, but cannot do anything with it except load it and fire it and hitch it to a horse; he cannot rotate it.  It also takes twice as long for a single person to reload it.

Horses (replaces the entries found in the Monster section of FANTASY HACK)

• HORSE, RIDING: AC: 12 HD 2d6 (8 hp) AT:bite or kick +2 (1d6) STR: +4, DEX: +2, MND: -3, S: Grants a rider a +10 bonus on chase rolls, standard cost: 40
• HORSE, WAR: AC: 12 HD 3d6 (12 hp) AT: bite +3 (1d6) or kick +3 (2d6) STR: +6, DEX: +2, MND: -3, S: Grants a rider a +7 on chase rolls, standard cost: 200
• HORSE, RACE: AC: 12 HD 2d6 (8 hp) AT: bite or kick +2 (1d6) STR: +5, DEX: +2, MND: -3, S: grants a rider a +14 bonus on chase rolls, standard cost:  125
• HORSE, OLD NAG: AC: 10 HD 1d6 (4 hp) AT: bite or kick +1 (1d6) STR: +4, DEX: +0, MIND: -3, S: grants a rider a +7 on chase rolls, standard cost 10

The performance of horses can be improved with proper care and tack.  There are three main items of gear used by these rules: a bridle, a saddle, and horseshoes.  All are rather specialized equipment that require considerable expertise to craft (and in the case of shoes, to put on the horse as well.)  Standard versions of the three cost: 10 for a saddle, 5 for a bit, and 5 for shoes (installed.)  Riding a horse without the proper gear results in a -1 penalty (each) for lack of a saddle or bridle, and a horse without shoes will face a -3 result on fatigue rolls during chase scenes.

Horses can also be found in the wild, although race horses and war horses are extremely hard to find.  Catching and breaking a wild horse involves sneaking up on it, lassoing it, mounting it, and then doing MND + Athletics checks against the horse's STR + HD.  You will need to pass three such checks in a row, while if you fail three in a row, the horse bucks you off, you'll need to do a DEX + Athletics check to avoid taking 1d6 damage from falling, and the horse will then either attack you or (more likely) run away and you will have failed.  If you do not get these checks in a row, you can continue trying to break the horse until you either succeed or fail three in a row.

Non standard, specialized or even magical versions can improve the performance of horses above that of the standard listed.  The following are some improvements that can be made:

• +1 or +2 (cost of +10 and +50) to fatigue checks during a chase scene; can be applied to a saddle or bridle
• +2 to kick damage with improved horseshoes
• +1 or +2 or even +3 (cost of +10, +50 and +150 respectively) to speed bonus on chase checks; can be applied to any of the three parts of equipment, and if applied to more than one, they can be cumulative.  A really tricked out race-horse, for instance, could have an additional +9 to it's chase bonus, for a total of +23
• Barding can offer +2 or +4 to AC (cost of 15 and 30 respectively) but reduces the speed bonus by the same amount, and imposes a fatigue penalty during chase scenes by the same amount as well.  It isn't much used in the Old West, but it's not entirely unheard of.

This same equipment can be used if riding any other more fantastical creature, by the way, although horseshoes probably won't be relevant to most creatures unless they have similar hooves.

Extra Mythical Horses

Mythical horses can be created by using the following standard mythical template, and then adding a special ability to the horse to customize it.

HORSE, MYTHICAL: AC 15 HD 5d6 (25 hp) AT: bite or kick +5 (3d6) STR: +6, DEX: +3, MND: -1, S: Grants a raider a +12 on chase rolls

Mythical horses cannot be bought.  Often there will only be one of each type in the entire setting, although legends and folklore suggests that if one is somehow killed, it will be spat back out of the Spirit World as an archetype, fully grown, again within the next few weeks or months.

How to catch one is different for each; for unicorns, for example, the lure of a virgin by a crystal clear pool in the forest is supposed to be the best method, for the four horses of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse, you may have to fight and defeat the Horseman.  The following are a sampling of mythical horses:

• Unicorn: gains an additional gore attack at +5 that does 3d8 damage
• Hippocampus: can travel through water as well as on land and allows its rider to breathe water while mounted
• Pegasus: can fly through the air as well as travel by land
• Sleipnir: this eight legged horse gains an additional +7 to chase checks due to its tremendous speed
• Death: the horse of the Horseman of the Apocalypse, this emaciated/skeletal and ghostly pale horse has the immunities of a flesh golem
• Famine: the horse of the Horseman of the Apocalypse, this black horse causes 1d4 STR damage with each bite attack (STR + level DC 18 to resist) and is surrounded by a swarm of insects that attacks anything adjacent to the horse (except its rider) until the swarm is defeated.  This swarm will restart with each new combat encounter.
• War: the horse of the Horseman of the Apocalypse, this red horse has a fiery breath weapon, exactly like a hell hound
• Conquest: the horse of the Horseman of the Apocalypse, this snowy white horse will cause anyone adjacent to it (except the rider) to be shocked by the lightning that courses about the horse for 1d6 damage each round (can be avoided or resisted on a DC 14 (DEX or STR + level check.)

Ta-da!  The Western Hack supplement (or Attachment IV, I suppose, to FANTASY HACK, which would be the best way to publish it) is done!  However, this may mean that I need to update the main body of FANTASY HACK to make sure that it's consistent with DARK•HERITAGE 2.0.  Sigh.  Still, that's quite an accomplishment; I didn't set out to do this when I started typing this post, and now it's done!  I may end up tweaking this a bit before it's published officially.  We'll see.

Anyway, here's a nice image of the Four Horsemen, although I'd have the red one a much brighter, unnaturally so red (about the color of the flag, actually) and my death would be even more... dead and ghostly looking, I suppose.

Still, you can do your own image search for the Four Horsemen.  There's obviously tons out there.  Maybe this one is a bit better on the horses themselves.

Nentir Vale

I'm giving some serious consideration to not really making a solid map of DH5 after all.  What?! How?! Why?!

Well, the reason is perfectly encapsulated in Ray Winninger's First Rule of Dungeoncraft.  Let me quote:

Before we go too far, though, it's time to introduce you to the First Rule of Dungeoncraft: Never force yourself to create more than you must. 

Write this rule on the inside cover of your Dungeon Master Guide. Failure to obey the First Rule has been the downfall of too many campaigns. You shouldn't feel compelled to create more information or detail than you'll need to conduct the next couple of game sessions. When some DMs sit down to create a new campaign, they are strongly tempted to draw dozens of maps, create hundreds of NPCs, and write histories of the campaign world stretching back thousands of years. While having this sort of information at your disposal can't hurt, it probably won't help—not for a long time yet. Spending lots of time on extraneous details now only slows you down, perhaps to the point where you lose interest in the game before it starts. For now, the goal is to figure out exactly what information you'll need to conduct your first few game sessions. You can fill in the holes later, as it becomes necessary. This approach not only gets you up and playing as quickly as possible but also keeps your options open and allows you to tailor the campaign around the input of the players and the outcome of their adventures. In this spirit, you should aim to start your campaign as soon as you can, while doing as little preliminary design as possible.

