Could we attempt to bring all the 3.5 conversions into one document and promote it through wizards. Obviously all the effort is fan based but maybe if we could be endorsed and hey even if we get a little advert into dragon or dungeon it may spark up interest.
I think it is quite obvious that if you don’t know Mystara from the good old days you will never hear about it now…
Thoughts?
Unfortunately, Wizards showed us what happens when enough fan-writers get together and produce a good 3rd edition supplement with Ravenloft: Wizards says thanks, but no thanks, and has its own writers make a supplement (because there's obviously a fan-base for it). Remember, WotC has lawyers, just like any other company, and those lawyers are whispering into the decision makers' ears: "Those fan-writers can claim copyright on the material, better that we write our own stuff."
The point is to keep the setting and the game going, which at this point requires some fan dedication.
I would suggest making a 3.5 updated setting guide. Then make a couple of adventures, probably simple adventures that introduce the setting showcase what is cool about Mystara. Include some maps and illustrations.
Place them up as PDFs on a reliable site, cutting out the enormous costs of printing.
But publishing more web stuff is a fine idea, as long as legal issues are dodged.
That being said, I'd almost rather have Mystara remain as it is, than have WOTC make a "new and better' one...
I think it's more about introducing new people to Mystara. Keeping the people who already play Mystara is not such an issue. You're right that they probably will keep playing, even if nothing new ever comes out.
Exactly the point. Even if wizards do pull the finger out and produce something Mystara I'm sure it would be nothing entirely 'new' for us. I think most of us pick and choose the bits we like anyway.
If all that happens is that Wizards says thanks but no thanks we're producing our own then mission accomplished. Mystara will *die* once we all leave the game if new blood isn't drawn in. I would rather see Mystara stack the shelves than eberon or any other setting...
What does "in the hands of the fans" really mean anyway? To me it just means we have just customised something...big deal. Look at Thorfs and DMs pages...the biggest hitters and all 'official' info. As much as the fans do until it is in print it don't matter that much. (No disrespect, I love most of the fan based stuff)
WotC has already put their chips on Eberon anyways. There is much less hassle for them to promote their own products. They may own all the copyrights but we have already seen the trouble with royalties.
I agree we need more "new" stuff in print and that we need fresh blood, I just want to avoid a rehash or just a simple conversion.
I can forsee a little problem here. For a "new Mystara" product to be successful in marketing it would have to be appealing to both old and new players. Do we old timers really just want a rehashing of the material we already know and love for the sake of newbies? I for one would not buy the product. I already have almost all Mystara products and I do not play it in 3E. A new set of rehashed info is not what I am looking for.
I would buy it regardless. Actually, we have seen a Mystara product covering the entire setting. And a sourcebook organized in the 3E manner, with detailed description of each race/culture etc would be awesome, even if it wouldn't cover any new areas or such.
And again, if a main sourcebook was to sell, that might be enough to kick off a few other products such as modules, novels and whatnot. That would be awesome! But I agree. The main benefit of such a product would be drawing newbies to the setting.
I am actually wondering why Wizards don't produce at least one sourcebook for each of their old settings. I think they would make a profit from the core books even if they don't support the settings beyond that.
Håvard
WotC has already put their chips on Eberon anyways. There is much less hassle for them to promote their own products. They may own all the copyrights but we have already seen the trouble with royalties.
Eberron's true strength is not that it's all owned by WotC without dispute. It's that Eberron is the first campaign setting designed after 3rd edition's release, so it takes full advantage of the rules.
Consider even such popular settings as the Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk. They still date back to AD&D 1st edition, and some squishing had to be done (literally on the map *chuckle*) to make it 3.5 compliant and also not overly disrupt the background.
I would buy it regardless. Actually, we have seen a Mystara product covering the entire setting. And a sourcebook organized in the 3E manner, with detailed description of each race/culture etc would be awesome, even if it wouldn't cover any new areas or such.
That would be nice, but given the disputes here over 3E conversions, I very seriously doubt any proposed sourcebook would satisfy anyone here.
I am actually wondering why Wizards don't produce at least one sourcebook for each of their old settings. I think they would make a profit from the core books even if they don't support the settings beyond that.
Well, they were selling the hardcover 3rd edition core books at $20 apiece, and they still only broke even on the deal. Which is why with 3.5 the book prices went back up to $30 apiece. Publishing a single hardcover to satisfy a very small percentage of the RPG market is not good business, unfortunately. I don't think copyright is an issue, since TSR owned all the products regardless of the authors, and WotC obtained those rights directly.
Also, WotC is extremely wary of past mistakes. TSR spread themselves out too thin with multiple campaign settings. As a result, they eventually collapsed, and all the material suffered on the way. (Consider the AD&D Mystara materials... mostly lame conversions of older materials.)
Adam
That would be nice, but given the disputes here over 3E conversions, I very seriously doubt any proposed sourcebook would satisfy anyone here.
Good point. I even have problems accepting the official conversions that have been made, in Dragon for instance. Still, it might be a good thing to have a book with official conversions and then make modifications to it, instead of starting from scratch.
Well, they were selling the hardcover 3rd edition core books at $20 apiece, and they still only broke even on the deal. Which is why with 3.5 the book prices went back up to $30 apiece. Publishing a single hardcover to satisfy a very small percentage of the RPG market is not good business, unfortunately. I don't think copyright is an issue, since TSR owned all the products regardless of the authors, and WotC obtained those rights directly.
Is this because they were hardcover or because of the fabulous full color interior? I wouldn't mind seeing a Mystara sourcebook with B/W interior for instance. Heck, it wouldnt even have to be hardcover.
Also, WotC is extremely wary of past mistakes. TSR spread themselves out too thin with multiple campaign settings. As a result, they eventually collapsed, and all the material suffered on the way. (Consider the AD&D Mystara materials... mostly lame conversions of older materials.)
I think the many settings of TSR were a mistake. Especially attempting to support each setting. The main problem of the late TSR though was the pouring out of low quality products.
The problem now is that people are already spread out between the different settings. I wont start playing in FR no matter how much material is published for that setting. The GH crowd stick to GH like they have done since the 70s, the same goes for the fans of the other settings. It is strange that no attempt is made at making some money on these groups of consumers...
Håvard
What does "in the hands of the fans" really mean anyway? To me it just means we have just customised something...big deal.
Uhm, I think we did (and are still doing) quite a lot. Not everything may be of production quality, of course, but there are lots of fan materials that are complex and organic enough. Just a few examples:
- the Mystaran Almanac
- Christian Constantin's Hulean history and geography
- Adrian Mattias' Western Brun stuff
- The Glantrian Personnel Division (ok, I'm biased here)
- The whole Outer Beings stuff.
Look at Thorfs and DMs pages...the biggest hitters and all 'official' info. As much as the fans do until it is in print it don't matter that much. (No disrespect, I love most of the fan based stuff)
Still, I'd love to see some of the non-canon maps (say, Davania or Hule/Midlands/Western Brun) redone in Thorf's style!
As to the ``matter'', it depends to whom... to me, a printed handbook of 3e Mystara is much less useful/interesting than most fan stuff.
Ah, and there's some sort of Mystara world book (hopefully) coming out at some point in the future (for Hackmaster).
End line: if we go for the impossible, I'd like much more to have Mystara open-sourced than re-released for 3e.
Uhm, I think we did (and are still doing) quite a lot. Not everything may be of production quality, of course, but there are lots of fan materials that are complex and organic enough.
Except that the fan materials are mostly focused upon expanding TSR storylines and ideas that were left dangling after the setting was orphaned. This forces new users to have to aquaint themselves with a lot of meaningless back history to even understand the setting.
To me, if Mystara is to survive, it has to be re-written from the ground up to support a new rules set, and has to abandon old ideas that no longer apply. I've been tempted to take a crack at this once or twice, sort of a re-writing of the Gazateer line, but the lack of interest in such things on the boards here convinced me not to waste my time.
Ah, and there's some sort of Mystara world book (hopefully) coming out at some point in the future (for Hackmaster).
This, I think, is a very good idea. Given that most of the Mystara posters here stubbornly refuse to accept the "any race/any class" paradigm, going with a rules system that focuses only on expanding original concepts rather than rewriting them seems ideal. Hopefully Kenzer will pull through on the supplement.
End line: if we go for the impossible, I'd like much more to have Mystara open-sourced than re-released for 3e.
Also a good idea, but probably won't happen. If WotC releases the copyrights, they technically should return to the original writers. So you'd have to get all the old module and supplement writers to agree to open-source their materials and ideas. For example, Ed Greenwood now uses the word "Hin" in Forgotten Realms to describe halflings, and he may object to its use in open-source public domain products.
Adam
Except that the fan materials are mostly focused upon expanding TSR storylines and ideas that were left dangling after the setting was orphaned. This forces new users to have to aquaint themselves with a lot of meaningless back history to even understand the setting.
Not all of them. There's a project called the Newbie Guide which tackles exactly that point. Also, a few other projects can help in this regard: e.g., DM's works on Immortals and religions, or the Timeline project.
Also, at least one of the three ``corebooks'' is already freely available (Savage Coast, thanks to TSR/WotC). The newbie guide was an attempt to cover the lack of a Known World corebook (event though only to a limited extend, we fixed a maxiumum of 2 pages per nation).
The Hollow World corebook can be obtained as ESD.
This, I think, is a very good idea. Given that most of the Mystara posters here stubbornly refuse to accept the "any race/any class" paradigm, going with a rules system that focuses only on expanding original concepts rather than rewriting them seems ideal. Hopefully Kenzer will pull through on the supplement.
Actually, IIRC the supplement did not materialize because of Mystaros' problems (lack of time to edit everything?), not because it was delayed by Kenzer.
Also a good idea, but probably won't happen. If WotC releases the copyrights, they technically should return to the original writers. So you'd have to get all the old module and supplement writers to agree to open-source their materials and ideas. For example, Ed Greenwood now uses the word "Hin" in Forgotten Realms to describe halflings, and he may object to its use in open-source public domain products.
