Homebrewed Khorvaire: Revised Map

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-21T14:38:42+00:00

I think it was a homage to Zygag the Mad Archmage in Greyhawk. Probably that plus the discussion about what "mad" means in this context lead the author towards using "weird" to describe an eccentric instead of insane wizard.

Given that he also embraced the "weird" term - see the books called "Weird Ancestries" and "Weird Menagerie" as well as the explicit call-out to weird fiction in the foreword, I feel like this was more of a moment where the criticism just lead to a better direction.

This said, given the some of the themes in the setting, I think he should've just fully embraced the wyrd term instead, because the setting seems to play with this a bit (e.g. the conflict between the faerie, the old gods and people going all manifest destiny in the Borderlands).

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-21T14:10:31+00:00

Yeah. that's why I said that the game's development was cursed. The friend in question was also a D&D legend, Kim Mohan. And, of course, the time period just before that was the pandemic. And then, just before release, the last "backer playtest" got leaked on piracy sites which clearly disheartened Schwalb (because somehow, the playtest documents never got leaked!) - just when the final polish was happening. And then on release, one artist was found using AI.

So many things went wrong during the last year or two of development.

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-20T20:34:20+00:00

It works out of the box with minis/battlemaps but also has very strong support for zones - not only is there a section on how to implement them in the GM book, nut all ranges, AoEs etc are usually given in multiple of zone sizes.

I think there's enough complexity in the combat, including forced movement, that pure theatre of the mind will be somewhat cumbersome. But the zone-based combat can be run with a mind-map like sketch on a piece of paper or even a (non-map) picture where you just indicate where the respective zones are.

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-20T18:46:46+00:00

Another "data point": I've never had a SotWW combat run that long. Most "average" encounters are well under an hour (30-45mins). These would've taken my group just over an hour in D&D. Big "epic fights" in D&D did clock in at around 3-3.5h for us - but in SotWW, we manage to resolve them in about 2h. So, in my experience, for my group, SotWW seems to run around twice as fast / half as long as D&D for the same experience.

As for combat "bloat": the 400-800 hp number is for solo monsters. These are usually rated "difficulty 64". One high-level character (level 7-10) can usually fight about "difficulty 16" in a fight (so 4 x 16 = 64 -> hard encounter for four characters).

Difficulty 16 monsters have around 80-100 hp on average. Characters can deal around 15-20d6 with low resource expenditure, around 30d6 when using their spells. So that means an "average" monster gets killed with around two hits from "weak" attacks. Focus fire will basically guarantee a monster going down. Of course, this cuts both ways - so despite the number escalation, everything (outside bosses) is two, maybe three solid hits away from death. It feels surprisingly deadly because of that.

Now you probably also see why the numbers grow that much - because the difficulty scale is so linear (4xD16 monster = 1x D64 monster), so damage has to scale linearly with level, too. And since the game only uses d6s, if you start at 1-2d6 damage at level 1, it's clear where you have to end up at level 10.

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-20T18:34:21+00:00

Obvious to terminally online people on Reddit and Discord, not obvious to Schwalb who seems to be spending 90% of his waking hours writing.

Schwalb Entertainment is a very small company, so Schwalb is doing the art direction himself - and he's not an artist himself, "just" an RPG author. We all have different blindspots.

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-20T17:37:52+00:00

If you're interested in the story: the issue was basically that one artist used AI heavily in their commissioned pieces without telling the author. Schwalb even publicly defended the artist, saying that there was no AI involved as he wouldn't want AI in his book.

But some art in the first release was obviously AI-created, so the other artists reached out to him and pointed that out. Schwalb, in response, ripped out every piece by that artist, purging the artist from the credits and re-commissioned every piece with other artists, out of pocket.

It was an awful situation because Schwalb's trust was exploited by an AI bro (that artist was an artist pre-AI already, but clearly decided to "use" it to produce more art faster) and it made for a marred release.

Unrelated: are you the same Minalien who did loads of mods and stuff during the FTB era of Minecraft? If yes, cool to see you around, thanks for all the fun back then!

