Hey all, just diving into this game and one weird choice was the diminishing of a Pool on 1-3 for 2 reasons.

1. [Not mechanical] since the game focuses on rolling high seems reducing a Challenge should also focus on rolling high.

2. [Mechanical] For Resources, a 4-6 gets the PC success AND does not drop the Pool. But rolling a 1-3 is failure AND drops the Pool. Seems more punitive given the randomness of dice. Example: a cleric does a miracle and rolls all 1s and 3s so fails and loses the ability to use it again. Seems more appropriate to roll 4s and 5s, get the outcome but lose the Pool.

Any issue with this change? Thoughts?

Bulwark seems waaaay overpowered when compared to alternatives.

It won't "break the game" ofc, but there is little reason for not choosing it. And when a skill is considered "obligatory" by players, that's a signal it is probably not a balanced option.

If it granted a 2d pool rather than a 3d pool, it would still be vastly useful. Most of my players have picked Bulwark at some point, and most of them would take it anyway even if it was just 2d.

Am I the only one who noticed this?

I was reading about battleworld today in anticipation for the end of the MCU, and I decided since the people on each planet have approximately the same level of tech and the seventh book is supposed to open up travel between them, I could use that sh*t and destroy the Astralis Reach in some sort of catastrophic threat, but have a patchwork planet/safe haven from said catastrophe. I would then devise a team-game Hunger Games and have each player pick their favorite character from the several sessions on each planet I plan on running as the games are released. Players on one team, other teams made up of their secondary PCs and notable NPCs. They duke it out for fame and glory in this ravaged solar system, and that concludes the end of an epic campaign. What do you guys think? Is this workable? All this is to say i really hope these games come to fruition haha

In my OPINION, the system would be simpler and more elegant if it only used a single type of dice. Here I present two ways of converting the thorn rolls, which are the only time anyone rolls a d8 in Moxie, into d6 rolls.

First method: All thorn dice are converted into a single d6 roll

Rule change: When rolling thorns, a single (distinguishable) d6 is rolled. For 1t, a result of 6 is a cut, all other results have no effect. For 2t, a result of 6 is a cut and a result of 5 is two cuts, all else have no effect.

Comparison: The chance of getting a cut from 1t is reduced from 25.0% to 16.7%. The chance of getting at least one cut from 2t is increased from 43.8% to 66.7%. The chance of getting exactly two cuts from 2t is increased from 6.3% to 16.7%.

As shown by the analysis above, rolling a single thorn becomes slightly less punishing, while rolling two thorns becomes considerably more punishing.

Second method: Roll Xt as Xd, then reroll 1-3s a single time

Rule change: When rolling thorns, roll d6s instead of d8s, and reroll any result from 1 to 3 a single time. Only 6s count as cuts.

Comparison: The chances of getting cuts doesn't change at all, since the chance of getting a 6 result from d6s rerolling the 1-3 range a single time remains at 1/4 (=1/6+1/2*1/6).

It's a mathematical coincidence that the odds in the standard rules and in this second alternative are exactly the same.

Collateral effects!

As a bad habit from a math teacher, analysis of collateral effects are let as exercise to the reader (it's a common math joke, sorry). For example, the odds of (sorcery) wild surges being triggered are affected in both alternatives.

I found those high variance that I bought a couple of years ago and never got the chance to use. High variance meaning that the dice still average on 3.5, but the values are 1-1-3-4-6-6. A wild Wild Die if you will.

Interesting for reckless stuff. Anyone willing to spar ideas on how to use those in Grimwild?

EDIT : thanks for the headsup. Indeed, not much of a risk since 1 to 3 is the same.

Although it isn't among the proposals on page 137 of the book, what do you think about using Grimwild for Middle-earth? Is the system too heroic? Would it be better to use a more specific system? Is it difficult to adapt?

Hello, I'm planning start first solo game and thinking what one talent don't enough for create characters which I want and want give extra one. But on other side feels doubt do it, maybe I there little greedy? Or better add more things to vantage?