So, yeah—I'm not going to run anytime soon, and I like world-building for it's own sake.  But a corollary to the First Rule is that it's not that all that detail won't help for a long time yet; it's that it's arguable if it ever really helps at all!  Later on in column #10, Winninger suggests a local map with a radius of about 60 miles.  I suggest doubling that, but I also suggest that that's all that you ever really need for multiple campaigns of adventure; especially if you are good at wringing the maximum potential out of your potential adventures and don't just breeze over them in your haste to move on to the next one.

As it happens, double that is about, give or take a little, the size of Nentir Vale, the localized setting default for 4e.  Now, this works really well for something that's frontier or Dark Age like in its assumptions.  4e is.  Dark•Heritage is (more frontier than dark age, whereas 4e is the reverse, but the two are overall mostly very similar).  If you're more into Imperial politics and whatnot, then maybe you do need a bigger canvas.  Julius Caesar started his career in Asia Minor, went to Rome, became governor for a time of Hispania, traveled extensively in Greece and Egypt, fought the Gauls and the Britons and the Germans, and fought a civil war against Pompey in Illyria.  He got around a much larger geography than the Nentir Vale, which is only about half the size of the Carpathian basin, which was just a tiny part of Caesar's adventures.

But personally, yeah—I like the frontier type campaign, so I'm thinking something that size of Nentir Vale (or the Bighorn Basin, to put it in a real world perspective).  So, all I really need to do is create a more detailed setting that's about the size of the Bighorn Basin or Nentir Vale, and just refer in somewhat handwavy fashion to what else exists in the world and where.  A sketchy map of the whole area isn't even required, although it might be nice, but more than that is totally unnecessary.

Now, some of you may well be suggesting that while I'm obviously name-dropping 4e and Nentir Vale, this was hardly a new idea to 4e.  You note that the Grand Duchy of Karameikos detailed (very lightly) in the old Moldvay-Cook B/X series Expert book was a very comparable example to Nentir Vale both in scope and scale, and certainly it predates it by decades.  Some of you may even note that I've already included my own version of such in Timischburg myself.  So why do I need a new one?  Or rather, naturally I don't, but why might I want one, instead of just spending a bit more time fleshing that one out?

The answer to that lies mostly in the question of tone.  Timischburg was originally invented specifically to be my own answer to Ustalav (from the Pathfinder Golarion setting) for my CULT OF UNDEATH project, and it was supposed to present a kind of Gothic/Transylvanian horror vibe.  While that was 100% appropriate for the CULT OF UNDEATH project, I question whether or not that's really the right approach to what I hope is more generally useful and can support perhaps a broader range of tones with ease.  Also; I need a place that's a frontier region, not one that's haunted by the ancient and the corrupt.  Not that there won't be the ancient and corrupt in the frontier region too, but it'll take a different form, and will generally be more alien.  Also; frontier regions tend to be more diverse, which is part of why there's so much potential for conflict (diversity + proximity = war).  But Timischburg had only limited opportunities for certain types of player characters (or fictional protagonists) to find anything that they could relate to.  Which was partially by design, but also partially... not really what I want for something more general.

So, I want to create another comparable area that is more one that has been washed over by wave after wave of now vanished political entities.  Lingering peoples from those past empires still... well, they linger, here and there.  New colonists, from the Six Colonist nations in particular, have started to establish their new homesteads and towns and maybe even a city or two, but the dominant theme should be one very different than that of Timischburg; it should be rival different settlements of various peoples each occupying the same general area, and with both alliances but also friction, and with loads of dangerous wilderness in between the various settlements.  This dangerous nature of the region means that natural rivalries are sometimes going to be repressed as civilized people regardless of background have to be willing, at least at times, to work together to survive.  This gets back to the more defined points of light type of paradigm.

Timischburg would exist here too, though—it would maybe be a neighboring block, and at least a small border of this newer portion (I'm thinking it'll be the Hill Country, as earlier described) will border Timischburg, although probably separated by pretty difficult boundaries, like the Knifetop Mountains and the surrounding Haunted Forest and Thursewood.  By their names, you can imagine that there isn't a lot of good traveling through those regions.  This probably also means that I'll have to both flip and rotate the Timischburg map to make it work, but that's OK.

Other than that I'll have to draw it again.  Sigh.

UPDATE: Requoting some elements of my discussion about Timischburg.  Maybe it works pretty well after all. What I think I'll end up doing is creating the Hill Country, attaching it directly to Timischburg, and just have two linked areas, for double the fun.  That's more work, but as I said up front; it's actually mostly work that I enjoy anyway.

Ghouls haunt the graveyards at night.  Byakhees flit around the towers of reclusive rural lords with vile reputations.  Dark Young lurk in the depths of the Haunted Forest, and werewolves have famously made the Bitterwood dangerous to pass through.  Succubi siphon the life from urban socialites who fool with powers over their heads that they don't understand or respect.  The Eltdown Fens crawl with shambling, moss-covered skeletons that rest uneasily in their watery graves.  The coastline features mysterious areas that are rumored to be ancient ports destroyed by Ketos.  Liches keep lonely towers in the wilderness, surrounded by their rotting servitors.  Nightgaunts haunt the peaks of the Knifetop Mountains.  Dark rumors of shoggoths lurking in the sewers of Grozavest and Preszov continue to linger.  The Thursewood is crawling with thurses (duh.)  The hilly ridge that gradually rises to the Mountains of Mittermarkt are topped with lonely, old barrows where wights lurk in the night. 

Etc. and so forth.  Everyone likes to talk about how during the Middle Ages people rarely traveled more than a few miles from where they were born.  With a place like Timischburg, it is painfully obvious why that's actually a great idea.

More thoughts on speed stat

Well, with a minimum of changes, (some of it fixing grammar and clarity more than actually changing anything) I've made sure that my chase rules are sufficiently functional in print right now today.  The way that this works is this:

• I made sure that the monster section of the rulebook refers to using the monsters' HD for all skill stats required if any checks are made.  It does.  It did already, actually, but I had to double check that that was clearly integrated.
• Second, I slightly modified the description of the chase rules to say that +10 for being mounted was a point of reference based on a standard horse.
• Third, I added another sentence in the chase rules suggesting that GMs can use that point of reference to come up with other bonuses to the chase check as required to account for monster speed.

This is a stop-gap, though.  It works just fine, but realistically, if I think chase scenes are going to be a significant portion of the game, then monsters should have a chase bonus score, or speed stat, or something like that.  For a typical D&D-like game, chase scenes are relatively uncommon, so that's probably OK, and having the GM decide when one comes up if there's a bonus to one party, and what it is, is perfectly fine.  It can be done on the fly, without any significant workload or stress on the GM's part.

For Western Hack, and for any other game where being mounted, and running around chasing each other is likely to happen more frequently, a bonus for every monster is probably required.  And honestly; just because I don't need one for Fantasy Hack or Dark•Heritage 2 as it is, that doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a nice addition to actually have a chase bonus score for every monster, actually.  It doesn't add any significant rules bloat, and if anything, maybe it encourages a different type of action scene to happen more often.  Sure, sure—everyone loves combat, but chases are just as common in action movies as fights for a reason; they're equally exciting!

