New Blog Title

I've decided to change the title of my blog because I'd like to start posting on a variety of topics that have less to do with a particular edition and focus more on general D&D topics. Things like alternate takes on ability scores (such as the six I proposed earlier), the history of various game ideas, and so on. I suspect it will still be slanted a bit toward 4th edition, but rethinking my blog has inspired me to branch out into other forms (such as retroclones). Some of my further entries might be my thoughts on these other forms of D&D.

New Ability Scores for D&D

If I were given license to redesign D&D from the ground up - or if I could make my own fantasy heartbreaker - here is what I'd use for the ability scores:

Strength - I'm tempted to rename it "Might," as that just sounds more powerful to me at the moment. But the name Strength is fine enough by me.

Vigor - My replacement name for Constitution. I like it because it more immediately suggests action, and I feel it better encapsulates intangible elements of health like energy and vitality.

Cunning - This would be a measure of a character's cleverness, guile, and penchant for duplicity. I see it as combining the tricksy aspects of Charisma, the common-sense aspects of Wisdom, and quick-thinking as evidenced by 4e's take on Intelligence (where it adds to Reflex and AC).

Dexterity - Pretty much what it always has been. A character's nimbleness, grace, and speed.

Intelligence - This stat would be refluffed a bit to a character's ability to notice detail in addition to mental acuity. Thus it would cover perception and insight - indeed, I may even just change the name to "Insight." I mean, most highly intelligent people I know are able to see things I wouldn't see, so it works for me. The "book-smart but not street-smart characters could take high Int

Spirit - I also like the word "Mettle," but this would cover the force of personality aspect of Charisma. However, I would also expand it to general grit and determination, meaning it could be used to overcome injuries or hardship through sheer will.

Under this schema, Strength and Vigor would be the Fortitude defense pair, Cunning and Dexterity would be the AC/Reflex defense pair, and Intelligence and Spirit would be the Will defense pair.

4e Bullywugs

My friend and I worked on this a few month's back for a short Chaos Scar game. Here's what we based Thubulbius Graymarsh III, bullywug avenger of Corellon on:

Bullywug

RACIAL TRAITS

Average Height: 5'4" - 6'0"
Average Weight: 150 - 240

Ability Scores: +2 Constitution, +2 Strength or +2 Dexterity
Size: Medium
Speed: 6 squares.

Vision: Normal.
Languages: Common.

Skill Bonuses: +2 Athletics, +2 Endurance.
Aquatic Origin: Your ancestors were native to an aquatic environment, so you are considered an aquatic creature for the purpose of effects that relate to creature origin.
Frog Legs: When you make an Athletics check to jump or swim, roll twice and use either result. When you jump you are considered to have a running start.
Rancid Air: You gain the rancid air power.
Swamp Walk: You ignore difficult terrain that is mud or shallow water.

Rancid Air Bullywug Racial Power
You assail the nostrils of your foes with a cloud of stinking vapor.
Encounter * Poison
Minor Action Close burst 1
Target: All creatures in the area.
Attack: Strength +2 vs. Fortitude, Constitution +2 vs. Fortitude, or Dexterity +2 vs. Fortitude
Increase to +4 bonus at 11th level, and to +6 bonus at 21st level.
Hit: The target is weakened until the end of its next turn.
Special: When you create this character, choose Strength, Constitution, or Dexterity as the ability score you use when making attack rolls with this power. This choice remains throughout you character's life and does not change the power's other effects.

Bullywugs are frog-like humanoids native to swampy environments. Most bullywugs are vicious, insane brutes despised by nature itself, but ages ago some of their number petitioned the primal spirits and vowed to dwell in harmony with the world. The spirits agreed, provided that these bullywugs forsook their chaotic leanings forever. Although they share many similar talents, the descendants of the repentant bullywugs are much more civilized, refined, and less constantly foul-smelling than their monstrous brethren.

Play a bullywug if you want ...

