D&D 5E Free 60+ page Guide to Sword & Sorcery for 5E D&D

[GlassJaw]

This is quite good. I’m impressed, especially for a free product. I really like that there are mechanics that support the sword & sorcery style of play.

That always frustrated me about Thule. Great setting but puts a lot of work on the DMs shoulders to adjust the mechanics for the setting.

 

[S'mon]

I place Xoth as a continent to the east of the main landmass in my Primeval Thule campaign. I've used material from all four of the published adventures and they work great.

I like Primeval Thule as actual-Greenland, but Xoth ought to work well for antediluvian Europe/Africa/Arabia. The Orientalist tone and desert type climate might suit the Arabian peninsula & NE Africa well; or maybe central Asia & Iran. The map, though well done for play as-is, is vague enough to be redrawn easily.

 

[JeffB]

Unsure if people misunderstood my comment- I wasn't complaining about the nudity, despite that my heritage includes puritans who arrived in North America long before the 13 Colonies revolted

I was jokingly saying in addition to all the great nipple shots the art is fantastic

 

[CapnZapp]

http://xoth.net/publishing/freebies/world_of_xoth_players_guide_5e.pdf

Let me note that I have now checked S'mon's post. It does not display any imagery on either desktop mobile or app. So it appears the link can safely be added to the OP, which still contains only the mod's comment as a replacement for the objectionable picture, and no friendly link. You should be able to do this yourself, @xoth.publishing

 

[CapnZapp]

Feedback on your 5E implementation:

* Alignment: I would argue 5E already does what you want. Yes, Bob the Explorer has an alignment listed. But there is no way to find out what it is. Detect Evil tells you about angels and demons. It draws a blank both on Bob, and Xena the Wicked Witch. There are close to zero game effects that depend on alignment, certainly at low- to medium levels (where S&S normally lives). That said, Protection from Evil and Good already works as you think - because these creatures are outsiders (not because of their alignment). So I'd say this section is a tad "obsolete" in that it reads as if the writer is expecting 3rd edition or Pathfinder 2 rules. I am definitely not complaining about your actual suggested changes - I'm just arguing you might want to properly update the phrasing to account for the ways 5E differ from previous D&D

* Sudden death: these ideas are common, but rarely work since the horrible truth is that the hp buffer is at the center of D&D. Any attempt to bypass it fights the very nature of the game. The long and short of it is: D&D expects heroes to regularly suffer large amounts of damage. At full hp or at few hp. This rule basically tells heroes to stop adventuring as soon as they are not close to full hp. And you get the wonky situation where you're still invulnerable to getting one-shotted except when you're already low on hp. This rule basically kicks those that already are lying down. Why not then simply give out fewer hp?

But you're not really looking to reduce the amount of "functional hp", are you? I think what you're after is "every hit could be fatal" and "heroes are separate from non-heroes".

So what about "when you roll a critical, new rule: calculate maximum damage and then multiply that number by a d6" AND give heroes - and just maybe the very most important non-monstrous NPCs - Fate Points (spend one fate point to make the D6 roll "1")

This accomplishes that sometimes you can insta-gibb the ghoul or temple guard just like in the source material, but heroes have a certain buffer against being insta-gibbed themselves. And you haven't made the lowest fifteen hp or so less useful (which means players don't feel worse than the regular rules already make them feel, when they're forced to press on despite knowing better).

 

[CapnZapp]

* natural healing: do you allow/encourage feats? Two feats are especially good in a game without easy access to Clerics or Healing Potions: Inspired Leader and Healer.

* Treasure should be spent: IMHO you should definitely mention gold for xp at the very least, if not actively offering a rule for it. That rule was MADE for Sword & Sorcery

You can certainly still use quest/milestone leveling just as you suggest. I guess my point is: a game should either track gold or not track gold.

If you track it, a good use for it is "now you've earned a level, but you still must pay 1 gp per xp". As a replacement for either "I buy a +1 Longsword" or "I build a Wizard's Tower or organize a Thieves Guild". Neither uptime or downtime really fits S&S, where heroes are more like drifters, living one day at a time (Conan becoming King notwithstanding).

If you don't track it, you simply say "I carry as many gold and silver candelabras as I can. In the morning I don't remember where they are". That is, you're either dirt poor or fabulously rich, with no need for meaningful nuance...

