This had to be my least-favorite OSR game before it became my best favorite. Why? Well, why I initially did not like this game was a pretty hefty list of reasons:
- No bards.
- Ability score modifiers are mostly not used.
- Fighters are the only ones to get STR hit and damage bonuses.
- Limited race and class options compared to other OSR games.
- Game seemed strangely stuck in a pre-B/X and BECMI era.
The above list slowly became why I liked the game, except for bards, but we will get to that in a bit. The game gets a lot right, such as :
- Classic magic resistance mechanics.
- Simplified encumbrance.
- One save number!
- Exactly as I would imagine rules-light AD&D.
- Designed to be hacked and modded.
But Bards?!
To be fair, no bard does not mean "none ever." And since the game does not come with one, I can shop around in the OSR and use the best. Or I can just house-rule it.
Bards could be a background profession; use your saving throw number to do a "bard thing" if you need to, or just have the referee rule on the performance. We do not need a bard spell list because you can be a thief-bard just as well as a magic-user bard. I do this as an optional rule and include professions such as blacksmith, scribe, leatherworker, alchemist, herbalist, miner, and others for players to pick from.
Is bard music magic? No, but it can creatively be used in so many ways it does not need to be magic at all. Then again, if you want it to be magic, use the saving throw to determine if the desired outcome takes effect (and allow saves on the other end, if needed). The more I think about it, why relegate something so fun to one class? Let it be an optional profession, and handle this entirely in roleplaying is my gut S&W ruling.
But I could always borrow a bard from another OSR game, such as Old School Essentials or even one of Labyrinth Lord's class guides. AD&D 2e has a bard, too I could use. I haven't found an excellent OSR bard class yet, but I am looking.
Less Mods, More Fun
The game is more challenging than your standard OSR set of rules because of the lack of ability score modifiers, but it does some great things with asymmetric balance - especially with fighters - that makes me happy. On the flip side, because a lot is left up to the referee, the game could be seen as more accessible than the OSR since it does not rely so much on "rules as written" as it does "players and creative solutions."
Saves
The one-saving throw number mechanic is still genius. The only thing better is Castles & Crusade's Siege Engine. Unlike C&C, the game still leans into a slightly more complex character sheet, requiring things like thief abilities to be recorded and modified at every level. I would love for these secondary abilities to be simplified as well. Personally, I would use the thief saving throw number for all thief abilities and modify it for referee-set difficulty, and just toss out the chart entirely. Who needs a chart with a 5-10% difference between entries? If climbing is supposed to be easy, throw a sizeable positive modifier on it, but keep the base saving throw for the most impossible climbs as the default.
You could do this for all classes; use the saving throw number as a backdoor skill system, which is precisely what I would do to reduce bookkeeping and paperwork. Ranger abilities? Magic users knowing runes? Clerics knowing religions? Assassin disguises? Profession rolls? Use the saving throw number, and modify it for difficulty.
Monsters++
The support of monsters is incredible, and there are plenty of adventures written for the game. S&W has one of the strongest line-ups of support books and adventures I have seen in the OSR. With Frog God Games' Lost Lands, you have an entire world with linked OSR adventures in a unique setting. This world is my Greyhawk.
Hack and Slash
But what makes Swords & Wizardry so remarkable is the game is meant to be hacked. They offer you suggestions in sidebars, and my "backdoor skill save" rules are 100% in line with the spirit of the game. We don't need rules, cyclopedias, and easy-to-reference books of every situation to "make sure we are playing the game correctly."
Playing the game correctly is how you want to play it.
vs. OSE
I initially liked Old School Essentials more than this game since it had "more!" OSE had all sorts of fun non-human classes, a bard, and all the specialty classes, and the game was concise and compact. I have come to like S&W more since the game is meant to be hacked, and I do not need all those options. The fighter in S&W is a more Conan-like beast (parry, multi-attack, damage bonuses) than the OSE generic man-at-arms style torchbearer fighter (no special abilities).
OSE is still fantastic work and a great reference book, but due to the source material, it can feel a little too watered-down in the class implementations. If we have a fighter in our adventuring party or I play one, I will choose S&W every time. Flavor-wise, S&W gets it right, and the fighter is incredible.
OSE does a lot of handholding for new players, which is a good thing. With S&W, you and your players make up 90% of the game, even down to how ability scores work and if and how they are checked. There is far less reliance on ability scores and mods, and I find this frees up my imagination and rulings and lessens the need for 4d6 and drop lowest. Also, the hardcore character optimization is gone. A 14 is still a great score, but in many games with ability score mods and stat inflation, it feels average.
OSE is still the best "industry standard" for writing adventures and B/X content, and Labyrinth Lord is still a solid standby. I would recommend OSE to new players and almost everyone, but for me, the AD&D-lite feeling of Swords & Wizardry hits all the right notes, the adventure and monster support is off the charts, and the game is not so reliant on ability score mods and rules reference.
The OSR is Community Gaming
In this age where millions of people worry and endlessly opine, "what will Wizards do to our favorite game?" having a game where "whatever way you play is official" is an incredible feeling of freedom and control. And having a book state, "hacking is how the game is played," and supporting it with modding rules means you are in control.
Why would I play a game controlled by a central committee of corporate game designers that thinks they know better for my game table? Why should I be forced to rebuy my core rulebooks? Why should Wall Street have a say in my game and if we need a new edition?
Isn't this game supposed to be ours?
No comments:
Post a Comment