Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Free 60+ page Guide to Sword & Sorcery for 5E D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7815645" data-attributes="member: 12731"><p>* 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.</p><p></p><p>* Treasure should be spent: IMHO you should definitely mention <em>gold for xp</em> at the very least, if not actively offering a rule for it. That rule was MADE for Sword & Sorcery <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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).</p><p></p><p>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... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>* One final piece of feedback. <em>Note: this subject is highly controversial and I fully understand if you choose to simply ignore it in any reply.</em></p><p></p><p>[SPOILER]The text states in several places there is a meaningful gender difference:</p><p>"Welcome to a world where men are mighty, women are voluptuous..." (page 4)</p><p>"a world of cruel kings, barbarous fighters, beautiful but seductive women..." (page 4)</p><p>"Female Mazanians are all stunningly beautiful, since all girls with the slightest physical flaw are quickly abandoned in the jungle." (page 15)</p><p></p><p>But you studiously avoid even hinting at any mechanical framework to support any of it <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>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 <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>Note: You still can play a female warrior based on Strength. You can still play a male <s>Bard</s> Courtier based on Charisma. After all, there are no penalties.</p><p></p><p>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.[/SPOILER]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7815645, member: 12731"] * 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 [I]gold for xp[/I] 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. [I]Note: this subject is highly controversial and I fully understand if you choose to simply ignore it in any reply.[/I] [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 [S]Bard[/S] 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.[/SPOILER] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Free 60+ page Guide to Sword & Sorcery for 5E D&D
Top