The Three-Body Problem trilogy (review)

I just finished reading the Remembrance of Earth's Past trilogy (AKA The Three-Body Problem trilogy; or TBP for short).

I'll write my impressions of the series without major spoilers. 

Which is difficult (and will seem kinda vague), but I think if you're going to read this one, it is better to find out as you go, as the first novel contains a mystery that will only be revealed halfway.

Also, there are some adaptations out there, and another one coming in 2024 - let's hope they're good.

Anyway, here is a small summary from Wikipedia:

Ye Wenjie is an astrophysicist who saw her father brutally murdered during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Later, she was conscripted by the military because of her scientific background and sent to a secret radar base in a remote region of China. Her fateful decision in the 1960s echoes across space and time to a group of scientists in the present day, forcing them to face humanity's greatest threat.

First things first: the trilogy is well worth the read, maintains a similarly decent quality throughout the three entries, and has a definitive and satisfactory (if not perfect) ending.

It contains aliens, spaceships, cryogenics, flying cars, lasers, anti-matter weapons... all the things you'd expect from a sci-fi epic (except, maybe, much transhumanism and AI).

TBP is both "hard" sci-fi, discussing physics and engineering extensively, with aspects of "soft" sci-fi, analyzing the political, sociological and psychological consequences of many catastrophic events on humanity.

Although the attention to detail and accuracy is noteworthy, the technology becomes more extreme and speculative as the novels progress (and the feeling of "deus ex machina" gets stronger as we go on) - to the point of being "indistinguishable from magic" to my eyes, especially in the third book (it might be different if you have any knowledge of theoretical physics; I wouldn't know).

More than anything, it is a epic tale spanning dozens of characters in multiple galaxies across millions for years, maybe more - from ancient China and Constantinople to the Cultural revolution and aeons of space exploration.

It reminds me of the Foundation series in this regard.

But TBP trilogy manages to be a lot scarier, dealing with war, genocide and mass extinction on a regular basis. The third book gave me existential anxiety as few books have before. Everything feels always at the brink of destruction.

The writing is slow at times - I often skipped technical details and lengthy description of places - but I never felt exactly bored (maybe anxious). There was just certain parts that felt unnecessary to the story.

The characters are well-written if occasionally a bit shallow, although this is not the focus of the books for the most part. I like the fact that here are few clear "villains", and even the protagonists manage to fail spectacularly at times.

TBP is full of big ideas - it discusses many difficulty questions but provides no easy answers.

All things considered, it is a page-turner - and I read the last book over a weekend because I was curious to finally get to the conclusion.

If you like epic, hard sci-fi, this one is worth checking out.

Minimalist monk (B/X) - take 2

I've tried writing a minimalist monk a while ago... but maybe it wasn't minimalist enough. I was still too close to AD&D. Let's try something even simpler (and closer to B/X and Old School Feats' "monk package").

Minimalist Monk (v 2.0)

Requirements: Minimum WIS 9.

Prime requisite: DEX.

XP, HP, saves: as fighter.

Attacks, weapons, armor: as thief.

Special features:

Pick one on level 1, and one more on every third level (3, 6, 9, 12).

Martial artist. You deal 1d4 damage with bare hands/feet, which is increased to 1d6, 1d8, 1d10 and 1d12 on levels 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12. When attacking with weapons, you can choose to use this damage or simply add +2 to weapon damage.

Unarmed offense. You can make an additional attack per round, but it must be an unarmed attack (punch, kick, etc.)

Unarmored defense. When unarmored, you get a bonus to AC equal to half your level (round up).

Mobile. During encounters, your movement rate is half you base movement instead of one third (e.g., 120’ [40’] becomes 120’ [60´]).

Acrobatics. You take half the usual damage when you fall. You get a +4 bonus to AC during retreat and withdrawal. You get a +4 bonus to  ability checks and saves involving jumping, tumbling, etc.

Pure body. You are immune to disease and poison.

Resilience. You get +1 to all saves. You can pick this feature twice.

Regeneration. Once per day, recover an amount of HP equal to your level.

Thievery. You can use thief skills as a thief half your level. You can pick this feature twice to be as skilled as a thief of your level.

Taboos:

Monks cannot own more than they can carry, nor can they use more than 3 magic items at the same time.

---

NOTES: 

The classic monk has more features - and is significantly more powerful, requiring more XP etc.

This one is about as powerful as a regular fighter (who gets to play with more weapons, armor, shields,. etc.).

I like this "pick a feature" approach to customize characters easily. If you like this customization without complication approach, try Old School Feats. 

Minimalist monk (B/X)

Here is my B/X version of the monk, vaguely inspired by AD&D and the RC, also using a few ideas from Old School Feats (that contains a Monk "package"). The goal is to make it balanced and simple, rather than sticking closely to the original, similarly to my minimalist warlord and white mage.

 

Minimalist Monk

Requirements: None 

Prime requisite: DEX

XP, HP, saves: as fighter.

Attacks, weapons, armor: as thief.

Skills (climb, traps, locks, hearing, stealth, but NOT pick pockets): as thief.

Special features:

Pick one on level 1, and one more on every even level.

Martial artist. You deal 1d3 damage with bare hands/feet, which is increased to 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10 and 1d12 on levels 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12. When attacking with weapons, you can choose to use this damage or simply add +2 to weapon damage.

Unarmed offense. You can make an extra attack per round, but it must be an unarmed attack (punch, kick, etc.)

Unarmored defense. You get a bonus to AC equal to half your level (round up), to a maximum of +6 if unarmored, +3 if wearing armor.

Mobile. During encounters, your movement rate is half you base movement instead of one third (e.g., 120’ [40’] becomes 120’ [60´]).

Acrobatics. You take half the usual damage when you fall. You get a +4 bonus to AC during retreat and withdrawal. You get a +4 bonus to  ability checks and saves involving jumping, tumbling, etc.

Pure body. You are immune to disease and poison.

Pure mind. You are immune from mind-controlling magic, including sleep, charm, geas, etc.

Pure soul. You get a +4 bonus to saving throws against all spells.

Regeneration. Once per day, recover an amount of HP equal to your level.

---

NOTES: 

The monk, in all its versions, has lots of small powers and fiddly bits. This is probably the simplest version can come up with while still maintaining the same feel. I prefer the "pick a feature" version than giving each feature a predetermined level as it allows for more customization while keeping things very simple.

Is this monk better than the fighter? I think the armor and THAC0 limitations are enough to balance them. What about the thief? The thief is a weak class with an easy XP progression, which the monk doesn't have; the monk cannot backstab either (although I'd let them take is as a feature).

If you think the monk is too powerful, I suggest using the magic-use XP progression, but no more - the monk still feels a bit weaker than a paladin.

I didn't include any taboos for the monk, but I think they would make sense. I'd let each monk pick a taboo according to their own vows (again, customization without complication): truthfulness, refusing healing potions and magic, cannot carry more than three magic items, etc.

Anyway, if you like this customization without complication approach, try Old School Feats. 

It contains most of these features, and many notes on balance, taboos, and so on.

EDIT: here is a leaner version.

AD&D DMG cover to cover - part VII, pages 84-100 (EXPERIENCE and THE CAMPAIGN)

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 discuss EXPERIENCE and THE CAMPAIGN!

EXPERIENCE 84

— ADJUSTMENT AND DIVISION OF EXPERIENCE POINTS 84

— EXPERIENCE VALUE OF TREASURE TAKEN 85

— EXPERIENCE POINTS VALUE OF MONSTERS 85

— SPECIAL BONUS AWARD TO EXPERIENCE POINTS 85

— GAINING EXPERIENCE LEVELS 86

THE CAMPAIGN 86

— CLIMATE & ECOLOGY 87

— TYPICAL INHABITANTS 88

— SOCIAL CLASS AND RANK IN ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS 88

— Government Forms 89

— Royal And Noble Titles 89

— THE TOWN AND CITY SOCIAL STRUCTURE 89

— ECONOMICS 90

— DUTIES, EXCISES, FEES, TARIFFS, TAXES, TITHES, AND TOLLS 90

— MONSTER POPULATIONS AND PLACEMENT 90

— PLACEMENT OF MONETARY TREASURE 91

— PLACEMENT OF MAGIC ITEMS 92

— TERRITORY DEVELOPMENT BY PLAYER CHARACTERS93

— PEASANTS, SERFS, AND SLAVES 94

— A SAMPLE DUNGEON 94

— THE FIRST DUNGEON ADVENTURE 96

EXPERIENCE

A small section that still manages to be overly complicated. I remember people saying how easy "1 GP = 1 XP" was. Well, that is not even half the story. 

The system is byzantine and impossible to memorize, but it starts by suggesting some DM fiat: "The judgment factor is inescapable with respect to weighting experience for the points gained from slaying monsters and/or gaining treasure. You must weigh the level of challenge — be it thinking or fighting — versus the level of experience of the player character(s) who gained it."

XP for killing monsters comes BEFORE XP for treasure, and follows a obscure formula (here is something easier: square the number of HD and multiply by 10, add 50% per special ability - similar to Dark Fantasy Basic).

XP for treasure is not as straightforward as "1 GP = 1 XP" either: it depends on the power of the treasure's "guardian" (i.e., monster) and, again, lots of DM fiat. 

It is unclear if the guardian must be FOUGHT or if, as people often say, AD&D is about AVOIDING fights to get to the treasure (which will still give you SOME XP, but not full XP, as suggested in page 84, last paragraph).

"Treasure must be physically taken out of the dungeon or lair and turned into a transportable medium" - apparently, this requires you to physically carry treasure that is NOT transportable. Sigh.

A note on page 85 explains that this intricate system is made to avoid the "non-game boredom" of giving XP for clerics that pray, thieves that steal, etc. 

HOWEVER, acting according to your class and alignment shortens training time and allows you to level without a tutor.

Because, you see, XP is not enough for leveling: you also need to spend time and gold for TRAINING.

The time necessary to train is 1-4 weeks, according to PC behavior. In practice, just consider the AVERAGE quality of PC behavior (presumably, since the last level up) to get a rating from 1 (poor) to 4 (excellent). Of course, the text MUST be a lot more complicated than that; see for yourself.

Award experience points normally. When each character is given his or her

total, also give them an alphabetic rating — E, S, F, or P. When a character’s

total experience points indicate eligibility for an advancement in level, use the

alphabetic assessment to assign equal weight to the behavior of the character

during each separate adventure — regardless of how many or how few

experience points were gained in each. The resulting total is then divided by the

number of entries (adventures) to come up with some number from 1 to 4. This

number indicates the number of WEEKS the character must spend in study and/

or training before he or she actually gains the benefits of the new level. Be

certain that all decimals are retained, as each .145 equals a game day.

The cost is 1500 gp per level per week, which means the thief might not have enough gold to get to level 2 even with enough XP and "good behavior" (this can happen to other characters that need to train for multiple weeks).

Training costs become negligible on higher levels, but time is always important, which is nice, as it suggests rotating characters.

THE CAMPAIGN

A campaign is a collection of adventures.

The section starts on world-building. Starting a campaign is easy enough:

This will typically result in your giving them a brief background, placing them in a settlement, and stating that they should prepare themselves to find and explore the dungeon/ruin they know is nearby. As background you inform them that they are from some nearby place where they were apprentices learning their respective professions, that they met by chance in an inn or tavern and resolved to journey together to seek their fortunes in the dangerous environment, and that, beyond the knowledge common to the area (speech, alignments, races, and the like), they know nothing of the world. 

Placing these new participants in a small settlement means that you need do  only minimal work describing the place and its inhabitants. Likewise, as player characters are inexperienced, a single dungeon or ruins map will suffice to begin play. 

[...] 

Eventually, as player characters develop and grow powerful, they will explore

and adventure over all of the area of the continent. When such activity

begins, you must then broaden your general map still farther so as to

encompass the whole globe. More still! You must begin to consider seriously

the makeup of your entire multiverse — space, planets and their satellites,

parallel worlds, the dimensions and planes. What is there? why? can

participants in the campaign get there? how? will they? Never fear! By the

time your campaign has grown to such a state of sophistication, you will be

ready to handle the new demands.

Great advice!

You can create your own setting, use an existing one as written, or alter it. 

"Until you are sure of yourself, lean upon the book. Improvisation might be fine later, but until you are completely relaxed as the DM, don’t run the risk of trying to “wing it” unless absolutely necessary.".

I like it - as I think improvisation is often over-rated.

Starting adventures/dungeons should be balanced against the players - not too easy, not too hard. Things get harder as the players and their characters advance in experience.

The testing grounds for novice adventurers must be kept to a difficulty factor which encourages rather than discourages players. If things are too easy, then there is no challenge, and boredom sets in after one or two games. Conversely, impossible difficulty and character deaths cause instant loss of interest.

[...]

The general idea is to develop a dungeon of multiple levels, and the deeper adventurers go, the more difficult the challenges become. [...] This same concept applies to areas outdoors as well, with more and terrible monsters occurring more frequently the further one goes away from civilization.

It is no exaggeration to state that the fantasy world builds itself, almost as if the milieu actually takes on a life and reality of its own. [...] the interaction of judge and players shapes the bare bones of the initial creation into something far larger. It becomes fleshed out, and adventuring breathes life into a make-believe world. Similarly, the geography and history you assign to the world will suddenly begin to shape the character of states and peoples. Details of former events will become obvious from mere outlines of the past course of things. Surprisingly, as the personalities of player characters and non-player characters in the milieu are bound to develop and become almost real, the nations and states and events of a well-conceived AD&D world will take on even more of their own direction and life.

This whole section is full of great DM advice!

CLIMATE & ECOLOGY contains some common sense and useful ideas, in the vein of "Gygaxian Naturalism" - dragons are not just archetypal monsters, but part of a food chain, etc.

TYPICAL INHABITANTS describes non-adventurers briefly; nothing interesting here.

SOCIAL CLASS AND RANK explains that these things depend on the setting, giving some examples.

Government Forms describe exactly that: autocracy, bureaucracy, confederacy, democracy, etc. Here is my own twist on the subject.

Royal And Noble Titles, likewise, describe a nobiliary hierarchy, both European (from emperors to knights and archbishops to priors, etc.) and Asian (including Maharajas, Sultans, Caliphs, and Khans).

THE TOWN AND CITY SOCIAL STRUCTURE is a (somewhat more interesting) description of how urban environments are governed.

ECONOMICS tries to explain the absurd prices you find in D&D. "The prices and costs of the game are based on inflationary economy, one where a sudden influx of silver and gold has driven everything well beyond its normal value." Yeah, okay.

The next justification sounds more reasonable: "It is simply more heroic for players to have their characters swaggering around with pouches full of gems and tossing out gold pieces than it is for them to have coppers." 

The reason for prices is the "rule of cool"; it doesn't have to make much sense.

DUTIES, EXCISES, FEES, TARIFFS, TAXES, TITHES, AND TOLLS are created "to take excess monies away from player characters". 

I had noticed this tendency of "give lots of treasure and then take it away" before, but here the author makes it explicit. This happens not only with taxes, but training, expenses, etc.

Which feel redundant and boring to me - why not just give them less treasure? 

Remember the "rule of cool"? in the previous section? Well, when did you see Conan or Elric paying taxes? Or tutors, for that matter - especially after they started adventuring?

A whole page on taxes, but "critical hit tables are too complicated". The DMG is like that sometimes.

MONSTER POPULATIONS AND PLACEMENT insists on the "Gygaxian Naturalism" but allows for a “Disneyland” atmosphere with random disjointed monsters if you want (although this is not recommended for long campaigns).

This section contains good advice too, followed by a few examples. 

Certain pre-done modules might serve in your milieu, and you should consider their inclusion in light of your overall schema. If they fit smoothly into the diagram of your milieu, by all means use them, but always alter them to include the personality of your campaign so the mesh is perfect. Likewise, fit monsters and magic so as to be reasonable within the scope of your milieu and the particular facet of it concerned. Alter creatures freely, remembering balance. Hit dice, armor class, attacks and damage, magical and psionic powers are all mutable; and after players become used to the standard types a few ringers will make them a bit less sure of things. Devising a few creatures unique to your world is also recommended.

PLACEMENT OF MONETARY TREASURE contains some vague, common sense advice on the matter. It also provides another explanation for the (low) value of precious metals: they become harder to carry.

PLACEMENT OF MAGIC ITEMS shows the author explicit regrets on giving away too many magic items, something that I've felt in my own games. 

On the other hand, “killer-dungeons” are also criticized. Balance must be found!

In any case, "you must NEVER allow random determination to dictate the inclusion of ANY meaningful magic items.".

Interesting stuff, as it suggests a complete revision of previous random tables/rules.

TERRITORY DEVELOPMENT BY PLAYER CHARACTERS deals with high-level PCs establishing strongholds and similar structures, which requires detailed maps and procures. 

This is how "the fantasy world builds itself" by "the interaction of judge and player".

Sounds incredibly fun!

I really like this section, makes me wish I had more high-level games.

PEASANTS, SERFS, AND SLAVES explains that they are always oppressed and periodically cause riots - which "the player character must suppress it as soon as possible". 

Interesting if a bit reductionist.

A SAMPLE DUNGEON describes exactly that. Well, almost - just the first three rooms. This is an excerpt of room number ONE: 

There are 10 moldy sacks of flour and grain stacked

here. The cloth is easily torn to reveal the contents. If all of them are

opened and searched, there is a 25% probability that the last will have

YELLOW MOLD in it, and handling will automatically cause it to burst

and all within 10’ must save versus poison or die in 1 turn.

So... yeah. Not a great example IMO. No "killer dungeons", remember? Right.

But this section contains icons and wandering monster tables, so a good format at least to help you create your own dungeons.

THE FIRST DUNGEON ADVENTURE describes a reasonably lengthy example of actual play - an expedition into the sample dungeon. It goes through many dungeon procedures that "The Adventure" skipped (well, listening is ALSO there for no apparent reason): doors, traps, hearing, etc., the most important being dungeon movement and the duration of various activities.

This part is particularly interesting:

You may use either of two methods to allow discovery of the mechanism which operates the portal:

1. You may designate probability by a linear curve, typically with a d6. Thus,

a secret door is discovered 1 in 6 by any non-elf, 2 in 6 by elven or halfelven

characters, each character being allowed to roll each turn in

checking a 10’ × 10’ area. This also allows you to have some secret doors

more difficult to discover, the linear curve being a d8 or d10.

2. You may have the discovery of the existence of the secret door enable

player characters to attempt to operate it by actual manipulation, i.e. the

players concerned give instructions as to how they will have their

characters attempt to make it function: “Turn the wall sconce.”, “Slide it

left.”, “Press the small protrusion, and see if it pivots.”, “Pull the chain.”

It is quite acceptable to have a mixture of methods of discovering the operation of secret door.

So both "player skill" and "character skill" are acceptable - or a combination of both, which I like. This is something I addressed here.

The example continues on and it is reasonably useful for someone learning RPGs. It contains some curious rulings of varying quality - the MU tries to stomp on a spider and rolls well enough, but the DM decides the spider attacks first and suffers no damage...

I also noticed that the PCs are exceptionally lucky in their rolls, which shouldn't be assumed.

I like the fact that the DM spells out some chances ("The halfling at the top of the stack has a 1 in 6 chance of slipping and bringing you all down") while hiding other rolls ("Rolling a d6 behind a screen so that the players cannot see the result which would normally indicate if noise were detected or not") and simulating another ("DM: (Rolling a few dice behind the screen several times, knowing that tapping won’t show anything, as the secret door is 10’ above the floor:)".

Overall, a decent example of play.

What have we learned today?

 

My favorite part here is the campaign-building advice. Sensible, easy, organic stuff. I was pleased to see Gygax reconsidering the amount of magical items available, and both approaches to the "PC skill versus player skill" approach. I am not a fan of the experience rules or the explanations on economy, but I can see that training could have some upsides, like introducing relevant NPCs and downtime events.

Coming next... NPCs! CONSTRUCTION AND SIEGE! CONDUCTING THE GAME!

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

Tales of the Demon Lord (actual play review)

I ran Tales of the Demon Lord a few years ago, when trying Shadow of the Demon Lord for the first time. I did a review of the game but I hadn't reviewed this collection of adventures, so here we go.

This is the blurb:

The End Starts Here
The signs are everywhere. The mad prophets shriek dire warnings on the streets of Crossings, while strange monsters roam the lands beyond the city’s walls. Strange cults flourish in the lawless wilds, while the undead muster in the desert wastes to the north. The end is near, but is it too late to stop it?
Tales of the Demon Lord presents eleven adventures set in the lands of the Northern Reach, the far-flung province of a dying empire. Game Masters can run the adventures as a complete campaign, taking starting characters to the heights of their master paths, or use them individually to tell a different story. In addition to the adventures, this sourcebook contains detailed information about the city of Crossings and a selection of new creatures to terrorize the Northern Reach and beyond. 

Tales is indeed a collection of eleven adventures (I ran nine or ten, IIRC) that can be weaved together in a coherent campaign, although they do not follow neatly from each nor provide an easy "sandbox" for the PCs to explore.

Instead, it leaves to the GM to fill the details and omissions, which requires some work.

If you play the system as written, these adventures are enough  to get the characters all the way from level one to level 10 and face the end of the world - as intended in the rules book.

Because of this, I find  this collection to be a great introduction to the system -  although my players felt their characters were advancing in breakneck speed.  If I were to run another SotDL  campaign, I'd probably let PCs advance only once per two-three adventures instead of one.

The setting (the city of Crossings) it's interesting as a base of operations and provides a few potential patrons and factions, but again it is up to the GM to connect the dots. 

