Game the Game: Classic Classes, The Ranger

CC_ranger_no_logo - BlankFirst Edition Rangers were bad-ass. You wanted one at either the front or rear of your party. Somewhere along the line, they were relegated to dual-wielding, or bow-wielding dervishes.


This is my attempt at bringing back some of the awesomeoness of Old Skool Rangers.



Free?!? RPG Day

CC_fighter - BlankHappy nerd day!

I wanted to do something to reward the person taking a look at this, and more to the point, I wanted to maintain my discipline of having something post every day here at Planet Zeist.

Check out this mini-supplement. It is my attempt to create a different option for players who want to play a fighter.

And, it is PWYW, so if you want to grab it for nothing, you can do that. If you want to reward me by buying it for ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS, you can do that as well.

Enjoy the offerings at your FLGS, or play some games with friends, or just sit down a read a game book.

Happy day!

Game the Game: Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy- Roguish Characters

The Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy Project is a collaboration between Acts of Geek and Worlds Workshop. For more of the Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy, click here


Rogues? Bah! Thieves!

I still have a pin from my first ever gaming convention, held at the Mountain Farms Mall in Hadley: Thieves Do It In Leather!

Thieves were where it was at for me! Assassins were cool, but always seemed like weaker Thieves. And then, there are the Elite Classes: Monks and Bards. And, what about the forgotten Thief-Acrobat?

1e made it easy, too easy. All Thieves were very much the same, their abilities progressed at the same rate. 2e allowed for a degree of customization. 3e and beyond made these skills. But the skill based approach made it so that anyone could be a Thief. Lame.

Thieves need their niche back. And is there room in that niche for Assassins and Acrobats? Let us take a look at the 1e Thief:

  • Pick Pockets
  • Open Locks
  • Find/ Remove Traps
  • Move Silently
  • Hide In Shadows
  • Hear Noise
  • Climb Walls
  • Read Languages
  • Use Magic Items
  • Thieves Cant
  • Backstab

Assassins had the %based Thief abilities, but at a reduced level, as well as:

  • Poison
  • Alignment and Secret Society Languages
  • Disguise
  • Assassination

And the Acrobats, what of the Acrobats, necessary so that the D&D cartoon can be enjoyed to the fullest? Acrobats were really the first Prestige Class. An Acrobat gave up the advancement of some Thief abilities (PP, OL, RM, F/RT) but gained

  • Tightrope Walking
  • Pole Vaulting
  • High Jumping
  • Broad Jumping
  • Tumbling (which was broken down into Attack, Evasion, and Falling)

So, should we allow for all these variants? How different should they be? Is an Assassin different from a Thief?

Some editions rely on skills, and this seems to make the Thief obsolete, excepting Backstab/ Sneak Attack. In 5e, a Rogue’s sneak attack can be almost too powerful.

With the goal being universal appeal and niche protection, let’s see what we can do to codify all these ideas and keep the Thief cool. Rogues are romantic, Thieves are down and dirty. Is there room for both, a dashing rogue, and a sneaky thief?

Fate Accelerated Edition has the following approaches, instead of skills:

  • Careful
  • Clever
  • Flashy
  • Forceful
  • Quick
  • Sneaky

Can we look at these approaches and find some inspiration. Inspired by FATE, but not wanting to subconsciously repeat, I came up with the following:

  • Stealing
  • Sneaking
  • Killing
  • Maneuvering
  • Infiltration
  • Social
  • Connections

My goal is to make Thieves cool again, to make being a Thief mean something, to encourage players to remain Thieves, and to work within a framework that has diminished the Thief to one or more skills.

What stays: Sneak Attack/ Back Stab, call it what you will. It will start at first level, and get better every other level.

This seems easy.

Assassins never seemed to click, I loved the idea of the Assassin, but the implementation has never been as cool as it should be. The 4e Assassin might as well have had “Shark Jumping” as an ability.

As I am banging my head against the wall, thinking about what Thieves were, what they evolved into, and what they can be again, I had a moment of inspiration.

I will remind folks that my design goal is to make something rules-light, rules-easy, with lots of open-endedness, recapturing the  core of the 1e classes and their intention, as well as niche protection.

