Dungeon and Dragons game (sort of) WoT based.

[Some_random_novice]

I am a Dungeon Master and recently I have talked to some players about WoT and they have expressed interest about a DnD game loosely based on the WoT books. As we have discussed it, it wouldn’t have a ton of plot points of the books but it would be around the era of the books and contain the same concepts like the White Tower, Saidar and Saidin, White cloak, etc.
I am looking for any advice about what to include in terms of plot points. Would love to discuss!

[Samt]

One of the challenges to adapting fantasy literature settings to tabletop roleplaying games is how to balance player character classes, abilities, and progressions.  WoT as a book series doesn't worry about the fact that characters who can channel are on a completely different level from characters that can't channel.  It's even completely fine that some channelers have a power ceiling that is much higher than others.  

 

I think it would be very hard to balance a campaign for different characters while also being faithful to the power level discrepancy between those characters.  What are your plans for addressing this?  Is this basically just the DnD system with WoT flavor or are you intending on making significant changes to the RPG system to be more faithful to the magic system and overall mythology of WoT?

[Some_random_novice]

I believe it would be a smart idea to keep the power discrepancies, personally I will keep the magic system the same and the overall mythology the same. While the magical characters will have an advantage to the know magical characters and that would be something I will put in the campaign. The loose campaign I have planned out will probably go threw Far Madding several times, which would give a disadvantage to magical characters. I will be adding in the differences of Saidar and Saidin, but I will keep most of the magic the same unless it is a spell I can specifically adapt. I don’ want to make the magic system to confusing for my players, while most have been playing dnd for years and quiet a few have read the WoT books, I know that some are relatively new to dnd and have not read WoT. Which in my head means it will still be very dnd for spell casting and magic for something’s but for others is will have more WoT magic. I intend on making the characters who have magic role for how powerful they are and can be, as in WoT, and I intend on having modifications so that the lower you are the less spell slots you are allowed regardless of  class and level. 
 

A lot of this campaign will end up being smaller adventures with an over reaching plot, and much less straight up fighting than normal. Which is why currently I am trying to make plots to follow and major plot points to include. 
 

Finally for classes and sub classes, most I have done are sub classes based off of class that are already there, such as taking a Paladin and adding/taking away stuff that could change it into a White cloak, or a sub class for a Druid become a Village Wisdom by making it less powerful. I am still keeping all the classes as options but just expanding upon a list, so the players have more options to stay truer the WoT.
 

 

[Scarloc99]

The most important thing is that players have fun and a key thing for that is that all player characters are balanced out, with strengths and weaknesses that compliment each other so no one player becomes overpowered. It is also really important for encounter balance. 
 

I also find setting a campaign in a well known book world can be hard. I have done it several times and, from experience suggest, for WOT you set your campaign either after the last battle, or long before the books. If you set it at the same time then the players really become observers to other NPCs doing the major things of the series. 

[Some_random_novice]

14 hours ago, Sir_Charrid said:

The most important thing is that players have fun and a key thing for that is that all player characters are balanced out, with strengths and weaknesses that compliment each other so no one player becomes overpowered. It is also really important for encounter balance. 
 

I also find setting a campaign in a well known book world can be hard. I have done it several times and, from experience suggest, for WOT you set your campaign either after the last battle, or long before the books. If you set it at the same time then the players really become observers to other NPCs doing the major things of the series. 

I have done a few campaigns based on smaller fantasy series, and I do understand that it will be more entertaining for it to not be set during the WoT books. Thank you for the advice. 
 

I will probably set it after the last battle by several years. Thank you for that suggestion. I definitely don’t want it to be a poor rewash of the books followed best by beat. 

[Scarloc99]

If you going class to class then I have been having a think, sorcerer is probably the best class for aes sedai or ashaman. The magic is inherent rather than “learnt” like a wizard, or “given” like a warlock or cleric. Having said that you could transpose the cleric class for a yellow sister maybe. Or the warlock but ignore the patron and some of the more esoteric sub classes. I would also just straight out ban any magic that brings characters back from the dead. I would also say that any aes sedai or ashaman has only just been raised. That explains the lack of experience and how they are not just able to sort every situation. Bards also could maybe be reskinned as a form or aes sedai or ashaman, ignore the magical musical aspect. We know that channelers get tired as they cast so that explains the spell slots per day. 
 

Of course it could be a non sedai channeler, a wind rider (maybe Druid but remove the ability to shape change), or Aiel wise women. 

 

Fighter, Barbarian, rogue, work well as they are, just refuse to allow the subclasses that allow magic. Ranger could work but you would need to limit the spell list to ones that make sense, for instance pass without a trace or hunters mark, flavoring them as abilities rather then magic. 

 

You will need to home brew rules for warders, giving them some ability linked to their aes sedai but also a weakness (pain to one affects the other). But I think you could reskin the game fairly easily. 

 

As far as monsters go, there will still be Trolllocs and dread lords out there. There are all the wonderful monsters that the seanchan have and you could have monsters of the week pop out of portals etc. Or have escaped from dark ones labs. You could probably reskin a ton of DnD monsters to represent those in world. 

 

As for the Seanchan, in my home brew campaign one of the nations keeps slaves, has a very structured system focused on purity of bloodlines (elves mate with elves, dwarfs with dwarfs etc and any “half breed” is an affront to society), and the wizards have created a magic item that they can attack to a sorcerer or a fey creature to draw directly on their magic like a battery. The item also causes a charm effect and immense pain if the one “collared” misbehaves. My players have not yet made the link to WOT lol but, if you are on DnD beyond, once I have figured out the mechanics of the “collar” I can make it public and share it with you. 

[Scarloc99]

19 hours ago, Some_random_novice said:

I have done a few campaigns based on smaller fantasy series, and I do understand that it will be more entertaining for it to not be set during the WoT books. Thank you for the advice. 
 

I will probably set it after the last battle by several years. Thank you for that suggestion. I definitely don’t want it to be a poor rewash of the books followed best by beat. 

Yeah having made the mistake of running a middle earth campaign set at the time of the fellowship while the players got to be hero’s they where always aware that there was a bigger story at play else where in the world. That campaign folded fairly quickly and then got restarted as a campaign set after the war of the ring with forces linked to Sauron trying to gain influence and take his place in the void as the elves left. 

[Some_random_novice]

Thank you @Sir_Charrid I have been planning to make channellers like Aes Sedai, Asha’man, Windfinders, Wise Ones, and Damane sorcerers for all your previously mentioned reasons. However I want to make Sul’dam Warlocks since they can learn how to channel. I am trying to figure out how to do Warders but in general I want them to have higher HP and proficiencies in at 3 types of weapons (which would be chosen by the player). 
 

I am also doing a lot of sub classes, like gleemen, Tuatha’an, Wisdoms, and Aiel Warriors in addition. 

[JyP]

Do you know there's already The Wheel of Time Roleplaying Game which is based on d20 rules - so somewhat adapted from D&D 3 ?

 

Or do you need something more in line with D&D 5th (current) edition ?

Edited February 6, 2023 by JyP

[JyP]

On 2/4/2023 at 2:16 AM, Samt said:

I think it would be very hard to balance a campaign for different characters while also being faithful to the power level discrepancy between those characters.  What are your plans for addressing this?  Is this basically just the DnD system with WoT flavor or are you intending on making significant changes to the RPG system to be more faithful to the magic system and overall mythology of WoT?

Well, be it with Star Wars RPG or Middle-earth, there's always this pesky Jedi / Wizard which is clearly in higher levels but in the party nonetheless 😁

 

As long as this is adressed in session 0, that not all PCs will have the same level, it should be ok. And yes, with higher levels come higher responsibilities (imagine playing Gandalf/Moiraine trying to herd 4 hobbits, an elf, a dwarf and 2 humans around / 5 taverens, each one with different goals...).

[Scarloc99]

43 minutes ago, JyP said:

Well, be it with Star Wars RPG or Middle-earth, there's always this pesky Jedi / Wizard which is clearly in higher levels but in the party nonetheless 😁

 

As long as this is adressed in session 0, that not all PCs will have the same level, it should be ok. And yes, with higher levels come higher responsibilities (imagine playing Gandalf/Moiraine trying to herd 4 hobbits, an elf, a dwarf and 2 humans around / 5 taverens, each one with different goals...).

I mean if the party all start at the same level then that aspect of it kind of goes away, whatever the system when it comes to Fantasy Magic Users tend to be glass cannons and aes sedai are no exception, get in amongst them with a sword and they will struggle. Jedi in the starwars game are slightly different but again that tends to balance things by making it take a while before you can do all the crazy cool stuff, and, sometimes being forced to be "good" because of a risk of getting darkside points can be a limitation so you need that smuggler to be able to do the dirty work for you. 

[JyP]

I guess there's a current trope in D&D that 1st-level characters are already heroes - which I dislike a bit, being somewhat of a grognard. A 1st-level wizard already knows how to use spells, a level 1 fighter already knows how to fight in any armor and with any weapon. Well, not everybody starts adventure being a deadly weapon from the Waste or already freshly raised as a Sister in Tar Valon.

 

You miss a lot of character building with all this background already done : for our ta'veren boys in the first book, it would be more like level-0 commoner (bowman / blacksmith / rogue) with plot armor.

 

You can start play 6th-level Aes Sedai, Warders and ta'veren, but you miss a bit I guess.

Edited February 6, 2023 by JyP

[Scarloc99]

5 hours ago, JyP said:

I guess there's a current trope in D&D that 1st-level characters are already heroes - which I dislike a bit, being somewhat of a grognard. A 1st-level wizard already knows how to use spells, a level 1 fighter already knows how to fight in any armor and with any weapon. Well, not everybody starts adventure being a deadly weapon from the Waste or already freshly raised as a Sister in Tar Valon.

 

You miss a lot of character building with all this background already done : for our ta'veren boys in the first book, it would be more like level-0 commoner (bowman / blacksmith / rogue) with plot armor.

 

You can start play 6th-level Aes Sedai, Warders and ta'veren, but you miss a bit I guess.

I mean not at all, in all my campaigns characters are starting out and have no adventuring history. Yes the wizard knows a couple of spells, or the fighter knows how to use a sword but, for most classes (and from the new edition all classes it looks like)  you don’t pick your subclass until level 3. 

[Some_random_novice]

I think that addressing the fact that the magical characters might have more of an ability, but I don’t think you can start every character at a level 0. I mean you don’t have to go through the entire process for an Aes Sedai character to go to the white tower, become a novice, then an accepted then finally have that persons character be ready to start a campaign. Same with Warders, or a Windfinder. I do appreciate the thought that starting characters might end up being much to powerful. But as said before even if that character is a new AES Sedai or Asha’man then even that character knows how to do stuff, same with a warrior or a rouge. At the beginning of a campaign can do something, but just are able to improve and get better, so levels. To me it seems unpractical to have a fighter not know how to hold a sword or a channeller that can’t do the simplest weave. 
 

Also I am not including any sort of Tavern abilities, it make any character way to over powered.

[Sabio]

Doesn't sound like RJ was a fan of the WOT RPG.

 

In Robert Jordan's Blog, dated 4th Oct 2006, he had this to say on the RPG:

"For Infested Templar, I had little to do with the RPG. Mainly my role was limited to telling them that they could not have paladins, ninjas, clerics, shuriken etc. I had to put so much time into that fighting that I washed my hands of the rest, I'm afraid. I could see that trying to make them actually adapt to the books was going to be Valmy Ridge all over again. At least I managed to stop them from putting in a ter'angreal that could bring on the Last Battle in some unspecified manner and also some other really terrible ideas. I wish I had been able to do more, but I had a book to write."

[SinisterDeath]

11 hours ago, Sabio said:

Doesn't sound like RJ was a fan of the WOT RPG.

 

In Robert Jordan's Blog, dated 4th Oct 2006, he had this to say on the RPG:

"For Infested Templar, I had little to do with the RPG. Mainly my role was limited to telling them that they could not have paladins, ninjas, clerics, shuriken etc. I had to put so much time into that fighting that I washed my hands of the rest, I'm afraid. I could see that trying to make them actually adapt to the books was going to be Valmy Ridge all over again. At least I managed to stop them from putting in a ter'angreal that could bring on the Last Battle in some unspecified manner and also some other really terrible ideas. I wish I had been able to do more, but I had a book to write."

From what I remember, it was a D&D 3.5 reskin, and the channeling mechanics were similar to that of a Sorcerer/Wizard, just with more steps.
E.g. You had to waste an entire round (6 seconds) "embracing the source"  before you could unleash the weaves.

The best thing this book did was incorporate the concept of "upcasting", something that D&D didn't have until 5th edition (I'm assuming here that 4th edition didn't have it)
D&D 3.5 had "level spell scaling", which in some ways is better (for the caster) than upcasting.

I'm actually curious now, and will have to do some digging to see if the WoT TTRPG is the first 3rd party system to implement "upcasting" within the D&D ttrpg world.

 

 

[CaddySedai]

Embracing the source should have at most been a bonus action lol

[Samt]

On 2/6/2023 at 4:34 AM, JyP said:

Well, be it with Star Wars RPG or Middle-earth, there's always this pesky Jedi / Wizard which is clearly in higher levels but in the party nonetheless 😁

 

As long as this is adressed in session 0, that not all PCs will have the same level, it should be ok. And yes, with higher levels come higher responsibilities (imagine playing Gandalf/Moiraine trying to herd 4 hobbits, an elf, a dwarf and 2 humans around / 5 taverens, each one with different goals...).

Having characters of different levels is one thing.  Moirraine and Gandalf don't start the story as level 1 casters obviously.  But neither do, for instance, Lan or Thom Merrilin.  My point is more how in WoT, casters have a much higher ceiling and even at low levels are much more powerful than even high level fighters.  Lan is probably a max level fighter, but even a relatively weak and inexperienced Aes Sedai can easily bind him with air and he is completely helpless.  It's also the case that powerful magic users such as Rand, Aviendha, and some of the forsaken are also highly skilled fighters.  

In other words, if you try to make Channeler and fighter into classes that accurately reflect how they are portrayed in the books, Channeler is just a much better class at every level.  It's possible that a fighter can sneak up or come across a fox head medallion, or something.  But those are the exceptions.  The classes are just imbalanced. 

 

So you either have to lay this out in session 0 and make sure everyone is on the same page, or you have to adjust the class power levels.  Or maybe you make a party of level 1 channelers and level 10 fighters and rogues.  I'm just curious how you address it.  

[CaddySedai]

And none of the current magic classes really would work with an Aes Sedai "reskin" because of inherent limitations on what spells are readied / usable. An Aes Sedai knows and can cast any weave they know at any time as long as they are not exhausted or burnt out.

 

SD and I were discussing ways that it would work more with a points and or fatigue/stamina system.

[JyP]

1 hour ago, CaddySedai said:

And none of the current magic classes really would work with an Aes Sedai "reskin" because of inherent limitations on what spells are readied / usable. An Aes Sedai knows and can cast any weave they know at any time as long as they are not exhausted or burnt out.

well, another option is to not use D&D as a basis then... but Ars Magica.

 

=> Aes Sedai => magus from the Order of Hermes

=> novices and accepted => apprentices

=> Warders, wilders, adventurers => companion 

 

Combat rules will be lighter, but magic rules are more in line.

 

edit : Ars Magica 4th edition rules in PDF are free on Atlas Games website , check magic rules : wizards can improvise spells, learn formulaic magic or even rituals - and most of the time will not lose too much fatigue levels by casting.

Edited February 7, 2023 by JyP

[JyP]

43 minutes ago, Samt said:

 if you try to make Channeler and fighter into classes that accurately reflect how they are portrayed in the books, Channeler is just a much better class at every level.  It's possible that a fighter can sneak up or come across a fox head medallion, or something.  But those are the exceptions.  The classes are just imbalanced. 

 

So you either have to lay this out in session 0 and make sure everyone is on the same page, or you have to adjust the class power levels.  Or maybe you make a party of level 1 channelers and level 10 fighters and rogues.  I'm just curious how you address it.  

The more I think about it, the more I think Ars Magica would fit way better in fact.

 

Yes there are imbalances : Ars Magica wizards are way better than other characters, by design. But they also have more flaws to deal with, which for WoT would be : 
- for all channelers : forkroot, steddings, being turned by 13 dreadlords, other channelers.

- for Aes Sedai : the Three Oaths, other Aes Sedai, Darkfriends, being feared by non casters

 

Ars Magica Companions, on the other side, don't have to deal with all this. We don't see Thom Merrilin being bothered by other bards or unable to act in steddings, or Lan unable to fight when Moiraine is lost.

[SinisterDeath]

1 hour ago, CaddySedai said:

Embracing the source should have at most been a bonus action lol

I don't believe bonus actions were a thing in 3.5.
They did have swift actions, which were essentially what is now a bonus action.

While I did mention embracing was an Action, I failed to mention it was specifically a Full Round Action, which basically means it didn't actually complete until the start of your next turn... so yeah, it would literally take 6 seconds to embrace the source.

I think there may even have been some weaves that were full round actions, which would theoretically allow creatures or players to move out of range before it went off.

*edit*
There exists on the internet someone's WoT 3.5 TTPRG to 5e conversion.
I personally don't like their attempt as I feel it's still too D&D.

 

I also feel that whoever wrote it, was playing fast and loose with existing copyright laws, but at least they weren't charging $$ for it.

[Scarloc99]

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

I don't believe bonus actions were a thing in 3.5.
They did have swift actions, which were essentially what is now a bonus action.

While I did mention embracing was an Action, I failed to mention it was specifically a Full Round Action, which basically means it didn't actually complete until the start of your next turn... so yeah, it would literally take 6 seconds to embrace the source.

I think there may even have been some weaves that were full round actions, which would theoretically allow creatures or players to move out of range before it went off.

*edit*
There exists on the internet someone's WoT 3.5 TTPRG to 5e conversion.
I personally don't like their attempt as I feel it's still too D&D.

 

I also feel that whoever wrote it, was playing fast and loose with existing copyright laws, but at least they weren't charging $$ for it.

Copyright laws in terms of what? The joys of the OGL and SRD (and all the drama that has been going on around them the past month or so) mean that anyone can publish and sell material for DnD without needing to follow any kind of copyright laws as long as they follow the OGL. Not sure how the WOT material is protected though :). 

but I do not want this to descend into an OGL discussion, that has taken over far far too many of my other feeds lol. 

[SinisterDeath]

21 minutes ago, Sir_Charrid said:

Copyright laws in terms of what? The joys of the OGL and SRD (and all the drama that has been going on around them the past month or so) mean that anyone can publish and sell material for DnD without needing to follow any kind of copyright laws as long as they follow the OGL. Not sure how the WOT material is protected though :). 

In terms of Wheel of Time trademarked and copyrighted content, which is not protected under the OGL or SRD.

[Scarloc99]

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

In terms of Wheel of Time trademarked and copyrighted content, which is not protected under the OGL or SRD.

Ahhh that makes more sense 🙂