"D&D was always for the freaks and the outsiders" is one of those statements that is technically true but if you dig a bit under the surface you realize that the freaks and outsiders in question are Misogyny Steve and The Dungeon Racist.

i think this says much more about the people y'all hang out with or know than it does ttrpg players as a whole but idk

I think this comment is indicative of the fact that you don't know a lot about the history of the game and the culture surrounding it.

Hey that's not fair. Orcs can do that to loads of races. No, this does not make anything better, especially given it's generally by force in early editions, but I think it's important to note the willingness to make exceptions to the racism when it would let them be more racist.

But it does let you say "highly sensitive elf ears" a bunch and see who blushes, so I think it's worth it overall.

Fireball is actually an unfinished, unstable spell.  It’s just, no wizard has ever been ballsy enough to try and cast the complete version before.

Scorching Ray is the most simplified version - a two-dimensional manifestation of fire at level 2. Fireball is one step up, as a three-dimensional burst and a level 3 spell.

Behold! The Flaming Hypercube! 4th level evocation, verbal and somatic components, plus the material component (a glass cube). Range: 60 feet. Area: a cube 15 feet on each side and on another side you can’t perceive.

Creatures in the area when you cast this spell, as well as creatures who were in the area in the last three rounds, must make a Dexterity (Reflex) save or take 10d8 fire damage (save halves).

Unlike the lower dimensional spells, Flaming Hypercube deals full damage to incorporeal things. The ethereal plane is functionally a bonus spatial dimension and that's where the fourth direction of 15 feet goes.

I have played the first module. The only thing I really remember is that if you touch a skunk you die instantly forever.

Alright, time to talk about one of the hot button issues in D&D today: skills, and how they've evolved over the 50-year lifespan of the game. We'll start, of course, from the beginning.

Dungeons & Dragons (1974)

So there actually isn't a skill system here. But the primordial origins are there, in the various neat little procedures of adventuring. Firstly there are languages. Humans know the "common tongue," which at this point isn't a single language, it just refers to the local Lingua Franca. I think all non-human player characters are assumed to be in 20% of other creatures who speak the language along with their own one. You also know an alignment language (Lawful, Chaotic, or Neutral), and one additional creature language for every point of Intelligence above 10.

NPC reactions. This is rolled on a simple 2d6 table for recruiting hirelings. Another 2d6 table is for monster reactions.

Surprise rolls. There are no stealth or perception skills, and adventurers are simply assumed to be sneaking around while in dungeons, with surprise rolled when monsters are encountered.

Doors can be listened at and secret doors found, with simple d6 rolls.

There's also a chance of getting lost in the wilderness, which sort of implies a general ability to not do so in most situations.

And that's basically it! You can already see several different skills we know today forming in the primordial soup.

But you feel like something is missing, right? Ah, of course! We must take a little detour to

Greyhawk (1975)

Did you know that in the original game, the only classes were fighting man, magic-user, and cleric? That's right, the now classic thief would not be introduced until the first supplement! And with them came for the first time actual named skills.

Thieves could open locks, remove traps, listen for noise, move silently, pick pockets, and hide in shadows. Additionally they could read languages, treasure maps, and even magical scrolls at higher levels.

Now, these skills are only for thieves, so what are other characters to do? Well for most of them, nothing. It simply is not a fighter's job to pick pockets, or a cleric's job to open a lock. Certainly an item can be forcefully taken from an NPC, and a door bashed open, so they are not completely helpless in these tasks. But the thief simply excels at doing such things with superior ability and grace. And of course any character can hear noises behind doors, thieves are simply better at it. Moving silently and hiding are two slightly odd skills, as they overlap with surprise rolls but don't interact with them. It can be assumed that a thief moving silently can scout ahead and report back without actually encountering the monsters they find, and a hiding thief can let wandering monsters pass by even when there isn't sufficient cover (as only shadows are needed, other characters can obviously still hide behind cover if they are aware of the need to do so). Other characters can also climb using ropes and other tools, but won't be able to climb sheer surfaces unaided like thieves can, so again the thief can simply do something general in a superior manner.

There are many classes with their own skills to be found in various magazines, but I'm not going to dig through them. So let the totality of original D&D skills be the above.

Next time: we get Advanced

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (1977)

(the Player's Handbook and Dungeon Masters Guide were actually released in 1978 and 1979 respectively, but that's beside the point)

Initially things are much the same as previously, with the use of thief skills clarified, and general rules procedures still taking the place of many tasks today relegated to skills. There's this neat little bit where the first time a character listens at a door or other such situation, you roll to determine whether they have keen hearing, which thence gives a bonus to hearing things. There's also the possibility of hearing loss due to loud noises.

The only real addition is in the Dungeon Masters Guide with non-professional skills. And this is barely a system, really. You can just have 0-2 skills related to mundane professions, which may or may not come in handy.

But wait, there's actually more!

Oriental Adventures (1985)

Unfortunate name aside, this has to be one of my favourite old sourcebooks, but not for our subject today. No, today we aren't talking about the tables for generating yearly events, we're talking about non-weapon proficiencies!

As the setting was perhaps more concerned with courtly intrigues than dungeon adventures (still a wargaming activity if you ask me), characters were much more grounded than the traditional adventurer who was largely detached from regular society. And thus became necessary a more robust system for skills outside those used for exploring dungeons and fighting monsters.

This system works in conjunction with the weapon proficiencys system also introduced in AD&D, and the two actually share slots! So where a gaijin cleric would possess at 1st level only 2 proficiencies, to be dedicated to weapons, a shukenja of Kara-Tur would have a whopping 6, with the assumption that a number of these would be given to other skills. The proficiencies are divided into the categories of Artisan, Barbarian, Common, and Court. The barbarian class getting its own entire category probably explains why the class has the most number of proficiency slots, as no one else can learn the useful survival skills provided. The others merely require a certain environment to learn. Each proficiency simply has a chance of success, increasing with slots spent on the proficiency, though most can be used without rolling. If you're a blacksmith, you're assumed to be competent enough at your job, unless a work of superior quality is attempted. Some must always be rolled. These peaceful proficiencies can also be used for contests, which can award experience points!

A fun little optional rule grants characters bonuses on the use of peaceful proficiencies if the player can provide some suitable sample of the craft in question, like a Japanese poem or something. it's very silly, which is why it's strictly optional.

Dungeoneer's Survival Guide and Wilderness Survival Guide (1986)

These are books for perverts (me), with frankly stupid amounts of detailed procedure for their respective subjects. A system for ability checks is introduced, where you can accomplish various miscellaneous tasks by rolling under the relevant ability. But most importantly for our purposes, they expand on the non-weapon proficiency system from Oriental Adventures.

No longer are slots divided between the two types, now weapon and non-weapon proficiencies have their own. Sorry, barbarian weapon masters of yesteryear. The chance for success is also now tied to an ability, making this a sort of expansion on the previously mentioned ability check system, though again the majority don't require a roll in most situations. Proficiencies are divided into the categories of Craftsman and Adventuring (called Wilderness in the Wilderness Survival Guide).

Apparently the affliction of "not reading the rules" is older than you might think, so there are people who ask things like "can you not build a fire without the Fire-building proficiency?" Many of the proficiencies are skills that any character should be able to attempt, and indeed having the proficiency simply enhances your ability to do something that is otherwise covered in one of the stupidly detailed procedures of the books. For example, anyone can build a fire… assuming they have flint and tinder. A character with Fire-building can do so without such tools. But you'd better learn the Swimming proficiency if you want to swim, much like in real life.

Next time: there's two of them? This is getting out of hand!

Sorry this took a while, had to deal with stuff. But let's get right into

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition (1989)

Yeah we're ignoring the Basic line of games, because they don't really add much to this facet of the game.

We actually sort of have three skill systems here. There's "Using What You Know," which just lets you use whatever skills you have in real life. They devote like half a page to it but I don't think they really mean for it to be used.

Then there's Secondary Skills. Again, very vague, not changed from before.

And finally nonweapon proficiencies. These follow the Survival Guide model of having their own slots, the number of which is increased by Intelligence. This time they're divided into the following categories: General, Priest, Rogue, Warrior, Wizard. The General category is open to everyone, while different classes get access to different class categories. You can select proficiences from outside your permitted list, but it costs more slots. Something I forgot to mention previously is that some proficiencies cost more slots, and some have modifiers to the ability check you make. So if you had an Intelligence of, say 13, you'd need to roll 13 or under to succeed at Astrology, a ten or under to succeed at Engineering due to a -2 modifier, and a 14 or under to succeed at Reading/Writing due to a +1 modifier. Not much has changed, this was all pretty much hashed out in the Survival Guides except for the categories.

But now we get nutty.

Player's Option: Skills & Powers (1995)

The Player's Option series is for perverts (me), making aspects of the game (character abilities, magic, and combat) way more complex. And one of them is of course relevant to the cause we pursue here.

We're given a revised version of nonweapon proficiencies. Instead of having slots, you spend character points, a thing introduced in the book. You need to have a 9 in relevant ability scores to avoid paying an extra cost for proficiencies, and each has a specific rating they start with, which is then modified by high and low ability scores. You can also use character points to increase your rating in a skill. So you have a skill rank of sorts, and a unified table of ability modifers to add or subtract, can you see where we're going here? Can you see what's in the horizon?

There's also traits which can be bought with character points, like Ambidexterity, as well as disadvantages that can be taken to give more character points.

And character points really are what drives this book. They can be used to customize the abilities of your race and class, even! You can now spend hours making a Blorbo in D&D, what fun!

The WotC editions are certainly vastly different from the TSR ones, this is true. But that change didn't just manifest out of thin air in 2000 with 3rd Edition. No, it all started here, five years earlier.

Next time: what do you mean I want to roll high?

AD&Dendum

Some stuff I forgot to mention before we get to the next proper thing. Would you believe I didn't really plan these that much?

First, languages. You once again get more of them for sufficient Intelligence. In 2nd Edition this is also so, but if nonweapon proficiencies are used the additional languages instead become additional proficiency slots, which can be used to buy new languages.

Second, thief skills. In 2nd Edition you no longer have a set progression for the skills, each thief instead getting an allotment of points each level to raise them. With Skills & Powers they can also choose which skills they possess, and there are are several new skills to choose from: detect magic, detect illusion, bribe, tunneling, and escape bonds.

I think that's mostly it.

Finally had a chance to sit down and write.

Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition (2000)

Ah, the one that started it all for yours truly. Here we go.

Gone are both thief skills and nonweapon proficiencies, as well as many simple gameplay procedures of old, and in their place stands a unified skill system. Originally there were supposed to be three categories: adventuring skills, mundane skills (like crafting and such), and heroic feats. Feats were eventually not considered a type of skill, and the rest got combined into one cateogry where Craft (underwater basketweaving) competes for resources with Concentration. Thief skills and most nonweapon proficiencies are now skills, while some of the latter are feats, like Blind-fighting.

The way it works is that you get a bunch of points to spend on skills, up to a maximum number of ranks determined by your level. Then you add the relevant ability score to that for your skill modifier and add that to your d20 roll, trying to meet a target number called a difficulty class (DC). So now you always want to roll high no matter if it's an attack, saving throw, or skill check.

You can't really just take a skill once like you could with proficiencies, you need to keep investing in them to keep them relevant. But there's actually less need to spread yourself thin than you'd think, even with the great number of skills. For example, you'll never need more than five ranks in Intuit Direction unless you have a negative Wisdom modifier, at which point I'd question why you're taking it as a cross-class skill in the first place.

Oh, right, cross-class. So instead of the class categories from 2e, each class now has a list of class skills that they can raise on a one-for-one basis, with cross-class skills costing double and having a halved maximum. There are some that can only be used trained (having at least 1 rank), and some that are exclusive to a certain class and can only be raised while taking a level in that class (multiclassing is different now). For example, only bards and rogues can learn to Decipher Script.

A consequence of this new system is that every character now has to interact with the skill system. You want to surprise monsters? There isn't a simple roll you make before combat anymore, you need to use Move Silently and Listen to determine that. And more than likely this will make everyone not trained in those skills not bother interacting with those facets of the game. Your plate wearing fighter will never surprise monsters again, because why even bother rolling?

Dungeons & Dragons v.3.5 (2003)

The skill list gets pruned a bunch. Gone are the quirky little skills like Innuendo and Read Lips. Gone is skill exclusivity, letting just anyone learn how to Use Magic Device if they fell like it. And you no longer need to take the Scry skill to use scrying spells.

One thing in the revised system that did more damage to the game than anyone probably realised at the time was a change to the Knowledge skills. There was now a clear system for identifying monsters and their special abilities. And if you've been following The Discourse you know how controversial that has proven.

Unearthed Arcana (2004)

Among the various variant systems of this tome are ones relating to the acquisition of skills. One basically just assumes you take the maximum number of ranks in a number of skills. Another dispenses with ranks entirely, simply adding your level to all your class skills (and nothing to cross-class skills). There's a feat that allows you to expand your selection later.

Also introduced is a system for complex skill checks, where succeeding in certain tasks will require more than une successful roll.

Next time: It's MMORPGing time!

We're in the home stretch now, gang.

Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition (2008)

People who say that this game is nothing like 3rd Edition clearly didn't follow that game near the end of its lifespan, because a lot of the groundwork was already laid. But we're not talking about most of those things, we're just talking skillz.

The skill list gets pruned with a pair of adamantine shears, the list has never been shorter since the original game. Gone are the civilian skills like Craft, Perform, and Profession. Thief skills are mostly just Thievery now. Monster knowledge checks are even more formalized now. But in a neat twist on 3rd Edition's "trained only" thing, now some skills have specific uses that require training, while other functions are available to everyone.

And as for how you train in skills? Generally you just pick a few of them based on what class you have, and those are given a bonus. All skills go up with level. More can be gained through the Skill Training feat, although how many do you really need?

Another innovation are skill challenges, which I feel was a bit underutilized as a design space. But basically they're non-combat challenges where you to accrue a certain number of successes before a certain number of failures. There's all sorts of stuff you can do with it, like giving certain skills different side effects. And you get experience points for them like you would from combat!

Also on the skill list were standouts like Gank, Grind, Taunt, and Look For Group.

Next time: The fall of Western civilization

It's like ten minutes before my bedtime so let's see if I can manage to write something half-way coherent about

Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition (2014)

The major departure from the way things used to be is that in this edition, the skills themselves have no mechanics attached.

You have proficiencies in skills and tools. If you have proficiency in a relevant skill or tool, you add your proficiency bonus to ability checks (not skill checks, those are not a thing). And while various game mechanics call for specific skills to be used, the skills themselves have no mechanics. There isn't a list of mechanics under Arcana or Investigation or Sleight of Hand.

And that, i think, is where this system stumbles. You're given a versatile tool, but not enough instruction in its use. It's actually pretty similar to how games like Vampire: The Masquerade do it. In one you might be called upon to roll a Charisma (Intimidation) check, while in the other you might roll Charisma+Intimidation. So why does the latter work? I think it's because one game gives you a bunch of standard rolls with relevant attribute+skill and difficulty, while the other doesn't. So you lack a strong foundation to use that flexibility.

Looks like it's bedtime for little vixens now. But I think people are familiar enough with this system (assuming, of course, that they have read the rules) that no more needs be said.

Next time: maybe a huge flowchart of how the skill list changed between editions???

Can you use speak with animals to communicate with a dog that can already talk but only in French?

In D&D rules, if it's intelligent enough to speak a language, it's not going to have the Animal type, so it won't work.

okay another thing: all of these games have classes that are built around being the Face of the party. and that's mechanically dumb! why would you want it to be mechanically advantageous for one player to talk every time!

There is an obvious rebuttal that it lets it be mechanically justified for less confident players to backseat aspects they're not comfortable with. But ultimately, what this really accomplishes is sitting out the role playing part of a roleplaying game. I have absolutely played with people who check out for that side of things because they're not chatty and they'd rather be on their phone then come back once they get to role dice to hit things. But ultimately, if you're that kind of person, are you sure you wouldn't rather get into something like Warhammer?

Realising I should include like 5-10 enemies in the first release of Blood Tithe, while homebrewing them should be easy there needs to be something to orient yourself from.

So, what classic monsters (e.g. Werewolves) and/or types of people (e.g Archer) would you like to see as enemies?