I have been looking for a way to differentiate Thieves from the Skills based approaches in 3e+. These skill heavy games have marginalized the Thief, and turned the Thief into a  Rogue, and that can be ok, but I would argue the world needs more Thieves!

Then, inspiration came! Thieves are Secret Agents! Thieves are James Bond! So, instead of reinventing the wheel, I turned to other sources, specifically John Wick’s spy game: Wilderness of Mirrors. This game strips out everything but cool spy stuff. There are stats that tell what you do, an even more streamlined approach to the FAE idea, this time focusing on cool spy stuff.

In Mr. Wick’s game, spies have Expertises. Every spy has them to some degree, so every spy can do everything. Spies can:

  • use technology
  • lie
  • kill people
  • be strong
  • steal

There is bit more eloquence to the way Mr. Wick writes up the Expertises, but I want you to buy that game and not get him mad at me for just copying his words.

But I think this can work.

So, I have a bit of a back and forth with Scott, and we come up with the following:

  • Acrobat
  • Arcanic
  • Assassin
  • Swindler
  • Thief
  • Thug

Great, you say to yourself having read this far looking for something interesting, or just killing time at work, what does it all mean, and why, and how does it work?

First, explanation:

Acrobat- tumbling, climbing walls, doing cool movement based stuff, a legacy term for 1e.

Arcanic- using magical items, deciphering ancient scripts, understanding unknown languages, understanding complicated traps. It is derived from Arcane, which yes, in D&D circles means magic not divine, but is being used here to refer to magics as well as mysteries and secrets, and instead of arcanist, which might have specific definitions, arcanic, is a derivative of mechanic, which has both utilitarian and criminal definitions.

Assassin- killing people, poison use.

Swindler- charming people, long cons, short cons, disguise.

Thief- stealing stuff, this would cover disarming locks, sneaking around, breaking into a building listening.

Thug- using force and intimidation, shadowing people, gathering intelligence.

So, how does these bits work? In keeping with my philosophy of avoiding frobt-loading classes and encouraging multiclassing as well as single classing, I offer the following:

At 1st level, and then at every even level, a Rogue (yes, I know, I didn’t like the term, but given that Thief is now an ability…) can assign one point to each of these six abilities. Each ability can be taken three times, so an 8th level rogue, who has 5 picks available [1,2,4,6,8] might have Acrobat- 1, Arcanic- 1, Assassin- 3.

These points may be used for Advantage dice with appropriate rolls. Additionally, some abilities might have additional effects:

Acrobat- a point may be expended for the session to avoid some catastrophic event, by jumping, rolling, falling out of the way.

Arcanic- a point may be expended for a session for a reroll when applying effort to an Arcanic related task.

Assassin- each point increases the base sneak attack dice, they start at a d4, and move up d6, d8, d10. A point may be expended once per session to allow a player to make an attack roll against a target using their Int as their ability and opposed by the targets Int or Wis. If successful, this “attack” does damage equal to the sneak attack damage, it is poison, or a trap. However, expending this point, does effectively reduce the players sneak attack dice appropriately immediately following.

Swindler- a point may be expended for a session to narratively, and retroactively have just the right thing, or to have put in place something unexpected. Think of this as the Leverage ability. The player would announce what they had done, which no one expected or noticed!

Thief- a point may be spent for a session to improvise what they need for a particular action, within reason. Maybe the player describes how they earlier pickpocketed the appropriate something, or truly, how they can make something out of nothing. This is not a chance for a character to avoid having to roll, if a players needs a specific key to open a door, or a wax seal, they will stull need to work for that, this is more when everyone thinks there is no chance a character might have something, they can come up with it: stripped naked, they still have thieves tools.

Thug- a point may be spent for a session to call upon previously unknown contacts for assistance.

Now, if I were given the power of Mike Mearls, and could actually design UD&D from the ground up, there might be more granularity within these abilities, but because I am going for very broad strokes so that UD&D can be a template on top of other rules engines, getting too specific would miss the point.

