Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to TSR-era D&D, derived systems, and compatible content.Broadly, OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons as played in the game's first decade—less emphasis on linear adventures and overarching meta-plots and a greater emphasis on player agency.If you are new to the OSR, welcome! Ask us whatever you're curious about: we'll be happy to help you get started.>Troves, Resources, Blogs, etc:http://pastebin.com/9fzM6128>Need a starter dungeon? Here's a curated collection:https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/86342023/#q86358321>Previous thread:>>92545989>TQHave you ever designed your own dungeon? Pic related was some college kid's starter dungeon in 1976. It may be a talent but it's also a skill you can learn.
>TQI've designed many dungeons. Some I considered good, some I considered bad. It turns out that the "design" (layout, etc.) often had very little to do with if players liked it or not. It was more about the impactful emotional moments that occurred during play.
>>92574597>TQEasily over a hundred of them, yes. I want to start doing it commercially soon.
>TQI recently designed a dungeon set in a volcanic mountain with some faction play. I felt rushed making it and would probably change a few things if I ever wanted to run it again.
İs there any legitimate argument to using 4d6k3 rather than 3d6 for ad&d? My players are fine with 3d6 in basic but convinced ad&d is weighted too heavy towards 4d6k3..
>>92574999depends on if you want classes that aren't fighter, thief, cleric and wizard to be playable easily
>>92574999Like >>92575028 says, 3d6 will vastly restrict class choice. AD&D wasn't designed for it. Here's an informative post about probabilities involved with each method:https://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=48623
>>92574999Checked.I'll give you an argument that doesn't even address game balance. Players like to feel like they got "good" characters. If they FEEL like AD&D is weighted toward 4d6k3, then whether it is or not, they will feel like their characters are less than they should be if you use 3d6. They will have less fun as a result, again, whether they are right or not. They might also look for other reasons not to like the campaign, which can cause it to die. All of that over the dice rolling method, and it's the dice rolling method that is the AD&D default to boot.Don't hurt your campaign like that dude. If you run AD&D, use 4d6k3 unless your players actively want to play lower-power PCs.
>Have you ever designed your own dungeon?I've made least 50 dungeons between my years DMing D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder and 5e and now OSR. I like making OSR dungeons because it's a lot different. Not always the biggest fan of the 10' square but that's mostly because it's hard to adjust my mindset to that.
>>92575028>>92575080>>92575103Thanks guys. İm not too married to either route, so think I'll go with 4d6 then and throw them a bone.
>>92575103This is all about expectations. If players come from a system or table where they get 4d6k3 + assign stats, then they will think that's normal and balk at 3d6 in order. If I tell a new player "roll 3d6 for each stat" and they have no understanding of D&D at all, they have no idea whether their character is good or bad. I just took a group of PF2e drones and did a B/X game using 3d6 in order. After explaining the differences in mentality between OSR and modern RPGs, they had zero complaints when their characters had less than optimal stats and jumped into play just fine.Part of the problem with the idea that players must have "good" characters (which is pervasive) is it assumes the players actually know what they want. Players often believe if they just have X ability scores or play Y class that they will have fun. The truth is that both often matter little and the attitude and open-mindedness of the player is more directly related to having fun with the game. I've watched players and also personally had more fun playing sub-average characters than I have playing super characters.
Any of you dungeon designers intentionally used Nintendo design, where a dungeon has one or more overarching gimmicks and you introduce the gimmick first in a neutral sandbox where the party has to actively deal with the gimmick before being allowed to progress?
>>92575235While I agree with everything in your post, it doesn't really apply to the question the other anon asked. His players had played old-school D&D enough to have opinions on character generation methods that differ between editions, so that cat was already out the bag.I do think groups would be better off (assuming they're OSR games) if the players never read anything except race and class descriptions, the way their own spells work, and perhaps some basic setting stuff though. Players knowing huge amounts about the system (including character generation options) is a negative thing, imo.
>>92575400In that scenario I would legitimately just show them the character creation section of the DMG that reads:"One of the great temptations for players is to create super characters. While this is not true of every player all the time, the desire for powerabove everything else afflicts most players at one time or another. Many players see their characters as nothing more than a collection ofnumbers that affects game systems. They don’t think of their characters as personalities to be developed. Players like this want to “win” thegame. These players are missing out on a lot of fun. [...]The greatest difficulty occurs when a player asks to bring in a character from another campaign where characters are more powerful. Unlessyou are prepared to handle them, super characters can seriously disrupt a campaign: Players with average characters gradually become bored and irritated as the powerful characters dominate the action. And players with powerful characters feel held back by their weaker companions. None of this contributes to harmony and cooperation among the characters or the players.Cooperation is a key element of roleplaying. In any group of player characters, everyone has strengths to contribute and weaknesses to overcome. This is the basis for the adventuring party - even a small group with sufficiently diverse talents can accomplish deeds far greaterthan its size would indicate. Now, throw in a character who is an army by himself. He doesn’t need the other characters, except perhaps as cannon fodder or bearers. He doesn’t need allies. His presence alone destroys one of the most fundamental aspects of the game - cooperation."If they don't get it or won't at least approach a different DM's ideas with an open mind and do what is asked of them, I probably don't want to play with them.
