Backgrounds as Races (or races as backgrounds)

Just because they're short doesn't mean they steal stuff

I've spoken a bit about how a system defines the way you play the game. D&D is a combat-heavy system, so it lends itself to complex combats and simple exploration/interaction. It's an excellent system for dungeon crawling, which is probably why "Dungeon" is in the title.

But a system also adds another bit of input on how you play the game, by including different races and classes. The Player's Handbook is the first book a player usually sees or buys, and if there's elves in there, by Pelor they are going to want to play elves. If they see stats for pets, they will demand pets. If there is a wizard class, there have to be wizard schools, and the players will want to join them.

Most Dungeon Masters are fine with these ideas. In fact, most Dungeon Masters play in settings right out of the modules, where all the handbook races are represented. The Forgotten Realms (perhaps by virtue of the D&D Adventurer's League) is still one of the most popular settings in D&D.

And in the cases where a DM wants to get creative and craft their own setting, it's easy to say "elves in my setting aren't snooty pricks, they are weird moon creatures!" Or to simply remove gnomes from an area because they don't live in that country. Or even to say "tieflings get different spells than the ones listed in the handbook" like they id in Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes.

But you can't get rid of the races entirely.

Why? Because of their stat boosts. In a system with bounded accuracy like D&D, the difference between a +2 ability modifier and a +3 modifier in a primary ability score will come up dozens of time in a session, tipping the scales on several rolls. Every little +1 helps. That's why the Adventurer's League doesn't award +1 weapons until level 5, and AC-boosting armor and shields are considered quite game-breaking.

In a game where every stat point matters, you'll find that certain race-class combinations become incredibly common. Elven Rangers, Dwarven Fighters, and Halfling Rogues are simply more powerful than other combinations. And while you'll find plenty of people who are interested in role-playing a particular race, there are many more who want to use a particular class and be good at it. Due to the rules and focus of the game, class is far, far more important than race to a character.

So, without a major change, you can't remove race options, because you are essentially asking players to take a hit to the effectiveness of their class.

So, let's talk about making a major change.

Backgrounds as Races

Let's say we are running a setting that is entirely human. Arthurian England, for example. Or some sort of sci-fi post-apocalypse game where humans haven't had enough time to mutate into new races or be visited by aliens. In such a scenario, would every human have the same background and abilities?

Of course not. They might be able to use smithing tools or an herbalism kit due to their background. They could speak certain languages, and have different equipment. And there's no reason why they couldn't have different ability scores, too.

Depending on your art style, they might still look the same, though

The basic human template assumes every human starts with a +1 in every stat. It's one of the weakest and most boring races in the handbook. The variant human is much better, granting +1 in two different stats, a skill, and a feat. Feats are incredibly powerful at first level, but the +1 in two different stats is still a bit lame. That's not even enough to get an ability score to an extra +1 modifier.

I have a house rule in my current games: if you don't roll at least one ability score to be 14 or higher during character creation, you can reroll your stats. Why? Because the game is built around the idea that nearly all first-level characters will have a +3 modifier in their primary stat. A +5 to hit is the minimum needed to get the 65% hit rate the game designers were shooting for. That's why the standard ability score array features a 15 in it - they assume you'll bump that up to 16 or 17 with your racial bonuses.

So, we need to add higher modifiers to the human class. And different backgrounds is the perfect justification to do it. After all, if you are a Charlatan, wouldn't it make sense for you to have a higher-than-average charisma? If you were a smith, wouldn't you be a bit stronger? By co-opting the backgrounds, we can create the mechanical diversity of races without needing the races themselves.

Normally, a background in 5th edition comes with a few perks already: you get 2 skill proficiencies, 2 language/tool proficiencies, some flavored equipment, and a perk. I've discussed before what goes into these backgrounds, and it's best to use them as a base when creating stat-boosting backgrounds.

Of course, stats aren't the only thing you'll want to boost when creating these new backgrounds. After all, races come with plenty of other features, proficiencies, and bonuses aside from stats. To estimate the power of these features, I've used the Detect Balance system from Eleazzaar. This lead to the following point-buy system that can be used to estimate human abilities. Each character should get about 25 points to start with, with a maximum of 30.

Ability Score Increases (A single ability score can only benefit from an increase once.)

• Ability Score +1 - 4 points
• Ability Score +2 - 8 points
• All Ability Scores +1 - 16 points

Proficiencies

• Common and 1 Standard Language - 0 points
• Common and 2-3 Standard Languages - 1 point
• 1 Exotic Language - 1 point
• Tool Proficiency - 1 point
• Skill Proficiency - 3 points
• Expertise on a skill with specific application - 2 points
• Skill Proficiency and Expertise - 6 points

Movement

• 30 feet - 0 points
• 35 feet - 2 points
• 30 feet climb - 2 points
• 30 feet swim - 2 points
• Ignore nonmagical difficult terrain - 3 points
• Not slowed by Heavy Armor - 2 points

Physical Abilities

• Hold Breath (15 minutes) - 1 point
• Powerful Build (+1 size for carrying things) - 3 points
• Nimbleness (move through space of larger creatures) - 2 points
• Acclimatized (ignore penalties of a certain environment) - 1 point

Advantage on Rolls

• Advantage on Rare Roll (e.g. History checks about a certain city) - 1 point
• Advantage on a Situational Roll (e.g. Animal Handling checks) - 2 points
• Advantage on a Common Roll (e.g. Perception checks to look for traps) - 4 points
• Advantage on a Very Common Roll (e.g. Initiative checks) - 8 points

Weapons and Armor

• 1 Simple Weapon Training - 1 point
• 1 Martial Weapon Training - 2 points
• Natural Weapon/Unarmed Strike (1d4) - 1 point
• Natural Weapon/Unarmed Strike (1d6) - 2 points
• Natural Weapon/Unarmed Strike (1d8) - 4 points
• Natural Weapon/Unarmed Strike (1d10) - 8 points
• Light Armor Training - 2 points
• Light/Medium Armor Training - 4 points

Other

• Feat - 20 points
• Tinker (from the Rock Gnome) - 1 point
• Lucky (from Halfling) - 4 points
• Toughness (+1 HP per level) - 5 points
• Cantrip - 3 points

As you probably have guessed, I've turned this into a PDF here.

