D&D General Project Bree-YARC: An Unholy Mashup of BX and 3e

[thirdkingdom]

After saying for years that I'm not going to publish a retro-clone, I've found myself starting to work on one. I'm going with a working title of Bree-YARC (Yet Another Retro-Clone) for the time being. The plan is to bring this to crowdfunding winter of 2026, and I've got the following goals in mind. I'll be trying to update this thread as work gets done on the project.

So far I'm incorporating the following:

• BX level limits, race-as-class (although I'm calling them ancestry as class), saving throw categories, hit point and attack/save progressions.
• XP requirements are going to be standardized. For humans (that I'll use as the primary examples), magic-user will be the default baseline for progression, with all other classes based off that. I'm keeping the BX restrictions on magic-users that help bring the power level down, specifically not being able to move and cast spells and losing spells if suffering damage while casting.
• AC will be ascending, and I'm using the base attack bonuses, but with the BX-progression. Saving throws have been reversed to a bonus, hitting a target number of 20.
• The above two changes will make it easier to change classes.
• I'm trying to reduce the impact of ability scores -- and eliminate them for monsters -- since I feel that is a hallmark of BX-style games, how you can have an effective character without stupendous ability scores. The hope is to also make it easier to run monsters and NPCs without having to keep track of so much information.
• I'm looking to incorporate downtime activities into leveling requirements, while keeping the XP for gold as the primary driver for advancement, as well as exploration bonuses.
• Retainers will continue to be important, as will morale and reaction rolls.
• Feats and skills.

I'm not as familiar with 3.x as I am with BX, so I'm curious to know if there are any hallmarks of 3.x-style games I should be including.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I'm not as familiar with 3.x as I am with BX, so I'm curious to know if there are any hallmarks of 3.x-style games I should be including.

It's hard to decide what is most iconic to 3e. For many, it is the feats. For others, the formulaic calculations of cost-of-magic-item-by-plus, wealth-by-level, challenge-ratings, etc. For many, I think it is the character build-choice decisions. Many of them are going to directly conflict with a BX design aesthetic. Others (like the 3e skill system) could be lifted straight out and ported into a BX game with little to no issues (other than changes to numbers and assumptions about magic items and the like).

Specific rules aside (minus the XP system), BX and 3e are simply on opposing sides of the Dragonlance revolution. There are different stated (or unstated) goals about the central play loop and what you are likely to have as player goals. That said, other than gp=xp (and honestly expected WBL, which stealthily puts 3e over closer to the 'treasure-hunting expected' camp than 2e or 5e), there aren't a lot of mechanical enforcers of this.

 

[thirdkingdom]

It's hard to decide what is most iconic to 3e. For many, it is the feats. For others, the formulaic calculations of cost-of-magic-item-by-plus, wealth-by-level, challenge-ratings, etc. For many, I think it is the character build-choice decisions. Many of them are going to directly conflict with a BX design aesthetic. Others (like the 3e skill system) could be lifted straight out and ported into a BX game with little to no issues (other than changes to numbers and assumptions about magic items and the like).

Specific rules aside (minus the XP system), BX and 3e are simply on opposing sides of the Dragonlance revolution. There are different stated (or unstated) goals about the central play loop and what you are likely to have as player goals. That said, other than gp=xp (and honestly expected WBL, which stealthily puts 3e over closer to the 'treasure-hunting expected' camp than 2e or 5e), there aren't a lot of mechanical enforcers of this.

This is, of course, why it is an unholy mashup. For advancement, I'm using four central pillars, in descending order of importance:

1. Treasure = XP. Encourages getting in, getting out, with as little combat as possible.
2. Exploration. My preferred mode of play is the sandbox hexcrawl, and I'd like to reward players for exploration, uncovering what I'm calling "secrets".
3. Downtime. I'm experimenting with making downtime mandatory at each level. AD&D did this with training times, but I'm making it more specific with a variety of downtime activities, both because I'd like to encourage players to make use of downtime to craft items, research, recruit retainers, etc. but also to deliberately try and slow down the pace of play (in-world)
4. Combat. Keeping in reaction and morale rolls should help keep combat as the "fail state" of BX, as will the minimal XP awards for monsters.

 

[Brendan Byrd]

I've been messing with similar for a homebrew, but importing BECMI flavor into a 3.x/d20 rule subset.
Iconic aspects of 3.0 for me:

1. d20 task resolution (d4 through d12 used for damage, turn effects, etc.)
2. All XP tables use the same method of calculation. Current Level XP Total + (Current Level x Constant) = Next Level XP Total
3. Character Level features distinct from Class Level features.
4. EVERYBODY uses the same rules. PC's, NPC's, & "monsters". (In 2e as a player, a pet peeve of mine was cool character concepts or abilities would show up, but NPC only.)
5. Ability Scores were no longer a static element

I've been tinkering with the MSRD basic classes (10 levels) for the demi-humans.
With the option available to move into an advanced class.
(And since in 3.0 everyone uses the same rules...that applies to humans as well. )

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'm not as familiar with 3.x as I am with BX, so I'm curious to know if there are any hallmarks of 3.x-style games I should be including.

Monster templates, which are a wonderful tool until you start stacking them up to the point of burying the base monster beneath a mountain of them.

 

[Rainbow Scissors]

Prestige Classes were a big part of 3rd Edition.

They were usually shorter (5 levels, but some were longer) special classes that you could only take if you met the skill/ability/feat/whatever requirements. So, a fighter (or other character who met the requirements) might decide to take levels in Undead Slayer or Frenzied Berserker; an arcane caster might decide to be a Blood Magus or a Dragon Disciple. There were also some that required being a specific race.

3rd Edition went a little too crazy with them and got super specific. Maybe you could have a few that cover broader ideas or archetypes that someone of almost any class might be able to achieve. 4th Edition did something like that with Paragon Paths, but Paragon Paths were assumed to be associated with certain classes. If you could go a step broader than that, I think it could be neat. The toughest part is keeping staying one single class interesting when the prestige options are available.

 

[thirdkingdom]

Here's my first attempt at a "mission statement" for the game, to describe the specific playstyle I'm shooting for. It's a very rough draft, jotting down ideas in support of the mechanics that I'm integrating.

This set of rules is designed to encourage a very specific playstyle; one of exploration, of experiencing a living world of wonder and mystery. The mechanics encourage exploration and downtime activities over combat and dungeon delving, although those are certainly present and an option for play. This game will encourage players to create a stable of characters of different classes and levels that can be sent on various missions, errands, and tasks, and the rules will support that style of play.