But that means I need to go through both rules sets making sure that I add the same speed bonus or chase bonus (or speed category, or whatever it is that I end up settling on; probably an actual numeric score) is the same for all monsters which are in both sets, which is most of them.  Sigh.  That sounds a little bit tedious, so don't hold your breath that I'm going to hurry up and do it in the next day or two.

Updated Chase Rules (Fantasy Hack and Dark•Heritage 2.1) BETA

I'm a little concerned, especially as I've now got the monster list in two places, that I don't want to rewrite both of them with a new stat for each monster, and then make sure that I've replicated the entire list properly between the two games (I'm actually pretty sure that a handful of monsters aren't on both lists for various reasons, so I'd have to go through them line item by line item to figure out which.)  Plus, I don't really want to add a new stat.  I may end up going that way before I'm done, but I want this to first be a modular add-on that doesn't require any actual changes to the rules as written before it gets integrated into the main rules.  Future state probably has it integrated in, however.

Chase rules in my m20 games are pretty straightforward... an "action scene" normally means combat, but if one party elects to try to run away, he makes a Athletics + DEX check vs his opponent, and if he wins, he gets to run without taking a hit (if he loses, he still runs, but the opponent gets a free attack on him first.  Then, each round of chasing, they continue to make opposed Athletics + DEX checks.  In most situations, if one of the two wins the check by 10 or more, then he has won the chase; i.e., if he's the one running away, he manages to get away (unless circumstances preclude this, i.e., a chase across a featureless open prairie, or something; if the one chasing wins, the scene becomes a combat scene again, and the guy running will have to attempt to run away all over again.)  Either way, five rounds into this type of scene, you start to have to make DC 15 Athletics + DEX checks to avoid becoming fatigues at having a negative modifier (-5 to the chase; -2 to any subsequent combat, until the action scene is over and it resets.)

You can use the GM Ruling system to come up with modifiers based on player actions, i.e. trying to jump over something, knock over obstacles, etc. to hinder pursuit, or whatever.  And the rules refer to a flat +10 bonus to any participant in a chase that is mounted.  But this defaults to being mounted on a horse; not all animals would be equally fast.  And besides, mounted opponents might want to chase other monsters, or be chased by them.  See the terror bird entry earlier today, for example; they can chase you across the savanna, and they can even be mounts, sometimes.

So how do I see this playing out?  Monsters don't even have an Athletics score, because monsters don't have skill scores (the idea is that GMs, if they need one, can whip one up on the fly.  I have a few options:

1. Give all monsters skill scores.  Faster monsters can be assumed to have a high Athletics score.
2. Change the chase rules to have a Speed score or speed factor rather than an Athletics + DEX check.  
3. Give each monster a generic speed rating, which creates a bonus or penalty to chase results.  This is similar to the horse +10 mentioned in the basic rules, but it would be a bit more nuances; horses might have different ratings, and other animals might have additional modifiers.  I'd probably go with broad categories rather than discrete numbers; something like:
1. Very slow: penalty of -5 to -10 Anything slower than this automatically loses chase checks
2. Slow: penalty of -2 to -4
3. Average: no penalty, but for a bit of minor variation, I suppose you could give them a range of -1 to +1.
4. Fast: +2 to +4
5. Very fast: +5 to +10
6. Extremely fast: Anything over +10

I probably like the last option best, and it's also easiest to implement without changing the way the game works too much.  GMs would still have to assign a speed to any monster, but I'd eventually update the file to include a chase modifier for all of them, because honestly, I probably should have from the get-go.  But with those categories, you'd have a benchmark to use when assigning chase scores.

This also works well for difficult assessments.  Is a bear a fast animal, for instance?  The general consensus is that no, not really, but it can rush pretty darn fast over a short space.  If you confronted a grizzly in the wild and tried to run away from it, it would probably have a hefty bonus to the chase check result for the first few rounds, but if it didn't catch you in 3-4 rounds, it would quit and let you just go.  Well, this way I don't have to try and portray that in the monster profile; the GM just rules it as such.

Dark•Heritage 2.0

As one may imagine, my week is about to get interestingly different than most weeks; I'll be celebrating a slightly extra lengthy Thanksgiving holiday starting... later today, actually, is when it will start.  While one would think that the extra free time would make it easier for me to make blog updates, I don't actually know that just because I'm spending no time at work over a 5-day weekend means that I'll actually have extra free time, or that if I do, I won't have other alternatives to fill it with besides blog updates.  So, it's likely that this will be my last post until Monday sometime.  So, I'd better make it count for something other than marking time.

First off, I've adapted the changes that I've been talking about, and which have been surging, evolving, and percolating for a number of months into Dark•Heritage 2.0.  This is the official update to the ruleset for Dark•Heritage, and it much more closely matches the format that I'd developed for Fantasy Hack after finishing Dark•Heritage version 1.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GDpZaQrEeZ6i8ggHAIep92ucgdrmEfxu/view?usp=sharing

If you've already got the first Dark•Heritage, or Fantasy Hack either one, you'll find a very strong sense of deja vu.  Which is OK.  Although I've spent a lot of time on these rules and whatnot, I don't honestly see Dark•Heritage as primarily a setting for roleplaying, although obviously it could be, since I have a roleplaying game of my own design (well, kitbashed, at least) to go with it.  No, rather I see it as the setting for fantasy stories that I just haven't told yet.  Which I've been meaning to get around to telling for a long time now. 

Sigh.

When I come back, I'll maybe talk briefly about some movies I've seen over the break, hiking plans, and plans for the further developments of Western Hack, Swashbuckling Hack, and DH5.

On Fantasy

One could make a case that Fantasy is the original mode of fiction in all of Western civilization and the various relatives, such as they are, of Western civilization.  What could be more fantastic that the Twelve Labors of Hercules, the story of the Trojan War as told in the Iliad, or the voyage home of Odysseus?  From the Celts, the Norse, the Aryans, and various Mesopotamians we get similar results; heroic men striding exotic and fantastic landscapes to fight supernatural villains and strange monsters; many of which remain with us as part of our cultural touchstones in the fantasy genre and fairy tales today; dragons, trolls, goblins, griffons, etc.

Most of these, while sometimes taking place in exotic and make-believe locales, also take place in the world that the tellers and their audience would have been familiar with; when Jason and the Argonauts head towards Colchis where they find the Golden Fleece and Medea, Colchis was a well-known location not far from the Greek Euxine Sea cities of Phasis and the (probably ethnic Georgian) city known to them as Dioscurias.  Prometheus was reputed to be in the mountains nearby as well.

Although this isn't the case now, fantasy for many years did this; it was reluctant to take too firm a leave of the familiar shores, and made numerous references to real world peoples, places and things.  One of the earliest to break with this was William Morris, one of the clear founders of the fantasy genre as we know it, who wrote very early fantasy novels like The Wood Beyond the World and The Well at the World's End.  Both C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien were fans of his work, and it was inspirational to them, at least in the sense that it gave them the idea of the kinds of things that they could write, if nothing else.  Robert E. Howard made some ties between his Hyborian Age (and earlier Thurian Age) and the real world, but they are also, effectively, true secondary world fantasies as well.  By this I mean, it takes place in a discrete, self-contained fantasy setting that, while it may bear resemblances to the real world, is not meant to be connected to them in any way whatsoever.

