Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Holmes as a COMPLETE game...

18 comments:

  1. I've been in love with the idea of this since Geoffry posted concerning it on DF long ago. Before, though it seems cool, I still couldn't commit. As much as I like things both light and concise and self-contained, I would still want to expand Holmes at least a bit. I'm not big on any iteration of D&D going beyond level 8-10 so something that only traverses a handful of levels isn't really my issue. It's only that there would seem to be something needed to be 'given' at nearly all of those few levels. The 8 points here do something towards this, and it's making me reconsider how I may cross from digging the idea to actually using it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh. I wondered also if you mean that fighters gain a single +1 to attack or a +1 each level?

    And, ya know... it would actually be a cool project if someone made, instead of a retro-clone, a game based on this idea of contained-wholly-within-low-level-kinda-sorta-old-school-D&D.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Are you familiar with Meepo's Holmes Companion? It's my favorite Holmes as a complete game expansion...

    https://sites.google.com/site/meepodm/holmes.pdf?attredirects=0

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good read - especially like the mortal wound/lose a level if above 1st idea rather than death (reminds me of Conan coming back after the Tree of Woe in the original 80s movie).

    The spell rebalancing to account for no/low future progression is good too - not a huge tweak, but a good one.  

    Agreed that the thief would need a skill upgrade to remain relevant; though you could make the case that the low skill levels basically constitute gambling, and folks who like long shots / high risk / swingy characters might not be bothered by the low success chances so much as take them as a challenge.

    Something else to consider for thieves would be giving them the ability to read scrolls as Holmes thieves - given that Holmes MUs can create scrolls at low levels, it'd create (both ruleswise/meta play and in-game/campaign world) some interesting & symbiotic partnerships between thieves and MUs.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wonderful stuff!

    I've been playing around with death = attribute loss to represent serious wounds, which models the idea of a specific wound causing loss of capability, but the death = level drain idea is so elegant and simple. I may have to try it out, this weekend.

    I'm not quite sure I'm following the details of the post-death d4 HD, though. If a 3rd level fighter dies, it becomes a 2nd level fighter with 1d4 hp? But then heals back up to their old max. hp at a rate of 1 hp per day?

    Re: Thieves. I'm all for beefing up their skills, and think that even giving them auto-success most of the time doesn't seem to break anything. For simplicity, I might just give the Thieves a 3-in-6 chance to do Thiefy things. Or, if progression was desired, 2-in-6 at first, 3-in-6 at 2nd, 4-in-6 at 3rd. But then, I have it out for percentiles.

    I'm a little surprised at the low XP for Elves. I guess the thinking is that they don't bring anything to the table except a few race abilities until level 2?

    ReplyDelete
  6. But the Elf's racial abilities are not insignificant given a game primarily designed around dungeon crawls. And you can't limit the Elf by imposing a level cap, so more XP is a decent tradeoff for the normal dual-class. Maybe you could allow Elves to be just FM or MUs, with the stipulation that they do not get a PR bonus?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Eric Norred Fighters get +1 by itself.  And yes, a project like that WOULD be cool.  Very cool...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Andy C Great ideas all!  I may have to revise this...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Doug M This is an great option for sure!  I wonder if an OD&D-styled approach, where the elf switches between adventures, might also be interesting...

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'd probably have the game cap out at 4th ("Hero") level. All of the rules for this level can easily be intuited from the rulebook, plus you get to add in all of those "4th level and higher" character abilities that it mentions, such as reading scrolls for thieves.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Michael Thomas has a few things to say on this topic

    ReplyDelete
  12. Side note.. when thinking about a pure Holmes / level capped thief, it'd be worth checking out the original pre-Greyhawk version from the Great Plains Game Players Newsletter, Gygax's first take on the thief class originally created by Gary Switzer et al from the Aero Hobbies hobby shop. Zach posted details about this version on his blog, fascinating read: http://zenopusarchives.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-d6-hd-od-thief.html

    ReplyDelete
  13. If you look at Holmes Basic Set, everything that is actual game mechanics rules can be traced back to OD&D, Greyhawk, or official releases in SR.
    It's "complete" game is OD&D (as it existed in early 1977).

    ReplyDelete
  14. Bryan Manahan, you are correct if one wanted to continue play at levels beyond 3rd (assuming one didn't go TSR's suggested route and use AD&D). The Holmes Basic rules set is clearly an adaptation of OD&D+GH, with a bit of California gaming flavor (Warlock et al) stirred in.

    The Holmes as a complete rules set idea, though, is how (and whether) it could be used as its own self contained set of rules for gritty swords & sorcery play with levels 1-3 constituting the full character power arc (similar to the 3e idea of "Epic 6" a number of years back, running 3e with a level range of only 1-6). I think it can be done, with some interesting ramifications both from a mechanics standpoint and an implied setting / campaign design standpoint. And of course a group of players willing to give it a go : )

    ReplyDelete