Semi-Review/Campaign Report: How & Why I Hacked B10, "Night's Dark Terror"

A little while ago, my players finished a very satisfying play-through of the old TSR module B10, Night's Dark Terror, set in the vaguely not-Slavic medieval-ish realm of Karameikos - the Grand Duchy that introduced Mystara, an old but rich D&D setting, to many of us (described in more detail in GAZ1, The Grand Duchy of Karameikos - affiliate link).

Here's my verdict in a nutshell: B10 is really good, more a flexible campaign platform than a single adventure, a somewhat-open, sandboxy romp, and great fun. All that being said, the module as written needs some TLC to avoid railroading, maintain logical coherency, and get the most bang for your buck - but the module's flexibility allows all the modifications needed to whip it into really fun shape. Recommended - but so are some changes. 

If you'd like to snag a copy, DriveThru has it (affiliate link) right here: B10, Night's Dark Terror.

If you're up for the long version, then read on; below, I offer a mini-review and campaign report, focusing on the ways I changed the module - and why. There are already quite a few online reviews of B10, and you should check them out too if you're shopping for adventures. Rather than just reinventing the wheel, I'll try to lay bare some of the design considerations that went into how I used B10. This post will probably be most useful to GMs who are familiar with B10, or who (might) want to run it. In other words, I won't try to do everything that a great review does, but I'll drill down into the nitty-gritty of actually running this thing.

No doubt there are many other fine ways to run this module; here's what worked at our table.

But first:  SPOILERS AHEAD. 

So much spoilage. More spoilage than a black suitcase full of shrimp left on the back porch all weekend in July. In order to break down what works in this module and what I found necessary to change, I will thoroughly spoil every major element of this module - and you should know that some of the module's greatest player joys involve the slow resolution of mystery. You really shouldn't read this post if you are, or may soon be, a player in this module. Otherwise, read on!

PREMISE

Here's the basic idea with B10: you've been hired to escort horses for sale to market up in Karameikos' desolate northeast. But the nearer you get to your employers' homestead, the more you see signs of trouble and disorder - culminating in a nasty goblin siege that descends on said homestead right as you arrive! Presuming you survive that lengthy battle, you then learn from local refugees that most of the neighboring settlements were also attacked - and your employer's brother, Stephan, has been kidnapped by the goblins! Your new employer's family commission you to go find their missing kinsman, kicking off an open-ended exploration of a substantial (and generally interesting) stretch of Karameikan wilderness. After many shenanigans, if you're able to track down and rescue the kidnapped Stephan, you discover that a vicious slaving cabal - the Iron Ring - is behind the goblin attacks. The Iron Ring is trying to wring (sorry...) from Stephan the tools to locate a forgotten ancient city, Hutaaka, reputed to be chock-full of fabulous treasures. Determined to stop his former captors/tormentors, Stephan now commissions you to join him on an urgent quest to find Hutaaka first, and liberate its treasures before they can enrich the Iron Ring. But the lost city holds terrible mysteries that may make it hard for anyone to plunder it...

Ok. That's the outline of B10 in a nutshell. I'll break things down in closer detail bit by bit. If it seems that this overall 'plot' seems...well, plotted, hinting at the plot-heavy approach of post-Gygaxian TSR, well, yeah, you'd be right. But (as I'll discuss) the individual pieces actually do allow a very flexible, open sandbox, with just enough structure for the players to have solid hooks to hang onto as they figure out what else they want to accomplish.


SYSTEM AND MECHANICS ISSUES

Yeah, yeah, system doesn't matter (except, of course, for when it really does). It will be worth noting that we ran B10 over the past year using two different systems, each somewhat outside the mainstream. For most of Autumn 2019, Winter, and much of Spring 2020, we ran this as a play-by-email, using my own homebrew rules that I cheekily called '74 against Thebes (it was...kind of an OD&D + ancient history nerd joke...). These were an evil hybrid of elements from Searchers of the Unknown, OD&D, Swords & Wizardry, Knave, and who knows what. I think they worked quite well.

The play-by-email format is important to note, because it influenced my campaign design decisions significantly for the first half of this campaign; PBEM has its own strengths and weaknesses, and pulling it off well can require careful thinking about pacing and the kinds of decision points that are most likely to keep robust play going well.

When COVID hit, alas, and the season of the Zoom drew nigh, we switched to weekly face-to-face (well, comparatively) play over video-chat. We also switched to a new rules-set - not because of deficiences in '74 against Thebes, but because I'd developed a mean hankering to run some PbtA gaming again, after several years "off" of that approach. This time, however, I was determined to run some PbtA action as fully in keeping with OSR principles as possible. (No, no, this actually can be done. I think I've mused on that in an earlier post).

This does mean that our second half of playing through B10 had a different flavor again, this time one that particularly rewarded set-ups with room for chaotic consequences and factional power-struggles spilling over (spoiler alert: they did).

With both systems, we also used magic items called 'Titans' Tears' which are gem-like spells that activate and fire when popped in the mouth. They are each 1-shot/1-use, but have no level restrictions; a little bit like Numenera cyphers, I suppose, but generally using typical D&D spell effects.


NO FEUDALISM, THANK YOU, THIS IS THE IRON AGE

Our campaign also had one other big difference worth noting up front: I re-set Karameikos as a faux-Iron Age setting rather than a faux-medieval setting. Often this resulted in only cosmetic differences, but none of the usual assumptions were on the table about the feudal hierarchy, etc. I was entirely willing to re-write canonical Mystaran lore as needed or desired.

Since our earlier interactions were done over email, I have a record of those stages of the game. Here's how I described the setting and pitch to the new players:

Karameikos! A land of deep forests thick with timber, mountains rich in ore, cold, fast rivers, and plains known for their noble horses. It’s also a land infamous for superstitions, though they may be well-earned; fey and dark things live in the forests (or so men say), there are wind-haunted ruins in the mountains, and outside the few urban areas the locals look uneasily into the wild places around them. 

150 years ago, the Thyatians conquered this land, outlawed the tribal gatherings of the local Tral people, and re-named the country after one of their own noble houses: Karameikos. Generations after the conquest, a sort of modus vivendi has emerged; Karameikan lords extract what metal, timber, and horses they need from the land, using some in their new towns (Threshold, Kel’ven, and distant Specularum, the capital) and otherwise usually leave the locals alone - if they don’t cause trouble. Though robbed of their tribal councils, the Tral have adapted, forming Ru’at - a word plausibly translated “fellowship, guild, faction, clan, army, club” - informal social networks that organize, protect, and police Tral society below and alongside the systems of the Karameikan conquerors. 

As fate would have it, your own path is now connected to one such Ru’at. You followed various roads across this ancient world, but they each led here: through Karameikos, and into deep debt. Your traveling funds exhausted, you have traded your promise of work up front for gold-lenders’ promises of ample recompense in future. Those gold-lenders, it turns out, are members of a Tral Ru’at with connections across northeastern Karameikos. Recognizing your various gifts and abilities, they have sent you on from the town Kel’ven to seek out a homestead named Sukiskyn. There, you are to assist with  two tasks: first, help guard a herd of horses on their way to sale, and then return to Sukiskyn to serve a Ru’at lore-keeper named Stephan, who apparently wants help with…well, the gold-changers aren’t sure. Something lore-related. Since you each owe 2,500 deben to the Ru’at, you don’t seem to have much choice anyway. So off you go to Sukiskyn. 

The module actually has the PCs just going to Sukiskyn to make money, but I've learned from Into the Odd / Electric Bastionland that starting out without money and in terrible debt can be a much more effective way to channel players toward adventure!


THE SIEGE OF SUKISKYN

The module opens with a troubled journey to the homestead of Sukiskyn, and then a really dramatic siege of that homestead by rampaging goblins. As already noted, the aftermath of this battle propels PCs into a search for Stephan, a kidnapped local.

I trimmed the opening very heavily, for two reasons. First, our play-by-email format meant that unnecessary chaff risked losing initial momentum, a really bad idea early in the campaign. Second, a few of these opening elements feel awkward to me, sort of like very modest railroading to get the players to the desired 'inciting moment' from within the narrative - rather than simply starting the narrative closer to that inciting moment. For example, the module has players arrive at Sukiskyn right after the attack has closed in; someone from the farmstead is supposed to come out and dramatically wave the players in to come take shelter with them just at the last minute...via boxed text. Never mind that I can easily imagine some PCs wanting to turn and run away from the battle...which effectively nerfs the beginning of the module.

Instead, I just started the action in medias res:

Sukiskyn is burning. Two of the homesteaders are dead; their bodies lay for some time backlit by the flames rising from the northern palisade, until another wave of attackers dragged away the remains…after which the sound of hooting, jeering, and tearing flesh was only drowned out by someone wailing hysterically inside the besieged homestead. At least it’s quiet now; even the drumming in the woods has stopped. Actually, that may not be a good thing. 

Then a little backstory to clarify what the honk was happening, then I opened with what is supposed to be the climax of the whole siege, the final charge by the enemies. Worked really well for PBEM format; trying to play through the whole battle over email from a cold start would have taken an eternity, without having much clear motivation as to what the point of it all was.

I never described the foes as goblins; for some reason, I think I thought that saying "goblins" would trigger "oh, no biggie then" in my more experienced players' minds. Here's how I introduced what have become a regular in the campaign:

When they first arrived, lighting torches and fires in the woods all about Sukiskyn, jeering and howling and drumming their blasted never-ending drumbeat, Pyotr whispered, “It is the Gobrach! The anthropophagi…” None of you has seen such things before, but the forms that eventually came screaming out of the woods to assault the farmstead were all too real. By torchlight, you saw dark beady eyes bugging out of bizarre, sharp-toothed ape-bat-bear faces, ringed by patchy coarse fur manes. They stood only as tall as bow-legged human youths, but in their hands were cruel weapons, and among their chirps and barks you could hear words, too, calling for creative death and the taste of blood. Some wore wolf-skins and rode wolves as they raced past the walls, shooting at anyone they could see; others only charged on foot, but wore rags and weapons all marked in red. They have come in several waves during the night, and finally burned the palisade and barn to the north, and left two of Pyotr’s family dead in the courtyard. A crowd of the beasts broke into the pens south of the main house, and drove off most of the family’s horse-herd - the animals you’d been tasked with escorting to sale. 

It’s been a long night since then. 

The players seemed to take these critters very seriously, and I think this approach - evocative description rather than familiar name - really helped early on.

Obviously, the players survived the fight (it would be a short campaign report otherwise).


A SANDBOX (SOME ASSEMBLY MAY BE REQUIRED): THE SEARCH FOR STEPHAN

After fighting off the gobrach, my players learned that other foes from the Wolfskull gobrach clan had kidnapped, Stephan, brother to the head of household at Sukiskyn. The PCs were told that if they could rescue Stephan, their debts to the Ru'at would be considered paid in full.

Instead, in the module, there's first some sort of cul-de-sac-ish business with chasing after horses stolen by goblins - but oh no, they were already sold off to horse-thieving bandits, so you can either pay through the nose to buy back stolen horses, or fight bandits. Ok. But this whole thing felt a bit unnecessary. In the module, however, Pyotr (in charge at Sukiskyn) asks the players to go find his brother in exchange for half the value of the horses they were supposed to escort to sale - so I guess there is a point in chasing down these horses, but ... I dunno, just having the players be really deeply in financial debt to these locals, and then having the locals be sincerely willing to clear said debt should they get their brother/son back, seemed more emotionally compelling both from the players' and NPCs' perspectives.

Now, it should be as easy as any D&D wilderness mission: since the Wolfskull clan has Stephan, go journey overland to their lair, nab him, and you're done. But, there's a problem. To quote the module:

If they accept, the party's main problem is that no-one at Sukiskyn knows where the Wolfskull lair is. In order to get the search underway, therefore, it is up to you as DM to determine how much, and what information the party can gain from the homesteaders, the Ilyakana refugees, and any goblin captives they may have. 

Yeah, this is kind of a problem, since it's saying that all progress on the module comes screaming to a halt unless the GM will whip up some reasons for making future progress possible. Hrrmmm. I have the sense from reading some discussions of B10 that some parties have had to just wander around, hexcrawling through the wilderness to see whether they happen to find any Wolfskull goblins hiding under a rock. Hexcrawling is all well and good, but probably not as an efficient response to an abduction by violent and potentially man-eating enemies.

To be clear, this wouldn't be too hard to address by having somebody know something. But the module, as written, adds some insult to injury here. Basically, whenever/however the players do finally discover the Wolfskull lair, if they can infiltrate it successfully they will learn that Stephan was there, but now he's been relocated to some other place called Xitaqa. And if/when the PCs return to Sukiskyn to ask whether anybody has heard of Xitaqa, they'll hear...Nope...but, oh, funny thing, one of our old-timers does know this crazy old legend about a centaur-spirit out on the moors, and if he really exists then he might know where Xitaqa is.

Which is cool, and fine! But...ummm...how come nobody mentioned this supernatural tour guide when we were all desperately racking our brains to figure out where the Wolfskull goblins might live?

In fact, Loshaad - said supernatural centaur spirit - is a watchful protector of horses in the region, and he seems to keep pretty effective tabs on everybody who might be messing with horses anywhere near Sukiskyn. I'm pretty sure that goblins who've been running off horses from homesteads would qualify there.

The fix is trivial, in my opinion, but it requires re-ordering some of the content as written in the module. You just have the family mention the centaur-guy right away, as soon as it becomes clear that nobody has any clue where Stephan might actually have been taken.

In no way does doing so prevent a rich series of overland journeys mixing random and fixed encounters. My players set out east to find Loshaad, the centaur-spirit. Meeting him, he told them (as per the module) that he would exchange information if the PCs killed two dangerous werewolves who'd been preying on wild horses in the area. The PCs agreed, but first they headed off further east to the local barrow-downs (quite pragmatically thinking that they needed more magical loot/weapons before fighting werewolves, and realizing that a row of ancient barrows might do the trick).

The barrows in the module are ok. I re-wrote them, not because they were bad, but they just didn't suit my aesthetic taste at the time. More significantly, I used the barrows to start planting clues about past history and other things in the sandbox setting - in this case, an ancient necromancer-lord named Nuromen. If that name rings a bell, it's because it comes from another module, BLUEHOLME: The Necropolis of Nuromen (affiliate link). As I thought about populating my little Karameikan sandbox, I decided to drop said Necropolis into the map (I used it to replace the stuff on the Island of Lost Dreams within the sandbox map, which I wasn't personally crazy on; but sticking Nuromen's old lair on the island in that lake looked like great fun). As it happens, the Nuromen module even has goblins who've been searching around the place recently, which fits in perfectly with what's going on around the B10 sandbox. And B10 has this weird, old row of barrow-mounds...so I added a slab at the barrows proclaiming it to be the edge of Nuromen's former territory.

Later, a random encounter that called for "elves" gave me the perfect excuse to drop in the 'hook' from the start of the Nuromen module, which has a fey princeling appear to ask PCs to go retrieve a stolen crown or something like that from the necropolis. The PCs ended up demurring politely, since they were hot on Stephan's trail, but I can say that the sandbox itself in B10 is one that allows very easy slotting in and out of content.

Oh, and the barrow-mounds are where one player character died in the jaws of an undead-possessed rabid cave bear, teaching the party that age-old lesson: hey, don't split up the party in an OSR game when you don't need to.

They got their loot (and they got their replacement PC, another debtor sent along to reinforce the search for Stephan by the concerned family's Ru'at). They tracked down, fought and killed the werewolves (and one PC got bitten and infected). Then it was off to Loshaad, who revealed that there had been a TON of gobrach activity of late at two sites (Xitaqa, and the Wolfskull lair) and that Stephan was probably at one of these. He also told them where they could find each of these sites.

Then the party hoofed it back to Sukiskyn where a sympathetic healer was able to cure the bitten almost-lycanthrope. The party deliberated over where to go, and decided...to head southeast to the Wolfskull lair.

Big, epic fight there. My hat's off to my players for clever tactical play against great odds here. They won, they rescued a human prisoner, and they learned...that they'd chosen wrong, and Stephan had been taken to Xitaqa. So off to the north they went, ready for a big showdown.

Oh. One other thing. The players did find one particularly disturbing magical item in the gobrach shaman's chamber at the Wolfskull lair. I included it more as a colorful illustration, as a sign that there were kinds of powers at work in the world that were very much not aligned with the PCs' values. Not, you see, as something really to be taken seriously, much less harnessed...

+ Ok, bear with me on this one…you mess with arcane powers in dark holes in the world, and you’ll find some weird stuff. You find a Titan’s Tongue. This is a life-size metal sculpture of…a tongue. If someone slices off their own tongue and then puts this metal sculpture in their mouth, two things happen:

+ their own severed tongue hardens and turns into a Titan’s Tongue. 

+ the metal tongue placed in their mouth grafts itself onto the stub, softens, and becomes (what appears to be) a regular tongue. However, from that point forward, anytime the wearer puts a Titan’s Tear in their mouth to activate its power, a portion of the power is absorbed by the Tongue before discharge. The player with the Titan’s Tongue in their mouth makes a Saving Throw (if they have a Scholar or Priest background or Sharp-Witted Trait they get a bonus die on the roll). If they pass the Save, the Tongue retains an imprint of the power released; from that point forward, the wearer of the tongue may cast the same “spell” effect once per day. [Ooooooooh….any takers…? I really don’t know how your characters will react to this - as an unclean aberration to be thrown away, or as grounds for some ritual tongue-piercing as a group bonding activity…]

The players asked for some clarifications...

Side effects? Really? What could possibly go wrong? Just kidding. You do know a tiny bit about these things from various whispers in the most ancient of lore. In a nutshell: the Titans' Tears themselves - despite their odd name - seem to contain powerful energy that was meant, one way or another, for the benefit of humankind since near the beginning (whether that energy was willingly stored up or sequestered away in an attempt to retain it from humankind, either way it was energy meant to assist humans in their tasks in the Order of Creation). 

The Tongues...are different. 

There are some other processes or powers that are reputed to have similar effect - (essentially making Titans' Tears a sustainable resource) - and there is some chance that you might yet encounter those - but the Titans' Tongues are the product of very ancient arcane experimentation by human sages, long ago, who wanted to contain and accelerate whatever powers they could obtain. They found a magical method of preserving power, but one that required pain and defacement as part of its cost. This is to say that the Tongue is an object meant to manipulate something healthy, using rather unhealthy methods. You do not know of any clear direct negative side-effect (or mechanical/rules-based penalty) for using it, but it would mean making something a bit askance from the Order of Creation a literal part of your own body. There is some chance that beings highly attuned to that Order might recognize it and react negatively toward you. It is a high-powered item, but not necessarily a nice one. 

Also, if you think about the way it works, there's a good chance that the tongue sitting in front of you used to belong to the gobrach Lord Vlack. Anybody want to wear his tongue? :-) 

So a bit of a moral/aesthetic dilemma for y'all. Any further questions while we're in the ruins of the Wolfskull Lair?

The PC who got bitten by the werewolf way back when? Well, he decided he wanted the tongue. Ewwww.


LET'S BREAK FOR A MOMENT...

This is getting quite substantial, so I'm going to stop for a break between posts here.

Is this helpful? Do you have other ideas for making B10 click and run well?

Just to be clear, B10 is a really good module, and the various criticisms here shouldn't detract from how much fun, and how mysterious, it can be for players.

For now, I'll close Part 1 of this discussion with a few rhetorical questions - like How would changing rulesets mid-campaign change the shape of play? Or How did I handle the urban adventures in Threshold? Or TANSTAAFL, so popping that cursed metal tongue into his mouth probably had some unpleasant long-term consequences, right? Right? 

Updating my preferred Mass Combat rules (weird Dungeon World-Into the Odd-etc. hack)

 Regular readers will know I've been chewing on simple domain and mass-combat rules lately. I've had a "Mass Combat rules Powered by the Apocalypse" blog post due for some time; as sometimes happens, however, actual life went faster than typing, and experiences at the gaming table, testing out my thoughts, plus reading some excellent ideas by others, have brought me to a slightly different place than the one I expected to write about next. :-) 

With significant influence from Into the Odd, Dungeon World, Apocalypse World, Macchiato Monsters, and blog posts from Jeremy Strandberg's Spouting Lore and at "Enthusiastic Skeleton Boys," I've arrived at a second draft of how I (think I) want to handle mass combat in my current campaign. That campaign basically runs on Dungeon World, but even if you're an OSR 'purist,' you might find something thought-provoking here. Comments and critiques welcome. What follows was written primarily to myself, as part of an ongoing interior conversation, but I hope it is clear enough to follow!

[One quick proactive comment: at this stage in the process, you should feel free to say whatever seems helpful in the comments, but I'm less interested in checking out brand-new systems and more interested in critiques to hone this system or its influences. Thanks!]. 

ORDERING UNITS AND THE COMBAT ACTION ECONOMY:

This system complements, but also moves just a little beyond, the normal PbtA game-flow. Individual Units can act like discrete individuals on the battlefield. When a PC commands a Unit, the player may direct the Unit as if it were a second PC, rather than resolving all the Unit’s actions only in connection with the PC’s own dice rolls. This keeps the actual rolls ‘player-facing,’ but it allows a larger array of Units to function meaningfully on the battlefield, without limiting the PCs’ own individual actions. It also prevents weird edge cases in which a PC’s STATS are used to determine Unit outcomes in ways that make little sense.

Normally, dice modifiers for Units attempting actions will be very low.

Green Quality Units: -1

Normal Quality Units: +0

Veteran Quality Units: +1

Elite Quality Units: +2

On a case-by-case basis, the GM may break down a Unit’s Quality bonuses in a few categories:

When Fighting…

When Maneuvering…

When Standing Fast…

(For example – Forest Skirmishers: Fighting +0, Maneuvering +1, Standing Fast -1).

…but normally the basic one-STAT list given above should be adequate.

HOW TO FIGHT WITH OR AGAINST UNITS:

For its combat statistics, a Unit uses the statistics of one of its average members. So, for example, a Large Unit of 100 Green peasant spearmen might have the following stats:

Peasant Spearmen (Large Unit). 3 HP, 0 Armor. Damage 1d8. Green Quality: -1. 

Whereas a smaller band of Brigands might look much tougher:

Brigand Band (Small Unit). 7 HP, 1 Armor. Damage 1d8. Normal Quality: +0. 

...even though the Brigands are only two steps from oblivion (see below), as opposed to four downgrades left for the much larger group of peasants. 

A Unit fights as if it were a single character, with various bonuses and penalties reflecting the size differences among rival units. 

Individuals (that's you, PCs) fighting Units can only roll 1d4 as their damage die, max, but this die-result may be increased by normal damage modifiers (spending ‘Mettle’, ‘Melee’ ability bonus, magic weapon damage bonuses, etc.). If an individual’s attack has the Area tag, then it may deal damage as normal and is not limited to the 1d4 attack die (for example, fireball spells or alchemical bombs are not limited to dealing 1d4 base damage).

The Mass Combat Unit Hierarchy:

Individuals

Tiny Units (10+)

Small Units (25+)

Medium Units (50+)

Large units (100+)

Each step up the Unit hierarchy gives a larger Unit +1 Damage, and +1 Armor. [EDIT: Moreover, when a Unit fights against an Individual, the unit inflicts +1d6 Damage instead of +1 Damage for each step up the size hierarchy, so that (for example) a Small Unit of Archers (bows, 1d6 damage) inflicts 1d6 +2d6 Damage when attacking an Individual]. 