And when they decide to edit this blogpost down for Reader’s Digest, this will be my gripping conclusion: Rogues, previously known as Thieves, have been twisted and evolved to such a point that the joy of the Thief is missing. With skills being a necessity of later editions of the Dungeons & Dragons, the Rogue has been marginalized, and is known for some mobility and sneak attack, but in so doing, one has taken away the niche and role of the Thief, the player who wanted to be a bastard, who wanted to be sneaky, who wanted to lurk in the shadows with a cloak pulled up obscuring their face. We need to get that back. Later editions of D&D are like Denzel Washington in Book of Eli- white teeth. We need to get back to some differentiation, Thieves were an ugly necessity of an adventuring party, don’t marginalize Bilbo.

I will next tackle Monks and Bards, two of the most unique classes that have had varying success in their post 1e iterations.

Game The Game: Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy-Martial Characters, Part Two

The Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy Project is a collaboration between Acts of Geek and Worlds Workshop. For more of the Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy, click here


Q: How many types of human fighter can you be in 5e? 13 backgrounds x 2 Archetypes= 26!

Wow! That is a lot of choices, an outsider might say. I say not. I say the backgrounds idea is neat, but it is incredibly limiting. I say the two archetypes are even more limiting.

When you very clearly define what choices someone has, on a very granular level, you are inherently limiting their choices. When you say what someone can do, you are also saying what someone can’t do.

This is my thesis.

In Part I, the Fighter and Ranger were rebuilt, allowing for some combat choices, a great degree of individual customization, and more significantly, making them each, IMHO, cool again, and providing niche protection.

Now, we move onto the most specialized of fighter-types, the Paladin and the Barbarian.

Originally, Part I was going to cover all martial characters, but the word-count started getting unwieldy, and full disclosure, I was struggling with the Paladin and Barbarian.

But I have them figured out now, and I will explain why I was struggling and my solution.

Returning to the introductory discussion about limiting player choices, this was my undoing. In trying to secure niche protection, I want each class to be able to do cool things that no other class can do, but also want to discourage the willy-nilly amount of nonsensical (non story-driven) multi-classing that happens.

Scott and I were having yet another discussion about the Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy experience, and agreed that many player choices are mechanically driven and not at all story related. And many class features are the same. And, ultimately, where is their corollary in the literature and other inspirational materials? The spiked chain fighter build? Please. That is a child solely of the game mechanics.

So, that brings me, finally to the Paladin and Barbarian. These are what I will call Elite Classes.

What are Elite Classes? Elite Classes are classes that do limit choices. Classes with such a degree of dedication required that committing to them is committing to a lifestyle. A character does not just decide “oh, I want to pick up a level or two of Paladin.” Paladins spend years training, they are vessels for their gods, they are beyond reproach. And Barbarians, it’s not a class it’s a lifestyle. That seems like an ad-campaign, and if I ever decided to publish this, I just realized how fun it would be for each class to have a full page spread ad promoting the class, showing off what it can do, what makes it unique, describing the classes niche protection. One does not simply become a Barbarian, it is what one is born into.

End. Of. Story.

So, these Elite Classes will have special rules, as will other Elite Classes.

But given this article is about the Paladin and Barbarian, both of these Elite Classes have the same rule applied to them:

Paladins and Barbarians are classes that are decided on at first level, and characters cannot multi-class. If a character decides to abandon either class, they lose all the class benefits, and may not get them back.

Call me draconian if you like, but as I dissect these classes, you will see it is a choice, and with that choice comes many benefits.

Sometimes freedom is about what you cannot do.

What were the traits of a 1e Paladin?

Very high Charisma was needed.
Lawful Good.
Detect evil.
Protection from Evil.
Lay on Hands.
Limited amount of treasure.
Bonus to saves.
Immunity to disease.
Able to cure disease.
Turn undead.
Clerical spells at higher levels.

There is a lot here. A lot of very cool stuff. The difficult requirements made being a Paladin something very, very cool. The alignment restrictions made being a Paladin very difficult. Truly, if there was a paladin in your party, everyone showed respect.

I will flat out say this: I am ignoring the war horse. It is cool flavor, but the mechanics of armored combat never really seemed to click with any edition. Keep the flavor, it is awesome, but I am not going to worry about the rules of it.

