Hobbits are great swimmers

Long torsos, short legs. It's an essential life skill, given that so much of their diet comes from the sea. Hobbits are both Green and blue water sailors. Foreign to Mela, they tend to wind up on the coasts and inner isles of the middle sea, which is most reminiscent of their home isles. Sometimes derided as 'midget pirates'. Aboard a bobbing boat, a low center of gravity counts for more than arms reach.

Most of the raiding/piracy/cannibalism that goes on is between hobbits. The far isles are too far from the ocumene for regular contact. Only when the currents after right is a voyage feasible. Resulting from a climactic oscillation, this happens every seven years or do, or about twice a generation.

Hobbits are considered to live 'over the horizon' and the far isles are effectively part of another continent, half an ocean away.

It's a big archipelago. Like earthsea, or Kuala Lumpur. Small islands by far the most common. Sunken mountains, rather than volcanos. Poor soil as a result. Hobbits intensly parochial. Each island had its own village (or villages, for larger islands). Not tribes, per se.

Their water craft look like proas or long ships, depending. Of the raid/trade/protect trifecta, different groups do all three.

Hobbits are foreign to Mela. As foreign as someone from Cathay in Europe. Plenty of individuals, left behind from raiding or trading parties (or just out to explore) but very few hobbit communities.

Mela: an alternative pre-history

So I'm making a setting. An 'Atlantean' past, set in an alternate pre-history, where the non-human races of Tolkien-esqe mythology actually exist.

Part of what is driving my compulsion to do this is recent research into human anthropological history. 50K years ago, we had a whole lot of 'homo' species running around, competing and interbreeding. So I'm creating 'homo' species that resemble the standard fantasy races, and then trying to retro-engineer the evolutionary pressures that would lead to that. Hobbits are easy: 'homo florensis' are tiny due to Island Dwarfism. Dwarves are beetle browed, broad chested homo neanderthalis/homo robustus. Large eyed, wide chested, thick-boned. But elves...elves are a pain. 

'Mela' itself refers to a Byzantine-esque human culture that surround the Middle Sea (circa 834, our Chronology). Post-imperial, quasi-feudal. Elves, Dwarves, and Hobbits all exist, but they are all exotic: They come from place very very far away. Elves from from Argoth, a heavily forested island over the sea to the east. Dwarves live on the high plateau to the north of Mela, and hobbits on the archipelago (EarthSea style, far far to the East).

In Mela, humans think of the World in terms of the OTO, the Orbis Terram Ordinal. (pardon my pseudo-latin nonsense). Humans think of the world, (the civilized world), as a T-shape inside inside an O. The T-shape represents the three seas (Black, Red, and Blue (Middle). The spaces between the seas are the continents: Europe, Asia, and Africa. And that's all the world that matter, the 'O' of civilized land set around the Middle sea. Beyond that, there is nothing by wasteland and monsters. Cosmopoligically, the people of Mela are pretty sure that there is a big body of water that surrounds all the continents (the 'Oceanus').  The climate a few hundred miles beyond the middle sea is pretty inhospitable to civilization, climactically. In Mela, this is conceived of as 'The Four Wastes', one for each Ordinal Direction: Cold (North), Grass (East), Sand (South) and Water (West).

The Cold Waste emerges from the planes near the middle Sea, and rises up to be something like the Alps...except the Alps are merely the edge of a gigantic plateau, like the Himalayan plateau, where the climate varies between Taiga, Tundra, and Cold Desert. Completely inhospitable to agriculture.

The Grass Waste is comparable to the central Asian grasslands; vast steppes, cold and arid. Also populated by roving bands of barbaric centaurs. (// Turko-Mongolic Nomads).

The 'Waste of Sand' is the Sahara desert. No water, terrible heat, trackless wastes. Populated by cyclopes and elephants. (The Melanese are a little unclear on how the two relate: They have very similar skulls, but the cyclopes are tremendous single-eyed two-legged things, and elephants are tremendous snake-nosed four-legged things. The two are often seen in company of one another, but it's not clear if the cyclopes herd the elephants, the elephants keep the cyclopes as 'guard dogs', or if one gives birth to the other. However, they are unified in their hostility to humans. While not civilized, cyclopes wield both slings and clubs. ("We call them 'Chuck'."). The sling stones range in size from croquet balls to bowling balls.

The 'Waste of Water' (at the foot of the 'T') is where the Middle Sea flows out onto the Oceanus. Navigation in Mela is primitive, and sailing too far out of sight of land is generally considered suicidal. Monstrous creatures like the leviathan (which eats ships) encourage this. The islands of the hobbits exist (somewhere) amidst it, but even the hobbits are hard-pressed to say exactly where. (They merely ride the currents to and from the islands, which are specks of land scattered amidst the water like stars in the sky. )

Weapon Range and Initiative

Matt Miller

Any thoughts on how to deal with weapon range in terms of initiative? Or weapon speed? In Mayhem, weapons had speed, that determined who went next, but it became more of an APR (attacks per round) thing than a 'swinging my hammer leaves me vulnerable' sort of thing. It's a knotty problem, as issues of range, timing, and and counter-attack are all bundled together.

Rob Hicks

The reality of a concept and the concept of the reality are very rarely the same thing....The reality of the spear is a super cheap and very effective way to arm cheap infantry with minimal training. The archetype is of a ranged attack for flashy wushu spins and thrusts. The latter is way more interesting, especially from a roleplaying perspective.... From that perspective, the relationship between range and speed is ... thematically irrelevant. The audience is much bigger for flashy maneuvers than hard realism.

Keith J Davies

...there is remarkably little difference between "weapon speeds" outside certain specific circumstances. You run into physiological limitations before weapon mass limitations.

Matt Miller

That's part of what I want to get at--that a lunge takes longer and leaves you more vulnerable. That and the physiological limitations of using a great axe, vs. using a hand axe. To me, this suggests a system where an action takes time (with the attack speed difference for most weapons being small), an initiative system where you character is 'off their guard' until their initiative count, and ties on initiative counts broken by a weapon reach. And perhaps a 2-weapon rule that says "You can't parry with a weapon you attacked with on your last action". ...I'm designing a simulation that treats every attack swing as a role of the dice.  People often treat a DnD attack as a single swing, so working with that metaphor.

Keith J Davies 

....whoever has won initiative controls the distance. [W]hen closing, bigger weapons get a bonus). If both fighters have the same reach they have no weapon-based modifier, otherwise for each step of reach difference you take a penalty. Dagger vs longsword, advantage is to the longsword initially because of longer reach. Dagger takes a penalty until he wins initiative, at which point he controls distance and stabstabstab... until longsword wins again. (This is part of why two weapon fighters use mismatched weapons, you have advantage in two reach categories)

Paul Goldstone

Runequest dealt with this utilising the Strike Rank system. This was based on the persons Size and Dexterity (character stats) and then modified by the weapon.
Longer weapons having a lower Strike Rank, so a tall and nimble person using a longsword would go before a short and nimble person. In situation of confined space or really close combat the weapons would have a Strike Rank modifier... For missile/thrown weapons, the Size aspect of the Strike Rank was dismissed. This system allowed ...diversity in weapons 

Keith Gatchalian 

...speed of the weapon is less an issue than reach.....from the time the two fighters engage, they are trading blows, parrying, making ripostes etc. The dice roll represents whether any of those blows or counterattacks make it through to cause damage. 

This is one of the weaknesses of the DnD system, that you only get to swing on your turn, even though you may have been fighting the whole turn. ...In a DnD combat, a fighter can engage someone, attack, then take a 5 foot step and then <have> someone else fill the space..... the defender never gets to "swing" back, even though as I point out, the combat is a series of blows, parrys and counterattacks. 

It does make sense for there to be a reach system, because a longer weapon, even if it is slower, will enable the fighter to strike first, as the other combatant maneuvers to get close enough to hit. ....there's no way a daggerman would ever strike before the two handed swordsman got a swing.......as a gamer, even in a fantasy game, you still have to ground the game in real world ...or the game becomes silly).

Paul Goldstone

In game terms a Size 18 Dexterity 20 warrior with a dagger would be quicker than a Size 10, Dexterity 10 warrior with a 2 handed sword .....The only conceivable way that the <dagger-user> went first was if...the wielder was significantly bigger, and exceedingly dexterous.

Rob Hicks

On a hexmap or a grid, how far would you...granulate reach? [C]ategorize it as some kind of initiative stat on the weapon? With Mayhem, we had effectively 3 ranges. 1, 2, and 3.... Is that enough to break ties? Is <granulated reach> worth creating an additional initiative stat? Could the <weapon stat> be used as tie-breakers for matched initiative? Are you comfortable with bows always going first? 