* One final piece of feedback. Note: this subject is highly controversial and I fully understand if you choose to simply ignore it in any reply.

Spoiler

The text states in several places there is a meaningful gender difference:
"Welcome to a world where men are mighty, women are voluptuous..." (page 4)
"a world of cruel kings, barbarous fighters, beautiful but seductive women..." (page 4)
"Female Mazanians are all stunningly beautiful, since all girls with the slightest physical flaw are quickly abandoned in the jungle." (page 15)

But you studiously avoid even hinting at any mechanical framework to support any of it

My personal observation is that since your game is already targeting a mature audience, it should be able to expect players to meaningfully handle gender differences, as opposed to the current inclusive trend. Don't get me wrong, I like equality in the real world. And I love the stereotype of the 4"10' lithe girl who busts heads as much as the next guy, but S&S is decidedly not a Luc Besson arena

Just as a brutally simplistic example, if the rules should offer "males get +2 to Strength, females get +2 to Charisma", even as an optional suggestion, most players will be nudged to playing "genre-appropriate" characters, that is, most hulking brutes will be male while most bewitching enchantresses will be female.

Note: You still can play a female warrior based on Strength. You can still play a male Bard Courtier based on Charisma. After all, there are no penalties.

But since 5E already offers robust support for the "Dex build", you are likely to end up with a bad-ass woman warrior that looks like Grace Jones or Sandahl Bergman, and not a gender-switched Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sven-Ole Thorsen (the bad guy with the ridoncolous hammer). Which is the point. The only point.

 

[CapnZapp]

I love your Cultures of Xoth! They are simple, elegant and spot on to drive home the themes of S&S!

I really think you're short-changing yourself by making them essentially optional. We already know all your rules are optional - you could and should integrate Cultures to be a core "Xoth rule" and character build choice. Move that chapter up to the front, and really play up the importance of defining your character as "Savage" or "Decadent".

Enlightened, Savage and Nomadic are essentially uncivilized, barbaric - or rather, outsiders to civilization. While Civilized and Decadents (and Degenerates, I guess) stem from established if not ancient civilizations.

Spoiler: and optionally...

Restrict the gender bonus discussed above to Uncivilized cultures. Civilized cultures instead get a bonus skill or something.

Only an Uncivilized culture could produce a mountain of a man like Schwartzenegger. In comparison, the gender difference in civilized countries are negligible - all civilized men have a certain effete appearance

 

[Coroc]

Like it very much, it gives me some nice ideas for my darksun conversion.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Let me note that I have now checked S'mon's post. It does not display any imagery on either desktop mobile or app. So it appears the link can safely be added to the OP, which still contains only the mod's comment as a replacement for the objectionable picture, and no friendly link. You should be able to do this yourself, @xoth.publishing

We’re all still getting a link directly to the pdf using S’mon’s link, including the art.

 

[xoth.publishing]

Feedback on your 5E implementation:

Thanks for the detailed feedback! My comments follow below...

* Alignment: I would argue 5E already does what you want. (...) So I'd say this section is a tad "obsolete" in that it reads as if the writer is expecting 3rd edition or Pathfinder 2 rules. I am definitely not complaining about your actual suggested changes - I'm just arguing you might want to properly update the phrasing to account for the ways 5E differ from previous D&D

Good points, I'll rephrase those sections. +1 to 5E for already handling this in a sensible manner!

* Sudden death: these ideas are common, but rarely work since the horrible truth is that the hp buffer is at the center of D&D. (...) you get the wonky situation where you're still invulnerable to getting one-shotted except when you're already low on hp.

By default, under the 5E rules you are instantly killed if brought to (negative your max hit points) from a single attack. As you rise in levels and gain more hit points this chance to be instantly killed will be reduced (unless the monsters you fight deal correspondingly more and more damage).

The intention between the adjustment to the instant death threshold is to make high-level characters more vulnerable (to lower-level opponents). That said, it can be argued that due to 5E's bounded accuracy, low-level opponents (in large numbers) can still be a threat to higher-level characters, so perhaps adjusting the instant death rule is not necessary.

The instant death modification is marked as an optional rule ("discuss with your players before adding this rule..."), but I think I'll rephrase the part about "the default assumed by this book" to make it more clear that this is indeed optional. In other words, use 5E as-is and only modifiy if you find your players are never actually in danger of dying.