I must create a system, or be enslaved by another man's. I will not reason and compare: my business is to create.

- William Blake

Monday, July 11, 2022

Minimalist B/X (no tables!)

B/X is one of my favorite version of D&D. One thing I dislike are the tables. I prefer Delta's Target 20 mechanic - simpler, smoother and very accurate:
Every roll is d20 + level + modifiers, with a result of 20 or more indicating success.
Dark Fantasy Basic does something similar, with 1/2, 2/3 and 3/3 skills, including combat and spellcasting (Delta's blog was a big inspiration).

But if you want another minimalist version... here you go.

Every roll is still "target 20". Fighters, thieves, clerics and magic-users all get the SAME attack rolls. A 10th level MU attacks like a 10th level fighter (which doesn't really matter because he has 10d6 fireballs and can't use a sword, but...).

HOWEVER.

Fighters attack with 2d20, picking the best die (this is just to give B/X fighters a boost. They deserve it).
Thieves do the same for skills (if you want them to be better at climbing, they roll 2d20 and add the results), and also when backstabbing. This means other classes can attempt the same skills but fail about twice as often.
Dwarves and Halflings use the best of 2d20 when making a saving throw.
Elves get the same benefits as magic-users (see below).

There are no more spell slots. MUs can learn one spell per level (spell level no higher than half their level, round up), in addition to read magic. When they cast it, they try to "target 20", subtracting twice the spell level. If they fail, they spell is forgotten for the day. (I recently rembered this idea from JV WestDFB uses forgetfulness as one possible spell mishap).

Clerics start learning spells on level 2 and can learn a maximum of 12 spells. Turning undead uses Target 20 (subtracting target's HD) to destroy undead, but rolling 10 or more is enough to turn them. The cleric uses 2d20 and pick best if his level is higher than the target, pick worst if his level is lower (the distinction is not strictly necessary, it just keeps the numbers closer).

Every roll adds an ability modifier (from -3 to +3). Intelligence for spells, Dexterity for most skills, maybe Charisma to Turn Undead and the other five stats for saving throws (as suggested in the Rules Cyclopedia).

(Playing around with all these d20s is fun, of course... maybe a natural 1 causes a chance of magical mishap, or if the fighter would hit with both dice is a special maneuver or crit, etc.... but that is taking the idea further than the "minimal").

So, if you make a careful comparison of this idea with the actual B/X numbers using a excel spreadsheet, you will notice that the standard deviation is, approximately, "eh, close enough".

Just kidding. But I do think the result would be close enough, and probably I'd prefer that over using tables to find out skill percentages and saving throws. Well, we'd still need XP tables to keep the balance - but the character sheet would be a bit shorter, looking more or less like this (with fewer spells):


Well, this is admittedly a half-baked idea, but I like how it looks.

Is it superior to Delta's formula or DFB? Not really, just a different take - which includes turning undead and spellcasting in the formula, and also gives a bit more importance to ability scores, encouraging smart wizards, dexterous rogues, etc. It also has other collateral effects I enjoy - making early fighters stronger, spellcasting simpler and more random, and so on.

It also functions as an universal mechanic: a 12th level fighter might easily know, for example, something about the biology of a troll... even with low Int, she has more experience than a low-level MU... Just roll 1d20+12+Int, try to get 20, and you're done. 

Use 2d20, picking highest or lowest, if the task is particularly easy or hard.

Anyway, let me know what you think!

These are all Affiliate links - by using them, you're helping to support this blog!

6 comments:

  1. This is an interesting idea. What I find funny is that you say no tables, but I probably would still have a six row table for every stat and the roll just to have a look-up table rather than do the math every time.

    Then again, just having the straight number to eyeball when you need a success is simple enough (compared to THAC0 and saving throw arrrays). Just a have some sepparate note any conditional effects (such as magic item bonuses).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've been playing with the idea of having a singular "throw" for each PC - and use it for THAC0 and saves. Start with 19 on level 1, end with 6 on level 14. Would make things even easier.
      It would work for the 7 basic classes, IMO. My only caveat is that it might make it harder to create certain classes like a paladin or ranger. But it is doable.

      Delete
    2. That would be neat. In the end, I am not sure if it's _my_ preferred system (I like some more levers to pull mechanically speaking), but it is a very compact system.

      Delete
  2. I also got tired of all the classes having different numbers to look up, but in such a system, negative modifiers seemed too harsh. Anyhoo, I went with weird dice to make my take on Arduin https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vZBVEa1HMVah1Y8pyaXR2-puCqvjfUlhEBGasYqCOp8/edit#

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, and in case me bringing it up didn't make the link clear, I went with target 15

      Delete
    2. Whoa, this looks cool! Some kind of weird DCC/Arduin mix. Those class quirks are awesome!

      Negative modifiers are harsh, I agree, but it encourages strong PCs to become fighters, etc. And I'd probably use 4d6 pick highest or something.

      Target 15 works well too. I favor target 20 to allow some granularity when adding level.

      Delete