#ad&d 1st edition

[theoutcastrogue]

Cold Iron in folklore, fiction, and RPGs

'Gold is for the mistress—silver for the maid! Copper for the craftsman cunning at his trade.' 'Good!' said the Baron, sitting in his hall, 'But Iron—Cold Iron—is master of them all!' — Rudyard Kipling, “Cold Iron”

Folklore

Drudenmesser, or "witch-knife", an apotropaic folding knife from Germany

The notion that iron (or steel) can ward against evil spirits, witches, fairies, etc is very widespread in folklore. You hang a horseshoe over your threshold to deny entry to evil spirits, you carry an iron tool with you to make sure devils won't assault you, you place a small knife under the baby's crib to ward it from witches, and so on. Iron is apotropaic in many many cultures.

In English, we often come across passages that refer to apotropaic cold iron (or cold steel). "All uncouth, unknown Wights are terrifyed by nothing earthly so much as by cold Iron", says Robert Kirk in 1691, which I believe is the earliest example. "Evil spirits cannot bear the touch of cold steel. Iron, or preferably steel, in any form is a protection", says John Gregorson Campbell in 1901.

Words

So what is cold iron? In this context, it’s just iron. The “cold” part is poetic, especially – but not only – if we’re talking about either blades (or swords, weapons, the force of arms) or manacles and the like. It just sounds more ominous. There are “cold yron chaines” in The Fairie Queene (1596), and a 1638 book of travels tells us that a Georgian general (in the Caucasus) vowed “to make the Turk to eat cold iron”.

Green’s Dictionary of Slang defines “cold iron” as a sword, and dates the term to 1698. From 1725 it appears in Cant dictionaries (could this sense be thieves’ cant, originally? why not, plenty of words and expressions started as underworld slang and then entered the mainstream), and from ~1750 its use becomes much more common.

NGram Viewer diagram for 1600-2019.

In other contexts, cold iron is (surprise!) iron that’s not hot. So let’s talk a bit about metallurgy.

Metals

In nature, we can find only one kind of iron that’s pure enough to work with: meteoritic iron. It has to literally fall from the sky. Barring that very rare occurrence, people have to mine the earth for iron ore, which is not workable as is. To separate the iron from the ore we have to smelt it, and for that we need heat, in the form of hot charcoals. Throwing the ore on the coals won’t do much of anything, it’s not hot enough. But if we enclose the coals in a little tower built of clay, leaving holes for air flow, the temperature rises enough to smelt the ore. That’s called a bloomery.

clay bloomery / medieval bloomery / beating the bloom to get rid of the slag

What comes out of the bloomery is a bloom: a porous, malleable mass of iron (that we need) and slag (byproducts that we don’t need). But now we can get rid of the slag and turn the porous mass to something solid, by hammering the hot bloom over and over. And once the slag is off, by the same process we can give it a desired shape in the forge, reheating it as needed. This is called “working” the iron, hence “wrought iron” objects, i.e. forged.

a blacksmith in his forge, with bellows, fire, and anvil (English woodcut, 1603)

This is the lowest-tech version, possibly going back to ~2000 BCE in Nigeria. If we add bellows, the improved air flow will raise the temperature. So smelting happens faster and more efficiently in the bloomery, and so does heating the iron in the forge, making it easier to work with. And that’s the standard process from the Iron Age all through the middle ages and beyond (although in China they may have skipped this stage and gone straight to the next one).

If we make the bloomery bigger and bigger, with stronger and stronger bellows, we end up with a blast furnace, a construction so efficient that the temperature outright melts the iron, and it’s liquified enough to be poured into a mould and acquire the desired shape when it cools off. This is “cast iron”.

a blast furnace

So in all of this, what’s cold iron? Well, it’s iron that went though the heat and cooled off. (No heat = no iron, all you got is ore.) If it came out of a bloomery, or if it wasn’t cast, it’s by definition worked, hammered, beaten, wrought, and that happened while it was still hot.

Is there such a thing as “cold-wrought” iron? No. In fact, “working cold iron” was a simile for something foolish or pointless. A smith who beats cold iron instead of putting it in the fire shows folly, says a 1694 book on religion, so you too should choose your best tools, piety and good decorum, to educate your children and servants, instead of beating them. When Don Quixote (1605) declares he’ll go knight-erranting again, Sancho Panza tries to dissuade him, but it’s like “preaching in the desert and hammering on cold iron” (a direct translation of martillar en hierro frío).

Minor work can be done on cold iron. A 1710 dictionary of technical terms tells us that a rivetting-hammer is “chiefly used for rivetting or setting straight cold iron, or for crooking of small work; but ’tis seldom used at the forge”. Fully fashioning an object out of cold iron is not a real process – though a 1659 History of the World would claim that in Arabia it’s so hot that “smiths work nails and horseshoes out of cold iron, softened only by the vigorous heat of the sun, and the hard hammering of hands on the anvil”. [I declare myself unqualified to judge the veracity of this statement, let's just say I have doubts.] And there is of course such a thing as “cold wrought-iron”, as in wrought iron after it’s cooled off.

Either way, in the context of pre-20th century English texts which refer to apotropaic “cold iron”, it’s definitely not “cold-wrought”, or meteoritic, or a special alloy of any kind. It’s just iron.

Fiction

The old superstition kept coming up in fantasy fiction. In 1910 Rudyard Kipling wrote the very influential short story “Cold Iron” (in the collection Rewards and Fairies), where he explains invents the details of the fairies’ aversion to iron. They can’t bewitch a child wearing boots, because the boots have nails in the soles. They can’t pass under a doorway guarded by a horseshoe, but they can slip through the backdoor that people neglected to guard. Mortals live “on the near side of Cold Iron”, because there’s iron in every house, while fairies live “on the far side of Cold Iron”, and want nothing to do with it. And changelings brought up by fairies will go back to the world of mortals as soon they touch cold iron for the first time.

In Poul Anderson’s The Broken Sword (1954), we read:

“Let me tell you, boy, that you humans, weak and short-lived and unwitting, are nonetheless more strong than elves and trolls, aye, than giants and gods. And that you can touch cold iron is only one reason.”

In Peter S. Beagle’s The Last Unicorn (1968) the unicorn is imprisoned in an iron cage:

“She turned and turned in her prison, her body shrinking from the touch of the iron bars all around her. No creature of man’s night loves cold iron, and while the unicorn could endure its presence, the murderous smell of it seemed to turn her bones to sand and her blood to rain.”

Poul Anderson would come back to that idea in Operation Chaos (1971), where the worldbuilding’s premise is that magic and magical creatures have been reintroduced into the modern world, because a scientist “discovered he could degauss the effects of cold iron and release the goetic forces”. And that until then, they had been steadily declining, ever since the Iron Age came along.

There are a million examples, I’m just focusing on those that would have had a more direct influence on roleplaying games. However, I should note that all these say “cold iron” but mean “iron”. Yes, the fey call it cold, but they are a poetic bunch. You can’t expect Robin Goodfellow’s words to be pedestrian, now can you?

RPGs

And from there, fantasy roleplaying systems got the idea that Cold Iron is a special material that fey are vulnerable to. The term had been floating around since the early D&D days, but inconsistently, scattered in random sourcebooks, and not necessarily meaning anything else than iron. In 1st Edition’s Monster Manual (1977) it’s ghasts and quasits who are vulnerable to it, not any fey creature. Devils and/or fiends might dislike iron, powdered cold iron is a component in Magic Circle Against Evil, and “cold-wrought iron” makes a couple of appearances. For example, in AD&D it can strike Fool’s Gold and turn it back to its natural state, revealing the illusion.