Lawful Good is a must. There is no room in D&D for the “every kid gets a medal for participating” attitude. LG or go home. Except for the anti-paladins, of course! But, those are NPCs. None of this namby-pamby other aligned paladins.

Detect Evil: At will, as per the spell of whatever edition you are playing.

Protection from Evil: “evil” creatures are at disadvantage against the paladin, and the additional effects as outlined in a Protection From Evil spell. Additionally, those within melee range of a Paladin are also subject to this effect.

Limited amount of treasure. This one is a keeper. Deal with it.

Immune to disease seems pretty easy to keep as is.

Now, we have the bonus to saves, curing disease, turning undead, and cleric spell access to deal with. I will also add smite to this, because although is a newer addition to the Paladin trope, it seems to fit.

The high Charisma should factor in, and as I look at what is left to address as well as various paladin iterations through the years, and also factoring in the tendency to min/max, the picture perhaps becomes more clear.

The Channel Divinity approach to turning undead as well as resolving other cool abilities was really sharp. As editions progressed, turning undead became less of a thing, and was even wasted in many campaigns, so modifying it and allowing it to be used other ways was a clever reinterpretation.

If a Paladin veers from their alignment of religion, the DM has the right to strip away any and or all of their cool abilities.

That has be part of the Paladin. This discourages wanton disregard for the trope of the Paladin, and also discourages becoming a Paladin just for the cool powers and abilities.

Paladins get a bonus to all their saves equal to their Charisma modifier.

Paladins can turn undead as a cleric two levels lower. Turning undead is a thing again in 5e. Let’s keep it that way. Additionally, Paladins are at advantage when attacking undead. And, if you want to expand your definition of undead to include evil creatures from the outer plans, summoned creatures, etc, those are all very appropriate, both for turning and advantage.

Avatar: a Paladin is an Avatar of their Deity. They have a number of Avatar Points equal to their level, per day!

And what can a Paladin do with Avatar Points?

Lay on Hands: Each Point spent heals a number of HP equal to the Paladin’s Charisma modifier.

Smite: Each Point spent allows a Paladin a bonus to Hit or Damage equal to the Paladin’s Charisma modifier.

Spellcasting: Paladin’s can cast Cleric spells. As Avatars, they do not memorize spells, they are able to cast what they need depending on their level. Starting at 6th level, a Paladin may spend Avatar Points to cast 1st level Cleric spells, at a cost of 1 point/ spell level. At 9th level they may cast 2nd level spells. At 12th level they may cast 3rd level spells. And at 15th level they may cast 4th level spells.

Additionally, because Paladins are martyrs personified, they may call upon their inner reserves for Martyr Points. A Paladin may, once per day, take HP damage up to their Cha modifier X their level, to gain Marytr Points equal to their level. Martyr Points are used the same way as Avatar Points, but their effectiveness is equal to the modifier amount +1. For example, a 7th level Paladin with an 18 Charisma calls upon his Martyr Points, he doesn’t have a lot of HP left, so he only wants to take a modifier of +2, so he will take 2×7= 14 damage, and gains 7 Martyr Points, each with a modifier equal to 2+1= 3, and needing that awesome amazing attack, uses 1 point to increase his chance to hit (+3 to hit) and the other 6 points to add to damage (+18 damage).
The damage taken by the Paladin does not affect the Paladin until the end of the following round, and this damage may not be healed until the end of the following day.

Avatar Points can be spent singly, or all at once.

Thus, a 5th level Paladin with a Charisma modifier of +3, has 5 Avatar Points.

Fighting the Big Bad, the party is not doing so well, so the Paladin spends one Avatar Point as a +3 bonus to Hit, and after hitting spends the remaining points as 12 points of bonus damage.

And, finally, the Barbarian!

What did the 1e Barbarian look like:

Lots of HP
Detest/ distrust of Magic
Ability to overcome defenses that require magic to affect
Bonus to poison saves, and poor saves against magic
Climbing cliffs and trees
Hiding in natural surroundings
Back protection
Leaping and springing
Detect illusion
Detect magic
First aid
Outdoor craft
Animal handling
Long distance signaling
Small craft, paddled
Small craft, rowed
Sound imitation
Snare building
Native territory

That is a lot of abilities. Now, keep in mind that 1e was skill-less, and they wanted to outline what a Barbarian could do, but the language in the text itself gave them several outs, so all of these abilities had to do with a barbarian in surroundings that were familiar to them, etc.

