Another review of a role playing game (RPG) derived from Dungeons & Dragons (D&D). The end of the line is in sight, at least for the RPGs I have easy access to. At this point, I do not plan on reviewing any Old School Revival (OSR) or other RPGs derived from early D&D.
Today’s RPG is Dragon Heresy Introductory Set by Douglas H. Cole. This game has a peculiar flavor. Unlike most of the RPGs I have reviewed, this one is very much tied to the world of Etera. Etera is a Norse-themed world where characters are “chosen of the Norse gods.” Just about all the deviations from D&D 5E adapt characters (races, classes, and backgrounds) to this world.
Except for combat. Combat in Dragon Heresy is substantially, although not enormously, different from combat in D&D. It feels like the author with some of the limitations of combat, particularly the streamlined, fairly low-risk combat in 5E.
This book feels like two different books. One is a setting book for Etera. One is a set of homebrew changes to the combat mechanism. I’ll describe and review each part separately.
Character creation is almost identical to that in D&D. If you have played D&D, you can completely skip the several pages discussing abilities. They are the same in both systems. Assigning ability scores is only a smidge different. The primary method of doing so in Dragon Heresy is to use a standard array. Dragon Heresy offers three different arrays as options, none of which are identical to 5Es. The arrays go from providing flat ability scores (12s and one 13) across the board to a more 5E-like one that emphasizes one score but trashes another. The traditional roll-4d6-and-drop one and the old school roll-3d6 methods are acknowledged as options.
Character races are familiar - humans, dragonborn, dwarf, half-elf, and tiefling. None of the other standard 5E races are present in Etera. Race stats are pretty much the same as in D&D. Dragon Heresy does flesh out each race’s culture and default behaviors in Etera, providing flavor appropriate to and needed by a setting book.
Classes are also familiar. OK, the barbarian has been renamed the berserker and the bard the skald. The cleric, fighter, and wizard should sound familiar. The basic mechanisms of each class are consistent with D&D. Most of the subclasses are new and setting specific. For example, the berserker/barbarian can follow the Path of Galdureidi and use the magic of the runes. A great deal of attention is paid to the cleric, who has many domains based on Norse gods and goddesses (and other celestials) to choose from - Death, Fate, Fluidity, Justice and War, Knowledge and Foresight, Magic and Transcendence, Renewal, Seafaring and Commerce, Storm, Warding, and Winter. Given the relatively few options for the other classes, clerics must be particularly enthralling for the author. The fighter, by contrast, only has the Champion and Commander archetypes, and the bard only has the Lore college and the Craft college.
Backgrounds are limited to acolyte, artisan, combatant, and karl/freeholder. Is that everything the people living on the edge of icy fjords did for a living? Probably the majority. There would certainly have been traders moving from village to village. A Norse setting seems ripe for folk heroes. There were certainly spies moving around, assessing the combat capabilities of their neighbors. In a game that does not include a rogue class, it probably makes sense not to include spies either. These must be a very honest and straightforward people. Except the followers of Loki.
Dragon Heresy adds a mechanism for social dealings with nobility - social status. This status provides a bonus to a character’s persuasion roll when dealing with a noble, if the character has high enough standing themselves. This status is purely materialistic - the character’s lifestyle expenses, the value of the class-specific items they wear, the value of gems and jewelry they wear, plus any longships or fortresses they have had built. It seems to me that last category, if not zero, would dominate the calculation.
For the setting itself, the game provides a fairly brief overview of the gods and major lands of Etera. It spends a lot more pages on beasts, NPCs, and monsters. The mechanisms are similar to those in a D&D Monster Manual, with two enhancements. The stat block has been expanded to include all of the statistics added to combat by Dragon Heresy. The flavor text is much more extensive than usually found in the Monster Manual but not overwhelming.
As a setting manual, Dragon Heresy Introductory Set is uninspiring. A lot of pages are spent rehashing D&D rules. Either this use of space prevented inclusion of a fully fleshed out setting, or the setting was never fully fleshed out. The book was labeled as “introductory”, so the author might have planned a more extensive follow-on. As far as I can tell, Gaming Ballistic, the publisher, has published a single adventure since the game book was published in 2019. Whether or not Gaming Ballistic is a brand for Steve Jackson Games, it is certainly focusing on Dungeon Fantasy, a GURPS-based fantasy RPG (with Douglas H. Cole contributing to its Nordlondr Viking setting). Even though it uses the GURPS system, Dungeon Fantasy races and classes are right out of D&D. It also has a much wider variety than Dragon Heresy.
Combat. 5E has been criticized for making combat too abstract and damage to easy to recover from. As a player and DM who likes to emphasize D&D’s social pillar, I do not have a problem with that. Some do. Below, I summarize the differences between 5E combat and Dragon Heresy combat.
Actions - Dragon Heresy adds two actions to combat. Search means the character is trying to find something. Sprint means that a character moves four times their basic speed. The consequences are that they cannot do anything else (no attacks, no bonus actions, no reactions). Enemies also have advantage on attacks. These new actions seem niche at best. Maybe the rogue is sneaking around trying to find the magical doodad needed to beat the big bad while the rest of the party is fending off the big bad’s horde of minions. Once he finds it, he has to hightail it back to the mage who can use the doodad. I do not think either of these actions add much value.
Vigor points - Vigor points are hit points. They are calculated the same and are used the same. Only the flavor has changed. Vigor points represent how able a character is to continue combat, how fatigued they are.
Wounds - If the character takes wounds, they take actual damage. They have to make a saving throw to avoid being demoralized (disadvantage on all attacks and skill tests), injured (disadvantage on attack rolls and skill tests, speed halved), unconscious, or (if they fail their D&D-like death saving throws) dead. Which saving throw is relevant is based on a comparison of the number of wounds taken versus the character’s wound maximum (CON score + STR modifier). Wounds take a long time in game to heal.
Threat and Hit DC - Instead of armor class (AC), characters have two relevant roll targets for attackers. The first is the Threat DC (10 + DEX modifier + other modifiers), which an attacker has to exceed to hit at all. Rolls between the Threat DC and the Hit DC (Threat DC + 8 + proficiency bonus) mean that damage is taken off from vigor points. The character managed to use a shield, a weapon, or a dodge to avoid being injured, but it tired them out. Rolls meeting or exceeding the Hit DC are taken as wounds. A “frantic defense” reaction can convert this damage into vigor reduction at an exchange rate of two vigor points for the reduction of one damage.
Damage reduction - Armor and some abilities subtract their damage reduction score from wound damage before that damage is applied to the character. Unlike D&D, heavy armor does not make a character harder to hit, but it does make them harder to damage.
Regular and Swift attacks - A Regular attack is made with a melee weapon, whether it is held or thrown. Regular attacks to damage as described above. A Swift attack is made by ranged weapons or ranged spells. If the target of a Swift attack has a shield, the attack is resolved as if it were a regular attack. If the target does not have a shield, they take wounds if the attack roll exceeds their Threat (not their Hit) DC. Shields are important in this game.
There are other rules that add complexity to combat, such as called shots and critical threat ranges. I will not try to summarize the social combat called flyting or the five pages of rules on how to grapple.
I can see the value of a system that treats combat fatigue and physical damage differently. However, the system of Threat and Hit DCs, along with damage reduction, just seems like it adds number crunching to a part of the game which should be intense and fast moving. Add in Swift attacks, and the chances of making a mistake, using the wrong number in this system gets to be pretty high. Kudos for good intentions, but the combat system is just to clunky for me.
Overall, I do not see a need for Dragon Heresy as a separate RPG. If the world were fleshed out more (as it is in Dungeon Fantasy), it could fly as a 5E setting supplement. Trying to make it a stand-alone game that differs significantly from 5E in only a few places, just does not work.
Den of the Red Wolf 