D&D General Building my Vanity 5E: Legacy of Freya

[Scurvy_Platypus]

tl;dr A number of folks over the years have made comments to the effect of "if you don't like it, you can always build your own D&D". And they're right... you can. And since this is something that's been poking at me for the past 15 years or so, I've decided to do something about it.

So, I'm on something of a schedule here and figured I'd try tapping into the collective...wisdom?... on ENWorld. My goal is to have this completed/play-testing by July of 26 (slightly less than 6 months from the date of original post).

Towards that end, I figured I'd list my (initial?) sources and see if there were any additions/improvements.

Note: I only want to use material that's within the Creative Commons environment. Why? shrug Maybe I want to publish it later (not really), maybe I want to see how practical it is to rely on open-source material (definitely), maybe I want to see what I wind up with only using open-source (CC) material (that's true), maybe it's just an interesting set of constraints for design (maybe? I dunno).

Base: Black Flag SRD. Why? The general consensus seems to be that it's a solid base, with some definite improvements to the original 2014 rules. To this, I plan on adding the Exhaustion rules from 2024. Maybe some of the other stuff around procedures for running the game etc as well. I wanna try and make as complete of a "single book to run a game" as possible. I'm not sure if there's anything else from 2014/2024 SRDs that I should also include. Happy to be told what and why though.

Spells: I think I'm gonna jack A5e/LevelUp spells wholesale for the spells. If there's individual instances of spells from other sources, again I'm happy to be told what and why. Where it's come up, the consensus seems to be that the A5E spells have been tuned to restrict/reduce problems.

Monsters: Oooo...a favourite topic of discussion. sigh I think I'm just gonna stick with the Black Flag ones as a base, unless folks can offer a compelling reason to use a different CC-licensed source instead. My initial spin on them however, is gonna be that I rebuild all of 'em using the Forge of Foes rules. Why on earth would I punish myself like that? Consistency. Also, understanding the system better. Nothing like getting a grip on the rules, like tearing apart and rebuilding some of the foundations. FoF appears to provide a clean basis for establishing what to expect from monsters; a lot less "this or that monster is under/over tuned compared to its CR", at least in terms of their basic stats. And if someone else decides they wanna use 'em, they know exactly how to modify them or not, since they're all built from the same basic chassis.

I do plan on posting my work, in part because I'm vain, and in part so that anyone else that feels like doing their own Vanity 5e can have something to look at and go from there. It's a lot easier to write when you're not staring at a blank page, believe me.

I do also plan on doing more than just playing Lego with rules pieces. However, I need to lay the foundation before I can add my own spin to it.

So... there you have it. Suggestions? I'm currently working on converting the Black Flag SRD over to an editable (sorry, still not edible) version. And then of course, I'll need to migrate the spells over as well. Possibly the monsters if enough folks offer a compelling reason.

 

[Stormonu]

Best of luck to you - it's a fun and frustrating exercise and when you start to dig into the guts of a system, you tend find there's lots more knobs and dials than you thought there was.

I'd suggest on starting on the framework of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue and Wizard (or Sorcerer, whichever magic class will be your "base"). Nail down their mechanics and it tends to make the other classes fit neatly into their grooves.

I'd also focus on the 1st-10th levels, then worry about higher levels. For me, anything above 15th was of very low priority as I just don't play those levels and generally only use them for the bad guys. It was a case for me that the class should feel finished at 15th level and above that it's mostly tuning those abilities - not adding new but moving laterally to improve them or open up new uses.

 

[mamba]

tl;dr A number of folks over the years have made comments to the effect of "if you don't like it, you can always build your own D&D". And they're right... you can. And since this is something that's been poking at me for the past 15 years or so, I've decided to do something about it.

I am kinda missing what your pain points are, what you are trying to fix / what you are aiming for, or is this just an exercise for the heck of it?

As far as starting with ToV, I'd do the same if I ever tried going down this path

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

I'd suggest on starting on the framework of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue and Wizard (or Sorcerer, whichever magic class will be your "base"). Nail down their mechanics and it tends to make the other classes fit neatly into their grooves.

I am kinda missing what your pain ponts are what you are trying to fix / what you are aiming for, or is this just an exercise for the heck of it?

As far as starting with ToV, I'd do the same if I ever tried going down this path

So, as far as specific pain points... I'm not looking to solve anything specifically, at least as far as the base classes are concerned. Which is why I haven't said anything specific about class tweaking or whatever. They're there, they don't seem to upset too many people too badly, they get the basic job done.

I've been playing in a 2024 game for a bit now and it seems ok.

So why do this? Well, part of it is "there's not a game that specifically does what I'm looking for." Since it's not there, I'm gonna make the game that I want. The specifics of what I want will happen in the 2nd/later stages of the project, so I want a good foundation now. Later, it'll be about tweaking and customising.

It's not entirely an exercise just for the heck of it. Yes, there's different ways I could be spending my time but as I said in the OP... this is something that's been nibbling in the back of my brain for the past 15 years.