For the purposes of UD&D, we will also add Rage, and attempt to distill all this flavor down to rules that are simple, easy to understand, and allow for maximum flavor meets fun!

A Barbarian has to have a lot of HP. This is a must.

Many of the Barbarian abilities can be simplified, but because we are trying to make something system independent, we will not address specific skills, rather, we will try to codify everything and make it somewhat universal:

Survival: Barbarians have advantage when in the wild, whether it is attempting to secure dinner for the party, climb a cliff, jump across a chasm, or set up an ambush.

Heightened Senses: Barbarians have advantage for rolls involving their innate senses, be it for surprise, finding something out of the ordinary, examining a corpse. These are all their senses, sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell. Barbarians are almost feral in their ways, sniffing, making quick small movements, touching, even tasting.

Heightened Physical Prowess: Because they come from a culture not as dependent on the comforts of magic, Barbarians have learned to make do. Any check involving Str or Con is treated as if the character’s modifier is one point higher, and all of these checks are made with advantage. Additionally, their carrying capacity is as if their Strength was 4 points higher.

Movement: Barbarians are faster than other characters. Because we are trying to make this system independent, instead of arbitrarily assigning them an increased rate of speed, Barbarians get two movement actions, and may use their full rate of speed with both.

Savage Points: A Barbarian gets one Savage Point per level per day. A Savage Point can be spent for Rage and First Aid.
Rage: Barbarians can enter a Rage. This lasts for an entire combat or scene. When Raging, a Barbarians is at disadvantage when being attacked, advantage against magic effects, and each Savage Point spent gives the Barbarian an extra attack or a temporary +2 to Str and Con. Additionally, while Raging, a Barbarian can overcome any magical defenses that require +X magic items to hit.
First Aid: A Savage Point can be spent for First Aid. First Aid gives a character advantage on a Save, or allows the barbarian to heal one HD. So, if a Barbarian is using First Aid on a character with d4 HD, they would heal d4 HP. If a Barbarian used it on a character with d10 HD, they would heal d10 HP.

Magic: This one is difficult, as I appreciate the idea behind Barbarians being removed from magic, at the same time, it is very hard to make this a fun reality in an RPG without limiting the player enjoyment, or having a player manipulate their way out of the restrictions. A Barbarian should be limited in what they keep in terms of magic equipment. What exactly does this mean? They should have less magical stuff than other party members, their magical inventory should be sparse. I don’t know what your campaign is like, so I will not give a number. This is up to the DM. How do you enforce it? You are the DM, you can make anything you want happen. Maybe take away their stuff. Describe it narratively “oh, that sword, you threw it away, it had bad mojo.”

Uncivilized Ways: Barbarians should be restricted to how much they embrace “modern” technology. But, instead of offering a list of what they can and cannot do, how about we say that their uncivilized ways should always be apparent. So, can they wear heavy armor, or metal armor? Sure, but they might throw away the sleeves to the armor, and use just the chest plate. Barbarians are not dumb, they are just more in touch with where they come from. Do they have to be illiterate, no? Should a DM restrict the amount of modern items they have? Perhaps. But more to the point, if you, the DM feel that the player is abusing the loosey-goosey nature of this “rule” put them at a disadvantage. “yes, you can wear the elaborate magical plate armor, but you will be at disadvantage when doing so, and enemies will be at advantage attacking you.” And, because you are the DM you can decide that these Uncivilized disadvantage dice trump all (meaning determine advantage and disadvantage as normal, and then apply disadvantage, so that no matter what a Barbarian does, they are at disadvantage).. Additionally, you can take away their Heightened Senses to some degree, or their increased movement. Do so subtly, or overtly. You have my permission to screw with your players. And maybe you don’t tell them until a most crucial moment.