Matt Miller

 I'd actually give bows initiative proportional to their range, for simplicity in breaking ties. If you can't gack the archer before the start of the next tick, you get an arrow to the face. Readied attack goes first, then resolve by weapon range/reach. No 'attacks of opportunity', although the greater reach of weapons provides an opportunity to get the before they get you.

Rob Hicks

...it just doesn't jive with my mental heuristics of how speed and range work....I don't see being worth the application of range as initiative.

Matt Miller

I'll presume that you mental heuristic is that larger weapons are slower to swing, and so should not have as good an initiative as smaller ones. That seems...reasonable for clubs and whatnot, but not for spears. 2 handed weapons in general are kind of ticklish, as are pole-arms, which are both spear/axe and staff.

Keith J Davies 

I have to disagree that bigger means slower, and blunt means slower. _Imbalanced_ weapons are awkward, I could see making exceptions for mauls and the like, but that's because of the imbalance, not the size or bluntness. Quarterstaves go _fast_, man. As do greatswords when properly applied. The mechanical advantage from two hands properly placed makes up for a _lot_ of mass differences.....ith greatswords it wasn't uncommon to hold the blade and beat someone about the head with the 'handle'. The weapon is as much a steel spear as it as a 'sword' 

Multi-mode weapon, still two-handed (hits hard) and in proficient hands 'speed' is largely limited by muscular speed. Life becomes so much easier when you base initiative advantages on who has the advantage of reach. Sometimes daggers are faster, sometimes halberds. If I have a polearm you don't even get to attack me with a dagger unless you ....close with me 

For melee I based it on immediate range (small weapons like daggers, you have to close with your opponent; in a square- or hex-based map like D&D 3.x you're "in the same square"). 'Normal melee weapons' are melee range, which covers everything that isn't immediate range or reach. Long weapons like pikes (and greatswords and other polearms if you know how) have 'reach' and go one unit farther. Whips...consider them 'double reach' and usable only at reach and double reach, useless in melee. 

(and yes, I have 'weapon tricks' -- something like D&D feats -- that let someone overcome these difficulties. I was convinced by a martial artist I know who demonstrated he could hit my body with a (practice) sword while I had a grip on his <shirt>, without moving us apart. "Okay, a 'close combat style' will let you do this", said I).

Robert J. Grady

I know, with simulated weapons, the spear usually gets one get shot against a greatsword fighter. But then the greatsword fighter is inside, and gets a good shot. After that, it comes down to footwork. Dagger vs. sword is more straightforward because they are often used in similar ways; usually reach is an advantage, to a (ahem) point. The epee was designed to optimize reach, but then smallswords came along and changed the game by going smaller and faster again. One thing RPGs often mess up is that, other things being equal, a two-handed weapon is less nimble than a one-handed one, but is FASTER and MORE ACCURATE. Rapier v. katana, the rapier guy is going to look for a vulnerable angle of attack, while the katana is going to look for the right opening and hit fast and hard.

Keith J Davies 

Note that the 'less nimble' is _not_ because of _weight_, it's because you keep both hands on the weapon. This greatly limits the weapon's 'nimbleness'. 

Spellcraft check vs spell DC

Matt Miller

There are thematic, societally, and mechanical ideas behind it. Thematically, it's based on the idea that magic is a skill that anyone can master--It's just freaking difficult, with a brutal learning curve. Like learning to program using manuals written in Farsi, and translated into Dutch, then English. Societally, it's a way to explain why Wizards spend so much time studying, and why most people can't do magic. Mechanically, every spells just has a DC to cast, and you roll spellpower to manage it. No limit on spells per day, although limits to a) spells known and b) spells prepared. A spell stays 'memorized' until you botch it. But magic is like playing piano while deaf. If the spell does not take effect, you know you botched it, but aren't sure how, and can't re-attempt the spell until you've had a chance to study.

Keith Gatchalian

That's how I'm using magic in my rules. I always thought, as a magic user in DnD, how boring and undramatic it was using a spell. I announce the casting, then maybe roll for damage, but the real dice rolling is done by the DM making a save.