Then Changeling: The Dreaming came along and made it a big deal, a fundamental rule, and an anathema to all fae:

Cold iron is the ultimate sign of Banality to changelings. ... Its presence makes changelings ill at ease, and cold iron weapons cause horrible, smoking wounds that rob changelings of Glamour and threaten their very existence.... The best way to think about cold iron is not as a thing, but as a process, a very low-tech process. It must be produced from iron ore over a charcoal fire. The resulting lump of black-gray material can then be forged (hammered) into useful shapes. — Changeling: The Dreaming (2nd Edition, 1997)

So now that we know how iron works, does that description make sense? Well, if we assume that the iron ore is unceremoniously dumped on coals, it does not. You can’t smelt iron like that. If we assume that a bloomery is involved even though it’s not mentioned, then yes, this is broadly speaking how iron’s been made since the Iron Age, and until blast furnaces came into the picture. But the World of Darkness isn’t a pseudo-medieval setting, it’s modern urban fantasy. So the implication here is that “cold iron” is iron made the old way: you can’t buy it in the store, someone has to replicate ye olde process and do the whole thing by hand. Now, this is NOT how the term “cold iron” has been used in real life or fiction thus far, but hey, fantasy games are allowed to invent things.

Regardless, 3.5 borrowed the idea, and for the first time D&D made this a core rule. Now most fey creatures had damage reduction and took less damage from weapons and natural attacks, unless the weapon was made of Cold Iron:

“This iron, mined deep underground, known for its effectiveness against fey creatures, is forged at a lower temperature to preserve its delicate properties.” — Player’s Handbook (3.5 Edition, 2003)

Pathfinder kept the rule, though 5e did not. And unlike Changeling, this definition left it somewhat ambiguous if we’re talking about a material with special composition (i.e. not iron) or made with a special process (i.e. iron but). The community was divided, threads were locked over this!

So until someone points me to new evidence, I’ll assume that the invention of cold iron as a special material, distinct from plain iron, should be attributed to TTRPGs.

#long post #cold iron #d&d #Changeling: The Dreaming #World of Darkness #Peter S. Beagle #The Last Unicorn #Rudyard Kipling #Poul Anderson #The Broken Sword #how to rogue #pathfinder #rogues in fiction #Operation Chaos #rogue superstitions #words of the trade #thieves' cant #ad&d #d&d history #1st edition #fey #3.5 #fluff #trs

[prokopetz]

Proposals to refer to One D&D as "6th Edition" in order to spite Hasbro marketing don't go far enough. We should retroactively assign full edition numbers to every major core rules revision for which the game's publishers declined to do so, as follows:

White box OD&D is now 1st Edition

Holmes Basic is now 2nd Edition

AD&D 1st Edition is now 3rd Edition

BX/Moldvay Basic is now 4th Edition

BECMI/Mentzer Basic is now 5th Edition

AD&D 2nd Edition is now 6th Edition

The Rules Cyclopedia is now 7th Edition

The AD&D 2nd Edition Player's Handbook redux with the infamous "This Is Not 3rd Edition" foreword is now 8th Edition

Player's Option is now 9th Edition

D&D 3rd Edition is now 10th Edition

D&D 3rd Edition Revised (3.5E) is now 11th Edition

D&D 4th Edition is now 12th Edition

D&D Essentials is now 13th Edition

D&D Next (later informally rebranded as "5th Edition" due to consumer pressure) is now 14th Edition

Finally, this means the forthcoming One D&D is 15th Edition.

Make sense?

#gaming #tabletop roleplaying #tabletop rpgs #dungeons & dragons #d&d #wizards of the coast #hasbro #branding #nameology

[moonziies]

SMILE! 📸

1st Rick and Morty fanart in 4 years :D

I debated doing fanart for RaM for the longest time since I felt the community was extremely judgy and problematic. Plus, it doesn't exactly have the best reputation. But S7 was just too good not to do fanart off! ALSO, I may have befriended the nicest mutuals on TikTok that encouraged me to start, so I had to 🤗

Edit: Added Sketch vs Final vid :D

#rick and morty #rick sanchez #morty smith #ram

[goatse-syndicalist-69]

Over the past several months @robotgirlbutt and I have been developing a sword & sorcery ttrpg intended for open table play. It is today with great excitement that I get to announce that we are finished with our alpha testing and are opening up the table to anyone interested. If you don't know what an Open Table is I suggest giving Justin Alexander's Open Table Manifesto a once over.

So what is the Bloodfall TTRPG? It's a sword & sorcery ttrpg (think Elric, Conan, or Fafhrd & The Gray Mouser) that's loosely based on the Cepheus Engine/Mongoose 1st Edition Traveller and our love of 1974 D&D. It is also mostly a dungeoncrawler but has a lot of room to grow out from that featuring heavily hexcrawling, social encounter procedures, and a fully integrated war game. This bit is probably the most important part of what Bloodfall is, a re-unity between tabletop roleplaying and war gaming.

The main campaign takes place in and around the Free City of Kyrath and its sprawling undercity megadungeon but we're working on adding a lot more regional wilderness locations in the near future. So if you're interested in a comprehensive sword & sorcery tabletop roleplaying system designed by a team of queer writers you can DM me for the server that we're running the table out of.

#open table gaming #bloodfall

[catulhu333]

Bahamut and Tiamat were aspects of Io/Asgorath in early 2nd edition of AD&D lore?

...as well being the two key archetypes influencing all dragons, and in 1st edition of AD&D, the only gods of dragons?

2014/2015 "Rage of Dragons" miniatures of Tiamat and Bahamut

Wile changes to Bahamut and Tiamat (and deific dragon lore in general) in 5th edition (were Bahamut and Tiamat are the supreme, and only real draconic gods), and to a degree 4th edition (were Bahamut and Tiamat were 2 halves of Io), were controversial; these changes are actually based on far older lore, that was changed mid 2nd edition, with 1992's Monster Mythology and further on.

In 1st edition of Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, Bahamut and Tiamat were the only dragon gods, with worship by dragons being split between them, as seen in 1984 article "Dragons and their deities" in Dragon #86: "Evil dragons worship Tiamat, and good dragons worship Bahamut. That is, for all practical purposes, the extent of common knowledge about the way dragons worship their deities."

The divinity of of two was first outright affirmed in 1980 in "Leomund's Tiny Hut: Rearranging and Redefining the Mighty Dragon" in Dragon #38; with Tiamat kinda earlier in the original 1978's Monster Manual, were she was presented among the Lords of Nine.

Miniatures of Bahamut (or as named in the catalog the Platinum Dragon) and Tiamat (or as named in the catalog the Spectral Dragon), from Grenadier Models 1990 catalogue, originally from the 1989 Dragon of the Month II line from 1989. Special thanks @oldschoolfrp, thanks to who I know of this lines existence. Their original post here. I recommend checking them out.

Paladine and Takhisis from Dragonlance, also debuting in 1984, were often identified with Bahamut (Paladine) and Tiamat (Takhisis). It's rather ambiguous though - the creator of both, Jeff Grubb believing this, but writers of Dragonlance novels, and main architects of the setting, Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman (who basically gave them personality and story), believing them as similar, but separate characters/deities.

Official publications either suggested a connection, or stated them to be the same (as well as Bahamut and Tiamat gaining traits of Paladine and Takhisis, like being siblings, and in past, lovers), with 5th edition (with 2021's Fizban's Treasury of Dragons), stating them to be the same.

Constellations of Krynn, in the center Takhisis (left) and Paladine (right) opposing each other, the Gilean' constellation between them. From 1984's "DL5: Dragons of Mystery".

Still, Paladine on Krynn (the world Dragonlance is set in) is/was the leader of the Gods of Good, and Takhisis is/was the leader of the Gods of Evil, and were among the most powerful deities of the setting, equaled only by their brother Gilean and second only to the High God and Chaos.

According to 1989's "Player's Guide to Dragonlance, the two together created the first dragons: "Paladine is Father of Good and Master of Law. During the Age of Dreams, Paladine led the gods in creation. Paladine and Takhisis, Queen of Darkness, infused the raw fury of chaos with form and purpose, creating the first material beings— dragons. Takhisis, jealous the first creations were not entirely hers, corrupted the chromatic dragons to evil. Paladine replaced his fallen children with the good, metallic dragons, but Takhisis’s act began the rift between good and evil."

This origin of dragons on Krynn evolved overtime though, with some changes, but I won't elaborate on this here.

1990's Draconomicon

The draconic pantheon was first expanded with 1990's Draconomicon, though oddly, Bahamat and Tiamat are not among the list of Draconic deities, at least seemingly.

The book instead presents Bahamut and Tiamat instead as seemingly archetypal forms of all dragons (even indeed, the twin Platonic forms of all dragons), even their gods, all of whom (with one exception) are their "pale reflections": " And here the conversation must turn to dragons, for in these species the diffusion theory seems to be the only suitable explanation for their wide-spread existence. Dragons are the only creatures for which there exist archetypal forms. In dragonkind, these forms are Bahamut, the Platinum Dragon, and Tiamat, the Chromatic Dragon. All of the core species of dragonkind the good aligned metallic dragons and the evil-aligned chromatic dragons (ignoring for a moment those fringe species like crystal dragons) seem to be pale reflections of their archetypal forms, displaying some but not all of that archetypes characteristics. For example, a red dragon possesses some but not all of the characteristics attributed to Tiamat, while a gold dragon possesses some but not all of the characteristics attributed to Bahamut. Indulging in mathematical language for a moment, each species of dragon seems to be a subset of properties belonging to one or other of the archetypes. Or, conversely, each archetype seems to possess a superset of the properties possessed by the appropriate class of dragonkind. Some sages truly believe this observation to be representative of the truth of the matter. According to this theory, the very existence of the two archetypal forms Bahamut and Tiamat is responsible for the existence of dragons throughout the multiverse. In metaphorical language, dragons are the shadows that the archetypes cast across the planes. As shadows are, in a sense, subsets of the creatures casting them as they must be, since shadows are two-dimensional so are the shadows of the dragon archetypes subsets of those archetypes characteristics and powers."

Two of the dragon gods, Lendys and Tamara, as Platinum Dragons, seem to be even closer to the archetype of Bahamut, both being platinum dragons themselves, but still lesser than him.

In the same book, there is also mentioned the oldest and highest draconic god, Asgorath the World-Shaper, later identified with Io. Asgorath is stated to to be creator of dragons, and the universe (in the sense of seemingly all existence), at least according to dragons.

But, the myth in the same sourcebook (as found in-universe in the Book of the World, a written down red dragon myth, suggests Asgorath is Tiamat: "It is easy to speculate, based on this myth. The plural inflection of the word breath might be taken as implying multiple heads; the Thorass word for renegade is bahmat. It seems almost too close a correlation can Asgorath be Tiamat and the Renegade be Bahamut?"

This is further alluded in Asgorath's description: "Thus, reds believe that Asgorath is Chaotic Evil as implied in the Book of the World mentioned at the beginning of the chapter while bronzes believe Asgorath is Lawful Good."

Suggesting that like red dragons see/perceive Asgorath as Tiamat, Bronze (and other good dragons) would see the World-Shaper as Bahamut. And that the two "archetypal dragons" are themselves seemingly aspects/parts/avatars of Asgorath. Which is further suggested together with Bahamut's description in Draconomicon: "Sages continue to debate the true nature of Bahamut. Is he the archetype of all good dragonkind, the ideal of which all other dragons are merely shadows? Is he an avatar of a greater deity?"

This is quite obviously an inspiration for Io being split in ancient times into Bahamut and Tiamat in 4th edition/Nerath lore. As well as in "Fizban's Treasury of Dragons", presenting Bahamut and Tiamat as the origin of all dragons, and their forms, it even also using allusions to platonic forms, and shadows of higher reality. As well as Bahamut and Tiamat creating the original universe (that split into the multiverse), like Asgorath was stated to.

Io was first introduced in 1992's Monster Mythology, if very probably taking inspiration from Asgorath (with whom he is directly identified in the book), as well as perhaps Krynn's High God. Io is also stated there to be believed by dragons to be their creator, and of all of existence. As well repeating Platonic and Gnostic ideas from Draconomicon about the world being a shadow of a higher, truer reality: "We Dragon-sages make a distinction between the Two Voids; the First Void, wherein only Io had existence, and the Shadow Void, where Io's willingly shed blood created the potential for existence and creation to come into being. Most non-dragon races only know of the Shadow Void, and they do not know of the earlier time outside time when only the Ninefold Dragon existed."

Monster Mythology though, makes Bahamut and Tiamat somewhat lesser in status, making them Lesser Gods, though only Io (as a Greater God) and Chronepsis (an Intermediate God) are above them, the other two gods (Faluzure and Aesterinian), being on the same level of power. Still though, it is a visible downgrade from their grand role in Draconomicon, and of their counterparts (Paladine and Takhisis) on Krynn. Monster Mythology is also the the first to make Bahamut and Tiamat explicitly siblings and "intended mates".

1998's "Cult of the Dragon" sourcebook, combined the draconic pantheons mentioned described in Draconomicon and Monster Mythology, often identifying/conflating some deities between the two (notably Asgorath and Io, though that was done before). Though this also resulted in a seeming further downgrade in status of Bahamut and Tiamat, them being still Lesser Gods (and Bahamut identified with Xymor, made as possible child of Lendys and Tamara), while including multiple Intermediate Gods (Astilabor, Garyx, Kereska, Lendys, Null as the Guardian of the Lost/Chronepsis, Tamara and Zorquan).

#bahamut #tiamat #dnd #advanced #dungeons & dragons #theory #dragonlance #forgotten realms #draconomicon

[thydungeongal]

Funniest thing about 1st edition of Warhammer RPG mode is that it included a skill system that was basically professions/lifestyles (same as AD&D 1E, btw), and to determine what skills your PC has you rolled d100, and one of the skills with 1/100 chance was transvestite.

There was additional explanation for some of the skills but not for this one, and while the system wasn't really detailed it stated that you could take levels in skills.

(Seriously, while it probably was a joke, adding randomly generated quirks is a fun idea to make people play more diverse characters. So that your halfling rogue could be a transvestite or a vegan or colourblind, things like that. The only problem is that they have to be relatively minor mechanically)

Holy shit I had not noticed that in the table

But yeah while some things about that game are very of its time I do like that type of minimalistic skill system where your pre-adventuring career acts as a guideline as to what things your character may be expected to be able to do without introducing randomness into the mix. It very much feels like a predecessor to the WFRP career system, although that one made it more fine-grained and basically like a class system where you were expected to ascend to one of the better careers

Anyway I'm also fan of big table that provides color to characters

#thydungeongal answers

[thecreaturecodex]

Phaerimm

Image © Jake Probelski

[Sponsored by @coldbloodassassin. The phaerimm are theoretically one of the foundationally important monsters in the Forgotten Realms setting, being tied closely to the Netherese, the sharn and other bits of lore. But they always struck me as kind of boring. They're yet another magically gifted aberration that views humanoids as slaves and cattle. And their stats seem to get more pared down and less interesting with every edition. I went back to their first mechanical appearance in AD&D 2e for inspiration.]

Phaerimm CR 12 NE Aberration This creature floats in the air, looking something like a flying sea anemone. It has a circular maw with eyes dotting its rim, four arms with clawed hands, and its body tapers into a long tail, ending in a stinger.

The phaerimm are strange aberrant creatures native to a deadly desert world in another galaxy. Phaerimm have not mastered planetary travel, and are found on other worlds typically as the descendants of captives and experimental test subjects enslaved by wizards looking for alternatives to celestials and fiends. It may be that the phaerimm sowed the seeds of their own calling, as they can be summoned through magic much more easily than other aberrant creatures. Most of these itinerant phaerimm are interested in converting other planets into worlds more like their own, and seek powerful magic items and ritual spells in order to drain the vitality from ecosystems and render them deserts.

Even a newly born phaerimm is a powerful magic user, and they use their spells preferentially over their formidable physical talents. Phaerimm are spontaneous casters, but can convert some of their spells into spell-like abilities to make them easier to cast and harder to counterspell. The vast majority of phaerimm are sadists, which can be used against them; a phaerimm will often make suboptimal tactical choices if it has an opportunity to spread more pain. Phaerimm are slavers, and view enslaved or magically controlled minions as utterly disposable.

The phaerimm are simultaneous hermaphrodites, able to both fertilize the eggs of other phaerimm and be fertilized in turn. Phaerimm courtship is more akin to a business exchange than anything romantic, and the eggs are kept in suspended animation until they can be inserted into a host—mammalian creatures are preferred, but anything living of Small or larger size can provide sufficient nutrients for the parasitoid embryo. Phaerimm keep their incubators secure, stocking their lairs with galleries of floating, insensate victims, each one growing a new horror inside.

An adult phaerimm is about twelve feet in length and weighs six hundred pounds. They fly magically, and are practically immobile in an antimagic field or similar effect.

Phaerimm CR 12 XP 19,200 NE Large aberration Init +5; Senses all-around vision, arcane sight, darkvision 60 ft., Perception +20, see invisibility

Defense AC 25, touch 10, flat-footed 24 (-1 size, +1 Dex, +15 natural) hp 150 (12d8+96) Fort +11, Ref +7, Will +12 DR 15/magic; Immune petrifaction and polymorph; SR 23 Defensive Abilities absorb magic; Weakness callable

Offense Speed 5 ft., fly 30 ft. (good) Melee bite +14 (2d6+6), 4 claws +14 (1d6+6), sting +14 (1d8+6 plus paralysis) Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft. (5 ft. with bite) Special Attacks implant, paralysis, prepare spell-like abilities Spell-like Abilities CL 13th, concentration +18 Constant—arcane sight, see invisibility 3/day—blur, shield 1/day—enervation, haste, waves of fatigue Spells CL 11th, concentration +17 5th (5/day)—dominate person (DC 21), waves of fatigue 4th (7/day)—crushing despair (DC 20), enervation, terrible remorse (DC 20) 3rd (7/day)—fireball (DC 18), haste, inflict pain (DC 19), ray of exhaustion (DC 18) 2nd (8/day)—blindness/deafness (DC 17), blur, bull’s strength, paranoia (DC 18), scorching ray 1st (8/day)—charm person (DC 17), mage armor, magic missile, ray of enfeeblement (DC 16), shield 0th—acid splash, detect poison, disrupt undead, light, mage hand, open/close, prestidigitation, resistance, touch of fatigue (DC 15)

Statistics Str 22, Dex 13, Con 26, Int 18, Wis 19, Cha 21 Base Atk +9; CMB +16; CMD 27 (cannot be tripped) Feats Arcane Strike,Empower Spell, Eschew Materials (B), Flyby Attack, Improved Initiative, Lightning Reflexes, Spell Focus (enchantment) Skills Fly +18, Intimidate +20, Knowledge (arcana) +19, Knowledge (dungeoneering, nature) +16, Perception +23, Spellcraft +19, Stealth +12; Racial Modifiers +4 Perception Languages Aklo, Common, Undercommon, telepathy 100 ft. SQ undersized weapons

Ecology Environment any deserts and underground Organization solitary, pair or enclave (3-12) Treasure double standard

Special Abilities Absorb Magic (Su) Whenever a spell fails to overcome a phaerimm’s spell resistance, the phaerimm heals an amount of damage equal to the spell’s caster level. Callable (Ex) A phaerimm is treated as an extraplanar outsider for the purposes of calling spells like planar binding. Flight (Su) A phaerimm’s fly speed is supernatural in nature. Implant (Ex) As a full round action, a phaerimm can lay an egg in a paralyzed or helpless target. The egg gestates for one week, whereupon a young phaerimm bursts from the host, killing it. While implanted with an egg, a host is unaffected until the final 24 hours of incubation, during which time it is treated as suffering a -10 penalty to all ability scores (minimum 1). A successful remove disease or similar effect against DC 23 removes the pellet, as does a successful DC 25 Heal check performed over the course of 10 minutes. Regardless of whether the Heal check succeeds or fails, it deals 1d4 damage to the host. Paralysis (Su) A creature stung by a phaerimm must succeed a DC 24 Fortitude save or be paralyzed for one minute. After this duration elapses, the creature must succeed a second DC 24 Fortitude save or be paralyzed for 1 week. While paralyzed, the afflicted creature floats five feet off the ground. Prepare Spell-like Ability (Su) When a phaerimm regains its spells, it may choose to prepare one of its known spells of each level above 0th as a spell-like ability with a caster level equal to its Hit Dice. 1st and 2nd level spells may be used 3/day as a spell-like ability, and spells of 3rd level or higher may be used 1/day. Spells A phaerimm can cast spells as an 11th level sorcerer. A phaerimm does not gain other sorcerer class abilities, such as a bloodline, unless it takes levels in sorcerer.

#pathfinder 1e #d&d #forgotten realms #phaerimm #aberration #sponsored post

[roserysttrpggarden]

Homebrew Class design For Dummies: Part 4: Class Resources

Hi there~! Hope you're having a lovely day. Welcome to the fourth-edition of Homebrew Class Design for Dummies, if you haven't read part 1, 2 and 3 click the links there. But in case you're new here, this is a series of write up i've decided to write to help anyone who wants to make a custom class for Fifth-Edition.

What is a Class Resource.

A class recourse, as the name implies is a resource pool that the player has to keep track off as they play that class. The most obvious example of this is Monks Ki points and Sorcerers Sorcery points,. Though these can also show up in other, much smaller ways. such as Channel Divinity on clerics and Lay on Hands for paladins.

If you don't wanna come up with an entirely new resource pool, then you can also look to other resources, such as spell slots, hit points or even hit dice as your classes resource if you really want too.

The Monk Problem

An issue that can come up with class-specific resource pools is that your class needs to expend it to do just about anything, this is most obviously showcased by 5e's Monk. Monk has several problems I might make a write-up on in the future, but for now i'll go over its Ki feature.

Monk has a resource known as KI, you gain an amount of ki points equal to your monk levels, which you regain on a short or long rest. You use your Ki points to fuel the following: Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, Step of The Wind, Deflect Missiles (To make an attack roll) Stunning Strike, Diamond Soul (To reroll a saving throw) and Empty Body. If you include the optional class features then you also can include Ki-Fueled Attack, Quicken healing and Focused-Aim. That's 7-10 features. Now add also add on top of that how you have very limited ki in actual play (1st-12th-level) and that you don't have a way to reliable recover Ki mid-fight, it leads to an overall bad play experience, no one likes to operate at half capacity for most of the adventuring day.

Solutions

An obvious solution to the monk problem is to give them a way to regenerate their resource in the midst of combat, maybe your class can regain their specific resource by dropping a creature to 0-hit points, or after a critical hit. Or maybe they can spend an action to recover spent uses of their resource. Though if you plan to use the former, make sure you put a CR cap so the player can't punch a couple rats to regain their resource. That's called the "Bag of Rats' If you're curious. Keep how your resource is used because a way to easily recover it might not always work depending on the class.

Using a Class Resource

Okay, so your class has a resource pool they need to manage, sweet. But now you have to figure out how your class uses said resource, is it used to amplify your classes existing feature similar to sorcery points or superiority dice? Or is it used to create new effects. Generally what your classes resource does should be used to enforce the playstyle you envision. Say for example you want your class to be a healer, allow them to heal and cleanse effects using said feature.

while this might seem obvious to some, your classes special resource should also be incorporated in some way into their subclasses, otherwise stick to PB times per day or X modifier times per day. Which nicely segways me onto:

Tracking

Something to look out for when making a class with a resource pool is making sure there isn't too much tracking involved. An immediate example that comes to mind is the UA Mystic, which could gain up to 71 psi point at the highest levels. Which is an issue cause no where else in D&D do you have to track that, but unlike Lay on Hands, it's not like you're tracking an even number either (5 per level) the result is that it becomes cumbersome to constantly look back at the document or your sheet to track how many you have. Another example of which is the Psionic Soul Sorcerer, which added a second resource in the form if PSI Dice to the Sorcerers kit, which leads to confusion since you're juggling two big pools at once.

In general it's a good idea to limit tracking where you can, you can even make your classes main resource unlimited use, which yes would require more to keep balanced, but it'll go a long way in making your class easy to pick up and play.

Summary

To summarize the points of this write up, when making a class resource you should:

Figure out how the resource pool manifests. (Points, die, etc)

Make sure it fits within your classes overall themes and playstyle.

Keep tracking as limited as you can (Or want)

Experiment with it

The Avatar

Last but not least, I will give a little update on the Avatar. Since I last posted I decided to scrap the radiance die because simply put, I couldn't think of how to make them interesting to use without treading too much on other features, much less how to incorporate them into subclass progression. And personally, epithets feel much more like an avatar thing than the radiance dice ever did.

In exchange. Avatars that reach 6th-level can now cause an epithet to ascend, which reads as follows:

The idea behind it is that if you have an epithet you really enjoy using, you can have it ascend and cause it to become stronger. It's also meant to help keep the epithets viable as you gain levels in this class, an example of this is the Mighty epithet, where if you cause it to ascend, as shown here:

Holy hell, I am so sorry for taking this long on the series. I got caught up with other projects + reworking the avatar itself, so this ended up being put on the backburner until now. Hopefully I can get the next entry: Subclasses out in a timely manner, but we shall see.

But that's all I have for today, make sure to like + share my content if you enjoy, have a nice day, go out and make some homebrew.

Homebrew Class design For Dummies: Part 1: The Foundation

Homebrew Class design For Dummies: Part 2: Getting Started

Homebrew Class design For Dummies: Part 3: Finishing the base class

Guide to Balancing Classes

#dnd homebrew #5e homebrew #dnd #dnd5e #homebrew 5e #5e #dnd 5e homebrew #dungeons and dragons #dungeons and dragons homebrew

[c-is-for-circinate]

Background AD&D info for Stranger Things Fans

I'm doing it, I'm writing an overly-long post A WHOLE SERIES of overly-long posts about how the Stranger Things kids play D&D, and what exactly first edition and AD&D were for.

Source: I've been playing since 3rd ed/3.5 era, NOT AD&D, but I've had a lot of friends who've been in the game for much longer and I'm kind of a nerd for rulesets so I watch D&D bros go off on youtube sometimes for fun. Also, I've actually read the AD&D player's handbook, which is an experience let me tell you. If anyone who's played older editions wants to chip in, go for it!

I think I'm going to have to write a separate post (or posts...god hopefully not posts) about the kids' individual classes. So stay tuned for that. I'll link it from this one when it's done.

First, some history: The earliest editions of D&D are a little confused, numbering-wise, because they didn't know there were going to be numbered editions yet. Dungeons and Dragons debuted in 1974 as an offshoot of mini-based tabletop wargames that already existed at the time. These were mostly big games, where players controlled whole armies rather than creating individual characters, and set their forces against one another. (Not unlike very complicated games of chess, if you really think about it.) D&D was not, to my knowledge, the first individual-character-based ttrpg, but it became the biggest pretty readily.

Advanced Dungeons and dragons, or AD&D, came out in '77 or '78 (Wiki says '77, the publication date on the copy I've been using says '78), although they were still publishing Basic D&D as an alternate option, more or less until the mid-nineties. AD&D was a lot more rules-heavy and had a lot more intricacy going on (relatively speaking), and it's the game the ST kids play.

Compared to modern D&D, AD&D's basic rules feel both more and less. The mechanics themselves are often way more complex, and navigating your way through all of those percentage tables as a DM implies a pretty high level of math skill, worth noting for both an 11-year-old or a guy who failed senior year twice. The character options, on the other hand, feel slim. On first glance.

AD&D only has five classes -- ten if you count subclasses, which you probably should for AD&D. There's fighters, with special fighter subclasses ranger (Lucas's class) or paladin (Mike's class); clerics (Will's class, supposedly), with special cleric subclass druid; magic-users (or mages, theoretically El's class), with special mage subclass illusionist; thieves (NOT rogues! but this is definitely Lady Applejack's actual class, with some caveats), with special thief subclass assassin; and monks. You will note I did not mention bards. We will get to bards. (Probably in the character post, when I talk about Dustin. Bards are...special.)

AD&D had no barbarians, no warlocks, no sorcerers. No special, prescribed forked paths for a character to venture down. Subclasses functioned mostly like classes do nowadays -- you'd roll up a character and be a paladin from day one, simply lumped under fighter because many of the core mechanics were the same. And a significant percentage of text given to describing these classes seems full of really restrictive orders and conditions. Clerics are never allowed to use a bladed weapon? Druids refuse to touch metal? Assassins must engage the local guildmaster in a duel to the death in order to progress to level 14? Where's the creativity, asks the modern 5e D&D player? Where's the freedom?

And this highlights a really core, central thing about how AD&D works and what it was for, that I think modern audiences can very easily miss:

1st edition AD&D is a game about archetypes.

Modern D&D is a game played in a sandbox that's been dug up and worked over for the past fifty years, in a cultural landscape that values individuality and originality and sometimes pretends that daring to share a trope with anything that came before is somewhere between boring and a straight-up crime. Original D&D came with very different baggage, and while it was still very much a game about storytelling, the KINDS of stories being told were a little different.

Characters weren't intended to be highly specialized, granular creations with intricate backstories and complex individualized skill sets. This wasn't even because those kinds of character-driven games or narratives were seen as bad, necessarily -- it's simply not what the game was written for!

First edition D&D was designed for big, epic adventures, where players could embody their own personal instance of a specific stock character trope. It was written for "I want to be a knight!" and "I want to be the magician!". It was about getting to be YOUR VERSION of a very particular, already-existing idea that would have been familiar from fantasy fiction at the time.

So, when the AD&D rules say that druids hold oak and ash trees sacred, that they will never destroy woodland or crops under any circumstances, that they cannot and will not use metal weapons or armor, that there only exist nine Level 12 druids in the world and they form a council with students below them -- this isn't an attempt to micromanage players, to be arbitrarily pedantic or controlling. This is Gary Gygax attempting to present the archetype that 'druid' is meant to encompass. This is what a druid is, according to this ruleset: a priest of nature, part of an order with rules and loyalties, with these priorities and these ideals. Mechanics and personality are not divorced in AD&D as they are in 5e; they are written together, to outline a specific character concept, and that is what's presented for the players to get to play.

If this sounds like it leads to boring, formulaic stories -- well, it could. But archetype-based stories, particularly adventure stories, are by no means necessarily bad. A story about a mysterious and knowledgeable old wizard; a naive-but-determined farmboy full of destiny and potential; a reckless rogue, slick but sometimes bumbling, selfish but secretly loyal; a beautiful princess, charming and clever and sharp-tongued when she wishes to be -- it's a pulp novel full of stock characters and tropes. It's Star Wars. What makes Star Wars special is NOT that its characters are specific, convoluted, or entirely original. What makes it special is that the specific instantiation of these characters, the little things that make Luke Skywalker be Luke Skywalker and not any other callow farmboy. Star Wars uses these archetypes well, and that makes them deeply satisfying. THAT'S the kind of story ethic behind AD&D.

First edition D&D has a reputation of being all about combat, and not about story at all. And on the surface, it's somewhat true: AD&D's rules are also highly combat-based. This isn't because players were expected to only do combat and dungeon crawls, and never roleplay -- but it WAS expected that, by signing on to play D&D, players were most interested in a campaign of exploration and fighting towards some fanciful goal. There was an element of buy-in from the start. The game was (and still very much is), at its core, about going on a quest.

The thing to remember, though, is that a quest IS a story. It's not the psychological trauma-unburdening character-driven narrative that pop culture might tell you to expect in modern D&D, but AD&D was every inch as story-based as the game's ever been. The stories being told were a little different, but with a very similar root.

The 1979 Dungeon Master's Guide is actually full of information about how to set up a world and stock it with people, political factions, and socioeconomic logistics. There are extensive rules about how high-level adventurers become part of the political fabric of the realm, building forts and amassing followers and making names for themselves. (Here, again, we see echoes of AD&D's forebearers in war games, and certain elements of the game that are all but gone from modern D&D.)

What there AREN'T a lot of rules about, on the other hand, are things like skill checks. There's no "persuasion" or "investigation" in AD&D, no list of specific things players can do and how good they are at them. Aside from combat and a small handful of specific non-combat activities, discretion over the success or failure of just about anything was left up to the DM. A DM was always free to call for a dice roll, and could set an arbitrary target number for success at any activity, but the rules also don't say they have to. To see if the characters persuade the barmaid to give them a hand, the players would have to be persuasive. To find the hidden clue in the cluttered chamber, the players might have to describe themselves looking in the right place.

In other words, there are relatively few rules for activities outside of combat, not because those activities were expected to be absent, but because they were expected to be unpredictable. How much exploration, and what players had to explore; what NPCs to interact with, and how they might react to being spoken to; what factions might exist, what moral quandaries could unfold, even the goal and big bad guy of the whole campaign -- the original sourcebooks for AD&D offer at best some very general advice, and NO hard and fast rules. That was for players and DMs to decide.

Many players and DMs, I know, fell on the side of engaging in relatively little worldbuilding complexity outside of the very mechanically-crunchy dungeon crawl. What little we see from the campaigns in ST is certainly mostly combat-oriented. And yet there are also hints of storylines happening off camera. Season 1's one-day eight-hour adventure was probably mostly dungeon crawl. Season 4's campaign takes most of a school year, until the players recognize the members of the cult they've been chasing for months, and know Vecna lore that would only have been published in one or two places anywhere by then, which means they probably learned it in-game. We don't see a lot of evidence of specific character plotlines -- in fact, repeatedly we're shown that the Party's characters share names with their players, making the whole thing even more clearly a big kids' game of let's-pretend. But that doesn't mean there's not a story.

So in short, the original game of D&D is built for epic quests, founded in very specific archetypes, but with the space for just about infinite in variation within that framework. That's what the Stranger Things kids are playing.

(And with this posted, I can start writing about the individual classes these kids are playing and what that says about each of them.)

#stranger things #D&D #driveby meta attack #seriously if an old-school AD&D player wants to tell me I'm way off here #I'd LOVE to learn more #I have more history and knowledge than many (certainly many on tumblr) #but far less than some #mostly it just felt like I needed to write THIS part down before I went off about rangers and bards #and y'all fanfic writers DEFINITELY need a lesson in what “paladin” meant Back In The Day #it's ok we'll get there don't worry #I just think this stuff is NEAT #LONG POST

[zu-is-here]

Hello Zuz !!!

How are you doing ?

I just finished wrapping my gifts, are you going to see your family for the end of the year's celebrations? (⁠≧⁠▽⁠≦⁠)

Oh hii Blue! (*´∇｀*)

Amazzzing, thanks <3 What about you?? ☆

Awww you did such a great work on them! (*ﾟ∀ﾟ*) So beautiful and filled with love ♡ What did you prepare for your family members, if it's not a secret? *^*

I am! (๑˃̵ᴗ˂̵) Though I was being lazy this year and just used bags instead ♪ (it's easier for adding many/more gifts heheh)

("Northern mail; delivered by Santa Claus's reindeers // Urgent gift delivery; hand over to the recipient at midnight")

It'll be a challenge to deliver them all (7) at once to the Christmas tree at my parents' house, so I'll have to act in parts, secretly... >:3c

UPD:

@bluepallilworld That's good to hear it! (*´꒳`*)

Awww such cute presents! (〃ω〃) Omg I've prepared chocolate balls for my lil siblings as well >:D The limited edition sounds so cool *^* So thoughtful! ☆

I've prepared candles+soap+bath bombs in the shape of tangerines for everyone, and separately: a chef's knife for dad, a care set for mom, a board game for the 1st sis, a set for dyeing clothes for the 2nd sis, and a coloring book for my bro ♪

Heheh thank youuu! <3

Oh right XD He does <3 Thank youuu ☆

Such a lucky chance! *w*

#updated #ask #zu is happy

[another-rpg-sideblog]

From the Cthulhu Mythos chapter of the 1st edition AD&D Deities & Demigods manual (TSR, 1980).

The Deep Ones first appeared in HP Lovecraft's novella The Shadow Over Innsmouth (1936).

#rpg #dungeons and dragons #dnd #monsters #cthulhu mythos #1st edition dungeons and dragons

[neverquiteeden]

A Set of Notations surrounding Letters from Watson

Any/all notes around the context of these stories shall be added as I discover them during the course of LfW. As always these are for my own understanding and I will not be including actual analysis or 'meta' here, only further context (including that about the author) that I personally found interesting.

List of content warnings for LfW is here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MxfryiP0jmrOkTt_TKHKKJX_ZKYj1EN4h1YznM9Ey54/edit#heading=h.q43fjlx73u8l

Study In Scarlet Extract 1.

Battle of Maiwand: 27th July 1880. British defeat by the Afghan forces.

Enteric fever: Typhoid or paratyphoid

11 shillings and sixpence: £38.06 today (43.58 euros or 46.24 dollars)

Jezail - refers to a type of gun, typically personal and well-made

Criterion Bar: According to a few sources, the Criterion bar was generally known as a meeting place for gay men. Specific loitering laws were enacted against soldiers and ex-soldiers after the second afghan war due to them supplementing their pensions by means disapproved by the government. Arthur Conan Doyle was not yet friends with Oscar Wilde at the time of writing this section, however, so it is possible that he did not know the significance of such places. They met between the publication of Stud. and Sign of Four, and Doyle began to use the epithet of Bohemian to describe Holmes after that encounter.

A placard in the Criterion Bar today claims that Stamford and Watson met there on 1st January 1881. This generally makes sense as to the timeframe of Watson returning from Afghanistan, though the date isn't agreed upon in all circles (this is probably why Letters was meant to start on the 1st).

How far bruises may be produced after death - it is generally accepted that classical bruising does not occur after death: bruises do form if the flesh is traumatised and vessels burst, but there is no inflammatory reaction such as seen in living, classical bruises. Blood also pools in the lower half of the body during livor mortis, which produces the appearance of bruises.

Guiacum test - One of the first tests for blood developed. It relied on guiacum/guaiacum, a tree resin, and hydrogen peroxide to produce a blue stain in the presence of blood.

#letters from watson #notes from eden #acd holmes #acd sherlock holmes #lettersfromwatson #acd john watson #sherlock holmes #prepare to be sick of me

[nebmia]

Common RPG advice is wrong, actually, part 2: Hit Points ARE Meat Points

Or: the dangers of believing everything the designers tell you

In Current Edition of the major fantasy rpg hit points are described as being not just a measure of the physical punishment you can take but as representing:

a combination of physical and mental durability, the will to live, and luck.

Which leads to the advice that most hits (while at high hit points) should actual be described as near misses, which the character has to exert themselves to avoid, and that actual wounds only occur when at low hit points. This just generally tends to confuse things for players as you keep describing mechanical hits as misses.

And this isn't a new thing. Mr G Gygax said something to the same effect (but in more words obviously) in 1st edition AD&D:

A certain amount of these hit points represent the actual physical punishment which can be sustained. The remainder, a significant portion of hit points at higher levels, stands for skill, luck, and/or magical factors.

Now this isn't a bad idea (although I think things like the BitD system of having separate mechanics for stress and physical harm is better), and it sounds good to a lot of people who think having characters be cut to pieces 5 times a day isn't realistic so the idea comes around a lot. But it falls apart because the idea only actually exists in these sections of 'advisory' text and isn't actually integrated into the mechanics of the game.

It isn't present in the language of 'hits', 'dealing damage' or 'health potions' (rather than 'near miss', ' dealing reduced will to fight', and 'skill and luck recovery potion' ). It doesn't mesh with things like high level characters being able to reliably shrug off falling from orbit or swimming in lava. It doesn't work with things like poisoned weapons (which must have actually pieced the skin for the effect to be applied no matter how many hit points you have left). It doesn't mesh with the fact that your AC or uncanny dodge already models a characters ability to avoid being hit. It doesn't fit with exhaustion existing as a mechanic for modelling fatigue. It doesn't fit with things that might reduce your 'will to fight' (like fear effects) or 'skill', or 'luck' never reducing your hit points. In fact the only things that reduce hit points are things that would cause actual damage to your physical body (or occasionally to your mind, but in the 'psychic magic melts your brain sense' rather than reducing your 'will to fight'). If the sentence telling you what hit points are supposed to represent wasn't present, then, nine times out of ten, someone trying to work it out from just the mechanics would have no idea it is supposed to have anything to do with anything other than how many times you can survive being stabbed. What has happened is that D&D characters started with very low numbers of hit points (meaning both at low levels and in early editions) and it made sense that a hit was a hit and after getting stabbed a few times you were dead. But then hit point totals grew (with levels and editions) and characters could be stabbed a lot of times and barely notice and people didn't think this was very realistic. Therefore, a post fact explanation was added to explain that HP didn't actually just represent how much physical damage you can take. in fact here is Gygax doing just that:

It is quite unreasonable to assume that as a character gains levels of ability in his or her class that a corresponding gain in actual ability to sustain physical damage takes place. It is preposterous to state such an assumption, for if we are to assume that a man is killed by a sword thrust which does 4 hit points of damage, we must similarly assume that a hero could, on the average, withstand five such thrusts before being slain! Why then the increase in hit points?

Why indeed. Well the answer is actually quite simple: the characters need to get stronger, therefore they need more hit points. The increased hit points come from a need of the game rather than from the fiction. The fictional explanation that it is

Because these reflect both the actual physical ability of the character to withstand damage — as indicated by constitution bonuses, and a commensurate increase in such areas as skill in combat and similar life-or-death situations, the “sixth sense” which warns the individual of some otherwise unforeseen events, sheer luck, and the fantastic provisions of magical protections and/or divine protection.

Is just applied after as a way to make sense of it but without a corresponding change in the mechanics to actually make this fiction part of the game. And that finally brings me to the point I wanted to make. Which is that you can't believe everything the designers put in the book. In addition to the actual mechanics and rules the designers will often include advisory or explanatory content (often in a little box to the side). Most of the time this is a good and helpful insight into what the mechanics are supposed to be doing. But sometimes the designers lie to you.

A common instance of this across many games is when the designers wax lyrical about how their game isn't just about combat but also about exploration and intrigue or whatever else but then you look at the mechanics and it is 97% about resolving tactical combat.

These passages are often about what the designer wanted their game to be, which in some cases hasn't actually lined up with the finished product. With D&D this is often because they are caught between their design goals and maintaining the sacred cows of D&D. If you wanted to rework HP to actually align with the idea that it doesn't just represent meat points then it wouldn't look like D&D hit points anymore.

A game I played recently that has a number of these 'little boxes full of lies' was numenera. It had the classic 'this game totally isn't just about combat'. There's also a bit trying to tell you that equal advancement isn't important and a lower level character isn't 'less powerful', which is a bold faced lie. Numenera characters absolutely balloon in power .

So in conclusion:

If its not an actual rule you can't necessarily trust that the things a designer says are actually present in the game.

Hit points are meat points. Embrace the fact that your high level martials can take a fireball to the face like its nothing.

#rpg advice is wrong actually #ttrpg #dnd #tabletop rpg #rpg #my stuff #hit points #meat points

[trashyandtiredsol]

UPDATED: April 8th, 2024

My Pinterest

My Twitch

[COMMISSION INFO] - Planning on working on a commission sheet soon

Updated Sona Reference Sheet

|ADULTING CHEAT SHEET FOR Y'ALL AND MYSELF|

|ALSO HERE'S WHY KOSA IS FUCKED UP|

|FAM TREE FOR Y'ALL|

|A WAY TO DEAL WITH YOUR ART BEING USED FOR AI|

|SOME WAYS TO START MAKING ART|

|SOME HEART ATTACK INFO TO KNOW|

|MY THOUGHTS ON AI ART|

🌟Reblogs On My Art Are Greatly Appreciated!

-> Also here's This for context for reblogs and This and This

🌟Please Do NOT Repost, Edit, Trace, Use, And/Or Sell My Art‼️

🌟ASK For Anything Else Regarding My Art‼️

Life Death and Love - Master Post

-> |#Life Death and Love au|

|Requests Open!|

Personal Info And Tags Under The Cut

Multi-Fandom Blog (Don't be surprised when you follow me for one thing then I post about another thing).

My names Sol or Solstice! (On here that is, not my actual name, tho I wish it was sometimes :/)

16 (Birthday's May 2nd, 2007 !!)

🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈Queer!🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈

Pronouns are He/She/They

-> |#sol full of art| my art tag

-> |#she/they| the pronouns posts I've made for myself

-> |#pinned post| important stuff

-> |#my saved art tips|

-> |#my saved tips|

-> |#nice music| It's just music I've reblogged that I like and maybe you'll enjoy it too!!

-> |#venting me| my vent tag, feel free to ignore!

-> |#answering asks|

-> |#nice convos!!| for conversations I have!! Kinda forget to tag this sometimes (a lot of times) and some of the conversations aren't really conversations either

-> /#absolutely/ plus some other word like fabulous or love it or lovely or gorgeous or stunning or love this concept or some other words I don't remember at the moment (Try searching absolutely in my blog and hopefully all the reblogs I did will show!)

-> |#saving!!| for some saved stuff I wanna look back on

-> |#sol full of texts| for my text posts

-> |#sol full of asks| for answered asks

-> |#tag chain|

-> |#picrew| for picrew's I do

-> |#sol's sona fanart| for were other's draw my sona!!! :D

-> |#ask game| for ask game reblogs

-> |#blum pirates| for the Blum Pirate Crew im a part of! All the info on that is in this tag

-> |#foodie au bluecrop blueberry| for my foodie au oc

-> |#tmnt foodie au| general tag for the foodie au

-> |#collabs| collabs I've done with others

-> |#art| art from reblogs and very occasionally my art if I add that tag to those art posts and is also a huge compilation of a whole bunch of art from different fandoms (you can click on other specific tags on most of those to find other related stuff I've reblogged)

-> |#Garfield Logan| and |#Beast Boy|

-> |#dtiysol💚| My DTIY's!

(70+ Follower DTIY) so far it's only Blue from the foodie au ( participant's: 01 ) Deadline: December 1st, 2023 (only adding a deadline so I don't end up forgetting about this after 2 months)

(Finished)

(100+ Follower DTIY) for my Life Death and Love au

( participant's: 00 ) Deadline: None

(Permanently Ongoing I Guess? )

#pinned post #sol full of art #she/they #my saved art tips #my saved tips #nice music #nice convos!! #saving!! #sol full of texts #sol full of asks #tag chain #picrew #sol's sona fanart #ask game #blum pirates #foodie au bluecrop blueberry #tmnt foodie au #collabs #dtiysol💚 #life death and love au #deco my tree

[thedemonscrawler]

gonna procrastinate on writing by talking about writing woo

So, fun fact! Permission Slip is usually being written on two different documents at once, which should be but are not actually identical? And neither of them match the actual AO3 version you guys read?

1st Draft

The first draft is written with a combination of OpenOffice and Google Docs.

(I'll get to why that says Mobile Copy in a sec)

The OpenOffice document is meant to be the Master Draft of the fic. It's the entire story so far-- outline, notes, all the chapters written and the bits of chapters we haven't gotten to yet.

Yeah, it's lengthy. The reason it says 'Active Version' is starting around Chapter 5, I began saving a copy of the document up to the most recent chapter finished.

This is because of how I write scenes out of order, and having an older draft lets me go back for things that got rewritten. It's also really neat to see how various ideas evolved over the story, or how old some of the scenes are.

OpenOffice has the Master Draft, not just because it can handle it, but so I can put my laptop into airplane mode and write offline if I really need to focus. But the story doesn't stay there!

If you've seen the snippets I've shared, you know that sometimes they're highlighted in grey, like this:

(yeah you enjoy that snippet from Chapter 15)

The grey highlights are a system to tell myself 'this is a section that needs to be copied over to the other document', almost always a section I have just written that session. Feels good to have a whole page in grey.

So from OpenOffice, the grey sections are copied over to GoogleDocs, and become the 2nd Draft.

2nd Draft

..okay, so there are actually TWO GoogleDoc copies of Permission Slip. One of them is a 'master' version, just like the Open Office file. The other is the Mobile version. The master version has all of the chapters and outline and stuff, while the Mobile copy only goes back one or two chapters prior to the current one. Why?

Cos it turns out that when a document gets to be around 110 pages long, Docs starts being a little bitch and lags real bad on mobile, or starts crashing. So the mobile version was made so I could type on my phone. Same deal, new sections are highlighted in grey and copied back to the OpenOffice version when I'm on the laptop again.

Since the GoogleDocs version can be worked on from multiple locations, it's the one that gets the most edits. If there are substantial changes made they'll be copied back to the OpenOffice document, but minor edits aren't as crucial, and there are some sections that are pretty different between the two now.

From the GoogleDocs version on to the final(ish) version:

3rd Draft

The AO3 version should match the GoogleDocs version, and for the most part it does-- but not always. That last minute readthrough to catch all the spaces added after italics is also a time for minor edits. Missing words, dialogue rewrites, etc. There's one chapter that had a chunk written in the editor, but unfortunately I can't remember which one it is now 8'D only that it's between chapters 9 and 12. Naturally the AO3 version is the one you guys get to see.

Uuuuh yeah so. Overcomplicated system, go!

Also if you want a word processor for free, I recommend LibreOffice! Its based on the same open source software as OpenOffice, only it's actually still being updated and stuff (I still use OO just cos it's what I have 8'D).

Unfortunately I have yet to find a word processing app with cloud-based storage that can be edited from multiple devices, so I can't replace GoogleDocs with something better.

[catulhu333]

Sharess was originally a good aspect of Shar *and* Lolth?

...and perhaps the fragment of remaining goodness from both evil goddesses, with all three being possibly originally the same entity? (At least in late 1st and early 2nd edition AD&D lore)

Depictions (from left to right) of Shar, Sharess and Lolth, from 2003's Faiths and Pantheons

It might be a bit obscure, but rather than Bast merging with/absorbing the goddesses Felidae and Zandilar the Dancer; Sharess was originally intended to be a Chaotic Good aspect of Shar, as seen in her very first description in the original 1987 "Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting": "Sharess, a CG aspect of Shar worshipped in Calimshan, Waterdeep, and by idle rich or decadents all over the Realms. Sharess is a goddess of lust, free love, and sensual fulfillment, and is worshipped in prolonged fests with scented baths, music, good food, dancing, and other gratifications."

This when asking one of the writers/editors, Matt Sernett about this, he confirmed that Sharess was actually meant to be a benevolent aspect of Shar, and this not being a misdirection as presented later in lore.

This was basically repeated in 1988's "Empires of the Sands", as well as in the 1993 2nd edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, though the latter further suggesting Sharess' benevolent nature might be an act, or that Sharess became a separate being from Shar by this point: "The true nature and identity of Sharess is unrevealed. She may he a direct part of the evil Shar, preparing her following for despair and loss. Or she may be a new thing entirely: a goddess of excess."

This starts to become even more interesting with 1991's "Drow of the Underdark", in the section with the short dictionary of Drow language. There "valsharess" is explained as meaning "Queen", and "Quarvalsharess" "(the) Goddess" in Drow language, specifically and only meaning Lolth (other goddesses are are written as quar'valsharess, and not starting with a capital letter).

The same sourcebook, details the syncretic She-Spider cult - who seemingly consider Lolth and Shar to be the same goddess. The cult was opposed by both goddesses, which is curious, seeing Shar's eagerness to subsume other deities. Though Lolth did latter possibly send her priestess (Malabeth Tr'rudena) to infiltrate the cult.

A card from TSR's Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Trading Cards, depicting Malabeth.

This is a proof (along with the mention Shar worship is relatively popular among Drow), of such syncretic cults between the two goddesses existing, as well as one of the hints Shar and Lolth are or were to a degree aspects of each other. Similarly how Sehanine Moonbow in both 2nd edition and 4th edition, was stated to be aspect of Shar's sister, Selûne, most notably first in the above mentioned 2nd edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting: "Sehanine: Sehanine is an intermediate power among the elves of the Realms, for they refer to her as an elven version of Selûne, the mortal goddess of the moon."

Indeed, Sharess herself might had been a hint at the connection between Lolth and Shar.

There appeared more hints overtime, like similar antagonism between the 2 pairs, Shar and Lolth becoming both connected to the New Moon, and even more in late 3.5 edition and 4th edition/Nerath lore. For example, it was stated at the very end of 3.5th edition that the god Mask is Shar's son, mirroring Vhaeraun being the son of Lolth. The two gods are very similar, both being gods of thievery connected to shadows, as well as Vhaeraun being called the "Masked Lord", "Masked Mage", "Masked God of the Night". Furthermore, both gods share near identical titles - Vhaeraun being called the "Lord of Shadow" and "Shadow Lord"; Mask being known as the "Lord of Shadows" and "Shadowlord". Both having a similar to near identical symbols. With there being theories, and hints before this reveal, Mask and Vhaeraun might be connected, maybe even aspects of each other, Mask even kinda hinting in one novel (1998's "Crucible: The Trial of Cyric the Mad" by Troy Denning) he is the same as Vhaeraun.

Symbols of Vhaeraun (left, from 1998's "Demihuman Deities") and Mask (right, from 1996's "Faiths and Avatars")

Pictures of Vhaeraun battling his son, Selvetarm (left, from 2004's "Player's Guide to Faerun"), and of Mask (right, from 2003's "Faiths and Pantheons") On Nerath, in turn Lolth and Sehanine are described as sisters, like Shar and Selûne are. So the (at least initial) opposition to the She-Spider cult from both, being possibly from not wanting for their connection to be revealed; or alternately be merged back by the power of belief.

Though to be clear, this could work either way if Shar and Lolth are or were aspects of each other, or not. As Sharess, in her original lore, possibly sprung into existence from the worship of the syncreticism of Shar and Lolth, that arose among drow, and then spread to other races/species, possibly originally named "Quarvalsharess"; before the name became shortened/corrupted among non-drow into just "Sharess". Or even started out named already Sharess among even drow, shortening from Quarvalsharess, to emphasize the "Shar" part.

It's probable Shar at least had more control over the Sharess aspect than Lolth (seeing Sharess was directly stated to be connected to her), and possibly the new goddess, in part absorbing or mirroring whatever benevolent aspects the two goddesses had, became an independent being. This quite probably being at least in part also caused by "Time of Troubles", when gods were forced into singular avatars, this event would have cut-off Sharess from both Shar and Lolth. Especially seeing the possibility of Sharess being an independent entity, was first mentioned not long after the Time of Troubles (ie when 2nd edition Forgotten Realms setting was set).

Depiction of Sharess, from 1995's Polyhedron #109

Soon though, Sharess was given a different origin (first in 1995's “Forgotten Deities: Sharess” in Polyhedron #109, then further developed with some changes in 1997's "Powers and Pantheons" and 1998's "Demihuman Deities") , if still being connected to Shar, and (more indirectly) to drow, and being an amalgamation of aspects of multiple goddesses (but different ones); it's still though an interesting possibility/alternate origin for home campaigns.

Or perhaps even theorizing some part of Shar or even Lolth did get into the divine merger that was Sharess. ("Was", as in 5th edition lore, Sharess was basically split back into Bast and Zandilar).

#sharess #lolth #shar #forgotten realms #dnd #advanced #dungeons & dragons #lloth #theory #drow