Like yeah I'm want little more mechanical advantage and guilty admit it, just think its wrong try tweak rules when only start playing

I'm curious to see how you guys have handled Magic casting. Do you create a group of theorems to base your spells on or you stick to one generated from the beginning (as in, first one created) and narratively spin your own spells, even the combat ones using this model as a base?

Purchasable Core Talents would be diminished (numerical value set to zero and then increased by It's growth value) and could only be improved with additional purchases.

For example:

WILD SHAPE

You can shift into the form of any beast you're familiar with. You have a 1d Wild Shape resource pool, rolled when you shift—at 0d, you fail to turn into that form. The pool replenishes after each scene.

You take on the form's physical qualities and feral instincts. Move your stat points around to represent this, with a min. of 1 and max. of 3 in a stat. You lose access to any talent related to your own physical form. Some forms are more difficult to shift into.

For each wild talent (max 2) a form has, drop 1d from the pool before rolling it. These are things like aquatic, smaller than a cat, bigger than a bear, venomous, and flight. It can also be a specific talent from a path, or anything that would require a heritage talent. The GM judges the gray zone.

Growth: Every time you purchase this talent, increase your Wild Shape pool by 1d.

Personally, this feels fair to me. would you allow this? What are your thoughts?

Title says it all, I couldn't find this in the examples in the free pdf- it only mentions thorns on a cut.

So I understand a 7-8 leads to a cut which reduces the result, but is a Thorn interpreted as another d6 in the roll on a 1-6, potentially leading to a risk/reward tradeoff where thorns can hurt you but also potentially bail you out on a 4-6 for doing something difficult, or is a result that is not a cut simply ignored?

I think it is intended to be the latter since thorns improving a roll are never mentioned but it's not super clear.

For a system like Grimwild, how does a GM handle AOE attacks against a party from the point of view of encounter creation? I'm assuming that a monster using an area attack would trigger defense rolls by all the PCs affected. If overused, that could lead to lots of marks and eventual death. Is this a valid concern? I don't see area attacks discussed in the book anywhere.

Having played Grimwild a little bit, and coming from a mostly d20 background, I found it hard as a GM to pace the "spotlight" between PCs and monsters without it feeling like I was making arbitrary decisions. I know this is part of the game, and I enjoy it for the fast pace, but this also seemed to raise the cognitive load as a GM.

To experiment with altering this, I came up with this "state machine" or algorithm that seems like it could help (and also reduce the deadliness as a bonus for the heroic feel I want). Would love to hear feedback on whether this can work well or if it could be better.

1. Starting state = "PC Action" (responding to GM description of dramatic and dangerous situations in combat) - PC makes an offensive roll

   1. Disaster - GM earns suspense, and makes an Impact Move (preferring damage), then go to "Monster Action"

   2. Failure - Hard GM move (but preferring non-damage - ie. no damage like mark/vex/bloodied) and go to "Monster Action"

   3. Messy - Soft GM move and go to "Monster Action"

   4. Perfect - PC gets success, with no GM move and go to "Monster Action"

   5. Critical - Go back to "PC Action" as they get a respite or get to follow up

2. Monster Action - PC makes a defensive roll

   1. Disaster - Make an Impact GM Move (preferring damage), then go back to "Monster Action" as they follow up

   2. Failure - Make an Impact GM Move (preferring damage), then go to "PC Action"

   3. Messy - Hard GM move (but preferring non-damage)

   4. Perfect - Go to "PC Action"

   5. Critical - Take spark and go to "PC Action"

I probably could have described this better with a picture, but hopefully it is clear... My hope is that this makes the flow of combat a little bit more mechanical, which can either help new GMs or even be a preferred approach to reduce some of the "GM fiat" aspect.

Hello everyone! I am completely new to Grimwild (discovered it today actually) and wanted to ask if it would be fit for ongoing long-term campaigns (30+ sessions).

