I’m now tempted to try making my own paleolithic hack.

I’m now tempted to try making my own paleolithic hack.

I’m now tempted to try making my own paleolithic hack. Thanks to Mark Tygart for the Hyborian Age books, though I think Sagas of the Icelanders is going to be a closer touchstone. 

Right now I’m thinking four stats, but I’m having a tough time coming up with snappy names for them. Here’s what I have so far:

– Physical fitness and overall health, comparable to Young in Saga of the Icelanders

– Instinct and animal-like cunning, the more predatory part of the psyche

– Social and higher brain functions, rational thought, the ability to innovate, craft, and defy tradition

– Influence of the spirit world, comparable to Weird.

I’m trying to decide if this is a good move:

I’m trying to decide if this is a good move:

I’m trying to decide if this is a good move:

While you have a shield equipped, add the following option to Defend:

• Redirect a spell or magical effect from the thing you defend to yourself

Does intercepting a spell or magical effect count as redirecting an attack?

This is the beginning of an idea, just wanted to sound it out.

This is the beginning of an idea, just wanted to sound it out.

This is the beginning of an idea, just wanted to sound it out.

When you make a sacrifice, answer the following three questions about what you are sacrificing to the fates:

Is it something valuable to you or your community?

Is it something living, or very recently deceased?

Is it NOT something that would be harmful if alive and unchecked?

For each answer of “yes”, hold 1 Fate.

The third clause is designed to make sure the sacrifice has some value. Junk isn’t a good sacrifice. A dead monster could be a sacrifice, but probably only worth 1 Fate. I’m not satisfied with it yet though. How would you write this?

I’m resurrecting this idea that +Jeremy Strandberg had about wealth-as-abstraction.

I’m resurrecting this idea that +Jeremy Strandberg had about wealth-as-abstraction.

I’m resurrecting this idea that +Jeremy Strandberg had about wealth-as-abstraction. Rather than having wealth as a stat, wealth can be an expendable resource, so when you use it, you roll+wealth spent. That would give you a Supply move that looks like this: 

When you outfit yourself for adventure, choose three pieces of gear based on the steading’s Prosperity that you want to acquire, and roll+wealth spent. *On a 10+, you find it all, no problem. *On a 7-9, choose one:

You can’t find everything you need, you only get two pieces of gear.

It’s expensive, spend 1 more wealth.

Throwing around all that money draws some unwanted attention.

More Prosperous steadings have more and better stuff for sale, though there may need to be some counterbalance that makes wealth more valuable based on a number of factors. This is just a first draft.

I think this may have come up before at some point, but I can’t find the thread…

I think this may have come up before at some point, but I can’t find the thread…

I think this may have come up before at some point, but I can’t find the thread…

There’s an old saying that goes, “When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.” If you have a character that gets an advantage or benefit to doing things a certain way, how much do you notice that they are on the lookout for opportunities to do anything that way, even if it’s not appropriate or doesn’t make sense?

I ask because I’m brainstorming a Defend-heavy character, and my concern is that they will do nothing but Defend if it becomes too good.

This is a different take on the Wizard, using a much more narrowly focused list of spells and putting more emphasis…

This is a different take on the Wizard, using a much more narrowly focused list of spells and putting more emphasis…

This is a different take on the Wizard, using a much more narrowly focused list of spells and putting more emphasis on a freeform magical utility. 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwbHes6iNuGrZUZmREFoekYwdTA/view?usp=sharing

I have this idea for a quicker and more abstract method of a group fighting a large horde of enemies, or battle…

I have this idea for a quicker and more abstract method of a group fighting a large horde of enemies, or battle…

I have this idea for a quicker and more abstract method of a group fighting a large horde of enemies, or battle between armies with the PCs being key figures:

A horde has two stats, Danger and Morale. Danger is how dangerous they are to you. The higher the Danger, the more the PCs have to work to avoid harm. A relatively simple enemy has Danger equal to the number of players. For a harder fight, increase Danger by one or more; for an easier fight, lower it by one.

Morale is how long the horde is willing to stay in the fight. A horde with high Morale can withstand a larger number of losses and continue pressing the attack. Think of Morale as the horde’s collective hit points.

2 Morale: Weak, easily chased off or defeated

4 Morale: Going to last more than one round

6 Morale: A long and difficult fight

8 Morale: A marathon battle

When you face a horde of monsters, describe how you deal with them and roll+ whatever stat the GM deems appropriate. *On a 10+, hold 2. *On a 7-9, hold 1. Spend your hold, 1-for-1, and describe how you:

Reduce Threat by 1.

Reduce Morale by 1.

Accomplish a side goal during the fight, or preventing the horde from accomplishing a side goal. (claiming a rallying point, taking out a specific person, controlling the magical battle overhead, etc.)

After all of the players have rolled and spent their hold, the GM gives makes a move for each point of Danger left. If the enemy is at zero Morale, they are defeated. Otherwise, both sides must decide if they are going to continue the fight. If they do, the situation must change somehow. One side may choose a different tactic, take the fight to a different location, or set a different objective.

The horde’s Danger is refreshed to the normal stating value at the end of each round, but Morale isn’t.

I know that coin counting is a staple among dungeon crawlers, but would anyone prefer a more abstract system, such…

I know that coin counting is a staple among dungeon crawlers, but would anyone prefer a more abstract system, such…

I know that coin counting is a staple among dungeon crawlers, but would anyone prefer a more abstract system, such as AW’s “Barter”? I would call it “Loot” for DW. (Aside, would you give it weight too? 1 Loot = 1 weight unless otherwise indicated)

1 Loot is enough for:

A handful of silver coins

A week’s stay at a decent inn

A simple weapon or bundle of ammo

A bottle of good wine or whiskey

Trail rations to feed an entire party for a week

A pack of simple adventuring supplies (5 uses) nothing too fancy, just simple, mundane things.

Treatment by an acolyte priest or surgeon

A proper bribe for an average guard

A night of feasting and strong drink for yourself

A week’s service of an unskilled laborer

2 Loot is enough for:

A bag of silver coins

A handful of gold coins

A finely-made sword, bow, or other weapon

A week’s stay at a quality inn

A suit of leather and chainmail

Treatment by a high priest or a competent surgeon

A proper bribe for someone important

A potion of healing

A night of feasting and strong drink for your party

A week’s service of a skilled laborer

A pack of fine adventuring supplies (5 uses) which may contain even expensive or complicated things.

3 Loot is enough for:

A bag of gold coins

A riding horse

A fine piece of jewelry

Clothes for a noble party

A good suit of scale mail

A week’s service of someone skilled and willing to go into danger with you.

A night of feasting and strong drink for the entire tavern

A rare and unique weapon, perhaps by a specific craftsman

A proper bribe for someone noble or powerful

To people who have played with Jacob Randolph’s Mage playbook, did you find it to be too powerful?

To people who have played with Jacob Randolph’s Mage playbook, did you find it to be too powerful?

To people who have played with Jacob Randolph’s Mage playbook, did you find it to be too powerful? If so, what would you do to fix it? I’m working on an idea, but I want to hear other people’s impressions first.