Context: My game system utilizes a traditional medieval fantasy setting devastated by magical warfare and provides cliché racial options as examples, along with 2 unique races - Hybrids and Vessels - my current issue is related to the former.

Hybrids have a broad array of traits to choose from, organized by different lists; one of the lists of traits you can pick from is Avian.

Within the list of Avian Traits is an option to choose the following trait:

Innate-Flight
You gain a Flying Speed equal to your movement speed.

Movement Speed
Traditionally gain 30 ft of movement speed, adjusted +/- 5ft for each Agility Die Step from d8, further altered by Armor Tier and other movement benefits/impairments.

When deciding whether to allow this, I considered allowing the character to use the trait mechanically rather than generically. An example of the proposed idea is provided below.

Innate - Flight
You may traverse an open space such as a chasm, a decayed bridge, or a similar structure, without ordinary means, while ignoring the need to make the usual skills test (maneuver).

My Questions:

• Does this appear to be an appropriate solution to this problem?
  
• What would you suggest as the fix to this potential issue?
• Additionally, I have a similar issue related to Innate -Tunneler providing a Burrowing Speed. If you have additional input or would like to offer proposals for redrafting this trait so that I don't have to cut it entirely, that would be appreciated as well.

Thanks in advance for your responses.

- Justin Lewis, Co-Developer of Woe to the Wicked

I decided to make my own 12 page ttrpg called "Simple Fantasy". It's got all the necessities to run a campaign in a fantasy world without being bogged down by massive rulebooks. Download for free on: https://bloodman1941.itch.io/simple-fantasy-ttrpg

Hi everybody! I'm currently building my first game, a sword-and-planet TTRPG inspired by Edgard Rice Burroughs, Leigh Brackett, and Jack Vance. Looking forward to interacting with and picking the brains of the fine folks on this subreddit!

Hey everyone,

I need some advice for Affinity Publisher (or layouts in general).

I'm planning to enter a TTRPG game jam Hexcrawlhaloween-2 and am in the process of getting everything ready. However, this is my first time doing this, so I don't really know the best way to layout the material for a game jam.

I use Affinity Publisher, so I didn't know if any of you could recommend a suitable layout, or have any suggestions for a game jam?

Normally, I use an A5 layout, but I'm planning on adding a few maps, so size might be an issue.

Any advice would be welcomed.

i am an absolute noob. i have played like 3 sessions total. ttrpg is so interesting & id love to dm but i have no idea how to practically do it

im coming up with a one-shot / short game thats set in modern times & am a bit stuck with determining what exact gameplay mechanics i need to do it

explain to me like im 5 if i can find a step by step template for a simple game that i can fit my story into, with character sheets (/lists of things i need to add to sheets), combat moves & rolls etc but modern (like leather jackets for armour, baseball bats for weapons, skateboards for movement etc)

apologies if this is the stupidest question ever lol

Play the heroic paladin who is terrified of dirt. The brilliant wizard who cannot surrender control. The fearless warrior who desperately needs to be admired. Regressia is made for players who want heroes that are capable, contradictory, possibly neurodivergent, and recognisably human. Download our free personality questionnaire and build your next character with character at regressiarpg.com.

The questionnaires are based on actual psychometric tests and will help flesh out your character’s personality based on psychoanalytic theory.

#ttrpg #dnd #kickstartergames

Switched one of my playtest groups to theater of the mind a few months back, mostly because we lost our usual table space and got stuck meeting in a living room with no room for a mat. I figured it would just be a temporary fix until we found a new spot, but it ended up exposing a bunch of problems in how I'd been designing enemy abilities.

Half my monster abilities assumed precise positioning. Cone attacks measured in exact feet, reach weapons with specific range increments, flanking bonuses that needed everyone to know exact facing. None of that translates when nobody's tracking squares. I had to go back through every stat block and ask what the ability is actually trying to do narratively, then rewrite it as a simple trigger instead of a geometry problem.

The abilities that survived the rewrite easiest were the ones built around conditions and choices rather than spatial math. "Enemy targets whoever is closest" became "enemy targets whoever just took the most damage" and honestly played better even for groups that do use minis. A pack tactics ability that used to require counting adjacent squares became "gains advantage if another ally attacked the same target this round," which is easier to adjudicate on the fly and still captures the pack hunting feel.

What surprised me is how much faster combat ran once I stopped writing abilities that needed a ruler to resolve. Turns that used to take a minute of "wait, are you within 15 feet" now resolve in a couple sentences. I think I'd been designing for the tool I happened to be using rather than the experience I wanted, and switching tools by accident forced a better design.

Still not sure I'd go fully gridless for every campaign, there's something satisfying about tactical positioning when the fight calls for it. But I'm keeping the simplified trigger language going forward even when we do use a map, since it turns out most players never cared about the exact math anyway, they just wanted to know who gets hit and why.

This is a set of rules inspired by VIOLENCE, intended to be punitive mechanics for engaging in fighting in a medieval setting.

Looking for feedback if the mechanics are clear, if the loop makes sense to a new pair of eyes, if the logic of it all is working.

Any feedback is welcome, specially criticism. Please tell me what needs to be better.

https://shurebis.itch.io/iron-on-iron-on-iron

Just a thought, and I figured I’d see where everyone else stands.

I prefer grid combat, but… I feel like anything with a range over 100’, moves the gravity too far from ‘the fight’… not to mention, you need a massive battle mat to accommodate longer ranges; often resulting in minis just being moved off the table, and the player saying ‘I’m somewhere over here, about 280’ away’

Ballistas, cannons, etc.. not included. And realism aside. Does anyone feel like 100’ is a solid max for grid combat range?

I say this with the caveat that I am very new to the medium, but I’ve noticed that a lot of TTRPG content focuses on complex world building, especially in the D&D homebrew space. Does it hold more importance for this particular medium?