And this is the mode in which fantasy has become known to fans of the genre today; it's secondary world unique, discrete setting, and it's pseudo-Medievalism.  (The Conan stories are also Medievalist, although this is often forgotten, because Conan tends to spend more time in Mediterranean locations that are a bit more exotic than his Howard's fake Romano-Frankish, or glorified Lombard Aquilonian Empire, Anglo-Saxon Brythunians, pseudo-Gaelic Cimmerians, etc. that are familiar to us from Early Medieval history, although with new names, geographies and histories.)  In fact, I'd daresay that most people wouldn't recognize fantasy without a kind of Renaissance Festival look and feel to it, and those works that deliberately change that do so particularly to stand out.  And honestly; they don't change it all that much.  Changing Medieval Western Europe as your kinda sorta baseline to the Roman Empire or Imperial Japan, or something like that, will only feel like a big change in a genre that's relatively tightly bound to begin with.

There has been a little bit of very specific and unusual deviations from this.  There's a big genre of urban fantasy, for instance, which does not utilize secondary world, and takes place in the modern world, just with fantasy elements all over the place.  Some of the more experimental stuff comes in different venues.  Star Wars (and some of the space opera stuff it was based on, like Dune, or others) has often been called swashbuckling fantasy in space, and why not; it's got monsters, dark lords, sword fights, princesses, wizards, etc.  The Dark Tower is the only fantasy work that I know of that utilizes some of the visual and character cues from Westerns in a secondary fantasy world.  There's been a bit more success with steampunk and even dieselpunk fantasy, especially in the world of video games.  The Tannhauser board game (and a few tie-in novels) provide a pretty sweet fantasy World War 2 setting; although it's alternate (fantasy) history rather than a true secondary world. The Pirates of the Caribbean movies prove that Golden Age of Piracy fantasy would work very well, although they don't create a fictional secondary world setting, sadly.

But why not?  I actually think space fantasy is relatively well-served (and my own Ad Astra game does a credible job of showing what I think that should look like anyway) but it's just about the only non-Medieval fantasy that really has any legs, and people usually don't consider it fantasy anyway, but rather some kind of science fiction.  The two that I'd really like to see are pirates and cowboys & injuns converted to fantasy with a true, secondary fictional world.  This means... what; modifying Ad Astra or Fantasy Hack (or DH5, maybe—which is already almost identical to Fantasy Hack anyway) to have cowboys and cowboy-like technology and cowboy-like setting assumptions baked into the rules.

And, of course, it'd need a setting.  Maybe some fiction would be fun.

Although this has been something that's been on my mind for literally years, I haven't done much with it other than some rather hesitant, half-hearted steps in that direction with DH4; although it was only one of many influences that got sucked into DH4, so it was too watered down to really feel like "Western fantasy."

Now; there are three Microlite games already that I'm aware of, because they're included in the big ole Microlite Collecton PDF already; Tumbleweed, Gunsmoke & Goblins and Owl Hoot Trail.  Both look pretty nifty, although I think maybe they try too hard to be atmospheric in the way that they're written and how they've renamed stats, skills, classes, etc. that are already familiar to us from other games.  I'd probably re-read them again, focus on harmonizing with Fantasy Hack conventions as good as possible, and then borrow whatever good ideas they have into a custom Fantasy Hack designed to be Western Hack.  Then I'll do Swashbuckling Hack too, focused on the type of stuff you see in The Three Musketeers and Captain Blood and stuff like that.  Neither is particularly difficult to get out of Fantasy Hack as it is, and in fact, with some very minor additions of equipment rules and maybe giving some thought to some kind of vehicle and mounted combat options.  Fantasy Hack has a nod to mounted chases, but in a cowboy setting, you've got stagecoaches, wild horse chases, and whatnot, and if you don't account for them at least as well as Ad Astra accounted for spaceship combat, then you're probably missing the boat seriously with your game, which doesn't have one of the key things that it needs in it to be successful.  Speaking of missing the boat, Swashcbuckling Hack may well need something with cannons, ships, and whatnot, given that the Golden Age of Piracy is such an important point of influence.

Both Western Hack and Swashbuckling Hack can be done, I'd think, not as stand-alone games, but as Optional and Alternate Appendices that further "hack" the rules of Fantasy Hack, but which require it to run.  Heck; maybe I'll add Noir Hack to it while I'm at it.  But honestly, what they most need are settings.

I think part of the reason I'm feeling particularly motivated is because of how much fun I'm having with Red Dead Redemption 2.  But it doesn't really do everything I want.  I find that the game is sometimes too punitive; you can't do anything without having the long arm of the law come down on you.  My son who played GTA5 the most thinks it's a bit odd that the law is much more frustrating in RDR2 than in GTA5, because by the terms of the genre itself, you'd expect the other way around.

I also really like the fake Old West of the RDR games.  Places like Blackwater, New Hanover, Saint Denis, West Elizabeth, Nuevo Paraiso, the Grizzly Mountains, etc. sound very much like places in the real west... but they're not.  Just like the places of Upmeads, Cheaping Knowe, the Long Lake, Mirkwood, Bree, the Burg of the Four Friths or Rivendell sound like places that ring with that Olde World charm, even though they're fictional places too.  But RDR doesn't take place in a true secondary world either; although they are fictional territories (or states, or whatever they are) they're fictional territories within the US, and numerous references to real places like New York City and California, and Japan and Spain and Peking, etc. pepper the dialogue of the characters too.  So, it's close, but not quite.

And although RDR has a lot of weird easter eggs; Nosferatu stalks the city of Saint Denis, UFOs appear in two places if you're there at the right time of night, and there's even a ghost train that runs along a certain section of track at midnight, and there's the bones of something that is, I presume, supposed to be a sasquatch, it's also not a fantasy game.  The weirdest thing you have to actually fight isn't anything like a dragon, or a cyclops; it's a hungry grizzly bear.

Now granted, fantasy can be overwrought with the fantastic, to the point where it has no ability to reach you emotionally anymore, because it's freakin' all over the place.  Good fantasy is actually somewhat discrete, and doesn't throw the fantastic at you non-stop, but contrasts it with the familiar and mundane, which is actually what you see most of the time.  While hobbits are, of course, a fantasy race, they are a great stand-in for mundane, regular Edwardian England as Tolkien understood it and loved it, so when Bilbo and later Frodo and the others have to travel across the length and breadth of the setting, we as the readers get to experience much of the sense of wonder that they as the characters do.  Which isn't all the time; it comes in discrete chunks, like the horror the Old Forest, the strange fairytale Tom Bombadil, the terror of the Ringwraiths and the barrow-wights, the wonder of Rivendell and Lothlorien, etc.

Which are punctuated by lots of travel and challenges across a landscape that you or I might not find unfamiliar.

Anyway, the rules add-ons and modifications aren't going to be too difficult to pull off. It's the settings that is going to be important.  I've got some work to do there.  But given that it's something that I've had in the back of my mind for a long time now, it's probably time that I start spelling out a few details as they come to me, and for that reason, I've created (of course) two new tags; Western Hack and Swashbuckling Hack.  They will be used for rules posts, setting posts, and general discussion about the initiatives.

