OD&D to 3.x

johnsemlak said:
Oh, by the way, what is a 'guild thief'?

Thanks for the links, by the way.

Anyway, if I remember correctly (my Rules Cyclopedia has fallen into the Void of Lost Game Books...) thief characters in OD&D could choose between being a "travelling" thief or building a guild and attracting apprentices. Anybody else have the reference or remember better that I?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Reynard said:
Thanks for the links, by the way.

Anyway, if I remember correctly (my Rules Cyclopedia has fallen into the Void of Lost Game Books...) thief characters in OD&D could choose between being a "travelling" thief or building a guild and attracting apprentices. Anybody else have the reference or remember better that I?

There was always the idea of the PCs being rulers or leaders of some sort, as spelled out in the Companion Set. Fighters build a keep/castle, Clerics build some massive churches, Wizards commission a tower or two, and Thieves set up/take over a misc. guild/privateering business (i.e. thieve's guild, merchant guild, pirate group, etc.). Elves start up a new tree-o'-life, and dwarves and halflings to their own demi-human special thing.

Or you can drop rulership and keep adventuring on as usual. I didn't think you had to 'specialize' if you didn't want to, such as fighters didn't have to become Knights, Paladins or the bad paladins, it was an option once they got up to their max HD. PCs could build their stuff and leave it behind without any penalties, to return later and wrest control again. It was pretty much wide open.
 

MerricB said:
Basic D&D 3.5: The Easy Way.
[...]
Cleric
BAB: equal to level * 3/4
SAVES: Fortitude = 2 + Level/2; Reflex = Level/3; Will = 2 + Level/2
Proficiency with all simple weapons.
Proficiency with all armours and shields
SPELL-USE: Ignore domain spells, allow spontaneous casting.
No bonus spells for high Wisdom.
SKILLS: None.
One point this makes is that the numeric progressions in D&D are unnecessarily complex. I'd consider giving each class a list of primary and secondary "skills" (Attack Bonus; Fort, Ref, and Will Saves; and actual Skills) with a bonus equal to Level or Level/2.

Fourth-level Fighter? To-Hit +4, Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +2, Riding +4, etc.
Sixth-level Rogue? To-Hit +3, Fort +3, Ref + 6, Will +3, Climbing +6, etc.
 

mmadsen said:
One point this makes is that the numeric progressions in D&D are unnecessarily complex. I'd consider giving each class a list of primary and secondary "skills" (Attack Bonus; Fort, Ref, and Will Saves; and actual Skills) with a bonus equal to Level or Level/2.

Fourth-level Fighter? To-Hit +4, Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +2, Riding +4, etc.
Sixth-level Rogue? To-Hit +3, Fort +3, Ref + 6, Will +3, Climbing +6, etc.

That's pretty much what I was going to say, but I'd keep the level/3 for saves and 3*level/4 for hits, and still add in stat bonuses. That's not too complicated, add allows a bit more variety.

12th level Rogue, 12/15/13/10/9/14: Melee +10, Ranged +11, Saves +5/+8/+3, Bluff +14, Climb +13, Hide +14, Heal +5.

Maybe have three types of skills: +level, +level/2, +0.

Edit: Oh, and keep cool feats, so not all 12th level Rogues are the same. Give different classes different feat progressions, like epic.
 
Last edited:

Maybe this is a bit more work, but...

Jump on the starting package bandwagon. basically, already define the skills and feats a character is going to have. For example...

FIGHTER:
HD d10
BAB: Best
Saves: Fort Good, Ref/Will Poor
Weapons: All allowed
Armor: Any + Shield
Skills: Jump, Ride, Swim, (level +3)
Feats: 1.) Weapon Focus (PC choice), 2.) Cleave 4.) Weapon Specialization (PC Choice), 6.) Blind-Fight 8.) Endurance 10.) Fighter Option 1 (Point Blank Shot, Imp Disarm, Trip, Sunder, or Bull Rush) 12.) Imp Weapon Focus 14.) Fighter Option 2 (choice), 16.) Imp Weapon Specialization, 18.) Fighter Option 3. 20.) Whirlwind Atk.

THIEF:
HD: d6
BAB: Average
Saves: For/Will Poor, Ref Good
Wpns: Any simple weapon + light one handed, plus bows
Armor: Light
Skills: Sleight of Hand, Open Lock, Search, Disable Device, Hide, Move Silent, Climb, Listen, Spot
Feats: 1.) Improved Init, 3.) Dodge 6.) Skill Focus 9.) Wpn Finesse 12.) Rogue Option 1 (Crippling Strike, Use Magic Device, Evasion, Opportunist), 15.) Rogue Option 2. 18.) Rogue Option 3
Special: UCD (never loose dex mod to AC), Sneak Attack (flanking does 1d6/4 lvls)

WIZARD:
HD d4
BAB: Poor
Saves: Will Good, Fort/Ref Poor
Wpns: Simple
Armor: None
Skills: Concentration, Knowledge: Spells, Alchemy
Feats: 1.) Combat Casting 3.) Spell Focus 6.) Greater Spell Focus 9.) Create Magic Item 12.) Spell Penetration 15.) Greater Spell Penetration 18.) Augment Summoning
Spells: As wizard, no bonus spells

PRIEST:
HD: d8
BAB: Average
Saves: Fort/Will Good, Ref Poor
Wpns: Simple
Armor: any
Skills: Know: religion, Diplomacy, Sense Motive
Feats: Wpn Focus (deities), 3.) Extra Turning 6.) Imp. Turning 9.) Iron Will 12.) Create Magic Item, 15.) Combat Casting, 18.) Leadership
Spells: as cleric, no domains, spontaneous cures
Turn Undead: as text

just some examples to think about.
 


johnsemlak said:
Question, Merric, have you played any games using those rules? 'Cause It looks like a good basis for a system.

No, I was just making them up on the fly. I have thought about it before, though.

The thing is: My players and I do not have a problem with the complexity of 3E. However, I know many people who do. A simpler version doesn't worry me unduly.

psychotic jim said:
Wasn't Gary Gygax going to do a simplified version of D&D under the OGL? Castles and Crusades or something like that?

Castles and Crusades is being produced by Troll Lord Games. Gygax's involvement is with the Castle Zagyg module that will be published for the C&C system rather than development of the rules itself.

Cheers!
 

Psychotic Jim said:
Wasn't Gary Gygax going to do a simplified version of D&D under the OGL? Castles and Crusades or something like that?
Castles and Crusades may not be as much a 'simplified' version of D&D as a Rules-lite version.

So what's the difference? I think Troll Lord Games' aim is to make a game for veteran gamers who don't like 3/3.5e's complexity. It is probably less aimed at new players, though I've seen TLG say they hope the product will bring in new gamers (note that 'new' D&Ders doesn't necessarily mean 'young' D&Ders).

I short, it will have a feel of 1e AD&D, but probably with a few of 3e's improvements thrown in.
 
Last edited:


Remove ads

Top