-to look like a frog
-to be at home in muddy swamps
-to struggle with and overcome negative stereotypes
-to be a member of a race that favors the assassin, battlemind, fighter, ranger, or rogue classes

Here are some sample feats in no particular order (some of these should be read in a jesting tone!):

Blasted Air
Prerequisite: Bullywug, rancid air racial power
Benefit: When you use your rancid air racial power, you can choose to make it a close blast 3 instead of a close burst 1.

Enlarged Air
Prerequisite: Bullywug, rancid air racial power
Benefit: When you use your rancid air power, you can choose to make it burst 2 instead of burst 1.

Immediate Air
Prerequisite: Bullywug, rancid air racial power
Benefit: You may use your rancid air racial power as an immediate interrupt.

Opportunity Air
Prerequisite: Bullywug, rancid air racial power
Benefit: Whenever you make an opportunity attack, instead of making the usual melee basic attack, you can use your rancid air racial power without expending it. When you do so, you ignore the power's action type, and one of your targets must be the creature that triggered the opportunity attack.

Twitcher Training
Prerequisite: Bullywug
Benefit: You gain a +2 AC bonus vs. oppertunity attacks while jumping

Toxic Affinity
Prerequisite: Bullywug
Benefit: Gain +5 poison resistance and a +2 feat bonus to saving throws vs. poison effects.

Only At-Wills and Dailies for Wizards?

When the Essentials Assassin playtest came out, one of the neat things the designers did was to give assassins a death strike ability. It's the only encounter power assassins have, and what I find particularly interesting is that an assassin's encounter power damage "budget" is rolled up into this one power. That is, while some classes at 3rd level have two encounter powers that do basically 2[W] damage each, the assassin has one power that does basically 4[W]. In the long term, the assassin has the same damage output as any other class, but it does so all at once, basically. As a result, the assassin must carefully use his death strike ability when he has an advantage.

Here's my crazy idea - what if wizards had no encounter powers and relied primarily on *dailies*? Of course, the wizard would still have a few basic attack spells (perhaps magic missile plus two other at-wills, like what the Essentials mage has) that allow him to manipulate the battlefield on a round-by-round basis. However, a first level wizard might have no encounter attack spells but be able to cast two or three daily attack spells per day (if there are normally about four encounters per day, then I figure 4 encounter powers are roughly equivalent to two or three dailies).

Why would I want to do this? Well, Essentials has gotten me to think about how things were in earlier editions. One of the hallmarks of pre-4e wizards/mages/magic-users was that they only had a few powerful abilities, but those abilities had the potential to be real game changers. The way earlier editions "balanced" this was to make wizards very weak at low levels but very strong at high levels. I agree with 4e's general disapproval of those kinds of balancing mechanisms, but I think that skillful management and application of power is what makes wizards "tick."

I feel a focus on dailies would do that for wizards. And, in a manner like the Essentials assassins, as long as the wizard's damage "budget" per day is roughly the same as other classes it should be kosher.

The biggest problem I see is that a wizard might horde his dailies and "blow his load" for the most important encounters. To minimize this temptation, I'd like skillful wizard players to recognize that hording dailies can be inefficient (allowing monsters to deal more damage, etc.). I'm also wondering if it might be worthwhile to make wizard dailies more costly to use, such as costing a healing surge.

But there you have it. Comments?

My First Essentials Character

---

I'm playing a level 6 human knight in our group's weekly game. The other PCs are an elf thief (also an Essentials character), goblin assassin (pre-Essentials version), goblin bard, wilden seeker, and gnome wizard (pre-Essentials version). We are hunting down a tiefling necromancer seeking some strange artifact (the DM is adapting a Dungeon Delve adventure for this, I think).

We had one combat with a bunch of undead. The room was originally pitch black, but the wizard cast Light and illuminated pretty much the whole area (I never really realized how useful light was until then ...). We rolled crap for initiative and were bottle-necked in the entryway, which sucked when the undead unleashed blasts and burst powers. I actually took over 100 hp of damage (max is 65) in that battle - I'm glad I opted for an Endurance based knight!