As I said, I was discussing impossible events -- the event of WotC open-sourcing Mystara is more or less as likely as WotC releasing Mystara as a 3e campaign setting.
Anyway, I don't know exactly who is the copyright holder for the various Mystaran things, and I'm no lawyer, but since WotC could licence AD&D/OD&D (including Mystara) to Kenzer, they would probably be able to do the same to anyone else (note that a licence, be it free-of-charge or ``open-source'', is not a release or transfer of copyright).
To me, if Mystara is to survive, it has to be re-written from the ground up to support a new rules set, and has to abandon old ideas that no longer apply. I've been tempted to take a crack at this once or twice, sort of a re-writing of the Gazateer line, but the lack of interest in such things on the boards here convinced me not to waste my time.
Just a quick note. Adamantyr has a very good point here. Wizards of the Coast rewrote their most lucrative campaign setting (Forgotten Realms) to bring it into third edition. I'm sure a number of hard-core FR fans were unhappy with the changes they made, because I know a few casual FR fans who were unhappy. However, the changes have made the setting better (in my opinion as a person who only passingly pays attention to the Realms). I'm not going to get into all that here, though.
What I will inject into the conversation is that if Wizards of the Coast did a third edition update of Mystara (or if Paizo bought the rights to do that, which would be sweet) the best way to do it would be to re-create the setting in a way similar to how it was re-created to bring it into second edition and how Wizards of the Coast re-created FR to bring that into third edition. I dare say many fans of Mystara would be quite unhappy with the changes made. For that reason alone I haven't made any push around here to try to secure the rights to do that (heck man, I'd write that entire book if they let me). There was a huge amount of flak we received for our re-creation of Dark Sun in the magazines, and that's the sort of anger I don't want to curry among you, the loyal Mystara fans.
EDIT: What I meant by how they converted the Known World into second edition's Mystara being the best way is that the setting would need to be rebuilt from the ground up to incorporate the new rules. I'm not say that they did a good job in converting the setting from OD&D to AD&D. I'm saying that if they were to put out a Mystara book and do it right, it would need 1) to shake up the campaign setting to make it fit into the new rules and 2) to be written by a fan of the setting.
... Wizards of the Coast rewrote their most lucrative campaign setting (Forgotten Realms) to bring it into third edition. I'm sure a number of hard-core FR fans were unhappy with the changes they made, because I know a few casual FR fans who were unhappy. However, the changes have made the setting better ...
Thank you for the voice of support, Mike. Maybe it's not a waste of time to do a little writing on it...
... There was a huge amount of flak we received for our re-creation of Dark Sun in the magazines, and that's the sort of anger I don't want to curry among you, the loyal Mystara fans.
I certainly don't dispute that. I couldn't believe how badly the DS fans reacted to the recreation. To be perfectly honest, I wasn't impressed with THEIR work in the slightest. I ran a DS 3rd edition campaign for several sessions and I relied almost exclusively on the Paizo work over the fan works. The fan materials were not converted not with an eye for 3rd edition, but for preserving statistics and rules from another rules set that didn't necessarily apply. And don't get me started on their insane level 50+ sorcerer-kings...
Anyway, one element of the campaign that stuck out for me was how exhausting it was trying to run a setting that was not adapted for 3rd edition. The mix of materials, both fan and magazine-based, the judgment calls I had to make off the cuff, the annoyance players had with the limitations of the setting... it all contributed to me tiring out and having to end it earlier than I had wanted.
Which is why, if Mystara is to be re-created, it can't be done in a half-way. It's my opinion that you have to solidify the setting in a SINGLE hardcover. I think it could be done, but it means that the writer has to decide what truly makes Mystara special and what has to be in that text, and what can be omitted. And don't assume future suppliments are coming... it's very likely you'll have only a single shot at it.
For my part, if I was tasked with writing the hardcover, I'd do a couple things:
1) Drop the concept of Immortals, call them gods. There's no rules to play gods in 3rd edition, and the word "immortals" just sounds like you're trying to be politically correct.
2) Drop all race/class restrictions. Anything the 3rd edition PHB has is allowed. Rewrite all nation histories taking this into account. You can add new prestige classes, subraces, and even classes as needed.
3) Drop/rewrite the Blackmoor history. This is partially because Dave Arneson is republishing his setting, and there may be complications involving it in Mystara. (It's also in Greyhawk, but he seems resigned to it being there.) I'd rather keep Blackmoor myself, but also remove a lot of the certainty involving events in it's creation and destruction.
4) Not use the Poor Wizard's Almanac or any past events as background. That is the old Mystara setting, and we can't take that baggage with us. The original Gazateers established a definitive timeline for events long after the setting was made. We can do the same thing.
Adamantyr
Adamantyr
Which is why, if Mystara is to be re-created, it can't be done in a half-way. It's my opinion that you have to solidify the setting in a SINGLE hardcover. I think it could be done, but it means that the writer has to decide what truly makes Mystara special and what has to be in that text, and what can be omitted. And don't assume future suppliments are coming... it's very likely you'll have only a single shot at it.
I'd say cull any specific descriptions of the HW, Davania, Skothar, unfortunately Savage Coast, and probably Alphatia. In other words, just stick with the Known World.
1) Drop the concept of Immortals, call them gods. There's no rules to play gods in 3rd edition, and the word "immortals" just sounds like you're trying to be politically correct.
I'd say if a player gets confused about the nature of Immortals versus Dieties (one of the core Mystara themes in my opinion), then they'd also be confused about the Lady of Pain from the 3E Manual of the Planes. I'd explain them sort of like the Lady of Pain, and use one of the Planar Cosmologies from the Vaults (where Mystara is sort of a world-sized Sigil at the center of the Prime instead fo the Outlands).
2) Drop all race/class restrictions. Anything the 3rd edition PHB has is allowed. Rewrite all nation histories taking this into account. You can add new prestige classes, subraces, and even classes as needed.
Does that mean that Hin are now the skinny halflings found in the PHB? Rewriting nation histories will cause a major reshaping of the Known World.
3) Drop/rewrite the Blackmoor history. This is partially because Dave Arneson is republishing his setting, and there may be complications involving it in Mystara. (It's also in Greyhawk, but he seems resigned to it being there.) I'd rather keep Blackmoor myself, but also remove a lot of the certainty involving events in it's creation and destruction.
Blackmoor has been in two worlds since its infancy, but the two Blackmoors are distinct. Even their geography isn't the same. The Blackmoor of Greyhawk doesn't have the Beagle, and the Blackmoor of Mystara doesn't have the EGG of Coot.
4) Not use the Poor Wizard's Almanac or any past events as background. That is the old Mystara setting, and we can't take that baggage with us. The original Gazateers established a definitive timeline for events long after the setting was made. We can do the same thing.
Poor Wizards Almanac: That's not too hard to do; many of us play before AC 980 anyway, since that's when most of our adventures from classic D&D are based.
The big problem I see with a one shot deal: If I were 15 years younger and a new D&D DM, then saw a campaign sourcebook & several pre-made adventures alongside a campaign sourcebook w/o any adventures, I'd buy the former. Mystara needs to be different enough from FR/GH to make people want it over these "Vanilla" fantasy settings. Unfortunately, with all these changes to the Known World, and only having room for the Known World, it is just another vanilla fantasy setting. Perhaps Mystara can be used as a setting where the first 3E Immortal-level rules are detailed? Does 3E have a setting which is purely political intrigue? Mystara could be the 3E world for Immortals to start in, then it could be fleshed out for mortal-level campaigns if the Immortal-level sourcebook sells well. *shrug*
I know most of us believe that the conversion to AD&D was the start of the end but I personally believe that a conversion to 3E is the only way mystara will live on.
If Mystara went 3E and minor things changed - so be it. We may not like it but future gamers wouldn't know the diffirence. Its all about getting mystara back out there.
Any source book most likely wouldn't have anything new for us, but that is what we need to endure to finally see a product that would have new content. No one in their right mind would release something that people couldn't put into context, and thats what it would be if a core mystara source wasn't produced first.
For my part, if I was tasked with writing the hardcover, I'd do a couple things:
[..]
That is the old Mystara setting, and we can't take that baggage with us.
Then it would be a different setting. One that won't necessarily appeal to old-timers, and would simply be another generic setting to the new gamers.
Mystara took an enormour dive in popularity when they tried to port it to AD&D. Im not sure a 3.x conversion would nescesarily go well. Like Eberron is written for 3.5, Mystara was written for classic D&D
I think the AD&D conversion failed for several reasons:
- The conversion was not that well done. Extra opportunities opened by AD&D were not exploited at all, even when there were similar openings in OD&D (think specialist priests, bards, etc.).
- The conversion was only retelling what everyone already knew -- I play AD&D, but I don't need a conversion to use OD&D Gazetteers in my games.
IMO, however, the Savage Coast conversion was much better, even though it changed the nature of the Red Curse.
Since I don't think Mystara will ever be released by anyone under d20 or 3.5 rules set, we're discussing about the sex of angels here.. but anyway, just to add another reply and cut the gap between Mystara boards and the others, I'll give you MY receipt for the "new" Mystara 3.5 flavour ;)
Date of the setting: 1005 AC, the beginning of the Wrath.
This way you have everything published in the old GAZ still usable, GLantri has an additional Principality (Morlay-Malinbois), the Heldannic Knights are a threat in the north and you have plenty of action in a war-torn scenario in the Isle of Dawn and in Sind. It's just ripe for every kind of adventure AND a mighty campaign decided by the PC's actions.
I'd include a separate Chapter on Campaigning in Mystara, where to describe the POSSIBLE outcome of the Wrath with many different scenarios (winning Alphatia, Winning Thyatis-Glantri-Heldannic Knights, tie, all out disaster, etc..) In this same chapter I'd also give the possibility to play at least in 3 other significant campaign eras of Mystara's past (a possible idea for other books, like what they're doing with Dragonlance): Rise & Fall of Nithia (BC1100-500), with SO MANY THINGS happening in the KW regions, Birth of Thyatis (BC 200-AC100) and the Alphatian Wars (BC1000-400), focused on Alphatians coming to Mystara and settling their continent.
