I like cleric domains. I think they’re a simple, direct way of differentiating clerics of different faiths from each other.

But here’s the thing: When you’re trying to strip the spell list back to its basics, domain spell lists seriously muck things up by significantly increasing the number of spells you need to include.

If you look at the Cleric and Arcanist spell lists on pages 99-101 of the Black Book Beta, you’ll see the ideal spell list I’d like to include. (This list has been heavily influenced by the earliest versions of the game; essentially stripping things back to an essential selection.) But if I include all the spells from the domain lists (on pages 101-104), those spells will be added to the Cleric and Arcanist spell lists. (And, in some cases, this will require even more spells to be added. For example, it doesn’t make much sense to include summon monster IX for the Chaos domain and not include the other summon monster spells.)

So here are some options I’m considering:

First, eliminate domains entirely. This simplifies character creation for clerics, but also prevents clerics from being easily customized to different gods.

Second, keep domains but eliminate domain spells. (In other words, clerics would get the domain powers from their selected domains, but there wouldn’t be any domain spell lists.)

Either option presents another question: Do I simply eliminate domain spell slots? Or do I simply fold those slots into the cleric’s daily spells? (In other words, do 4+1 spells per day become 4 spells per day or 5 spells per day?)

Or am I completely off-base here and should just go ahead and bloat the Grimoire up to accommodate the domains?

(Alternatively, if I just strip domains down to domain powers, I’d probably have room to include a wider range of domains.)

 Loading ...

(click for legible size)

I still can’t decide if it bugs me or not that alignment takes up something like 1/5th of the chapter on character creation (simply due to the bulk of information being conveyed). It was originally meant to be relegated to a sidebar, but it actually proved too large for that and ended up getting all of page 11 to itself.

Of course, that’s partly because the information on alignment needs to be entirely contained in Chapter 1, whereas the rest of Chapter 1 references players out to the more detailed descriptions of ability scores, classes, races, and the like found elsewhere in the rulebook.

A couple of other options I entertained:

(1) Removing alignment entirely. I would have left “good” and “evil” descriptors in for spells and extraplanar creatures, but the basic concept of PCs having an “alignment” would have been gone. Ultimately, I decided this was too radical a departure.

(2) Just describing the two axes of alignment — good vs. evil; law vs. chaos — in general terms and not discussing each combination in detail. (This might have included an old school, x-y axis chart of alignments.) A remnant of this remains in the sidebar on page 11, but what I discovered was that new players weren’t grokking the system. They were asking a lot of clarifying questions, and that’s usually an indication that the rulebook isn’t doing its job.

What do you think?

I’ve culled out some of the more popular responses to Beta Response 2: The Human Feat and here’s a quick poll. You can vote for multiple options, so lemme know all the ones that look like a good idea to you.

 Loading ...

A few of my quick thoughts on this discussion:

I’m surprised by how popular the idea of Improved Initiative is. I’ve always considered it a fairly weak feat and this was an opinion shared by most of the designers I knew back in the day. Poking around, I can see that it seems to have become popular in the CharOp community 4-5 years ago. Which I suppose makes sense given the set of artificial suppositions the CharOp community generally works in. I’d be interested in hearing a greater elaboration on why people think it’s a must-have feat.

I considered the various “+2 to save X” feats when I was first designing the human. Since any choice seemed fairly arbitrary, I backed away from it. But Iron Will makes sense to me.

The +2 bonus to stunt checks sounds really nifty. I’m hesitant to tie it to an L&L-specific system like that (because I know that part of the appeal of L&L for many people is their ability to parcel out portions of it for utility in their 3E campaign), but it’s definitely got some nice flair to it.

Okay. Nobody likes the Diplomat feat choice for humans. Can’t blame you: I’m not a huge fan, either.

So here’s your challenge, should you choose to accept it: Pick a different feat and make your case .

A few thoughts to keep in mind:

1. Try to avoid adding an extra decision point to character creation. A generic Skill Focus, for example, would require players to choose the skill to which the Skill Focus applies. The human already has one such decision (picking their Bonus Skill) and I actually thought long and hard about pre-picking that skill for them. A major design goal of character creation in L&L was to strip down the decision tree to a bare minimum.
2. Try to avoid anything that would necessitate a special entry in every human’s stat block. Taking Skill Focus as an example again, a DM not only needs to make a decision about Skill Focus for every single human NPC, but they also need to note that in their stat block. L&L also tries to minimize this “stat block clutter” in order to make NPCs and monsters easier to run on the fly.
3. It doesn’t necessarily need to be equally valuable to all classes, but it shouldn’t be completely worthless to any given class, either.
4. Similarly, it shouldn’t duplicate any feat which has been given as a class ability to one of the classes. This would either render it worthless to that class (see #3) or it would require special rules explaining what happens with humans who take that class and gain that ability (adding complexity).

Hit me up, people. Let’s make the game better.

Over the weekend, sponsors received their early access copies of the Black Book Beta. It’s kind of nerve-wracking to suddenly have this project out in the open after 3 years (or 8 years, depending on how you count).

But the whole point of having a Black Book Beta was to throw the dragnet out there and start getting wider feedback on the game. And I welcome the discussion! Use the comment thread here to discuss your thoughts. Tell me the good. Tell me the bad. Tell me whatever you’re thinking.

To get us started: Heromedel posted his First Impressions over on Heromeblog.

If you end up posting some thoughts elsewhere, comment here and leave us a link.

FACEBOOK FANPAGE: Legends & Labyrinths now has a Facebook page. Right now we’re just spinning things up to speed over there, but take a peek and thumbs-up us to your friends.

THE NEXT LANDMARKS: If we hit $3000 by the end of the month, all Labyrinth Prowlers (sponsors of $30 and up) will receive PDF copies of Mini-Adventure 1: Complex of Zombies and Mini-Adventure 2: The Black Mist when the funding project ends. If you’re currently just a Registered Adventurer or a Beta Warrior and like what you see, you can always upgrade your perk level by simply paying the difference at 8-Bit.

As we hit additional landmarks, there’ll be more bonus content for Beta Warriors and Labyrinth Prowlers alike! Spread the word!

And thanks for your support!