Are the Paladin and Barbarian overpowered? Yes, the Barbarian could rage at 20th level and get an extra 20 attacks, that is pretty bad-ass, right? Yes, but that is some serious front loading, so, who cares. What can a wizard at that level do? Well, we will find out when we get to the spellcasting classes. Next up will be the roguish classes: The Thief, Assassin, and possibly the Bard and Monk, though the latter two are in some ways even more elite than the Paladin or Barbarian.

Game the Game: Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy-Martial Characters, Part One

The Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy Project is a collaboration between Acts of Geek and Worlds Workshop. For more of the Ultimate Dungeon Fantasy, click here


Martial characters. This is a much more elegant way of saying fighter types. Fighter types (fighter, ranger, paladin, barbarian) are interesting, as they have evolved quiet a bit from 3e on, and I wonder if all that evolution is a good thing. I used to comment that, when the party is sitting around the campfire, the ranger is off playing in the woods, the paladin is praying, and the fighter is sharpening a sword. This should be the difference, and should be reinforced by the mechanics.

Looking at the rogues gallery, there are many different fighter archetypes represented, and I would posit that the current edition of D&D discourages this. In 5e, one picks a background (limited choices, mean not true freedom), and then picks a martial archetype, of which there are two, both of which are very specific. This seems to be very, very limiting, and is one Champion that different from another Champion? And Battle Masters seemingly have some choices they can make in battle, but do any of these choices do much mechanically.

The Fighter has frequently suffered from having limited combat options other than “I roll to hit” and many editions penalize players for not buffing up with the best armor and weapon choices. 3e and 4e allowed for some customization with weapon selections and the like, but there were indeed choices that were more optimal.

If the goal is to create a system that allows for any option you can imagine, how is this helping?

I am going to start with the Fighter, and hopefully the other classes will fall into place.

Fighters should maintain their rate of multiple attacks per specific edition.

Fighters always have advantage attacking in combat.

Each level of Fighter, gives one Combat Edge point. Combat Edge points do the following:
– at the beginning of each round, the number of Combat Edge points refreshes.
– they trump advantage, so expending 1 will give a Fighter advantage, even if the Fighter had no advantage prior, this Combat Edge advantage can only be negated by an opposing Fighter.
– Combat Edge points can be rolled more than one at a time, so a 3rd level fighter, who has three Combat Edge points/ round might decide to spend them all on one attack, and would therefore roll 4 dice for the attack, and would keep the best result.
– Combat Edge points can be used for defense, and work as advantage, but a character can also expend more than one.
– Saves or checks can add extra advantage dice to a roll.
– Damage: a character can reroll damage with the use of one Combat Edge point.

So, why Combat Edge points? It gives fighters something a bit more interesting to do aside from declaring that they roll to hit. Yes, that is likely still all they will be doing, but they will be hitting frequently, and avoiding damage as much as possible, this allows for a player to represent their character any number of ways, allowing the dice to support their narrative.

The other major component is that Fighters should be mook-killers. For the sake of this article, mooks will be considered any opponent who has less HD or a lower CR than the levels of Fighter the character has. A Fighter can attack multiple times, the total number of attacks being the difference between the Fighter level and the (HD or CR) +1, so a 9th level fighter against CR 8 monsters could attack [(9-8)+1] times (2, the answer to that equation is 2!) The same 9th level Fighter against a CR 6 monster would have [(9-6)+1]= 4 attacks! These extra attacks can only be used against those opponents.

My Ultimate Fighter thus is a mook-killer, and has some mechanical options in combat, that are not confined to any specific system, but that let the character be the best at what they do.

Does this make the Fighter less dull? I hope so. Does it allow for more flavor and customization, without having to resort to specialization? Yes. Want your Fighter to be a foppish dandy clad only a silk shirt unbuttoned just ever-so much, armed only with a rapier and his cunning wit? You can do that! Swashbuckle away. And if that same fighter decides to pick up a crossbow, they can fire that as well!

Now, what about Rangers?

Rangers have become the Episodes I-III Jedi. The essence of what they were meant to be has been lost and bastardized and accepted. It’s too bad, we need to get the Ranger back to being cool, and simple and not just a Drizz’t clone.

1e Rangers were not at all like the Rangers of today, their primary cool abilities were: tracking, surprise, and a bonus against “giant” class creatures, and at higher levels, some low-level druidic and magic-user spell-casting ability. They were generally lightly armored, but this did not have to be the case, they were always good aligned, and the coolest feature, they had 2 HD at 1st level.

The whole two weapon fighting or bow specialization is a construct of later editions.

So, what to keep, what to revise, and what to add?

I appreciate the Good aligned aspect, but think it is unreasonable. Similarly, the bonus against the “giant” class was cool, but Rangers should be able to have all sorts of enemies. In 1e and 2e, Tracking was a thing, a special thing, a Ranger thing.

We need to get that back.

Trackers: Rangers are skilled in the art of tracking, primarily outdoors, but their uncanny abilities transcend the natural boundaries. For a game that purports to encourage Exploration, Social Interaction, and Combat, the rules for the first two seem to be lacking, and the first is an area in which the Ranger should excel! There are already skills in many games, and there are rules for those. So, we will instead be making a new ability, called Observation. It is an ability available only to Rangers. The bonus to their roll is equal to their Wis modifier plus their ranger level. The difficulty for any check is equal to the CR+10. Simple? Yes. But, what about tracking through difficult terrain, a lot of monsters, only a couple monsters who are disguising their passing, or too much time has elapsed, or of the Ranger has a special affinity for monsters of this ilk? Apply advantage and disadvantage as needed. No need for a chart breaking things down, because, what happens in an attempt to quantify, you clearly state what can be done, but also, by exclusion, what cannot be done.

Observation allows a Ranger to track, ambush, gather information on, be sneaky when doing all these things. All sorts of fun stuff. So, sure, you want to min/ max cheese it out, grab 1 level of Ranger for the ability, but your higher level Ranger will indeed be so much better.

Surprise. Rangers don’t get surprised. This makes them perfect for taking point or bringing up the rear in a party. Allow them to always have advantage on surprise and initiative rolls.

Designating an enemy. At first level, a Ranger will designate an enemy, or group of enemies. But how can this not be abused? Perhaps Orks are a Ranger’s enemies. When the players learn the Orks are tied to the cult of Vecna, well, that broadens things. When they come riding down on war elephants, this also qualifies. What if a Ranger is enemies with all the giant-kin that reside in the hills tormenting their homeland? This works too. This point is to give the Ranger enemies that can grow with them, and are not just limited to one race or sub-race. But, what happens when the Ranger learns and grows and finds new enemies? Well, they can designate those enemies as well.


Similar to the Fighter, who gain Combat Edge points, Rangers gain Enemy points. They gain one per level. If they decide to broaden their group of enemies, or add a new enemy, they must consult their DM. On a character sheet, the levels will be noted. Example: Levels 1-5, The Orks and Giant-kin of The Mordish Hills. Levels 6-9, Cultists of Reynion. Levels 10-17, Undead and the followers of the Dread God of Death.

So, what do Enemy points do?

– the number of Enemy points available to a character refreshes at the beginning of every round, depending on the enemies being engaged. So, the above Ranger, against the enemies of the Mordish Hills would have 5 Enemy points.
– Enemy points can be spent to gain advantage on any roll against an enemy in combat.
– embracing the most recent interpretation of the Ranger, an Enemy point can be spent for an extra attack. But this attack is at disadvantage. Per the above, a 5th level Ranger with 5 Enemy points could get two extra attacks, and negate the disadvantage of both, and still have 1 point left over.
– Enemy points can be use to give an enemy disadvantage on a roll.

Spell-casting. Because we are not reinventing the wheel, keep this as is per your specific edition. Personally, I loved the flavor of the 1e Ranger and their spell-casting.

I’m over 1,500 words, so I’m going to finish in another blog-post, where I will attempt to tackle the Paladin and Barbarian.

Game the Game: Building a Better Dungeon, Part 0: Foreword-A Competitive Exercise in Game Design

So, one of the folks in my gaming circle was one of the setting finalists in the Wizards of the Coast setting competition from years ago.

I will admit, he joined my gaming circle after he was a finalist, but that is the way of things. He was looking for a gaming circle, and my gaming group was looking for a member, so, we made Chuck Woolery proud.

