What is "grim and gritty" and "low magic" anyway?

[Bendris Noulg]

Well, mine just came today, and while there's a few things not to my taste, there are a few things I'd definitely would like to incorporate into my game.

• Environment Variant Races (to fine tune races I already have as well as develop races I "know" are there but never wrote up)
• Variant Scout and Thug (Side Note: Expert variant looks very much like my own version)
• Variant Paladins (although as Prestige Classes)
• Bard as a Prestige Class (something I'd been considering, now made easy for me)
• Backgrounds (under consideration, will likely do something modeled in a similar fashion but more setting-specific)
• Action Points (although giving less, just to "try them out")
• Contacts (for fleshing out background; contacts are actually a common occurance in our game already, but this UA system is good for characters starting above 1st Level to determine past associates)
• Reputation
• Taint

Stuff I already use/have done include:

• W&V (or essentially my own take, which I originally built from SW combined with various bits from message board discussions)
• Spell Points with a Fatigue-like system is something I already have, converted from Spells & Magic.
• Paladin as a Prestige Class (Barbarians and Monks, too)
• Defense Bonus and DR for Armor (although Defense is scaled higher, combined with a defense roll, with your Defense roll effected by the Armor, thus providing a Defense mechanic that scales with the Attack mechanic)
• Facing (based on MEG's Fighter's Corner)
• Themed Summoning (albeit through a different method)
• Legendary Weapons (from their initial release in Swords of Our Fathers)
• Sanity (although becoming more familiar with these rules, combined with some commentary regarding them in the Sanity thread, I'm looking at the possibility of merging the system I use with the UA version; still not sure, yet, and will likely throw that one past the group for their opinion.)

Not sure if I'll actually use them, but I am looking over the Incantations and these do seem nice. Not entirely sure if I want to use them, as I already applied True Ritual rules to spells our group wanted to trim-down and I feel the two would occupy the same "niche" of spellcasting methodologies. I can see them having been a great addition if such wasn't the case already.

 

[malladin]

To me
"Low magic" usually means "I hate handing out magical items, so I removed them, inadvertantly making anyone who plays a wizard or cleric significantly more powerful than the rest of the party, but that's ok, because I cover it by saying that wizards and clerics are uncommon. Even though there's one of each in every party."

Actually, I think that if you have a look at our DarkLore game you will see that, if anything, the reverse is true. Yes, there is an emphasis on rarity of items and spells, but spellcasters are limited to 5th or 4th level spells whilst there is a system that allows characters to gain powerful items just by developing levels (The point of this is to emphasise that the items are rare and a significant part of the character, whilst not detracting from the enjoyment of having a FB Sword, Bow or whatever.

"Grim and gritty" usually means "I love save vs death mechanics and I hate hitpoints. I've further devalued the fighters of the party by removing any staying power they have."

Largely a fair point. I do love 'save vs death' mechanics. However, the fact that this system destroys the fighter's stickability is something that we have taken great care to consider. Firstly, though, I need to say that we have completely removed the basic classes and replaced them with six more generic , readily multiclassable, basic classes, therefore allowing us to completely rework any balance issues appropriately. I think this is actually a valid point you make here, and only by replacing the classes can we produce a system that is balanced.

I also think that this highlights another aspect of 'Grim & Gritty'. I think that versatile characters is an important part of toning down the setting. In writing DarkLore I have tried to develop a 'fantasy novel' feel, taken from the types of fantasy novels I like, such as Tolkien, KJ Parker and Robin Hobb. The characters in these stories are usually difficult to define as any one class and have a lot of different abilities and complex character histories. With the versatile classes we've done for DarkLore and the free multiclassing I think we've highlighted this.

Simply put - if someone uses either of these phrases to describe their campaign, it means that they didn't really think about the campaign world beyond their own personal DMing preferences.

Well, this is now where you start to get a bit silly. I can understand that you don't like grim & gritty and previously had some reasonable arguments for why taking this apporach may unbalance the game. Hopefully I have provided the counter argument to say that by putting the extra work you can get around these problems. However to dismiss the concept in this manner is bigotted.

To say that DarkLore is ill thoughtout is so badly wrong it makes me laugh. DarkLore is the culmination of probably about 60 years of roleplaying experience (4 people have been signifcantly involved with developing the setting ideas). There's hundreds of pages of notes on history and the different nations, cosmology, secret societies, politics and the like. Not only that, but it's been built by History, Paeleontology and Ecconomics graduates so has been developed with an eye to tying the world together in an ways that shows how the societies have developed and interacted with each other.

Anyway, what's wrong with thinking about my own DMing preferences? I'm the one that puts the time into planning the adventures and making sure it all runs smoothly. I think the whole game is a synergenic experience for all. If the GM has a system they enjoy playing with the players will respons favourably whereas if the players are put off by the system

Ben, Malladin's Gate

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Actually, I think that if you have a look at our DarkLore game you will see that, if anything, the reverse is true. Yes, there is an emphasis on rarity of items and spells, but spellcasters are limited to 5th or 4th level spells whilst there is a system that allows characters to gain powerful items just by developing levels (The point of this is to emphasise that the items are rare and a significant part of the character, whilst not detracting from the enjoyment of having a FB Sword, Bow or whatever.

