Interest Check: Swords & Wizardry, possible PbP

[gambler1650]

So, awhile back I ran a PbP on another board and generally enjoyed it. Things died due to RL issues both for myself and some players. I'm interested in starting up another PbP, but this time instead of going with a somewhat rules heavy game (as the Midnight/D3.5 game was), I want to switch to an old school rule set, namely Swords & Wizardry (which is basically the original D&D three brown books updated to the present - with a couple of add ons, like the Thief class.. there are some interpretations of the original rules that may not be exactly the same, but generally these were for rules that were too ambiguous.. and there are some changes to the original rules, for instance all weapons no longer simply do 1d6 damage ).

The setting will be my own, but influenced by Necromancer Games' sandbox modules, the Wilderlands, and the like. I want to give the players quite a bit of freedom to decide where to go, but I also have an idea for an underlying theme or two that I think will be quite cool if the players focus in on it.

If you want to see the kind of style I prefer, here's part of my old PbP:
Midnight - Shadow of the Gods

Basically, I would love to find players who are willing to write more than just "I go 20 feet down the hall and kick in the door.", and would also love players who are willing to interact with each other during periods when I may not be around (and this will happen once in awhile for 1-2 weeks or so), to keep interest in the thread going.

I'm looking for 3-4 players who are willing to check in at least every 2-3 days. If there's interest with whatever players I end up with, I may set aside times for the PbP group to be online to crank through a fair bit at once, but at least initially I'd say that I'd plan for things to be low key as far as how often players will be expected to check in/post.

If there's interest, let me know. And if you don't know Swords & Wizardry, a link to the free PDF for the Core Rules is at:

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_70/6374000/6374501/4/print/ebookfinal9.pdf

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'm a pbp vet (I have been running a campaign that split into two since Feb. 2006), and this sounds like a good fit for me and my playstyle. I don't yet have S&W, but will grab the PDF of the core rules if chosen and the appropriate print product (there are several versions of the game out there, I know) after that.

Does S&W couple race/class or are the two separate? I'd be interested in a character that would be very recognizable in the summer of '79, when I started playing (AD&D).

 

[gambler1650]

In S&W Core Rules (which is what I would use, as opposed to the 'Complete' version), class and race are separate - sort of. Hmm, looking at the PDF and the third printing that I have, there are definitely changes between the two.

From the third printing:

Humans can be any of the classes (Fighting-Man, Magic-User, Cleric, Thief of Monk: Thief and Monk are optional classes, I'd definitely allow the Thief but probably not the Monk -likely wouldn't fit my campaign world concept).

A dwarf is either a 'Fighting-man' (Fighter) or a Dwarven Warrior (the only difference being that a Dwarven Warrior can advance beyond Level 6).

An Elf can 'change' class between Fighting-Man and Magic-User every day. Basically he wakes up and says "I want to fight!" or "I want to be able to cast spells."

A Halfling can be either a Fighting-Man or a Thief (an optional class in 3rd printing of S&W, but I would allow it), but can only advance to 4th level as a fighter.

 

[gambler1650]

Actually, looking at it a bit more closely, I'd probably go with 4th printing. Things are a touch more flexible with classes/races.

Still only 4 base classes: Fighter, Magic-User, Cleric and Thief.

A Dwarf may be a Fighter or a multi-classed Fighter-Thief. A Fighter-Thief is limited to only 6 levels in Fighter. A Dwarf fighter is limited to 6 levels unless they have a strength of 17 (then can go to 7th level) or 18 (then can go to 8th level).

Elves can be Fighter/Magic-User, Thief, or Fighter/Magic-User/Thief. They can advance as a Thief to an unlimited level, as a Fighter to 4th level, and as a Magic-User to 8th level (up to 2 more levels as fighter or Magic-User given high strength or dexterity).

Halflings can be a Fighter or a Thief. They can only advance to 4th level as a fighter and unlimited as a thief.

There are some optional rules for advancing more slowly in 'limited' classes for non-human races, and I might allow that assuming a PbP goes long enough that it becomes an issue.

 

[gambler1650]

A bump with just a bit more info:

The campaign would be titled: Legacy of the Silver Dragon

The backdrop is a small town on the outskirts of human civilization that had a protector in the form of a Silver Dragon named Eliaesel, who lived in a mountain nearby. She was effectively the ruler of the town, although she empowered a council to overrule her rulings if 3/4 of the members agreed to do so. The council was made up with equal numbers from all facets and races of society.

And then Eliaesel vanished (not sure how long ago, likely 5-10 years before the start of the campaign). The town hoped she would return, but none sent to the mountain to search for her were able to find her lair, or if they did - none that did returned. Instead they found hostile humanoids, which had left the town alone due to its protector.

Currently the town is in a state of flux. The Council attempts to hold onto its power, but without a strong leader over it, they get little done. They have called for a vote by the populace to elect such a leader, and numerous people have thrown their hat into the ring.. but the politics have grown fractious, and no matter who wins - large portions of the populace will likely be unhappy.

And, those aforementioned hostile humanoids are beginning to realize that the town is no longer as well defended as it once was... Caravans need guards, the town's threats need to be scouted, and there are rumors of items in ruins and caverns in the mountain which could be used to protect the town.

