New Gothic TTRPG by Ed Greenwood and Gwendolyn Kestrel

[Psyren]

Described as "Diablo meets Castlevania", Ed Greenwood (Forgotten Realms) and Gwendolyn Kestrel (a lead D&D 4e designer - wait, don't leave!) are collaborating on a new TRPG called Hellguard: Curse of Cania.

https://www.dicebreaker.com/games/he...rse-caina-trpg

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...curse-of-caina

Not too many details on the system, though it appears to be xd6 (3d6? 6d6? 8d6?) going by the images. It's also described as "rules-light" and "anime-inspired combat." There are also plans to include a compatibility section that will allow you to run Hellguard in conjunction with other systems (presumably D&D, PF and/or CoC) as well.

[False God]

So... a 2D side-scrolling 'Vania RPG where you slaughter everything within sight in hope of good loot drops?

I mean, this sounds like a great premise for a video game (and I liked 4E), but "Diablo+Castlevania" tells me more about the gameplay than the themes. Frankly after the absolute garbage that was Diablo Immortal, I'm not sure I'd be quick to name-drop that IP as a source of inspiration.

*peruses the Kickstarter* Breaker? Knight? Witch? Um....someone over at ActiBlizz might want to call their IP guys...

[Zombimode]

I'm disappointed that it is not a Gothic TTRPG.

[Psyren]

So... a 2D side-scrolling 'Vania RPG where you slaughter everything within sight in hope of good loot drops?

I mean, this sounds like a great premise for a video game (and I liked 4E), but "Diablo+Castlevania" tells me more about the gameplay than the themes. Frankly after the absolute garbage that was Diablo Immortal, I'm not sure I'd be quick to name-drop that IP as a source of inspiration.

Ha! Point. I was more highlighting the... star power?... behind the creators than the gameplay, which AFAICT is still a bit vague.

Though I'd disagree that there's no theme information - Castlevania and Diablo have some pretty distinct themes, such as being grossly outnumbered by swarms of varied baddies, encouraging lots of dark imagery, and cinematic/brutal boss fights.

*peruses the Kickstarter* Breaker? Knight? Witch? Um....someone over at ActiBlizz might want to call their IP guys...

Am I missing something? I can't think of any Blizzard product that uses those names.

I'm disappointed that it is not a Gothic TTRPG.

Sorry to disappoint, I actually forgot this one existed when I wrote the title I was just lifting words from the KS page.

[False God]

Ha! Point. I was more highlighting the... star power?... behind the creators than the gameplay, which AFAICT is still a bit vague.

Though I'd disagree that there's no theme information - Castlevania and Diablo have some pretty distinct themes, such as being grossly outnumbered by swarms of varied baddies, encouraging lots of dark imagery, and cinematic/brutal boss fights.

True, I suppose I often think of Diablo and Castlevania more as genres than their specific imagery due to my time playing video games. I'm actually a bit curious how they intend to have this run as a 3-4hr game with that style of gameplay (it does mention tactical grid-based combat and IME those are not fast games).

Am I missing something? I can't think of any Blizzard product that uses those names.

The "class" names are extremely similar to the actual "classes" in Diablo and the imagery from their minis is also similar. Sure, Blizzard doesn't have rights to stuff like "Barbarian" or "Paladin" exclusively. I suppose my point is that it REALLY screams "We're porting Diablo to the table!!!" which to me seems a little uncreative given the creators.

[Psyren]

True, I suppose I often think of Diablo and Castlevania more as genres than their specific imagery due to my time playing video games. I'm actually a bit curious how they intend to have this run as a 3-4hr game with that style of gameplay (it does mention tactical grid-based combat and IME those are not fast games).

Point, I have no idea. And if it's dice pool that could be even worse!

The "class" names are extremely similar to the actual "classes" in Diablo and the imagery from their minis is also similar. Sure, Blizzard doesn't have rights to stuff like "Barbarian" or "Paladin" exclusively. I suppose my point is that it REALLY screams "We're porting Diablo to the table!!!" which to me seems a little uncreative given the creators.

I think anyone would be hard-pressed to come up with class names that haven't been previously used in some other game honestly. But no, none of the ones you've listed are in any Blizzard RPG that i know of.

[Jervis]

Wow thanks for posting this. Looks pretty neat. I might have to actually back something again.

[Anonymouswizard]

I think anyone would be hard-pressed to come up with class names that haven't been previously used in some other game honestly. But no, none of the ones you've listed are in any Blizzard RPG that i know of.

