Optional Rules

[Tavis]

I really like the optional rule for having 0 level characters level up after one adventure because:

a) it reminds me of an early-70s, proto-D&D Arneson Blackmoor rule in which there were only three levels and you advanced one after each adventure

b) it reminds me of a new-school game like Trail of Cthulu in which the reasoning behind the options is provided to make "dials" you can use to tune the game in one direction or another

For further discussion:
- what direction would it take the game if you did level once per adventure?
- what other optional rules would folks like to see (esp. ones that hark back to ideas not carried forth from 1974 by mainstream RPG developmet)?
- do others dig this kind of design explanation in RPG texts the way I do?

[goodmangames]

- what direction would it take the game if you did level once per adventure?

Yeah, that rule came about because 0-level games are lots of fun. Once. Then your characters keep on dying, one game after another, and it gets tiresome.

Allowing for one level per adventure after 1st makes things very different. Something I want to emphasize is the "you're no hero" element. In OD&D, it was a huge deal to make it to 3rd level...much less 6th or 7th. So I want there to be a very slow growth to higher levels. Somewhere in the DM's section I put a table with population incidence for higher-level characters -- and that's for higher-level farmers and blacksmiths, much less fighters and wizards! 3rd, 4th, and 5th level should be very rare. Of course, so far I haven't played a single campaign long enough to test this, but what I want to happen (once I transition from short games to an ongoing campaign) is a slow, steady ramp.

- what other optional rules would folks like to see (esp. ones that hark back to ideas not carried forth from 1974 by mainstream RPG developmet)?

I'd love to hear more on this! There are lots of obscure ones - helmet rules, 18/00 strength, immunity to poisons at a high enough Con...a "checklist" of these random rules would be neat. Not sure they should all be included but it would be fun to evaluate.

- do others dig this kind of design explanation in RPG texts the way I do?

I go back and forth on including those sorts of explanations. I'm glad to hear you do like it. I guess when the audience is older, more educated, experienced gamers, those explanations are received differently than when 15-year-olds read them! I'm also curious to hear what other people think.