A crazy critical hit idea (1% x level chance for damage x1d20)

I like the idea, present in certain gritty RPGs, that a critical hit from a goblin with a rusty knife could kill most PCs, although the chances are minimal. Same for the PCs shooting an arrow against a dragon. Combat is always deadly.

I tried implementing this idea in various ways, and this is the easiest I could think of... but it is still a bit weird.

Here's how it goes: a critical hit (natural 20) that doesn't kill your target has a chance (1% per fighter level) of becoming a deadly blow. A deadly blow multiplies your damage by 1d20.

A 8th level fighter has 8% chance of dealing a deadly blow for each natural 20. It will hardly come up against lowly enemies (they die immediately most of the times), but occasionally, when fighting a dragon or dinosaur, you'll create the scenes you read about in Conan stories (I'm thinking Red Nails) or Tolkien (Bard versus Smaug).

And now even a punch (or improvised weapon) could kill.

Of course, fighting a dragon becomes a lot more dangerous, for PCs of ANY level. No more guarantees...

(If you want armor so give you a bigger chance of survival - which I think is fair - subtract 1 point from the d20 for each point of AC better than unarmored, to a minimum multiplier of x2).

Conversely, there should be a minimal chance of surviving 0 HP. "There is always a chance", as Moldvay says! 1% per fighter level sounds good for that too.

Finally, if you're feeling especially generous and benevolent, you could make a random roll to see where a critical hit lands, potentially turning certain death into something more palatable (e.g., maiming for life).

(A final note: This would be even easier in a d100, system of course. Roll doubles and you multiply your damage by that number: 33 triples your damage, etc. Assuming your fighting ability is around 20% to 99%, it works quite well).

In practice, I don't think I would use such system -  it would be very hard on the PCs and I don't know if my players are ready for this much lethality. But could be interesting in a very gritty/horror system.

My problems with old school treasure

One thing I'm starting to dislike running OSR adventures* is the insane amount of treasure and magical items that you find. In addition, the more I read the DMG, the more I feel they were just too generous with treasure and had to come up of endless ways of spending it (training, upkeep, research, rust monsters, disenchanters, item saving throws, etc.).

(* I've been running DCC, LotFP and BFRPG adventures. However, I'm under the impression that's TSR modules are the same - or worse.)

One important caveat: I'm talking about old school games because it has been a while since I've played 5e or other games. I don't remember this being a big issue then, but this could have many reasons (for example, Curse of Strahd is not full of magic items, but it also gives you lots of gold and few things to buy). My issue with 5e was the exaggerated number of class features, but that is another subject.

Anyway, I have three main issues with treasure in OSR adventures.

Magic items

There are just too many to keep track of. My current party has around 3-4 magic items per player at level 5. Each item has different powers, and simple "+1 swords" are getting rarer as each adventure prefers having unique, interesting items (I cannot blame them). Identifying magic items is another headache. 

I prefer something grittier, with a Sword & Sorcery vibe, which makes things worse. Conan never gets too many magic items, but even the Fellowship of the Ring gets no more than one or two per character over the whole story. Same for the rest of the Appendix N (except Hawkmoon, and some Vance stories, or so I'm told; let me know if you have other examples).

Come to think of it, not even in the highest of high fantasy books a "medium level" party has that many magic items. In AD&D, a paladin is LIMITED to TEN magic items!

Needless to say, intelligent swords are very rare in fiction too, with the most notable example being Stormbringer.

The problem is that giving away fewer magic weapons and armor leaves little room for improvement of old school fighters (and paladins), for example.

Earning and spending

My PCs are level 5 and don't have much to do with their money (except if they decide to go the domain-building route), unless I start charging for small expenses, note keeping, etc. At least now it will you start affecting their encumbrance (and they find  cleric willing to cure a curse for a steep price). 

Conan, Grey Mouser etc. would spend some money drinking and gambling, but I can't force the PCs to do the same. Even Conan didn't buy a kingdom - he took one!

In fact, I'm having a hard time thinking of any fantasy hero counting coins. There is one notable exception (Geralt of Rivia), but most heroes are either always broke or "rich" with things that are not money: followers, titles, lands, etc.

Gold standard

I have tried defending the gold standard before.