And, here's a few images to get you ready for what's coming, although don't take these images as indicative of anything specific you'll see in my stuff.  These are just some images I found online.  But like I said; because both of these ideas are vastly under-served, there aren't a lot of images out there that really work anyway.  And some of them are way too steampunky for my taste; steampunk and the Old West in fantasy are not the same thing at all.

Do I *REALLY* want a Timischburg map?

I had always assumed, of course, that I'd eventually draw up a map for my TIMISCHBURG setting.  Why wouldn't I?  That's what you do with settings, and besides, I love drawing maps anyway, for its own sake.  So, why wouldn't I draw one for this setting?

Quick reminder, since I haven't talked about it much in the last few months; what is TIMISCHBURG anyway?  Here's the quick summary:

1. I'd been playing around with homebrewing the DARK•HERITAGE setting for quite some time.  I went through no less than five versions of the setting, each significantly different from the others.  As a setting, it was more swashbuckling dark fantasy with a combination Golden Age of Piracy + The Old West + picaresque Mediterranean skulduggery all rolled up into a setting that had little to do with D&D as most people traditionally thought of it.
2. Because of this, I'd played around with various rulesets to represent it, gradually migrating further and further afield from D&D exactly.  I started with D&D with an almost completely different selection of classes and a different magic system, and from there went to d20 Past and played around with house-ruled Old School Hack and more, before finally settling on a customized version of m20.
3. Because I liked m20 so much, I played around with various other iterations of the game, including making a Star Wars version, and eventually coming up with one with which I could run CULT OF UNDEATH, a side project of mine.  CULT OF UNDEATH was more similar in its basic setting assumptions than DARK•HERITAGE was, so the m20 set I made for it was more similar to D&D, obviously.
4. Kinda on a whim, I thought—hey, what if I expended my CULT OF UNDEATH rules into being a full-fledged alt.D&D that exactly fit my tastes, anyway?  I could probably do that without too much work based on what I already have.  (Famous last words.  Actually, it ended up being kinda sorta true, but of course, I ended up growing the scope somewhat and spending more time and effort on it than I anticipated.)  This became FANTASY HACK, my own "My D&D" ruleset.  Because I was mimicking to a certain extent the structure of the B/X ruleset, I ended up needing to include a small section of setting (like the Grand Duchy of Karameikosin the Expert book) and I took the work I'd done for CULT OF UNDEATH and turned it into the country of TIMISCHBURG and included it as a hex map with a few names and whatnot.
5. And... of course, I ended up wanting to fill in some of the blank spaces beyond Timischburg per se, and that's how I get TIMISCHBURG the setting, which is bigger than Timischburg the country, although Timischburg the country is smack in the middle of it and is the most developed.  TIMISCHBURG the setting, therefore, ends up being the lightly developed and only somewhat vaguely referred to "default" setting for FANTASY HACK, if that makes sense.

I always assumed that eventually I'd draw a real map for the setting itself beyond the hexmap I have for the country.  Because, that's what you do with settings, right?  But I'm starting to convince myself that I don't even want to and that it'd be better if I didn't.  I've got this vague "bubble map" which doesn't do much other than show the relative size and positions of a few nations that I've name-dropped in so far.  But what if that's the only map I ever actually come up with, unless I need to do a specific regional map like I did for Timischburg itself?

After all, before Tolkien came along, we read fantasy books that didn't have maps all the time, and it didn't hurt us to not have a map, did it?  And unless you're the GM of a setting, how much of a setting map do you really need anyway?  Actually, even if you are the GM, I'd argue that you can certainly do fine without one.  The only thing I'd miss is that I do like maps for their own sake.

Anyway, once again, a quick rundown of what these nations are:

• Timischburg—the first developed and main part of the setting; everything else is deliberately meant to surround it.    This is a kind of Medieval Transylvania or Wallachia or something like that; a pseudo-Austrian aristocracy over a more Eastern population of peasants, lots of Gothic horror influences.  Because it started as the setting for CULT OF UNDEATH, it bears some resemblances here and there to Paizo's Ustalav.  Certainly in tone, it should be almost the same, although almost every detail will be different.
• Terassa—immediately to the east and a tiny bit to the south of Timischburg; this is a kind like Medieval Castile, Leon, Asturias, Genoa, etc. including that they may have recently thrown out the Qazmiri in their own version of the Reconquista.  If I actually care to have a place for elfs to live, they're in a forested enclave located here.
• al Qazmir—an Arabian Nights-like country south of the sea from Terassa and eastern Timischburg; home of the jann as an exotic, aristocratic race.
• Carlovingia—a pseudo-Frankish empire located to the northeast of Timischburg, and the probable source of the Timischer aristocracy.  Can be seen as either a unified Carolingian Empire, or an early Holy Roman Empire, or even an analog to the Warhammer Empire, if you like.
• Lexovii—pseudo-Gauls and other Celts, directly north of the Timischburg lands.  This isn't a "country" so much as it is a "nation."  There could be other people who live in their lands—goblins and dwarfs, specifically, although that's more for people who need to have goblins and dwarfs in their D&D settings than for me; I'd just as soon do without.
• Vossmark—north of the Lexovii are the fake Vikings.
• Tesculum—west of the Lexovii and the northern parts of Timischburg, and even bordering on Vossmark is the quite large Graeco-Roman styled kingdom, and one where I'd like to see more expansion, actually.
• Gunaakt—the orc-lands, south of Tesculum and immediately east of the southern part of Timischburg.
• Baal Hamazi—fractured kingdom east of Gunaakt.
• Nizrekh—an island kingdom south of Gunaakt; a hybrid of Cryx from Warmachine and an Nehekhara from Warhammer, kinda.  Undead, piracy, monsters, and ancient Egypt.

And, of course, the Timischburg map itself: http://darkheritage.blogspot.com/2016/12/fantasy-hack-v14-appendix-iii.html

And the CULT OF UNDEATH tag will give you a lot more information on the country, as well as a sample adventure/campaign set therein.

Or maybe this link would be easier to use.  The content is the same either way.  https://sites.google.com/site/cultofundeath/

