101 Evil Schemes For Dnd From The Dragon Magazine Annual From 2000

design comm for a “gilded thorn” mage

goblin of the week NO.1

goblin of FIBERGLASS INSULATION

d&d monster inspo:

A pair of French chestnut crushing clogs used in the 19th century. These shoes were worn by farmers to trample on chestnuts and acorns to separate the nutmeats from the shells so it could be ground into flour.

Some fun ideas for warlock pacts. You can see the rest of this series on my Kofi! I appreciate all tips.

DM Tip: The Trouble With Treasure/ An Alternate Wealth System

If you’re a player or dungeonmaster who’s at all interested in game design you might’ve noticed D&D’s treasure and economy systems suck. You also might have noticed even if you’re not interested in game design, because the longer you play d&d the more it becomes glaringly obvious that the game doesn’t actually HAVE a treasure and economy system despite pretending otherwise.  This is a major problem given that seeking riches is one of the default adventuring motivations, and largely stems from the fact that back in ye-olden days gold was directly related to experience points, so wealth accrued exponentially in line with the increasing cost of levelling up. This is why magic items cost to damn much despite being not only a staple of the genre but absolutely necessary to the long-term viability of certain classes (as I discuss here in my post about gear as class features).  

After being cut lose however, nothing was really DONE with gold in d&d from a gameplay perspective: Treasure generation largely fell to dm discretion or random tables, and the useful things a party could buy steadily shrunk to the point where characters could be stuck with their starting equipment for an entire campaign.  “Too much gold and nothing to spend it on” became one of the major criticisms of d&d 5e, but only touched on the problem that without something worthwhile to spend treasure on the party has less and less reason to venture into the dangerous unknown, take dodgy contracts, or perform any of a half dozen other plot beats that make up traditional adventuring.

 The system likewise breaks down once you pass a certain threshold of wealth, or once you try to model larger economic activities: divvying up a lockbox full of dungeon plunder to reequip your heroes before launching out on the next mission works great for the first couple of levels, but completely falls apart when you’re dealing common enough story tropes such as running a business, transporting cargo as merchants, or caring for the estates around a castle.

What I propose is splitting d&d’s economy into two halves: Wealth, which represents the piles of GP and other coins the party carries with them, and Resources, more abstract points which chart how plugged in the party is to local systems of production, trade, and patronage.

If you’d like an explanation of how these systems work, and how they can improve your game like they improved mine, I’ll explain both of these mechanics in detail below the cut, as well as subsystems that let your party open businesses, operate estates, build castles, and make a living as merchants.

Keep reading

Making Choices Matter

When a player makes a choice in the game, they want that to matter.

That sounds extremely simple. No shit, right?

But that's actually something that I think a lot of GMs overlook, or don't realize.

When your player makes a choice during character creation, picking an offball skill or a weird feat or a strange subclass, they are literally communicating to the GM: "I'm interested in this."

I've made this opinion before, but in my opinion the true core tenet of GMing a game is to cater to your players. After all, you're putting on a little show for them. They're your friends, and you deserve to have fun as well, of course; but they are making decisions and they would love it if those decisions mattered.

This came up because there's a new playtest for the Dragon Game and in it, Paladins are no longer immune to disease or able to cure it with their Lay On Hands feature. I saw a post that said, "[That feature] made using diseases trivial in a game with a paladin."

I argue: The entire point of taking the feature is so that you can use diseases and let the Paladin player feel cool.

I would actually include disease in a game that otherwise did not include it, if we had a Paladin in the party. I would go out of my way to do that.

Because it's really cool if you say, "Okay, everyone who failed the save now has a disease," and the Paladin player pipes up and goes, "Wait a minute! I'm immune to disease! Fuck yeah!" The player feels super cool now. And if they're high enough level, the Paladin can use Lay on Hands to make their friends cured of the disease. That's something that literally no other character in the game would be capable of!

But this other person...they're just gonna never include disease in the game if they have a Paladin in the party, because they don't want to see the players succeed, I guess. Which, to me, is fundamentally the wrong approach to having a fun time with your friends.

I design these challenges to be overcome. I know as soon as I put a huge fucked up monster in front of them and say, "Haha, this thing has 3 attacks and legendary actions, you guys are fucked," the whole point is for them to destroy it. The entire reason I have this monster here is for them to kill it and win.

If your player makes a choice and you never cater to it, they have wasted that choice. This player wanted to be immune to disease! They thought it would be super cool if the enemy spewed out some horrifying shit that grows boils on your skin or whatever and they get to just go, "Nope, I don't even have to make a save, I'm literally immune to it. Die, monster! You don't belong in this world!" But because they have a bad GM who doesn't cater to their players, and in fact plays against them, they never get to have that cool moment. It never happens for them. They wasted their choice.

And I think the worst thing a GM can do is waste a player choice. They could have picked something else, but they didn't, and now they get nothing, and that sucks.

Now, the dragon game is FULL of choices. You aren't obligated to include disease for every game you have a Paladin in. That's ludicrous. A class, especially in 5e, is a huge package of multiple features and ideas, and it's basically impossible to cater to and include every single one throughout the campaign. Some of it you'll just fucking forget exists. Hopefully, you are a good GM, and communicate to your players when they make a character. Hey, Divine Health isn't even a feature you have to pick, you just get it. So maybe your Paladin player couldn't give a shit less about it. No harm, no foul. But to outright say, "I'm never using disease in a game with a Paladin," is pretty absurd to me.

It’s his hat now

Last of the location plot hooks. Support or commission me here!

What a horrible way to define a word. “Okay, we need a good way to explain what a dime is. Should I show somebody purchasing something, or making change for a dollar, or anything indicating its value? No, I’m going to show a witch turning it into a frog.”