Pictured: 7 people who had to choose the same race for the bonuses

Thus, using this system, we can create pure human backgrounds that confer the same mechanical powers a race would! Here are some examples from the Player's Handbook.

Charlatan (Gambler)
In addition to normal background features, the character gains:

• Dexterity +2 (8 points)
• Charisma +1 (4 points)
• Common and 1 Standard language (0 points)
• Thieves Cant (exotic language, 1 point)
• Dice Proficiency (1 points)
• Advantage on Insight Checks versus bluffing (common roll, 4 points)
• Lucky (4 points)
• Mage Hand Cantrip (3 points)

Charlatan (Swindler)
In addition to normal background features, the character gains:

• Charisma +2 (8 points)
• Wisdom +1 (4 points)
• Common and 2-3 Standard languages (1 point)
• Thieves Cant (exotic language, 1 point)
• Deception Expertise (6 points)
• Lucky (4 points)
• Tinker (1 point)

Soldier (Blacksmith)

In addition to normal background features, the character gains:

• Strength +2 (8 points)
• Constitution +2 (8 points)
• Common and 1 Standard language (0 points)
• Smith's Tools Proficiency (1 point)
• Expertise on Performance checks to craft items (2 points)
• Not Slowed by Heavy Armor (2 points)
• Powerful Build (3 points)
• Unarmed Strike 1d4 (1 point)

Urchin

In addition to normal background features, the character gains:

• All ability scores +1 (16 points)
• Common and 1 Standard language (0 points)
• Thieves Cant (exotic language, 1 point)
• 30 feet climb (2 points)
• Hold Breath 15 minutes (1 point)
• Nimbleness (2 points)
• Advantage on History checks about home city (rare roll, 1 point)
• Slingshot Training (1 point)
• Unarmed Strike 1d4 (1 point)

As you can see, not only does this system allow you to make more specific backgrounds, it also allows you to modify background features to suit a particular character. Do you want your Indiana Jones-esque rogue to be able to use a whip? That's only 2 points here, but in the normal system it would require an entire feat.

This system allows for more diversity of background-class combinations, and helps players all start on a level playing field when it comes to ability scores. And, of course, it allows the DM to create balanced settings with heavy race restrictions.

In some settings, "Wood Elf Ranger" might as well be synonymous with "Elf"

As a last note, I've built this system under the assumption that humans are not innately magical, and might learn a cantrip but don't have any magic for themselves. Of course, I'll have to add that in for Ahneria, but this is the basic system.

Thanks for reading!

Designer Feats

Put them in your designer shoes

A couple weeks ago, I discussed building new races and classes. I mentioned that adding feats to the game is the quickest and easiest way to modify a class without breaking the system.

So how do you make feats?

Well, you look on that spreadsheet I linked, and make an ability from there into a feat. Done!

Oh, wait, you want a different feat?

A cool new feat that is totally unique?

And it isn't on the spreadsheet?

Okay, fine.

Making Feats

There are two types of feats in D&D 5e: Full Feats and Half Feats. A Half Feat is a few weaker abilities bundled with an Ability Score Improvement appropriate to the feat. It's called a Half Feat because Feats normally replace Ability Score Improvements, and a Half Feat takes half of both and combines them.

So, in terms of the spreadsheet above, a Full Feat should be worth about 8 points, and a Half Feat should be worth 4 points, with an ASI covering the other 4. This is pretty useful information, as it gives you a whole slew of abilities to use as a template for your new feats. Basically, add up 8 points of racial abilities, and you've got yourself a feat.

But not all feats are created equal. Some are worth more or less than others.

Exclusively uses great weapons

Here are some feats that break the mold:

• Great Weapon Master/Sharpshooter are amazing feats, easily worth 10 points apiece.
• War Caster gives advantage on a common roll and two other abilities, making it at least 10 points.
• Shield Master is like Evasion + always half cover + another bonus action option
• Ritual Caster is incredibly useful for classes that don't already have the ability to cast rituals
• Healer is great for non-healing classes. Healer's Kits are cheap!
• Crossbow Expert gives you a bonus action, negates disadvantage on a common roll, and lets you use extra attacks with your crossbow. Amazing!
• Athlete: even with the ASI, these are situational at best, probably not worth 4 points.
• Durable: Won't even be useful half the time. Not worth it.
• Marital Adept: ONE superiority die. Nope.
• Skilled: Absolutely not worth it.
• Weapon Master: There's literally no class that benefits from this. They already have all the weapon proficiencies they need. Your basically just punishing multiclass character by forcing them to take another feat. I hate this feat.

So, when designing your feat, you can reasonably make a set of abilities in the 6-10 point range. Too much higher, though, and you risk making a feat that players will feel required to take. Too low, though, and you'll never see your feat be used.

And remember, when you make a feat, you aren't just going up against a 2 point Ability Score Improvement. You are also going up against character's potential build. A character in 5e generally wants their most relevant stats to be at 20 by level 8 or 12. This means that unless your player rolled well on their stats, they probably won't be taking feats until higher levels in the game.

Of course, this varies by class based on which stats the class needs, and how many ASI's they get over the course of the character.