In any case, the combat went without a hitch rules-wise. I really liked not having any dailies - in the previous campaign, I played a warlock from level 1 to 3 and hardly used my daily (Flames of Phlegethos). I liked having enhanced basic attacks, as I could do cool things on OAs - I took Hammer Hands for the pushing, and Hold (Defend?) the Line for the slow effect. I know some people are concerned about the fighter being too simplistic, but I had to make important choices about which stance to adopt during my turn and when my turn ended.

I really liked Defender's Aura (although I wish it had a more evocative name, like Defender's Vigilance or something like that). Fluff-wise it felt more "realistic," and mechanics-wise I felt pretty effective at locking down a group of enemies. Ironically, although we were bottle-necked at the opening, my close proximity to a large number of enemies was a big help! I also had the opportunity to see how the knight worked with a traditional mark, because the bard has the Misdirected Mark spell. It also went fine, and I liked not having to worry about the goblin overwriting my mark.

When my first turn came up (I was dead last in the initiative order!), the undead had the entryway pretty much covered. Only one square was open to allow PCs through, which meant a lot of OAs. When I finally went, I adopted Hammer Hands stance, moved forward and attacked. I rolled a 16 total, which the DM said wasn't enough to hit. So I mock-heroically shouted "Heroic Effort!" and asked if a 20 hit. He said yes! I pushed the skeleton back, then moved into a space adjacent to it where I covered 3 undead. That freed up some moving space and felt awesome.

I think the rogue's player had a good time, too - he mostly used Ambush Trick and got CA most of the time. While it was cool that the rogue could use Sneak Attack once per turn, he wasn't often in position to do an OA so it didn't matter much. He also liked being able to use a shortbow.

In sum I think both the rogue's player and me were quite happy with our characters. We could do lots of interesting things, but I don't think we overshadowed the traditional PCs. Our group is pretty much a hack and slash group, so I should be able to get a better idea about how things work out on the combat end as we continue to play.

XP House Rules

Having played a lot of D&D over the past couple of years, I've come around to the idea of awarding xp only when objectives or goals are completed. In essence, this is basically exclusive use of quest xp, which is hardly a new idea. However, I feel this would have subtle, far-reaching changes on play. Not the least of which is that combat wouldn't always be the first option (and, given how combat can drag, it might be one of the last options PCs consider).

Furthermore, I'm thinking of only awarding xp when characters engage in certain behaviors. These could be training exercises, prayers, studying dusty tomes, or carousing. I think this would go a long way in cementing PCs' relationship to the game world.

I'll have to come back with another post detailing such a system. But I think it has a lot of promise.

Player-created Elements of the World

A couple of weekends ago, our group encountered a ghost guarding a sword. I thought it was just going to be another monster, but after that session my DM emailed me with an "assignment": write up some details on Lady Dholbruar, the aforementioned ghost. I think he was mostly looking for a pitch on where to go for future adventures, but I thought it would be cool to have her inhabit the sword. She was a champion of Bane in life, so I told the DM she might have transgressed in some way and was bound to the sword against her will. I'm looking forward to the various twists my DM might throw with this one.

He's allowed players to create other bits of the world as well. For example, in my character's history I said I stole a deep black gem from a merchant. I was intending the gem to be obviously magical, and as a result of this weekend's game I'm thinking there might be some shadow magic involved with it.

The main point is that I really like how the DM is incorporating player ideas into the world. This is pretty common during character creation, like with my character's stolen gem, but I haven't seen it as much during play (like with the spirit-haunted sword). It's definitely something I was to try out when I next DM a game - I just hope I have players who will buy into it!