 

[gambler1650]

Just a bump...

 

[Fenris]

I'll toss my hat into the ring here as well. i9 do love a game where I can really get into a character. It will be good to let go and get back to my roots as well. I downloaded the rules and will read them over to get used to them.

 

[gambler1650]

I'd be happy to have both of you (Whizbang and Fenris) involved. I have one other player I'm trying to get on board - he's never done a PbP, but enjoys D&D and writing. That leaves probably room for 1 more player, so if anyone else is up for this kind of game, please let me know.

One thing I'm debating is starting stats and character generation:

Unlike more modern iterations, abilities really aren't as important - or at least don't appear to be at first blush. The range of modifiers and what they modify is generally less (though 4th edition S&W did add a few additional modifiers). What a high attribute is often best for is that it provides a 5% increase in XP received if your profession's prime attribute (strength for a fighter for instance) is 13+, so the character advances more quickly.

The REAL killer is hit points. If you roll a 1 for HP, your character pretty much is guaranteed to die unless you're super cautious and lucky). And unless you have a CON of 13+, you always have a chance of starting with 1 HP. I do plan to run this without fudging die rolls, though I plan to provide some help (see below) since most of us aren't used to the old school style.

I propose the following for character generation:

3D6 in order (in other words, roll the dice for each attribute).

If your character has either of the following conditions, you may reroll it:

Less than 54 TOTAL points for attributes (the average is 63 - 10.5 per attribute, 54 is if you rolled a 9 on every attribute), OR

No attribute 13 or above.

Now it's also possible to have 3-4 people who all roll up a character that would be a better fighter than anything else. To allow for party flexibility, I will permit each character to switch any two attributes.

For Hit Points: Roll the die for your class as given, divide by 2 (rounding down) and add to HALF the maximum HP you could have achieved. Then add/subtract your CON modifier.

So, let's say you're a Fighter with a CON of 14 (+1 to HP). Your hit die is 1D10. Half of your maximum HP (10) at Level 1 is 5. You roll a 3, which is halved and rounded down to 1. 5 + 1 (Die Roll) + 1 (CON Bonus) = 7

So, what I suggest is.. once you've looked at the rules, roll up a set of attributes. One way to determine the party composition would be to then post the attributes with your first and second choice of character (profession and race). Then discuss amongst yourselves who (if anyone) will switch attributes in order to make the party more diverse.

If you prefer to keep your character's attributes/class (even race) secret for some reason, then feel free to message me with the attributes/character class/race, and when I've seen the whole list, I can make suggestions as to if someone should change their classes, or do a swap of two of their attributes.


So, additional 'help' to the party. I plan to use a 'Hero Point' type system, where you can spend a Hero Point to:

1. Force one reroll (but you must take the result).
2. Cause any damage that would reduce you to 0 or less HP to leave you at 1 HP.
(Possibly others if I think of them)

Players will start with 1 Hero Point, and gain extra Hero points by, well, doing things heroically.

There's a fine line between heroic and foolhardy however. Simply charging 10 orcs as soon as you see them (think Han Solo and stormtroopers), isn't going to get a Hero Point. If somehow you do so and take out all 10, then probably you'll get a Hero Point. If you hold a doorway against 10 orcs when one of your company is down, and the other is desperately trying to find a way out of the apparently dead end you're in - you'll probably get a Hero Point, possibly even before the scene is completed (allowing you to hold out longer).

Hero Points will also be awarded for good roleplaying. If you consistently write:

"I'm swinging my sword at the nearest Orc, hoping to protect the wizard."

you'll only get Hero Points for actions described above. If however you provide more description and make your character seem to come alive through your writing, you'll likely get a Hero Point after major climaxes (the end of a particular adventure, or series of events). This doesn't mean that you have to write paragraphs of literature. But as in the example above, something like:

<Character Name> steps forward menacingly, keeping himself between the slavering orc and the fallen wizard. "You're NOT getting past me," he says, and then brings his axe smashing down towards the orc's head.

would be sufficient if that level of description is done consistently.

 

[gambler1650]

Still searching for one more player.

I have opened the 'OOC' thread for the campaign here:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/talkin...ilver-dragon-swords-wizardry-core-4th-ed.html

 

[Binder Fred]

It doesn't seem like Rhun's Casual Pathfinder game is getting off the ground, so I'd like to participate if I could (?).

I'm thinking of playing a young elven Fighter/Magic User named Antares. A scholarly, enthousiastically inquisitive type with an endless supply of oftentimes dangerous curiosity about - well - everything! Wears loose robes, tied at the elbow for convinience, and the starry silver circlet of an apprentice elven mage on his brow (hasn't earned the pointy hat yet ).

By the by, what are your thoughts on re-skining powers, Gambler? I was thinking of maybe making his Fighter/high Strength powers come from magical spells instead, if I could. Same crunch rule-wise, but IC lifting a big rock would for example involve casting a sparkly "levitation spell" with upwartd hand motions (same STR check to do it though), shooting a blazing "Fire Dart spell" instead of shooting arrows (still need the roll, the bow and the arrows as "material components", of course), shouting "Mellon" with grandiose gestures instead of bashing into a door, etc, etc. Would that be possible, in whole or in part?