• Barbarians have 5 ASIs, and need to get STR and CON to 20. Depending on their starting stats, might be able to take 1 feat, but it isn't likely until later in the build.
• Bards have 5 ASIs, and need to get CHA to 20, with a preference for high DEX. You can expect them to take a feat once they hit higher levels.
• Clerics have 5 ASIs, and need to get WIS to 20, with a preference for high CON. You can expect them to take a feat once they hit higher levels.
• Driuds have 5 ASIs, and need to get WIS to 20, with a preference for high CON or DEX. You can expect them to take a feat once they hit higher levels.
• Fighters have 7 ASIs, and need to get STR or DEX to 20, with a preference for high CON or INT. Depending on their starting stats, they will probably take anywhere from 2 to 4 feats.
• Monks have 5 ASIs, and need to get WIS and DEX to 20. Depending on their starting stats, might be able to take 1 feat, but it isn't likely until later in the build.
• Paladins have 5 ASIs, and need to get STR and CHA to 20, with a preference for high CON. With that many stat requirements, they aren't likely to be able to take a feat.
• Rangers have 5 ASIs, and need to get STR or DEX to 20, with a preference for high WIS. You can expect them to take a feat once they hit higher levels.
• Rogues have 6 ASIs, and need to get DEX to 20, with a possible need for high INT. Depending on their starting stats, they will probably take anywhere from 2 to 4 feats.
• Sorcerers have 5 ASIs, and need to get CHA to 20, with a preference for high CON or DEX. You can expect them to take a feat once they hit higher levels.
• Warlocks have 5 ASIs, and need to get CHA to 20, with a preference for high CON. You can expect them to take a feat once they hit higher levels.
• Wizards have 5 ASIs, and need to get INT to 20, with a possible need for high CHA. Depending on their starting stats and subclass, they will probably take anywhere from 1 to 3 feats.

So Fighters, Rogues, and Wizards have the most freedom to take feats, which means the most-used feats will be abilities that those classes don't normally have access to. These classes are also very generic, meaning with a simple feat you can make a ton of unique characters without much hassle. And because of the high number of feats such characters will take, it's likely the designers expected these to be the easiest classes to customize and add feats to.

Want to dual-wield axes? Why not?

But on the other end of the spectrum, you have the Barbarian, Monk, and Paladin. These classes aren't really going to have enough stats in their build to consider feats. If you want to make a feat for your Paladin, it better be worth them not reaching 20 STR or CON by the end of their build.

That said, an easy way to make a Feat more desirable (and encourage players to pick it up earlier) is to make it a Half Feat. Particularly for those classes that would wait until the late game to grab a feat, adding that ASI +1 makes their option a little less severe. The player doesn't feel like they've lost their chance at getting to 20.

For reference, to build a Half Feat, you'll need to make the feature the Feat grants related to the ability score that is affected. Here are the examples from the Player's Handbook:

• STR: Athlete, Heavily Armored, Heavy Armor Master, Lightly Armored, Moderately Armored, Resilient, Tavern Brawler, Weapon Master
• DEX: Athlete, Lightly Armored, Moderately Armored, Resilient, Weapon Master
• CON: Durable, Resilient, Tavern Brawler
• INT: Keen Mind, Linguist, Observant, Resilient
• WIS: Observant, Resilient
• CHA: Actor, Resilient

You'll find that the less feat-taking classes will be drawn towards these Feats, and you should model your new feats off of them.

I think that about covers it. For more examples of feats, I wrote a couple articles about them a while back. Check them out, and let me know how I did!

Won't you think of the paladins?

Thanks for reading!

Making Races

Everything seems about normal here. 'Cept that bug guy. And is he missing his skin?

On the D&D wiki, you can find literally thousands of homebrewed classes, races, subclasses, equipment, spells, backgrounds, and more. For the most part (aside from a fairly extensive list of loot and some backgrounds) I've veered away from building homebrew materials for players. I find there's just so many options already, and I'd rather make something cool and memorable using the basic rules than try to "inject" cool into my character with a custom set of abilities.

However, there is some very good design philosophy on the Wiki when it comes to creating homebrew material. It boils down to this: if you're going to make a class, you need to make it impact the game as little as possible.

You might be thinking, class? Isn't this article about making races? Well, sort of. Hold tight.

There are a lot of issues in adding material to the existing rules. Look at Pathfinder and D&D 3.X for examples. Without properly understanding the system and playtesting the material, it's difficult to tell how something will interact with the other parts of the game. Perhaps your "Spirit Fighter" idea is cool, but with a Cloak of Etherealness he becomes invincible. Maybe you have a great "Pirate" class, but you end up totally overshadowing the player with a Swashbuckler Rogue. Each class has a role they fill, and you can't let the core classes lose that.

And that's not even addressing the issues of minor balance. D&D 5e isn't a perfectly balanced system, but its balance is intentional. Did you know that classes always get two saving throws: a common one (Dex/Con/Wis) and an uncommon one (Str/Int/Cha)? So if you make a "Drunken Master" class with proficiency in Dex and Con saves, you've changed the balance of the game. There are hundreds of small design rules like this that we can only infer, since we don't have access to the WotC 5e  Design Documents.

So, how do you add something new to the game? Well, according to the Wiki, there are five steps you have to consider.

Druid? No, you have the wrong guy

First: Can you simply reflavor the class? This one is my favorite. I've played a wizard who thought he was a fighter, a druid that looks and acts like a barbarian, and a whole game of warlocks pretending to be something else. And yes, all of that is using the basic rules. One of the examples in the Wiki is calling a wizard an "alchemist" and just making their spells be potions. I love it.

The next step is if creating a background is enough to get the character you want. For characters who are odd, like Demigods, or characters who want to be former adventurers turning over a new leaf, such as a retired assassin, a background is all that is necessary.

After that, you might use a custom feat to get the character you want. If you want to create that "Spirit Fighter", maybe all you need is a feat called Ghost-Touched that allows them to attack incorporeal creatures. That would have very little impact on the game, but at this point you have to accept that the feat is canon - something all players could take. If you build your game around fighting ghosts, that's fine, but your players might not like the prospect of being forced to take a particular feat.