This is why I haven't developed my idea for a dark fantasy RPG. I've yet to come up with decent class names that aren't clearly inspired by DIE.

Blizzard classes, however, get fairly generic names. Druid, Wizard, Demon Hunter. These classes are certainly going in the same direction, but no more than, for example, Romance of the Perilous Land.

Anyway, it looks interesting, but likely nothing new. I'll probably back the Kickstarter once I have my paycheck, but if the rules push towards the pregenerated PCs I'll likely just leave it on my shelf.

[Slipjig]

The description makes it sound like most modules are going to an investigation followed by a combat scenario. You can pack a pretty decent amount of action into a 2-hour encounter so long as either a) there aren't that many figures on the field or b) the combat is relatively simple.

I'm digging the "using our top-tier powers too much lets hellish influence leak into the world, making both the world narratively worse and the enemies tougher" mechanic.

[Anonymouswizard]

So on closer reading it seems to be leaning pretty hard into 'pregens only'. Which is annoying, as otherwise it looks potentially cool but I don't have the money to back the full version.

In general there's some good ideas here. Particularly the strong core loop and focus on shorter self-contained scenarios. I'm just worried that players aren't going to get any customisation, that it'll be five 'characters' instead of five 'classes'.

I'm still probably going to back it at the rulebook level, because character creation can probably be mostly reverse engineered and the gaps filled in. But it's still a disappointment.

[Slipjig]

I'd offer up Gloomhaven as an example where pre-gen characters can still be plenty of fun. Not everybody's cup of tea, but not a dealbreaker. Plus you can write much tighter scenarios if you have a pretty good idea of what the party's abilities will be.

[Psyren]

I believe their goal is for you to regularly get through an adventure in a single 3-4 hour session. Doing that alongside character creation would be challenging.

[Anonymouswizard]

I believe their goal is for you to regularly get through an adventure in a single 3-4 hour session. Doing that alongside character creation would be challenging.

Adventure≠campaign.

But that just means you want a short character creation sequence. Like 'roll stats, pick class, go'.

[Psyren]

Adventure≠campaign.

Normally yes but my understanding is that this is actually what they're going for. Each adventure corresponds either to a one-shot, or at most a module in a multi-part AP. Whereas in D&D/PF, a single module could typically consist of multiple days/sessions. The stated goal is for this to be more accessible for board gamers who are newer to TTRPGs.

But that just means you want a short character creation sequence. Like 'roll stats, pick class, go'.

That's indeed shorter than D&D, but still not as short as "pick pregen, go" though.

[Pauly]

Gwendolyn Kestrel?
Is that her birth name? It sounds more like the name you’d give your urban fantasy character in a series of pulp novels about fighting demons and vampyres whilst trying to live life as a modern girl.

[Batcathat]

Having no character creation at all seems likely to be a turn off for a lot of potential players (granted, I think I like character creation more than most, so my opinion might not be representative). Better to have a quick and easy character creation system (plus some pregens for people who prefer not to), I think.

[Satinavian]

Personally i am completely uninterested in something that intends to be used for only one-shots. That is even more a turn off than the pre-gens only.

[Anonymouswizard]

Normally yes but my understanding is that this is actually what they're going for. Each adventure corresponds either to a one-shot, or at most a module in a multi-part AP. Whereas in D&D/PF, a single module could typically consist of multiple days/sessions. The stated goal is for this to be more accessible for board gamers who are newer to TTRPGs.

And in Savage Worlds the average module is one to two pages long!

Not everything is D&D.

That's indeed shorter than D&D, but still not as short as "pick pregen, go" though.

And the options can't coexist because...

A lot of people just have more connection to a character they've created for themselves. And what I've described is barely more complex than what some board games use.

[Psyren]

Not everything is D&D.

I'm well aware, but them name-dropping Greenwood and Kestrel is very clearly marketing to the D&D audience who would know those names, so it's the most likely frame of reference for their other descriptions. (For example, when they say the game is "rules-light", it might actually be considered rules-heavy compared to some other stuff out there, most likely they're comparing to D&D.)

And the options can't coexist because...

I never said they couldn't; I was just stating a fact (that pregens are the fastest way to pick up and play.)

Judging from one of the questions on the Comments Page, chargen rules don't look to be included. "Magor" asked about character creation rules 3 days ago and the official response only mentions the pregens.

[KorvinStarmast]

Actual game authors / devs are: Max Carr and Mikael D. Sebag.
It appears to me that Greenwood and Kestrel are name drops; as far as I can tell "contributing author" covers a lot of ground.
The other contributing authors are: Noura Ibrahim, Richard Lee Byers, B. Dave Walters.
It looks as though their stuff phases in upon achieving various stretch goals ... we'll see.

chargen rules don't look to be included.