Part of this is also...a bit harder to articulate. For lack of anything better, let's say, I want to try and walk the talk. I've got ideas and a vision and even if nobody else... likes? is interested in? ... that particular vision, I'd like to see it through, all the way, in at least one instance. I don't want to just talk about what my ideal 5e or whatever game is, or debate about whether this or that iteration has better rules. I want to put it to the test. I don't want to try just adding some house rules to my game... I want to be able to hand a document to players and say, "This is the game". They can read it, see all the rules, get excited for the game and its setting, and we can explore from there.

Also, I think back to my early forum days and a specific desire to try and fix some problems in a game and not being entirely sure where to start or even how to start. So... I guess this is a way to show other folks a way to start, even if it doesn't happen to be a particularly good way. I'm also a bit inspired by el-remmen and his Vanity Frankenstein project; in many ways, he seems to be mostly doing it for himself, but hasn't let that stop him. I'm sorta crowd-sourcing it in a way that he didn't/isn't but... I hope to end up in a similar space, even if we have different goals and ways of going about it.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

Best of luck to you - it's a fun and frustrating exercise and when you start to dig into the guts of a system, you tend find there's lots more knobs and dials than you thought there was.

I'd suggest on starting on the framework of Fighter, Cleric, Rogue and Wizard (or Sorcerer, whichever magic class will be your "base"). Nail down their mechanics and it tends to make the other classes fit neatly into their grooves.

I'd also focus on the 1st-10th levels, then worry about higher levels. For me, anything above 15th was of very low priority as I just don't play those levels and generally only use them for the bad guys. It was a case for me that the class should feel finished at 15th level and above that it's mostly tuning those abilities - not adding new but moving laterally to improve them or open up new uses.

I wanted to dive a bit deeper on this...

I'm a bit torn on addressing base classes and their abilities. Just looking through the forums, there's so much noise about "what's broken" and why and how and how to solve it... I feel like I could ask 10 people for their opinion and get 15 different answers, with at least one person probably getting warned for personal attacks on themselves. I guess it's sort of the equivalent of people getting together and arguing sports teams and players.

In lieu of anything better and especially because I've set the restriction for the project that it needs to use CC licensed stuff (or entirely original material)... I'm kinda taking the (probably) unsatisfying approach of starting with a set of base classes that people don't entirely hate and then leaving them as-is.

I tried searching for a Valkyrie class, just to see what options there were... and it was virtually non-existent. A few suggestions about re-flavouring a Paladin and/or Aasimar (tiefling too). I mean, maybe I could find something on DMsGuild... but then I have to wonder about how balanced the class really is, along with how well it'll integrate in with all the other classes. And that's even assuming someone has Creative Commonsed it (by Attribution, just like the SRD material already being used), which is a whole other issue.

And building the class myself? We don't even have a common set of rules for like point-buy monsters and what their various special abilities are worth. Across the more than 20 years of "modern" D&D, we only had a few products for 3.x. There's less that I'm aware of for 5e. And that's monster building, which is quite a bit easier in many ways than class-building. I can't see a way to deal with classes that isn't just going to be a grief-rabbit hole but maybe that's just me.

 

[Stormonu]

I don't know about others, but bolting on a subclass was what got me started down the rabbit hole. Once I moved past just subclasses and got serious about adding a Battlemage class instead of being satisfied with Eldritch Knight, it became "If I'm going to make this class, why don't I go ahead and tune the others to how I'd like them?" 900 pages later, I'm still tweaking....

There was quite a few books on monster design in 3E (and 5E), but you have to look past WotC to find them. Some are definitely better than others. For my buck, for 5E the best book that broke down monster design in my eyes is Forge of Foes, BTW.

ChatGPT can be an aid in analyzing your design if you need initial help or even where to start with the seed of an idea, but definitely take what it says with a grain of salt (and double-check behind it when you can).

But whether your changes are small or large, I hope you happiness with the end result.

 

[mamba]

I don't know about others, but bolting on a subclass was what got me started down the rabbit hole.

if I wander into this hole, it will be over (sub)classes and species, like you.

My first step would be to come up with some power formula for these, so I have an idea of how powerful they can be at what level and what features would be appropriate from a balance perspective.

Is there some good info on designing those?

For species it probably is

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/513957/crafting-heritages-cultures-and-more-worldbuilding

no idea about classes

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

For species it probably is

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/513957/crafting-heritages-cultures-and-more-worldbuilding

That looks cool. Unfortunately, I live in the land of the Southern Peso, so that $37 US becomes like $60 NZ. I'll have to think about maybe picking it up when the project is further along. Definitely looks interesting though.

Classes... sigh... It's possible to work out the very basics (to hit, proficiency bonus, etc) but it's being able to define those pesky class abilities. To an extent, you might be able to work around it by having a costing system for spells and then trying to price class abilities in relation to those (like Crawford said they do for monsters), as well as maybe having a system set up for monsters. With both spells and monsters though, it'd definitely be a case of finding some key benchmark abilities, costing those, and then trying to figure out how a class ability compared in effectiveness to those.