Goblin PC

I posted this on some other threads (one on RPGnet, the other on EN World), but I wanted to list my 4e goblin PC write-up here. I wrote it for my friend Brenden's goblin bard:

Goblin

RACIAL TRAITS
Average Height: 3'4" - 3'8"
Average Weight: 40 - 55

Ability scores: +2 Charisma, +2 Dexterity
Size: Small
Speed: 6 squares.
Vision: Low-light

Languages: Common, Goblin
Skill Bonuses: +2 Stealth, +2 Thievery.
Devious Scamper: You gain a +2 bonus to speed during the surprise rounds and the first non-surprise round of any combat.
Goblin Reflexes: You gain a +1 racial bonus to your Reflex defense.
Goblin Tactics: You can have the goblin tactics power.
Goblin Vigor: You gain a +5 bonus to defenses made against disease attacks, to saving throws made to avoid contracting a disease, and to Endurance checks to determine disease progression.

Goblin Tactics
You avoid your enemy’s blow and cleverly slink past his defenses.
At-Will
Immediate Reaction Personal
Trigger: You are missed by a melee attack.
Effect: You shift 1 square.

Githzerai

I like the Githzerai. They have a cool backstory of once being a slave race to mindflayers, splitting with their githyanki brethren, and then developing an ascetic monastic tradition. The only thing I don't like about them so much is how they're "native" to the Elemental Chaos - they're "population center" is in a plane that most traditional campaigns will never get to until paragon levels.

I'd rather githzerai be "centered" in the regular world than another plane of existence. So to that end I'm going to say that they are extraterrestrials, having broken away from their githyanki ancestors ages ago and alighting on the campaign world. I imagine that, when the githzerai landed, psionic power was in more limited supply. So over time, they adopted ascetic traditions that husbanded their psionic energy as their technology gradually broke down and/or failed to operate on the campaign world.

I like this take on the githzerai because it more firmly places them in the world, gives them a science fantasy angle (I've become fond of that genre lately), leaves open the idea of space-faring githyanki hunting them, and also sets up the possibility that some of their old, forgotten tech is still out there. With the Far Realm's proximity to the world, perhaps more psionic energy is availble to power these ancient vessels.

Tying githzerai to the real world appeals so much to me I'll probably go a similar route for other planar races, such as genasi, shadar-kai, or eladrin.

The Cyclops

I've never been a huge fan of 4e's take on cyclopses. Basically, they're giant fey "muscle" for the fomorians. That's fine and all, but it seems a little dissonant compared to how cyclopses have been portrayed in earlier editions of D&D and their classical sources (where they more like brutes if anything).

In my campaign, I think I'll make cyclopses related to orcs. Perhaps during Gruumsh's mythic battle with Correllon, some of the spilled blood from Gruumsh's eye washed onto Gruumsh's most loyal servitors. "Anointed" by this blood, they became one eyed like their patron and transformed into cyclopses.

I'm not sure if making cyclops into bigger orcs is necessarily a move up in the world , but I like it. It feels truer to mythology and D&D lore, which is a good thing in my opinion.

Constitution as the Luck Stat

I was reading the AD&D 1e DMG, enjoying my swim in the sea of Gygaxian prose, when I came across the discussion on page 82 about hit points.

It is quite unreasonable to assume that as a character gains levels of ability in his or her class that a corresponding gain in actual ability to sustain physical damage takes place. It is preposterous to state such an assumption, for if we are to assume that a man is killed by a sword thrust which does 4 hit points of damage, we must similarly assume that a hero could, on the average, withstand five such thrusts before being slain! Why then the increase in hit points? Because these reflect both the actual physical ability of the character to withstand damage - as indicated by constitution bonuses- and a commensurate increase in such areas as skill in combat and similar life-or-death situations, the "sixth sense" which warns the individual of some otherwise unforeseen events, sheer luck, and the fantastic provisions of magical protections and/or divine protection. Therefore, constitution affects both actual ability to withstand physical punishment hit points (physique) and the immeasurable areas which involve the sixth sense and luck (fitness).