Cows. Sure, they can be a good emergency blood supply, but it doesn't mean they'll be happy about it. It also could provide a decent baseline for what something scary enough to be worth fighting at all but not scary enough to be a real challenge can look like. If you're a vampire wizard and you can't take on a bull that's mad you're trying to steal his blood that's on you, but your ribs may well still be in worse shape than before.

Negative levels, both temporary and permanent, were a thing in 3rd ed from undead and they sucked. Taking a level away forever wasn't actually the bad part though, the bad part is temporarily applying negative level penalties to basically ever number on your sheet and either remembering to do so or having to erase every number on your sheet twice. Thematically it's just siphoning off a chunk of your soul though rather than making you turn against your class identity. However good news there are prestige classes for being a paladin who's decided to be evil and actively work against their god, a former cleric who's lost all their cleric powers and now does divine magic via spite fueled theft from gods directly and anti druids who have to blight and despoil forests to get their powers. This isn't de leveling at all, you're still gaining levels, but I think it's a much more interesting way to reflect turning against your classes original identity than level loss.

Does anyone know any games that have rules support for choking people?

GURPS 4e has them as part of its grappling rules and unlike certain other systems has actually good, well fleshed out, fun to use grappling rules that don't completely bog down your play session. Admittedly, those good points are less pronounced with choking in particular, but it's still pretty good for something done out of a tabletop grapple attack.

I've been tempted lately to go back to my old pokemon mystery dungeon rpg project and remake it into a pbta style game.

Do you think the playbooks should be specific Pokémon or the general typings? Should it be like Mudkip has a playbook or should it be like Water-type is a playbook?

If you're going PbtA you've got to go type based playbooks as your most specific option. Even then 18 playbooks is a lot for a PbtA game though and that doesn't even get you type combinations. I think you want to go for playstyles instead. Suicune doesn't play a lot like Floatzel, but it does play a lot like Skarmory. Make a Tank playbook for them, with moves that buff, phase, ect. Everyone can select a type at chargen and for each of their moves if you think maintaining type matchups are vital to keep, but it doesn't need to be more than that. Flamethrower, Ice Beam, Surf, Thunderbolt, they're all pretty interchangable. So you don't need a move for each of them. You just need a move that's called Generic STAB Move and reskin as appropriate. Specific pokemon are then created through a combination of types, move selection and flavour. Suicune might be using the same playbook as Skarmory, but your Suicune player wouldn't take Entry Hazard as a move, they don't get that. Suicune and Alomomola might end up playing the same. That's actually a good thing though. If you try make a game where Ratatta and Bidoof feel meaningfully different to each other you will go insane.

Let me put it this way. Y'know how people love Warlocks? Because they come built-in with a character conflict, and that conflict is directly tied to their mechanical identity. It's dramatic, it's interesting, and it basically gives you a real writing prompt where other characters just get a list of stereotypes and a background element like "you went to school" or "you like nature".

There are games where every class is a warlock.

And sometimes the game where every class is a warlock has its own warlock

Can I count different editions of the same game seperately? By which I mean, I am absolutely doing that in order to artificially inflate my total and get to click the biggest number regardless of initial intent.

I wish Call of Cthulhu gave you stats for vehicles, I feel like something like a car crash is going to be common enough that some guidelines for something like a car's hit points would be useful

Also the story titled Call of Cthulhu literally features a guy ramming into Cthulhu with a ship the game should give you the tools to replicate this

I figure if it's a horror game, your vehicles have exactly 1 hit point. Sometimes the car is fucked before you even get to it.

See, I super disagree with that. Sometimes the fun of horror games is dying by inches. Narrowly escape an Evil Thingy in your car? Well you strained the gearbox in the process and you can never get that back mechanically. Sure, you could drop it off at the mechanic but that just leaves you even more screwed the next time an Evil Thingy attacks. Vehicle stats get to be used like ammo for your car, and a gun with one bullet isn't a compelling narrative tool in a horror game.

1947

kid had a great week

happy 77 years to the best week of this kid's life

I live in San Leandro! I'm disappointed our local cinemas don't have signs up about this local holiday

okay since celibacy always sweeps. I'm rigging this one sorry celibacy soldiers