Now, I'm finding increasingly difficult to wrap my head around the idea that a ONE POUND silver dagger costs THREE pounds of gold, while simultaneously making gold TEN times the value of silver.

Maybe you could pretend that gold and silver are so common that one week of food (or just one garlic) costs half a pound of gold, but you occasionally find small pieces of jewelry that are worth two to ten pounds of gold. A CLUB costs 3 gold... GARLIC costs 5 in B/X... Gold must be literally growing on trees - or it would be easier to cut trees and make clubs than finding/exploring a gold mine.

Of course, changing these absurd weights will you make it too easy to carry a fortune without affecting encumbrance.

Solutions

For a S&S vibe, I could replace some magic items by "masterwork" items of ancient civilizations, maybe with +1 to hit OR damage. Alternatively, we could go the  Game of Thrones route and make different qualities of weapons. "Castle forged" swords are high quality, equivalent to +1 swords, and Valyrian Steel are +2, without any enchantments, just because the material/crafting is superior.

It would be appropriate and flavorful, and fighters could identify them immediately (without the need of a spell or specialist) - and they'd still get customization through feats, despite fewer magic weapons.

Old school D&D has enough things to spend money on, I know. The problem is my PCs are hoarders and I don't want to play tax attorney - and they don't want to build a kingdom just yet. A good solution I've seen elsewhere is giving XP for money spent. This will give them a reason to drink, gamble, etc. And maybe you can occasionally find a trainer that doubles the amount of XP you get for the money spent.

The silver standard is a good solution for the value of gold. I'd also reduce the amount of treasure altogether, maybe ten times - you could reduce the XP requirements accordingly, or just multiply XP by a factor of 5 to 15, depending on how you spend it. Or the other hand, making coins lighter (100 per pound) would allow decent amounts of money to be carried.

How to get to level 36 by level 20 (fixing old school levels)

The "Basic D&D" level progression has up to 36 levels. What if I told you you could you could get the same result with 20 levels, and make the game much easier and more intuitive in the process?

(If you don't know Basic D&D, click here).

Even if you're playing B/X or some clone (e.g., OSE, BFRPG, etc.), the game was originally intended to have 36 levels instead of 14, but it was replaced by the BECMI line before that.

In basic games, starting on level 9, your character's HP growth apparently slows down (in fact, it is the opposite: since XP requirements decelerate abruptly, you gain a lot more HP per XP after level 9, comparatively, as explained here).

Contrary to popular belief, this method does not stop HP bloat - it just adds level bloat, as we will illustrate below.

Of course, using 36, 20, or 10 levels is purely arbitrary. However, using 20 levels fits very well with the d20, which is one of the main reasons most modern versions of D&D go to level 20 (with possible expansions). 

Also, counting in fives is intuitive for us five-fingered species, so dividing PCs into tiers: 5, 10, 15, 20, also feels very natural. 5th level PCs are heroes, 10th level PCs are rulers (instead of level 9), 15th level PCs are legendary (beyond the usual B/X 14th levels, so you might avoid these altogether), and by 20th level they are mythic heroes at their peak (these are the Conans, Elrics, etc. of the world).

The table below is the magic-user progression in the RC (I used save versus spells as an example, divide XP by 1000 for simplicity):

As you can see, a level 36 MU has an average of 50 HP (under RC rules, it is likely the MU has no Constitution bonus). 50 HP? You already guessed it - with an average of 1d4 HP per level (2.5), you could get to 50 HP in level 20 if you keep gaining 1d4 per level.

The table below does exactly that - while keeping the XP needed for the same amount of HP unchanged.

So, notice that with 3.300.000 XP the MU still has an average of 43 HP, but it is now level 17 instead of 29. 

Now, let's play with saves a bit. Assume a MU with 3.300.000 XP still has a save of 2 - the best that can be. With 2.850.00 XP he'd have 3. Extrapolate all the way from there, one point per level and... voilá. We don't even need tables anymore. just start at 18 and reduce 1 per level (this is similar to Target 20, of course). 

This does not map perfectly to the RC, but it is close enough for my tastes - and also easier and smoother. 

It also fixes the RC rule (page 32) that states: The maximum damage produced by any single spell—including fire bull, lightening bolt, and delayed blast fireball—is 20 dice, of the type specified (usually d6, therefore a maximum of 20d6). This is very important for game balance, and should not be ignored. For example, without this maximum, a 36th level magic-user could instantly slay any other magic-user by surprise, regardless of the results of the saving throw!