End back-story

So, Scott and I were discussing D&D, not just 5e, but all editions of D&D.

I will tangent again. I was recently visiting my friend Chris, whose 9th grade age son (what is that 13? 14? Is he driving yet? Old enough to get married?) is getting into gaming, I was thrilled to see a 1st Edition PHB and DMG on his bedroom floor, but Chris said that his son was playing some sort of custom, streamlined, bastardized version, that his son’s friend had taught him.

This started me thinking. Thinking about D&D. Thinking about how for so many people D&D was something they discovered when they were that age, maybe a tad younger, maybe a tad older.

But then, the “game designer” in me asked this scholarly question “What is stopping this upstanding young man from playing the game with the Rules As Written (RAW)?”

And then I thought: Imagine If: there was a version of D&D simple enough for a bunch of young men to play, but robust enough that older folks could play as well, enjoying some creative freedom, without feeling like they are playing the “kiddie” version of the game.

And, this brings me back to Scott. He and I were discussing this. He has certain opinions about what he wants out of a fantasy game, and I have certain ideas as well. Some may be the same, some may be different.

And, Scott, suggested, instead of a collaboration (because as much as Scott is a super smart, awesome guy, our design philosophies are a bit different), that we each design what we think could go into this ideal version of XXXXX D&D.

So, this is the start of it, we are hoping to be done by the end of November.

As this is my first entry, I will start off brainstorming:

In 1st Edition (and 2nd to somewhat, though kits complicated things), it is my argument that at the end of a day of adventuring, when the party is hanging out by the fire, the Ranger is off playing in the woods, the Paladin is praying, and the Fighter is sharpening his sword. My first challenge is to make being a Fighter cool again, but simple. Scott and I both agree that the 4e fighter was a ton of fun to play, due to the many options available, beyond “I roll to hit” each and /every/ round. So, I think I will attempt to tackle this first, and it is my hope that this will help many of the pieces of the puzzle fall into place.

Some other design considerations:

Unified XP: This started with 3e, and one could make the argument in 1st and 2nd this is also what separated the Fighter from the Ranger and Paladin. I would not disagree, but when everyone was the same level, or close, the two classes should feel different, flavor-wise, and mechanically. But, having just one table for XP that all classes use is something I want to keep.

gtgUltimate01Multi-classing: To someone who played D&D from 1st Edition on, who fondly recalls (and still has) a copy of the Rogues Gallery (favorite character: Lassiviren the Dark), multi-classing is something that needs to be included, I want something nice and simple and elegant and not subject to… abuse. There, I said it.

Spells: Scott wants to attempt to rewrite the spells. I don’t think I have the right kind of creative energy to do that. I could try. I would posit that Magic Missile and Fireball and other iconic spells are intrinsic and should be part of D&D.

Mechanics: there will need to be a d20.

Inspirations (aka Thievery roll): I am going to look at Castles and Crusades as well as 13th Age, as well as D&D and lots of other games, drawing upon what they do well, what could do better, and possibly what their intent is.

Why D&D? It is a common language that most RPG nerds speak. We can share stories, praise what we like, and bitch about what don’t we like(4e made Scott cringe as a DM, I really liked a lot of it, but will admit it had some flaws). It is the game every other game must acknowledge. My friend’s son isn’t interested in Dungeon World, or something akin. He wants to play D&D. He doesn’t want to be the kid with the Atari: Jaguar, he just wants a Nintendo like every other kid.

I am not expecting to create something that will necessarily be publishable, but who knows-I want to try and see what I can come up with. This is my challenge to myself.

I would love to be able to hand Chris’ son a set of rules that worked with his 1st Edition books and amplified his fun, I’d love to hand a similar set of rules to a 5e player, and have them say “hey, that’s really cool!”

So, in a way, I am reinventing the wheel.

What can I break, what can I rebuild, and how can I do it so that D&D is still D&D?

This is my personal challenge.

I am excited to see what Scott comes up with, I am excited to be part of his process and have him be part of mine. I will surely comment on his posts, and hope he will do the same.

Let the games (design) begin!