Unfortunately, the adventures themselves are mostly set in nearby villages (with no strong connections to city intrigues), so you don't get most of the advantages of having a coherent setting. There are a couple of exceptions (a dungeon you explore twice, a couple of recurring characters, and an attempt to tie everyone together in the last chapter), but they are few.

In my campaign, the PCs were  working for the city watch, and they got assigned to more dangerous missions (and more leeway) as they progressed in fame and fortune.

The appearance of this book is similar to the core book, which means decent, not great. Everything is grey and red, the maps are simple but serviceable (the resolution is a bit low, often too low), and the art is scarce.

The adventures themselves are good - maybe above average. They feel like D&D classics with a dark twist (and heavy metal or hard rock titles), unfortunately relying on some tired tropes (e.g., evil orcs, abandoned dwarven mines, etc.). 

They are thematically coherent, but they lack some sense of connection.

In chapter 9, for example, the author says - "Before the adventure begins, a number of things happen in Crossings. You can introduce these events in prior adventure sessions, or simply reveal that they occurred prior to the beginning of this adventure.". 

Wouldn't it be nice if the author himself had introduced them in the previous 8 chapters?

A regional map would be nice too (you have to go to the core book for that), maybe with some random encounters for the road (instead of leaving it to each adventure).

Each adventure has 2-6 pages, which is almost perfect for me. Once again, the GM has to fill some gaps, but I find this is easier than grasping 50 pages before running a single session.

This is very close to my favorite format, and I wish we had more OSR modules like this.

Finally, I must add a note on balance. I found the first adventure to be particularly hard and unfair, which is okay is a gritty campaign, but probably not on the very beginning, when the players have few tools and little knowledge to face these challenges.

All the adventures are dangerous but this is specially so (which might be good if you want to show your players that this systems is especially deadly).

There are other small balance issues (IIRC, in one adventure a group of 10 powerful NPCs are killed by half a dozen weak mook NPCs for no apparent reason, and one adventure seems to be a inescapable trap to automaton PCs as it requires sleep), but nothing as extreme.

In short, this is a good introductory module that can be made awesome with some DM effort. Add better maps, some art, a few extra pages on connections between NPCs and adventures, and you'd have a great sandbox.

While I ran it using SotDL rules, I think you could adapt it for OSR systems without much difficulty.

I've recommend checking Shadow of the Demon Lord before, as it is full of good ideas. If you want to try them in practice, I certainly recommend Tales of the Demon Lord. 

If you dislike dark fantasy (and still read this for some reason!), you might wait for the "vanilla" version of SotDL, "Shadow of the Weird Wizard", coming soon from the same author.

Minimalist grappling and striking (B/X, OSR)

In my most recent foray into the AD&D DMG, I found myself a bit frustrated with the combat mechanics. My general impression - and the same is true for the PHB - is that AD&D has tons of cool rules for combat, but these rules fell disjointed and complicated.

This is the second (but maybe not the last) post addressing this issue (here is the first).

The "WEAPONLESS COMBAT PROCEDURES" section is especially bad IMO, because:

- It adds an entirely different combat system for unarmed combat.

- It is needlessly complex and not a great fit to the existing combat rules (e.g., you can knock out people with a fist but not with a club).

- You do not get to choose your attacks, apparently (e.g., roll to see if you bite or kick).

- The author doesn't seem to understand real unarmed combat.

As far as I know, this is one of those rules Gygax didn't use in his own games.

[Notice that the Unearthed Arcana - which I haven't completely read - seems to have an reasonably elegant and straightforward system, that I'll use as inspiration, with some 5e stuff added to the mix]. 

But weaponless combat itself is, potentially, a fun addition to D&D characters (monsters already have some options such as bite, "bear hug", etc.).

How can we make it simple?

First, let's separate striking from wrestling/grappling.

Source.

Striking

Striking with a club or even claw is already covered by the rules. A fist should use similar rules - just a lot less damage than a weapon. Damage is 1 point for bare hands, 1d2 with a gauntlet or similar. Kicking is the same (with the advantage that you're rarely barefoot), but a natural 1 forces you to save versus paralysis or fall prone.

You could add an infinite amount of detail here (e.g., critical hits, fists versus armor, weapon length versus fists, speed, spell interruption, etc.), but you should only use that if you also use similar rules for weapons (e.g.: a fist has less reach than a short sword, but the difference between a dagger and a spear might be even greater).

Wrestling/grappling

Again, there is an infinite amount of detail to grappling (see my review of Dungeon Grappling, with is compatible with most OSR games), but we could "pareto" this thing to cover 80% of our needs with 20% of the existing crunch - or even better.

My first instinct would be using he d20, and you can do that if you want - but I think the d6 works better for various reasons.

I'll use attack bonus [AB] for my example, because I use ascending AC, but you could use THAC0 (see "motives and alternatives" below). 

Using B/X or OSE, THAC0 19 is a +0 attack bonus; THAC0 16 translates to +3, and so on. Remember that you usually add your Strength bonus (see below).

Simply roll with 1d6 + AB against your opponents AB (not AC). If you win, you can grab your opponent. If you win by 5 or more, you can hold, shove, trip, disarm, damage, etc. If you win by 10 or more, you can choose two options, and so on. Fail and nothing happens.

- Grab: the target gets -2 to attacks and +2 to be attacked (including further grappling). This lasts until the target's first attack (or movement etc.).

- Hold: like grab, but your opponent is held until he breaks free with a grapple attempt of his own.

- Shove: push your target away 10 feet.

- Trip: the target is prone (-4/+4 for attacks unless he uses half his movement to get up).

- Disarm: get your opponent's weapon or toss it aside.

- Damage: cause 1d4 damage with locks, punches, elbows, etc.

Other considerations.

Size/weight: if one side is significantly larger or heavier (e.g., double the weight), it gets a +4 bonus to grapple (+2 if 50% heavier, etc.). Enough size difference may make grappling impossible, but if your setting has an "epic" tone, a high-level fighter could conceivably pull a giant by his feet and bring him down, or get a dragon by the horns.

Limbs: using more than one limb gives you +1 per limb. Having more than 2 limbs on the ground (e.g., quadrupeds or centaurs) will similarly help you to defend against most maneuvers. Creatures without limbs (e.g. gelatinous cube) or non-humanoid shape are immune against some grappling maneuvers.

Bite: A creature with a bite attack can usually use that to grapple too, depending on size.

Weapons: you can grapple with certain weapons, in certain ways (a stick or polearm can be used to trip, a shield can be used to shove, etc. - DM's call). Otherwise, you need a free hand.

Armor: will usually not help/hinder against grappling. In fact, grappling a heavily armored foe might be a good tactic, especially if you're also heavily armored and a bit stronger.

Strength: can always be added to your AB when grappling.

Dexterity: can replace Strength when grappling, but only when defending.

Movement: you can move while grappling/grappled but your foe counts as encumbrance.

Interrupting spells: any grappling maneuver except grab interrupts a spell, similarly to taking damage.

Groups: various creatures can attempt to grapple a single powerful foe at once; however, see "stacking modifiers".

Stacking modifiers: if a creature is held by another creature AND prone AND grabbed by a third creature, only the worst modifier applies, with -1 for each additional creature (in our example, the modifier would be -6: -4 for being prone, -1 for being held, -1 for being grabbed).

Motives and alternatives to AB (attack bonus)

I use attack bonus because it includes class, level and Strength into its formula. A strong, experienced fighter should be great at grappling.

Using THAC0 is doable (e.g., roll 1d6 plus the target's THAC0 and try to beat your own THAC0).

Using HD would be a reasonable alternative - but requires more rolling and adding up, in addition to special rules for Strength and PCs with more than 9 levels (since they get no more HD despite improving THAC0).

Using 1d20 is doable but you'd have to rework all bonuses. I prefer 1d6 because you can keep math easy and bonuses small, although I might consider using 1d20 to keep it more similar to other attacks (I did something similar in Dark Fantasy Basic but I think it deserves refining).

Using saving throws as written in B/X or D&D is not a great idea, IMO - it makes grappling less relevant as you level up, and it stops big monsters from grappling each other effectively.

"Pummeling" and unconsciousness

The DMG uses "pummeling" with a fist or dagger (but apparently not a club or mace) as a way to make your opponent unconscious. This should not be unique to unarmed combat, of course. 

Here, I prefer the 5e rule: if you reduce an opponent to 0 HP with a melee attack, you can decide he gets unconscious (e.g., attack with a pommel, the flat of the blade, etc.).

There should be a small change of death regardless, unless you reduce the target to 0 HP trough grappling (choke, etc.).

Extremely simple combat maneuvers

Here is another take on a similar subject. It is a bit more freeform, but works well enough for weapons. Unarmed combat would take additional considerations, since the damage is usually too small to scare most foes - maybe defeating the entire purpose of grappling in armor.

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

Dragonlance: Dragons of Deceit

Readers of this blog are probably familiar with the Dragonlance D&D setting. Here is the short of it (from Wikipedia):

Dragonlance is a shared universe created by Laura and Tracy Hickman, and expanded by Tracy Hickman and Margaret Weis under the direction of TSR, Inc. into a series of fantasy novels. The Hickmans conceived Dragonlance while driving in their car on the way to TSR for a job interview. Tracy Hickman met his future writing partner Margaret Weis at TSR, and they gathered a group of associates to play the Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game. The adventures during that game inspired a series of gaming modules, a series of novels, licensed products such as board games, and lead miniature figures.

I have read the first (and probably most famous) trilogy decades ago. At the time, I found it... okay-ish. Certainly not as interesting as the classics I was reading at the time (Tolkien, Poe, Lovecraft, etc.) but I still liked it better than The Icewind Dale Trilogy. 

It had an appropriate epic scope, diverse (if stereotyped) characters, and a setting that was almost create enough with its draconian foes, three moons and their respective mages, and deities walking the earth. It was maybe a bit "young adult-ish" for my tastes, but the main flaw was a few instances of "tell, don't show" where the author would bafflingly skip an epic scene only for it to be told by other characters later.

Mildly interesting, but not something I was willing  to pursue further.

However, I've recently found Dragons of Deceit on a sale and decided to give it a try.

It might have something to do with nostalgia or the fact that I had a friend who read ALL novels and told me some of the stories with an obvious passion. I imagined the books might have become better as the authors gained experience.

Well, this is not the case for this Dragons of Deceit.

The book tells the story of Destina Rosethorn, the young daughter of a brave knight who goes into battle against the same villains of the first trilogy. Trying to save her father (and herself) from all the problems that come with this fact, she goes searching for an artifact that would allow her to travel trough time.

The first problem with this book becomes obvious right in the beginning, as it adopts the "Poughkeepsie" style criticized by LeGuin in her famous essay; i.e., the setting looks exactly like modern days with some magic and pointy ears (and even more D&D-isms than the first trilogy as far as I can remember, such as people starting working miracles for no reason).

Feudal lords spend vast amounts of time with lawyers and merchants, with some of the main battles being resolved in courts or with a few coins. There are "magic shops" willing to sell potions and time-traveling devices. Gods walk the earth like common folk, and they talk funny. Dragons are nice and willing to be ridden just because. The mage police is called when there is a problem with mages. And so on. 

Everything is magical... which means nothing is.

The second problem is common in many trilogies (the worst offender in recent memory is probably The Blade Itself): nothing interesting needs to happen because we have two more books to tell a story. Dragons of deceit, however, is a duology; so only the first half of the book feels a bit stale. In the second part, LOTS of things happen, and the universe is potentially turned upside down.

Well, kinda. Like the death of a comic book superhero, you often feel that the stakes are mild, and no permanent damage will be done (or, worse, nothing will "really" happen because time travel will solve itself).

The third problem is the "tell, don't show" I've mentioned above. Few important scenes are skipped, but even when you see them happen, it gets told again nevertheless. A character often explains to others something that has happened a few chapters before. 

Stories get repeated again and again. Characters and scenes from other novels get "repeated" too, as they get retold or revisited with time travel. 

You would expect the author of the original trilogy to come up with new characters and battles, but alas, these are few (come to think of it, the book has only a couple of real fights).

In short, the tone of this books is light and vanilla. 

The characters get into multiple hijinks and marriage jokes that might make you smirk if you're in a great mood.

All "good" characters are nice to each other regardless of circumstance, there are almost no shades of gray between good and evil, and so on. This is closer to "young adults" and further away from "dark fantasy" than the original trilogy.

Compared to other books reviewed in this blog, this it is not great. Not as funny as proper comedy, not as epic as something like Anderson or Tolkien, not as imaginative as Vance or CAS.

On the other hand, it is a reasonably quick and easy read and the second half at least gets you curious to get to the end (and maybe read the other half of the duology). I think it deserves at least a few points for being reasonably short.

In short, if you really liked the original Dragonlance books or setting, this could be is a fun read that might hit you pleasantly in the nostalgia. If you haven't read the original trilogy, try that first - Dragons of Deceit obviously relies on the fact that the reader is probably a fan.