The second-to-last step to consider before creating a class is if a subclass to an existing class would do what you want to do. This has been the approach taken by Wizards in Xanathar's Guide, and I think it's quite appropriate for this stage in 5e's development. A subclass adds a lot of flavor, but remember that it can't be too restrictive. People need to be free to play the subclass in multiple ways, to allow different characters to be created.

The final step, of course, is making the class as a class. That's assuming none of the above options worked out for you.

Just rename the classes. I mean, you're already using your imagination, right?

So, after a long detour, we can talk about making races!

The same design philosophy applies here. If you want a new race, consider re-flavoring an existing race, changing or modifying a single feature of an existing race, or adding a sub-race to an existing race. Don't make a Demigod race, just use Aasimar.

But the races in the current game simply don't cover everything. That's because classes are fairly flexible, and the idea of "fighter" or "rogue" can cover a multitude of fantasy character tropes. But races (and therefore appearances) are much more difficult to spread out in such a way.

The good news is that the issue of balancing races has mostly been worked out by clever players. You can find a massive list of racial features and their relative strengths here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vq1kz6PRAbw5LHy6amH-bNb4OuB8DBXL1RsZROt03Sc/edit?usp=drive_web

But the design philosophy above should still be followed! If you are able to use an existing race as a template, do so! A race of cursed humans could be based on Tieflings, Kenku, Half-Orcs, or even Goblins. Just modify them slightly.

However, the real difficulty of creating races isn't the mechanics of it. It's the culture.

Some have more than others...

When designing a race, think about how that race fits into your world. Unlike classes, races don't have to "fill a role" or be completely unique. Dwarves, Elves, Humans, Gnomes, Orcs, and Lizardfolk all have their own type of smithing or crafting. The overlap expands the world and makes it more realistic. There can be several races all with similar traits, but no two races should have exactly the same traits.

When working out a culture for your race, it's good to consider the following things:

• Appearance (not too specific, to allow for individuality)
• Traditions and common mannerisms among members of the race
• This includes what the race traditionally values
• Families and relationships within the race
• Relationships with other races
• Where this race lives (again, not too specific! Races expand and move throughout the world!)
• Why a member of this race would leave home and go adventuring
• Traditional race names
• Age and Alignment (actually part of the race description but still informed by the culture)

Classes give the people in your world a set of skills they can use to influence their surroundings, but races are those surroundings. Thus, defining their place in the world helps forge the nature of your world.

So, when designing a race, I like to cover a lot of these bases by using traits, much like I did for the races in the Player's Handbook. Personality traits can cover common mannerisms, relationships with other races, and reasons a member of the race would go adventuring. An Ideal can relate to the race's traditional values, including relationships within the race or the race's normal alignment. Bonds, or Motivations if you prefer, can deal with values, relationships, adventuring reasons, and even where the race normally lives. And flaws can cover mannerisms and inter-racial relationships.

This leaves only the age, alignment, appearance, and names for the actual description. Age and alignment go in the stat block itself, so no worries there. When we create the list of features, it's easy to include them.

For names and appearances, I like to give examples as reference. Pictures are good for appearance, and I use www.fantasynamegenerators.com for inspiration on names. Usually I just pick one of the generators on the site and state that it will be the basis for naming this particular race. More often than not, I can find one that's pretty close to what I was thinking! For example, a race of dryads could use this name generator under the Magic: the Gathering section.

With that all in mind, here's an example of the traits I would give to the Aarakocra.

As you can see, from this we learn a lot about the type of culture Aarakocra have in Ahneria. They value song and family, but also the ability to move and fly. They are generally Chaotic Good, and seek to discover new experiences or to help those in need.

Of course, a player doesn't have to select from these options. But if they do, they will find themselves more like the Aarakocra who are their kin. And if the players meet an Aarakocra, they can expect them to have some of these traits.

I'm planning on going through this exercise because I want to start exploring a new part of Ahneira: the Republic of Khoomes. And I think I'll be going for a kind of "animal kingdom" vibe. I'm talking Disney's Robin Hood style.

Classic rogue

I realize this article was a lot of design philosophy and not a lot of design. But I am working on the actual races, and when they are ready I'll be posting them in their own article. Hopefully there will be enough flavor and variety to make the continent interesting and exciting for exploration!

Thanks for reading!

Old News: Racial Traits, the PDF

One of the first pieces of art ever posted on this blog...

So, I didn't have a D&D session this weekend. I've been gearing up for my wedding next month, and there's going to be a few weeks without a Monday Recap for a bit.

But since I still want to put out content, I've decided to start putting up some of my recent efforts on Homebrewery. Homebrewery is an awesome tool that lets you make PDFs that appear similar to the official WotC documents. Since the Creature Loot PDF, people have been clamoring for me to put together easy-to-access PDFs of my articles.

Well, here's the first one! It's a recap to the racial traits articles that I posted over a year ago. Feels like forever!

https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-L9zVQBx1oDLUSAKMCfs

Thanks for reading! Recap articles return maybe next week!

Pre-Campaign Prep: Boardgames, not bored gamers

A Dungeon Master prepares

Carrying on the idea I started up in my first Pre-Campaign Prep article, I want to explore the idea of using different systems to create challenge in D&D, without really using D&D rules.

To paraphrase the idea from the previous article, a boardgame is the simplest way to see how a particular set of rules translates into a player experience. When you can relate that experience to a different kind of real-world situation, you have the potential to use an existing ruleset to create choice and tension within the game.

Many board games have themes, which informs their design choices. In Monopoly, you can buy and sell property because it's a game about Real Estate. In Chess, you capture pieces because it is a war game. And in D&D, you get a massive combat system because the game is about fighting against monsters and evil creatures.

But when you aren't fighting a foe that is about equal to the power level of the party, the combat system of D&D tends to fall apart. That's why we can use other games to create systems that replicate non-fighting decisions, or situations where the fighting would be unfairly easy or difficult.

