d9000 Patricks

Knave 2 Retrospective and Review

The physical copies of the Knave 2e Kickstarter are shipped or on their way. That seems like a good time to share my experiences with the system.

I've used the system for a year starting in June 2023 with the first draft available through Kickstarter. I run two separate campaigns at the same time:

The game is not to be confused with full ecosystems like Shadowdark RPG or Dungeon Crawl Classics. It's compatible with old school adventures but there aren't a many written expressly for use with Knave 2e and you'll have to do some conversion work on the fly. It's a game for the GM who's also a tinkerer and game designer, with OSR modules and bestiaries at hand.

I like Knave 2. I'll focus on the problems I had with it but it's still a game I would recommend over most OSR hacks and heartbreakers. Especially for groups with an experienced OSR referee who runs for players new to the genre.

This review is mostly aimed at other GMs who plan to use the system for a longer campaign. I'll focus on problems I ran into so you can make an informed decision whether the system is four you and nip issues in the bud in your own game. There's a checklist at the end of the post that summarizes my personal pain points in the form of solution-oriented questions.

Character Creation

Player characters have the classic six attributes but they are on a scale of 1-10 and they double as a bonus to d20 rolls. The system grants 3 points at every level, including level 1. Every stat has an extra use. They double as saving throws. What attributes are used for are mixed up compared to retroclones in an attempt to avoid dump stats.

This system has some upsides:

There are also downsides:

I stuck with the attribute distribution for the online campaign but I changed it for the offline campaign with kids. I made Dexterity the stat for intiative, ranged attacks and lockpicking; and Wisdom the stat for active blessings. This more conventional distribution felt better in practice.

Death & Dying

Damage is dealt first to HP, then to inventory slots as wounds. Players have 10+CON inventory slots.

In the online game it's somewhat annyoing to deal with shifting inventories over text. In the offline game there was a lot of erasing and rewriting. In a future offline game, I'd definitely use a physical inventory system such as Mausritter item cards or business cards in a plastic holder or Post-It notes.

Wounds that replace items is something I liked more in theory than in practice, where it's often a lot of inventory management. I would be willing to give it another try with a physical card inventory from the start, though.

Resolution System

Knave 2 manages to resolve all ability checks and saving throws with a single roll, even opposed checks. These rolls can also be reversed. That's a very clever innovation carried over from Knave's first edition. I'm a fan. You simply roll against 11 + the enemy's stat. Monster stats are equal to their HD, or half of their HD if the stat seems like their weakness (a Zombie may not be dexterous, an Ogre may not be wise). Any situational advantage grants a +5, or a -5 for disadvantages. Fitting careers grant a +5 outside of combat. There is no limit to stacking these advantages and no automatic failure and success for a natural 1 or 20. My students learned to use the advantages heavily after 5-10 sessions, looking to blind or trip high AC enemies. The online adults generally forgot about it, even though I tried to point out they have the option to stack advantages.

A minor downside to the mechanic is that you'll have to do some math on the fly. I'm not really a math guy and even after almost a year of running the system once to twice a week I get confused about who rolls against whose derived value from what. Then again, I tend to switch around whether the GM or the players roll based on what seems quickest, which may be the real problem - I spend time thinking about what resolution is the quickest before resolving an action which can mean I accidentally try to simulate both of them simultaneously in my head.

A major downside that's not adressed in the book is how the system falters when enemies have 10+ HD and kind of breaks down for 20+ HD monsters. 10+ HD monsters require at least one point in the corresponding stat or advantage to even have a chance and 20+ require players to stack up advantages even with a +10 bonuses AND even if they are "weak" at something, they'll still produce a target number of 21+. Also, high HD enemies auto-hit unless they are plastered with disadvantages. You'll easily get into a situation where a player rolls the best value they possibly could have rolled and it's still a failure, or an enemy rolls a 1 and still hits. That seems off to me. It might be a conscious design decision to promote stacking advantages. It's not adressed in the book. It's definitely a pain point for me because enemies encountered in my campaigns went up to 16 HD in both campaigns and are likely to go higher in one of them. Obviously: "Rulings, not rules" applies. Still, high-level monster stats aren't the kind of thing I feel comfortable in just winging.

Attack rolls of 21+ grant a free combat maneuver, not unlike to how Mighty Deeds work in DCC. I really like this prompt for creativity and it's quite elegant. Players will have to invest in the attack attributes STR or WIS to get this result but there is no need for something like a deed die mechanic. It's not always easy to come up with something interesting, so I stole a rule from Mythic Bastionland and gave players a choice between the free combat maneuver or a +1 to damage.

Players can break a weapon to deal double damage. This option was rarely used, players forgot or didn't want to bother with buying new weapons all the time. As soon as they get magic weapons, they'll use those. I think this rule has potential for more rules-savvy players since you have a reason to use mundane weapons even after piling up magic weapons. However, as I said, both of my groups basically ignored this rule with rare exceptions. I like this rule in theory but it didn't do much in practice.