The rule is no longer needed - and now, a 15th level MU casting a 15d6 fireball against a 15th-level fighter is unlikely to kill him in the first try, because the fighter has 15d8 HP!

BTW, you have probably already intuited that you could do the exact same process with the fighter. In the RC, his "THAC0" goes from 19 to 1 over 36 levels. Reduce the fighter to 20 levels, and you have one point of THAC0 improvement per level (similar to AD&D). And thieves' skills could work similarly.

We could use the alternate XP table above, but I prefer simplicity, round numbers and easy formulas over byzantine tables, so just stick with it for the first 10 levels and then go to a flat 400,000 XP per level. This is remarkably close to the original XP requirements per HP. Here is the table for reference:

I'll confess I might require 50,000 XP on level 17 to end with a nice round 5.000.000 on level 20. Also because in my game MUs get 9th level spells on 17, which is another advantage - maximum spell level is always equal to half MU level, round up.

And, for the final twist, I use the same table for all classes. I give a few power-ups (feats), especially for fighters and thieves (who also get 1d6 HP per level - they deserve the boost). Clerics get streamlined a bit, and magic becomes a bit weaker at higher levels, which is good and balanced IMO - even if you're playing B/X and limited to 14 levels.

So, that is what we've got for today... all these ideas are being progressively incorporated in my minimalist OSR game, which you can get for free in the link. All feedback is welcome!

EDIT: I've been told Frank Mentzer mentioned on FB that he wished to have changed it to 20 levels, although I haven't seem it myself. Cool stuff!

Minimum combat detail: deadly daggers, clumsy bows, and reach supremacy

A brief note to my latest weapon series...

You don't need to practice HEMA (or ANY martial arts, although maybe you should consider it) to know a little bit about fighting. You can watch plenty of examples on YouTube, from the safety of your home. The problem is, the more you see it, the more to "unsee" it. Sure, we don't need "realism" in our games, but we don't want combat to be absurd either. And sometimes, it is.

Daggers are extremely deadly. 1d4 damage barely does them justice. Check the video below to see a bunch of professional or semi-professional fighters get obliterated by knife attackers in a 20-second simulation - over and over again. 

Fighting with weapons is brutal stuff... 

Of course, had they been armed or armored, the situation would be different. Such videos also exist in the internet. You have simulated medieval combat with "realistic" (but blunt) weapons. While in heavy armor, it comes down to strength, skill and endurance. Wrestling and even punching become much more useful (and a well-placed dagger could STILL be deadly... but it would take more effort). Blunt swords do not deal that much damage, obviously... but they can still hurt if you're strong enough. Imagine using a mace!

The final part of this equation is LARPing combat, since it simulates a single strike causing massive damage. It usually disregards armor (and doesn't require strength), but allows different weapons and even shields. Watch one, and you might see that long weapons rule the battlefield and shields are incredibly protective. Here, bringing a dagger to a spear fight is simply ludicrous.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find good YT examples, but I've watched several games in real life and spears/polearms/etc. rule. Let me know if you have any videos. And watch this spear vs. Longsword compilation instead.

Finally, I usually say that bows are hard to use without training. I think you have to experience this one for yourself. You've seen the damage a dagger can do, and you can play with a stick and a punching bag if you want to. But the only by trying to shoot a target that is 30' away (which is a +1 bonus in B/X) you'll see why I think ranged weapons are just too powerful in D&D.

A pro can do amazing things with a bow, of course. "Fast shooting" is still slower than a dagger however, and requires more concentration (i.e., no one is shooting back or punching you in the face).

Am I willing to go into AD&D levels of detail to reflect every single nuance portrayed here? Certainly not. But at least AD&D gave it a shot! Anyway, here are a few simple things that I'd like to see addressed:

- The possibility of a quick kill. 

- The life-saving importance of armor against blades (and other weapons).

- The difficulty of shooting bows and throwing weapons. 

- The importance of weapon length/reach.

- The advantages of various weapons (instead "sword is the best, period").

And I'd like to see some reasonable rules on weight and speed. Not  necessarily realistic -  but not absurd either. Even a 6-pound one-handed sword sounds out of place, as it would be very hard to swing  (don't try this at home, you'll hurt yourself). And a minute is just too long to be stabbed to death, as seem above - a few seconds is more likely.

So this is what I where I'm trying to get with my combat system. Not more realism, but more detail, speed and brutality.

P.S.: I'm on Twitter now! I only got in there, still getting the hang of it. Seems to be a bit better than FB so far. Has communities and all. As always, I only talk RPGs. Follow me if you like this stuff!

AD&D DMG cover to cover - part IV, pages 37-46 (TIME and SPELLS)

We´ve been reading the original DMG - the ultimate DM book! - but from a B/X and OSR point-of-view.

Check the other parts of this series here.

Today we will discuss:

TIME 37
— TIME IN THE CAMPAIGN 37
— TIME IN THE DUNGEON 38
CHARACTER SPELLS 38
— DAY-TO-DAY ACQUISITION OF CLERIC SPELLS 38
— ACQUISITION OF MAGIC-USER SPELLS 39
— ACQUISITION OF ILLUSIONIST SPELLS 39
— RECOVERY OF SPELLS 39
— SPELL CASTING 40
— TRIBAL SPELL CASTERS 40
SPELL EXPLANATIONS 41
— SPELLS: SPECIAL COMMENTARY FOR REFEREEING 41
— Cleric Spells 41
— Druid Spells 43
— Magic-User Spells 44
— Illusionist Spells 46

TIME

So, I went "digging" into the DMG... and now I think I've found some gold. This single page made me want to completely change the way I run games. It might be the most interesting part so far.

Of course this is not the first time I've read this. This part contains a famous quote in all caps. In addition, many people have been talking about this lately most notably Jeffro Johnson. Here is a relevant bit:

Game time is of utmost importance. Failure to keep careful track of time expenditure by player characters will result in many anomalies in the game. The stricture of time is what makes recovery of hit points meaningful. Likewise, the time spent adventuring in wilderness areas removes concerned characters from their bases of operation — be they rented chambers or battlemented strongholds. Certainly the most important time stricture pertains to the manufacture of magic items, for during the period of such activity no

adventuring can be done. Time is also considered in gaining levels and learning new languages and more. All of these demands upon game time force choices upon player characters, and likewise number their days of game life.

One of the things stressed in the original game of D&D was the importance of recording game time with respect to each and every player character in a campaign. In AD&D it is emphasized even more: YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT.

The gist of this section is emphasizing how important time keeping is for your campaign. This includes not only turns and rounds but also days, weeks and months. The book also stresses the importance of downtime and rotating characters. For example, when a PC is hurt, diseased, or busy with an important project (e.g., researching spells or creating a magic item), you should go adventuring without him or her - or maybe using an entire different party. Even better, you can have multiple groups of players, and different parties, as hinted before. 

The method Gygax used for that is "real time": If one week has passed in the real world, one week has passed in the game world. This means a player could be using a different character for months. Of course you will occasionally need to freeze time between sessions, but now the clock is not working only at the players (in their characters) convenience. Time-railroading is limited. This gives the campaign a much more satisfying, organic feel.

(Of course, this has some issues. Unless we have some "fast forwards", we will never use the rules about aging... without getting older ourselves!).

For smaller units of time, the book recommends careful note keeping. I'm not a big fan of this, but you can easily be replaced by real time too, as I suggested here and apparently has become popular in other games lately. 

Time seems to be the glue that holds many rules together: Healing, researching, building, random encounters, searching, torches, diseases, etc. Once you ignore it, everything seems to come crashing down. Maybe this is one of the fundamental ideas of old school play.

There is much to ponder about this section. For now, I'll just recommend that you read it yourself, in its entirety. This is the first time in this series that I do that. 

CHARACTER SPELLS (plus ACQUISITION)

After finishing this important section on time I thought I could glance over the section on spells. However, there's important stuff here too.

The first parts of this section are about spell acquisition.  I always disliked the idea  that clerics get ALL spells "for free". Here, the book makes clear that this requires continued service in favor of a deity - and, for higher level spells, direct communication with their gods! An "unfaithful" cleric must perform sacrifice and atonement to get spells (which may require time), but changing deities might have irreversible consequences (including instant death, which is less interesting). Similar rules apply to paladins.

Starting magic-users get additional spells and scrolls when compared to B/X,  but here it is clear that these spells are random. The book provides a small table that ensures they'll be varied enough:

Illusionists follow a similar pattern. Some spell choice is permitted on "difficult campaigns".

As magic-users level up, they can get more spells, but they can only choose one per level. Everything else must be acquired trough scrolls, NPCs (or other PCs), and so on. This is seldom an easy process: you might fail to learn from a scroll, and NPCs might require magic items in exchange of spells.

Once again, the book is trying to limit PCs, but this time it does so in a very interesting way for both clerics and magic-users. Now they cannot simply handwave the origin of their spells. On the contrary, they have to engage with the setting to build their PC's repertoire. And there is enough randomness in the game that two magic-users will never be alike.

This sounds fair. Fighters get their "special powers" by finding magic items, intelligent swords, etc., and they usually don't get to choose (unless you're using something like proficiencies or Old School Feats). There should be a balance between choice and chance, and I think AD&D does pretty well in this regard.

RECOVERY OF SPELLS

Spell recovery requires time (again - this is the linchpin), to a maximum 12 hours of sleep plus 15 minutes for each spell level to be recovered. This create meaningful choices - what RPGs are all about. And is also a bit more fair to fighters (they need to rest a lot to recover all their HP).

SPELL CASTING

Next we get a small section explaining how spells work within the fictional world (reportedly taking inspiration from Vance and Bellair). Enticing, short, and clear.

TRIBAL SPELL CASTERS

This sections explain that various humanoids (ogres, orcs, bugbears, trolls, giants, etc.) have their own "shamans" (clerics) and "witch-doctors" (magic-users/clerics). Unfortunately, it does not tell you  if the witch-doctors have grimoires... (I would guess they don't).

While the section was interesting and useful (for suggesting spells and levels for these creatures), I don't find this distinction between shaman and cleric or mage and witch doctor to have much merit, especially as they are restricted to NPCs. It feels a bit like PC "races" can only be "civilized" fighting against "barbaric" foes. Why not have a PC or human/elf shaman? Also, did they forget ogre mages?

We could get something useful out of this (e.g.,  different forms of magic), but as written it feels insufficient and detached from the rest of the game (classes, random encounters, Monster Manual, etc.).

SPELL EXPLANATIONS

This section details particular spell. I'll skip this part entirely; it is basically impossible to understand without the PHB, and it is only separated from it because the books weren't written at the same time.  From a brief glance, most explanations sounds both sensible and flavorful.

What have we learned today?

 

The bit about time, if considered seriously, is definitely a game-changer. I don't remember the exact rules for spell acquisition in B/X, but the ones in the DMG are pretty good. And, okay, I'll admit, I might add a troll shaman or two to my games.

Coming next... THE ADVENTURE!

Additional reading (on time and spells):

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2022/04/real-time-dungeon-exploration.html

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2022/05/railroading-in-space-and-time-and.html

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-best-way-to-get-spells-in-d.html

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2020/02/living-spells.html

Contains affiliate links. By purchasing stuff through affiliate links you're helping to support this blog.

Minimalist/expanded B/X weapons

Here is my revised B/X weapon list. 

The goals is to make it simpler (fewer words/entries, also clearer), expanded (more weapons), more balanced (no useless or flawless weapons), varied (distinctions between weapons) and easier to use (pick your weapon size/style before choosing a particular weapon). Weights are a bit more sensible but not entirely realistic. 

This is somewhat similar to Dark Fantasy Basic, but adapted to B/X. It also incorporate some AD&Disms such as speed, reach, defeating armor, and damage against large creatures, but keeps them extremely simplified.  

Two-handed mace is needed!

Melee weapon	Price	Weight	Dmg.	Range
Dagger	3	10	1d4	10
Small/short weapon	6	30	1d6	10
Medium weapon	10	50	1d8	-
Large/Great weapon	20	80	1d10	-
Polearm	30	120	1d10	-
Ranged weapon	Price	Weight	Dmg.	Range
Sling	2	10	1d4	50
Short bow	20	30	1d6	50
Long bow	30	40	1d6	70
Crossbow	40	50	1d6	80

Small weapons are one-handed, and can be used in the off-hand too (except spears). Medium weapons are one-handed, but can be held with two (+1 damage). Large weapons require two hands.

----

CLASSES

Clerics can only use blunt weapons: hammers, maces, clubs, some polearms, slings. Mages can use  daggers and staves (optional: can use other weapons, -4 to hit). Dwarves and halflings need two hands to use medium weapons (no bonus damage) and cannot use large ones (or longbows).

---

WEAPON TYPES

Every melee weapon can be taken in small, medium, or large size unless indicate otherwise.

Axes, hammers, maces deal +1 damage on a natural 20 in melee (but not thrown). They are also good at breaking down doors, etc.

Clubs are cheap (1 sp) medium weapons that deal 1d4 damage.

Crossbows need one round to recharge after fired and deal +1 damage on a natural 20.

Javelins are cheap (1 gp) small spears that can be thrown (90') but not used in melee for more than one single hit (as they may bend when they hit).

Lances are just heavy spears made to be used one-handed when riding a horse (1d6 damage). They deal double damage on a charge.

Picks get +1 to-hit against heavy armor (chain or better), unless the opponent is large. A pick can be added to a axe/hammer/mace for 5 gp.

Polearms are "combination" weapons - either a sword on top of a long pole (naginata/halberd/etc. - +1 damage against large foes AND +1 on a critical 20), or a combination of one or two other large weapons (spear and hammer, hammer and axe, pick and axe, etc.). They are always as long as large spears and if they include a spear they can be used to brace against a charge (1d8).

Spears are cheaper (half price), lighter (-10 weight) and deal less damage (1d4, 1d6, 1d8), but can be thrown (60'). Large spears cannot be thrown, but are very long. Medium and large spears deal double damage when bracing against a charge.

Staves (e.g., quarterstaff) are cheap (2 sp), light (40) large weapons that deal 1d6 damage.

Swords deal +1 damage against large enemies; they cannot be thrown. Fencing swords are medium, weight 40, cost 15, can only be used one-handed, and have no benefit against large foes, but get +1 to-hit against unarmored targets. 

---

HOUSE RULES

Critical hits (on a natural 20): +2 damage; +4 for large weapons (+3/+5 for certain weapons as seen above).

Initiative: on ties, when both sides are attacking, the weapons will indicate who attacks first. If you are not engaged with your foe, the longest (or better range) weapon attacks first. If you are already engaged, the quickest weapon attacks first.

[For now, it is up to the GM to decide which is which, but should be obvious most of the time - larger weapons are longer and slower, and within the same size axes and maces are shorter and slower while spears are the opposite. A polearm is always slower].

(Thanks again Sleeper for the idea).

Dual wielding: if holding one weapon in each hand, you can make an attack with the other weapon when you roll a natural 2. On initiative ties, you choose which weapon to use. If holding two identical weapons (e.g., two shortswords), they are considered both faster and longer against an opponent using a single identical weapon (shortsword).

Range: you can double the maximum range (-2 penalty) or triple it (-3 penalty), but not more.

---

NOTES:

We've been talking about weapons. I wasn't 100% satisfied with my previous attempt. So I thought I'd try a minimalist version before adding details (such as length and speed). I really like the results.

I'll try to add Speed Factor the next time around. But TBH this looks pretty good for my own games.

Oil flasks and holy water have special rules and do not belong in this list IMO. A torch is not a weapon and should deal maybe 1d2 damage at most, unless combined with an oil flask or something. The "slow" tag is discarded as it doesn't accomplish anything IMO.

This is now incorporated in my Minimalist OSR game. I'd love to get feedback on this. Leave a comment or get in touch.

And let me know if I missed anything!

DMG (1e) cover-to-cover: INDEX

I've been the original DMG - the ultimate DM book! - but from a B/X and OSR point-of-view. Why? This is explained in part I. 

This is what I've got so far. My plan is to finish commenting on the entire book, write an overall conclusion/review, and comparing it to "advanced" OSR books before the end of 2023. I might do the PHB next (will leave a link here if I do).

1. Part I, pages 1-9 (preface, introduction)
2. Part II, pages 9-22 (the game, character abilities, races, classes) 
3. Sidequest: all elves are half-elves.
4. Part III, pages 23-37 (alignment, money, armor, hirelings, henchmen)
5. Part IV, pages 37-46 (time and spells)
6. Part V, pages 47-60 (the adventure)
7. Part VI, pages 61-83 (combat)
8. Sidequest: minimalist grappling and striking.
9. Part VII, pages 84-100 (experience and the campaign)
10. Part VIII, pages 100-114 (NPCs, constructions and conducting the game)
11. Part IX, pages 114-169 (MAGIC RESEARCH/ITEMS and TREASURE).
12. Coming soon!

Contains affiliate links. By purchasing stuff through affiliate links you're helping to support this blog.

B/X weapon list remade

Continued from last post.

Here is a list of B/X weapons (adapted from OSE) with small changes in weight and the addition of speed factor. I think I've managed to distinguish every weapon with its own niche. No weapon is identical or simply better or worse than all others (if I've missed something, let me know).

The "slow" tag is removed and replaced by Speed Factor.

Notice that if you want to simply ignore speed factor and all the house rules below, the list below is still a bit more balanced (and sensible, IMO) than the original.

Assuming you're you are running the B/X as written, this is how you use speed factor (thanks Sleeper for the suggestion): whenever initiative is tied, and both sides are attacking, the weapons will indicate who attacks first. If you are not engaged with your foe, the longest weapon* attacks first. If you are already engaged, the quickest (lower SF) weapon attacks first.

[*when in doubt, the longest weapon is the one that does more damage; if they do the same damage, spear beats sword beats axe beats mace - or treat them as identical, if you find this hard to memorize].

Optional rule: when initiative is tied, roll 1d10. Every weapon that has a SF equal lower than this result also gets to attack twice (to make things even easier, you can just roll initiative with 1d10).

In addition, whenever you roll a natural 20, you get the chance of dealing a brutal hit: make another attack against the same target with a bonus equal to your SF.

[I like this solution because it makes the right weapons good against armor. If you want something faster, a natural 20 will give you more damage instead - maybe equal to half your SF, or equal to SF if you beat AC by 10 or more].

I reduced weapon ranges to their maximum range (e.g., "missile (30’)" instead of  "missile (5’–10’ / 11’–20’ / 21’–30’ )", to better fit the blog format - but it is something I plan to change too.

Weapon	Price	Wt.	Dmg.	SF	Properties
Axe, battle	7	50	1d8	8	2H
Club	3	50	1d4	4	Blunt
Crossbow	30	50	1d6	10	Missile (240’), Reload, 2H
Dagger	3	10	1d4	2	Thrown (30’)
Axe, hand	4	30	1d6	4	Thrown (30’)
Holy water (vial)	25	-	1d8	5	Thrown (50’), Splash weapon
Javelin	1	20	1d4	5	Thrown (90’)
Lance	5	120	1d6	6	Charge
Long bow	40	30	1d6	6	Missile (210’), 2H
Mace	5	30	1d6	7	Blunt
Oil (flask), burning	2	-	1d8	5	Thrown (50’), Splash weapon
Pole arm	7	120	1d10	10	Brace, 2H
Short bow	25	30	1d6	4	Missile (150’), 2H
Sword, short	7	20	1d6	3	-
Silver dagger	30	10	1d4	2	Thrown (30’)
Sling	2	20	1d4	7	Blunt, Missile (160’)
Spear	3	30	1d6	5	Brace, thrown (60’)
Staff	2	40	1d6	4	Blunt, 2H
Sword, long	10	60	1d8	5	-
Torch	1/6	-	1d4	4	-
Sword, great	15	100	1d10	8	2H
War hammer	10	20	1d6	6	Blunt

As we have seen on the last post, the simple system has a lot of positive , "hidden", consequences: for example, axes and maces are better against heavy armor, while swords and daggers become even more deadly against unarmored foes.

Well, it is a start. But I feel that there is still work to do. I'd like to see:

- More weapons.
- More balance and diversity in weapons.
- More sensible weights.
- Interrupting spells!

- Dual wielding.

- Fighting one and two-handed with the same weapon.

- Sensible rules for dwarves and halflings. Their limitations aren't limiting if  they can just pick the best weapon (the sword).

- More weapon details ..  WITHOUT making things difficult! Including, maybe, space required, backstabbing, large foes, fighting dragons and oozes, and so on.

So this is what I'm trying next! Stay tuned!