I'm running a setting based off of Viking Age Scandinavia and British Isles(the few unified countries are not!England, not!Scotland, not!Wales, not!Orkney/otherIslands, not!Norway, not!Sweden, not!Denmark, and not!Iceland), with everything being based off of Viking or Celtic stuff from around that time
What would be the best way to homebrew a system, preferably for 5e since it's what I have most experience in so far?
The deities would be two pantheons of Celtic and Norse deities, and religion and magic would be closely intertwined, no trace of Christianity either
The ideas I've had so far are
The setting is very low fantasy, with magic only being grouped into the simplest of Arcane, Holy, Restorative, and Status, while weapons being classified as Swords, Spears, Maces, Daggers, and Bows(which may change)
Warrior- Based off of berserkers and warriors, cross between fighter and barbarian, use Swords, Maces, and Spears Cleric- Equivalent to priests, holymen who use Holy and Restoritive magic Thief- Thieves with Bows and Daggers Mage- Magician equivalents that can cast Arcane and Status magic, the only magicians not serving directly under a religious order Bard- Bards that serve as lorekeepers and satirists and magicians in the west, can use Status and Restoritive magic Druid- Druids that use Arcane and Restoritive magic, can't shapeshift into animals Paladin- (I haven't thought of an equivalent to these guys)Heavily armored "knights"(they don't have plate armor, just the most heavy and defensive) that can use Spears, Swords, and Restoritive, the only melee and magic hybrid but isnt as good as Bards or Clerics for healing Ranger- Wanderers, woodsmen, and rangers that use Bows and Swords Sorcerer/Warlock- Based off of Volva, seers serving a deity that use Arcane and Holy magic
Lay it on me Veeky Forums how awful is this and how can I make it better while still fitting in the setting?
I would increase the # spells for casters, but cap it at 3rd or 4th level at most. Outside of that >Fighters are strong and fearsome, they lead the others from the front >Clerics are holy men and women, they may be mad, they may not be. >Thieves work, if you want them to work for a King or Thane, they may want to refluff them more as more "Practical" fighters, forsaking honor for simplicity >Mages should be folded under Clerics honestly, but can work as diviners or other strange folks who delved into knowledge they shouldn't have >Bards work, encourage Skalds >Druids work >Paladins should be the berserkers and crazed warriors we know and love. If you want to make it work a bit better, creating a strange harmony between Barbarians and Paladins would be best. >Rangers are perfect >Warlocks fall under Mages and Clerics
Overall, you're on the right track, you may want to track down some books on running low-fantasy in 5E as it's not designed especially for that. My magic suggestion will limit casters significantly, but give them a bit more options at the same time. Good start though.
Luke Lopez
I think the first most important question is:
Do you want to play D&D 5e with a Viking Age feel or do you want to play a Viking Age game and just use 5e D&D.
For example, if you're doing the first you're on the right track. If you want the second you'd want to consider just leaving out certain classes and options entirely, like Clerics, Paladins and Sorcerers, as well as most Wizards that aren't Diviners for example.
Ian Thomas
...
Christian Jackson
So far as the weapon catagories go, I'd suggest adding Axes and Thrown, since swords were relatively scarce and a mark of wealth/status while axes were cheaper as they needed less metal.
Grayson King
Ive had axes be doubled under maces currently bc they are fairly similar Thrown could possibly be added, currenly are just divided amongst other weapons
First one, good to know
That threads been immensely helpful for worldbuilding and atmosphere but almost nothing for gameplay
Perhaps mages would be folded with clerics, they are also fairly close to the Volva thing I have going with Sorcerers and Warlocks so maybe they could get merged together
The thing about Paladins is that they need to have the secondary healer roll along with the tank, and probably the chivalrous(or Norse/Celtic equivalent) in attitude
Aiden Gray
I would suggest that you start by deciding what races and classes to exclude. In your post you are really stretching to justify some stuff. Don't do that.
Just say 'nope, no mages this game at least at start'. Same for some races if you don't think they fit. If you want it to have a viking feel, then you should only include those things that feel 'viking'. Otherwise it is just going to feel like any other D&D game, just with a different starting location.
For the vikng/conan game I am ramping up (when current campaign ends) I will be excluding a number of classes: Mage, Paladin, a few others. Some will be heavily advised against, Sorcerer and Warlock for example. Everyone will start as a human.
Later, if it makes sense, I'll let people take other classes or even start new characters with other races. But at start it will be 'what should be there'.
For example, if someone really wants to play a Paladin I will look for a way for him to 'become' a Paladin later on - like around level three or so. Maybe he accomplishes something and is chosen by ancestor spirits to champion the tribe. If someone wants to play an elf mage, I'll look at adding some sort of winter elf tribe that they can pick someone up from later on.
But to start, if you have to stretch to justify then just don't include it.
Carter Nguyen
>weapons being classified as Swords, Spears, Maces, Daggers, and Bows To parrot , this is a very un-Vikinglike weapon set.
In general almost every Viking would carry a shield in combat.
Swords were rare, expensive weapons to be passed down through noble family lines (they had a lot in common with samurai swords, even though they aren't as meme'd).
Maces just were not a thing, I would suggest removing them entirely.
You definitely need some axes in your life. A one-handed axe was a universal sidearm, useful both as a tool and a weapon, and way cheaper than a sword. The two-handed axe (what we would call a Dane axe but which you would probably want to call something else) was also around, though rarer because using one meant you weren't using a shield, but useful because you could hook or bash somebody else's shield. I'd restrict its use to Warrior/"Paladin."
Spears are good. In fact, I'd diversify your spears. The basic "spear" would be an all-purpose weapon, used in one hand alongside the shield, and was the primary weapon for nearly every Viking warrior. It was there for stabbing people with, obviously, but you could also throw it at close range. The javelin was purely a throwing weapon and would have been the main ranged weapon, way more common than bows and arrows. The "hewing spear" had a bigger head that could be used for cutting and would be more likely to be used as a two-handed weapon.
As far as "daggers" go, Vikings had both the seax (which is like a big ass Bowie knife basically usable as a small sword) and shorter regular knives for everyday use, these would be considered different weapons in their time.
Bows were a thing but they were used for hunting and not considered a "battlefield" weapon, again because you don't get a shield. Restricting them to "Ranger" makes sense.
Also not a battlefield weapon, but the sling would've been common is worth considering as a "Thief" weapon.
Landon Parker
Yeah, I've replaced Maces with Axes and Bows are locked to hunter/thief esque classes that won't be in direct combat I could add in a Polearm class since there seem to be a lot of 2 handed long reach weapons, but granted each weapon type is also one or two handed(the entire group I'm DMing for is relatively new to DnD and actually didn't like their system of weapon categorization, they did all grow up on Fire Emblem, which is what they have been discussing making a similar weapons system)
If needed I may axe Paladins entirely, and possibly add some way for Warriors to get some sort of healing ability, or just have the two Restoritive classes be the healers
Magic is gonna be a lot rarer, I've been thinking of ways to limit it, probably having a cap at like 4th tier spells like the guy above said
The classes I think are pretty fitting without much work are Warriors, Thieves, Bards, Druids, Rangers, and the Volva Sorcerers, and if I can't find a proper implementation for Clerics, Mages, and Paladins they will get the axe
Daniel Peterson
>I could add in a Polearm class since there seem to be a lot of 2 handed long reach weapons, but granted each weapon type is also one or two handed Worth noting that, among the Vikings, there would never be such a thing as a "two-handed sword", they only had the one kind. Also any spear by their nature can be used in one hand or two.
I would also make both the base spear and one-handed axe be able to be thrown in combat as needed, along with specialized javelins for use as a ranged weapon.
>If needed I may axe Paladins entirely I would split your primary martial class up (they are Vikings after all, really all classes should be martials with maybe one shamanistic magic user) into at least two, making one the tanky "Warrior" with armor and a focus on fighting with a shield, and the other the "Berserker"/"Ulfhednar"/whatever and making them damage-focused, using a winged hewing spear/atgeir or a Dane axe, or maybe also dual-wielding if you like that even though it's not too historical.
Luke Davis
>that pic Cease and fucking desist. You don't even realize how obnoxious you are.
Juan King
What's wrong with it?
Ryder Hill
Throwing spears, axes, and daggers could be a cool thing to do, albeit I can't really think of a situation where disarming one of your weapons just for a ranged hit would be very advantageous
It's also worth noting that Vikings are only one half of the setting, theres equal inspiration from Celtic history and folklore
I've been trying to think for minutes trying to wrap my head around exactly what he was talking about until I just realized >Its a girl warrior
Matthew Hughes
>albeit I can't really think of a situation where disarming one of your weapons just for a ranged hit would be very advantageous Simple, you can't reach your buddy this turn and he's in trouble, throw your spear instead.