I find the last sentence striking. While I've long come around to the idea that hit points are highly abstract, representing healthiness, divine favor, fighting spirit, etc. in addition to the physical "pieces of meat," it never occurred to me to apply that same logic to Constitution. For as long as I can recall, I've been associating it with actual physical health, and thinking about it as anything but that creates some dissonance for me.

But the more I consider it, the more I like Constitution as an abstract conglomeration of luck, vitality, and health. Of all the stats, Constitution best represents the character's vitality, vigor, and life force, the interface between the character's intangible soul and base matter. Characters with high Constitutions, somehow, possess more of this animating energy. Perhaps it's because they are physically large - when lots of matter accumulates, more of the animating energy is present. Or perhaps individuals are just able to utilize it more effectively, consciously or unconsciously tapping into a "sixth" sense. A high Constitution represents not only the source of energy to effect change in the physical world, but also the energy to power the soul and fight against the currents of fate.

I like this take on Constitution because it implies that it can be active, as opposed to primarily reactive, defensive stat. In 4e at least, it helps explain why classes might use it as an attack stat. Battleminds might have learned how to psionically harness this energy. Warlocks might be "tithing" a portion of their life force to their patrons (I'm now totally sold on a completely Con-based warlock).

Revised Scorching Burst

Here's scorching burst with a minor tweak to make it just a little more Controllery:

Rangers

Since 4e's release, there have been many ideas for a Martial Controller class. I felt the Savant class I proposed a while back could make a good Martial Controller, but an idea that slowly gained currency in my mind is making the ranger a Martial Controller. Indeed, here are a few choice excerpts from the ranger class description in the 4e PH:

"Rangers are watchful warriors who roam past the horizon to safeguard a region, a principle, or a way of life...

"As a ranger, you possess almost supernaturally keen senses and a deep appreciation for untamed wilderness. With your knowledge of the natural world, you are able to track enemies through nearly any landscape..."

This is not unlike my idea for a savant class - a warrior who's percepting and cunning. So why totally reinvent the wheel? It's far better in my opinion to use traditional elements in a new way.

However, to make this work, I don't think rangers can continue to be primarily based on Strength or Dexterity. I think these ability scores should remain important for rangers, but I'm beginning to think that Wisdom would make the best primary score for this class. And once you think of Wisdom as being the primary ability score for rangers, the feel of the class changes dramatically. Now we have warriors who are keen-eyed, able to exploit openings as they perceive them. Their instincts would be honed to perfection, allowing them to react to situations with amazing quickness. And a high Wisdom helps firm up the instinctual connection between beastmaster rangers and their beasts.

So thematically I think it's great. But the class would have to change. Oh, it still would be composed of melee and ranged specialists, but ranger exploits would change to accommodate their new Controller role. For example, I'm thinking of making Twin Strike a melee power (bow rangers would get Rapid Shot as a ranged equivalent) that would be something like this:


I like this because it makes fighting the ranger a matter of positioning. If monsters don't want to have the -2 penalty to hit, they will have to move away. Depending on how the ranger positions himself, this may lead to further headaches for the creature. This is, in my opinion, the essence of the Controller role.

Obviously more work needs to be done. But I'll try to keep chipping away at it until I get a nice suite of powers.

Iuz

It's taken me some time, but here's my first try at statting up "old Iuz of fearbabe talk." Admittedly, it's a massive wall of text ... click on the image if you want to see it full size.

I'll be interested in hearing other peoples' thoughts on it, but already I'm thinking that a fight with Iuz might be better as a staged encounter. In the first stage, the PCs will take on the Boneheart and Iuz in his manikin form. I might lower Iuz's levels a bit in this case - maybe he'd be 22. The second stage begins a round or two after Iuz "dies" - he "returns" in his demonic form as a solo creature. Two simpler stat blocks would be better than one more complex one, IMO.

