D&D General Heroes of Myth and Legend

[Garthanos]

A wiki page for allowing the presentation of HOML material and its discussion

Heroes of Myth & Legend -hereafter referred to as HoML- is a fantasy role-playing game of legendary heroes and mythical monsters. The players will take on the roles of heroic adventurers, player characters, while the Game Master (GM) will act as their guide through the worlds of myth and legend, playing the roles the non-player characters (NPCs). As the PCs move through the world of HoML the GM will present them with information and challenging situations. These situations may be of any possible type, foul monsters to slay, mysteries to solve, wars to fight, etc. The rules of HoML are used as a set of guidelines to help the GM and players determine what the abilities of their characters are and how the actions of the PCs and NPCs, and the effects of the environment affect the PCs and their story.

HoML is designed to allow the players to participate directly in the development of the story. While the GM is tasked with presentation and has primary responsibility for the coherency of the fiction, the players are empowered to introduce some elements focused on their characters, and this game includes mechanics which help to adjudicate this process, as well as guidelines for their use. The goal of the game is to have fun and see what happens when the PCs come into conflict with the forces of fate, the gods, monsters, and the people around them.

OK, so there's a PDF in Attachments! Same one can be found on my GDrive share, but I will try to keep updating this one too.

And the nice up to date HTML

 

[Garthanos]

@Campbell Salutations and invitations.

 

[Garthanos]

@AbdulAlhazred when you are saying there's a pdf, I have to ask where is there?

 

[dave2008]

What is this about?

 

[Garthanos]

What is this about?

@AbdulAlhazred's game idea that evolved from 4e.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, it was sort of 4e, once upon a time. I guess it is still pretty recognizably a '4e like game' although this version is getting further from the original.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

So, HOML2 kind of looks like this:

There are 3 'modes of play', Interlude (free RP, canonically no dice are ever rolled), Challenge (analogous to 4e SC), and Action Sequence (combat).

The first interesting point here is there are simply no such thing as checks, except in challenge/combat. So, if a player says "Hey I really want to fight this guy" then they're controlling which of these is in force. Likewise they might try to switch from combat to challenge (IE by escaping or trying to parley). There isn't verbiage saying "they get what they want" OTOH the GM is in charge of scene framing. So the assumption is transitioning modes of play means some agreement on what the next mode and the associated scene looks like (or else the players just say something like "OK we proceed" and the GM can go back to first principles and make up what comes next).

Checks work a lot like 4e, except instead of 'skills' I imagined it as 'knacks' (meaning more what you are inclined to do, so 'Engineering' is more a trait, you characteristically solve problems by making things). Every check then has a 'governing aspect' which is going to tell you which knack and thus which ability bonus and proficiency bonus apply. You might also have knowledge or be proficient in a tool. The 'proficient in a tool' also covers weapons/implements pretty nicely. An aspect COULD simply be something like 'combat', which doesn't relate directly to a specific knack.

So, a check consists of the GM setting a scene, a player says "My character accomplishes X by doing Y" and then the GM says "OK, the governing aspect for that is Stealthy, so you can make a check using the Stealth knack, etc." Someone could then jump in with "Oh, and I distract the enemy by throwing a stone, over there..." which might grant advantage on the ensuing check (I'm just using 5e advantage/disadvantage, and no other non-static bonuses).

If a scene involved an ongoing activity, then the GM might state that whatever check was made previously for that stands, so you don't need to roll 12 times to sneak into the orc camp, nor does every PC have to make a separate check, etc. Standard stuff.

Since all checks are part of challenges/combat something is tallied, success or failure, consequences are meted out, or whatever, the GM evolves the plot to the next scene, or at least decision point in the existing scene, and the process repeats until the challenge is done.

Players can 'play fate' (sort of a better version of 5e's inspiration) when they wish, that lets them change the narrative. They can also expend power points to 'pump up' their success, but you have to wager them before the roll and they don't do anything to help failure. PPs are used for all the things 4e uses 'points' for, APs and HS basically. You get one back when you rest. Using fate requires 'leveraging' something, usually a trait of the character. You can also 'invoke misfortune', inviting the GM to rain on you in return for getting your fate back, so you can use it later.

Players can also 'up the stakes', by accepting a consequence of an action in trade for some other thing they liked less. The classic case being "you fell in the pit and died" with the response being "No, I fell in the pit, and now my leg is broken." You basically take an affliction in return for getting back some of your hit points. This is probably MOST applicable to combat, but can be used in challenges too (I guess technically it could even happen in an Interlude, though its hard to see that sort of action happening with nothing at stake).

I THINK this 'engine' will drive the game. It should give everyone some table stakes and assuming the GM sticks to a fairly 'Story Game' kind of agenda something should happen.

That is ESSENTIALLY the structure of the game at the table in play. The

 

[Gilladian]

Sounds pretty good. I haven’t dived into the rules yet; maybe tonight.

 

[Garthanos]

Does not need the number behind it til you have a "published" version @AbdulAlhazred

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Does not need the number behind it til you have a "published" version @AbdulAlhazred

Yeah, well, for myself I distinguish between the 'old' version that @Gilladian has played with a bit, and the 'new' version. The original was a lot closer to 4e in terms of it was just free checks, plus challenges and combat, and the whole framework of checks was straight out of 4e.

Honestly, if you look at the document, the only thing that tells you which 'version' it is, is the date, lol. That date is automagically generated, so it always indicates if things have been changed. I guess maybe I could have RELEASE NOTES! Hahaha.