Classes, PrCs & Races:
change as little as possible from D&D 3.5 standards, BUT don't lose the Mystaran flavor for the main races. So I'd allow ALL Base classes (I've got gripes with the Paladin as Core Class, but anyway..) go with Bard as preferred class for Halflings, Sorcerers for Elves and Thief for Gnomes, THROW AWAY the gnomish spelllike powers from the PHB and instead give a couple of spell-like powers to ELVES. And build VERY SPECIFIC PrC TIED to the SETTING.
No class should be barred to any race, BUT some classes should be more difficult to get to some races, and any such choice, when it goes against the "racial bias" should imply penalties for the characters (I'm obviously thinking to Dwarf Wizards here... they would probably have chances of spell-failure or become corrupted by magic as per Moulder Dwarves..)
ADD the new core class: SHAMAN (Spirit Shaman of Ethengar).
FEATS:
Provide a wide list of REGIONAL feats AND classes normally available in each nation, to make newbies understand what can or CANNOT be found here and there, and set the tone for the setting (we don't wanna see drow rangers with two scimitars or dwarf archmages popping up like mushrooms, hopefully ;)).
Gazetteer:
An entire Chapter devoted to each nation of the KW to be unveiled and presented in its more important and distinctive features. Here should be included a wide geopolitical and economic overview of all the nations of Brun and Alphatia.
Another Chapter focused on the rest of Brun (Norwold, Hule and the Savage Coast)
Another Chapter focused on Alphatia and the Eastern islands/continents, with Davania briefly portrayed as the "Lost World", ripe for dinosaur hunting, discovering of lost civilizations, and similar campaigns (treat it like Africa/South America during the XIX century).
History:
A big chapter with the Mystara timeline. I wouldn't go too much in details here, but give the reader a good idea on how the things went in the different eras. We could then add more details in each country's timeline in the GAZ section.
Immortals:
A good chapter to explain what are immortals and how the Multiverse of Mystara works. And a nice table to list all of the most important immortals, with portfolio and Domains and symbols, and new specific domains detailed. Don't add the road to immortality here, and don't add specific backgrounds for deities, it's not THAT important. It's however important to show where these faiths are widespread and who worships who.
NPCs:
a chapter with many important NPCs detailed, especially likely antagonists and allies. They must be USEABLE (I don't care to know what are King Stephan vitals if I won't be using them, mind you? ;))
ARTIFACTS & MAGIC ITEMS:
Give them players unique Mystaran Artifacts and Powerful or LEgendary items to crave and look for.
NEW MAGIC:
I'm not too keen on adding new spells, but I'd add a whole section on the new forms of magic: SHAMANISM (the spirits of Ethengar and in general Natural spirits), RED CURSE (for Savage Coast), RADIANCE and the SEVEN SECRET CRAFTS of Glantri.
That's the way I'd structure a Mystara Campaign Book... Appeal to Old Timers without forgetting to add something new specifically tailored to 3.5 fans and newbies.
I am also dead set against anything that changes Mystara. If you are going to rewrite it to be more compatible with a rule set then you have not saved Mystara at all. I think too many people pay too much attention to stats. What we really need is a socio-political sourcebook which has no bias towards a specific ruleset. I couldn't care less about how the guy next to me converts for 3E just as he couldn't care less about my 2E conversions. So why write that in at all? The real Mystara isn't in a list of rule set specific stats on Npcs, its in the people and nations and customs. IMO converting the setting is adding a step we don't need.
Given a decent description of any character we could all probably flesh out some classes and stats (according to our favorite ruleset) without those already being provided. So npc stats are a waste of space, but GOOD description would be mandatory.
With the no restriction rule everyone wants to follow with 3E there isnt any reason for regional feat lists. All restrictions would be implied in the description but thats only a tendency not a rule.
As for artifacts and magic items I see no real need for lists of these but maybe since we have the immortals maybe a few artifacts from each sphere wouldn't hurt. Again descriptions of reported powers here nothing rule set specific need to be detailed, although maybe included in that last chapter could be stats to give a general outline of how to do an artifact.
To really catch the attention of old-timers you need something a bit new. Maybe expanding the info on Skothar or Davania. What might really get our blood pumping would be one conglomerated map from the Immortals arm to Skothar.
I could see, though, a nice chapter at the end dedicated to 3E PrCs but just the ones that really stick out. Most of what DM lists under his chapter on the magic would probably work well as PrCs plus some other additional ones like Hin Master, Darokin Merchant, Minrothaddan Sea Prince, etc. But I wouldn't get too crazy with this as I've already seen a trend of making PrCs when the right combinations of core classes and just calling yourself by that title would do just fine. And as always we should leave room for the GM to do his own thing. This chapter would be mostly to help clean up the messier parts of conversion like the secret crafts (which are an addition to regular magic), Darokin's merchant "class" (which has no direct conversion base), and Shamans (which could just be a modified priest or a PrC) among others.
I am also dead set against anything that changes Mystara. If you are going to rewrite it to be more compatible with a rule set then you have not saved Mystara at all. I think too many people pay too much attention to stats. What we really need is a socio-political sourcebook which has no bias towards a specific ruleset. I couldn't care less about how the guy next to me converts for 3E just as he couldn't care less about my 2E conversions. So why write that in at all? The real Mystara isn't in a list of rule set specific stats on Npcs, its in the people and nations and customs. IMO converting the setting is adding a step we don't need.
Given a decent description of any character we could all probably flesh out some classes and stats (according to our favorite ruleset) without those already being provided. So npc stats are a waste of space, but GOOD description would be mandatory.
With the no restriction rule everyone wants to follow with 3E there isnt any reason for regional feat lists. All restrictions would be implied in the description but thats only a tendency not a rule.
As for artifacts and magic items I see no real need for lists of these but maybe since we have the immortals maybe a few artifacts from each sphere wouldn't hurt. Again descriptions of reported powers here nothing rule set specific need to be detailed, although maybe included in that last chapter could be stats to give a general outline of how to do an artifact.
To really catch the attention of old-timers you need something a bit new. Maybe expanding the info on Skothar or Davania. What might really get our blood pumping would be one conglomerated map from the Immortals arm to Skothar.
I could see, though, a nice chapter at the end dedicated to 3E PrCs but just the ones that really stick out. Most of what DM lists under his chapter on the magic would probably work well as PrCs plus some other additional ones like Hin Master, Darokin Merchant, Minrothaddan Sea Prince, etc. But I wouldn't get too crazy with this as I've already seen a trend of making PrCs when the right combinations of core classes and just calling yourself by that title would do just fine. And as always we should leave room for the GM to do his own thing. This chapter would be mostly to help clean up the messier parts of conversion like the secret crafts (which are an addition to regular magic), Darokin's merchant "class" (which has no direct conversion base), and Shamans (which could just be a modified priest or a PrC) among others.
Sorry DM, I am an old-timer and that list didn't appeal to me at all. As I said before, I already have all that information and I do not play 3E. Even if i did play 3E I don't need a conversion book.
I am also dead set against anything that changes Mystara. If you are going to rewrite it to be more compatible with a rule set then you have not saved Mystara at all. I think too many people pay too much attention to stats.
I fully agree with you here. Of course stats/rules are of some importance in the game, so they should be provided, but a simple rules update is not enough to justify a new book, and a rules change should not affect (heavily) the world.
Anyway, I doubt DM is going to rewrite Mystara any more that anyone else (that is, not outside his own campaign) ;)
GP
The number one change I'd make to bring in new players is call the product line "The Hollow World". Calling the product line "Mystara" is like calling the Forgotten Realms "Faerun" or the Dark Sun line "Athas" - not evocative. (Eberron needed all of WotC's marketing might to overcome the name, IMHO.)
"The Hollow World" is a perfectly good description of the planet as a whole, not just the interior, and gives you a perfect hook to attract people. "What's unique about this setting?" "Well, the world is hollow, and inside is a magically preserved set of races that would otherwise die out, so whenever there are ruins on the surface the empire that made them still exists behind a magical barrier."
The main gazeteer could be divided into "The Realm Above", "The Realm Below" (the lower Broken Lands, the Shadow Elves, Graakhalia, Barimoor's caverns, etc.) and "The Realm Within" (the hollow world). That also gets rid of the confusion about what to call the surface as a whole - is it "The Known World" to parallel "The Hollow World", or is that just part of Brun?
- Immortals. I really don't see these as being "integral" to Mystara at all. They are integral to OD&D, as they're part of the rules there. Part of the conversion process is to leave the rules behind.
It's possible you could write your own system to play immortals, but I honestly find no value in this. I have no interest in RP'ing a god, and trying to tie it into a campaign setting exclusively makes little sense. Better to have it as some kind of "Deities and Demigods" supplimental rules system. That way anyone can use it for their respective settings.
- History. My first experience with the Known World was the Isle of Dread module. I still like reading over the short descriptives given there. There was a wealth of potential and possibility in the briefs of the various nations.
In my mind, that's the best place to begin to start a 3E conversion. Starting from the Isle of Dread supplimental materials, you rewrite the nations and cultures from the ground up. You use the OD&D materials as inspiration and reference, but with considerable caution.
The Gazateer line did a good job constructing a campaign setting from these old materials. But keep in mind the audience it was designed for, younger players who's moms they were trying not to offend. In addition, much of the material was designed, naturally, around existing OD&D concepts and rules. Concepts unexplored in 3E, such as new potential prestige classes, spells, and items can be written up and added. Anything that contradicts 3E rules needs to be considered. Should it be ported in some form, or discarded?
I would also view the work from a player and DM perspective. For example, the original GAZ1 assumed that players may want to seek dominions when they reached Companion levels. So lands, areas, and adventures were set aside for this purpose. 3rd Edition doesn't have strict rules for dominions. It focuses on dungeons and more adventure-style play. So instead, I'd devote a good portion to creating dungeon maps for keeps, caves, ruins, etc. on the Karameikos map for the DM to populate as he will, with adventure and quest threads tied to individual towns, NPC's, etc.
Honestly, it's actually sounding like a rather fun project! A lot of work, and likely unappreciated around here
, but an interesting way to view an old favorite setting in a new light.Adamantyr
Again, I would state that to sell enough books to make it feasable for them to print it you HAVE to target old-timers and newbies alike. To target just the newbs leaves approx. half of the potential consumers out of the equation and therefore, leaves out half the potential profit. Mystara still lives at all because of us old-timers. We need new blood sure, but we old-timers ARE the fan base atm. Are you really suggesting we alienate the fan base in an attempt to create more interest in it? To me this seems absurd!
I didnt buy the 2E conversions even though I play 2E. I do not need the same information rehashed into a new ruleset. I did not need that then and I do not need it now.
You already possess core books. You already own the rules. You have all the info you need. So why is it we have to have rules heavy CAMPAIGN sourcebooks? Lets pay another $30 for the same thing I've already paid $100s for. We need setting information not a huge list of stats.
Or maybe you all should put a header on the forums page itself. something to the effect of:
If you do not support 3.xE or intend to post non-canon material do not expect any respect or appreciation of any work or support you might give. It will not be given.
To me, this type of epic, world shaping gaming is much more fun than killing your nth archtypical villain who a)is trying to resurrect a dead god b)is trying to conquer the world thru his hordes of undead and humanoids or c) posesses an artifact of infinite power that may destroy the world if he uses it. And it was possible Mystara more than any other setting.
Any 3e conversion needs to preserve the flavor of Mystara as much as possible to keep it from becoming another vanilla fantasy setting. Some things, such as the Radiance, the idea of Hollow World, and the somewhat patchwork nature of the nations, are more obvious. However, I feel the dominion rules and the War Machine Rules (as well as the related Sea and Siege Machines) fit in there as well. Some of my group's best campaigns involved dominion politics and large scale wars- something 3e doesn't really have any material for.
There's been some attempts at bringing mass-combat into 3rd edition, mostly by 3rd party open-source developers. By and large, I found most of them unimpressive.
The Radiance was an interesting way to make Glantri distinctive, but it also creates a multitude of headaches elsewhere. If all magic, for example, stems from it, why was there magic prior to it being introduced onto Mystara? And why is there magic in other planes? I'm not sure if I'd port this up or not... this is one of the tough ones.
Hollow World is a great concept, I'm a huge fan of Burrough's "Pellucidar" novels. Unfortunately, it's implementation was flawed on many levels. The magic restrictions really bothered me. For example, if you say "no conjuration spells", you've also just removed healing spells from the game. Making huge lists of exceptions to the rule is just ridiculous. HW is a concept that deserves more than a light set of rules, it deserves a whole sourcebook with an entirely new set of classes, races, and maybe even alternate magical systems.
To me, this type of epic, world shaping gaming is much more fun than killing your nth archtypical villain who a)is trying to resurrect a dead god b)is trying to conquer the world thru his hordes of undead and humanoids or c) posesses an artifact of infinite power that may destroy the world if he uses it. And it was possible Mystara more than any other setting.
Sounds like a fun campaign. However, I don't think everyone defines Mystara this way. Most players who I play D&D with have the more classic expectations, and don't want to get involved in politics.
If you have a group that does, great! Have you considered using your campaign to test-bed some 3E mechanics for dominion/war machine rules? That would be a great start to adding such mechanics, which would have the benefit of having been tried in real playtesting conditions.
Adamantyr
There's been some attempts at bringing mass-combat into 3rd edition, mostly by 3rd party open-source developers. By and large, I found most of them unimpressive.
I looked into Fields of Blood (I think that's the right name) and it was ok, but nothing to get overly excited about. I don't want to get into miniatures so the Miniatures Handbook is out. I'm hopeful Heroes of Battle will have some good ideas.The Radiance was an interesting way to make Glantri distinctive, but it also creates a multitude of headaches elsewhere. If all magic, for example, stems from it, why was there magic prior to it being introduced onto Mystara? And why is there magic in other planes? I'm not sure if I'd port this up or not... this is one of the tough ones.
You are correct- this will take some thought. I don't like it as the source of all magic in Mystara, but as a supplemental source of magical power, it has potential.Hollow World is a great concept, I'm a huge fan of Burrough's "Pellucidar" novels. Unfortunately, it's implementation was flawed on many levels. The magic restrictions really bothered me. For example, if you say "no conjuration spells", you've also just removed healing spells from the game. Making huge lists of exceptions to the rule is just ridiculous. HW is a concept that deserves more than a light set of rules, it deserves a whole sourcebook with an entirely new set of classes, races, and maybe even alternate magical systems.
The magic restrictions made things more challenging for sure. Some of the restrictions made sense to me, others not as much. This is part of Mystara were the balance between preserving flavor and being overly restrictive treads a very thin line.Sounds like a fun campaign. However, I don't think everyone defines Mystara this way. Most players who I play D&D with have the more classic expectations, and don't want to get involved in politics.
If you have a group that does, great! Have you considered using your campaign to test-bed some 3E mechanics for dominion/war machine rules? That would be a great start to adding such mechanics, which would have the benefit of having been tried in real playtesting conditions.
We have just started to convert over to 3E and after a preliminary walkthrough, it looks like these rules will convert rather painlessly- the war machine leadership score formula will have to change some, as will the nature of the special troops and I'm not sure if the NPC classes should "count" the same as PC classes right now. The dominion rules will probably integrate Bruce Heard's economic guidelines, but otherwise will have only moderate tweaking. The interesting part will be how to develope feats and PrC's that work within those two systems.
There's been some attempts at bringing mass-combat into 3rd edition, mostly by 3rd party open-source developers. By and large, I found most of them unimpressive.
I actually converted the War Machine to 2E before I made my prototype program for it. I wonder if some of the same War Machine concepts can be converted to 3E...
The Radiance was an interesting way to make Glantri distinctive, but it also creates a multitude of headaches elsewhere. If all magic, for example, stems from it, why was there magic prior to it being introduced onto Mystara? And why is there magic in other planes? I'm not sure if I'd port this up or not... this is one of the tough ones.
The Radiance as the source of all magic was a fiction invented in GKoM. In WotI, Magic stemmed from the Sphere of Energy, and the NotS leeched the Sphere of Energy for power, thus the "drain" on magic. In WotI, the Radiance was an alternate source of magic, with its source being indirectly the same.
For example, if you say "no conjuration spells", you've also just removed healing spells from the game.
Well, the system names do not match; conjuration in OD&D meant something more akin to "conjure monster". There were no spell groups in OD&D...
Sounds like a fun campaign. However, I don't think everyone defines Mystara this way. Most players who I play D&D with have the more classic expectations, and don't want to get involved in politics.
Just wait for them to get a little older, or give them "The Count of Monte Cristo" as a gift.
If you have a group that does, great! Have you considered using your campaign to test-bed some 3E mechanics for dominion/war machine rules?
I actually would like to do such a thing, but am cheap and already own too many classic D&D and 2E AD&D materials.
Look at the FR 3E book. It was a top seller, but really, how much of it was completely new to old timers and how much was it rehash of the old material?
I cannot judge since I am not an expert, but I BELIEVE it was 95% old material adjusted in a new fashion.
I think we should do the same for Mystara: 90% old material presented in a coherent and unified way, with 3E rules, and 10% or more if possible of new material focusing on undetailed (or poorly detailed countries). The "new material" would certainly focus on Heldannic Knights and Wendar for OW, and above all Alphatia, Isle of Dawn and other isles for the rest of the world.
The main problem that you have when writing such a book is that you must give the same basic information both to those who already know it and to newbies. So the writer cannot focus on "new things" hoping that the reader ALREADY knows what he is talking about when he mentions the Alphatian Council or the Glantrian Parliament. You have to explain it AGAIN. It is not an addition to the basic sourcebook: it IS THE CAMPAIGN SETTING MAIN SOURCEBOOK.
ANd then you have space problems. For obvious reasons, a published product shouldn't be larger than a certain number of pages, else it becomes too expensive to cover the production costs. A campaign sourcebook should stay around 300 pages, certainly no more than 320 and no less of 240 if it wants to be comprehensive and "cheap".
If however you write an E-book, you can write as many pages you want (okay, to stay real let's say no more than 500, since you have to print it and carry along too! [:p]).
For this reason you have to carefully choose what goes inside. For this reason I wouldn't put too many info on the Hollow World in the base sourcebook: the HW is a completely different setting inside the main campaign. You can talk about it, but do not delve too much inside it or you'll lose the aim of the book. The official Mystara campaign is based on its outer side, not the inner.
Then if you want you can release a separate booklet on campaigns in the HW (which IIRC are not extremely popular as much as say FR Underdark).
Again I stress it: I am not in favour of a "no restrictions" policy when it comes to Mystara and races/classes allowed, but if you say "no x class/race combination on Mystara" you have to explain why. And there might always be exceptions to the rule (everyone has his own Mystara ;)). So some changes and options should be allowed (the first and foremost I would be in favour of is allowing half-elves).
And finally, you are right about magic items: no big list of sword of this and that. What I would like to insert is a restricted list of specifically important and "Mystaran" items of power that every PC would look for (like say Khoronus's time machine or the Bead of Oblivion or the Crown of Vestland or the Shadowlord's Blackstick or the Crystal Dagger of Cymorrak, etc..). They are crunch but the way I'd present them, they would be more a source of inspiration for adventures or epic campaigns ;)
Anyway, I really think if we ever see any such book, it will certainly be a fan-based written one. I have no hopes any publisher could resurrect the original Mystara in print (I don't consider Hackwurld of Mystaros the resurrection of Mystara, merely another take at it... as if it was another reality à la Sliders ;) ).
I have no hopes any publisher could resurrect the original Mystara in print (I don't consider Hackwurld of Mystaros the resurrection of Mystara, merely another take at it... as if it was another reality à la Sliders ;) ).
Why? What is, IYO, the qualifying point that would make a book ``another take'' and another book ``a resurrection''?
A resurrection to me is writing a book about Mystara which doesn't change the premises of the world as they were written by its original authors. ;)
So some changes and options should be allowed (the first and foremost I would be in favour of is allowing half-elves).