Indeed, it's often the nature of most LM games to bestow the players with "upper level" items at "mid levels" (6-12) rather than a constant upgrading of items from minor to major. It's even occured where artifacts/epic items have landed in the hands of a low level character (although not being able to draw upon the "full might" of the item, or the item being most useful only in certain situations, are features often applied to provide balance).

Largely a fair point. I do love 'save vs death' mechanics. However, the fact that this system destroys the fighter's stickability is something that we have taken great care to consider.

My solution in that regard was to alter the way Wounds are determined, being handled as (Constitution x Size multiple) + BAB. This has worked wonders to prevent melee types from being nerfed.

I also think that this highlights another aspect of 'Grim & Gritty'. I think that versatile characters is an important part of toning down the setting. In writing DarkLore I have tried to develop a 'fantasy novel' feel, taken from the types of fantasy novels I like, such as Tolkien, KJ Parker and Robin Hobb. The characters in these stories are usually difficult to define as any one class and have a lot of different abilities and complex character histories. With the versatile classes we've done for DarkLore and the free multiclassing I think we've highlighted this.

Yep.

Question: By "free multiclassing", due you mean to indicate that there is no Exp penalty for "uneven" multiclassing? Reason I ask is that Favored Classes are, to a degree, a part of Racial balace, and while I dumped the penalty, I retained Favored Classes by applying a "reward" system for taking levels in the Class (that being the semi-popular +1 Skill Point per Class Level variant that you might have seen pop up on the boards from time to time).

Well, this is now where you start to get a bit silly. I can understand that you don't like grim & gritty and previously had some reasonable arguments for why taking this apporach may unbalance the game. Hopefully I have provided the counter argument to say that by putting the extra work you can get around these problems. However to dismiss the concept in this manner is bigotted.

Welcome to the club.:\

To say that DarkLore is ill thoughtout is so badly wrong it makes me laugh. DarkLore is the culmination of probably about 60 years of roleplaying experience (4 people have been signifcantly involved with developing the setting ideas). There's hundreds of pages of notes on history and the different nations, cosmology, secret societies, politics and the like. Not only that, but it's been built by History, Paeleontology and Ecconomics graduates so has been developed with an eye to tying the world together in an ways that shows how the societies have developed and interacted with each other.

How much of it's on the web? Sounds like a good read.

Anyway, what's wrong with thinking about my own DMing preferences? I'm the one that puts the time into planning the adventures and making sure it all runs smoothly. I think the whole game is a synergenic experience for all. If the GM has a system they enjoy playing with the players will respons favourably whereas if the players are put off by the system

I've had good experiences in this regard; Indeed, my players were put off by 3E and insisted that I wouldn't be able to preserve the feel and flavor of our campaign if we converted. After explaining the d20 engine and how it works, and that seperating the operating mechanic from the conditions and expectations of D&D itself was possible, they got really excited. And while a bit has changed from the 2E campaign regarding mechanics and meta-game set ups (and after 3 years is still being thought out and improved on through continued game play), flavor and fairness have definately been retained, much to the delight of my group.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

My solution in that regard was to alter the way Wounds are determined, being handled as (Constitution x Size multiple) + BAB. This has worked wonders to prevent melee types from being nerfed.

Grim Tales sets the Massive Damage Threshold at CON + armor + natural armor. In effect, an attack must pierce both the armor and the CON to force a Massive Damage save.

I find that in gritty games overall, damage dealing capacity is also reduced. Giving a dragon a MAS of CON x Size effectively means the MAS will never be used.

On the other hand, since natural armor scales up with size anyway, I found it works pretty good to increase MAS without necessarily putting it out of reach entirely.

Although Grim Tales is low magic, it remains high adventure/action, so dropping a dragon with a shot to the heart should remain a (albeit distant) possibility.

I also made a last-minute incorporation of the Armor Damage Conversion rules from Unearthed Arcana, though those are optional. As noted in UA, that particular rule doesn't change the duration of combat, it merely means that most combats will end with unconscious characters, rather than dead ones. (Which, in itself, has its own grim implications.)


Wulf

 

[Bendris Noulg]

What's the target date on that, anyways? The more you post, the more I'm itching to get it.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

What's the target date on that, anyways? The more you post, the more I'm itching to get it.

Perfectionism yields delays, as always, but it's finally going to print this weekend.

Any plans to review it?


Wulf

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Well, I don't actually do reviews, but if you know my postings at all, then you know that if I like it, I'll plug it (and if I use it, it gets a banner on my site ).

 

[malladin]

My solution in that regard was to alter the way Wounds are determined, being handled as (Constitution x Size multiple) + BAB. This has worked wonders to prevent melee types from being nerfed.

That's an interesting idea. Our philosophy with DarkLore was a fantasy-ised D20 Modern, so we simply adapted the D20M massive damage mechanic, but borrowed Mutants and Mastermind's critical hit system to end up with something which copes with reducing a character's abiluity as they take critical hits (one of the best things about the storyteller system style health levels) whilst retaining the need for them to keep an eye on those nasty little nicks that can add up to them blacking out (which storyteller health levels does not account very well for.

Question: By "free multiclassing", due you mean to indicate that there is no Exp penalty for "uneven" multiclassing? Reason I ask is that Favored Classes are, to a degree, a part of Racial balace, and while I dumped the penalty, I retained Favored Classes by applying a "reward" system for taking levels in the Class (that being the semi-popular +1 Skill Point per Class Level variant that you might have seen pop up on the boards from time to time).

We got around that by completely rejigging the race system. Now all races can freely multiclass and get a bonus feat, but only humans get a free choice on these feats. This means that most other races are a little more powerful, as they tend to be in the literature, particularly Tolkein. So we came up with a new mechanic for letting people play more powerful races which doesn't involve messing around with ECLs.

How much of it's on the web? Sounds like a good read.

As a PDF product its all 'on the web', but unfortunately not all for free. we have a preview available from this link:
http://www.malladinsgate.com/downloads/previews/DarkLorePreview.zip
This has the basic classes, prior to a slight reshuffle following 3.5 release. The product is self is only $5 and can be downloaded from RPGNow (http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=2146&). Plus all our takings go to ENWorld's continued upkeep.

Cheerio,

Ben

 

[Bendris Noulg]

As a PDF product its all 'on the web', but unfortunately not all for free. we have a preview available from this link:
http://www.malladinsgate.com/downloads/previews/DarkLorePreview.zip
This has the basic classes, prior to a slight reshuffle following 3.5 release. The product is self is only $5 and can be downloaded from RPGNow (http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=2146&).

Kewl...

Plus all our takings go to ENWorld's continued upkeep.

Hmmm... That is interesting. How's that work exactly?

 

[takyris]

Great thread. GREAT thread.

Not much to add -- I've done D&D and d20 Modern recently. d20 Modern ended up being lmgng, since the characters were ordinary folks investigating an island with Odd Occurrences. After the TPK (ah, Takyris the new d20M GM, with his less than stellar grasp of the mechanics and consequences thereof), we played other stuff for awhile.

I recently asked my players what they wanted to do for the next game. A low-magic historical-setting game was on the list. I said I'd be using d20 Modern classes and rules, with skills and some class abilities altered to keep things balanced (ie, making an Alchemist to replace the Techie AdC). My players, as a group, said, "Nah, not interested. If we're playing in a fantasy game, we want to be able to blow stuff up."

Case closed. The DM's job is to give the players the kind of game they want.

Personally, I can enjoy either. I enjoyed Pirates of the Carribean, which was low-magic -- no spellcasters, one magical effect -- and I enjoy watching Justice League -- all kinds of people with amazingly powerful powers. i can get a sense of character from both. Both held vast amounts of enjoyment for me. For me, the key is to know which one I want to play, and which one I want to DM, and which one my players want me to DM.

Depending on the exact definition of gng, however, I'm not sure I'm as interested. Was PotC grim & gritty? Nobody took on a full regiment of soldiers -- when the heroes did, they got captured. On the other hand, nobody lost an eye or suffered internal bleeding or anything like that. It is, as people better than I have noted, a spectrum. At various levels of grittyness, you get, for one melee attack of a mid-level character by another mid-level character:

Grittiness level:

Low: You slash at him, and he flies backward and crushes a brick wall from the sheer force of your power. Then he gets up, sneers, and says, "It'll take more than that to take down Ol' Gruff!"

Medium: You slash at him, and he parries but seems a little slower to react now -- maybe you nicked him?

High: You slash at him, and he takes a slash across his hip as he tries to parry. He's bleeding freely, and he's going to be slowed down if he tries to move very quickly.

Uber: You slash at him, and you hit. Hold on, I'm going to make his Pain Threshold check, his Shock check, his Fear check, his Arterial check, his Bone Chip check, his Tendon check, and his Musculature check. I'll wait on Disease and Rust Poisoning until after the combat.

Frankly, I like swashbuckling in my fantasy. Swashbucklers don't take on entire regiments -- or, if they do, it's because they're leaping across tables and slashing the ropes holding candelabras and such. It's not because they're cutting a swath through the entirety of the town guard. That said, swashbucklers also don't die from a single hit unless they're fighting someone MUCH more powerful than they are.

Ergo, that's what I tend to play. d20 Modern lets me get most of that, and D&D lets me get the rest. And M&M lets me shoot laser beams. Come on. Laser beams. Don't tell me you never wanted to shoot laser beams...