I find myself teetering between what I like about Swords and Wizardry and the stuff I like from Tunnels and Trolls (the classes, the weird language table, the SR system), and I'm wondering if I can hybridize them somehow. Generally, I like the simplicity of S&W more, and dislike T&T's roll-a-fistful-of dice system, but I like to tinker, and S&W is so tempting to tinker with...
First thought, classes. Keep the fighter, throw out the cleric, and mix in some cleric spells into the wizard lists. Maybe change turn undead into a spell, while we're at it.
But I like the T&T differentiation between fighters, wizards, and rogues (as people with a smattering of informal training in magic, but who live by wits and weapons). What to do with the rogues?
I'm thinking of a class, let's call him the mountebank (in a nod to one of Gary Gygax's lost 2nd edition classes), and give him the combat details and hit points of the cleric, a smattering of low-level spells, and then we have the rogue.
Using the T&T SR system, which I like, might just be a matter of thinking differently about the S&W save system. That leaves me with the weird T&T language table which just means making a new table of my own. And I can do that.
May need to tinker some soon....
I've been hybridizing rules since 1975 or so when I tried adding some stuff from GDW's En Garde to OD&D. That did not work as well as I hoped, but that did not stop me from adding material from Arduin, C&S, T&T, etc. over the next few years. Some things worked well. Others were soon removed.
ReplyDeleteWhoah, I really like the idea of turning undead as a spell! I'm dumping the cleric in my own setting and had been wondering what to do about turning. Nifty.
ReplyDeleteI think the spell approach allows limited use of turning (returning some fear of even low-level undead), and makes players some meaningful choices about researching the spell, choosing to devote resources to it, etc. We'll see how it plays out, if this ever makes it to the table.
ReplyDelete