My takeaway from the kickstarter page when I read through it a few days ago was: "the five PCs are already made, go play them."
If you scroll down a bit you get to the picture that says:
Five Playable Classes. The text reads:
Play as one of five pregenerated characters, each descended from an ancient and powerful bloodline.

The "class" names are extremely similar to the actual "classes" in Diablo and the imagery from their minis is also similar. Sure, Blizzard doesn't have rights to stuff like "Barbarian" or "Paladin" exclusively. I suppose my point is that it REALLY screams "We're porting Diablo to the table!!!" which to me seems a little uncreative given the creators.

When I bought the Diablo II collector's set when Diablo II came out, there was included in that box a little D&D (Edition 3, I think) set of counters and stuff that I don't recall ever playing. It's somewhere in a box with my amazon picture and my barbarian picture, and I may trip over it this weekend when I clean out some stuff from my upstairs closet.

[Quertus]

Well, add me to the “not a fan of pregens” list. I’m not really invested in telling someone else’s story - I can read a book or watch a movie if I want that experience.

However, I was hit by the perverse idea that maybe they have a chargen system, but that it’s not balanced, and they realize that it’s easier to build balanced pregens with their system than to balance the system.

[Anonymouswizard]

I think the thing that annoys me is that Chuubo's Marvelous Wish Granting Engine is focused on pregens, and it still includes character creation rules.

Honestly this sounds like a great situation for Playbooks or the like. Pick a few traits, write in a name, pick an optional move, and bam you're good to go. Then make certain points in the adventure allow characters to grab more optional moves on exchange for [bad thing]. Throw in some line about them only being able to keep a certain amount of power safely and you can rest at the start of every module.

Although I do love that Knight figure.

[Thane of Fife]

It appears to me that Greenwood and Kestrel are name drops; as far as I can tell "contributing author" covers a lot of ground.

Yeah, I agree. I also think it's a little weird calling Kestrel a 4e designer because pretty much every book I've ever seen with her name on it is for 3e (she may honestly be most well known for the Book of Erotic Fantasy, though she was involved with plenty of more mainstream 3e stuff).

My takeaway from the kickstarter page when I read through it a few days ago was: "the five PCs are already made, go play them."

Honestly, to me, it reads more like a game in the style of Hero Quest or Descent, but maybe with a little more non-combat stuff lathered on. Maybe closer to Dragon Strike.

There's a link to some sample rules; take a look at those.

[Schwann145]

I think I'm more interested in John Wick as a Design Consultant than any of the Contributing Authors, tbh, lol (even if I'm a fan of them as well!)

[Leon]

Gwendolyn Kestrel (a lead D&D 4e designer - wait, don't leave!)

A reason to stay, is named on a number of 3.5 books

Frankly after the absolute garbage that was Diablo Immortal, I'm not sure I'd be quick to name-drop that IP as a source of inspiration.

One bad apple of a diablo game dosen't mean much for anyone with fond memories of 1and 2

Breaker? Knight? Witch? Um....someone over at ActiBlizz might want to call their IP guys...

Fairly generic names, may aswell say call Pazio for having Witch in there.




I have the Diablo II Diablerie 3rd Ed conversion book in my bookshelf, never used it but i had some neat stuff in it.

[Talakeal]

As someone who is myself making a Gothic Fantasy RPG, I will be keeping a close eye on this, if only because it is such an under-represented and ill-defined genre.

[Anonymouswizard]

As someone who is myself making a Gothic Fantasy RPG, I will be keeping a close eye on this, if only because it is such an under-represented and ill-defined genre.

Honestly I don't think it's a competitor. Your game has character creation.

[Eldan]

A reason to stay, is named on a number of 3.5 books

From some googling, other than the Book of Erotic Fantasy, she did the Monster Manual 3 (that was... fine?) and Races of the Dragon, a book I don't remember, possibly because I might be confusing all the contents with Dragon Magic and Draconomicon. Then she has a few second author credits with Bruce Cordell: Demonweb Pits, Underdark and Planar Handbook.

[Talakeal]

Honestly I don't think it's a competitor. Your game has character creation.

Not worried about competition or mechanical similarities. Mostly I am curious about setting genre and how they are using gothic fantasy.

[Satinavian]

Hmmm, i don't actually see any prominent mentioning of Gothic Fantasy on the Kickstarter page and i am also not sure that Diablo+Castlevania really fits that genre all that well.