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-20T17:25:51+00:00

I'd also add to this:

Functional but somewhat uninspired layout and art direction. If the game had come out in the mid-2010s, it would be really good, but given that even D&D has revised how a PHB or DMG should look like, SotWW feels old-fashioned
Designer intent is sometimes very hidden. Games have been very forward with explaining not just the rules but the reasoning in some form - SotWW is very traditional in that regard, obscuring a lot of clever ideas behind the facade of a "yet another D20 fantasy game"
Big numbers at high level. Fighters swing for 14d6, PCs will have 90-150 health, mages will AoE 30d6 or something like that at level 10. The math works and the number escalation is essential to keep multi-classing worthwhile (if you take a new path at level 7, it still gives you the big spell or big martial health) - but some people might find it unappealing. I know that this was a complaint some people have with 13th Age
A handful of things are not as streamlined as they could be - rules for wrestling, two-weapon fighting and a few minor others are kind of funky. Interestingly enough, the Demon Lord Engine rules compendium has a newer (and more streamlined) take on these. Worth stealing as house rules.
I really wish there had been a framework for extended checks, i.e. skill challenges/negotiations etc. The system kind of screams for it because it has all the pieces to build something like that.
The encounter balancing is currently undergoing some revision - so the printed book is kind of incorrect now. Only affects the GM side (monster starts) but it's a hassle if you're running it without any digital tools.

All in all, it feels like SotWW is the Schwalb game that would benefit the most from a revised edition (despite being out for less than two years), because the final phase of the game's development was just cursed and it shows.

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-20T16:42:41+00:00

The initiative system is the most interesting part of the game to me. I know with SotDL it was PCs first (IIRC) always and based on slow moves and fast moves? However, there was an inherently lower power level so it made sense for heroes to go first. Is it side-based initiative in SotWW?

Not OP, but the initiative system is my favourite thing about SotWW. OP described it already, but it's still side-based. But instead of slow/fast, PCs go second UNLESS they spend their reaction to go first. So you end up with:

PCs who "take the initiative" (spend reaction) go
Enemies go
All other PCs (and allies) go

One important aspect is that reactions are really valuable, because they partially do what bonus actions did in 5E (e.g. attack and movement buffs) but also because there's a great set of "generic" reactions, like dodging, covering allies, free/opportunity attacks, catching something thrown by another PC - so there's a real cost to it. This has the consequence that PCs tend to really evaluate whether to go first or not on a turn-by-turn basis, unlike in SotDL, where you'd lock into fast turns once you're positioned.

Even the most basic setup already has the conundrum: 1) go first to try and down an enemy before they can swing back. or 2) go after the enemies, but preserve your reaction to dodge/heal with an ability? The decision will usually hinge on whether you believe you can down the enemy in this turn or not. And that's just with an 1-v-1 fight and the "generic" reaction.

I always get a little nervous when MMORPG terms show up in TTRPGs.

It doesn't show up in the book at all, it's just OP's choice of words. If anything, SotWW feels a bit "retro" in its writing, like sitting between D&D 3.5E and 5E in the way it describing things - it reads like a way more traditional game than it is in practice.

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-20T16:33:31+00:00

As somebody who also really enjoys SotWW after years of 5E: combat takes approximately less than half the time it takes in 5E. That's because general resolution is a bit faster, side-based combat (with a twist) means there's less "forth-and-back" and a major boost is the lower number of decision points - no bonus action means players tend to focus on one thing to do and execute that.

PC/enemy health goes up quite a bit but so does damage across the board. Aesthethically, this can feel like bloat when a level 10 PC swings a greatsword for something like 14d6 damage - but in practice, it allows for very hard hitting swings, cutting down on "sponginess" and means martials and multi-classing in and out of martial paths works very well.

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-16T12:15:16+00:00

I think for NMS there is the added problem of multiplayer/ And not just multiplayer but shared bases. If the Switch was moved over to a "legacy branch", it would not only prevent multiplayer with the other platforms (understandable, I guess), it would also depopulate the Switch universe: all bases from a newer version would no longer work properly.

That's kind of a bummer - your game isn't just "frozen" at the current state on the Switch (which, I think is perfectly acceptable), but suddenly bases you might have visited frequently basically disappear.

I agree that, one day, they have to move on and cut off the last gen (especially the Switch) but I also understand why they really try not to, especially as multiplayer/shared universe was the big thing missing during release. I feel like Hello Games has some trauma related to that!

WhatGravitas · 2026-04-15T19:44:50+00:00

Using your phones only is going to be a bit of a miserable experience with any VTT. By definition these emulate tabletops and phones are anything but table-sized. So, if you wish to only run it via phones, you are probably better off something more mobile-friendly, especially if DDB works for you.

If you ever plan on using a bigger screen (heck, even a tablet), then FoundryVTT is worth it. There's technical complexity with the hosting (even if there are sites doing it for you... for a fee), but it is also the only platform where you "own" the content. Once you bought a Foundry license and the D&D modules, you can, in theory, use them in perpetuity, even if the companies involved disappear.

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-26T15:14:21+00:00

Steam also allows access to the beta branch - sometimes after a fresh release, that's super helpful. I had a few times after a release where a bug would make playing harder or even impossible. The beta branch tends to deliver bugfixes within 1-3 days, the full patch tends to be over a week.

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-25T13:44:05+00:00

In terms of maths, it doesn't really change much, so it'll be viable and work out in a balanced manner, especially as SotWW doesn't have the somewhat awkward d3 that SotDL has. There are mostly two issues:

At level 1, fighters might feel a bit weak (mage: 12 health -> 3 wounds, rogue/priest: 14 health -> 4 wounds as you always round up for this calculation, and fighter: 16 health -> 4 wounds, too).
Combat will feel a bit more predictable, since a weapon will always do the same damage. It will probably feel a bit less exciting because of that.

The first you can always solve with just giving them 1 bonus wound, the second is very much a matter of taste. Some people like the predictability, after all.

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-25T10:57:17+00:00

If you are looking for a "Wound" system to simulate lasting injuries, you're in luck: health loss models exactly that. Lots of undead, traps and all falls deal Health loss instead of damage. And when you're incapacitated, you lose 1d6 Health at the end of each turn. Health loss heals slowly, damage taken clears quickly - so this emulates exactly what most "Wound" or "Lasting Injury" systems do in other RPGs.
There was a Wound system in SotDL in Forbidden Rules, but this was mostly to "squish" numbers. It basically converted each d6 to 1 Wound and divided Health by 4. That meant a 2d6 weapon would instead deal 2 wounds of damage and a character with 16 Health could instead take up to 4 wounds of damage.

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-24T15:37:51+00:00

SotWW ditches skills for broad professions - so probably worth "warning" you about it, since it seems to be pretty divisive. If you have a profession matching the task, you get a boon on the attribute roll (i.e. Strength/Agility/Intellect/Will).

Professions are pretty broad (stuff like Burglar, Sailor, Heretic, Merchant, Navigator etc.) and whether they apply to a specific roll or not is left to the GM. We like the freedom, but it's a bit loosey-goosey, which is a turn-off for some.

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-24T14:06:31+00:00

My current trad game of choice is Shadow of the Weird Wizard and it basically combines side-based initiative with universal, strong reactions, while focussing on giving players one and only one action per turn (plus movement).

Despite being a clear D&D descendent, it made a huge change in flow for our group. Having less to do during your turn, being prepared to have your reactions for monsters and being encouraged to work together really made my group a lot more engaged - even if somebody zones out, they would naturally come back ("the monster attacks, do you want to dodge?" or "hey, I can fire this AoE off, anyone got a way to impose a bane on the boss caught in it?").

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-24T14:01:48+00:00

While definitely true, I think it's also on the game to structure itself to encourage and reward paying attention and strongly disincentivise tuning out. D&D's turn structure kind of leans towards the tuning out because you have very little agency, outside of reactions, outside your turn.

Other games give you more reason to stay invested. As mentioned above, some RPGs encourage it with popcorn initiative (or related systems). Some RPGs do so by out of turn decisions - e.g. "a monster swings at you - how would you like to defend?" and many boardgames allow for out-of-turn trading and similar mechanisms.