With respect to this stat block, I just realized I need to mention something about his soul gems. I have to add those in a future version. I also tried to hit on Iuz's "iconic" abilities. His greatsword, strangling grasp, cloak, horrific visage, and spittle were mentioned in ToEE. The cloak is based on an Amulet of Double Fortune. "Shadow Step" and "Finger of Death" are nods to Iuz's Assassin abilities. "Unkindness of Ravens" was inspired from From the Ashes, which says Iuz can "summon vast storms of ferocious ravens and bony bat-like magical creatures from the Outer Planes." I'm not sure what the "bony bat-like" creatures could be, but I'd like to stat that up. And "Gnarled Staff" and "Gaze of the Old One" are powers I just made up because I thought they would be cool.

Again, it's quite a lot, and I'm not sure how often some of those powers would show up (particularly "Strangling Grasp"). I'm also not so sure at-will shifting between forms will be cool or not. If anyone happens to play out a fight with this write-up, let me know.

Post Con Update

Saturday I DMed a scenario at a local con - "Revenge of the Rat God." Unfortunately, we started about an hour late and weren't able to complete the scenario and the Rat God didn't make an appearance. My plan was to have him inhabit the body of the overlord of the city after the PCs killed him in the final battle, kinda like the concluding battle of King of the Trollhaunt Warrens.

I wanted skill challenges to play a significant role in the adventure, so before the con I spent quite a bit of time adapting a couple of them to my scenario. I really liked "Moving Through Suderham" as presented in DMG2, so I used that as the basis for "Moving Through Tarkash," Tarkash being the hobgoblin city. I spend a lot of time drawing out a map which PCs could use as a basis for this skill challenge. In addition, in Dungeon 174's adventure Test of Fire there is a skill challenge where PCs participate in ritual combat to gain the favor of a leading efreet noble. I thought this would be cool to use as the basis for PCs attempting to sway a militaristic hobgoblin commander to their side.

But for all my prep, I found that the players didn't really care for the skill challenges. When they got to Tarkash, the players of the barbarian and cleric wanted to hole up in the slums while the more stealthy illusionist and assassin went around the city looking for their contact. Indeed, when I suggested they all travel together I encountered a great deal of resistance from those players. Of course, this makes perfect sense - traditionally, keeping a low profile as they move about the city is the purview of the roguish types. However, a Suderham-style skill challenge requires that all PCs have travel together, and I couldn't think of a convincing explanation for all the PCs to travel through town together. I eventually went with saying the hobgoblin commander they were trying to convince wanted to see all of the PCs or the deal would be off. Because of time constraints, I opted to forgo the ritual combat skill challenge and just sent them off to the next combat encounter.

Finally, I learned that paragon level PCs are just too much a one-off con game. I was hoping to have experienced 4e players, as they would have a better handle on how the game works. But even experienced players have a hard time keeping track of all their powers, feats, and so on. When I next run a scenario at a con, it'll definitely be in low or mid heroic tier.

But there were some positives I can take away from the experience. First, the assassin was played by the most savvy 4e player of my group, so I got to see an experienced player try out the class and it was really cool. Several times during fights I noticed that assassin darting next to targets, attacking, then darting away, which is how I think an assassin should operate.

Second, I got to make a cool map of Tarkash and I thought more about my house setting. I also got some more experience adapting published skill challenges to my own needs. I probably would never have written up what I did were it not for the con.

Third, I finally realized - after almost two years! - that wizards are basically as versatile as they always have been. In the back of my mind, ever since PH1 I've felt wizards have lost some of their trademark versatility. But as I was making the gnome wizard pregen, I recalled that when I created wizards in earlier editions, I would tend to pick one or two "trademark" attack spells and then have a bunch of utility spells. It occurred to me that this was exactly how I was making the gnome - my at-wills, encounters, and dailies were my trademark attacks, and the crap ton of rituals I had were my utility abilities.

I guess in summary, while I didn't have a particularly good time running my scenario, I do feel I learned a lot that I can apply to future games I run, at conventions or otherwise.

