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

[Ath'kethin]

Yeah well, that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying 5th Edition can be a good choice for S&S. In many areas it is actually the best edition for S&S! It's just that you need to sacrifice the convenience of the regular spell framework. Actually I think you need to make far less intrusive changes than you might think. You do need to go further than just "no fireballs" though.

Instead of simply telling fans of the genre "this is as good as it gets, if you want more use a different system", I would be interested to discuss how to minimally tweak the D&D spell-casting rules to (much) better support S&S tropes (for player characters).

I'm not sure how "minimal" you'd consider this one, but I've implemented the following in my very Sword & Sorcery inspired 5e campaigns (which are really a mishmash of Primeval Thule, Xoth, and Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperboria):

1. No damage-dealing cantrips
1a. No spellcasters except warlocks
1b. Magic Initiate feat is OK, but see 1, above

2. Use the patron-specific Warlock class features from the Primeval Thule Player's Companion

3. Limit healing potions to Keoghtom's Ointment (renamed in my campaign as Nergal's Blessing

4. Spellcasters are feared and despised by everyone.

5. There is exactly one of most magic items, especially magic weapons. So you don't go seeking A flame tongue, you go seeking THE Flame Tongue. And you can be sure that others are seeking it too.

I ran a bunch of 5e campaigns using these guidelines, and it's worked pretty well.

 

[CapnZapp]

• For some additional house rules that are not - yet? - in the Player's Guide, see The World of Xoth » Blog Archive » By these (5E) rules I axe! and feel free to comment on those as well...

Thank you for inviting me to!

I'll assume a rule only deserves inclusion if it considerably strengthens D&D's ability to support S&S themes. Your product is not just some generic D&D supplement, after all.

• while I understand the sentiment "Int is underused by D&D" I would like to argue not appreciating Int properly is actually appropriate for S&S For general D&D, yes, rebalancing ability scores is a worthy houserule. But for S&S?
• while some feats are overpowered I would argue they're actually very appropriate for S&S. I think your product is better off assuming individual DMs bring whatever general rebalancing from their other D&D games to your world of Xoth. It's not something you want to lock into place.
• I don't immediately understand if you gain +1 to flanking on top of advantage or in place of it. Anyway, it's minor minutiae that has nothing to do with S&S so I would not add it to this Player's Guide
• disadvantage after being proned or disarmed: If I squint I can see the low fantasy appeal that works in S&S too here. My concern is: they're pretty detailed rules for very specific corner cases. I'd try to rework it into a single general rule covering all kinds of disadvantageous positions. In fact S&S could do well strengthening improvisational ways of fighting, but that's out of scope here.
• penalizing hit point loss further - again low fantasy, not S&S. At least not for the game of S&S (it works well in novels and on screen). I'd focus exhaustion more on environmental hazards (such as running out of water)
• adding a "shield mini game" would be neat and even moderately S&S appropriate. Not sure it's worth the hassle though. I'd check supplements like New Argonauts (D&D for ancient eras) for possible ideas.
• the core rule already is "long rest gives all hp back"? Anyhoo, I don't like how this forces the GM to either deny long rests altogether, or wipe the slate clean. When I run 5E I have long rests give back no hit points but all healing surges. I find this actually simpler than even the core rules (always a good thing) and also S&S appropriate: by spending all your healing surges right away, you're combat ready but you've used up your reserves. At least you have the choice. That is imo a much better implementation of "you're weary and worn out" since it doesn't mess with the basic fact D&D heroes need hp to do their job, while not forcing "you're fully fit even though yesterday was a disaster" upon the characters.
• As for S&S, consider saying deserts swamps etc only give you back 1/2 or even 1/4 health (hp in the core rules, healing surges in my variant) but then make sure there are alternative ways for resilient tough-as-hell heroes to compensate. Perhaps something as simple as chewing tobacco or doing 'rooms or regular old physical intimacy restores a couple of healing surges during long rests? That is, not magical potions but the simple things of life (This would help explain the good old trope of barbarians carousing during downtime...)