Classes & Archetypes III: Advanced Players Guide part 2

Fighter

• Archer: The archer is dedicated to the careful mastery of the bow, perfecting his skills with years of practice honed day after day on ranges and hunting for game, or else on the battlefield, raining destruction down on the enemy lines. — A classic archetype, of course.  Robin Hood.  How can you call yourself a serious fantasy game without enabling this archetype in some way or another?
• Crossbowman: The crossbowman has perfected the deadly use of the crossbow, a simple but cruelly efficient weapon, as a craftsman mastering a lethal tool. — Of course, this just seems the same archetype with a slightly different weapon.  Is that really necessary?
• Free Hand Fighter: The free hand fighter specializes in the delicate art of handling a single weapon in one hand while using his free hand to balance, block, tip, and distract his opponents. While not a brawler, his open hand is as much a weapon as a bow or blade. His fighting school benefits only apply when he is using a one-handed weapon and carrying nothing in his other hand. — I dunno.  This seems like overkill to me.  Then again, if you watch the absolutely excellent 70s The Three Musketeers and The Four Musketeers, you'll see that swashbucklers actually fought like this an awful lot.  Those movies were rather well known for their accurate (ish) fight scenes.
• Mobile Fighter: Where some fighters focus on strength and raw power, the mobile fighter relies on swiftness and mobility, gliding across the battlefield like a steel whirlwind and leaving destruction in his wake. — Given the abstract nature of combat in D&D, this maybe is a bit much.  It's of course even more abstract in m20, so this becomes a tactical variation that has no meaning in any of my games.
• Phalanx Soldier: The phalanx soldier specializes in defensive tactics, using his shield to guard himself and his allies and forming a shield wall like an unbreakable anvil against which his enemies break. — While this is, of course, an actual archetype from the ancient (not Medieval) world, it's a little hard to see how that makes it at all useful to your typical adventuring party.  Since you're unlikely to roleplay a soldier in an army surrounded by your brothers-in-arms, I just don't see the point.
• Polearm Master: The polearm master is schooled in the ancient wisdom that enemies are best faced at the end of long striking pole, lashing like a serpent before clumsy swords and axes can even be brought to bear. — Swords and axes aren't clumsy.  But there are plenty of HEMAs that will tell you that this wisdom is, in fact, true.  Polearms are superior to shorter weapons for the most part.  It's curious that the Migration period Germanic warrior would fight with ranged weapons first (thrown francisca and then angon) then fight with his spear or angon, and only rarely actually used a sword.  A sword was more of a status symbol than a day to day weapon.
• Roughrider: Roughriders study and practice the fine points of mounted combat, drilling endlessly with warbeasts—from noble thoroughbreds to trained monsters—to form a perfect synergy between rider and steed. — A combination of a knight and a cowboy archetype in one package.  Not a bad idea.
• Savage Warrior: Warriors' might is not measured only by their skill with steel, but also by their ability to inflict death with fang and claw, horn and hoof, and every exotic appendage the natural and unnatural world has to offer. — There already is a barbarian class.
• Shielded Fighter: A shielded fighter focuses on both offense and defense, blending weapon and shield in perfect balance to impede his enemies while delivering deadly blows, and even turning the shield itself into a formidable weapon. These fighting school benefits apply when wielding a weapon and a shield simultaneously. — In other words... a fighter.  Y'know, in the actual middle ages, this was just what everyone did.
• Two-Handed Fighter: Some fighters focus their efforts on finding the biggest, heaviest, most imposing weapon they can find and training to manage and harness the weight of their massive weapons for maximum impact. These fighting school benefits only apply when using two-handed weapons. — OK.  If all of these fighter archetypes are defined merely by what weapon they use, this list is going to start getting old.
• Two Weapon Warrior: Trained under great masters who preached the simple truth that two are better than one when it comes to weapons, the two-weapon warrior is a terror when his hands are full. From paired daggers to exotic double weapons, all combinations come equally alive in his skilled hands. — Darth Maul.  Or The Three Musketeers mentioned above, quite often.
• Weapon Master: Devoted to the perfection of a single weapon, the weapon master's meditations upon his favored weapon border on the obsessive, but none can deny his consummate skill. The weapon master must select a single type of weapon (such as longsword or shortbow). All of his abilities apply to that weapon type. — My m20 rules actually accommodate this concept very well, believe it or not.

Monk — I have very little use for this class/archetype in the first place.  I rarely see them played, and I don't know what David Carradine wandering through a pseudo-Medieval Europe like that old 80s show Kung Fu has to do with anything I'd really want to see in my D&D or D&D-ish games anyway.  But, no doubt the monk has its fans.  Because I'm not one, I probably won't have much to say on most of this subset in the list.

• Drunken Master: Most monks lead lives of moderation and quiet contemplation. But the drunken master finds perfection through excess. Powered by strong wine, he uses his intoxication to reach a state where his ki is more potent, if somewhat fleeting. — Well, if you haven't seen the really famous Jackie Chan movie on which this is based, you really should.  It's pretty amazing.  Don't watch the first one, though, watch Drunken Master II, or under it's US release title, The Legend of the Drunken Master. 
• Hungry Ghost Monk: The hungry ghost monk looks to spirits that prey upon the living as models of perfection. He sees the life energy of the universe as a resource to be manipulated, even stealing it from other creatures. It is through this constant influx of energy that the hungry ghost monk reaches his ultimate goal: power—personal, pure, and simple. — A vampire monk based on a Chinese folk story.  Sigh.
• Ki Mystic: The ki mystic believes that violence is sometimes necessary, but knowing and understanding is the true root of perfection. Through meditation and spiritual visions, a ki mystic can see beyond the veil of reality to the underlying truth of all existence. — I have no idea what all that bafflegarble is actually supposed to mean.
• Monk of the Empty Hand: The monk of the empty hand eschews normal weapons in favor of whatever is lying around—rocks, chair legs, flagons of ale, even a simple quill pen all become deadly weapons in the hands of such a monk. A monk of the empty hand draws on his own ki to infuse his improvised weapons with power, and can transform a broken bottle into a magical weapon. — If he's constantly picking stuff up and fighting with it, it's hardly "empty hand" is it?  Kinda reminds me of that guy "Mad Dog" in Ong Bak.
• Monk of the Four Winds: The monk of the four winds is connected to the natural world in a way few other creatures—even other monks—can hope to match. He can call upon the elements and the spirits of the world in times of need, and as he nears his goal of perfection, he gains the ability to slow down time and even defeat death itself. — OK...
• Monk of the Healing Hand: Monks of the healing hand seek perfection through helping others. By focusing their meditations on the flow of life within themselves and all creation they gain an understanding of how to share their ki with others, healing wounds and even bringing the dead back to life. For such a monk, sacrificing himself to save another is the surest way to achieve transcendence. — Yeah, but what exactly is the point in a game that already has clerics?
• Monk of the Lotus: Monks are warriors who hone their bodies into deadly weapons, but some monks eschew violence in favor of a more peaceful philosophy. While a monk of the lotus realizes that combat cannot always be avoided—and is more than capable in a fight—he understands that all creatures are connected, and to harm another is to harm the self. Instead, he strives to find peaceful resolutions to conflicts, and in doing so, hopes to achieve inner peace. — That sounds really, really boring to play.  Plus, kind of a pussy.
• Monk of the Sacred Mountain: The monk of the sacred mountain finds strength and power in the earth beneath his feet. Rather than spinning though the battlefield with the fluid motion of the river, he roots himself to the ground, as immovable and unshakable as the stones of the mountain. — Sounds like a minor tactical variation that I don't see the point of.
• Weapon Adept: While all monks train in both unarmed combat and with weapons, the weapon adept seeks to become one with his weapons, transforming them into perfect extensions of his own body. Through such training, a weapon adept seeks to attain perfection by becoming a living weapon himself. — Oh, so to be good in a combat, he wants to learn to use weapons well!  Well, that's certainly innovative.
• Zen Archer: Some monks seek to become one with another weapon entirely—the bow. The zen archer takes a weapon most other monks eschew and seeks perfection in the pull of a taut bowstring, the flex of a bow's limbs, and the flight of an arrow fired true. — Sounds already like the very first item from today, except with some weird Jedi BS thrown in for good measure.

