Pendragon d20?

[mmadsen]

Has anyone else done anything with traits and passions?

I previously presented the idea of just two Trait Pairs for D&D: Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil. I also divvied up the original Pendragon Trait Pairs into Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil categories.

For Passions, I'm considering a few ideas. One is to allow a quasi-Rage with a successful Passion Check. Another is to allow a Second Wind (get some Hit Points back) with a successful Passion Check. That second option would be more meaningful in a low-healing campaign (like Omega World's Reserve Hit Points).

I have been toying with this idea for a while. I think DnD, with Cthullu Magic and Mythos, and Pendragon Traits and Passions would make for a VERY interesting setting.

I'd love to see a swords & sorcery (or swords & chivalry) variant of D&D with CoC magic and Pendragon Traits.

 

[derverdammte]

My apologies for not finding the link earlier--here is the location of Sean's alternate magic system:

http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/magicsys.html

 

[mmadsen]

...if a wizard or sorceress has to rest for days after using a few spells, then he or she would be useless as a PC.

If you're already using CoC-style magic, you can replace Wizards with Experts who know spells. This lets them play a role even when they aren't spellcasting. Granted, it's not combat prowess, but the wizard would get to be the guy who always knows everything.

Another idea that I haven't seen in any d20 magic systems (but I'm sure is out there) is the idea behind GURPS' alternate "unlimited mana" rules: you have no hard limit to the number of spells you can cast, but worse and worse things happen to you the further you push your limits. If you have a hard limit, you have to throw up your hands and say, "Sorry, gang, I'm out of Magic Missiles." If you have a soft limit, you say, "You do not know what you ask of me, halfling! You haven't lived with the nightmares!"

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

(A re-post of a re-post of a re-post... )

Here's a little something that mmadsen , myself, and others cooked up a few months ago--unfortunately, the original thread was lost in the changeover, so this is only dimly remembered...

(Those familiar with Pendragon will recognize much of this.)

The alignments are recorded in diametrically opposed pairs Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil.

The sum of these pairs totals 20. For example, a character with a score of 12 in Lawful would have a score of 8 in Chaotic.

A score of 13+ in one of these aspects gives the player the relevant alignment. For example, a character with 3 Lawful/Chaotic 17 would be considered Chaotic.

--If neither value is greater than 12, the character is considered Neutral with respect to that aspect.

--Each time a character performs a Lawful/Chaotic or Good/Evil act, he receives one or more checks by the relevant aspect, depending upon the magnitude of the act.

--Roll one d20 (one at a time) for each check by an aspect, if the roll is greater than the current value increase the value by one (and decrease the opposed aspect by a similar amount).

I would suggest starting characters off with scores of 15 if they choose Lawful, Chaotic, Good, and/or Evil as their starting alignment aspects, while assigning a score of 10 if they choose to be Neutral.

For example, I want my Ranger to begin as Neutral Good. His starting values will be as follows...

10 Lawful/Chaotic 10 (Neutral)

15 Good/Evil 5 (Good)

Note: The closer you get to "perfection" with regard to a certain aspect, the harder it becomes to attain, and the easier it becomes to fall away from. I think this is a nice touch.

In addition to using this as an alignment tracking system, you could also use it as a means of influencing N/PCs behavior, ala Pendragon (but that's another topic).

As another option...

Characters who are of a class that requires a specific aspect of alignment, may start off with a 20 in that aspect.

For example, a Lawful Good Monk would begin with:

20 Lawful/Chaotic 0

15 Good/Evil 5

While a Paladin would begin as a veritable paragon of perfection (and all but doomed to fall from it...):

20 Lawful/Chaotic 0

20 Good/Evil 0

A Neutral Good Ranger, with the old 1e alignment requirements, would start like this:

10 Lawful/Chaotic 10

20 Good/Evil 0

Anywho, just a few ideas...

 

[mmadsen]

Here's a little something that mmadsen , myself, and others cooked up a few months ago--unfortunately, the original thread was lost in the changeover, so this is only dimly remembered...

Actually, I think I just found the original thread. Here's your opening post (edited slightly):

This is the barebones of an idea that a few of us started to hash out over on the general boards while discussing Pendragon).

Basically, Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil are recorded together as opposed values. The sum of the values in each set totals 20--therefore, if one value should rise, the other will fall a like amount (and vice versa). For example, a character with a value of 17 Good would have a corresponding value of 3 in Evil. If this same character should later have his Good drop to 13, his Evil will rise to 7.

The alignment choices for beginning characters result in the following values...

LAW vs CHAOS

• Lawful: 15 Lawful/Chaotic 5
• Neutral: 10 Lawful/Chaotic 10
• Chaotic: 5 Lawful/Chaotic 15

GOOD vs EVIL

• Good: 15 Good/Evil 5
• Neutral: 10 Good/Evil 10
• Evil: 5 Good/Evil 15

So a Neutral Good character would look like this...

10 Lawful/Chaotic 10 (Neutral)
15 Good/Evil 5 (Good)

I would suggest that the ranges for the various values be something along the lines of the following...

Having 13 or greater in a value grants the applicable alignment aspect.