On a natural 1 attack roll, the weapon breaks. This led to some mild giggling and fun interpretations when playing against Goblins who clearly aren't able to construct their weapons properly or when coming up with how a Giant Hawk's "weapon" may break (broken beak, bent claw). Both groups were adamantly against applying this rule to hard-won magic items and I wasn't going to be mean about it. This means the rule overall favored the players. It's one of the better fumble rules out there in my opinion.

Procedures

Encounter Distance, Surprise, Initiative

Knave 2 includes rules for encounter distance and surprise that fit into the d20 rolls. Wisdom vs. Dexterity to determine surprise, for example. Party leaders compare their Charisma to determine which side goes first.

The mechanics replace the traditional d6 rolls from B/X D&D but work essentially the same except for initative which is a single roll. No individual initative, no rerolling initative every round.

Leader initiative continues to cause some friction in my games. "Who is the leader?" I ask my players. "Whoever has the most Charisma!". And so the players begin staring at each others character sheets or counting out how much Charisma they have for an awkward moment. Whenever I have the presence of mind, I replace leader initiative with a CHA roll of the character closest to the enemy. That's how surprise works, too (except with a WIS roll).

Reaction

Knave 2 uses the traditional 2d6 reaction roll but includes specific reactions for every result. I like the table a lot (e.g. 6: avoid the PCs, 8: follow or observe). Except for the most common result on a 7: "Ignore the PCs". It's just too boring a result that happens too often. And players very rarely do something other than ignore them back.

The Hazard Die

The Hazard Die has been around for a while and replaces turn-tracking with the random encounter roll. In Knave 2, each round the GM rolls a d6:

I quickly removed the fatigue result which never prompted an interesting decision or really anything but time wasted. Of course you're going to rest, unless you're escaping the dungeon in which case of course you're going to take the 1 damage. It just kept being a drag and required artificial explanations. "The sun burns so hot you have to rest or lose a hit point!", "You climb the stairs to exhaustion: rest or take damage!" - "... okay? (mildly irritated head scratching)".

I kept the Burn result but I ignored it when it came up twice in a row.

Ignoring results that don't make sense is what makes the hazard die work in general in my mind. Which I really don't like, I feel like I'm betraying my role as a neutral arbiter. Maybe it should be called the "Reminder Die"? I digress.

I kept the Sign result though I must admit at some point I forgot that you're supposed to actually remember and use the encounter the next time a 1 is rolled. I started to just roll randomly. Oops.

The Delve Shift result I removed last. I wanted it to work but couldn't come up with enough interesting changes in Castle Xyntillan, a haunted castle. This result kept catching me off guard and whatever I came up with was usually ignored, mistaken for an encounter or mistaken for a meaningful clue. Here's an Example Delve Shift using vermin: "A bunch of rats race past you!". Typical reactions: (1) "Oh no! How big are they? How many?" - "just regular rats, just 4" - "oh okay I guess, we move on"; (2) "WHY? OH NO RUN, HIDE" - "you run, you hide, nothing happens"; (3) "Oh yeah we rolled a 4, whatever." All of these reactions are simply less interesting to me than an actual encounter, encounter sign or continued delve would be. In fact, the most interesting Delve Shifts always ended up actually being a red herring to an encounter (e.g. apparitions or doors lock around you). I prefer those signs of a presence with the presence attached. Other examples for Delve Shifts would be falling debris or wind etc. - a lot of those assume a spatial awareness of the dungeon that just wasn't there when running a published megadungeon out of the book or a one page dungeon I put into my sandbox months ago. I also thought of using a gust of wind to blow out torches, for example. But again, this produces red herrings since there are regional effects that blow out torches and I feel antagonistic coming up with harmful effects willy-nilly while the game is already running. And preparing omens that might come up on a 4 feels like much work for little benefit. If I went through the bother to prepare descriptive clues in advance, I just tell those kinds of omens to players as they explore and don't wait for a 4 to be rolled. I love the idea of a changing environment as part of dungeons but coming up with them on the fly in an existing megadungeon didn't work for me. It overall produced less interesting experiences than just rolling an encounter or exploring the next room. I think the Delve Shift idea works better when attached to an adventure rather than to an always-on procedure.

I haven't used the hex crawling procedures beyond encounter rolls, so I won't comment on them.

Relic Magic & Patrons

Relic Magic is essentially the divine magic part of the game. Players can fulfill a mission from a deity, devil, nature spirit or other "Patron". If they succeed, they get a blessing attached to a relic in their inventory. Players can find relics (items) and shrines (locations) in the world. A player with an appropriate relic can get a mission from a Patron (= god, devil, nature spirit etc.) at their shrine. If they succeed, they get a blessing related to the Patron's domain of power attached to the relic. A blessing is a magic ability of some kind.

You have to complete the game yourself here - there are 100 spell books, but not a single blessing and barely any guidance. A blessing should be "small but useful, such as an aura or minor spell" and "designed in collaboration with the player".

The system produced a lot of pressure for me to develop any religious room and location in modules further. That may be on me to a large degree because I misunderstoot an important part. I only just now realized that communication with a patron should only be possible if the player already has a relic. I always let players communicate with patrons as soon as they found a shrine. Solution: Read carefully and treat relics as part of the walkie-talkies they are and not just as the counterpart to a spell book. Oops.