As far as classes, it really depends on how far you want to go with Viking/Celtic flavor vs. traditional D&D type gameplay, but if it were up to me I'd drop a ton of the magic use and have:
Warrior- The only one with heavy armor (chainmail) at least off the bat, super tanky, use a shield and any one-handed weapons- spears, axes, swords, javelins and daggers.
Champion/Berserker- Doesn't so much "rage", though that could be a class option. Wears no armor but is magically protected/can heal themselves/however you want to handle "the gods don't want me to die." Uses a shield and one-handed weapons, or a two-handed axe.
Skirmisher- Light on their feet but still a martial class, use either a shield and ranged javelins with a backup melee weapon or duel one-handed weapons.
Skald/Bard- Can buff or debuff others but also still a martial class, uses a shield and one-handed weapons in combat. The party face.
Hunter- The combination thief/ranger, stealthy and uses a bow, a sling, or a two-handed spear along with one-handed axes and daggers.
Seer- The only direct magic user, more of a shaman and religious in nature, good at healing, curses, nature magic, a bit of summoning, but with no direct offensive "magic missile" type spells. For Viking flavor this would be a female-only role but that's not required. Uses only one-handed axes or daggers for self-defense.
In general a Viking/Celtic/Iron Age setting should be one about people smacking each other with axes and not about knights in heavy armor or mages shooting lasers at each other. Otherwise what's the point?
Dylan Thompson
Mages are definitely gonna be rare, and the highest form of armor is chainmail + gambeson + a few plates of metal, and even then it's rare to find and expensive to make, almost all of the party will use gambeson and chainmail
Mages will also be rare, and I am probably going to combine the Mage and Sorcerer/Warlock into a Seer class, with toned down Druids and Bards too
There is so much mythology surrounding the Valkyries and given that they are literal choosers of the slain along with warriors and serve the gods(the fertility and death one at that) it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to have a class that could heal others through that
Yeah that last one's a few decades off but it's not like unified countries didn't exist back then
Joshua Jones
Just because they are not unified does not mean they are not referred to with the common name. In the saga of Egil Skallagrimsson he at some point goes to raid Denmark even though it was not a unified country at that point. He also has a beef with King of Norway, makes friends with King of England and fights against the King of Scotland. They are all referred to as such even though they probablydid not have control of the entire country try themselves. Not for the lack of trying either as it was every king's ambition.
Jace Thomas
SJW bullshit.
Isaiah Stewart
Let's ignore archeological evidence and written accounts of female warriors in the north European cultures and ree about sjws
Camden Torres
A gift for you, OP. Use it well.
Anthony Ross
>There are stories about Baba Yaga, she must have existed
Christian Clark
>There are few historic attestations that Viking Age women took part in warfare,[7] but the Byzantine historian John Skylitzes records that women fought in battle when Sviatoslav I of Kiev attacked the Byzantines in Bulgaria in 971.[7] When the Varangians (not to be confused with the Byzantine Varangian Guard) had suffered a devastating defeat in the Siege of Dorostolon, the victors were stunned at discovering armed women among the fallen warriors.[7]
>When Leif Erikson's pregnant half-sister Freydís Eiríksdóttir was in Vinland, she is reported to have taken up a sword, and, bare-breasted, scared away the attacking Skrælings.[7] The fight is recounted in the Greenland saga, though Freydís is not explicitly referred to as a shieldmaiden in the text.[8]
>Saxo Grammaticus reported that shieldmaidens fought on the side of the Danes at the Battle of Brávellir in the year 750:
>Now out of the town of Sle, under the captains Hetha (Heid) and Wisna, with Hakon Cut-cheek came Tummi the Sailmaker. On these captains, who had the bodies of women, nature bestowed the souls of men. Webiorg was also inspired with the same spirit, and was attended by Bo (Bui) Bramason and Brat the Jute, thirsting for war.
>—Saxo Grammaticus[9]
Robert Barnes
You could also play a game that isn't a based on a pile of shit of a system like 5e. There are Fate of the Norns, Yggdrasill, Rune or Midgard: Viking Legends (it's free) that are dedicated viking games. Pendragon (Land of Giants), Runequest (Vikings), and GURPS (GURPS Vikings) have viking splat books. There's als a PbtA viking game (Sagas of the Icelanders). Finally, if you're masochist, which probably you are playing 5e, there's a viking sourcebook for 2e.
