Tuesday, January 11, 2011

True Spell Casting: True 20

True Spellcasting – an Alternate Spellcasting Rule for True20

I have been enjoying playing with True20 off and on and it has really met my needs in a game, but there are still some things about it that I miss from other games. In particular is magic.

The True20 powers system is a very good one and it can emulate almost any magical system I have wanted to try, but there is one area where it falls short and that is in terms of spells. By spells I mean magical effects that are typically written down and can be learned or taught. Yes, very similar to D&D, but also spells that could be found in Call of Cthulhu or the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPGs.

Why Spells?
Part of it is one of storytelling, sometimes I need a one-time magical effect and I don’t really need a new power to describe it or I need a way of transmitting the knowledge of magical effects in a portable means; ie. in books.
The other the is one of necessity. I have dozens of D&D 3.x/d20 books, many are filled with spells, so all in all hundreds if not thousands of spells.
Wouldn’t powers-as-spells work just as well? Well yes, and in fact it would work for I guess 80% or more of all the spells. With a limited power selection the difference between Adepts are often mostly cosmetic.
Also there are spells that there are not True20 Power equivalents, wish is a good example, and most of the spells in d20 Call of Cthulhu.
And finally, I like to run a magic-rich game. True20 is perfect for this low-magic game I am working on now, but less so to emulate say D&D or my modern horror/supernatural game.

How to Do it?
I do not want to abandon the Power structure in True20, nor do I want to adopt the d20 Spell system wholesale either, but a simple compromise seems to work out well.

To do this I have created a new Supernatural Power called simply enough, Spellcasting. An adept can take Spellcasting up to nine (9) times.
To actually cast the spell the adept uses the Spellcasting power just like any other power.

Spellcasting 1
Concentration
You can cast spells of the First Level. Read the spell description for effects and it the spell needs to be Maintained and if it is Fatiguing.

Spellcasting 2
Concentration
Prerequisite: Spellcasting 1
As Spellcasting 1 except now the caster can cast spells of Second Level.

And so on…

Learning Spells
Taking the power at a new level is not enough to cast spells. The adept must first take the power then learn the spell. This allows the Gamemaster to control which spells can be entered into the game. It also allows which spells can or can’t be learned. For example the Gamemaster can restrict Wizard spells or even “Ranger” spells to a particular group of casters, or even by schools or descriptors (Necromancy or “Fire”).
Spells could be learned via enrollment in specialized “Wizard schools” (D&D or Harry Potter), from occult libraries (Buffy) or found in ancient tomes (Army of Darkness, Call of Cthulhu).

To learn a spell requires a difficulty check.

DC = 15 + Spell Level (in magic rich games) or 20 + Spell Level (in magic rare game)

The bonus for this check is like a skill check. A d20 + Bonus
Bonus = Power Level (Adept Level + 3) + Key Ability (Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma)

Alternately you can make this a true skill check with Knowledge (Supernatural) or even bringing in the Spellcraft skill.

If the spells can be found the Adept can learn 3 + Key Ability number of spells per Spell level in total, though they can have as many spells in their library as they can.

For example, Taryn, a 1st level Charisma-based Adept takes Spellcasting 1 as a power. She has Charisma +2. She can cast 1st level spells and can learn up to 5 total 1st level spells (3 + 2). Even though she has a library full of 2nd level spells from her mother, they cannot be learned until she takes Spellcastng 2.

Casting Spells
To cast a spell the Adept needs to have appropriate level of the Spellcasting Power.

Casting a spell is not quite the same as using a Power. They often do require the movement of hands, saying special words and the use of material components. Because of this anytime a spell is cast, a spellcasting check needs to be made.

Spell Casting DC = 10 + Spell level
Bonus = Adept Level +3 + Key Ability.

So in our example Taryn our 1st level adept casts Color Spray, a 1st level spell.
The DC for her to cast this spell is 11 (10 + 1) this represents her getting her colored sand and saying the words.
Her bonus is +6 (Adept level 1, +3, +2 for Charisma). So she needs to roll a 5 or more on a d20.

To Save Against a Spell
DC = 10 + Key Ability + Spell’s Level

Converting Spells
D20 spells are not written like True20 powers, but there is enough similarity to allow conversion, for the most part the conversions are dealt with in the True20 book.

Healing or Damage that does 1d6 per caster level has a damage bonus of +1 per level of the Adept.
For the odd case where damage is 1d8 or more then use the follow conversions.
1d6 per caster level = +1 per adept level
1d8 per caster level = +1 per adept level then +1
1d10 per caster level = +1 per adept level then +2
1d12 per caster level = +1 per adept level then +3

Damage the effects abilities is dealt with the conversions below
1d3, 1d4 = 1
1d6 = 2
1d8 = 3
1d10 = 4
1d12 = 5

Converting Spells, Part 2: d20 Call of Cthulhu
The spells in the d20 Call of Cthulhu are mostly d20 compatible. What they lack are spell levels and most cause some sort of damage to the caster, usually damage to an ability, but often damage in terms of sanity loss.

For ability damage divide the listed damage by 2.
For HP damage use the conversions above.
For Sanity use the Mental Health track from the True20 Companion. Sanity damage effects the base Sanity Bonus (page 88, T20C).

To convert Sanity damage take the amount the of d6’s rolled as the loss. For example if sanity damage is 3d6 then the damage to the Sanity Bonus is -3. For any die other than a d6 then add +1. So Sanity Damage in d20 CoC that causes 2d8 would be 2+1 or -3.

Spells in d20 Call of Cthulhu are all considering to be 1st level in terms of learning and casting. But do not let that fool you. The CoC spells are all difficult to cast and often dangerous to both friends and enemies alike. The DCs to learn the spells are often given not with the spell itself, but the books in which they are written in (the Necronomicon, Nameless Cults, etc.)

Alternately you can consider CoC spells to be of level 10, thus requiring another level of Spellcasting in order to cast, but that removes the ability of the regular investigator to cast these spells.

Converting Spells, Part 3: BESM d20 Advanced Magic
Spells in BESM d20 Advanced Magic were another attempt to overhaul the magic system. Instead of levels the spells are given in terms of DCs.
To find the level of any spell take the DC divide by 10 and round up.

Fortune Cards, Critical Hit Decks, Tarot Cards all in my game!

Heck with it.

One day I am going to going to let my players in whatever D&D-type game I am playing at the time use WotC's Fortune Cards, Paizo's Game Mastery card decks and maybe I'll through in some Tarot/Tarokka Cards and the Deck of Many things all in the same game.

And I'll let my "Boss" or "Big bad" monsters have the same.

What the hell right?  It should be a blast.

Monday, January 10, 2011

For Vancian Spell systems: Signature Spells

Playing with the idea of Signature Spells in various Vancian spell systems.

A Signature spell is one that once memorized can be cast up to three times per day.

I Am thinking that Magic-Users (and not clerics) gain 1 Signature Spell per spell level.  So they can have a First Level Signature Spell, a Second Level One and so on.  They could not gain this spell till the level after they gain the spell.  So if a Magic-User wants to use Lightning Bolt as a signature spell, he would need to take the spell at 5th level (the first time he can take a 3rd level spell) and then make it his signature spell at 6th level.

He could not take lightning bolt at 5th and then make Fireball (another 3rd level spell) his signature spell at 6th.

I don't think it would terribly upset play.

Thoughts?

Sunday, January 9, 2011

The Kitten Board and The Trevor Project!

Reposting from Amber Benson's blog, http://amberbensonwrotethis.blogspot.com/2011/01/kitten-board-and-trevor-project.html.

I helped in the first Kitten Board Trevor Project fundraiser back in 2002 and it was a smash success.
So I am happy to see that they still are working for such a great cause.

I don't own a Triangle Tara myself yet, so I am going to wait till the next charity to get one.

Congrats to Amber, Xita, Triangle Tara and all the Kittens who made this a success!

My favorite things about the OSR

In my effort not to add to the negativity of a spate of recent blog postings and discussions I have had I wanted to talk a bit on what I like best about the whole OSR movement/phenomena.

DIY D&D
Back in the paleolithic days of the internet TSR was the big bully on the block.  There were plenty of great email lists (MPGN) and sites (The Great Netbook Site, Morpheus') that had a ton of great content.  Not all of it was good, in fact most of it was bad, but there was an honestness about it all that I liked.  When WotC came around they opened up the game with the OGL and even had a pretty open web-site license as well.  D&D was no longer in the dark corners of the web.  Everyone was now a "publisher".  The OSR takes the best of both worlds really.  There is a gritty honestness about all the products and they are not hidden in some dark site or list that you can't get access too (STILL waiting on my password to Morpeus' site).
The products are high quality and fun.  And damn some of them look really great.  I am not a fan of LotFP but it is a sweet looking set.

What Ifs and the Path Not Taken
Playing D&D in the early 80's was often a guessing game.  You could get a game going at school and have 5 guys show up each with a different rulebook (LBBs, Holmes, Moldvay, AD&D, some homebrew).  Sometimes this was an issue, most times it was not a problem at all.  The OSR captures that feel well.  Spellcraft & Swordplay is a great OD&D "what if", Basic Fantasy RPG is a great example of how many of us actually played D&D when we sat at a table with Basic and Advanced books in hand. The various S&W books are like watching OD&D morph into AD&D if it had all been done with a solid plan in mind.  *I* may not ever need another retro-clone ever again, but I can't begrudge anyone for wanting to try to make their own particular version.  I do think we have reached the maximum amount of clones, near-clones and forgotten half-brothers the market can stand.

It's like having everything I always wanted, all at once
When growing up there were a lot of things I wanted for my game that I never got.  Most times it was because the things I wanted were not sold in my area (though talking to friends now I see I had it better than most), could not afford what I wanted, or it simply didn't exist.  I had to make my own Witch class when I was not 100% satisfied with what I found available to me.  Same with the Hearler class I made back in the day.  But now all of that is out there somewhere.  Part of this is because of the 'net obviously, but there are others out there that felt like did and are now making those things.  B/X Companion is a great example and one I'll continue to praise for a long time. Basic Fantasy RPG is another one and there are countless more out there.  It is like having a subscription to Dragon, White Dwarf and Dungeoneer circa 1978-1983 all at once.

Old School games, new school aesthetics
I have had the chance to be part of some of the most awesome publications in the RPG biz.  The old books are fun, but production wise, art wise, style AND writing most can't stand up to newer books.  The OSR applies that same aesthetic to their works.  Even a one shot with clip art still has the aesthetics of a modern book.  It is what people expect.  Now this is something of a stickler.  I love my beat up worn out copy of Eldritch Wizardry, but have you looked at it with modern eyes?  Not only is the art cartoony it is poorly edited and difficult to read.  I can't fault the original books for their production values, it is just easier and faster to do a better looking product today.   But the OSR can make an old school book AND give it the readability and look of books of today.  Afterall wasn't that what OSRIC was all about?

There is so much cool stuff going on that I wonder why anyone even has the time to complain about what someone else or what other edition is doing?

Saturday, January 8, 2011

This is why we don't have nice things...

To the 4-Haters, 3-haters, the 3.5-but-still-like-3-haters, the OSR-haters, the Orcs-with-lasers-haters, the Orcs-with-lasers-haters-haters, the ones that like Orcs but not Orks and that One Guy.  And to all one-true-wayers and anyone that thinks that it is part of a company's business plan just to screw you over.

This is all for you.



I have seen fewer cat-fights and bitching in a Spanish soap-opera.

Look, I like some of the points made by the blog-cognoscenti but the constant complaining about "that other game" (whatever that is for them) is getting old again.

Tell me why you like you game, but try to do it without resorting to "it is the only true way to play because the new/old/different way sucks."

Friday, January 7, 2011

ChicagoWiz's RPG Blog: Where's our EPT and Blackmoor? Is the "OSR" doomed to retreads?

Some good discussion over at ChicagoWiz's blog.

And there is a good point here. Can we continue to keep cranking out clone after clone? The truth is we can't and maybe we all should have stopped a bit back, but that being said what is next for the OSR?

ChicagoWiz's RPG Blog: Where's our EPT and Blackmoor? Is the "OSR" doomed to retreads?