 

[Yaarel]

I tried searching for a Valkyrie class, just to see what options there were... and it was virtually non-existent. A few suggestions about re-flavouring a Paladin and/or Aasimar (tiefling too). I mean, maybe I could find something on DMsGuild... but then I have to wonder about how balanced the class really is, along with how well it'll integrate in with all the other classes. And that's even assuming someone has Creative Commonsed it (by Attribution, just like the SRD material already being used), which is a whole other issue.

For a Valkyrja class:

This is the Norse nickname "slain chooser" for a norn, a fate. Specifically these are fates who choose the time of death of a human to happen during combat. Typically, these fates are elf women, and consider death in battle to be honorable, courageous and impacting society in a memorable positive way.

To represent Valkyrjur in D&D:

The Elves and their nornir personify magic thus are full casters, and must be highly prescient to steer combat outcomes. As personifications of death in combat, the Valkyra nornir should also be competent in the ways that the warriors kill, thus be a gishy fullcaster. There are various ways to represent a Valkyrja. The Bard class is a solid go-to. Thinkable too is a reflavored Cleric, perhaps taking on a Paladin oath as the cosmic force. I am also interested in what the e24 Psion will look like, and if a solid melee-gish-build is possible, that would be excellent too.

A partcaster is probably not magical enough, but if the combat itself is magical, such as Paladin smite, it can work too.

Note that the dwarf women also function as nornir, albeit associate failure and futility, whence less so an honorable Valkyrja.

Norse culture is strongly gender divided, but at the same time, if individuals are skilled at a cross gender role, they are respected and consulted for their skill. While unattested, one can expect that the women-only nornir would nevertheless include some men as well, who happened to be skilled at shamanic prescience.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

For a Valkyrja class:

Thanks for your thoughts. Happy to hear anything further.

The setting for these rules is... post-apoc?... so I, happy to drift a bit from the traditional. Maybe I will take a Paladin and swap a bit of their abilities or something.

Because of my discomfort with cultural appropriation, as well as my lack of solid Norse history, etc I decided to go with the setting being Vanir-derived. As I understand it, the Vanir are a giant question mark in a lot of respects, so I feel like I've got room to play.

Spoiler: Premise of the setting

Basically, the setting is Norse-adjacent. Freya has her own sort of Valhalla (Fólkvangr) and had to marry Odin to calm down the war between the Norse and the Vanir. However, Freya was also aware, in something of a meta fashion ('cause of magic yo) of the role the Norns played in locking her into an endless cycle of repetition. So she decided to try and break it. Fólkvangr became a home/refuge, not just for Norse and Vanir dead, but also for others from across the planes. Some of Loki's get also found a home in Fólkvangr. The ... Valkyrja (is that the proper/better term for what we usually write as Valkyrie?) were more than mortals but less than gods. And, over time and outside their "normal" selection and ferry duties, they also had families. The off-spring of these unions were also extra-heroic, given who their parent were.

Seithr (my chosen anglicisation of Seiðr) was widely practiced in a variety of forms and held an important part in the lives of... Fólkvangrians?... both those that were chosen from the slain, as well as the offspring of Valkyrja.

Eventually, Ragnarök arrived, as it always did and a chunk of Fólkvangr emptied out. However, those that had been born there, those that had sought and been granted refuge... they were immune to the call. So Freya's plan sorted worked. Before Ragnarök, of course came Fimbulwinter. When Fimbulwinter descended, everyone worried because... ya know... death by freezing. However, it turns out that the svartálfar were more clever than folks thought and previously unknown/sealed passages opened up and provided underground refuge for the duration of Fimbulwinter and Ragnarök.

These passages and underground refuges twined through the roots and branches of Yggdrasil and weren't always the safest of places. Explorations seemed to indicate that they went to other realms, and it was speculated that the passages utilised Yggdrasil in some fashion.

The svartálfar themselves were never seen and it's unknown if they were simply allies of the Norse/Vanir, or also subject to the Norns. Over time, as practice of Seithr evolved, new areas were unlocked and new learnings were gained.

Eventually, in some unknown fashion, the refuges which had been sealed against Fimbulwinter and anything that might have survived outside, opened to a land that had once been known but was now reborn into something different.

So... yeah. Kinda post-apoc but not. More hopeful than post-apoc tends to be. Instead of "everything used to be great and then they broke the world and now it all sucks", it's "things were good, Fimbulwinter sucked, and now we've got the tools to really make the world different".

The world is a giant unknown and characters will be exploring to fill in the gaps, make new alliances, etc. Old ruins to explore (thanks Fimbulwinter), monsters and stuff to fight (thanks Yggdrasil, svartálfar refuges, and crazy requests for sanctuary that were granted), and all the other traditional adventuring stuff. Most of the setting is unstated, free for whomever to populate however desired. I've got an idea for a map, which I may or may not include.

All of this is in the back of my mind as I'm working through the rules base. So a ...Valkyrja?... class would be nice in terms of tuning the rules to match more with the setting, but... it's not a make-or-break thing at this point.