.....For my game,(using DnD terms) I use Knowledge Arcana ranks to = number of spells known(ranks is used as caster level), Spellcraft to actually cast the spell, and then I use an arbitrary stat ( like Str, Con etc) Magic Power to indicate the upper level of spells castable. So if you have an 18 (+4) Magic Power, you can cast upto 4th level in spells.     

There are ways of course to increase your MP, but I like having some balance since the MU gets to cast more spells per day, and in practice, the lower level spells get cast more anyway. I also allow spell fumbles if you roll a 1 on the to cast roll ( think Mickey in Fantastia) and spell crits of some sort. A Feat added to a spell is measured against the Knowledge Arcana rank, not the MP, so let's say you have a score of 6 in KA and your feat makes your spell =7th level, than its a no go, but 6 or less you can cast it. 

My real concern is in practice how much work this will add as a DM....that's the one place the fire and forget system helps you out. I hate slowing down the game while I crunch numbers for multiple casters.

Matt Miller 

Spells levels were actually something I was trying to avoid, using a direct DC. Then the feat modifies the DC directly. Rather than translating spell+feat to DC, then rolling.

Keith Gatchalian

...Tying level to spell DC. Something like 15+1 = a 16DC for a first level spell. Should be easy to make with a fair number of ranks in Spellcraft, but that's why I was trying to make several skills needed to be an effective mage.

Mela

Class Tropes

I started with a series of tropes:

• "Rough start": Orphaned, abandoned, enslaved, grew up in a slum, kidnapped
• "Extreme Training": "All we did was train. For years".
• "Martial Elite": Part of a military caste, with associated training, wealth and privilege.
• "Cloistered": Hidden from broader society and humanity; by distance or secrecy
• "Esoteric Arts": Fantastic and Fantasy skills from myth and legend
• "Hierarchy": You take order from above; divine or imperial. 
• "Jack of All Trades": Little bit of everything, bonus to all skills.
• "Armed & Armored": Fighting is what you do;

TROPES BY CLASS

• Berserker: Rough Start, Extreme Training, Armed&Armored
• Templar: Cloistered, Obedience, Rough start, Armed&Armored
• Priest: Esoteric Arts, Obedience
• Soldier: Jack of all Trades, Armed&Armored
• Knight/Samurai: Military Elite, Hierarchy, Armed&Armored
• Mystic: Rough Start, Extreme Training, Cloistered
• Champion: Cloistered, Esoteric Arts, Hierarchy, Armed&Armored
• Assassin/Ninja: Military Elite, Extreme Training, Cloistered
• Criminal: Rough Start, Cloistered, Hierarchy
• Rogue: Rough Start, Jack of All Trades
• Sorcerer: Esoteric Arts, Cloistered, Military Elite
• Warlock: Esoteric Arts, Rough Start, Armed&Armored
• Wizard: Esoteric Arts, Extreme Training, Cloistered

DnD Class Analogues

• Barbarian-->'Berserker' (Rage: Temporary HP, Bonus Damage, Immunity)
• Cleric-->'Templar'/Sohei/Monk (Exotic Weapons, Shield-Brother, Demon-Hunter?)
• Cleric-->'Priest'/Shaman (Favor for spells, Lay on Hands)
• Fighter-->'Soldier'/Guard/Mercenary/Bandit (More skills, more general)
• Fighter-->'Knight'/Samurai (Specialty fighting, Armor or Bow, Resources)
• Monk-->'Mystic'/Shugenja/Hermit (Martial Arts, Chi)
• Paladin-->'Champion'/Avatar/"Extra measure of Grace, Extra Measure of Duty" (Smite, Favored Enemy, Immunity, Track?)
• Rogue--> 'Assassin'/Ninja (Breaking & Entering, Vital strike, Poisson, Ambush, Dark-fighting)
• Rogue--> 'Criminal': Yakuza/Triad/Mafioso/Thieves Guild/Jhereg (Burglar, Pick-pocket, etc).
• Rogue--> 'Rogue'/Minstrel, "World owes me a living", (Gambling, Trickery, Charisma,)
• Sorcerer-->'Sorcerer' (Bloodline, Channeling, MP)
• Warlock-->'Warlock' (Darkpact, Powers, Evocations, Accursed, Dark Knight?)
• Wizard--> 'Wizard' (Spellcraft check vs spell DC)

I pitched a few classes out as suitable only for tribal/demi-human societies

• Bard-->NULL
• Druid-->NULL
• Ranger--> NULL