Elijah Perez
This really is the best option in my opinion, if I wanted to make a proper not-Dark Ages type game I'd go with GURPS, but I'm not familiar with these other games, so I'm sure there may be a good option there.
Nathaniel Walker
>side that lost had women warriors in their number
Biology speaks for itself.
Austin Hill
>comes into the thread just to point out that you don't like the OP picture, and contribute nothing else No, user. You're being obnoxious.
Joseph Cooper
You already know the biggest abortion of a system that exists. All other games are simpler, clearer, easier to learn - in one word: better. You'd really benefit from learning a new system.
For example, BRP-based games like Runequest are extremely simple: You have stats that go from 1 to 20, you have hit points that go from 1 to 20, and you have skills that go from 1 to 100 (the starting skill level is written on the character sheet). If you want to make a skill check, you roll 1d100 (if the task is simple, you give a bonus, if the task is difficult you deduct a penalty). If the roll lower or equal than your skill level you succeed, otherwise you fail. Stat checks work the same (personally I roll 1d20, but normally you multiply the stat by 5 and roll 1d100). In combat you roll to attack and you roll to defend. When you hit, you do damage. When hit, you deduct armor. Once hit points are at 0 you're dead. Just reading this you already know the basics from Runequest.
Carter Reyes
Based on what I wrote above, you can add or remove crunch. You can use character classes or have a fully free character creation, you can use a hit location chart, you can have fixed or variable armor rating for various body parts, you can have a variety of weapon stats and special effects, etc.
James Collins
Runequest is literally made for Dark Ages era playing. I'll add one thing: the resistance table, which is great for opposed skill/stat checks like wrestling. Also, you have both a hit point total (take more damage and you're dead) and hit points for each of your limbs, torso, head etc. (take enough damage and oops there goes your hand flying off). And I can't stress this enough: a shield is your friend, and armour is your BFF.
Blake Sanchez
Basically, every BRP can easily be tweaked to play Dark Ages or Medieval games. My group often used the 1994 Elric edition as basic for almost every more or less historic setting we played.
Levi Morales
...
Robert Young
>the 1994 Elric edition
My long-time gaming group and I are still grogging about with our ancient blue boxes of Runequest, although we're really tempted to try out 6E because it adds a few things I've always wanted to run (Culture/Career style char building and the Pendragon-style passions where you can Hate (Saxons) so much you go mad and have to run about in the forest for a bit).
Brayden Miller
6e is great, it has a viking supplement with mass combat rules. It's not like dnd at all though so it might not be what OP is looking for
William Scott
Mythras seems interesting, but honestly, I don't see the point in using an updated system, when the old game I was using works perfectly.
Christopher Bailey
Seconding this ,BRP it's my prefered system for Gritty fantasy/Historicals, clear, easy to learns and you can mod it to taste. Check out Mythras if you are new, pretty decent and has nice options for combat (and magic). There is a little suplement than it's called Ships and Shieldwalls than is very interesting for bigger campaings for Vikings. And of course you should check the Vikings Sups than where made for BRP/Runequest or Grps, if only for inspiration and nice, folklore like monsters.
Isaac Richardson
What's the difference between RQ6e and Mythras, aren't they the same or am I thinking of something else?
Aaron Powell
RuneQuest characters don't have a very long lifespan compared to their DnD counterparts. Be a badass warrior in RuneQuest and have 16 hit points. A battle axe does 1d8+2 damage (a great axe does 3d6), plus maybe 1d4 if the opponent is strong. Be a level 12 warrior in DnD have like 40 hit points (a battle axe does 1d8 damage, the great axe does 1d12).
Christopher Williams
I think that two or three edition companies were doing RuneQuest stuff. One disappeared, one snatched the rights to RuneQuest and the third made Mythras.
Julian Sanders
And then there's RQ Classic, which is basically the old game with a snazzier layout and "questions for the creators" type sidebars.
Christopher Foster
This sounds confusing.
Jose Lopez
MYFAROG
Christian Evans
It's even worse: if you have 16 total HP, your arms only have 5, and if you take a 1D8+2+1D4 shot there, it's a chance your arm goes flying off in one blow. Your chest has only 7 HP, and if you take a decent impaling hit from a spear... That's why I said a shield and armour are your best friends. You really don't want a hit coming through in RQ.