If neither value in an opposed pair is greater than 12, the applicable alignment is considered to be "Neutral".

When checking for alignment shifts at the end of an adventure you could make one roll versus each value for every "check" accumulated next to it. These "checks" are assigned by the DM for the various actions the characters take that may affect alignment.

To raise a value by one point, roll greater than the current value on 1d20.

You will note that this means it becomes ever more difficult to attain "perfection", and ever easier to fall away from it (this is true whether your idea of perfection is one of perfect good, or of perfect evil).

The next issue that needs to be tackled is the awarding of these "checks". The DM can simply assign them according to his own judgment (assigning multiple checks for particularly noteworthy or notorious acts, while only assigning a single check, if any, to more minor ones). The DM could even construct a table, appropriate to his campaign, that assigns fixed numbers of "checks" to various actions.

Alternatively, a random number of "checks" could be assigned, dependent upon the magnitude of the act. For example...

Trivial: d6-5 Checks
Minor: d6-3 Checks
Noteworthy: d6 Checks
Major: d8 Checks
Life Altering: d10 Checks

...or whatever values are appropriate for your campaign.

I think this is a nice option that keeps characters from being too sure about what they can afford to get away with.

Well, I think that's enough to get the ball rolling ...

 

[mmadsen]

I previously presented the idea of just two Trait Pairs for D&D: Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil. I also divvied up the original Pendragon Trait Pairs into Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil categories.

Now that I've found the old thread, I have my old post on Trait Pairs in D&D:

Obviously my idea of having exactly two trait pairs, Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil, carries over to D&D quite directly. A less direct but, perhaps, more interesting option, at least for Pendragon fans, is to stick to Pendragon's 13 trait pairs and use its concept of virtues, with five virtues for each religion.

For instance, the 13 trait pairs in Pendragon are:

Chaste / Lustful
Energetic / Lazy
Forgiving / Vengeful
Generous / Selfish
Honest / Deceitful
Just / Arbitrary
Merciful / Cruel
Modest / Proud
Pious / Worldly
Prudent / Reckless
Temperate / Indulgent
Trusting / Suspicious
Valorous / Cowardly

The five virtues for Christians (in Pendragon) are: Chaste, Modest, Forgiving, Merciful, and Temperate. If all five of those virtues are 16 or higher, the character gets a Christian bonus of +6 hit points (in Pendragon). A D&D campaign could easily require those virtues of Clerics of Pelor.

Pendragon also has a notion of Chivalrous traits irrespective of religion: Energetic, Generous, Just, Merciful, Modest, and Valorous. A Paladin coud be expected to keep those traits at 16 or higher (or sum 80 or higher, as in Pendragon).

Societies could grant the equivalent of Honor to individuals who meet their virtue requirements. For instance, in Orc society, warriors who are sufficiently Valorous, Suspicious, Indulgent, Reckless, Worldly, Proud, etc. might gain respect and power.

Or we could work our way back to D&D's alignments, but a bit more roundabout. We could divvy up Pendragon's 13 trait pairs into two mega-trait pairs: Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil.

Lawful/Chaotic
Chaste/Lustful
Energetic/Lazy(?)
Just/Arbitrary
Modest/Proud
Pious/Worldly
Prudent/Reckless
Temperate/Indulgent

Good/Evil
Forgiving/Vengeful
Generous/Selfish
Merciful/Cruel
Honest/Deceitful
Trusting/Suspicious
Valorous/Cowardly(?)

The individual traits are much more clearly defined than something like "Chaotic", but we can still work back to the D&D alignments if we want them.

 

[mmadsen]

In the old thread, ninthcouncil brought up a good idea (using Traits as Abilities with bonuses) and a good point about that (that the Trait Pair should sum to 21, not 20):

Bonuses can be worked out as per normal attributes, and applied to saving throws as necessary. So, to resist a sleep effect, one might add the Energetic bonus to the Fortitude roll.

There is however a statistical anomaly if bonuses are used as well as straight scores. Because the Bonuses are based around a zero point of 10-11, they aren't (unlike the traits) symmetrical about 10, so a character with Chaste 15 and Lustful 5 has bonuses of Chaste +2 and Lustful -3. This can be avoided by calculating the Chaotic/Evil traits using 21 - Opposing Trait instead of 20.

 

[Maerdwyn]

Now that I've found the old thread, I have my old post on Trait Pairs in D&D:

Obviously my idea of having exactly two trait pairs, Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil, carries over to D&D quite directly. A less direct but, perhaps, more interesting option, at least for Pendragon fans, is to stick to Pendragon's 13 trait pairs and use its concept of virtues, with five virtues for each religion.

Thanks for finding the old thread, mmadsen!

I like this quite a bit, and will be using it for various religions and organizations in my next campaign.

 

[mmadsen]

Thanks for finding the old thread, mmadsen!

You're very welcome, Maerdwyn. If you know who started a particular thread -- often I don't remember -- you can show threads by "thread starter", from "the beginning". Then you can hunt around alphabetically for, in this case, "Thorvald Kviksverd".

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

You know, I hadn't considered it before, but Pendragon should work well for a Conan flavored campaign--especially if background skill charts were made for each of the different nations.