Paladin

• Divine Defender: Some paladins see themselves as the last line of defense between the teeming hordes of evil and the innocent folk trying to make a living in a harsh, unforgiving world. These defenders spend their lives protecting others and taking on foes that the common man should not even know exist. To aid them in their holy mission, they have special powers to protect themselves and those around them. — Kinda sounds like... the paladin.  
• Hospitaler: Paladins are known for their charity and for tending to the sick. The hospitaler takes to this calling above all others, spending much of her time healing the poor, and giving aid and succor to those in need. — It's one thing if you want to (more or less) use the name of an actual knightly order, but you should at least understand that order, I think.  Anyway, again—while this may well be a laudable character that if the game were real life we'd be glad to know, it hardly seems like the kind of heroic archetype that, y'know, enables the game exactly.
• Sacred Servant: Paladins as a general rule, venerate the gods of good and purity, but some take this a step further, dedicating themselves to a specific deity and furthering the cause of the faith. These sacred servants are rewarded for their devotion with additional spells and powerful allies. A sacred servant must select one deity to worship. This deity's alignment must be lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good. — This is meaningless without the religious assumptions that D&D kinda sorta brings with it.
• Shining Knight: While paladins often are seen mounted atop a loyal steed, the shining knight is the true symbol of mounted bravery. They are never far from their steeds and are always clad in brightly polished armor. — Paladins are already known for their steed, and how polished their armor is hardly seems like an archetypal detail to me.
• Undead Scourge: Undead are an abomination in the eyes of the just and righteous. It is no surprise then that there are some paladins that dedicate themselves to wiping these unholy terrors from the world. — There are a lot of these kinds of classes in the game, but without knowing ahead of time that undead are going to be your major mission in the game, then it kinda seems like why would you ever want to use this class for anything?
• Warrior of the Holy Light: Some paladins use their gifts to focus on the holy light that shines within their souls. With the gifts of purity and redemption, these paladins spend much of their lives helping others find the true path. Unleashing this power takes patience and comes at a steep price. — Huh?
• Antipaladin (Alternate Class): Although it is a rare occurrence, paladins do sometimes stray from the path of righteousness. Most of these wayward holy warriors seek out redemption and forgiveness for their misdeeds, regaining their powers through piety, charity, and powerful magic. Yet there are others, the dark and disturbed few, who turn actively to evil, courting the dark powers they once railed against in order to take vengeance on their former brothers. It's said that those who climb the farthest have the farthest to fall, and antipaladins are living proof of this fact, their pride and hatred blinding them to the glory of their forsaken patrons.  Antipaladins become the antithesis of their former selves. They make pacts with fiends, take the lives of the innocent, and put nothing ahead of their personal power and wealth. Champions of evil, they often lead armies of evil creatures and work with other villains to bring ruin to the holy and tyranny to the weak. Not surprisingly, paladins stop at nothing to put an end to such nefarious antiheroes. — Yeah, OK.  I'm not exactly a neophyte to D&D, so I've been familiar with the anti-paladin for quite a while.  Heck, back in the mid 80s or so, I even had an anti-paladin Ral Partha miniature.  Actually, that's probably still kicking around in my basement somewhere, come to think of it.

Ranger — Given that this is my absolute favorite of the normal archetypes that they've made a class out of, I probably have plenty to say about the subheadings below.  Some I'll like, some I'll hate, and some I'll be meh about, but all of them have to be addressed because I'm such a huge fan of the hunter archetype, and have been ever since watching Errol Flynn as Robin Hood and reading about Aragorn.  Of course, because I like the archetype so much, I've often been dissatisfied with the implementation of it, because I have very specific "requirements" of what I want it to look like myself, so my relationship with class itself (and various alternative versions of it that I've seen) is kinda love/hate sometimes.

• Beast Master: Some rangers, particularly those in primitive lands or who were raised by animals, have unusually strong bonds with animals. Unique among rangers, they can bond with multiple animals of any kind, creating a menagerie of wild yet loyal creatures, like a strange family. — I have to think that there's a kind of 80s barbarian movie vibe to this (not just because they used the same title) but I like the idea anyway.
• Guide: Many rangers are loners, but some choose to use their familiarity with the land to guide others safely through the wilderness. The guide forgoes a favored enemy to focus on the task or foe at hand, and can pass his knowledge and luck on to his charges. — I always thought the favored enemy was kind of a silly mechanic anyway.
• Horse Lord: Rangers of the plains use horses or other riding beasts to hunt their lands, forging a near-mystical relationship with their mounts. Horse lords are unparalleled mounted combatants, the envy of even the most dedicated cavalier. Though called “horse lords” as a generic term, these rangers are not restricted to horses for their animal companions—any creature the ranger can ride is included in these abilities. — From the Huns, Scythians, Mongols, Comanche and the Rohirrim and even the American cowboy, this is one of those iconic archetypes out there, and absolutely has to be enabled, I think.  On the other hand—especially in a dungeon environment like D&D often has, I have to wonder sometimes what the point is.
• Infiltrator: Some rangers study their favored enemies and learn their ways, applying this knowledge to their own abilities and using their foes' strengths against them. Infiltrators are willing to walk a mile in an enemy's shoes so as to learn everything there is to know about their foes in order to more effectively hunt and kill them. — In part because I dislike the favored enemy ability, then I guess I have less use for this particular bullet point.
• Shapeshifter: Most rangers venture into the wilderness, but there are some who let the wilderness seep into them. Whether by curse, disease, ancient rite, a slight lycanthropic influence in the blood, or the corrupting influence of chaos, these rangers embrace the wild to transform themselves into something untamed and feral. Shapeshifters are often held in awe, but are even more often feared. — There are a lot of subtle variations on this theme that we've already seen.  This one has a bit more of a Beorn-like vibe going on.
• Skirmisher: Many rangers rely on spells, but there are some who eschew aid from divine powers for their own reasons. Skirmishers rely on their wits, their wisdom, and sometimes even instinct to aid in their quests. — I consider this almost mandatory for any ranger I play, but I take it merely as a mechanical template that replaces spells with some other abilities.  I'd then go ahead and look for an additional archetype, maybe.
• Spirit Ranger: Some rangers nurture a connection with the spirits that reside in all things. By communing with these spirits, the spirit ranger can gain glimpses of things to come. — I'm not 100% sure what this means, exactly.
• Urban Ranger: For the urban ranger, the streets and sewers of the city are just as dangerous as the barren wastelands or the deep forests. — This is still just a weird concept.

Rogue — the rogue is my second favorite archetype, and I think the class itself does a decent job of emulating it, for the most part.  This is the true "urban ranger" and given that I see most of my settings as a combination of dangerous yet beautiful safari-type wilderness dotted with wretched hives of scum and villainy, it's perhaps not surprising that the ranger and the rogue are usually my favorite classes to play when playing D&D itself.  In fact, I've often multiclassed between them, sometimes.