Insightful Warlord

In the most recent WotC poll, they are asking if people want to have previews for the Insightful Warlord build or the Skirmishing Warlord. I'm excited about this, because the Insightful Warlord seems to be very much like the savant class I proposed a few days ago! Hopefully most people are interested in the Insightful Warlord so I can get an early preview... ;)

Revenge of the Rat God

Last year, I ran a game at local con. The scenario was entitled "Lair of the Rat God," and it involved a bunch of level 4 PCs - a dwarf fighter, elf druid, human warden, human cleric, and human ranger. The fighter and druid were ardent 2e players who didn't care so much for 4e because the PCs could do too much. The ranger was played by a guy who hated 4e. If that guy decides to play again, I hope he feels better about the game ...

The con is coming back for its second year this weekend, and I'm running a sequel of sorts called "Revenge of the Rat God." Taking place a year later, this scenario would feature the original PCs, plus a few others, upgraded to level 11. Here's the tagline for the scenario:

It has been one year since stalwart adventurers foiled the plans of Squerrik, the odious Rat God. Those hardy souls who stood fast against the Rat God's evil have moved on to a grander stage, becoming paragons of cunning, strength, and bravery.

However, war between the hobgoblins of Tarkash and the free peoples of Rivermeet threatens to undo all that has been built. To find the means with which to best the sinister allies of Tarkash, the adventurers must delve deep into the Underdark, dare the terrors below, and avoid ... the revenge of the Rat God!

I know it's really important to be well prepared for a con game, but I've been battling writer's block for some time now. I don't have much ready for it, but finally tonight I had a breakthrough and have a much clearer path about where to take the adventure. Essentially, PCs will be sent to the hobgoblin city, where they'll have to lay low for a while, gathering intelligence about the hobgoblin threat. I think I'll steal a lot from the Suderham skill challenge in DMG2.

During their reconaissance, PCs will learn they have to delve into the Underdark, battle a purple dragon, then return and put a stop to Tarkash's aggressive ambitions.

What I like about writing this scenario up is that I'm doing a lot of incidental world building. I'm mostly throwing names onto a page, but here's a bit from my DM "intro blurb":

For decades after the fall of Nerath, Rivermeet was controlled by a succession bandit lords swearing fealty to the hobgoblins of Tarkash. That all ended just over five years ago, when an alliance led by Raelen Vistanar, last scion of the former ruling family of Rivermeet, cast out the bandit rulers and reforged the broken pact with the elves of Moonwood. With the reopening of a safe trade route through that perilous woodland realm, Rivermeet is well on the way to reclaiming its prominent role as a center of trade for the Northmarch.

But with the reemergence of Rivermeet, Tarkash has seen its once prominent role decline. Anger simmering, the High Command of Tarkash – led by the grim Overlord Belkod – have bided their time, waiting for the opportunity to exact vengeance. Hobgoblin priests of Torog, one of the patron deities of Tarkash, formed an unlikely pact with the drow of the Underdark, and Tarkash mustered troops. As Rivermeet's allies grew preoccupied with their own concerns, Belkod and his aggressive faction within High Command have determined that now is the time to strike.

I find it neat how just a few words can begin a world. Rivermeet, Tarkash, and the Northmarch could all make a neat campaign world in my opinion. Perhaps someday I'll run an actual campaign there and flesh it out some more.

The Savant

I've had an idea for an intellectual class using the Martial power source for a while now. Called the savant, members of this class would be amazingly intelligent, able to instantly assess and exploit weaknesses. They would have an uncanny knack for preparation, being ready for almost any contingency. They also would be very knowledgeable, perhaps getting a bonus to all knowledge skills.

Originally I called this class the "mastermind," but after I read AD&D's "Lost" Second Edition - an article discussing some of Gygax's ideas for his version of 2e - I came to prefer the term savant. "Savant" avoids the overtly sinister overtones of "mastermind," and the connection to a version of D&D that never was appeals to me. I feel as if I'm channeling the shade of Gygax, even if I'm not actually on his level as a game designer!

I don't feel that this kind of cerebral adventurer, getting by primarily through supreme intellect, is easy to represent with the current lineup of classes. Wizards are intelligent enough, but their powers are all obviously magical. Rogues don't really rely on a sharp intellect so much as quick reflexes. Tactical warlords are close, but that class is a bit too warlike for my tastes. Psions also come close, but much like the wizards I'd prefer less obviously magical individuals. Given what's available at this juncture, perhaps a hybrid psion|warlord would best fit the idea?

I think when new classes are being discussed, it's helpful to have an image from literature or the movies that crystallizes the look and feel of the class. Recently, this is what happened when I watched the movie Sherlock Holmes, starring Robert Downey, Jr., and it didn't take long. Near the beginning of the movie there's a scene where, with only a glance at his foe, Holmes is able to plan out his next moves in minute detail. Then, Holmes executes his moves exactly as he thought them out. Immediately I thought to myself "That's what I want a savant to feel like!" Other characters that I think are a good fit for the savant label are Van Helsing from Dracula, Croaker from Glen Cook's Black Company novels, Batman as portrayed by Christian Bale in Batman Begins, the folkloric Zhuge Liang as depicted in The Romance of the Three Kingdoms, and Grand Admiral Thrawn from the Heir to the Empire trilogy set in the Star Wars Expanded Universe.

Another important consideration is what Role the savant would have. Given my thoughts on how the savant has amazing perceptive abilities and is an expert at foiling the plans of his adversaries, I think either a Striker or Controller would be appropriate. However, the general thrust of the powers and features I imagine this class having - ruining the plans of enemies, manipulating the flow of battle on a larger scale - suggest that Controller might be a slightly better fit. I'll just have to start thinking up some powers!

Locathah in 4e

Recently I posted about the locathah in a thread concerning the fourth PH3 race. I liked what I wrote there so much I thought I'd write my first blog post about it.

Locathah have been cool to me ever since I read about the secrets of Rog'osto, City of Spires in Al Qadim. In that setting, the locathah were the ancient, forgotten builders of these wonderful, silvery spires. The idea of a powerful, fish-like race was further cemented when I read the 3e Wilderlands of High Fantasy material. In that setting, the Viridians are an ancient, sorcerous race descended from the gods and merfolk.

I think this background, coupled with the current description of the race as being intelligent, nomadic hunter-gatherers, make the locathah a good fit for the 4e world.

Ages ago, a powerful empire of locathah dwelled beneath the waves. Avid students of the arcane and of psionics, the piscine race was composed of brilliant builders. Not the least of their achievements was their capitol city, the marvellous City of Spires. However, during the course of their studies, they contacted a variety of malign, alien entities. These eldritch terrors were brought to the world for further research, but something went horribly wrong and the locathah civilization was destroyed utterly.

The locathah who survived the cataclysm fled to the coastal lands and lost most of the lore of their storied race. They became wanderers and nomads, travelling the coastlines of the world. But to this day, tribal chiefs tell tales of the wonders of their ancestors, inspiring the adventuresome spirits of their listeners to seek out their ancient homeland.

Some locathah still dwell in the deeps. These deep ones commune with Dagon, where they learn foul secrets and magic. Others were thought to completely degenerate, becoming kuo-toa, or to give themselve over to savagery, instinct, and evil, becoming sahuagin.

For playability reasons, I'd make the locathah a primarily land-dwelling race. They would still be able to breathe water and to swim well, but most of them still have a great fear of returning to the deep waters of the world. I definitely would give them a +2 to Int to reflect their natural intelligence, but I'm not sure where I'd put their other ability bonus. I like +2 Wis because it would make locathah good shamans, druids, wizards, and psions, but I also like +2 Con to reflect their hardiness and ability to survive the ocean depths.