Coming up with a blessing is a challenge. I muddled through it but here are some suggestions:

Another issue cropped up because my Patron missions usually required the whole party to do something in order for one person to get rewarded. In the campaign with kids this lead to jealousy about who gets a relic. The players who didn't get the reward from a mission felt short-changed because they had to do the mission as well but didn't get the power. I thought about giving every player a relic and blessing for every mission but it seemed like the players would end up with a lot of the same abilties and quickly become very same-y. I talked to them about that and gave them a choice, in the end they agreed (or at least didn't have the guts to disagree when asked for their opinion haha). Still, the whole "quest-for-it" reward system introduces an envy and jealousy problem. Adults were timid to pursue their missions because they wanted to avoid being the one person that gets credit for a group effort. Players were concerned they'd step on each other's toes and tried to avoid the exact issue I ran into with less mature players. One potential solution for Knave 2 games might be to steer these missions in a direction where the person who has the most to gain also takes a higher risk ("defeat the dragon from within its belly" instead of "defeat the dragon"). I haven't really figured out a satisfying solution for me. Maybe it's just one of these times where you have to take the good with the bad, similar to xp-for-gold which increases player autonomy but sometimes incentivizes psychopathic behavior. That's not exclusive to Knave 2, of course: I've played in both the Reavers and Arden Vulgaris campaigns before, both of which use different systems with similar "quest-for-it" mechanics that reward single players (Wolves Upon the Coast has "Boasts" to the party and Arden Vulgaris has houseruled "Oaths" to the gods into Shadowdark). The issue cropped up in both campaigns as well, although responsible adults generally have it under control. Just be aware of the issue, it's not always obvious from the GM side.

Alchemy

Alchemy is another freeform magic type system. Instead of a list of fixed recipes, players themselves can pitch a potion effect if they have monster parts and can make an argument for a loose association (example: a dragon's lung to breathe fire or for fire resistance). They have to roll a 16+ on an INT check or the potion fails. If you succeed by 10+. a recipe is discovered and no further rolls are needed for the exact same potion. I like the system and I'll likely keep some version of it around in a future campaign. It's probably my favorite freeform magic type mechanic together with Whitehack miracles. There are some things you may want to keep in mind.

Taking your time to brew a potion grants +5 to the roll. What both groups very quickly figured out is that a player with the alchemist career gets another +5. This means that a player who chooses to invest 3 INT in their character at level one will be guaranteed to succeed a brewing attempt by level 3. This meant the alchemist career was in very high demand for a second character in both games. I'm not sure I like that. It's one instance that makes me think a 1 should automatically be a failure, regardless of bonuses; or maybe the alchemist career shouldn't exist.

The system is designed in such a way that the players are supposed to make a pitch and an argument for a potion effect, then the referee decides if it makes sense or what would be fair instead. Even after 20+ sessions and heavy use of the system, players in both of my games would still end up slaying a monster, then ask me: "What can I do with the ectoplasm/skeleton bone/panther legs?". There seems to be some sort of player instinct or mental block to unlearn the habit of asking a GM what an item does exactly. I usually have an idea but I usually also have to actively remind myself to say "it's up to you pitch me something that makes sense". And players usually come up with something themselves! I'd advise you to suppress your own ideas here for a moment until they had a moment to get creative themselves.

One player asked if they could combine potion effects that are already brewed. I agreed but under the following conditions:

Here are some potion ideas directly from player brains:

Random Tables

Knave 2e comes with a lot of d100 tables with entries of just one or two words. Highlights are:

I like random tables, though I feel like Ben Milton couldn't out-compete his previous game Maze Rats. I found myself using my Maze Rats copy over Knave 2 both at the table and during prep. Knave 2 just made it harder for me to find what I was looking for for multple reasons:

Not to mention that Maze Rats was translated in various languages by third parties, including my native tongue. I doubt that Knave 2 will see the same treatment since it's longer and not licensed under CC-BY 4.0, meaning people can't translate and sell it for their own profit as easily.

Adventuring Gear

Knave 2 doesn't list individual prices for low-cost adventuring gear. Items are common, uncommon or rare which cost 5, 20 and 100+ coins respectively. Common items are found even in villages, uncommon ones only in towns and rare ones only in cities.

The blanket pricing saves a lot of time of looking up prices which are made-up and ahistorical in the first place. I'm a fan.

I could do without the distinction between a 5 and 20 coin tier. Over the course of play I ruled the same items sometimes as common, sometimes as uncommon. I've had to make too many arbitrary gut decisions about whether something is available in a village vs. a town and therefore worth 5 or 20 coins. I wish there was a list of adventuring gear with the suggested rarity. I could hand that to players so they didn't feel obligated to ask me for the price of a rope, pickaxe or 10' foot pole. In a new campaign I'd either make a list of adventuring gear tailored to the setting or be lazy and give up the distinction and price them all at 10c.

Miscellaneous

A Checklist for Knave 2 Campaigns

The following list of problems are almost guaranteed to come up in a longer campaign. Some of them only if you use published adventures which I'll assume you do. If you plan to run Knave 2 for any extended amount of time, you probably want to think about them.

Resources