>>92575235I do think its reasonable for people to go 'I'd really like to play an Elf' and be allowed a not-actively-self-destructing Elf. I like 3d6 down the line, but I don't think it's some sort of original sin that the player who wants to play the Wizard gets to play the Wizard.3d6 down the line works best with OSR play primarily because of an inherent flaw in the system, that classes have multiple dumpable stats and allocation would allow the system to be easily solved. If that wasn't the case, 3d6 with assign would easily be the best system. We have just decided as a community, generally, that we like the stats too much to want to fix them, so the flaws are just accepted quirks, but you shouldn't mistake that for them *not being flaws*.
>>92575467It's not original sin, it's just that the player don't know what they want, which is why I posted this >>92575450While I sympathize with the idea that a player may have some preconceived hope of playing a certain kind of character, but I almost always find that forcing the player outside of their comfort zone or premade character during character creation ends with better results.3d6 in order is the true spirit of D&D. It's fundamental that the players and the world itself is at least partially controlled by the whims of the dice. The sooner the players accept that (during character creation ideally) the sooner they will accept many other aspects of OSR-style play such as highly common PC death, highly lethal traps, unfortunate encounter rolls, etc.
>>92575450>If they don't get it or won't at least approach a different DM's ideas with an open mind and do what is asked of them, I probably don't want to play with them.I agree with this. I don't think this is what the other anon described, though. His players wanted to use the default character generation method from AD&D to make their AD&D characters, and asked if there was a legit reason to let them use it instead of an objectively worse (in that it will, the vast majority of the time, produce a character with worse ability scores than is standard for AD&D) character generation method for AD&D.To be perfectly frank, the other anon didn't see that there are definitely real reasons for using the 4d6k3 method in AD&D instead of 3d6. Thankfully he had the foresight to ask here, because he was clearly trying to house rule AD&D without sufficient experience with the AD&D system.
>>92575450Doesn't Gygax also say that characters should have two 15s?
>>92575514>3d6 in order is the true spirit of D&DBut AD&D was built on a more generous method of generation, like 4d6 drop low. If you use 4d6 drop low, your ability bonuses* will end up being about the same as if you use flat 3d6 for B/X. That's because you have to roll higher to get the same modifier. And if you use flat 3d6, you tend to end up with really boring characters.*Bonuses, not penalties. You'll have fewer penalties, but that's a perk not a bug, since D&D doesn't always handle penalties well.
>>92575520The DMG spells out the differences and disadvantages of the five methods. Personally, if there is some difference of opinion or strong conflict over very powerful ability scores (4d6, drop lowest, arrange as desired) and very random/weaker ability scores (3d6 in order), just use method 3 (3d6, arrange as desired) which I think is a good middle ground in achieve many positive objectives while given players a chance at the class they want (even though I don't think that's a good idea, but if that's they only way they'll play then so be it).
AD&D 2E uses 3d6 and that’s one of the reasons it’s not liked compared to AD&D 1E.
The way I do character generation for AD&D is 3d 6 8 times, drop 2 worst scores, pick ONE score to assign where you like, and put the rest in order. It sounds weird as fuck, but it threads the needle pretty well.
>>92575587Well if I'm pedantic, the PHB says, "it is usually essential to the character's survival to be exceptional (with a rating of 15 or above) in no fewer than two ability characteristics."This doesn't mean the player or PC is *entitled* to two 15s. Only that two 15s would provide a greater statistical chance of survival. Personally, I don't think PCs are that likely to survive in the first place and it's a very new school idea to only give the players "super characters," so I don't put a lot of stock in that idea.Gygax goes on to rail against super characters in the DMG and provide 4 other methods of ability score generation, so I don't really think he put as much emphasis on that as people believe. It seems more like a convenient evidence for players that want their DM to give them super characters.
>>92575619ADDENDUM: The reason I do it this way is that it weights results toward a little bit better than average, but not as much better than average as 4d6k3 rolling 6 scores, and at the same time it lets players aim for the class they want to play without guaranteeing it. I really feel that it is the best of all available options.
>>92575658Gygax also wrote a barbarian class, and his character generation method for that was INSANE. For instance, for Strength they rolled 9d6 and dropped the 6 worst dice. Think about that for a second. I'll try to find the rest of it.
>>92575684Well no one can say he didn't read Conan.
Ive always made my own dungeons, never DMd a module (I do read them tho) or premade dungeon. Pretty much all of them I have in pen and paper but I do have the first and second levels of my megadungeon on digital.
>>92575701
>>92575658>>92575684Found it. It's in Dragon 63, on page 8. The big, bad barbarian.
This is the anydice output for 9d6k3.
>>92575726Yeah that's literally Conan. If you read Robert E. Howard, Conan is basically a perfect human except that he's sometimes naive and very quick to anger. In all physical aspects he is super human and he is still quite quick-witted and charismatic (both with the ladies and as a leader) compared to a normal person.
>>92575726>>92575745This leads me in the direction of wondering if it might not be a good idea to let players just outright select a class, and then roll for scores weighted in some way that is appropriate for the class. Or perhaps:>pick an ability score; roll 5d6k3 for it>roll 1d10/2 (to generate a number between 1 and 5) to select one of the 5 remaining abilities; roll 2d6 for it>roll 3d6 in order for remaining abilities
>>92575768There are all sorts of ways to give the player what they think they want while hiding it behind very weighted probabilities. If you want to do this and let your players have super characters, that's your prerogative as DM.I would argue that you and your players will have a better time if you let the dice fall where they may and play the character instead of a class.
>>92575701>>92575717How did you make these?
>>92575823GIMP, by hand lmao. I mean first on paper then I did it on gimp
>>92575829
>>92575028"Wizard" isn't an AD&D class, it's a level title.
>>92575658>the PHB says, "it is usually essential to the character's survival to be exceptional (with a rating of 15 or above) in no fewer than two ability characteristics."Page? I don't remember this.
What if the only two classes were Fighting Man and Maging Woman
>>92576015errbody knows that girls cant do shit, other than suck DICK. mage more like gayge
>>92576012Pg.9 Character Abilities, 1st para.
>tfw i actually like the idea of kits from 2e>tfw i like thac0 more than matricesi guess you can take a fag out of pathfinder but you can never take the pathfinder out of the fag... gygax forgive me
>>92576015round it out with tomboy thieves and femboy clerics
There are a couple mechanics in AD&D 2e that I prefer to their 1e counterparts. Specifically, I like the 2e initiative system more than the 1e system. Does importing those few mechanics make an otherwise 1e game make said game not OSR? I don't particularly think it does, but I wanted the opinion of people here on that.>pic unrelated
>>92576106i tend to use 2e classes and nwp, fully aware that its FOE, but use 1e dmg and mechanics for almost everything dm facing. do what you want anon, you and your players will have the most fun that way. just be diligent to understand chestertons fence and why you're making any decisions you are.
>>92575726>>92575745why would anyone be a regular fighter when the barbarian exists?
>>92576180i haven't read it, but i would hazard to guess that Barbarians are unable to have proper strongholds, maybe at most gaining the equivalent of a barbarian NPC lair/village
>>92576180That's an excellent question. There's more than just that page of information, but honestly I think it boils down to the fact that by the time Dragon 63 came out, Gygax was into his "I'm a rockstar that can do no wrong" cocaine addled arc. I think the rules he wrote for Barbarian in Dragon 63 are ridiculous, and I only posted them because ability score generation was the topic of the moment.
>>92575619I've done similar, roll 7 down the line, you can trade one attribute with the 7th. If you don't use this, you can stock a reroll on an hit point roll.
>>92575812You keep dropping the words 'super characters' as an unstated assumption that any variance off of 3d6 dtl is going to immediately or eventually devolve into super characters. The people you are responding to are not intending to create super characters. This is fallacious, argue in better faith.
>>92576265Literally read the DMG. I'm doing nothing but quoting your lord and savior. I'm arguing for exactly what is stated there based on experience from 20+ years of playing TTRPGs. Gygax had the right of it.
>>92575764That class doesn't give particularly good charisma or intelligence.
Conan is a thief.
>>92576948And a kang
>>92576086Kits are one of the only good things in 2e IMO. THAC0 was a common thing at tables by the late 70s.>>92576094I like the way you think. >>92576106Initiative isn't one of the fundamental OSR mechanics, it switches around a bit between OD&D/Basic/AD&D. If you wanted to backport that, it wouldn't hurt any. The hickmanfagging and broken dungeon explore system are entirely separate from its initiative system.
>Push Limits>A number of times in his life equal to two times his level, a Fighter can push himself far past his normal limits. When this ability is used, he gains an immediate additional movement and action. This can only be done on his initiative in combat, and only once per turn. >Additional uses of this ability may be earned through deeds of immense valor, bravery, or skill in com bat, but not within the same turn as Push Limits was used.Thoughts? I am debating scrapping the last bit because it's kind of storygamey and fiat-ridden.
>>92577319The whole thing is really metagamey, instead of that couldn't you just use hp as a resource?
>>92577319>Thoughts?Reword it so it doesn't sound like WotC legalese 5aggotry, then throw it the trash and just use multiple attacks.
>>92577319>>92577319FOEIt doesnt even make sense. So a first level fighter can only do it twice "in his lufe" but once he reaches 2nd level he can do it twice more? Even for schlock it failsGo play 4E if you want feats
>>92575764>If you read Robert E. Howard, Conan is basically a perfect human except that he's sometimes naive and very quick to angerApart from that time he got so black out drunk that when the local guard came for him he ran into a door so hard that he knocked himself out.I always love mentioning that when people talk about Conan as never making any mistakes because its the most entertaining example.>He's just a flat, boring mary sue who never fucks up>Lmao, Conan the Doorstroyer
>>92577672Yeah people who say that have usually read the non-Howard stories by later writers, which have similar problems to the Lovecraft Mythos stories written by August Derleth and others.
>>92577725Unironically sounds terrible. I'm glad I've only ever read the Howard stories and not been tempted by the old 'I need more and this writer wrote fan-shit'But I won't weeb out about how good Conan is.Instead;>TQAlways unless I find something nice looking I can steal.
>>92577544Using HP could make this guy's dumb idea actually decent. I use wounds/vitality to divide flesh points from fighting spirit points, so fighters that do this are literally burning off their fighting edge and getting themselves that much closer to taking physical injuries, every time they do it. I'd make it one half an HD's worth of damage, so 4 for Basic, 5 for Advanced.
>>92577773It also allows for last stand blaze of glory plays as long as you specify the damage comes AFTER the extra action.I can't see why you wouldn't allow it, kinda hard to exploit an ability that literally kills you.Unless you let NPCs start using it, which might still actually not be so bad, makes it more dangerous to corner someone or force a fight to the death if they can get a free twotap on the way out.
>>92574597Any housrules for OSR games that would be set in the renaissance instead of the usual medieval typed era? I ask because obviously fencing would have a very different feeling from fighting with swords and shields.
>>92575617There's fifty reasons "AD&D" 2e is crap, and that one doesn't make the list.
>>92578064Really aside from the cannons and guns it's about the same.If you want the feeling of nigh instant death from total lack of armor, just use the non-variable health rule where 1HD/d6 = 1 HP, with d8 being 2 and d10 being 3 additionally.Now almost everything is one round, and often one HIT from death, and combat is entirely about getting the initiative, evasion, covert assassinations, ranged weapons, and negotiating/taking prisoners/hostages as often as possible.
>>92578064Check out Helvéczia by Gabor Lux / Melan / EMDT. It is set in fantasy Central Europe around the Renaissance / Early Modern period.
>>92574597>Have you ever designed your own dungeonyes but not for tt role playing
>>92577319It's workable. Tying it level like that, so that it's very much a one-time thing, is something I'd instinctively shy away from, but D&D is very strongly tied to a sense of progression, so I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. But then I'm a fan of having some kind of fate/luck/drive points to allow people to try extra hard on something, but not all the time. That feels more immersive, more interesting, and ultimately more realistic to me. So if I were doing something like this just for fighters, I'd probably be giving them a handful of valor or mettle or whatever points, and letting them spend several in order to get what's essentially a bonus turn (while just spending one might boost a roll, etc.). But that's obviously more involved than what you're doing.
>>92574597Which progression do you follow for your fighters in terms of to hit chance? +1 each level like AD&D? +1 every 3 levels?
>>92578262>Which progression do you follow for your fighters in terms of to hit chance? +1 each level like AD&D? +1 every 3 levels?+2 every 3 levels, you presumably mean.Honestly, I think BECMI's progression (which is just B/X's, but without that 3 point jump, so it's always 2 points) works better, because to-hits get a bit too good at high level, given weapon pluses and whatnot. With that said, I think to-hits suck a bit too much for starting characters, mainly just because it's frustrating to repeatedly miss. So rather than do things strictly BECMI's way, I prefer to get rid of B/X's 3 point jump (from 17 to 14 THAC0), but boosting low-level scores (starting at THAC0 18 rather than 19) instead of worsening high-level scores, like BECMI does.
>>92578139While I tend to agree with the general trend here that 2e is pretty lame, you faggots are getting annoying.
>>92578262+1 at level 1 increasing by 1 every odd levelrough parity with B/X, smoother progression, better level 1we don't play past 10 or so for it to get worse and fighters also get to pick (or roll) fighter talents from a list of a dozen. based off the carcass crawler ones but fiddled with and added to. picrelyes we use slot-based encumbrance and ascending AC
>>92578373>rough parity with B/X, smoother progression, better level 1I wouldn't say that 1/2 is in rough parity with 2/3.
>>92578467BX | Shitbrew+0 | +1+0 | +1+0 | +2+2 | +2 +2 | +3+2 | +3+5 | +4+5 | +4+5 | +5+7 | +5+7 | +6+7 | +6+9 | +8+9 | +8The only especially different levels are 3rd and 10th. It's basically close enough.
>>92578544whoops wires crossed for the shitbrew side in the last two levels. those are also pretty different. my mistake.still. it works pretty good for the first 12 levels which are the ones that matter the most. and like >>92578300said high levels to-hit is kinda too good in my shared opinion
So how does +X, +Y against [enemy] weapons work exactly? The rulebooks are not very clear.Is the +Y against [enemy] in addition to the +X on damage rolls, or does it replace the original value? Also, it does not apply to attack rolls as I understood it.
>>92578569Longsword +1 / +3 vs DragonsNon-dragons: +1 to attacks, 1d8+1 damageDragons: +3 to attacks, 1d8+3 damage
>>92578262>+1 each level like AD&DIt's +2 every even level
>>92575467It's not a flaw - its a style. 3d6 down the line encourages abilities to inform class choice: and demihumans, with their extra powers, serve to counter bad ability rolls - not as a consolation prize, but a counter to the impact of bad rolls. This also assumes a stable of characters; you aren't playing just one dude - you may have two or three characters, only one of which you take out at a time.This is more evident in the earliest editions - e.g. by the book, LBB Strength does literally nothing more than inform Fighting Man prime requisite. As the editions progressed, abilities became more important and Gygax realized that smart gamers aren't going to intentionally gimp themselves.
>>92578705It's either. Read the note under the fighter attack matrix:>Special Note Regarding Fighters' Progression: This table is designed to >allow fighters to advance by 5% per level of experience attained, rather >than 10% every 2 levels, if you believe that such will be helpful in your >particular campaign. If you opt for a per level advancement in combat >ability, simply use the table but give a +1 "to hit" bonus to fighters who >attain the second level of experience shown in each group of 2 levels, i.e. >1-2, 3-4, etc. You may, of course, elect not to allow per level combat ad- >vancement.
>>92575701>>92575717Nice!
>>92575768I believe Unearthed Arcana has rules for doing that. Paladin gets like 15d6k3 or some shit for Charisma (lol), trying to ensure the minimum
>>92578544Look at this shitbrew insteadBX | Shitbrew+0 | +0+0 | +1+0 | +1+2 | +2+2 | +3+2 | +4+5 | +5+5 | +5+5 | +6+7 | +7+7 | +8+7 | +8+9 | +9+9 | +10That's right, you make the curve look cooler and more smooth, you don't nerf the fighter and rather buff them early on.What you think?
>>92578970I'm for giving the Fighter +1 at level 2I'm against giving the Fighter +10I'm against the progression not following a predictable pattern.
>>92579053>I'm against giving the Fighter +10Ok yes, but it's a level 14 thing, basically 1 player might reach this ever, and maybe 3 NPCs in the whole continent have this ability.>I'm against the progression not following a predictable pattern.This is actually right, let's try again.you get two times the same value, then +1 for 3 levels, then the pattern repeats.BX | Shitbrew+0 | +0+0 | +1+0 | +1+2 | +2+2 | +3+2 | +4+5 | +5+5 | +5+5 | +6+7 | +7+7 | +8+7 | +9+9 | +9+9 | +10Better now? The previous one was made to follow the curve, this one has a pattern, a strange ass pattern, but still.I make this thing start from level 2 cause I think at level 1 everyone should have +0.
Are there any ACKStard Anons here who can tell me how they feel and what their table experience is with the extremely low spellcasting service costs?I get that it follows from the economic assumptions and make sense from that point of view, but 5 gp for Cure Light Wounds? Come on, that cheapens magic.
>>92579105>you get two times the same value, then +1 for 3 levels, then the pattern repeats.Needs prettier pattern, pattern ugly
>>92579192DMG prices for comparison
>>92579192Personally I've always ignored that table, doesn't make sense to have magic so aviable and so trivial, the prices are extra cheap for player characters.I dunno what the author had in mind, he otherwise organized all other economic aspects pretty well, this one seems really strange to me, I expect my magic fantasy to have less magic than this and thus make it more costly and rare, not to say the wizards only live in class II areas, but I don't think you could realistically find level 1 spells in market of class VI.
>>92579255>I dunno what the author had in mind>I expect my magic fantasy to have less magic than this and thus make it more costly and rareThe problem is that if you accept one of the core rules of ACKS, that money earned through regular day jobs above a certain level-dependent threshold gives XP, if you use more traditional prices for spellcasting services, e.g. the ones in the DMG, you get that spellcasters with 9-to-5 jobs gain levels far too quickly.Is it a concern? Not in many campaings. Yes if one of your players decides to actually run a day job spell caster.
>>92579192Cross-reference it with the details on class per population and it's perfectly reasonable for your average small village to have a Cleric 1.With that in mind the really low end magic becomes closer to faith ceremonies.Still the main price for higher level stuff is finding someone willing and able to do it for you.Think of it in realistic terms; would village priests be welcome anywhere if every time Farmer Wurzles son buries a pitchfork in his ass they asked the community to take out a loan? Especially given its something priests can do several times a day with the only cost being having to nut in the occasional choir boy.
>>92579291>that money earned through regular day jobs above a certain level-dependent threshold gives XPOk forgot about that, can't we just say that doing the job of casting a spell, in the comfort of your home, doesn't give you EXP? I mean I can get behind crafting items and managing a barony or shit like that, but casting a normal ass spell on request of a rich dude is already your job, it's nothing special.>>92579322You are right, I've always considered the numbers he gives there to be a bit too high, thus I change them downwards making my setting a bit more grounded and less magical, I guess it's simply how I like to run things.
>>92579344>You are right, I've always considered the numbers he gives there to be a bit too high, thus I change them downwards making my setting a bit more grounded and less magical, I guess it's simply how I like to run things.Best way to do that is to downplay really low end magic I find.Think Conan, your average mage isn't calling up Chungaminius the Quadriplegic-maker, that's reserved for actual (aka: High level) mages. But what they do have access to is herbs, smoke, mirrors, light alchemy and smaller stuff.Swap out that 5 GP casting of cure light wounds from 'He lays hands on you and your wounds close immediately' to 'the local priest knowing how to apply sacred ungents and when he draws the cloth back across them your wounds are gone' or something and it remains a bit mystical.Personally I use the Ceremonial Magic rules from Heroic, but tweaked for my personal tastes in magic. Still, whatever works at your table works.
>>92579322>Cross-reference it with the details on class per population and it's perfectly reasonable for your average small village to have a Cleric 1.I appreciate that, I understand the econ 101 behind it, and I agree that it follows naturally.I still maintain that, on the other hand, it cheapens magic, turning* the whole world into essentially a Glantri-lite.* Pehaps "turning" is the wrong world. One could argue that it's already implicit in the O/AD&D/B/X/BECMI rules, and all that Macris has done is pointing it out by using some fairly reasonable econ 101 hypotheses.Still. Not a direction I want to go down.>>92579344>can't we just say that doing the job of casting a spell, in the comfort of your home, doesn't give you EXP?Yes, that looks like an option, but then it opens the door to the question: Do you want to overhaul the whole XP-threshold rule, or just make that single exception? (I don't like exceptions too much.)Another option might be to increase costs for working as a day job spell caster. Either as taxes or lab-maintenance, which would create an economic wedge and increase prices. But then how would that affect adventurer spell casters?
>>92579393>I still maintain that, on the other hand, it cheapens magic, turning* the whole world into essentially a Glantri-lite.My counter to that would be 'Does small villages having their own doctor cheapen heart surgery?'You have some incredible, wild, semi-miracle bullshit that can be done by people who've dedicated their entire lives to it, which is the logical progression of 'Local doctor tells people to stop eating their dinner after fisting cows without washing their hands first'.I'd say it doesn't detract since the scope of what's being done is the real awe-inspirer. But if you do feel it breaks things too much for your taste? Fair cop.
Running a Greyhawk campaign, and looking for a good high-res image or pdf of the Lazzaretti/Paizo map. Any links? I already have Darlene map pdfs, before anyone asks
>>92578227based rapist
TQ:Yes, hundreds of Dungeons.Copying shapes onto graph paper requires as much talent as breathing,Anyone can do it.
Anyone have good homebrews for OSE nat 20/1s? My players are terminally 5e-brained and "always hits/misses" isn't fun enough for them
>>92579380It's a nice compromise, seems a good idea, thanks.>>92579393>I still maintain that, on the other hand, it cheapens magic, turning* the whole world into essentially a Glantri-lite.Exactly the same feeling, it's not the kind of thing I think about where each village has a few wizards and what not, and yes, maybe the implicit setting always had this king of situation, but I've always low balled the amount of magic users available so nothing new for me.I'll try give another look at the tables for population and amount of magic users and see what I extrapolate, but for now I mantain that the cost of magic should be double and give 1/4 of the EXP, doesn't sit well for me that you can get EXP for literally no risk of anything, when managing a barony you run the risk of the population fucking with you if you get greedy, but there you just run the risk of having your tea spill while you cast any magic you want from your chair.
>>92576086Unironically 2e THAC0 is easier to explain to uninitiated/newschoolers than matrices, literally just say>THAC0 is the DC of your attack>The enemies AC is the modifierThey will get that near instantaneously.
>>92579882100%. I taught myself THAC0 because no one I knew played old RPGs and it only clicked once I started thinking about AC as a modifier to the "standard" roll.The way "to hit armor class 0" is presented in the rules is a travesty against English. There are about half a dozen easier ways to word the system they envisioned.
>>92575768>select a class, and then roll for scores weighted in some way that is appropriate for the classI thought this was interesting too. This is the first time I've seen this idea (perhaps I'm not very well-informed).>>92578716>you may have two or three characters, only one of which you take out at a timeI agree with the stable concept and think getting players to try different classes is good. But here's a question: why isn't playing multiple characters at the same time encouraged more, or outright enforced? Pros: larger party sizes, more class experimentation, gets players thinking about group tactics rather than My Guy doing a thing on My Turn. Cons: more mental overhead, but for something like B/X the classes are quite simple.I'm running S&W with 4 players and told them to each generate at least two characters, and either control both or 1 PC + hired soldier for a minimum group size of 8. It seems to be working well so far.
>>92576086THAC0 is literally listed in the 1e DMG IIRC, as shorthand in the condensed statblocks for the Monster Manual monsters.
>>92579999Nice quads.As for multiple PCs, a lot of players can't stop themselves from cheating/abusing rule loopholes. Having 2 PCs in a fight at the same time will make the DM duties a nightmare when autictic Joey won't be able to understand that PC 1 can't read the mind of PC 2 so he can't act on something he doesn't know.As a forever DM I have known that feel to often.
>>92580873>As for multiple PCs, a lot of players can't stop themselves from cheating/abusing rule loopholes. Having 2 PCs in a fight at the same time will make the DM duties a nightmare when autictic Joey won't be able to understand that PC 1 can't read the mind of PC 2 so he can't act on something he doesn't know.Clearly the only solution is that the players are unwittingly part of an Illithid hive mind as agents of THOON.The more they act like a hive mind the worse the outcome for them as they lose all independence to the glory of THOON.
>>92580873>Joey won't be able to understand that PC 1 can't read the mind of PC 2This has not been an issue so far, but we're only 5 sessions in. If anything, I have been encouraging my players to coordinate more and "call the plays" during battle. I use side-based initiative and my players are new so that may have something to do with it as well.
>>92580873You don't actually make people act like they don't share info with each other during combat, do you?
>>92579999>why isn't playing multiple characters at the same time encouraged more, or outright enforced?thats what henchmen are
>>92581203They can, I'm even lenient on how much they can communicate without talking out loud, but complex plans have to be talked about before or instructions given out loud if they are too unexpected. There's a special kind of player that just wants to abuse rules and logic/realism all the time to 'win'. At least I've had them in my games a lot. maybe others are more lucky. But every loophole in the rules is exploited by them even if it makes no logical sense in the game/story. If they get some meta piece of info, they CAN'T not use it. It's impossible for them. And if they got that info by reading the module or glancing at my notes and I change it, they get into an autism tantrum-tier fit.Why are half of my players so shit? Maybe I'm at fault somehow?
>>92581279Sure, which is why I mentioned hired soldiers. My point was that I don't see many people saying "it is recommended that every player control 1 PC and at least 1 henchmen, or 2 PCs". B/X even has that bit that says "It is recommended that the DM not allow beginning players to hire retainers" and although the OSR is certainly not beholden to that, why not pressure for SHOULD or even MUST? I see a lot of people saying "old-school D&D assumed much larger party sizes than today", I don't see a lot of people saying "...and that should be enforced."
>>92574597>TQYeah, plenty of times. Hell, one of them is in the Adventure Anthology 3 for BFRPG.
>>92575726They did that shit for all the classes in Unearthed Arcana. 9d6 for your prime stat, 8d6 for another, 7d6 etc down to 3d6 for your "dump stat".
>>92580425Purely as a comparative stat - never intended for use in combat (see: repeating 20's)
>>92579679crits do max damage, no rolldaggers do double max (8+str/magic)if you must have fumbles for some reason, on a 1 they're overextended and off-balance, -2 to AC and enemies prefer to target them, they go last in initiative next roundif it was a ranged attack and they're shooting into melee it hits a different target
>>92582030That sounds utterly atrocious. I know UA was pushed out in a hurry because the company needed a cash infusion. I guess they resorted to power creep as a sales tactic as well.
>>92582289Credit where it's due: Gygax didn't resort to power creep, he invented it.
>>92578544Yeah, the final numbers aren't that different until levels 10, 13 and 14, and limiting the numbers at the end is actually a good thing, in my opinion. I was probably just nitpicking "parity", when the mathematical progressions are significantly different, but because your system starts a +1, that offsets everything enough so they don't get too out-of-line until later on, when you kind of want them to.
>>92582030It’s so shoddy. For one thing it included Comeliness in its calculations and for whatever reason Thieves get 8d6. Because that’s what all kinds thieves are known for, their stunning good looks.I loved it when I was a kid because you always rolled up absolute beasts but it’s obviously massively broken.
I just can't find a good AD&D character sheet.The original is too clutted, most made have obnoxious art, look worse than the original or lack critical information like movement.Attached is the best I could find, yet it still has that useless attack table and the weapon in use lines lack a space for extra damage from Strength (and yes, it should be there too for easy of reference on damage rolls). Is there any sheet anons favor?
Anyone ever read or played this version of the game? How does it differ from B/X and BECMI (other than stopping at level 5 in this book; I don't know if there are other books for this version)?
>>92585455It's basically re-explained BECMI rules with new art. There's also the black box called 'The New Easy to Master Dungeons and Dragons Game' which has the same text.You can find both in mageguru's depository.
>>92585540>You can find both in mageguru's depository.I have no idea how to do that.
>>92585556rebrand dot ly slash DnD-RepositoryYes, it's cap sensitive.
>>92585540So it's just BECMI? No significant differences?
>>92585596In terms of rules, no.It does mention THAC0 though.
>>92585578Note the monthlies are now private to his personal discord
>>92585673Man, discord is cancer
>>92585673Monthlies? What are those? Monthly updates, sure, but do they ever make it over to the repository?
>>92574597Is MechWarrior II osr?
Anons how do I name the fallen Roman empire analogue in my setting?
>>92585540The constant repackaging of BX(CMI) is a real curiosity. I guess it'd make sense if there's rules updates, improved explanation, integration of popular additions and superior layout, but I don't think that's the case.
>>92585033If you're picky just make your own dude. It's not that hard. Everything in that example looks like basic tables and I'm sure you could replicate it passably in your document editor of choice. If you do so and post it here, other anons might even use it.
>>925861641) change some consonants (more X's and Z's are always good)2) add apostrophes3) end in -iansRomans becomes Zo'kanians
>>92586171Both of the versions of that rule set that came after BECMI were better-presented than BECMI itself.
>>92577672I think the story of how he becomes a corsair and ultimately meets Belit is most indicative of his primary character flaws.
>>92586171Real talk: Basic sold really well, so they milked it for all they could get.
>>92585033I like the OSRIC character sheet, though I wish it had a character portrait section. I like drawing those.
Would WHRP 1st edition count as OSR? It's old enough, and was more related to AD&D compared to later versions of WHRP and D&D, which diverge a bit more.
>>92587401Hello newfriend, please read the OP. It describes what is appropriate for this general. Enjoy your stay.
>go to the OSR discord>everyone is discussing shadowdark, into the odd, cairn, mothership, even fucking mork borg>saying "FOE GYG" is apparently hate speechHow do we save OSR?
>>92587621>discord
>>92585455rebrand-d0t-ly/osrg
>>92586164Namor
>>92587621Be the change you wish to see in the world. Do not engage with clowns. Recruit more people, run more games, run good games. That's how you get converts.
>>92587621What do you mean by "the" OSR Discord
What does everyone think of Dungeon Craft/Professor Dungeon Master?
>>92588520I think his association with old-school mostly comes from being an Xer, not an actual commitment to the rules or style. He seems to be XDM-pilled more than anything else, and for those who don't know Xtreme Dungeon Mastery is a book written by Hickman, who was one of the leading figures in the transition of D&D away from old-school play in the 80s.So while Prof DM incidentally likes some things we think of as old-school like DM rulings and high lethality, he's really into making things fast and cinematic and has no problem with using storygame mechanics to achieve that.
>>92586164FREA, pronounced 'fraya'.
>>92587401>It's old enoughOSR is not about old games, it's about the first decade of D&D. So no.
>>92586164I've sidestepped all pretense, my campaign is set in the real world, but with fantasy elements, the names are all historic, the players don't have to pretend to remember my funny names and I don't have to explain egypt to them in a strange way, I just tell them where they are culturally and they go along.
>>92587621>saying "FOE GYG" is apparently hate speechIt is, in fact. In this case hate speech is good speech.
>>92588744That's fine, but do you also use the real-world Mediterranean/Europe map? Doesn't it spoil exploration a bit?
>>92588768Yes I use actual real world map, the exploration is fun in the sense they don't what will live in the mountains up north, they don't know where the dungeons are or what's inside them.They know generally where the big cities are and can go there for economic reasons and what not, but they don't know who governs them and how.It makes the world a lot simpler in my opinions, you tell them "you are now in Rome" and they can decide where to go from there, without having to explain 100000 words of made up story which boils down to "this city is basically Rome in the middle ages".
>>92588768Why would it? