Definitely! In a 3.5 campaign I ran a few years ago, rare books where the mechanism by which you “unlocked” feats and classes from the splat-books, and also contained information from the setting.
These are all ideas it would be cool to eventually incorporate into “heroic acks”.
Thanks for this link koewn! I skimmed through both pdfs last night and there is certainly inspiration in them.
I’m thinking that if you want to truly convey a sword & sorcery styled game that features larger than life characters as the PCs, you’re going to have to address the default concepts of magic. The Acheron supplement proposes the best “magic taint” concept I’ve seen to date. I really want to include that concept in some fashion in my campaign. After giving it some thought, I’ve come up with the following. The use of magic can be organized into three categories:
Benevolent Magic = Light Magic = White Magic
Indistinct Magic = Shadow Magic = Grey Magic
Malevolent Magic = Dark Magic = Black Magic
Not new… but I think this type of framework to hang magic on will work really well with recreating a setting which has the feel of Middle Earth or the Hyborian Age. I’ll post more.
This is similar to how this is done in Crypts & Things, a system I love. I had some thoughts about doing something inspired by it in ACKS for Barbarian Conqueror King but decided to keep the current system for the sake of making BCK as compatible with ACKS as possible. The idea is:
No Arcane/Divine divide. All spellcaster classes use the Sorcerer class category, which has the same XP and point requirements as a Cleric, but casts and learns spells as a Mage, and does not include Turn Undead (which becomes a spell). Why use the easier progression (as Clerics need less XP than Mages to go up in levels)? Because of what I present below, i.e. many of the combat spells are DANGEROUS and a Lawful caster will never cast them. Also I wanted sorcerers with swords…
Spells are divided into three categories: White (Lawful), Grey (Neutral) and Black (Chaotic). Lawful characters may learn only White and Grey magicks, Chaotic characters may learn only Grey and Black magicks, and Neutral characters may learn any spell. BUT Lawful characters get bonuses (maybe faster progression?) for Lawful spells, and Chaotic characters get bonuses for Chaotic spells.
White spells are all spells which restore an object or body to its initial state (e.g. healing), plus divinations and protection spells. Grey spells are most utility spells that distort reality to a degree (e.g. levitation, flight, illusions and so on). Black spells increase entropy in a massive way (e.g. fireballs) or tamper with life or death in a way related to undeath (e.g. necromancy).
Casting White spells is as usual. When casting Grey spells, the caster loses 1hp per spell level cast; a successful save vs. spells halves this (round up). When casting Black spells, the caster loses 1hp per spell level, no save allowed for this, AND must save vs. spells or lose 1 sanity (starting sanity is equal to Wisdom; when it reaches 0, roll on a “mortal mental effects” table for madness).
Yes golan, the Conan hack for OD&D that koewn provided the link to is very similar to that.
Right now, I’m thinking of using the white, grey, black magic concept more as an organizational tool to differentiate caster-types rather than making outright house rules on the matter.
For example, black magic is practiced by “mages of the black cabal” and they have their own sets of spells, such as all the necromantic and transformation spells. However, for the “sages of the white council,” such spells are forbidden, though maybe they have a few scrolls of them secreted away deep in the dungeons of their citadel hidden from those who would wish to use them!
I’m also wondering if I should re-skin the cleric class into divine spirits given mortal form (i.e. a Maiar equivalent).
Okay, so I’ve made a revision to character starting ability scores, and added a couple more. I got a chance to try them out this past weekend and I’m quite happy with most of them.
A change:
Starting Character Ability Scores:
I made the following changes:
Essentially, this equates to 3.5’s elite array (15,14,13,12,10,8), but is far more flexible.
Something new:
INCREASING ABILITY SCORES
Starting at 3rd level, when a PC reaches a new level, the player may increase one of his ability scores by 1 point. You cannot increase the same score two levels in a row. No score may be raised higher than a total of 2 points above its original total.
This results in a PC (at least one with 14 levels) having all original scores eventually increased by 2, although the player has control over how the increase happens.
Something new:
HEROIC SURGE
Once per day, at the beginning of any round, a PC may declare a heroic surge. He immediately regains 1 HD + Level worth of hit points. These hit points are temporary hit points and damage is dealt to them first. They last for 1 turn. The PC cannot declare a heroic surge if he is at 0 or less hit points.
This got used in the session, and I was very happy with how it worked and felt in the context of the adventure. With the goal of mitigating the prevalence and dependency of magical healing (potions, wands, clerics, etc.), mechanic-wise, this is more-or-less equates to giving everyone one “potion of healing” or one “cure light wounds” each day. I reserve the right to have important NPCs make use of it as well.
I’m still not sold on my Dodge/Parry mechanic idea. It was there, but did not get any use. I love the chart and the idea of dodging and parrying being options, but I haven’t yet found a good way to include any of it yet.
I’m also considering something along the lines of a critical hit mechanic, but not in the traditional sense. I don’t really want a mechanic that simply deals more damage, but instead does the following:
Another thought is to keep a “critical hit” within the same damage range as a normal hit, but have it be more likely to deal higher damage within that range:
succeed by 5+: roll two damage dice, and choose the highest result
succeed by 10+: roll three damage dice and choose the highest result
etc…
Example:
A fighter attacks using a sword two-handed. He needs an 8+ to hit and throws a 15, succeeding by 7…
For damage, he rolls 2d8, chooses the higher result of the two, and then applies any modifiers.
Putting dodge/parry mechanic on the back burner and contemplating a critical hit mechanic:
EXCEPTIONAL HITS
Characters score exceptional hits when they succeed on their attack throws by 5 or more. For every 5 points above the score needed to hit, in addition to the attack’s normal effect, the player rolls 2d6 and consults the appropriate chart below:
Humanoids
2 Disarm*
3 Knockdown*
4 Wrestling* or Brawl* (50% of either)
5 Force Back*
6-8 No additional effect
9 Wardrobe Malfunction
10 Damaged Armor
11 Damaged Weapon
12 Injured Appendage/Organ
Monsters
2 Injured Appendage/Organ
3 Injured Hide
4 Wrestling**
5 Give Ground
6-8 No additional effect
9 Brawl*
10 Knockdown*
11 Injured Attack
12 Injured Appendage/Organ
Note: If a rolled result does not apply to the target, treat the result for humanoids as FORCE BACK and treat the result for monsters as GIVE GROUND.
DAMAGED ARMOR
The target’s armor or shield is damaged – reduce its effectiveness by 1. A shield is the target 75% of the time if there’s a choice. Damaged armor can be repaired at a cost of 10gp per point of effectiveness. Armor that loses all effectiveness is ruined.
DAMAGED WEAPON
The target’s weapon suffers damage (-1 to hit or to damage determined randomly). Damaged weapons can be repaired for 25% of their cost, per penalty. If a weapon is damaged 4 times in this way, it is ruined.
GIVE GROUND
The monster must move back 5’. If this would do further harm to the monster (such as moving over a cliff), it gets a save vs. Paralysis to avoid the effect.
INJURED APPENDAGE/ORGAN
A significant part of the target’s body is at risk of injury. The target must save vs. Paralysis or have the chosen appendage/organ injured for the rest of the fight. The GM chooses what is targeted according to the situation and determines what the actual hindrance will be for the target.
INJURED ATTACK
One of the monster’s attacks (determined randomly) is temporarily incapacitated for 1d6 rounds. If the monster has only one attack, it gets a save vs. Paralysis to avoid this effect.
INJURED HIDE
The monster’s hide has been damaged, such that its AC is reduced by 1 for the rest of the fight.
WARDROBE MALFUNCTION
An article of clothing, jewelry, or exposed item (backpack, belt pouch, etc) gets damaged.
Very cool! I like how it makes the combats more interesting without making them more deadly. My only concern is that some of them will have a huge variance in effect depending on the judge, especially damage to items and appendages.
,
Thank You Alex. Interesting “crits” that give an advantage that’s something else besides doing more damage is certainly the goal. I see what you’re saying about the potential huge variance in damaged items and appendages, but I’m hoping the variance to be a feature rather than a bug. I’m worried that codifying it too much would make the whole a bit unwieldy and restrict narrative/spontaneous play. Perhaps listing examples would help.
Hey Jard, I’ve been thinking about this, it’s a really great idea for a mythic campaign. I’m slowly reading “The Saga of the Volsungs”, and Sigurd eating the dragon’s heart and thus gaining the ability to understand the speech of birds is a perfect example of this. I also recall D&D’s Castle Amber having a few encounters where PCs could get permanent benefits that didn’t involve receiving an actual magic item.
Brainstorming a “dodge/parry” mechanic again:
This is an abstract interpretation of parrying and dodging by simply improving AC at the expense of decreasing your ability to hit. It assumes that you can dodge and parry easier when lightly armored rather than heavily armored, thus it’s very advantageous to characters who wear little or no armor. The rule takes advantage of the Cleave mechanic.
You can spend potential cleave attempts each round to increase your AC. Each available cleave attempt spent increases your AC by 1 until your next turn. However, there are 2 caveats:
Examples:
A 5th level barbarian in a loin-cloth (i.e. no armor) can spend from 1 to 5 of his available cleave attempts to gain a +1 to +5 bonus to AC.
The same barbarian has donned chain mail armor. He will gain no benefit from this defensive option unless he spends all 5 of his available cleave attempts, since wearing the chain mail armor reduces any bonus gained by 4. Spending 5 cleaves will grant him a +1 AC bonus, but he’ll be attacking at a -5 penalty.
Any thoughts would be appreciated!
I think this is pretty good.
It’s costlier than the d20 options (Combat Expertise feat, trade BAB for AC) by also requiring one to spend Cleave.
It’s also limited to improvement over existing armor, also good.
It also completely eliminates Mage-types from doing this, since they have no cleaves to spend, and that’s good too.
Looking at maximum application, the loinclothed barbarian at level 14 can gain an AC of 14, with a -14 to his attack throw, yes?
Presuming he’s in a fight with other en-towelled humans in a sauna, he’d have an attack throw of 15+ to hit AC 0, ignoring any help from various proficiencies or magical weapons.
That’s enough to get him to the door and out of the sauna unscathed.
…and now I’m trying to find the game theory answer to a sauna full of 14th level barbarians wearing towels all wanting the most advantageous combination of AC and attack throws.
/I can’t believe I made it through that post without any innuendo
Yeah, the later days of 4th edition, especially the DMG2 and the Dark Sun books, really hammered home that many of the effects we limit to magical items don’t necessarily have to be.
Another thought on the above:
This idea lets all characters with access to cleaves reach the base target AC 6 (i.e. plate armor), albiet at penalty.
You can spend cleaves to increase your AC. Each cleave spent increases your AC by 1, but reduces your attack throws by 1 until your next turn.
Caveat:
Your AC bonuses from the following sources may not exceed a total of 6
Using the examples above:
A 5th level barbarian in a loin cloth can spend 1 to 5 cleaves to gain a +1 to +5 bonus to AC, albeit at a -1 to -5 penalty on attack throws
The same barbarian wearing chain armor can spend 1 or 2 cleaves to gain a +1 or +2 bonus to AC, albeit at a -1 or -2 penalty to attack throws.
What a great example to bring up 
So, yes, one of the reasons for the mechanic to exist is specifically to facilitate the possibility of (among other lightly armored heroes from stories) loin clothed barbarian-like characters who, like Conan, kick butt against swarms of low-level enemies while not often getting hit themselves.
Following your example, King Conan (a 13th level fighter in ACKS) caught in a sauna by toweled, 0-level would-be assassins ideally would give up 9 cleave attempts and take a -9 penalty to hit for a base AC of 9. There would be no need of increasing it further since the entoweled opponents would then need 20+ to hit. King Conan would be hitting them on 11+ and still have 4 cleaves to use that turn. Note that the odds don’t include any bonuses from Strength or Dexterity, which King Conan would likely have, skewing the odds even more in his favor.
And of course, the scenario would be complicated by the presence of a scantily clad, alabaster skinned woman… but that component is beyond the scope of the rule.
Ah, good point on the maximum spend to hit 20+, didn’t think about that.
If everyone’s AC 0, then the max spend based on apparent attack throw of opponents is:
11+ - 9
10+ - 10
9+ - 11
8+ - 12
7+ - 13
6+ - 14
so King Conan can become nigh-unhittable (20+) by up to 5/6th level assassins, whiles still striking AC 0 at 15+.
I think there’s something to be said on this about if you’re high enough level, always be someplace where a lot of clothes that can hide armor is suspicious.
Saunas, bedrooms, harems, etc. Maybe a harem sized sauna with a bed? It’s good to be the king.
Is there a reason you aren’t just saying “you can’t increase your AC over 6 by expending cleaves”?
I would imagine it’s because there are things which add to AC (shields, DEX bonus, magical protection,…) which aren’t on the list of things which can’t give a total of more than 6 AC. If you have no armor, DEX 16, and a +1 shield, then you could expend cleaves to get up to AC 6 of “armor” and then get the +2 DEX bonus, +1 for a shield, and +1 for the shield’s enchantment for a total AC 10. (I’m assuming that the AC 6 “worn armor” limit excludes shield, because the post started by explicitly connecting AC 6 with plate armor, which is AC 6 with no shield.)
nDervish has it exactly right. This idea assumes that everyone who can cleave has the “right” to get up to a base AC of 6 if they have enough skill, but there is a cost to do so, which includes any or all of these:
A base AC of 6 was chosen specifically because in standard ACKS, the best armor you can get is plate, which grants AC 6. Note that under this iteration, you can mitigate the penalties needed to achieve AC 6 by wearing better armor.
The intent of the rule is:
I don’t know if it’s a worthwhile rule… it’s hard to tell if my players will use it.
That makes sense. I guess I wasn’t thinking clearly. It seems to me though that the rule is a bit over complicated, and that if you’re going to trade away attack bonuses for it it might be better to just put a simple cap on it than have a bunch of exceptions.