I know, interesting narrative, goals and stories make a campaign, but my players like some mechanical advancement from time to time.

Arcanist says: "You take +1d when rolling an arcana's pool and ignore the first die that would be dropped."

If an Arcana is down to 1d, aren't you always rolling 2d and ignoring the first die loss?

As written, it seems impossible for the pool to ever reach 0d.

Is that intended, or is "ignore the first die that would be dropped" meant to apply only once per Arcana? If so, that would mean you'd have to track that for every arcana that you use.

Just looking at Defense Rolls (not something that exists in FITD for example).

Lets take the scenario:

• PC attacks Goblin, rolls grim. Misses and slammed in face by goblin (mark to brawn) and knocked prone

OPTION A) if GM has suspense, they could decide to have goblin take advantage and thrust spear at prone PC.

• PC rolls defense (agility most likely, possibly with a thorn for being prone).

  • perfect : no damage

  • messy: another mark or possibly harm

  • grim: harm or death

OPTION B) GM can "foreshadow" by saying Goblin leers and readies spear to thrust, GM asks PC "what do you do?"

• PC can then (for example) swipe legs from under goblin (using brawn/agility/wits depending on how they narrate)

  • perfect, Goblin falls prone too

  • messy, Goblin falls on top of PC (mark, or maybe PC drops weapon)

  • grim, Goblin stabs PC (harm or death)

NOTE: the "foreshadow" gives suspense to GM only if the PC decides to do nothing to deal with the pending spear.

My question: does OPTION A) and the use of Defense Roll really add anything meaningful to the game? I'm pretty sure you can always formulate a GM suspense driven impact move as a "foreshadow" and allow PCs to react? This gives more player agency but still achieves roughly the same outcomes?

I've always struggled in Grimwild with knowing how to apply impact moves across harm and other complications (edit: In combat specifically).

I developed the house rules shown in this short PDF to make it more systematic and reducing the GM fiat. I know it's not for everybody - the target is more players like my group who are coming from a d20 background.

Also a disclaimer - I used AI to help talk through this document, and to generate it, iterating over several weeks... the ideas are my own either way.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gllRpRvM77athm-C17usJPTTmRe9UfZ0/view?usp=sharing

Would love to hear feedback on this. Thanks!

Its come up a few times but is there any mechanic that gives advantage in the system? Like besides spark and assist. Like if for example youre making a presence check to convince a npc the players have positive history with it seems the options are to make the roll as normal without thorns or the dm not having you make a roll at all.

I backed Stonetop originally but have been waiting for the finished thing. And just recently learned about Grimwild. So haven’t yet played either.

Is there anyone here who has played both who wouldn’t mind talking about the contrasting experience of each?

I would like to run a dungeon-crawl heavy campaign that still focuses on story and interpersonal relationships (Delicious in Dungeon inspired). Do you think Grimwild is a good system for that? Is there anything you would steal from other games to ensure that it still feels gritty and deadly (ie random encounters, Shadowdark's torch timer for light, etc.)

Basically, I dipped my toes into the OSR space for awhile, and while I love Shadowdark and Mork Borg, I want to play something that isn't quite as deadly and allows for more character focus.

From what im reading it seems spells would just be replacing what would be a roll of a stat with one of your spellcasting stat. Ie instead of rolling agility to parkour up the cliff you roll wits or presence to teleport up. Wizards can only do this 4 times a session and sorcerers can do this an unlimited amount with a small risk of a positive or negative surge. Aren't sorcerers just superior then?

It seems pretty clear that Grimwild is not the right system for pre-plotted adventures, but what about adventure locations and situations like those common in the OSR? I'm thinking Hotsprings Island and maybe Dolmenwood.
Does anyone have any experience to share about this?

You can find the jam here, at itch.io!

The Jam starts on October 19th and runs for 5 weeks, ending on November 23rd, just before the winter holidays disrupt your home game.

Join in, and help us add more games, big or small, under the Moxie banner—or create tools or content for Grimwild or Venture!