 

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

Anyway I digress. I think S&S games like Xoth should have no instant death rules at all. This is more a theoretical post on how to implement it where appropriate.

You have your own strong opinion on this, but I disagree. I think it is appropriate to the genre, but it’s not my game to design.

Contrast to my suggested variant (above). It is borne out of the realization the exact numbers don't matter!

Yes exactly what I’ve presented from my first post. I think we are agreement here. Any such rule should be linked to critical’s, which could be done on the rare occasions when you roll max damage for you attack. It’s straight forward and doesn’t necessitate working out a proportion of your weapon damage. though it would be a rare occurrence.
I also like the idea of spending inspiration when you roll a critical to allow a chance of a roll on the DMG system shock table. The results are varied with stun, and dropping to zero hit-points being a possibility. Even with dropping to zero hit-points 5e’s death saves mean you rarely have instant death.

For me S&S needs a balance between heroic action, with gritty leanings, and a real threat of death. I think 5e can reach that compromise, but not in its standard form so well. My suggestions in my first post are how I envision achieving that.

The instant death rule in Xoth is not where I’d put the emphasis personally, though I’m not strongly against it. I could see a form of instant death being put to effective use in some circumstances to emphasis unique threatening monsters abilities that need to be overcome in unique ways.

A greater possibility of character/foe death creates a tension and drama that I believe S&S needs. The standard rhythm of chipping away at hit-points needs that rare unpredictable critical effect to colour proceedings and shake things up occasionally.

Think we agree on how to implement it, just not whether it should be done I think it’s clear where we both stand.

Anyway good luck with the game.

 

[CapnZapp]

Looking forward to hearing any ideas you may have on making magic more dangerous/unpredictable for spellcasters... without making spellcasting PCs totally unplayable.

And therein lies the challenge.

D&D spellcasters are balanced. Just making life harder on them doesn't work, since that results in players sensitive to optimizing to avoid those classes.

I mean it kind of works, in that, sure, you can ask a player playing a caster to suck up the fact his spell selection is considerably worsened by making sure to play up the awe and fear that character evokes.

But ideally, you would offer spellcasting classes with the same balance compared to the rest of the classes as regular 5E, only differently implemented to support the notion magic is unreliable and dangerous instead of as reliable and uncontroversial as a tool.

In 3E spellcasters were very strong (overpowered even), but that's not the case with 5E. (At least not in games allowing all RAW feats)

(This has nothing to do with which classes your setting offers. I think I remember already discussing whether to allow most existing spellcasting classes, only tweaked to fit in)

This is to say that if anything, your magic needs to be stronger, not weaker, if you make it dangerous or unpredictable. Removing spells and cantrips might be needed, but isn't helping with this.

---

I would probably go with the themes of blood and corruption.

Blood points let you cast stronger spells than the RAW game, so you're tempted to use that. (This compensates for the nerfs elsewhere) Your blood... or someone else's...? (The simplest implementation is to allow you to cast your spell cheaper rather than more powerfully, using a lower slot, though possibly even above your regular max level)

Corruption accrues by casting spells. Too much magic in too short a time period and you risk... things. (Things that deserve a thread of its own)

The intent here is to let the player have complete control over the risks involved. Narratively the character takes risks by accumulating corruption, but the player needs to be able to predict how much corruption each spellcasting action yields.

Any given spellcasting action remains totally predictable just like in the core rules. Except the accumulated result of much spellcasting is not necessarily safe. Simply letting the player see the raising and falling of these scores help empathize the wicked nature of sorcery, even if there seldom is any practical consequences.

Again, the point isn't to make the game unplayable for the caster, just give off the illusion of just that

If you include such a system in your product, Xoth, you will have added value for everybody interested in such magics, not just fans of S&S.

 

[CapnZapp]

which could be done on the rare occasions when you roll max damage for you attack. It’s straight forward and doesn’t necessitate working out a proportion of your weapon damage. though it would be a rare occurrence.

That was my first thought, but I found it too illogical a dagger should have a much larger chance of killing a foe than a greataxe.

 

[CapnZapp]

You have your own strong opinion on this, but I disagree. I think it is appropriate to the genre, but it’s not my game to design.

I should clarify it is very much appropriate to the genre.

Except it somehow never happens to the Conan(s) of the story.

That is, D&D is a game. In which you fight hundreds of apemen and ghastly centipedes.

This basic activity* cannot be penalized by death, since there's no way around it.
*) I mean the activity of fighting. Entering combat. Obviously you can run out of hit points and die that way.

Therefore. Appropriate to the genre, yes, but not when implemented as a game.

If anything, make criticals deal more damage. This neatly avoids all the issues of the common Instant Death rule implementations, while still offering the odd brutalizing hit. If so, make sure to allow players ways to mitigate them (such as by that shield idea from Xoth's house rules).

But I will stop arguing against instant death now. I've said my piece.

 

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

That was my first thought, but I found it too illogical a dagger should have a much larger chance of killing a foe than a greataxe.

I guess it depends on how you imagine the attack. A knife to a critically vulnerable area can be deadly, as can an axe blow to the head. One may look more spectacular though.
For me it remains a simple way to implement an exceptional critical, without disrupting the familar 5e game too much. All weapons can be deadly in the right circumstances. I feel this rule reflects that.

 

[xoth.publishing]

Cut on-the-fence quality rules altogether, is my sincere recommendation.

Agreed!

 

[S'mon]

Death saves are a pretty strong safety net, but there isn't nearly enough feeling of danger and excitement that I’d expect from an S&S game.

I definitely haven't experienced this as an issue running eg 5e Primeval Thule. There are two easy fixes if it is for you (which I use in all my games):

(1) No raise dead/resurrection
(2) Wildly unbalanced encounters; ignore encounter-building guidelines and expect PCs to flee when overmatched.

As Zapp says, random PC insta-death (or crippling) seems more suited to WHFRP and other genuinely low-fantasy (GoT/ASOIAF?) than to the Sword & Sorcery genre. Fafhrd & Mouser, Elric, Conan, don't get randomly taken out. Neither do their 'NPC' equivalents, who die a lot for dramatic effect, but usually as a result of some Unimaginable Horror, not from a lucky attack roll by the city guard.

 

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

I definitely haven't experienced this as an issue running eg 5e Primeval Thule. There are two easy fixes if it is for you (which I use in all my games):

(1) No raise dead/resurrection
(2) Wildly unbalanced encounters; ignore encounter-building guidelines and expect PCs to flee when overmatched.

As Zapp says, random PC insta-death (or crippling) seems more suited to WHFRP and other genuinely low-fantasy (GoT/ASOIAF?) than to the Sword & Sorcery genre. Fafhrd & Mouser, Elric, Conan, don't get randomly taken out. Neither do their 'NPC' equivalents, who die a lot for dramatic effect, but usually as a result of some Unimaginable Horror, not from a lucky attack roll by the city guard.

The critical effects from the system shock table are mostly short term hindrances, with one result being fall to zero-hit points and death saves. There are no lasting wounds there, which is why I thought it appropriate.
With my first suggestion was using the limited resource of Inspiration to trigger a roll on the table after rolling a critical. It would be a much more player focused tool, as mooks wouldn’t have access to inspiration.

If you did use the random max damage option as well, then I think there’s real mileage in using the developers house rule of allowing a shield or weapon to be broken to mitigate the effect.
If inspiration is to be used more creatively, you could also allow that to be spent to mitigate a critical effect. Though you may need to change the inspiration rules to allow a small pool for each session. A maximum of 3 for example.

like I’ve said there’s plenty of safety mechanisms in 5e to prevent instant death already. it’s not a system that engenders a great feeling of risk against the odds, particularly after 6th level. The odds are already stacked up in favour of the pc’s. Don’t think there’s a danger of it turning into wfrp