How to Use This Guide

Want to play a game?

Now, I'm not suggesting that you should whip out the Monopoly board in your D&D session. Your players came here to play D&D. Pulling out a different game breaks an implied contract for your session.

But remember, rules create a play experience. You don't have to use all of the rules of another game, but taking some of them and repurposing the rules to mesh with D&D rules can give you that play experience without changing the game.

Here are some ways to meld the game rules of another game into D&D:

• If the game has a random element (dice, card draws, etc) replace it with a d20 roll on a preset table
• If players have life totals, stats, or resources, replace them with D&D numbers: HP, skills, gold, etc.
• If the game uses a game board, either convert it to 5 inch squares, hexes, or find a way to remove the elements of the rules that require a board
• If the game requires turns or rounds, decide if it is compatible with initiative

Obviously, this will change based on the situation and the game. But with those guidelines in mind, let's explore the type of player experience given by different types of games.

War Games

Talk about uneven distribution of craftsmanship

These types of games are the oldest in the book. They are used to simulate war as a method of expressing tactics without losing lives, which in medieval times was a great opportunity. Nowadays, these games aren't as directly applicable as they once were, but can still be used to create a situation where two armies fight for control of an area.

• Chess: two equal sized armies, units of unequal power and importance, no change in power of different areas, emphasis on planning and threat
• Battleship: two equal sized armies, working with limited information, reducing options based on known information
• Stratego: two equal sized armies, units of unequal power and importance, no change in power of different areas, working with limited information, emphasis on discovery and tracking losses
• Risk: multiple armies of different sizes, units of approximately equal power, areas of unequal power and importance, heavy emphasis on positioning
• Warhammer: two or more armies of approximately equal power, units of unequal power, focus on strategic positioning and utilizing unit abilities

D&D itself was once a War Game, so these rules are the easiest to implement into a game. NPC units can easily become chess pieces, a war in fog or darkness can borrow ideas from battleship, or a large-scale fight can take ideas from Risk and Warhammer.

Resource Gathering Games



I swear to Pharoh if you lay down another road this friendship is over

This is a relatively newer form of game, within the last century or so. The goal is not to defeat your opponent by removing their resources, but by having more resources (usually victory points) than them. This can lead to a lot of interesting situations that create new player experiences.

• Monopoly: use a given resource (money) to leverage areas of the board (properties) against your opponents
• Settlers of Catan: use a random resource (goods) to leverage areas of the board (hexes) against your opponents
• 7 Wonders/Dominion: gather resources, the choice of which denies that resource to your opponents, the resources themselves don't impact much of the game until the very end
• Poker: the quality of the resources is varied (by card suit/number), and their impact on the game is dependant on the total set of resources rather than just having the most of something

These games are usually still every player for themselves, so it works best if the players have multiple "foes" to work against. Otherwise, you'll have to only use high-level concepts instead of specific rules.

Path Games



I don't remember there being lightning in Chess...

Though these games are generally seen as children's games, they can be valuable in learning about making travel games interesting. Just looking at the board gives ideas about how to reward and punish players during travel.

The other important point in these games is that there is a finish line with a timer: you must reach it before someone else does. That element of urgency should not be forgotten.

• Chutes and Ladders: The simplest of these types of games, rewards are moving ahead and punishments are falling behind
• Candyland: introduces a few more challenges, also, a different choice: you can take one of two paths, each with its own dangers
• Life: not only does this game have multiple paths and potential setbacks, but it introduces an extra element: You only win if you've gathered enough of a resource by the end
• Sorry: encourages inter-player combat while keeping the goal of reaching a finish line
• Quelf/Trivial Pursuit: Every space on the board requires a challenge with its own reward or punishment.

Honestly, if someone came up with a deck of wilderness encounters that read like the Quelf card deck, I'd buy it immediately.

Guessing Games



How many images of weird chess landscapes are on the internet?

This covers a broad array, but the best part of these games is that usually there is a single person who knows the information and the other players don't. This translates pretty well into a DM vs players situation.

• Hide and Seek: the basis for every stealth check in D&D. Try using rules variants to mix things up
• Clue: part of this game is that the killer doesn't know they did it until the end. That's not as great in D&D, but limiting resources and clues is awesome.
• Pictionary/Charades/20 Questions: fairly straightforward. Giving the players 20 questions for a major interrogation would be a good way to use this.
• Mastermind: Uses limited resources and truthful confirmation to allow guessing. Might be good for a long-term mystery

These can be tricky to implement, but they can make a mystery game more tense and interesting.

Social Games



A lot.

These games can probably be put directly into a D&D session with few changes.

• Apples to Apples/Card Against Humanity: use it as a series of one-upper stories, maybe to spread a rumor
• Never Have I Ever: instant scene where the characters get to learn about each other
• Werewolf/Mafia: good for a one-shot, or a game where the players have to deal with doppelgangers
• Spin the Bottle: I don't recommend it

Other Games



Rule #75: Don't tell the players that you're gambling with their lives

A lot of games are what are called "solved" games or "perfect" games. Interestingly, these games are usually the least usable for D&D implementation.

A solved game has a single ideal strategy. Tic Tac Toe is the most common example, but many games have ideal strategies, or close enough that someone who knows the game can always defeat someone who doesn't.

• Checkers
• Uno
• Connect Four
• Chopsticks (a finger game)
• Small boards of Go and Reversi

In this instance, the real challenge of the game is learning how to play. Once you have that down, it just becomes an exercise in performing the ideal strategy.

We want to create and use rulesets that give the player choice in D&D. There needs to be multiple viable choices that can easily lead to victory or defeat. That's another reason why you shouldn't just whip out the Monopoly board during your session.

In the end, no board game is quite like D&D, and it's good to keep that in mind, even as you pilfer parts of rulesets to use for your games.

Or you could just quit D&D and play the best game of all time

Thanks for reading!

Pre-Campaign Prep: Structured Improvisation

According to the DMG, you should have died 3 days ago

If you couldn't tell by this blog, I am a preparation-style Dungeon Master. I enjoy making up systems for interacting with the world in new ways, not simply sticking to the rules listed in the DMG and MM.

I put a lot of work into game prep. This includes normal prep activities, such as writing out scene descriptions, planning major plot points, and creating monsters to fight, but it also includes making compelling systems for the players to experience the world with.

This will probably merit another article down the line, but I am a big fan of boardgames. To me, it is the simplest way to see how a particular set of rules translates into a player experience. When you can relate that experience to a different kind of real-world situation, you have the potential to use an existing ruleset to create choice and tension within the game.

I won't dig into this, but suffice to say that part of a DM's job is to engage their players, and I prefer to set up a world as much as possible to help my players engage with it.

But what about when players have the freedom to run amok?

Structured Improvisation

I don't care if the king's name is Lichy McLichface, I want to go there!

When I was in college, I was in an improv comedy troupe. It was a lot of fun and I learned a lot about stage presence and comedy. But it wasn't until I became the coach of the team during my senior year that I opened up a whole new level of understanding about improvised storytelling.

Any improv show, from Whose Line is it Anyway to Chicago's Second City, basically uses the stage to tell a story without planning it out. Even the incredibly short jokes from Whose Line, such as during the "Props" or "Scenes From a Hat" games, use the tropes of storytelling and audience expectation to create humor.

Fewer people are familiar with the idea of long-form improv, where instead of playing set games and focusing on jokes, a group of actors gathers details to essentially create a play on the spot.

Most people would find this very difficult to do in front of an audience, and I'd wager that even experienced low-prep DM's would struggle at first. There are no rulebooks, no setting documents, no monsters or stats or ability scores. There's no dungeon master or referee stating what is and isn't possible.

But there are rules.

The most obvious source of rules is the structure of a story itself. Whether you think in terms of the three-act-structure, the hero's journey, Dan Harmon's Story Circle, or the story arc, the basics are present and similar across many stories. Following these tropes can lead to a good story structure, and it is something that all of the members of a long-form improv troupe have to agree on before they ever see the stage.

Dan Harmon's Recipe for Feels

Even more than that, there are rules about how characters have to act. They need motivation. They need routines. They need secrets, challenges, or troubles.

This is what is called the "Structure" of the improv. It's the backbone that guides the actors and lets them know that there are right and wrong ways to act. The right way is to serve the story, to follow the path, to play the characters the story calls for.

Now, in a D&D game, most of this is already implied. The players and NPCs act in certain ways. The setting and main plot imply certain story structures.

But you can have all the proper elements of a story and still tell a bad story.

So, what makes a bad story or a good story?

Leaving out the Gaps



So you're saying my AU set in a world inspired by Disturbed's album catalog can be good?

I don't mean a story you like or dislike. I also don't mean a story that is funny, adventurous, epic, sad, thrilling, or isn't any of those things. That's a very subjective metric, personal to the listener. The Dungeon Master isn't the audience, and if they try to make a story that is "fun" or "awesome", they might end up only making something they themselves enjoy.

Even using the aforementioned story structures can lead to problems. Does every adventure need to follow the hero's journey? Does every character need motivation? I'm sure you can think of very compelling stories that avoid these structures. The most recent example in my mind is The Big Lebowski, or Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

What, then, is the metric?

This idea comes from Keith Johnstone's amazing book Impro. It's a simple idea that has some big ramifications on storytelling. The idea is that a good story is over when every plot detail has been resolved.



Try resolving this one, idiot!

That might seem obvious, but here are some implications of that idea:

Conservation of Detail: Things that aren't important to the plot shouldn't be included. This doesn't mean there should never be detours or side-quests, since they contribute a lot to character development, but if they are present then they should both resolve and help contribute to the main plotlines.

No Plot Holes: A big challenge for writers is when they introduce something into the story that could easily solve the plot, and yet the characters don't use it in that way. A good storyteller should always have a reason to close the plot hole. This counts as resolving a plot detail, similar to the characters reaching a dead end in a dungeon. Finding out a path is wrong can be just as viable to a story as finding the right path.

Fewer Dead Ends: Speaking of dead-end plots, the resolution of plot details brings into question the use of fizzled plans and wrong paths in the first place. What plot are we furthering? What plot are we resolving by using this idea? If the plot has a time limit on it and the dead-end introduces tension and the possibility of failure, it's a good plot device. If the dead-end reveals a clue about the main plot's resolution by simple process of elimination, it could be viable as well. But the drive to resolve plots should call these types of plots into careful question.


Not a dead end as much as a death end

Audience Satisfaction: Even children can tell when a story is complete, and when there is more to be told. If there are unresolved plots, the story isn't over, merely paused. Cliffhangers, twists, and stingers on stories only inform the audience that they have to wait for more story to be revealed. This can be a powerful way to keep audiences (and players) engaged in your story, but so often stories are ended with unresolved plots merely because it is "Cool" or "Suspenseful". If an audience has sat through your story, grant them resolution. Without it, you can't claim your story is complete.

Implied Structure: Another set of plot points that aren't always as obvious are character plots. A group of heroes may set out to kill an evil dragon, but along the way they also resolve their differences and learn to be better people. This personal growth is often the most compelling part of the character's story, and it is where all of the story structures listed above come from. Simply the act of resolving personal plot points usually leads to the structure of the Hero's Journey.

Application in Dungeons and Dragons

Let's bring this topic back around to running improvised D&D games. You can probably already see where I'm going with this.

When it comes to preparing for sandbox-style games, where the players can go anywhere and do anything, it becomes important to give them a trail of bread crumbs to lead them along the main plot. This can and should inform the type of things they find as they wander.



Sup boo

The module Storm King's Thunder uses this fairly well. It has a long list of locations and encounters the players can find. To nobody's surprise, nearly all of the suggested encounters have to do with giants, who are the focus of the story. Even the random encounters lead to giants about 30% of the time.

This is the idea of conservation of detail. When your players can go anywhere, they need to see their plots affecting the world. You can even include their character plots in on this, as NPCs might become friendlier in a given town when the heroes save it from evil.

This also leads to fewer dead-end plots and unrelated side quests. When the players are given a plot, attach it to the main plot if you want it to be suspenseful, or have it be caused by the main plot if you think it ought to resolve. Examples: a village ruined by ogres who bear the symbol of a giant lord could cause suspense (who is this giant lord and will they strike again?), or a village needs help fending off goblin attacks after giants ruined their defenses, and killing the goblins provides the resolution.

So, how does a DM prep for this kind of play?

First off, I set up a really nice little set of tables to determine what kind of things the players discover on their travels. I also have been setting up tables for use in large cities, both generally and for specific cities. Reddit has an awesome page that can help you get started.


If you don't think this is awesome then you can go home now

Next, I compile the major and minor plots I want to play. Everything from the massive, 15 level story arcs, all the way down to "Save the village from ogres" level plots.

From there I go through my tables and prep a few different ways each encounter can relate to the main plot. If my random table reads:

1. Find a village
2. Find a ruin
3. Find a temple
4. Find a cave

And I want to make a game about (for instance) Dragons, I would prep:

1. A village burned up by a dragon, a village under attack by a dragon, a village run by dragon worshippers
2. A ruin that is a dragon's lair, a ruin of an ancient dragon long-forgotten, a ruin taken over by dragon worshippers
3. A temple of people who hate dragons, a temple dedicated to good dragons, a temple secretly controlled by dragon worshippers
4. A dragon's cave, a kobold cave in dragon's territory, a cave full of dragon worshippers

When the players find something at random, you can use it to direct them towards your plot. I would never give my players a "generic fantasy village" with "generic fantasy plot". If you're going to spend a session in a village, it would be better used to further your plotlines than to just talk to peasants.

This may seem to be a bit heavy on the main plot, and I agree. Players might get bored with dealing with dragons every game. Which is why I recommend having a few different main plotlines running at the same time. Switching between them can keep the game varied and interesting.


I cast the spell "Plot Relevance!" Accept my OC!

What about a group that is getting tired of dealing with major villains and world-ending plotlines? Well, there are two good solutions. The first is to have them deal with the consequences of a plot, such as the goblins attacking the village in the giant example above.

The second solution is to have a game focused on character plotlines. This can be especially effective in city games, where the group can separate for a bit. Remember, character plots are also main plotlines! If a backstabbing rogue helps a needy orphan when his allies aren't around to judge him, that is a worthwhile plot advancement. These types of games can be regular or spares, depending on the needs of your gaming group. My first gaming group spent a lot of time each game working on personal plots, just because that was they kind of thing we were into.

So, even in a game where prep seems impossible, you can still put together "random" encounters that drive your plot forward. And when the players are finding plot hooks all over the place, they will start to realize where the story is taking them, and become more invested in it as a result of their adventures.

At least, until they are eaten by a grue

Thanks for reading!

Racial Traits: Tieflings

Somehow people seem to be incapable of drawing female tielfings that aren't sexy

Here we are, the last race in the Player's Handbook. I may continue this series to include races in the Princes of the Apocalypse Player Supplement, or in Volo's Guide to Monsters. But I have to say the traits already listed in Volo's Guide are a great jumping-off point already, if you want to do something like this for your home games.

Tieflings are a lot of fun, and not just for grimdark players who want a free tortured past with the purchase of their character. I'd love to see a tiefling who is extremely nice to others, or who secretly enjoys their devilish appearance.

Also, in case their are any abyssal tieflings out there, I'd highly recommend changing references to "Asmodeus" and "the Nine Hells" to "Graz'zt" and "the Triple Realm of the Abyss".

Tiefling Traits



"This is how I show affection"

d8 Personality Trait
1. I've learned to ignore insults and even violence thrown my way.
2. I try to be extra-nice to make up for the trouble I cause.
3. I have a habit of toying with my horns or tail, even though it makes most people uncomfortable.
4. I'm extremely aware of other people's feelings, and know right away when someone feels hurt or sad.
5. I hate jokes and pranks. I'm not comfortable laughing at other people.
6. I like scaring people with my appearance, especially those who already fear me.
7. Even though I am burdened with this curse, I still find certain aspects of Asmodeus, Lord of the Nine Hells, alluring.
8. I can never fall in love, because I never want to place my burden on my descendants.

d6 Ideal
1. Loyalty. Those who can look beyond the surface and into the hearts of others are worth sticking with forever. (Good)
2. Notoriety. There's no such thing as a bad reputation if it helps you get what you need. (Chaotic)
3. Power. Other races are right to fear the darkness and fire of the Nine Hells. (Evil)
4. Caution. A closed heart is a safe heart, and a careful tiefling is a living tiefling. (Chaotic)
5. Destiny. Nothing can alter the course of fate, and those who are born to be crushed beneath the world can only wait for their end. (Neutral)
6. Endurance. Life is difficult, and only those who can weather its trials will prevail. (Any)

d6 Bond
1. I have sworn to take my vengeance upon Asmodeus and his minions, even though it may be an impossible task.
2. My family of Tieflings are all that matter to me, whether or not we share blood we all share a curse.
3. I have a mentor who took me in despite my appearance, and I owe that person everything.
4. Those who look down on me will someday know my wrath.
5. Despite what others think, I enjoy my unusual appearance. I just hate the curse that came with it.
6. I chose my name carefully, and I hope to live up to the virtue it represents.

d6 Flaw
1. I am quick to respond to violence with violence, despite the consequences.
2. I trust anyone who gives me food or shelter, sometimes despite my better judgment.
3. I have earned a sharp tongue from my years of being insulted, and it often gets me in trouble.
4. It might take years for me to fully trust someone, and that trust can be broken in an instant.
5. I have a morbid fascination with dark magic, necromancy, and conjuring fiends.
6. I imagine I hear insults and jabs in every sentence spoken to me.