Creatures with the Huge tag in combat with a Unit count as Units, not Individuals (but Huge creatures do count as Individuals when in combat with Individuals). Use a Huge creature’s Hit Point number as an equivalent to the number of men when calculating the creature’s nominal Unit size.

When a Unit reaches 0 HP, it automatically loses a step, downgrading to a Unit of the size below it, and tests Morale to avoid routing. Tiny Units that reach 0 HP are destroyed.

Overflow Damage does not ‘roll over’ when a Unit downgrades; a Unit will only downgrade one step from any single attack – for example, a fireball attack on a Medium Unit can only downgrade it to a Small Unit, even if the total damage is not exhausted by the first downgrade.

Proximity – a PC may join in Proximity with a unit. When in Proximity:

-       a PC benefits from the Size Armor bonus (if any) of the Unit;

-       a PC may try to restrain the Unit to prevent a rout (after failing a morale test)

-       a PC also takes damage along with the unit whenever it suffers harm.

TESTING UNIT MORALE - at 0 hp, downgrade the Unit, then roll 2d6 + Nothing.

On 8+, the Unit holds and doesn’t rout (yet). On 7-, the Unit routs, unless a PC in Proximity passes a Hold Unit check.

·      Modifiers:
-1 if the unit is Green/Frightened,
+1 for Veterans,
+2 for Elites.
(Can treat Large creatures as +1, Huge creatures as +2, or even forego the roll at all for Huge creatures, and maybe Large too, and Brave combatants, on a case-by-case basis).

NPC Commanders of note may grant bonuses as they try to rally their troops, too.

Hold Unit: When a unit routs, a PC in Proximity to the Unit may roll +CHA to try to hold them in place with a rousing speech. It had better be a good speech.

·      10+, the unit holds instead of routing.

·      7-9, the unit holds instead of routing, but choose one:

o   They’re in bad shape, and lose 1d4 further hit points, unmodified by Armor,

o   OR the enemy capitalizes on your little speech to advance further on the field of battle,

o   OR the GM chooses something (which might be one of those two options).

·      6-: the unit breaks, and your feeble attempt to hold them un-nerves other troops - all allied Units in LOS of the breaking unit must test morale, too!

Putting the MY back in Mystara: a rough map for a new campaign...

Well, I'm indulging in a fun side-post even though I need to finish up that series on simple domain play and mass combat procedures (I still shake my head thinking that I initially intended to write "a single post" on streamlined options for domain play. Good grief; Post Part 5 is still in Draft form...).

At any rate, I thought I'd chat up what's going on at my gaming table. My players recently finished a really enjoyable play-through of a heavily modified B10, Night's Dark Terror, a classic, sandboxy romp through the northeast of the Grand Duchy of Karameikos in Mystara, the "known world" setting of the old BECMI-box days (those are affiliate links above, by the way). B10 is an excellent module (though I recommend some modifications, which I may just elaborate...in another post).

For now, suffice it to say that our players completed the basic arc of the B10 module, and in doing so saved the world (not because B10 tells you to, but because I added a big doomsday threat in the non-spoiler-ese 'place that B10 takes you to.'). Last night, we picked up again to kick off our next campaign arc, which will use X1, The Isle of Dread, as a chassis - heavily "chromed" by a bunch of other stuff, including classic modules and a lot of faction stuff of my own devising.

[In the very unlikely event that any of my players are reading this, tune out and stop reading NOW to avoid the risk of spoilers]. 

I'm sharing below a very crude, rough map that I threw together quickly on Powerpoint for my players before last night's session. It's a garbage map, but it illustrates how a GM might take the "official canon" of old-school Mystara and modify it very heavily to suit a local campaign. For one thing, our campaign is set in a fictional Iron Age setting, not the sorta-generic-medieval-ish setting of the Mystara boxed sets. This means that our "Minrothad" directly evokes Phoenicians and Carthaginians; Thyatians are sort of Neo-Babylonians mixed with Romans.

Anyone familiar with the map of Mystara should notice some dramatic changes here. Ierendi simply does not exist, because...well, because Ierendi. One PC is from "Madhrelia" which the player invented, but they're basically the Huns, so, Ethengar Khanate. Note that the great Mystaran playground of Karameikos has seen some dramatic, dramatic changes. I decided to play up Karameikan/Thyatian and Traldar ethnic tensions quite a bit more than is 'canon' during our campaign, which led to some exploration of premodern colonial/imperial expansion and its resulting tensions as an ongoing element in play. At the conclusion of the campaign arc, I gave the players some very simple tools to dictate what developments they would most want to see happen in the world around them over the next few season before our second campaign arc (with the understanding that there were too many pressing needs to fix everything; they each got just one pick for tweaking 'current events'). All that culminated with the players leading an insurrection at the campaign's end that helped create a free Traldar (just "Tral" in our campaign) kingdom in what had been the north of Karameikos (the family of Stephan and Pyotr, from B10, emerged as the initial ruling family!). Meanwhile the Iron Ring slavers got stomped on hard (the red smush on the map west of Karameikos is what used to be their stronhold).

In the new normal for the next campaign arc, Thyatians are the big expansionist power coming to get everyone. Our "not-Phoenician" Minrothad is still a group of trading-house islands, but the great port of Rothago has dominated its Minrothad fellows so that now only one other port, Minar, stands apart from their hegemony. Minar has invited the Thyatians to back them up (nothing could possibly go wrong with that strategy!) and the Thyatians have also 'generously' stepped in to hold together southern Karameikos after the collapse of Karameikan rule up north. The PCs have learned that one member of the recently-overthrown Thyatian dynasty is alive in hiding somewhere in the Sea of Dread. Speaking of which - each of the PCs has their own reason to go to the Isle of Dread, but those reasons mainly revolve around uncovering the history of the fallen Nithian Empire, because something connected to it is stirring and an ancient threat awakens...insert typical theme music.

I drew up a network map to plot out the interrelationships of various faction leaders. One of my kids complained that it was impossible to figure out, but I protested that it's no worse to keep track of than the eastern Mediterranean during the Roman Republic (yeah, I'm a nerd). To clarify, this relationship map is for me, not the players. To add color, depth, and surprise to these relationships, I used random tables from Renegade Crowns (affiliate link), an old Warhammer Fantasy sourcebook, with pleasing results.

Anyway - thanks for reading. As I hope these ideas illustrate, the settled canon of an old D&D setting is always YOURS to modify as you wish at your own table. I never would have expected a year ago, that I'd be presiding over the destruction of Karameikos, but my players clearly enjoy the agency and empowerment they get from being active shapers of the world, and not merely passive recipients of a frozen status quo.

By the end of our kick-off session last night, alchemical accidents by the party's physician had made one character grow wolf-fangs (permanent) and another stink horribly (temporary), another character discovered that he gets sea-sick, and now the players have reached the Isle and are ready for ... what lies ahead.

Happy gaming.

Simpler Domains & Warbands. Part 4, Really Simple MASS COMBAT (Into the Odd version)

Once, there was Chainmail. Later, there was War Machine, and then Battlesystem. An Echo, Resounding has a battle system. For something lighter, there's Chris Kutalik's By this Axe or the even smaller-scale By this Poleaxe. Delta's Book of War. Etc., etc., etc. These (and quite a few other approaches) generally adopt some or all of the structure...and pace...of classic tabletop wargames. And then, of course, there are the myriad options for playing an 'actual' formal miniatures wargame, without any clear tie to an RPG.

Roight, me lads, form line...eh, wot's that?
We've no convenient mass combat rules? Aaarg, retreat!!!

None of those perfectly fit my current goals and needs as I think about weaving "mini-domain play" into my campaign. If my players are to lead little warbands of followers, clash with corsair crews or cultist gangs, and scatter enemies not just singly but by the dozen, then I'd like a way to manage it all that fits the following criteria:

+ ideally, the mass-combat rules will fit into a session's normal procedures of play as smoothly as possibly. The gold standard here would be integrated mass combat rules that do NOT form a separate sub-system. Yep, this can be done; read on!

+ similarly (or to stress a sub-point within point 1), if possible, tracking damage for gangs/warbands should use the same hp/harm system used to track damage for PCs - though I'm more willing to flex on this point, if necessary.

+ the rules should keep PCs' roles and fates clear and distinct; player characters don't just vanish into a mass of combatants, and PCs ideally should retain independent and critical jobs on the field of battle - they don't function just as bonuses to a larger unit's statline.

+ finally, in keeping with my love for minimalist design, I favor rules that aren't too taxing or complicated - they should work, and get outta the way!

Let's look at some options that I find interesting or appealing, and consider some observations on their strengths and weaknesses. I will also note, in passing, that recent blogoredditsphere conversations have also raised simple-mass-combat questions; for some other takes (and different recommendations) see, for example, here and here (look far down Norbert's post for mass combat guidance) and here [EDIT: and here, too!]. 

Now, for the stuff that I'm thinking about.

INTO THE ODD - DETACHMENT RULES 

Just as Chris M's Into the Odd (and now, Electric Bastionland) includes really nice, dirt-simple "Enterprise" rules that offer a very solid basis for one-brain-cell domain play (recently discussed here), Into the Odd (henceforth: ItO) also includes perfectly serviceable, simple but effective "Detachment" rules for handling combat with gangs, large crews, military units, giant monsters, etc.  If you aren't familiar with ItO, a few tips will be necessary to understand all this: damage automatically hits; instead of rolling to hit, then rolling for damage, you just roll straight to damage. Damage comes off HP without narratively doing 'damage' - but after 0 HP, you start taking "Critical Damage," which comes right off your Strength stat (usually), equates to actual bodily harm, and requires passing a STR save to stay in the fight). You die at 0 STR. 

To wit (taken from the free rules, available in the right margins here): 

DETACHMENTS cost 10 gold to start up, and cost a further d6 gold in upkeep each month, or else they revolt. ... Equipping a Detachment costs twenty times the individual item cost. Detachments start with 1d6 HP and advance in Experience Levels just as individuals do [which, in ItO, generally requires delving missions completed, not a gold-for-xp target]. 

In battle, an ItO Detachment is functionally identical to an individual character, with a few minor tweaks (this means a gang's stats fit on an index card, if not a postage stamp). 

A Detachment deals "Enhanced" damage against individuals (In ItO, this means it rolls 1d12 damage). Normally, an individual can't even attack a Detachment unless that individual's attack is "explosive or suitably large-scale" (so a dragon's breath weapon or a wizard's lightning bolts might toast your own gang of hirelings, but a PC with a halberd can't scratch a goblin warband; you either need to run away, or figure out some more creative way to affect the baddies). If you command a Detachment to do something risky, this "may require a WIL (Will) Save" by the player commanding that Detachment. 

"When a Detachment takes Critical Damage [i.e., 0 HP and damage coming off STR] they are broken and cannot act until rallied. At STR 0 the Detachment is wiped out. When half of a force is broken, the remaining Detachments must pass a WIL save or be routed. Hit Points and Ability Scores are recovered with Short and Long Rests just as with individuals. 

The newer version, Electric Bastionland, offers a few tweaks: Individual attacks against Detachments can cause damage, but they're Impaired (limited to 1d4); Detachment attacks vs. individuals do weapon +1d12, and have a 'Blast' tag - they affect all targets in an area. 

There are also a few other very short rules for ships, vehicles, structures, etc. Quite recently, one GM put together a very nice expanded model for using these rules in a pirate/nautical setting, quite worth checking out for play at sea or on land. 

Alright, let's discuss these. There are wonderful things here, but also a few points I'd like to change or expand. I love how smoothly these fit right into the (admittedly super-minimalist) rules for normal play in ItO; I like how the dirt-simple rules for financing Detachments work with the Enterprise rules (but don't require you to have an Enterprise to run a Detachment, or vice versa); and the fact that a Detachment can 'level up' in the same way as a PC (by running on adventures) is a very interesting design choice that pushes toward specific kinds of veteran units - rather than just throwing in more cash to make a specific, single unit stronger, you can always hire a new separate detachment, but individual detachments gain experience and Hit Points only by joining you, over time, on those terrifying ventures into the darkness below.

All that aside, as a general-purpose mass-combat/mini-domain-play system, I'd like to see a few changes. Past a certain point, Detachments seem a little limited by the binary way they are defined (something is either an Individual or a Detachment). No matter the size or experience of the Detachment, it still rolls the same amount of Damage. When two Detachments fight each other, only their Hit Points (and equipment, I suppose) differentiate between them. Equipping a Detachment with halberds always costs "Halberd cost x 20" no matter the size of the Detachment. Again, these are brilliantly simple  and will cover most of what anyone needs for a small gang, but I think there are enough edge cases to make some tweaks desirable.

HACKING THE ItO DETACHMENT FRAMEWORK

Several Powered by the Apocalypse (PbtA) systems that I have yet to discuss handle these issues in a nicely nuanced way; if I were running an ItO game right now, I think I'd borrow some of their ideas, and adjust Detachments like this: 

There are four classes of combatant, ranked by size: 

Individuals, 

Small Detachments, 

Medium Detachments, 

Large Detachments. 

Detachments can also be differentiated by their experience, which is reflected in their Hit Points, which only increase as they 'Level Up' (just as individuals do). Hiring/forming a detachment costs 1d6 for Small, 2d8 for Medium, and 3d10 for Large. 

In combat, individuals roll normally against other individuals. They roll Impaired damage against Detachments unless their attack has a Blast tag or other suitably extensive damage effect. Detachments roll Enhanced (1d12) damage against Individuals, and regular damage (by weapon type) against other detachments. 

When combatants of the same size-class fight, they roll damage as usual. When combatants of different size-classes fight, the larger combatant gains +1 Armor (damage reduction) and +1 bonus attack die for each step higher above their opponent's size. The attacker's hit dice are rolled together, including any bonus dice, but only the highest rolled result is used.

Examples: 

A Small Detachment of musketeers is exchanging fire with a Large Detachment of musketeers. Both Detachments are fairly green, and have 5 HP and 1 Armor. The Small Detachment rolls 1d8 damage, getting a 5, which is reduced by -3 (-2 because the other unit is two steps above them in size, so they gain 2 bonus armor atop their worn 1 Armor). Then the larger unit opens fire. They roll 3d8 (1d8 for their weapon attack, plus two bonus attack dice since they are two steps higher in size), getting a 1, 5, 8. Taking the highest result rolled, they inflict 8 damage, reduced only by the -1 Armor worn by the smaller gang. The smaller unit drops to 0 HP, -2 STR, and they rout (this is a pretty plausible outcome...).  

A more fortunate Small Detachment of spear-wielding goblins  (3 HP, 0 Armor) gang up on a lone but large sword-wielding barbarian (6 HP, 1 Armor). Not-Conan rushes the goblin gang, swinging his blade in great chopping arcs, but there are just so many of the vile things...he rolls an Impaired attack against the Detachment (1d4), inflicting 3 damage. The goblin gang is 1 step larger, however, so they gain 1 free Armor; they are left with 1 HP despite the barbarian's assault. Now they roll to attack, dealing Enhanced (1d12) damage to an individual, and rolling it twice because their +1 size step grants them an extra attack die. Results rolled are = 4, 8. They deal 8 damage, reduced by the Barbarian's 1 Armor, and now the barbarian is out of HP and taking Critical Damage...time to run away, perhaps...

...In which our hero helpfully shows how these rules
let individuals interact with Small Detachments. 

As these examples show, a few tweaks borrowed from Apocalypse World and its spin-offs can add a fair bit of depth and nuance to the simple procedures in Into the Odd, without breaking anything in ItO's more "OSR adjacent" system. 

YEAH, BUT WHAT IF I'M RUNNING NORMAL D&D...

Games using some version of D&D's normal combat rules (instead of the rules as modified specifically for Into the Odd) would need some tweaks to make these ideas work. There are too many possible variations to address comprehensively here, but I can offer a few suggestions:

+ ItO uses Armor as Damage Reduction. If your system doesn't do that, that's probably one key obstacle (though I suppose you could still use these rules with gang-size damage reduction on top of whatever else you're doing with AC). 

+ ItO dispenses with to-hit rolls. Between ItO, my own OD&D homebrew, and Dungeon World, I've gotten accustomed to playing with rules that speed up combat, so I suppose I can only shake my head sadly if you're really, really committed to rolling 3 on 1d20 all the time and prolonging combat. ;-) With the normal to-hit roll procedure, damage between detachments will be less common and less decisive, but that's just normal for to-hit-roll combat anyway. 

+ ItO hands out low Hit Points to PCs, and sticks with fairly low damage levels, compared to many other rulesets. A 20-HP PC is a very experienced, resilient character in ItO. 1d12 is a substantial damage roll. If your system typically involves higher HP or damage totals, I'd suggest increasing the Armor bonus from +1 per size-step to something a little higher, reflecting whatever is the typical range of damage rolled by a basic attack.

+ Along the same track, damage between size-levels needs to be adjusted if you don't want to use ItO's Impaired (1d4)/Enhanced (1d12) damage system. Without letting Detachments roll 1d12 vs individuals, you can also rewrite the hack above so that each size-step up gives the larger attacker +3 damage, or +1d6 extra damage, or something like that (this fits with some of the PbtA/Dungeon World mass combat ideas I still need to write about). 

USING TINY RULES TO GO BIG

"Ok, folks, your scouts' warning was clearly correct; they know you're coming. As you crest the last ridge above Hearthfire Village at the head of your army, you look across the sun-dappled settlement to see that Baron Argov's troops are already drawn up in their battle lines on the low hill opposite from you. You see their banners flapping in the breeze: it looks like Argov's got a Medium Detachment of pikemen holding his right flank, and a Large Detachment of bannerless (and no doubt miserable) peasant levies spread out across his left flank. In the center, you see the red banner of the Venomspike, and you know that the Small Detachment of armored orcs standing there has strength and skill that belies that unit's small size. And if your eyes aren't failing you, that tall figure in black armor at their side is Argov himself, with the foul necromancer in her dark robes behind him...

Now, how do you want to deploy your five detachments as you enter the valley?" 

I think these simple rules would work really well to game out a mass combat between small armies, in a way that still lets individual characters interact meaningfully with each other and with large units. 

Since my current campaign is using modified Dungeon World rules, however, there are a few other angles that I want to incorporate at my own table. Please stay tuned; next up, I hope to talk about some PbtA warband-combat and simple domain rules in their own right, as they add some further helpful ideas for enriching this kind of play. 

Simpler Domains & Warbands. Part 3: Enterprise Rules from INTO THE ODD

Ok, preambles aside (here and here), let's dive directly into systems that could satisfy my desire for elegant, straightforward "mini-domain play" that let PCs run gangs, warbands, properties, or businesses - while keeping adventure front-and-center and without burning too many brain cells on administration.

Let's begin with the...


Enterprise Rules from INTO THE ODD

Into the Odd is a delightful, simple adventure game that can be hacked in all sorts of crazy directions, or played as-is with great enjoyment. Author Chris McDowall recently released Electric Bastionland, which is something between a 2nd edition and a sister-game to Into the Odd. I highly recommend his game designs. His really outstanding blog, Bastionland, includes links to free versions of Into the Odd and Electric Bastionland, or you can follow links from Bastionland to buy the full versions as well. [EDIT: on yesterday's initial post, I mis-spelled Chris' last name as MacDowall. Sorry!]

Because this stuff is right up there in the free version - and because it only takes half a page, which is a real credit to its elegance - I'm just going to walk right through Chris' "Enterprise" rules, which could cover anything from managing profitable land to running a business (whether a tavern or a smuggling ring). The rules are dirt-simple, like mud-under-your-fingernails dirt simple, but honestly...before dismissing these, ask yourself whether this wouldn't suffice for 90% of what a mini-domain game would need...

Let's look at those Enterprise rules (I won't touch the Detachment combat rules here, focusing just on the social-economic part of the domain game for now).

Into the Odd states that...

"Between expeditions, you can try your hand at business, or muster a military force. DETACHMENTS and ENTERPRISES each cost 10 Gold to establish. Detachments demand a further d6 Gold in upkeep each month, or else they revolt."

"Income: New ENTERPRISES generate 1d4 Gold of Income each month. They also face a Threat that will cause 1d4 Gold in Losses unless dealt with. If an Enterprise cannot pay its debts, it collapses. Growth: If an ENTERPRISE ends a month with Profit, its income moves up to the next type of die, to a maximum of d12. However, this larger die also applies to losses from Threats.

"Improvements: Equipping a Detachment costs twenty times the individual item cost. Detachments start with 1d6 HP and advance in Experience Levels just as individuals do." 

Chris just threw down a complete, if very basic, system for founding, running, profiting from, and maybe losing a diverse range of undertakings - his samples include "Underground Distillery," "Smuggling Ring," "Reptile Cult," and "Hidden Vineyard."

Some observations:

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT: if the BECMI Companion rules for dominions assume a late medieval faux-European feudal context, Into the Odd's simple rules most directly evoke the latter game's implied setting: a whimsical but gritty early-modern/modern urban milieu, in which an essentially capitalist cash economy dominates society. Thus, for example, the mechanical benefit for successfully running an Enterprise = more cash (though nothing prevents players and GMs from making sure that 'Reptile Cult' has other benefits/drawbacks as well). Similarly, cash is the only thing needed to recruit and keep the services of a band of fighters - as opposed to, say, mustering men available from a given estate of land, or calling on troops bound by specific oaths of loyalty. There's nothing wrong with this, but this assumption should be noted; in a more typically ancient or medieval game setting, I'd suggest tweaking the relationships between precious metal, land, enterprise, and organized violence. As written, therefore, this stands out to me as an amazingly efficient and elegant system, but it would call for a bit more development in something like the faux-Iron Age setting I'm running for players now.

RELATIVE SCALE OF ENTERPRISES: mixing these rules with the abstract wealth mechanics I discussed here could make these even more effective. Currently, ItO's rules describe a total of five stages of Enterprise, those using d4, d6, d8, d10, and d12 to track their 'business' opportunities and risks. That is already a decent range, but one could add legs by making the puniest Enterprises cost 10 Copper to establish, and letting them 'grow' slowly up to the 1d12 Copper level - after which point they might graduate to the 1d4 Silver level, and so on. This would help accentuate the idea that regular access to the different precious metals involves not just different amounts of coinage, but different realms of social power.

As written, Into the Odd doesn't have a very long arc for character advancement (it goes up to Level 5, if I recall correctly). If one split the Enterprise categories into Copper, Silver, and Gold Enterprises, I'd suggest two options: either adjust the advancement array accordingly if you want the campaign to focus on the long 'domain' arc, or ... perhaps better yet...don't change it, but let each new 'generation' of PC keep running the business/enterprise handed down by their mentors. ItO already requires rearing up apprentices by the time you level up as a full veteran; handing the new guy your Enterprise, and then watching the new guy build that enterprise up into something even more grand, before trying yet again, could actually be a very satisfying way to run a deep, rich campaign using a very simple ruleset.

GIMME ADVENTURE! I noted in my criteria for my ideal mini-domain rules that I want them to function as a drive toward ongoing adventure, more than a pull away into the world of technical accounting. ItO's Enterprise rules do this by requiring each Enterprise, each month, to roll for profits against losses coming from some un-named Threat. During lucky months, a player might roll higher profits than losses and just decide to take the gain without any fuss. At other times, a player will have to tangle with those threats. This gives the GM a regular green-light to force the players into who-knows-what kind of trouble, ideally suited to the nature of each Enterprise, if they want to keep the whole thing afloat. Just imagine; what kind of Threats might impose losses for that Reptile Cult? And what kind of adventure hooks would automatically jump out from your answer? This is a very neat way to balance the needs of an adventure roleplaying game with a profitable domain system, without much overhead at all.


IN CONCLUSION

Well, I'm not sure I can settle exactly on ItO's rules as written, particularly since I want to rethink the core assumptions for a non-monetized, non-capitalist setting, but I think this shows just how short a ruleset can be while still satisfying most of the things I'm looking for - or, at least, offering a base for moving in that direction. One can imagine using the same core mechanic for non-monetary resources (like Honor or Influence or who knows what).

What do you all think, gang?

Happy gaming!

Simpler Domains & Warbands. Part 2: Ruleset Options and the 'Usual Suspects'

My last post invoked a desire for 'mini-domain' play, accessible even at middling levels, that would allow for fun management of modest warbands, property, and political shenanigans, going beyond mere hireling rules without slowing down the game with too much funky bean-counting.

This post first outlines further my theoretical goals - what kind of system I think I want to find - and then surveys some of the 'usual suspects' that people often use for domain play...and why I'm not choosing them. I'm sorry that the content-per-post pace is a bit slower than I anticipated; to break this series up into more manageable units, I'm trying to release shorter posts with discrete topics rather than cramming everything into one mega-read. Look for separate posts soon comparing and exploring in more detail the quite manageable "mini-domain" and also "mass combat" rules presented by Into the Odd, Dungeon World, Land of Ice and Blades, or even Apocalypse World, all of which I think could satisfy what I'm looking for in their own way - or at least support that most respectable of Frankensteins, the home-brewed, house-ruled heart-breaker hot mess.


WHAT I (THINK I) AM LOOKING FOR 

Actually, don't just take my word for it. Way back in the halcyon days of 2009, Grognardia ran this piece on the importance of D&D's domain-based 'end game' - emphasizing not Companion- but Expert-level play. Just a few comments in on that blog post, Jeff Rients pitched in, lamenting modern inattentiveness to hirelings and henchmen, with these interesting words:

I think between the hardscabble start and the barony is an intermediary phase where you manage the members of your gang.

That - right there - sums up what I think I'm looking for, at least for now. From Conan temporarily leading a pirate crew to Robin Hood with his merry men, I want a good way for my level-5s to exercise some authority, push some small units around, and maybe reap the fruits of some modest properties. And, of course, I wouldn't be upset if this might lead to a glorious game of thrones later, all modeled loosely enough to avoid major administrative headaches for GMs or players...

So: I want a fun, preferably elegant way to administer play in which PCs:
+ control a small-medium gang (ahem...warband) and/or a non-militant association of followers of comparable size/complexity/expense...
+ ...and therefore must factor in the relationships and plans of comparable, peer-level NPCs in the region. 

My ideal mini-domain rules, therefore, should include:
+ gang/warband rules - and, so, mass combat rules
+ 'company' or 'establishment' rules, ideally, for players running a property, mini-domain, or business;
+ faction network/relationship rules

Finally, my design and play preferences would favor rules that encourage:
+ adventurous narrative developments and complications... 
+ over mundane accounting
when in doubt, or when those two conflict.

Mini-domain play should be:
+ an asset for further adventure in a character's life above all else,
+ rather than an effective simulation of management above all else.

I also prefer rules that keep player choices and character in-game actions connected to logical fictional consequences, which means I'm not leaning fully into some flavors of 'narrative story-gaming' here.

These preferences are very pronounced for me, and will shape my entire discussion of options below and in subsequent discussion. Others may not share those preferences, which is perfectly respectable; but be aware that one's preferences will shape the personal suitability of different rulesets. As I'm not the kind of GM who wants to worry too much about each hex's historical population densities vs. tax rates, or the specific agricultural fertility of different soil-types, you won't find me digging too deep into the rulesets that allow for such things. :-)


THE USUAL SUSPECTS

There are some robust options I do NOT hope to use; let me introduce them, and explain why they aren't on my short list. (In no case will that mean these aren't good; they just don't fit the particular vision I expressed above. If you'd like to check any of them out, please be aware that the URL links below to products on DriveThruRPG are affiliate links, which support this site's activities but don't add cost to you as a customer).

But first: there is apparently a solid universal law of Physics that "any given blog-author 'X' will not discover an online discussion about topic 'Y' until after 'X' has written several paragraphs about 'Y.'" And so it was that only this morning (after writing for a while last night) I came across an interesting 13-part series (!) By Brandes Stoddard on Tribality, in which Stoddard surveyed the range of domain and dominion rulesets -- from Mentzer's Expert rules all the way to 3.5, Pathfinder, Harnmaster, 13th Age, and various other offerings both old and new. The link there to the Expert discussion offers part 1 of 13, and Part 13 (with links to previous entries) is here. Where relevant below, I'll simply point you to Stoddard's detailed survey of these options and try to avoid reinventing the wheel completely. At any rate, my own point will be to focus on some options NOT on that list (and perhaps not on many lists).

Let's begin at the beginning, noting that the B/X and BECMI sets already include Stronghold rules at the Expert level, and Dominion, War, and Siege rules (in BECMI) at the Companion and Master level. I've got proxy access to the Expert Stronghold stuff via the retroclones. Although I don't have a copy of the BECMI-based Rules Cyclopedia or the Companion volume, I do have the Companion module Test of the Warlords. Between those items and, well, now with Stoddard's detailed descriptions here and here, I feel pretty confident noting that this isn't exactly what I'm looking for, though it might do the trick for many others. I'd like to avoid even the level of accounting these systems call for, if feasible, and I'd prefer a more open-ended system that doesn't depend as much on the assumptions of the frontier hexcrawl or the structures of a fictional high-late medieval European feudalism (nothing wrong with that setting, of course, I just don't to be limited to it).

Moving onward. Nowadays, most even vaguely OSR-adjacent conversations about domain play usually end up mentioning either Autarch's ACKS (Adventurer, Conqueror, King System) and its multiple Domains at War supplements (Campaigns, Battles, Troops & Terrain) or, for something quite different, Kevin Crawford/Sine Nomine's AER (An Echo, Resounding). This forum discussion includes a lengthy discussion of the two systems in comparison with each other, made more useful by the fact that both system's authors (if I remember correctly) pitch in to talk about their differing design choices. Stoddard discusses them here and here.

As that forum discussion makes clear, An Echo, Resounding is the more abstract, somewhat more free-form option when comparing those two approaches to domain management. It sounded like my cup of tea, so I bought it a while ago. My impression? Well...it is a very high-quality, well-done system. It's also not what I'm looking for. Despite its relatively more abstract system, it remains hyper-detailed enough that actually running it just looked like a lot more work than I'd bargained for. I know of a GM who is currently running a kind of bifurcated campaign; RPG players do classic tabletop adventures and then, in-between sessions, a completely different stable of players use An Echo, Resounding to manage the political, economic, and military rivalries going on around the main party. That's a very neat concept, but it illustrates the depth and complexity supported - or maybe required - by AER. So, sadly, AER does not meet my desired criteria for "simpler mini-domain play." (If you do want a fairly involved domain system, I would highly recommend it).

I'm much less familiar with Birthright, which was an AD&D 2nd edition system-and-campaign-setting in days of yore that allowed players to begin Domain play right from the start of a campaign - by playing as noble leaders born into authority. My sense from reading others' thoughts is that this was a very imaginative, neat resource, but it fizzled, possibly for market factors outside the game itself. I will simply point you either to Stoddard's very positive overview, or to this 21-year-old review - and pick out two statements from the latter. On the one hand, "perhaps the core of the entire setting is the Domains themselves." Ok, sounds cool! But..."The Birthright boxed set contains ... a 96-page rulebook detailing the modifications made to the AD&D system when playing the Birthright campaign..." URRRRRK!!!! PULL THE PARKING BRAKE!!! SCREECH!!! Nope, sorry, not looking for any approach that involves a 96-page rulebook separate from the discussion of the domains themselves. Moving on - quite wistfully, as I do hear amazing things about running this...

Finally, there are also some other options, probably less well-known, that I want to mention in passing even though they aren't where I'm landing either.

For anyone interested in the popular but very specific niche of managing an urban criminal gang fighting for wealth, recruitment, jobs, and turf, you might check out Gathox Vertical Slum. It's a near-gonzo weird (science-) fantasy urban setting built on the back of a giant dimension-hoppin monster. No, really. But it also includes an approximately 10-page (IIRC) subsystem for managing urban criminal gangs whose various heists and investigations can support power-plays for turf in the city. Tables open to PbtA and its Forged in the Dark derivatives might instead consider the fantasy heist RPG Blades in the Dark, which has its own urban gang rules, too, or its descendant Band of Blades, about ensemble casts of PC soldiers fighting to get their military company to safety. There is an online SRD now for Blades in the Dark games; if interested, check it out before plunking down $$ to make sure the expensive but very well-reputed BitD is for you.

Legacy: Life among the Ruins is a PbtA game that includes quite different domain play; run a family or other faction across multiple generations, while periodically zooming in to focus on specific characters' exploits. The family/faction rules include a number of 'domain play' options. My players weren't looking for this kind of game, so I'm not using it, but it's worth knowing about (there are a couple of free quick-start options for this game, so check those out before jumping in for $$$).

Ok. So much for what I'm NOT using.

Please stay tuned, and happy gaming!

Simple(r) Domains, Warbands, Associations, and Gangs. Part 1: Rationale

My recent post on streamlined wealth/currency mechanics promised a follow-up on streamlined rules for domain play. Voici! Ok, it's time to start talking here about some simple(r) ways to handle domain play or gangs (ahem...loyal warbands or armies) of followers. 

From where I stand - at least at this moment - I'm inclined to favor thinking small in terms of domain play. I get the impression from a lot of GMs that the promise of very high-level domain play isn't always matched by the rewards of slogging through a detailed domain campaign. (To be fair, most campaigns don't make it that far anyway). This is not to say that this can't be great fun (I mean, just how many hours did I burn decades ago playing Civ 2, after all?), but there is a valid point that most of us play D&D because we like zooming in to the exploits of doughty individuals climbing rooftops and crawling dungeons - not tax-collectors reviewing the quarterly tithe rolls. Personally, playing a detailed boardgame about kingdom management sounds kind of fun, but as others online have mentioned elsewhere, that experience would not scratch the same itch as the desire to play a game of ol' fashioned D&D. No doubt many of us would like to be Aragorn, massing troops to march on the Black Gate while half the party goes commando (nope, phrased that one wrong) inside Mordor - but is a giant meta-game of domain management necessary to make that happen in an RPG? 

As Chris Kutalik argued years ago, however, mid-level domain play (maybe 'mini-domain play') using quite small spheres of influence might actually be just as or even more rewarding for many players. I'll focus on building with this idea. For one thing, 'mini-domain play' would be much more accessible for most of us. Moreover, if there are some good ways to streamline domain play in general at the mid-level, the same principles could be useful even at high levels, too. 

My players are close to the end of one low-ish level campaign arc (B10, Night's Dark Terror), and next up, I think, will be a great big jolly Isle of Dread crawl -- but repackaged in a faction-rich sandbox so that all the face-munching dinosaurs and jungle volcanoes are matched by feuding pirate admirals, envoys of scheming empires, agents of terrible subterranean powers, and probably a few thrones 'back home' hanging in the balance. Against that setting, I think it would be fun to give my players command of a few gangs of hoodlums trusty followers and see whether they build themselves up into a regional force to be reckoned with. But if my players stand a chance of taking out - or joining with or even replacing - great corsair lords of the Sea of Dread, I sure need some handy way to manage basic 'domain' play activity - even if the characters are a long, long way away from "Companion" level. Hmmm. Effective streamlined 'mini-domain' rules, however, should be perfectly workable at mid-level (or even lower). 

And - historically speaking - for some settings, this kind of 'mini-domain play' actually will represent something pretty close to the pinnacle of power. The laws of King Ine of Wessex, 7th-8th-c. Anglo-Saxon ruler, defined bodies of armed attackers thusly: up to seven men counted as thieves, seven to thirty-five attackers formed a warband of marauders, and foes more numerous than thirty-five were labelled an "army" (here)! This is a far, far, far cry from the range of militant powers available a few centuries earlier or more centuries later, but for any comparable setting it shows that you don't actually need a host of thousands to be playing "the domain game." To quote Ben Levick on the scale of early Anglo-Saxon warfare:

"A seventh or eighth century king most often came to his throne through violence or through the threat of violence, and kept his crown by warding off domestic and foreign rivals. Peace was simply the aftermath of one war and the prelude to another. In violent times such as these, it was necessary that a king secure (in the words of the Beowulf poet) "beloved companions to stand by him, people to serve him when war comes." ... The size of these armies was quite small ... Although the exact size of armies of this time remain unknown, even the most powerful kings could probably not call upon warriors numbering more than the low hundreds. Certainly in the late eighth century the æþeling (prince) Cyneherd considered his army of eighty-four men sufficiently large to attempt to seize the throne of Wessex. Time and again we are told in the sources that a new king had to defend his kingdom with tiny armies. Later in their reigns, these same kings having survived these attacks made "while their kingdoms were still weak," are found leading great armies. After all, victory meant tribute and land, and these in turn meant that a king could attract more warriors into his service."

That is kind of an extreme example, but it should illustrate just how plausibly 'domain play' issues could be well within the reach of an average party of level 5, or lower.

"Apologies, my lord...
only the floorplan without a 10' square grid was available print-on-demand.
Perhaps when you reach 6th level???"

Even in a more settled, sophisticated, powerful setting, there are places where this lower-level mini-domain scope of conflict would remain important. The Roman Empire, for example, could field mighty armies of thousands that could crush opposing forces even greater in number. Out in the provinces, however - especially in the more rough-and-tumble corners of empire, like Isauria/Rough Cilicia, there was sometimes room for little local warlords to carve out their own tiny domains - and the local land-owning magnate patrons who kept the empire running day to day, and controlled many of the levers of justice and violence at the community level, probably seemed like the Big Cheese to myriad souls now forgotten by history. 

Rather than dragging my feet while I write a long mega-post too thick to read comfortably, I'm going to break this up, and let what is here so far serve as preamble. Soon, I intend to discuss the following: 

+ why I'm not using the usual suspects - ACKS, An Echo Resounding, 'Companion' rules, and Birthright - and why a few much simpler rulesets look more useful. Oh, and I'll look in passing to honorable mention of Gathox Vertical Slum, Legacy: Life among the Ruins, and Blades in the Dark/Band of Blades...

+ simpler systems that I do think might solve most of my problems for me, or at least carve out the design space for me to hack a simple "mini-domain game" - I'm looking at YOU, A Land of Ice and Blades (and your big cousin, Apocalypse World), and at you too, Into the Odd! I'll survey their key 'domain' mechanics and why I think they're great - and what I might do to build on their foundation. 

+ how I think I'll be handling gang/warband conflict. The leading answer so far rhymes with Schmapocalypse Hurled, but I'll explain why. 

+ Not sure whether I'll get to this, but I'd really like to put all this to the test and write up a "playtest 'actual' play" report in which (say) a couple of 5th-level PCs lead thirty spearmen and a dozen archers through part of some dungeoncrawl module...to see whether these ideas really would work right in that itch-space so particular to classic TTRPGs. 

Thanks all. If this is your jam, feel free to leave comments, questions, or goads for further reflection in the comments as you await next installments. No doubt others have thought about this stuff already. Happy gaming!