• Acrobat: Agility and daring are both excellent rogue traits, and their confluence can create spectacular feats of acrobatics. Whether they are daring thieves, infiltrating assassins, or intrepid spies, proper training in acrobatics is a valuable boon for rogues. — Ah, yes.  The gymnast!  McKayle Maroney is not impressed.
• Burglar: Adept at infiltration, trap removal, and lock picking, burglars prey on the homes of the wealthy and forgotten tombs alike. Such riches are guarded with vicious traps and hazards, but the devious mind of the burglar allows her to find such dangers and avoid them. — While I think that this is certainly appropriate for D&D specifically, this one also is a nice archetype for other types of games too.  Jimmy the Hand type guy.
• Cutpurse: Everyone who lives in the city understands that a wealthy man stays wealthy by guarding his purse while wandering the streets and markets. Cutpurses are often trained by guilds to collect the guild's tax from local businesses on a daily basis, whether through intimidation or pickpocketing. Some find themselves taking up the mantle of adventurer, and their talents are generally appreciated in this role, but the cutpurse is still the first person her companions look to when an item goes missing. — While this is a very clear fantasy city archetype, I wonder how you can expand that into something usable by a player character.
• Investigator: Not all rogues work against the law. Investigators use their skills to serve the law, often in the employ of nobles or in the pursuit of noble causes. In some cities cabals of investigators work for rulers or bureaucracies, but often an investigator is a free agent who pursues whatever mysteries come across her path. Of course, not all investigators serve the law. Crime lords and guildmasters often have squads of investigators serving their own nefarious purposes.  — Another great archetype (which we've explored already in other form) that probably isn't necessarily a great fit to the rogue class.  What does the backstab (or sneak attack, as it is now) ability have to do with being Sherlock Holmes?
• Poisoner: Some consider poisoning an evil act. The poisoner knows poison is just a tool toward an end, and is no different than any other weapon. Some poisoners see themselves as great equalizers, as they are able to craft weapons that the weakest of creatures can wield to devastating effect, but most have no lofty delusions about their work. — This is probably a minor archetype mechanically that offers little difference to the class other than a swamp of an ability or two.  Not a bad idea, but probably too specialized for play.
• Rake: The rake is a rogue who is open about her skills and talents, often to the point of being boastful. Usually she has the protection of an important figure who finds her services useful, but sometimes her bravado is enough to keep enemies away. She is often used as a face for the group for diplomacy, gathering information, negotiations, or to gain the most lucrative contracts and quests from local authorities. — "She".  Sigh.  Face from the A-Team certainly shows that this idea works in the ensemble team kind of format that D&D tends to make use of.
• Scout: Not all rogues live in the city. Scouts frequently roam the wilderness, often banding together as bandits, but sometimes serving as guides, as trailblazers, or as companions to a ranger or barbarian warrior. More comfortable with sneaking and hiding outdoors, the scout is still effective in the city and the dungeon. — Using the rogue class to become a ranger analog.  
• Sniper: Some say that the sniper is the worst kind of assassin: a killer who waits silently in the shadows and then strikes from a distance without remorse. Snipers, of course, understand that such protestations about “cowardice” and “honor” regarding their profession are in fact merely the bleatings of sheep fearing the slaughter and pay them no heed. Most snipers take pride in their formidable abilities, which allow them to take life quickly, quietly, and efficiently, then disappear into their surroundings without a trace. — Everyone knows what this means, I think.
• Spy: The best spies are like chameleons, but not only can they change their appearances to fit the situation, they can also change their personalities, allegiances, and even loves if that's what it takes to achieve their clandestine goals. Spies are the ultimate manipulators, and even those who commission their services sometimes find that they've merely served the spies' own interests. — Another great archetype, but one that is probably going to get little play in the group setting that D&D favors.  If you ever do an unusual 1-on-1 type game, you could really make some hay with this archetype, though.  Or if you're not playing and you're writing fiction, of course.
• Swashbuckler: A paragon of mobile swordplay, the swashbuckler is a rogue who focuses almost exclusively on honing her skill at arms and perfecting daring acrobatic moves and elaborate flourishes that border on performance. — Of course, there is a swashbuckler class already, so using the rogue class to try and get there is probably overkill.  There's a lot of overlap in the Pathfinder archetype system, which I suppose gives you lots of wiggle room in terms of how to come up with your character.
• Thug: Some criminals steal with finesse, their victims only discovering the crime when the rogue is long gone and the coin already spent. A thug, on the other hand, cares nothing for finesse. Through both threat and violence, the thug gets what she wants by the promise of force, and has no problem making good on that promise as needed. — Given that the rogue isn't much of a combat specialist or a bruiser, I'd be surprised to find that this archetype works well to actually match the archetype.
• Trapsmith: Some rogues are not content with just disabling traps—they love to build them, finding a captivating beauty in the turning of gears and the slither of ropes over pulleys. The trapsmith may have started out putting together traps in order to better understand how to disable them, but for most, it's long since gone beyond that—they now relish the challenge of creating the perfect combat machine. — I'm not a fan of traps in the game.  A few are... ok.  Specializing in them is absurd.

Sorcerer — I don't have much interest in the specifics of the sorcerer class, and the bloodlines "archetypes" aren't archetypal, there's just interesting tactical variations that have little bearing on my game.  I'll probably present these mostly without comment.

• Aquatic: Your family traces its heritage back to the ocean depths, whether scions of undersea empires left in the wake of nomadic sea-tribes, or the spawn of creeping ichthyic infiltrators into remote seaside villages. The song of the sea hums in your blood, calling the waves and all those within to your command. — Love the subtle reference to Lovecraft.
• Boreal: Descended from inhabitants of the lands of ice and snow, you count among your ancestors giant-kin, troll-born, and frost-rimed spirits. Their savage and raw energies flow down through generations to infuse you to the marrow with the chill of the polar wind, crackling auroras, and the long winter's night.
• Deep Earth: The echoing cave-songs and the rumble and creak of primal spirits deep below the ground thrum in your soul and in all your family line. You are likely slow, steady, and stable in your thinking, little prone to wandering and preferring to instead find depth in contemplation.
• Dreamspun: Your family is a long line of dreamers, who dream not as ordinary mortals do but rather as those who reach through and touch the supernal realm of dreams and the farthest shores of night. Whether it is a gift or curse is not always clear, but your visions of the past and future call you ineluctably to a life of adventure. — Another subtle Lovecraft reference...
• Protean: You have in your veins the ever-changing wildness of primal chaos, the raw essence of unbound creation. Your mind and spirit burst with the constant inspiration of consummate freedom, though you have difficulty following through on a task when another, new and exciting, catches your interest.
• Serpentine: Your bloodline carries the lingering stain of ancient serpent races that ruled when the world was young; your forebears were likely favored slaves anointed by their reptilian masters and gifted with their cold cunning and subtle manipulation. While deception and a mesmeric charm are your birthright, you may struggle for truth in spite of your heritage.
• Shadow: Spirits from the shadow plane dally at times in the world of light, and such as these lay with your ancestors once upon a time, imparting the mystery of shadow-stuff into your lineage. You are often sullen and withdrawn, preferring to skulk at the fringes of social circles and keep to yourself, cultivating an air of mystery and majesty that is all your own.
• Starsoul: You come from a line of stargazers and explorers who delved deeply into the darkness beyond the stars. In touching the void, the void touched them, and your mind, spirit, and body yearn to span the gulf between worlds.
• Stormborn: You trace your heritage to fierce and proud spirits of storm and sky, and living lightning sings in your veins.
• Verdant: Your progenitors infused themselves with raw plant life, binding it into their own tissue and passing it down to their literal seed, giving you innate communion with nature.