Look at these two kooky characters. Classic half-demon

If you would like to read more about why I am writing these, or how I use them in my games, please check out my first post on Dwarves.

Thanks for reading!

Racial Traits: Half Orcs

Bout to mess up some dwarves

This was one of my favorite lists to write. I had never really looked into the Half-Orc description before (orcs are rare in the city I am currently running), and was surprised to see they have a lot of fun details that could really form the basis of an entire character.

I love the idea that a half orc would be just as quick to sadness as to anger.

Half-Orc Traits



Mine is the very soul of sorrow

d8 Personality Trait
1. Every one of my scars has a story, some good, some bad.
2. I can hear the whispers of Gruumsh One-Eye, the evil God of Orcs, in my dreams. I struggle to understand what they mean.
3. I'm not above breaking a few bones to get what I want, no matter the situation.
4. Despite my strong emotions, I have trouble saying exactly what's on my mind.
5. Physical combat makes me feel alive, and nothing else can compare to it.
6. I've learned that I will always have to fight to get what I want.
7. You could hear me laugh or cry from a mile away.
8. No talk good. Fight good.

d6 Ideal
1. Notoriety. A half-orc is nothing without a reputation for others to praise or fear. (Chaotic)
2. Pride. The value of a deed measures the value of a half-orc. (Neutral)
3. Strength. The only way to win in life is to break those who are weaker than you. (Evil)
4. Redemption. A person's actions can redeem their heritage, no matter how evil. (Good)
5. Emotion. Feelings, from rage to pleasure, should never be suppressed. (Chaotic)
6. Endurance. Life is difficult, and only those who can weather its trials will prevail. (Any)

d6 Bond
1. I would do anything to prove my worth to one side of my heritage.
2. I keep a memento from one of my parents, and value it more than my own life.
3. I have intense feelings of love for a particular person, and would do anything to protect them.
4. My collection of scars is my pride and joy, and I am always looking for a chance to earn a new one.
5. I can feel the influence of Gruumsh One-Eye in my heart, and I loathe (or accept) his evil ways.
6. There's nothing greater in the world that the thrill of battle.

d6 Flaw
1. I am overly reckless in battle, because I am eager to collect more scars.
2. Anyone who uses a word more than three syllables long deserves to be punched in the face.
3. I have a temper shorter than a gnome, and I snap easily at others.
4. I don't always understand why the things I do are bad.
5. I hate showing my pain and push others away when I am hurt.
6. I often ignore the advice of those smarter than me. Who do they think they are?



D&D is like halloween. There's a sexy version of every race

If you would like to read more about why I am writing these, or how I use them in my games, please check out my first post on Dwarves.

Thanks for reading!

Racial Traits: Half Elves

Like elves but uglier!

I know what you're thinking. This isn't just a combination of the human and elf racial trait lists. Well, not entirely.

According to the PHB, Half-Elves live either in elven enclaves, human cities, or neither. So it stands to reason that some half-elves would grow up with the aspects of those around them. But there are also some new traits on here, which represent the diplomacy and in-betweenness of the race.

For extra fun, pick an elf trait and a human trait and be the actual diplomatic bridge between your party members!

Half-Elf Traits



Like humans but prettier!

d8 Personality Trait
1. I can find a friend in every city I visit.
2. My desire to understand the world eclipses my baser instincts.
3. I can sleep anywhere, from marshes to mountains.
4. I'll jump on any opportunity that benefits me. You never know when it might come up again!
5. I've collected hundreds of stories and songs over my lifetime, and I always have one that applies to a situation.
6. I'd rather fall back and fight another day than make a costly mistake.
7. I'm privy to many diplomatic and political secrets, which I sometimes use to get out of trouble.
8. I'm always aware of the political dynamic of a situation.

d6 Ideal
1. Acceptance. The world is vast, and there is room for all types and peoples within it. (Good)
2. Diplomacy. Through the exchange of ideas, all obstacles can be overcome. (Good)
3. Innovation. I want to make something that has never been made, live a life that nobody else has, and do things that have never been done. (Chaotic)
4. Discovery. The world is vast and fascinating, and I want to see every twig and leaf. (Chaotic)
5. Freedom. The opportunity to express oneself without limitation is always a worthy goal. (Chaotic)
6. Solitude. It is important to spend time in quiet contemplation to consider a life well spent. (Any)

d6 Bond
1. My freedom is the most important treasure I've earned.
2. I have a big dream and it's going to take more than just me to do it. I am always looking for followers or recruits.
3. I will stand alongside any who fight the oppression of their people.
4. I fight for a cause that is greater than any mortal. I'd gladly lay down my life to support it.
5. I've become part of an enclave of half-elves that I would never turn my back on.
6. I favor one side of my ancestry over the other, and I strive to be more like and accepted by that race.

d6 Flaw
1. I often make the same mistake more than once because I hate dwelling on my errors.
2. I believe I can talk my way out of anything, even if an ogre was barreling towards me.
3. I jump from cause to cause like a butterfly on the wind. I'm not really sure what I believe.
4. I can't hear an opinion I disagree with without launching into a verbal repartee.
5. I hate when people impose the slightest restriction on me, and often go out of my way to disobey it.
6. I am overly quick to empathize with others, even those who are outcasts or villains.




Sometimes you try really hard to make something nice and then you get a guy who can only grow awkward stubble

If you would like to read more about why I am writing these, or how I use them in my games, please check out my first post on Dwarves.

Thanks for reading!