Yes, I'm changing my thoughts on this one.
I was reading GAZ5 this morning, and read this, under "love and romance" on page 12:
Elves do wed humans from time to time according to the rules of a human land they live in, and these bondings often last the lifetime of the human, but for an elf this is no more than the time any serious liason might last.
This to me definitely opens up the possibility of half-elves.
If you write a book about Mystara that doesn't have the NoS or Blackmoor in Mystara's past, doesn't have Alphatia and has changed many things about the society and politics of a few or many nations of the setting (like say adding firearms and drow), I'd call it "another take on Mystara".
A resurrection to me is writing a book about Mystara which doesn't change the premises of the world as they were written by its original authors. ;)
Uhm, then I'm not sure that what you described would be a resurrection, and Hackwurld would be another take -- just for one, Halfling Bards as a popular combination is definitely a change to the setting that makes it a variant (while, e.g., half-elves are not, since they were there in OD&D as well -- at least in SC).
As for not having Alphatia, well, that's not a change, it's just post Wrath
Anyway, no single campaign book could hold all of Mystara -- concentrating on the KW is not an unlikely choice.
Changing Mystara's base history and erasing all other continents save Brun (as Hackwurld is doing, IIRC) qualifies as taking another approach at the setting.
One thing is broadening the PC classes allowed, another is rewriting the world's history and geography: this radically changes the foundations of the world.
Now if I said "elves are not spellcasters in Mystara", this would qualify too as another take on the setting. But all I'm saying is that, judging from their obsession with legend lore and storytelling described in GAZ8, Mystara halflings are not PHB halflings. Hence they have bard instead of thief as preferred class (which doesn't mean ALL hins are bards ;)).
Mind you, if I had to stay true to OD&D Mystara, I would have to rule that Mystara hins not only don't have Thief as preferred class as in PHB, but they CANNOT be thieves, bards, wizards, clerics... ecc... that would be a pretty boring and stereotyped race to play, if you're limited only to hin Fighters ;)
Giampaolo, having hin bards is just an additional option to a specific setting, much like they did when they added hin masters and dwarf clerics with GAZ8 and GAZ6.
No, it's not. You're saying that most halfling would belong to spellcasting classes. If you think about it, when ``they'' added hin masters and dwarf clerics it was pretty clear that hin masters and dwarf clerics were uncommon and/or secretive. (Even then, there were references to dwarven clerics before GAZ6)
One thing is broadening the PC classes allowed, another is rewriting the world's history and geography: this radically changes the foundations of the world.
Some broadenings, such as sorcerers or dwarf/halfling wizards, simply don't fit into the setting -- elves have always had spellbooks, and dwarves have always specifically been unable to use wizardly magic (even the Moulder Dwarves don't actually cast spells; at most, they would be Mechanicians or Artificers)
Hence they have bard instead of thief as preferred class (which doesn't mean ALL hins are bards ;)).
It does mean, though, that most halflings would be spellcasters, which is definitely contrary to the setting -- e.g., halflings and dwarves are persecuted in Glantri because they are magic resistant and cannot use wizardly magic. It wouldn't be so, if they had been able to become wizards.
By modifying apparently minor things, you may open gaps in the setting's consistency.
Mind you, if I had to stay true to OD&D Mystara, I would have to rule that Mystara hins not only don't have Thief as preferred class as in PHB, but they CANNOT be thieves, bards, wizards, clerics... ecc... that would be a pretty boring and stereotyped race to play, if you're limited only to hin Fighters ;)
To stay true to OD&D Mystara, they would be able to become fighters (from standard OD&D Halflings), thieves (since all races can become thieves by taking appropriate skills, see the Shadow Elven gaz, for example), and hin masters (their clerical option).
Of course they can't be wizards or clerics! If it was so, you would have to change the setting, since there won't be any need of human clerics in the Five Shires and other Hin communities (and there are in several places).
If you really want halfling bards, you could well settle for non-spellcasting bards (as in AD&D), which are very appropriate since they have anti-magic abilities that can be seen as an extended version of denial.
However, you don't have to stay true to OD&D Mystara. I'm certainly not going to say how you should play your game -- OTOH, I wouldn't need a sourcebook whose only ``improvement'' over existing books would be to tell me that Hin can be wizards!
Of course, I wouldn't buy a 3e version of Mystara anyway, but that's different...
I do not see the problem of adding sorcerors to Mystara, although I would venture to say that they would be rare since the majority of mages have always been the nose-in-book type. Again this doesn't really change any restrictions of cultural bias. The idea that every elf was a fighter and a magic-user is on the basis that elves have a natural affinity to nature and the way things work including the natural forces of magic. They do not have to study it constantly to remind themselves because they have been learning it from birth and they have close to a whole human lifetime to learn it before they are mature enough to go out on their own. Unfortunately, to be fair to all players, magic had to work the same across the board so elves had to have spellbooks like anyone else. Now that there is a distinction between two kinds of magic-use, I would say the elves are prime candidates for being sorcerors as this is actually more in tune with cultural bias. Sorcerors in general are one of the few things about 3E I actually like.
I would have to agree with Agathokles that I also do not need a book to tell me that i can play a hin wizard. The rules for that has always been in the core books since 1E AD&D, they simply restricted that combination (I argue because of cultural tendencies that were used as the basis for the rules). Only now that 3E allows for those combinations has it become an issue. Hin, like dwarves, may well have the mental aptitude for the complex rituals and rites of magic-use, but in Mystara they have an innate magic resistance that would make for an unacceptable amount of spells fizzling on their own MR. Now, you might argue that in 3E that it becomes a + to saves, but +2 on a scale of say 40 does not equal 20%. 20% of all spells in any ruleset is still 20% of all spells. Lifting MR changes the structure of the culture which changes the setting.
This is why I would not buy a specifically 3E version of a campaign sourcebook. If I want to play 3E I will buy the core books and already have the rules. What I need is a setting, not another rules crunching list of stats for it. They provided a ruleset that provided for full customization of the game, so to put out a book with all of the details in it goes against what they were trying to do. It would be better to just write it like a real-world article, with no ruleset specific info. Of course, all of the cultural biases and racial tendencies would be there. All the information one needs to understand the Mystaran setting (like why there are no dwarven wizards, and what the Glasntrian Parliment is). This allows for a better atmosphere for interpreting Mystara through the 3E rules. It also allows interpretation by any ruleset. Though, I am not against them putting a couple of chapters in back to provide example PrCs, Immortal relics, special feats and to explain general 3E outlines. After all, they still want to promote their new ruleset (which I do not blame them for).
What would really bring in new blood would be novels. Now where could we find a bunch of people who know alot about Mystara and have stories to tell about it...........
I think there is still some issues with seperating the idea of the ruleset vs the campaign setting. To stay true to OD&D Mystara (the ruleset), yes, you can only be a halfling fighter, period! To stay true to Mystara (the setting) you could be a hin fighter,bard, thief, or master (whatever your take on it), but cannot be a hin wizard or cleric. This does not violate the idea of their culture or setting but expands to include other classes that might be found in that culture. However, I would say that fighter is the preferred class of hin not bard. I do not base this on the ruleset idea, but on the culture idea. There is a fine line here but it is there.
There is a flaw in your reasoning, though. The setting of Mystara, in your example, limits halflings to four classes based upon material from GAZ8. The Gazateer line was developed to both expand the setting AND the OD&D rules set for greater flexibility. In other words, it's part of the OD&D rules system, and anything those rules defined as "cultural constraints" should not be assumed to be fixed.
... Sorcerors in general are one of the few things about 3E I actually like.
Yes, I like them too. They allow an impulsive player to play a spellcaster more easily, something that was definitely missing from the older systems. Choosing spell load-outs based on presumptions on what you MAY need gets rather old sometimes...
I would have to agree with Agathokles that I also do not need a book to tell me that i can play a hin wizard...
Of course not. Rules are made to be broken and re-written as the DM and players see fit. Campaign settings can be altered as needed, I think the Forgotten Realms were a much better place when it had nice large empty areas for players to do things with... much like Mystara was initially.
... It would be better to just write it like a real-world article, with no ruleset specific info. Of course, all of the cultural biases and racial tendencies would be there. All the information one needs to understand the Mystaran setting (like why there are no dwarven wizards, and what the Glasntrian Parliment is). This allows for a better atmosphere for interpreting Mystara through the 3E rules. It also allows interpretation by any ruleset...
I have to respectfully disagree with you on this. I have way too much to do in a given game to have to also worry about "interpreting" setting at the same time. Of course, some DM's prefer this. If they have custom rules-sets, they're probably used to it. Besides, we're discussing 3E conversions on the thread, not generic ones.
What would really bring in new blood would be novels. Now where could we find a bunch of people who know alot about Mystara and have stories to tell about it...........
That is one way. Published novels is unlikely, but fan fiction is always a path. I toyed with the idea of starting an episodic story using a Minrothad ship, in similar style to "Voyage of the Princess Ark". Unfortunately, my story-telling skills are not quite up to the task.
Obviously, some people here consider the setting and the rules so tied together they can't be seperated. I disagree on this point.
One thing I keep seeing is the fear of the setting becoming "vanilla". Well, news flash for you... Mystara IS vanilla, with maybe a few chocolate chips thrown in. :D The setting was designed as the opening campaign setting for beginning players! As a result, it has to support any and all rules sets given in the original rules.
So, if you do a 3E conversion, if you truly want it to be what Mystara was, you have to permit everything 3E does as well. (Core, mind you... the supplements have always been a case of "if you want to".) You can say that dwarf wizards are rare, or halflings are usually these classes, and you can do it without making it a hard-written rule.
Adamantyr
No, it's not. You're saying that most halfling would belong to spellcasting classes. If you think about it, when ``they'' added hin masters and dwarf clerics it was pretty clear that hin masters and dwarf clerics were uncommon and/or secretive. (Even then, there were references to dwarven clerics before GAZ6)
One misapprehension that I see as coming from the idea of "preferred classes" is that giving a race a particular preferred class means that most of that race is members of said class. It's an unfortunate (and natural) assumption, but I don't think it holds true, primarily because these are PC classes. Most NPCs should/would still have the "normal" NPC classes- expert, commoner (the most common, oddly enough ;), Adept, etc.
PCs are and always have been meant to be (in any edition) exceptions to the rule. They are the individuals that "break the mold", that stand away from the crowd. That is, I think, the true intent behind PCs and the "preferred class" idea merely takes that one step further. PCs (and notable NPCs) take the standard classes, and the preferred classes merely reflect a tendency among those exceptions to the rule. Thus, for DM to venture that hin have bard as a preferred class doesn't (and shouldn't) say that hin bards are ubiquitous and necessitate changes to Mystaran history- it simply means that among those exceptional hin who venture beyond the bounds of "normal" life, bards are more common than, say, rangers or paladins. The vast majority of NPCs will still be little more than commoners- most no more than 1st level at best.
The same theory should/would hold true for Dwarven Wizards and the like- just by allowing for their possibility, doesn't mean that they are common and necessitate rewriting Mystara as we know it to reflect that.
It does mean, though, that most halflings would be spellcasters, which is definitely contrary to the setting -- e.g., halflings and dwarves are persecuted in Glantri because they are magic resistant and cannot use wizardly magic. It wouldn't be so, if they had been able to become wizards.
By modifying apparently minor things, you may open gaps in the setting's consistency.
As I suggested elsewhere (maybe even in this thread? I forget...) just because a dwarf could potentially become a wizard doesn't mean that the history of Glantri and Rockhome would be any different. The dwarves came to Glantri as unwanted prospectors, and seemingly brought a deadly plague with them- both reason enough for the Glantrians to despise dwarves, in addition to their magic resistance. It would take a lot more than just being able to cast magic for a dwarf to gain acceptance in Glantri due to this history- but allowing for the possibility need not suddenly negate all that history. (If anything, IMO, it could lead to some interesting new politics in a realm already known for being a political hotbed.)
Of course they can't be wizards or clerics! If it was so, you would have to change the setting, since there won't be any need of human clerics in the Five Shires and other Hin communities (and there are in several places).
They may not need them for healing, but just because they are unnecessary has never stopped missionaries of religions from attempting to spread their gospel to new lands. Clerics aren't just healing machines- human clergy in the Shires are doubtless trying to spread their beliefs among the little people.
Preferred Class doesn't mean, as I already said, that all of the people of said race belongs to this class! It only means that, IF a hin were to advance as one of the Base Classes, his natural true calling would be that of a Bard. If he decides to make 10 levels as Fighter it's not a problem. If he then decides to start the Bardic path, he will discover he can be a good bard and doesn't need so much practice (i.e. XP) to advance as say if he chose the cleric's path along the Fighter's path.
We're talking about a rules system for Multiclassing here. We're saying that for a specific race is EASIER to be a Bard/Wizard/Sorcerer whatever than any other Base class, because it's in their DNA so to speak.
But we're not saying that because it's easier, ALL of them are doing this. There are still plenty of experts, aristocrats, commoners (NPC classes) in the Shires, and Fighters and Rangers as well... or do you think there cannot be Rangers among the hins because there were no rules that represented rangers in OD/D Mystara??
I would not be THAT strict ;)
Thus, for DM to venture that hin have bard as a preferred class doesn't (and shouldn't) say that hin bards are ubiquitous and necessitate changes to Mystaran history- it simply means that among those exceptional hin who venture beyond the bounds of "normal" life, bards are more common than, say, rangers or paladins.
My point is that, actually, it is not just saying that Hin bards should be more common than paladins, but that they should be more common than fighters or thieves. Anyway, the basic issue is that Hins and Dwarves simply shouldn't be able to become wizards or (full) bards.
And by modifying this basic assumption you make a major change to the setting -- much bigger than, say, allowing Dwarves to become Thieves.
Of course you can modify the basic reasons for the fact that Dwarves and Hins are not welcome in Glantri (yet, since Hin were not among the colonists, it would be very difficult to build some rationale that did not include their inability to cast wizardly magic), but this already is a change to the setting.
Back to DM's last post -- you're saying that for Hin (a notoriously non-magical race) it is genetically easier to enter a magic-using career. That's something I wouldn't allow.
Indeed, AD&D does not allow Halfling rangers (with exceptions), or Dwarven wizards, even though there's nothing that would specifically make it difficult to use or create such characters. Simply, they're not appropriate to the (meta)setting. When and where they're appropriate, of course they can be used (e.g., Halfling Rangers in Dark Sun, Dwarven Sha'irs in Al Qadim, etc., "demi" rangers and bards in the "Complete" books).
Anyway, one of the really absurd things about 3e is this "everything core should be allowed" thing. But why? Just because people have spent money on the book and should therefore be able to use all of it? That's good reasoning for marketing people -- but since I don't work for WotC I don't really care about marketing reasons.
Now, the Dwarven/Hin Wizard (even worse: Sorcerer) is just the kind of silly thing: there's no reason to allow them, except the "everything core should be allowed" -- it really doesn't add to the game experience, it doesn't improve the setting in any significant way.
BTW, if "everything core should be allowed", than you should consider adding, for example, drows, since they are in the core books.
And you're lucky, since Mystara is already pretty inclusive (except Drows, Metallic Dragons, Mind Flayers and evil undersea races, it's almost all there) -- think what Dark Sun people should do to fit the "everything core should be allowed"!
I doubt that halflings cannot become Bards because they are "inherently non-magical". Nowhere it is stated that hin are resistant to magic as dwarves are. Moreover, their culture if filled with storytellers (and there are special storytelling rules in GAZ8 as well as in GAZ2). Despite this fact, do you really think that there are no hin bards (or ylari bards for that matter) because the setting doesn't allow them? I do think there are NO BARDS around Mystara because THE RULES didn't account for Bard class.
But lo and behold! Surprise surprise! With issue XYZ of Dragon Magazine, Bruce Heard introduces the Bard class for Eusdria ! Does this mean that they're restricted to Eusdria? I don't think so! Does it mean that BRuce is going AGAINST the setting? Or just because it's the setting's editor, he can do everything and we cannot?
Frankly I don't see the point. I've got Red Steel, and there's plenty of opportunity for hins and elves and DWARVES to become SKALDs, that is to say BARDS, with access to ARCANE spellcasting. So what does this mean? Is it all a question of setting or of rules?
I am not saying "every race has access to every class possible in Mystara". Far from that! But where there are exceptions (read: dwarven wizards) we must explain WHY there are exceptions and focus on where the exceptions are part of the setting and where instead depend on the rules. I don't think that hin without arcane magic depends on setting.
Dwarves and arcane magic, however, is another matter that has to be explained... ;)
Where exactly can I find AD&D rules for generic Mystara campaign (where you say that "AD&D does not allow Halfling rangers (with exceptions), or Dwarven wizards, even though there's nothing that would specifically make it difficult to use or create such characters."), GP, since I do not seem to recall the source?
Where did I say that the AD&D I was talking of was specifically for Mystara? I was talking of generic AD&D rules, and I wasn't even specifically speaking of Mystara (indeed, I was referencing Dark Sun and Al Qadim at the end of that section).
I do think there are NO BARDS around Mystara because THE RULES didn't account for Bard class.
But lo and behold! Surprise surprise! With issue XYZ of Dragon Magazine, Bruce Heard introduces the Bard class for Eusdria ! Does this mean that they're restricted to Eusdria? I don't think so! Does it mean that BRuce is going AGAINST the setting? Or just because it's the setting's editor, he can do everything and we cannot?
Indeed, he has some advantage on you. :D
Otherwise, since Mystara does not have a clear beginning (when was the setting, with the Red Box?), then anything at all could be added, and since, say, Shadow Elves where not in the original box but where later added, why not adding Drows? (Or for that matter, psionics or pick anything you really don't want)
So, yes, Bruce could because he was setting editor -- you're not, and therefore you can't (create new canon, that is, of course you're free to have IYC plenty of dwarven sorcerers and halfling bards)
In the end, there was a bard class (for Robrenn, not for Eusdria, which had half-elves and elven clerics and paladins) in Mystara even in OD&D, which makes bards a viable class -- but not for halflings.
This is not because of halfling cannot per se be bards, but because they can't cast wizardly magic. If you had a non-spellcasting bard class, or a clerical bard class (both are available in AD&D), it could be acceptable for halfling (though probably only the non spellcasting one would be good for Five Shires).
Frankly I don't see the point. I've got Red Steel, and there's plenty of opportunity for hins and elves and DWARVES to become SKALDs, that is to say BARDS, with access to ARCANE spellcasting. So what does this mean? Is it all a question of setting or of rules?
You'd better read the rules for Skalds, since:
``Dwarf bards do not cast spells at all. Instead, they learn to resist spells as described in the "Player Characters" chapter.'' (SC)
``Skalds come only from Eusdria. Only humans, elves, and dwarves can become Skalds. Elves and dwarves cannot advance past 12th level. Non-natives are never taught to be Skalds.'' (SC)
As you can see, the rules have been bent to allow for a basic fact -- that Dwarves can never cast wizardly magic. Therefore, the answer is that it is a matter of setting, not rules.
Its all really a matter of what the individual DM thinks is the better solution
I gotta agree with weasel on this one. The application of the rules, and how that best represents the core essence of Mystara seems to be really subjective. This discussion is making me even more aware of how subjective that is. I think that any time a setting is converted to a new system, reality will change a little.
I think most people agree on some core principles that define Mystara, but there is disagreement on how to enforce those principles. This is probably also a question of opinions about how the 3E system should be used. How far should the everything be open to anyone line be taken. (IMHO very far).
Regarding the question of the individual DM this is not a problem since each DM can decide for himself. However, in the discussion of a HYPOTHETICAL 3E Mystara book, by WotC these questions become an issue. Even if such a product might never happen, I think this discussion is interesting in showing different opinions about what is important about the essence of Mystara.
For a 3E product, the aim should IMO be to attract new fans aswell as appeal to old ones. Both will be a challenge it seems. For attracting new fans, I think it is a good idea not to bring in too many restrictions or even rule changes. However, I think what would be cool is to have a handful of changes that have to be interesting and connected t how the setting is different. These should IMHO be connected to the defining elements of Mystara. Things like The Radience, The Immortals (possibly the spheres), one or two extra races (Shadow elves, Lupins and Rakasta come to mind), a few PrCs etc. Forced limiations such as not allowing a certain race to be of a certain class will not appeal to newcomers.
For the book to appeal to old-timers, many of whom still use previous rules systems, I think it would be a good idea to keep the book as rules-light as possible. Note that this does not contradict the above. This will allow for more space to cover new aspects of the setting. However, since there is limited space in one book, I think this should not be a question of covering new geographical areas. Concentrating mainly on the Known World would allow a more in depth coverage of the various races, cultures, societies and religions of the land. Heck, religion is hardly dealt with at all in existing (non-fan) material. Detailed write-ups for each race (including all the human races) and Core classes (Where are they found, where are they common, rare, virtually non-existent etc) in the traditional 3E framework (Thin the 3E FR sourcebook) would be awesome, and should be very useful also for fans of the pre 3E rulesets.
I am a bit dishearted when I hear people say they would never buy Mystara stuff made for 3E, Hackmaster or anything other than OD&D, because even if the Core book wouldn't have anything new in it, good sales would guarantee more stuff for our favorite world! Imagine new poster-sized maps, color illustrations, fiction, etc etc. I think it would be amazing. Then we could have discussions here about how to convert it to your system of choice. And more people would join us, even if they weren't around when the Gazeteers were available in hard copy.
Håvard
Forced limiations such as not allowing a certain race to be of a certain class will not appeal to newcomers.
I sincerely can't get this... why would one not accept a limitation given by the setting? I mean, if one were to produce a D&D campaign setting set in the RW (say, Masque of the Red Death) would it so unreasonable to ban non-human races?
I am a bit dishearted when I hear people say they would never buy Mystara stuff made for 3E, Hackmaster or anything other than OD&D, because even if the Core book wouldn't have anything new in it, good sales would guarantee more stuff for our favorite world! Imagine new poster-sized maps, color illustrations, fiction, etc etc. I think it would be amazing. Then we could have discussions here about how to convert it to your system of choice. And more people would join us, even if they weren't around when the Gazeteers were available in hard copy.
I'm not that optimistic. If people wanted the Gazetteers, they could get it as ESDs, and they're much less costly than any 3E campaign setting.
I, personally, would never buy something that simply reprinted information I already have in a format I'll never use.
OTOH, I'm quite puzzled when I see people who wouldn't consider Hackwurld of Mystaros because James is going to limit his book to KW, and then expect me to agree that a Mystara campaign book should not set restrictions to class/race combinations (especially when the reason for removing the restriction is "everything core should be allowed").
I sincerely can't get this... why would one not accept a limitation given by the setting? I mean, if one were to produce a D&D campaign setting set in the RW (say, Masque of the Red Death) would it so unreasonable to ban non-human races?
It depends on whether the limitation contributes significantly to making the setting distinctly different from other settings. I could see not allowing dwarf wizards being made such an issue, though it lacks the originality of something that would draw people to the setting IMO. If it was to be included I think it should be made into a major issue and made in a way that made Mystaran Dwarves even more magic resistant than other 3E dwarves.
I'm not that optimistic. If people wanted the Gazetteers, they could get it as ESDs, and they're much less costly than any 3E campaign setting.
I, personally, would never buy something that simply reprinted information I already have in a format I'll never use.
Okay, I can understand that. I guess that was basically what was done in the 2e conversion. For any new publication I would expect the material to be rewritten, with more in depth information about certain aspects even though the book might not cover geographical areas not covered by the Gaz'es (possibly exception of Heldann, Wendar and Sindh)..
Håvard
I wouldn't allow dwarven wizards in Mystara 3E, because all old sources say that Mystaran dwarves are high resistant to magic. HOW this translates into 3E rules must still be verified, but that's it.
What I am seriously doubting is the halfling's position. I never found anything about halflings' renowned anti-magic attitude. The Denial power only works inside the Five Shires, and is probably due to the magical field that the various Crucibles of Blackflame create around the land (and which can be tapped in this way by all hins and hins only). So why do you say they cannot be bards or wizards?
And also, has any of you any idea of the halflings' genealogy? How were they born? Were they created by some immortal who shaped them with anti-magic attitude like Kagyar did with MODERN dwarves (Rockborn dwarves , which also mean that Kogolor dwarves can probably BE wizards if they study enough!)?? I believe that we must answer these questions if we want to say "no hins can wield arcane magic in Mystara". Such prohibitions are okay in any setting, provided they ARE EXPLAINED inside the setting's history or magical background ;)
Okay, I can understand that. I guess that was basically what was done in the 2e conversion.
And, I fear, one of the reasons why the conversion didn't work ;)
For any new publication I would expect the material to be rewritten, with more in depth information about certain aspects even though the book might not cover geographical areas not covered by the Gaz'es (possibly exception of Heldann, Wendar and Sindh)..
Consider that the gazetteer format makes it difficult to add more in depth information to a campaign book. All 14 gazetteers would add to a page count impossible to reach for a campaign setting, even considering the usual reprinting of info (e.g., the skill system).
(Rockborn dwarves , which also mean that Kogolor dwarves can probably BE wizards if they study enough!)?
Indeed, I would allow Kogolor Wokani (but not in the HW, and therefore only in campaigns set in the distant past of Mystara). However, Kogolor Dwarves would have to be described as clearly different from Rockborn Dwarves -- no special defences against poisons/radiation, no special dwarven abilities with mining. Basically, it would be a different race.
As for halfling history, it is shrouded in mystery. They lived in Davania, and were forced to leave for some reason. Halfling are one of the most underdeveloped element of Mystara.
And, I fear, one of the reasons why the conversion didn't work ;)
At least one reason why most people did not like the Mystara AD&D2 products. The conversions themselves were decent enough I suppose, but I would have liked to see way more Kits and other elements where the aD&D2 system excells. The same for a 3E conversion: building on the strengths of the indvidiual system would make the conversions alot more appealing.
Consider that the gazetteer format makes it difficult to add more in depth information to a campaign book. All 14 gazetteers would add to a page count impossible to reach for a campaign setting, even considering the usual reprinting of info (e.g., the skill system).
I dont know about that. I think some information from the gazateers should be left out allowing for other information to be added. I especially imagine a 3E product going into more detail on each race (human and demihuman) and religion, as well as the nature of magic on Mystara, while each country would (by neccesity) get less coverage than in the Gazeteers. All rules (such as skill system, trading system, magic) from the Gaz's would be removed, although some of it might be replaced by 3E equivalents. The number of NPCs would also have to be reduced. Ofcourse, all of the parts that would have to be left out could be included in future products, perhaps one for each country (like the Gaz series) or along other division lines.
One such possibility:
Lands of demihumans: Alfheim, Rockhome, Five Shires
Lands of the Norsemen: Vestland, Ostland, Soderfjord
Lands of Merchants: Darokin, Ierendi, Minrothad
Lands of Magic: Glantri, Alphatia, Wendar
Lands of Faith: Ylaruam, Athruagin, Sindh
Lands of Warriors:Thyatis, Karameikos, Heldann
Lands of Raiders: Broken Lands, Shadow Elves, Ethengar
Håvard
It may have been said before, but its not always what you CAN but what you CANNOT, that defines a race, army or character. Its also the entire basis of the class system.
I would start, myself, with two articles. One, an article detailing the Grand Duchy of Karameikos. The other, a Dungeon adventure set in the Duchy.
The article would be a capsulation of the Duchy, including a brief history, a well-detailed map of the region, a couple NPC's (The Duke and the Baron, most likely) and Specularum written up in full "city stat format". The other cities would be mentioned by name with populations, but left undetailed otherwise. Details of the various core races and classes and where they can be found in the duchy would also be provided for players.
As for the Dungeon adventure, there's quite a bit of material I'd like to do. One is the "Haunted Keep" from the original Basic and Expert sets, but in its entirety. I wouldn't use any previous layouts (which both the box set and GAZ1 are sorely lacking in), instead I'd make my own. Writing up some politics to tie it in with Luln and the Barony would also make it a little more flavorful than your standard dungeon crawl.
Another possible adventure would be something with more politics, perhaps set in Specularum, but I wouldn't want to step on "The Veiled Society", an adventure too GOOD to make a crude copy of. There's always actually doing "The Veiled Society" as a Dungeon adventure, of course, but I think it's important we write new material instead of rehashing old stuff in it's entirety.
So, if any Dragon/Dungeon guys loitering about want to say "Hey, that sounds good, write it up and submit it", just holler.
Adamantyr
Lands of demihumans: Alfheim, Rockhome, Five Shires
Lands of the Norsemen: Vestland, Ostland, Soderfjord
Lands of Merchants: Darokin, Ierendi, Minrothad
Lands of Magic: Glantri, Alphatia, Wendar
Lands of Faith: Ylaruam, Athruagin, Sindh
Lands of Warriors:Thyatis, Karameikos, Heldann
Lands of Raiders: Broken Lands, Shadow Elves, Ethengar
Very insightful idea there, Havard! Not to mention bringing the original purpose of these discussions back to the forefront.
Now on to this interesting halfling topic (and everything following is merely my humble opinion based on how I've been able to interpret things ;) ). I'm not sure exactly why people are against the hin being able to use arcane magics. I think it's very easy to see that it would be very rare and more likely to be seen in hin that adventure outside the Shires.
Their magical resistance in the form of the denial ability really has nothing to do with the hin as a race, but as a result of magical artifacts involving Immortals. It appears that in the history of the Shires, elves had taught a few of the halflings some of their lore. This MAY or MAY NOT have included arcane magic.
Here is an interesting quote from page 2 of the Five Shires gaz:
Humans are the most likely non-hin races to be found... Such magic-users, always Lawful in alignment, are welcome by local hin clans if they live peacefully, have few visitors from outside the Shires, and aid local hin with their magic.
This could refer to the magics of the Masters, but since that magic is given to them by the High Heroes and that they fully understand this, I don't really think the Masters are the "local hin" being referenced here. This only says to me that the notion of a hin using arcane magic is not completely un-Mystaran.
Something to think about; In theology, it is often said that you should not base a theological belief on what the text does not say.
the quote refers to the human magic user, aiding local hin with the magic users magic.
If you WANT it to say that! :P ;)
If you WANT it to say that! :P ;)
I realise you've ... out part of the passage, which I haven't had time to go and read, but the part you quoted says exactly what weasel fierce said - human magic users are welcome, if they are lawful, live peacefully, don't have too many visitors, and use their human magic to aid the hin
- inferring that the hin do not have readily available magic of their own. (Which is me reading into the text, I know, but I feel it is a valid inference in this case. But you can disagree with me if you want.
)At least one reason why most people did not like the Mystara AD&D2 products. The conversions themselves were decent enough I suppose, but I would have liked to see way more Kits and other elements where the aD&D2 system excells.
Indeed. That's the major difference between, say, K:KoA and Savage Coast: K:KoA kits are mediocre, Savage Coast kits are much more detailed -- not only the easier ones, such as Inheritors or Honorbounds, but also the more common: Rural Hero, Veteran and Highwayman are definitely less detailed (even in the fluff department) then the SC equivalents (Local Hero, Myrmidon and Bandit).
The result is that I'd use these SC kits to replace those in K:KoA.
Also, there were many opportunities missed -- priests of the two churches are basically the same (to the point that in K:KoA, the CoK worships Halav, Petra and Zirchev!), while GAZ1 offered many opportunities to make them different.
Defenders (see Savage Coast) would have been perfect to replace Paladins and as a kit for the Order of the Griffon (I use Defenders and War Priests).
One nice idea of the SC book is to provide the Local Hero and Noble kits as ``fallback'' options for characters not otherwise detailed. OTOH K:KoA tries to cover every option, and in the end is left with little space to detail setting specific options.
I dont know about that. I think some information from the gazateers should be left out allowing for other information to be added.
Of course. The problem is that you would get (at best) something similar to the SC book -- with two to five pages per nation. BTW, if that is the goal, you might have a look at the newbie guide, which provides two-page description of most (all?) areas of the KW (you get some 30 pages overall).
I've only read some of the posts in this thread and it's easy to see that eveyone has a different opinion of what Mystara really is. This in mind, I think it was posted that whoever (Paizo are you listening!!!!! Forget about the DS thing. The fans shouldn't have flamed you guys!) does untake this project, probably should just start with a 35e conversion of Gaz1/K:KoA. There is plenty in Karameikos to keep a campaign going for some time and then expand from there. This would be a great series of articles for Dragon and Dungeon magazines. After all of the information is compiled, Paizo could then release it as a hardback just like they have with the Shackled City adventure path. This would be the most gain for the least pain.
One of the keys of making this project work would be only good feedback from us, the fans. I am defining "good feedback" as any information that would be useful to the authors that does not attack the authors work (e.g., "Bargle should probably be a 20th level mage rather than a sorcerer" rather than "It sucks!! How could you!!").
Besides, any DM who's worth a grain of salt can make it work.
--Ray.
What explainations exist for Oil of Darkness and Stone Ships? The dwarves might hire mages to enchant their weapons, but not their relics...
the quote refers to the human magic user, aiding local hin with the magic users magic.
I agree that is the most likely what the quote is saying. I thought it would be interesting to show how the same words could mean something slightly different when view from a different slant; like those optical illusions where you can see an old woman or a young beautiful woman in the same picture.
What explainations exist for Oil of Darkness and Stone Ships? The dwarves might hire mages to enchant their weapons, but not their relics...
The Dwarves do not need to hire wizards to enchant their weapons, and most dwarves would not allow wizards to meddle with their work anyway.
According to the Gazetteer, any Dwarf with 1.400.000 XP (or a Dwarven Cleric with 1.000.000 XP) can create magical weapon and armor, limited to simply adding bonuses (i.e., the Dwarf can create a Sword +5, but not a Flaming Sword +1).
The explanation would be that the dwarf is so focused on his craft that he is able to infuse part of his lifeforce into it. However, he is not able to fully control this process, so only basic effects are achieved (i.e., the dwarf wills the sword to be better, stronger, more flexible, but not to do anything that is usually outside the reach of a sword, like sprouting flames or healing wounds).
Dwarves can also create their special magic items, but that's an effect of the use of the Forge of Power (and the relics are clerical, not wizardly magic).
Also, Dwarven Cleric might be allowed to create clerical items with the standard procedures (using a Forge of Power, if the procedure usually requires an altar or shrine).
Note that by requiring hired mages (or worse, that the Dwarf be a wizard himself) to allow Dwarves to enchant weapons, one would impose a limitation due to the ruleset (3e) to the setting (which in the specific case can also be easily removed, since 3e item creation rules appear to be based upon OD&D rules).
The Dwarves do not need to hire wizards to enchant their weapons, and most dwarves would not allow wizards to meddle with their work anyway.
According to the Gazetteer, any Dwarf with 1.400.000 XP (or a Dwarven Cleric with 1.000.000 XP) can create magical weapon and armor, limited to simply adding bonuses (i.e., the Dwarf can create a Sword +5, but not a Flaming Sword +1).
Might be a cool idea to create a "Dwarven Artificer" class for OD&D. The class would be identical to the Dwarven Cleric class, except that the Dwarf would learn m-u spells rather than cleric spells, and that he could not actually cast the spells, only learn them for enchantment purposes. Enchantment would follow the rules you refer to above. What do you think?
Håvard
Might be a cool idea to create a "Dwarven Artificer" class for OD&D. The class would be identical to the Dwarven Cleric class, except that the Dwarf would learn m-u spells rather than cleric spells, and that he could not actually cast the spells, only learn them for enchantment purposes. Enchantment would follow the rules you refer to above. What do you think?
It should be relatively easy to convert the existing AD&D classes that work this way (there are a couple of them, IIRC). As to converting directly the Dwarven Cleric, it may work, but I'm not entirely certain that the power level would be adequate -- would need playtesting.
Also, I'd allow it only to Moulder Dwarves, as Rockborn Dwarves, according to the GAZ, don't seem to keen on creating ''miscellaneous items''.
It should be relatively easy to convert the existing AD&D classes that work this way (there are a couple of them, IIRC). As to converting directly the Dwarven Cleric, it may work, but I'm not entirely certain that the power level would be adequate -- would need playtesting.
Agreed. I just tossed out the idea. It would definately need some playtesting. What AD&D classes work this way?
Also, I'd allow it only to Moulder Dwarves, as Rockborn Dwarves, according to the GAZ, don't seem to keen on creating ''miscellaneous items''.
I dont know about that. The Rockhome gaz lists quite a few examples of weird experiments the Dwarves are doing. Like that plane travelling device...
Håvard
Agreed. I just tossed out the idea. It would definately need some playtesting. What AD&D classes work this way?
There are special wizard classes that use different ways to work magic, called Schools of Thaumaturgy. The Artificers has special abilities to create one-shot items (simply storing a spell effect in a specially prepared object), a temporary item, or a permanent item (the standard variety). It appears in Player's Option: Spells & Magic.
There's also the Mechanician (or Clockwork Mage), a type of wizard from Al Qadim, described in the Shai'rs Handbook (great wizard splatbook for AD&D in general, IMO), which focuses more on creating construct (steam-powered!). This type of characters actually never cast spells, and most Mechanicians are Gnomes or Dwarves.
Also, using PO:S&M it would be quite easy to build a customized artificer to fit the Dwarven Artificer character.
I dont know about that. The Rockhome gaz lists quite a few examples of weird experiments the Dwarves are doing. Like that plane travelling device...
Well, those are thought as plot devices, not as standard PC equipment. They should be created ''by accident'' so as not to be replicable. Most likely, creating any of these items involves the use of a Forge of Power.
Well, those are thought as plot devices, not as standard PC equipment. They should be created ''by accident'' so as not to be replicable. Most likely, creating any of these items involves the use of a Forge of Power.
See, I don't like things like that. If it exists in the setting, I want rules for how to make it. If it can only be made by the Immortals, fine then I want to know the PP cost. If it can be made by mortals, then a 36th level PC should be able to make it.
Anyways, the point was that dwarves do indeed dabble in creating all sorts of devices, magical or technological.
Håvard
See, I don't like things like that. If it exists in the setting, I want rules for how to make it. If it can only be made by the Immortals, fine then I want to know the PP cost. If it can be made by mortals, then a 36th level PC should be able to make it.
I'm sorry, but that's how the GAZ puts it.
Anyways, the point was that dwarves do indeed dabble in creating all sorts of devices, magical or technological.
In those cases, the GAZ does not exclude the intervention of a friendly magic user (indeed, one is needed explicitly for the Zeppelin, then why not for the dimension launcher).
Combine this with the explicit request of a human magic user to add spell-like abilities to dwarven magic items, and you are back to the standard options.
Simply put, Dwarves from the GAZ cannot create miscellaneous device by themselves, and their "inventions" are said to be mostly in the field of mechanical engineering.
Of course, from time to time a group of Dwarven craftsmen may enroll a wizard (there are a few in Dengar) to provide some magical enchantment, but that would not be that common, IMO.
I love the Vaults of Pandius site, not just because there are OD&D articles there which come in handy for my game, but because all the editions are represented, and no one of them seems dominant. There's also tons of edition independent fluff and rules light articles that any DM can adapt.
While the Mystara 3e site has some equally cool material, I find myself not visiting it too much because, frankly, the heavy focus on 3rd edition mechanics annoys me.
Greyhawk, Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms have all gone over to the 3e side, IMO keeping Mystara open to all the editions is the key to keeping it alive.
Supporting the Mystaros HackMaster stuff can't hurt either, even if you don't use HackMaster, getting the players that do to use Mystara instead of Garweeze Wurld only strengthens the Mystara community.