Robert Adams
Yeah if a hit gets through you're pretty much dead. This makes encounters very difficult to balance, the few times I tried to dm the players either killed everything without receiving a single scratch or got completely btfo
Easton Gomez
I'm not completely familiar with RQ. Like I said, I played mostly Elric, which is somewhat simplified (no hit locations) and a tad less deadly.
Nolan Allen
Runequest I could look into but balancing encounters in 5e was already my one big weakness
Also for mages I decided I'd go the fire emblem approach by having them be able to cast a small range of spells that are limited in utility, with learning new spells taking a while and capping out at simple levels like 4th tier equivalent in damage
Nolan Nelson
There's not much to balance. Fall into an ambush and your dead. Pick up a fight with a larger force without good strategy and your dead. Combat is dangerous and exciting at the same time.
Cooper Kelly
RQ is one of those games that enemies are something you respect, not sacks of walking experience waiting for the PCs to kick the giblets and XP out of them.
That said, there are ways to avoid taking damage. Training in shields and weapon parrying helps you avoid getting hit; armour lessens the amount of damage you'll take. Tactics is vitally important, so it's not "every man charge!" all the time. Also, if moving around in hostile terrain, a scout is equally vital because you just know there's an arsehole with a bow or javelin in the bush, waiting to have a go at you.
But there's always the option of not fighting at all, or fighting in a way that satisfies honour without drawing blood. Talk your way out of fighting, beg for mercy, bribe the bastards, use magic in a cunning fashion for the first option, a PC could suggest, say, wrestling or unarmed combat instead of swords or knives.
Jonathan Russell
Worth noting that while women warriors were very much a thing, is about how a Viking shieldmaiden should be played- as a real hardass, not a beautiful princess with flowing hair that puts on armor and takes up weapons. Think of a girl with lots of brothers.
Women who fought with the men were a known thing and wouldn't surprise anyone who encountered them, but they'd likely have a social stigma attached- not outcasts, just seen as kind of a weirdo.
Jace Jackson
Using dungeons and dragons for anything except generic high-powered fantasy is frustrating at best.
It's like saying you want a canoe, so you're going to take the wheels off the car, and weld all the doors shut.
It's not impossible, but the amount of work it takes to make a good job of it is retarded when you compare it to just buying a boat or building one from scratch.
We understand that you probably only know about D&D 5th edition, but there are so many games out there that are already doing what you are trying to do, and are better at it because they were made that way, not hacked, frankensteined etc.
Ian Reed
>splitting rivers REEEEEEEEEEEE
Evan Flores
>use British Isles >leave out Ireland and its infinitely more interesting mythology but keep in fucking Wales Baffling decision m8.
Justin Harris
Ireland and Scotland were going to be hybridized together, dont shit on Wales m8
Jackson Rivera
If you aren't using Cú Chulainn in your setting based in the British Isles then you're a faget.
>Hybridising two entirely different nations just because Ireland replaced the Picts Boring.
Jayden Johnson
So more brienne of tarth then heavy metal?
Nathaniel Bell
The map is from the 15th century. Cartographers were slightly less autistic during that time.
Ayden Miller
>religion and magic would be closely intertwined >no trace of Christianity either >Clerics >Paladins >Mages >Druids >Sorcerers
You're fucking up real hard. I don't even know where to start.
Carter Martinez
I had to dig out some of my Veteran of the RPG Wars copy of Stormbringer to check, and it doesn't track individual limbs either, and neither does my old Call of Cthulhu. The Avalon Hill blue box RQ, on the other hand, does.
Blake Jenkins
I'd give up on the 5e based class system. IMHO trying to do that is fitting a round peg in a square hole.
If you want something bearing a passing similarity to historic reality use Pendragon and it's Viking supplement "Land of Giants"
Asher Hernandez
On the other hand, if you don't care about even a passing similarity to reality, try Rune, which is a fun game in its own right.
David Moore
>The only successful shieldmaiden was naked.
Female armor autists are required by law and honor to commit suicide.
Ryan Ortiz
Warriors don't have undamaged skeletons when they're dug up. You don't have archaeological evidence, you're just a gullible retard.
Zachary Price
>Paladin- (I haven't thought of an equivalent to these guys) Huskarls (huscarls, housecarls, whatever spelling you like) probably are the closest. The personal guards of important people drawn from close retainers they wore the heaviest armour available and are typified as using the two handed daneaxe, although since there wasn't any standardization they could wield other weapons.
