Friday, January 1, 2010

LotFP Weird Fantasy Role-Playing Version 0.01


It's not a coherent piece of work, it's not nearly finished, blah blah, but I think you'll see the basic ideas so far. This isn't a new game, just a slight variation of the game, where the differences here can be ported over to other games, or ignored entirely.

One problem I'm having doing the basic writeup of the rules is that I'll be having a tutorial booklet in the box which will introduce a lot of game concepts, so I'm not sure how to introduce them in the rules book. Should it also be explanatory, or assume the reader has either a working knowledge of the tutorial or traditional gaming in general?

Also, I seem to be wavering on whether to use pronouns or not. ah well.

Anyway, here's a first look, the "rehearsal tape" version.


  1. I've just done a quick scan. It looks really good. I like the mage getting 1d6, and then 1d4 hp per level.


    Under Halfling, in the Stereotype sentence: nto should be not.

    For Specialists, the Sneak Attack ability seems very powerful, at least for high level Specialists. They would get a +2 to hit and up to +20 damage on a successful attack.

    For XP awards, maybe a suggestion for the Swords and Sorcery crowd: XP is gained for gold spent on women and wine after the adventure is over, instead of saving up gold for magic items. Basically, the characters could say at the start of the next adventure, "I spent 1,000 gold on booze and hookers, and get the XP", and erase that amount from their character sheet. I saw this in another SnS game, though I don't recall which one, but I liked it.

    In the Magic Section, maybe reword the first sentence "Magic is an Art, not a Science". That isn't a big deal, though.

  2. I say assume that everyone has read the tutorial or skipped it because they don't need to. Also, I will knife fight anyone who insists that "they" can't be used singularly.

  3. I'm about halfway through 'Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue' in which the author's main thesis is that the history of the English language is a history of rules being broken. Essentially he reduces the notion of "proper grammar" to rubble, and advocates the use of "they" as a singular pronoun, amongst other awesome things.

  4. Looks good so far, and I'm with Jeff on using they in that manner. :)

    Lots of minor tweaks that I totally agree with.

    This bit though:

    "Rapier: This one handed weapon suffers a -2 penalty to hit opponent with an AC of 6 or better (not counting DEX modifiers)."

    I'm not sure about that. From what I've read of armor + weapon history the Rapier was quite effective in targeting the weak points in heavy armour. Rapier thrust under the arm... through slits in the helmet, etc. I was surprised by that because I would have also thought it less effective against heavy armor... but apparently not.

  5. Now I can't find that link and the ones I have found are saying the opposite - that fine maille was quite effective at blocking a rapier. :)

  6. Going along with using the singular they (of which I am a proponent):

  7. For the cleric, you have the class described as a holy warrior. However, you also have clerics never improving in combat ability. Maybe give them a slow increase (every 3-5 levels), or change their description to be scholarly.

  8. You get extra kudos for including rules for starvation and dehydration in the basic ruleset, although they both seem too "quick", perhaps half as fast?

  9. Stuart, if that is the case I think it's best modelled by having it hard to make a successful hit, but make it a crit when it happens.

  10. I find the use of singular 'they' grating (I continue to use 'he' and 'his' in their gender-neutral form, which I suppose makes me some kind of neanderthal sexist bastard, by today's standards).

    But I don't care enough about it to knife fight over it.

  11. The Magic-users changing hit die is a bit inelegant. You could just put in maximum die value for first level, as it is a very common houserule (or even a rule in some edition).

    I agree with Dan that Sneak Attack is too powerful.

  12. As an editor I always urge an author to see the use of "they" and "their" in plural context. Neither are singular.

    I agree about the under powering of the Cleric, but I also think that the Halfling suffers from the exact same problem. As written, the Halfling class is a combative class that can never learn to fight any better.

  13. that pronoun thing is a sticky issue

    may I suggest some humor . . .

  14. Wow thank-you you for sharing some of these home-grown house rules with us, I was really impressed with your interpretation of the alignment system, and the reworking of the thief I should now call it specialist class; great stuff. I am definitely going to have to use some of these ideas.
    Have you been using all these rules yourself, in your own campaign?

  15. 14 Jan 2009
    Weapon Restrictions by Class
    “BUT GANDALF WAS A MAGIC USER,” is the familiar lament.
    My response is memorized,
    “No you cannot use the magic sword; actually, Gandalf was an immortal or angel not merely a magic-user. So when your character is 700 years old, then and only then will I let your magic-user use a sword; unless of course, you are willing to give up some spell casting ability in exchange for your desired prowess with a long-sword.”
    It is HISTORICALLY ACCURATE, in the past humans defined their role by the weapons with which they concentrated their training:
    Samurai specialized with the naginata, the katana and the bow,
    Medieval mercenaries excelled in the use of the crossbow,
    Renaissance infantry trained either with the pike or the musket,
    and Modern infantry are trained with assault rifles and light machineguns, while pistols are reserved for officers and submachingeguns are reserved for special forces.

    TRUE OCCULT LITERATURE does not support sword welding mages. The sword/ blade/ anthem used by traditional magicians is not a weapon but a focus of occult or spiritual energy; see Familiar Spirits by Donald Tyson Finding the Third Eye by Vera Stanley Adler and Three Books of Occult Philosophy by Cornelius Agrippa.
    (yes, I have read all three – for education purposes- I am not a self-proclaimed magician or occultist).

    Authors like Jack Vance and Michael Morcock allow their spell casting protagonists to use swords. I do not consider Turjan and Elric to be true wizards, I would classify them as agents or jacks-of-all-trades (fighter/thief/mage) for which I have created a special class to described these characters.

    It is helps the GM AVOID THE DICKHEAD factor; if I place a +1 battle-axe in my game, I understand it is going to be used the fighter, the barbarian or the warrior. I do not have to sit through a 20 minute argument while the magic-user, thief or the priest tries to justify why their character would be best served by owning the +1 battle axe. If I want to power-up the non-fighter types I will added an enchanted staff, short-sword or mace to the treasure haul.

    NOW, instead of using weapon proficiencies (AD&D), I presume PCs will invest their down time between gaming session refining their skill with their current selection of armaments.

    I also allow priests to use those weapons ordained by their deity; for example priests of Diana the Huntress would be allowed to use bows and priests of Ares the Warrior would be allowed to use the spear and the gladius.

    I respect individual GMs right to modify their own worlds and campaigns containing their own unique flavors and tastes; therefore, weapons available to a character class would be agreed upon before game play commences.