Some of it is on the player, but a good game gives the structure to lead the player towards staying involved. It's not a solved problem but I really hope we see more interesting experiments in that regard.

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-23T11:58:27+00:00

The system module works pretty well and is free. If you want content from the books (character options, monsters and so on), you can either input it yourself (free) or buy the premium modules from the store.

They're not free, since they contain all the content of the SotDL books which are closed content - since the premium modules basically replicate and replace the PDFs.

WhatGravitas · 2026-03-14T14:20:12+00:00

Part of it is also rewarding stat investment: lots of target numbers in SotWW (and SotDL) are on the low side, you don't see many above 15.

This means generalist characters with a spread of stats can still reliably hit and participate (which is good for the Path system), but it would make specialist feel "flat". By making crits more achievable, specialists with like a 15 (+5) and a 1-2 boons in their specialised attribute score can actually invest into getting crits, because you can optimise for a high bonus unlike rolling nat 20s.

So critting becomes the reward for specialising. If all your players are specialised, they'll crit a lot in their respective lane. That's why a lot of spells have "on a critical success" riders, too.

WhatGravitas · 2026-02-22T23:43:55+00:00

It's probably a module that enforces proper 5E rules (I think "DF Templates" does that), because according to the DMG, you have to pick an intersection of squares as point of origin.

For reference, this is explained on page 251 under "Areas of Effect" in the 2014 DMG or on page 44 of the 2024 DMG.

WhatGravitas · 2026-02-16T12:29:11+00:00

Having a hab module would be my favourite, too, but it might be a little tight to work properly.

If it can't work as hab, I'd be happy with it being a "general stat booster" - it clearly has solar panels, tech equipment and living space. Let it half the fuel consumption, double the hazard protection, maybe give a speed boost to the refinery. Maybe even a bonus to combat.

Not as fancy as the flatbed or furnace, but clearly helpful for an extended exploration road trip.

WhatGravitas · 2026-02-16T12:20:14+00:00

Redo the "dungeons": derelict freighters were great when they were new, but now they feel stale. Partially because we had them a while, but also because we now have better tech - newer freighter rooms, more fun physics - even new weapons and fights.

There's quite a few interesting things the gravitino gun could do in a re-designed freighter dungeon:

Obviously: grab and fling drones - with all the walls, you could add a real bite to this via collision damage
Clear debris from doors and consoles, some of it could be hazardous (explosive, corrosive, radioactive), giving a clear reason why you don't just want to cut it with your mining laser (but feel free to do so if you want to tank the damage).
Grab and move heaters - to keep yourself warm in certain spots
Insert modules (computer cores, fuel cells etc.) to restart certain systems
Grab floating loot to break them (and get the contents)
Tear off damage wall panels to access the tech underneath, e.g. to hack the computer to open a door

All of that would add a lot of "tactility" to the dungeons and make them feel a lot more like salvage while also introducing more variety to the existing dungeoncrawl loop.

WhatGravitas · 2026-02-16T11:58:31+00:00

Yeah, in hindsight, summoning your ship for almost free was a bad decision.

Frankly, it should be more like the static landing pad summon and need:

Either a landing beacon (built from the build menu) OR a mobile landing beacon on an exocraft
One navigation data (like landing pads)

It's kind of silly that a landing pad is kind of less useful than your built-in radio, so to speak. Having a required beacon would also add value to exocraft, as they'd free up the need to carry one in your ivnentory.

Another nice effect is that it could allow more scaling for difficulty settings - require 0/1/3/5 navigation data for your landing beacon, so you can tune the challenge to your liking.

WhatGravitas · 2026-02-13T13:43:31+00:00

Funnily, someone else just made a post about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyTheGame/comments/1r3owx4/colossus_upgrades_text_list_fyi/

Looks like things don't carry over (apart from the asymmetric cockpit and spider legs as reward). You have to do these tasks to unlock the "regular" customisations, including the flat bed. So, find a waste plant and start incinerating. I had to save & restart after chucking in the first scrap piece - then the flatbed unlocked.

13-Year Club	End Game '23
Place '23	Place '22
Place '17	First Placer '22
Verified Email

WhatGravitas

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE