Wednesday, 5 December 2018

Defending the Tarrasque

[Warning: this is a post for true DnD wonks. It probably rates at least an 8 out of 10 on the nerd scale.]

[Edit: I've gotten some good suggestions from the original poster in a short time. First, a round is 6 seconds and not 10. Well... that's an embarrassing brain fart. I'll adjust for that. (Though it does literally say, "about 6 seconds" so it could be 10 :D.) The OP also suggested that the character be maximized. That changes things as well but it doesn't change the overall results.]

Defending the Tarrasque? That's a laugh. In every edition up to 5e the tarrasque is THE monster to beat. There aren't any tougher or fiercer outside of Spelljammer weirdness. Most entries list it as a civilization killer. It's a walking 50 foot apocalypse with swords of sharpness for claws and a carapace that reflects your magic spells back at you.

At least it was THE monster to beat. Well... it still is in a way. The 5e tarrasque has a 30CR. That's a 30 Challenge Rating. There aren't any other published creatures in the game with that challenge rating except Tiamat--a giant five headed fire/frost/acid/poison gas/lightning breathing demon devil dragon--from--wait for it--Rise of Tiamat.

Some, perhaps many, would say that the tarrasque has fallen on hard times in the fifth edition. Of course, it's not a pushover. The standard John Doe model tarrasque has 676 hit points, five attacks that do a minimum of 24 damage each, magic resistance, and three extra actions a round with its legendary actions. It is also immune to non-magical weapon attacks. Sadly, it's lost its regeneration from previous editions and its immunity to non-magical weapons can be overcome by any sort of magical weapon: it doesn't matter how many or few pluses the weapon has. Yes, the legendary tarrasque can now be damaged by a lowly +1 sword. How the mighty have fallen.

And how very low have they fallen indeed.  Even unto contempt itself.

Case in point (and the reason I'm writing this post), I was privy sometime ago to a poster on facebook who claimed the tarrasque could be taken out by a first level player--perhaps even easily. Granted, most claims on the internet should be met with large doses of scepticism. Such a claim, on its face, seems to be one of those claims. However, since I am a neurotically fair-minded person I considered it, and had to admit there was more to it than what one might first imagine. That was a hard thing for me. Full disclosure--I'm a big fan of the tarrasque. I want it to live up to its 30 CR rating. Ok. Perhaps not so much a fan of the tarrasque, but I just want a DnD game where the challenge ratings are accurate. A 30 CR monster should mean a truly epic challenge that pushes the players to the ultimate limits of their ingenuity and courage. It should be a walking breathing Tomb of Horrors. If any first-level character, even one piloting a veritech, could take out a tarrasque, then the system is seriously broken.

For those who are anxiously biting their fingernails or those who have reached the point of TLDR, the reality is not as bad as the poster made out. However, it's not great. However again, it brings up some interesting realities about 5e DnD.

Anyhow, here's the scenario. Taking out the tarrasque at first-level requires a character that can fly and who is armed with a +1 bow. "Madness!" you cry. "No!" the poster would reply. +1 weapons are fairly easy to come by. What about flying? Pick an Aarakocra (id est--a birdman). How? Take your aarakocra, grab your +1 bow, fly out of range of the tarrasque (easily done since most tarrasques lacking a handy-dandy zeppelin strapped to their backs can't fly), and snipe the tarrasque till it dies. Of course, you can only hit it by rolling a 20, which means it would take a few hours--but the tarrasque can thus be more-or-less easily taken out by a first level character.

I forget what the rest of the conversation on the thread was like. I don't think too much was said. I think there was some math-hammering about how long the process would take. Some suggested having the tarrasque chuck some boulders at the birdman.

Let's touch on that last suggestion since it generated an interesting bit of controversy. Can the tarrasque make up for its lack of ranged attacks by chucking rocks etc. at its enemies? Of course it can. It really depends on how you envision it. If it has claws like a T-Rex then probably not. If it has claws like anything else then probably. I think such a tactic is perfectly acceptable. HOWEVER, I don't think it's acceptable if we are analysing the tarrasque. It has to be analysed as written. It doesn't have any throwing attacks like a giant might. Otherwise, we can come up with a bunch of weird scenarios to beef up our tarrasque. Perhaps we could give it a potion of fire-breathing? Perhaps we can give it a leaping attack? You see, all these extra scenarios distort the actual capabilities of the tarrasque. The rock throwing one seems reasonable but allowing it opens the door to more ludicrous--yet possible--scenarios like the zeppelin backpack scenario.



So we are back to square one for our beleaguered kaiju. If the tarrasque can't toss anything at the aarakocra sniper is it doomed?!

No. Let's get into some real analysis. First of all, let's consider the time it would take for our flying archer to take down the tarrasque (I think I'm about to set the world record for most-mentions of the tarrasque on a single page). One caveat however. I'm not sure my math is going to be perfect on this. It doesn't really need to be precise though, as it will generally show the problems with such a scenario.

Since our intrepid archer can only hit the tarrasque on a natural 20, it means that in the long run, and it's going to be a long one, our archer should be able to hit and damage the tarrasque once every twenty attack rolls, which also means once every twenty rounds. Assuming that our archer is armed with a +1 shortbow and not any other sort of ranged weapon, our archer should do 8 points of damage on every hit since a short bow does an average of 3.5 damage on each hit which would be doubled for a critical hit (so 7 points) and that's 8 with the +1 bonus. (We're not adjusting for possible stat bonuses because that brings up multiple scenarios which I don't care to calculate.) The tarrasque has 676 hit points so that will take 85 hits to drop the tarrasque and given that the archer bird will hit once every 20 rounds, it should take 85x20 or 1700 rounds. Each round is 6 seconds... 10 rounds in a minute.. 60 minutes in an hour... or 170 minutes or 2 hours and 50 minutes in total. (I think.)

Apart from the time commitment, this is also going to take 1700 arrows. 20 arrows weighs 1 pound. Arrows require a quiver and 20 arrows can fit into a quiver. 1700 arrows weigh 85 pounds and require 85 quivers, each of which weigh 1 pound. All-in-all the arrows and quivers alone weigh 170 pounds in addition to 2 pounds for the shortbow and that brings us to a minimum of 172 pounds that the aarakocra will need to fly around with. It's a point of trivia, but given the carrying rules the aarakocra will need at least a 12 strength to carry all that.

What does this all mean? This is where the rules start undermining this scenario. First of all, there is the problem of carrying all the arrows necessary to down the tarrasque. While the character might barely be able to carry all those arrows, they are going to need to be carried in 85 quivers. I think even the most fair-minded of DMs would have a problem with a single character sporting all that. The rules for aarakocra (aarakocrai?) specify that they can't fly while wearing medium or heavy armor. While it's not explicit, it's clear that either the weight or encumbrance of wearing those sorts of armor will keep an aarakocra grounded. Likewise, carrying 85 full quivers (if that is even possible) or even the weight of 85 full quivers should prevent the archer-bird from flying.

This brings us into another more-obvious problem for the scenario and which DMs can benefit from. Why has the player even been allowed to play an aarakocra (I hate spelling that) and why has it been given a +1 bow at first level? Granted, this is a theoretical scenario but the take-away for DMs is that you need to be very careful about what you allow into your games. Aarakocra, an optional race, have wisely been restricted from official play since having flight, especially at first level, is a very powerful ability. The same goes for magical items. Fifth edition has been designed to need a minimum of magical items at most levels. A number of classes even have means to make magical attacks in lieu of having a magical weapon, so the need is even less. Lesson: you don't need to allow any race or class that has been published. Certainly, a DM allowing an aarakocra to carry all these arrows is also stretching the rules past the point of breaking. You might as well allow the player to shoot death-rays from her eyes.

[[Edit: I originally made a mistake and calculated with rounds being 10 seconds each. This drops the scenario just below the 3 hour mark so this part is moot.] Second, looking at the rules for flying mounts in the DMG (pgs 119-120) we see that flying mounts need 1 hour of rest for every 3 hours of flight. It doesn't say how long characters can fly under their own power if they aren't constructs or flying by magic, but since an aarakocra is neither we are safe to assume they count as their own mounts and can only stay aloft for 3 hours maximum. Sadly for the aarakocra, landing means quickly becoming a tarrasque snack. Scenario over.]

This isn't the end, however. There is an even more important rule to take into consideration. The player needs to roll a natural 20 to damage the tarrasque. Given the time it will take to down the tarrasque and given the tragic laws of probability and statistics, this means the player will also be rolling as many 1s as they will be rolling 20s. Here's the sticking point about this. Considering the number of 20s you are going to need to roll to kill the tarrasque, each 20 is rather insignificant by itself. That is not the case for rolling a natural 1--a critical fumble. Given the absolute lethality of the tarrasque for a first-level character, it only takes one fumble to spell the character's end. When you also consider that the character should be rolling 85 natural 1s in the time it takes to kill the tarrasque, it should be plain that the archer will never get to that magical eighty-fifth natural 20. At the very least, the character will suffer a critical equipment failure which will mean they will be unable to complete the task of killing the tarrasque.

And there we have it--under close inspection it's impossible for our brave aarakocra archer to take down the tarrasque without some mind-boggling DM permissiveness.

So... all this was nerdy fun, but I hope you realise how ridiculous the whole exercise was. What was the point? The point is that while the hard design-realities of 5e's rules are going to make it impossible for a first-level character to take out a tarrasque... (ellipsis added for drama) many of the considerations that would stop a first-level character are easily overcome by higher-level characters. The tarrasque is a 30 CR creature. The CR rating means that the CR of a monster should present a worthy but not deadly challenge for a party of four characters of that equal level. For example, a 10 CR monster should be a moderate challenge for a party of four 10th level characters. The maximum level any character can attain in 5e is 20th level. The tarrasque, to repeat, is CR 30. As I've mentioned, that means the challenge of facing the tarrasque should strongly (if not overwhelmingly) tax the resources of even the most powerful party.

But does it in fantasy reality?

Consider the scenario of our poor aarakocra against the resources available to a 20th level character. At 20th level, characters should be ruling their own kingdoms (or equivalent thereof). At 20th level the characters should be able to call on all sorts of powerful allies and probably have a deity or three on speed-dial to call in some favours. At 20th level, it shouldn't be hard to have a character muster a small army of aarakocra archers all armed with magical bows. At 20th level, it shouldn't be hard for characters to have a small fleet of flying carpets or airships or airships armed with magical ballistas. At 20th level, the character's abilities should have expanded far beyond what they can do as individuals.

It's hard to imagine then, what challenge a tarrasque can really pose to a 20th level character. It will still be a hard fight. However, with a little preparation the players should be able to down a tarrasque unless the DM tosses in some other shenanigans.

This doesn't seem right for a CR30 monster. Consider an ancient Red dragon. It's 'only' CR24 but when compared to the tarrasque it presents much more of a threat to a party of 20th level characters. First of all, it has a ranged attack. Beyond that, it has a genius-level intelligence, superhuman-level charisma, a huge supply of resources it can draw from in its treasure horde, and lifespan of centuries or even millennia to develop and carry out its schemes.

In conclusion, what can we learn from all this?

Generally, we once again see that the CR system isn't an accurate gauge of determining challenge for a party--especially a high-level party.

Concerning the tarrasque itself, in other conversations I've seen about using the tarrasque, it isn't too much of a threat to a 20th level party unless the party is placed in unusual circumstances. (A tarrasque appears! You're all underground and naked!) What the tarrasque does make is a great wrecking-ball and centerpiece. By 20th-level the players should have evolved from murder-hobos and have invested in a few things in their fantasy world. It would seem that the tarrasque would be a great way to threaten that. The role of the characters, therefore, would be to intervene and stop the tarrasque from destroying the kingdom or whatever important mcguffin 20th-level characters care about. The tarrasque campaign, as we can see, probably requires some extra elements to hamper the characters efforts from stopping the tarrasque.

First of all, there shouldn't ever be a run of the mill tarrasque. It's CR30. The party should never encounter a mid-range tarrasque. It should always have maximum hit points and do maximum damage.

Even better, things should get really complicated when the tarrasque appears. Perhaps, the forces of evil decide to attack en masse when the tarrasque appears. They might have been responsible for unleashing the tarrasque or they might just be taking advantage of the opportunity. Perhaps there is a civil war going on in the players' realms. Perhaps the forces of nature, such as natural disasters, present the characters with an impossible choice--stop the tarrasque or help the victims. In short, if you are going to use the tarrasque in high-level campaigns it shouldn't be used as a direct threat to the characters, and it should be assisted by all sorts of complications that hamper the party from marshalling their full strength against it. The tarrasque should be an end-game challenge and retrospective of the characters' stories. For 20 levels the characters have been building up their stories. Ideally, the tarrasque should be a major part of a campaign that threatens everything the characters have done throughout their entire careers. Old allies should come forth; old enemies should reappear; long-term secrets should be revealed. In short, the tarrasque is less of an opponent and more of a narrative tool to sum up the totality of the players' lives.

[Push back: The OP suggested a maximized aarakocra fighter with a magical longbow (why not a magical hunting rifle or even an anti-matter rifle since the DM is being psychotically generous? They're in the DMG!) and archery fighting style. Ok. I can allow that. You can figure it out yourself. Long story short--it does radically drop the scenario time and amount of arrows the bird needs to carry, but numerous 1s will still be rolled to get there. Once again, it's not going to happen.]

[Counter-Pushback: Now that I think of it just because the tarrasque can't attack the maxed-out aarakocra sniper that doesn't mean it just has to stand there. From a pure mechanical perspective it can dodge or dash away. Dodging means the sniper bird attacks with disadvantage. That does two things. If I recall correctly disadvantage is equivalent to a -4 or -5 attack penalty. The aarakocra is most likely back to the same chances of only hitting it on a natural 20. That brings the required time and encumbrance back closer to my original calculations. Rolling with disadvantage also increases the chance of rolling a 1. Moreover, even though the tarrasque is using its action to dodge it can use a legendary action to finish the aarakocra off when it eventually rolls a 1 (which will probably be sooner than later). The tarrasque can also use dash and movement as a legendary action to outpace and outrange even a flying aarakocra with a longbow. With a 30 con it can either escape the fight altogether or if it kites the player (which it can probably do since the player in the scenario is committed to beating the tarrasque) it can stay in long range of the bow and the player will again be attacking with disadvantage. It can also kite the player and stay out of range (but still within sight) until the aarakocra is forced to land and rest for an hour--at which point it returns, overtakes, and eats our feathered hero.]

Monday, 13 August 2018

5e Core Story Seeds Project

Just a short introduction here...

The fifth edition has a strong emphasis on narrative and story-telling. To that end, all of the three core rulebooks are liberally sprinkled with story ideas, settings, and interesting set pieces for adventures. My goal with this post is to list them all for your ease and inspiration. (Some seeds are repeated several times (e.g. venturing into dismal ruins); I have omitted the repetitions when they don't add anything new to the list) I don't think I will be able to do this in one sitting so this post will be an ongoing project which I add to over the next few weeks.  Let us begin with the Player Handbook.

Player's Handbook

  1. Explore a dark dungeon, a ruined city, a haunted castle, a lost temple deep in a jungle, or a lava-filled cavern beneath a mysterious mountain.
  2. An adventure might feature a fantastic setting, whether it's an underground dungeon, a crumbling castle, a stretch of wilderness, or a bustling city.
  3. A wizard walking through the streets with an animated shield guardian as a bodyguard.
  4. A cult leader seeks to awaken a god who slumbers beneath the sea, a hag kidnaps youths to magically drain them of their vigor, a mad wizard labors to invents an army of automatons with a facsimile of life, a dragon begins a mystic ritual to rise up as a god of destruction.
  5. He aspires to someday reclaim Mithral Hall, his homeland, from the shadow dragon that drove the dwarves out.
  6. Kingdoms rich in ancient grandeur, halls carved into the roots of mountains, the echoing of picks and hammers in deeps mines and blazing forges.
  7. What begins as one dwarf's hunt for vengeance can become a full-blown clan feud.
  8. A dwarf might seek to restore a clan's lost honor, avenge an ancient wrong the clan suffered, or earn a new place withing the clan after having been exiled.
  9. A dwarf might search for the axe wielded by a mighty ancestor, lost on the field of battle centuries ago.
  10. In cities deep in the Underdark live the duergar, or gray dwarves. These vicious, stealthy slave traders raid the surface world for captives, then sell their prey to the others races of the Underdark.
  11. [Elves] live in places of ethereal beauty, in the midst of ancient forests in silvery spires glittering with faerie light, where soft music drifts through the air and gentle fragrances waft on the breeze.
  12. Human nobles compete for the service of elf instructors to teach swordplay or magic to their children.
  13. Some might join with rebels fighting against oppression, and others might become champions of moral causes.
  14. [Drow] are a race of demon-worshipping marauders dwelling in the subterranean depths of the Underdark, emerging only on the blackest nights to pillage and slaughter the surface dwellers they despise.
  15. Lolth, their spider-goddess, [...] sanctions murder and the extermination of entire families as noble houses vie for position.
  16. Most halflings live in small, peaceful communities with large farms and well-kept groves.
  17. Migration and conquest
  18. A constant hum of busy activity pervades the warrens and neighbourhoods where gnomes forms their close-knit communities. Louder sounds punctuate the hum: a crunch of grinding gears here, a minor explosion there, a yelp of surprise or triumph, and especially bursts of laughter.
  19. Demagogues blame tieflings for strange happenings. 
  20. Life in the wild places of the world is fraught with peril: rival tribes, deadly weather, and terrifying monsters.
  21. [...] Enter long-forgotten tombs, discover lost works of magic, decipher old tomes, travel to strange places, or encounter exotic creatures.
  22. Orphan raised by a hag in a dismal swamp.
  23. [...] stumbled into the clutches of a hag, making a bargain for a musical gift in addition to your life and freedom, but at what cost? 
  24. Seeking holy relics in ancient tombs.
  25. [...] study esoteric lore, collect old tomes, delve into the secret places of the earth, and learn all they can.
  26. Chasing away lies.
  27. Hunt the evil monstrosities that despoil the woodlands.
  28. Inspire fear in the common folk, either to keep those folk on the path of righteousness or to encourage them to offer sacrifices of propitiation.
  29. Stealing from the rich, freeing captives
  30. Oppose cults of Elemental Evil and others who promote one element to the exclusion of others.
  31. Lead raids against [aberrations (e.g. beholders or mind flayers)j or undead (e.g. zombies and vampires)]
  32. Drive off a trespassing monster.
  33. Serve as spies or assassins at the command of their leader, a noble patron, or some other mortal or divine power.
  34. Protecting their neighbours from monsters or tyrants.
  35. Accomplish a greater mission than merely slaying monsters and plundering their treasure.
  36. Merely slaying monsters and plundering their treasure.
  37. Delve into an ancient ruin or dusty crypt.
  38. Seek absolution
  39. Evil forces slaughter helpless villagers
  40. An entire people turns against the will of the gods
  41. A thieves' guild grows too violent and powerful
  42. A dragon rampages through the countryside
  43. Hunting the orcs [they know] are planning a raid
  44. Hunting the monsters that threaten the edges of civilization-humanoid raiders, rampaging beasts and monstrosities, terrible giants, and deadly dragons.
  45. Defend the outskirts of civilization from the ravages of monsters and humanoid hordes that press in from the wild.
  46. Scams and heists.
  47. Infiltrating ancient ruins and hidden crypts.
  48. Exterminate the enemies of your deity.
  49. Seek a greater understanding of [a] magical force.
  50. Piece together arcane secrets to bolster their power.
  51. Baleful spirits require exorcism.
  52. Portals to other planes must be closed.
  53. Recover some stolen gems.
  54. Negotiating with the beggar prince.
  55. Take on a hobgoblin army.
  56. Doing some jobs on the side for the local thieves' guild
  57. Uncover dark secrets and sinister plots

Monday, 6 August 2018

Lovecrafting DnD 5e: Part 1

Second post.  I'm thinking of overarching things.  Big things--some of them bearing tentacles.  So what I'm going to do for you is write a few posts on making your DnD campaign Lovecraftian. You know... H.P. Lovecraft? Cthulhu?

Sigh.

Everyone wait while that dude in the back gets up to speed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._P._Lovecraft

oh and we probably need a picture of Cthulhu



I'm going to write this specific post on general considerations for a Lovecraftian campaign and then I'm going to look at how we can apply that to the 5e published adventures.

The last boring thing I need to do is let you know I'm going to be riffing off this article by some guy named Cook.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20020329x

So... the world of HP Lovecraft.  Alien Elder Gods. Madness. Chanting subhuman cults. The end of the world. Fun stuff right? DnD has a long history of incorporating Lovecraft's writing. Waaaay back in 1e it gave us fun stuff like a few puddings based off of Shaggoths and Mind Flayers.  Who can forget the Cthulhu mythos fiasco too?  Fast forwarding to 5e we have shout outs to Lovecraft in the Warlock class.

Clearly his work is filled with stuff we can rip off for our own pleasure. But how?

Going back to the article I posted from Monte Cook we see there are two ways we can use Lovecraft for our campaigns.  I'm going to argue there are more but let's start with those two.

First, you can use Lovecraft's work in a creature feature way.  The world you are gaming in isn't a crapsack Lovecraftian cosmos but it does have Lovecraftian creatures and elements. I guess we could call this partial Lovecraft or heroic Lovecraft. It's the style you see in Marvel or DC comics when they bring in a big bad like Shuma-Gorath. You just find Lovecraftian monsters like Shaggoths or an elder god worshiping cult and plunk them down in your campaign for a change of pace. It's fun and allows you to hint at darker things without committing yourself to a full Lovecraftian campaign. Easy-peasy.

Second, you can run the crapsack full Lovecraftian cosmos. The universe is mind bogglingly old and uncaring. The gods are alien intelligences of immense power and unfathomable motivations. Humans (and whatever other races you might include) are microbes. They don't matter apart from being a nice light snack.

At first glance, such a campaign world might not seem too appealing to set your 5e games. D&D is a heroic game and much of the system reflects that. Having the players be physically and mentally fragile runs contrary to fighters who can walk away from 100 foot drops and wizards who can chuck 9 levels of death at you.

The second way has a lot of nuance to it. It's probably best to say it consists of numerous substyles that depend on how bleak you want your campaign to be. Of course, you are free to adjust the bleak knobs throughout the campaign--though dialing back from a bleaker setting would be difficult.

At the happiest least-bleak end, you have a cosmos that is ultimately Lovecraftian, but only at a distance. It can appear as any other fantasy campaign; the Lovecraftian elements are mostly passive and hidden. This style matches the cosmos of Robert E. Howard's Conan the Barbarian. Howard, a friend of Lovecraft, drew some inspiration from Lovecraft's mythos--one of the most obvious references being the cannibal god Yog who is obviously a nod towards Yog Sothoth. This style of campaign is very similar to the creature feature one with the exception that you have the horrible truth of the universe as a card up your sleeve to use as extra flavour for the background. The idea of flavour is a perfect analogy to distinguish this style from creature feature and bleaker substyles. Creature feature is an occasional dish you serve to your players. Happy Lovecraft is a constant seasoning you use in all your games but isn't the meat or potatoes. The Lovecraft cosmos is always lurking in the background, but is only ever experienced as a regular stream of hints or insinuations. The players would have to push very hard to get a short glimpse of the true nature of the universe. It would have to be the climax of one or several long term campaigns. The world wouldn't change after it, but the after effects for the characters would be devastating. Death. Madness. Corruption. Transformation. Such an ending might be a good way to end a long term campaign with high level characters and start again with a new team. Primarily, the happy Lovecraftian cosmos is a transitory one. It gives you the freedom to draw on Lovecraft's mythos like the creature feature one, but also gives you the flexibility to shift to a much darker campaign.

The next substyle of bleakness would be the active but hopeful campaign world. The Lovecraftian elements are a central feature rather than being a part of the background machinery. What sets this campaign apart from the bleakest campaign is that the characters can make a real difference in the world. Ultimately, the world will always be a Lovecraftian nightmare, but the players can either decisively overcome the Lovecraftian elements in their world or at least forestall them. In short, the good guys can win. The fish cult of Cthulhu can be eradicated, but they will be back for future generations.

This brings us to the final sort of substyle: the hopeless Lovecraftian world. The world is headed towards a Lovecraftian apocalypse and there is no stopping it. Lovecraftian elements are overt in the game. Frankly, this is a survival game similar to Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu, but set in a fantasy world. The bulk of the campaign will have the players dealing with and trying to survive the Lovecraftian elements. It will be filled with twisted subhumans, fanatical cults, forbidden tomes, eldritch locales, and mind bending revelations. This sort of game play demands the characters be much more frail than the same characters in a mellower campaign. You would be well advised to use the sanity point, terror, and insanity systems from the DMG. You might also consider making the characters physically frailer by adjusting the rest system to restore less hit points, and switching the character generation system to one that produces lower stats. Magic should also be riskier and more sinister. Gaining levels in a spell casting class or even casting a spell might require a Wisdom saving throw to avoid loss of sanity points. Everything comes with a cost.

Conclusion

I've covered two possible sorts of Lovecraftian campaigns, but there are numerous others as well. In future posts I'll be looking at the Cthulhu post apocalyptic campaign and the Dreamlands campaign.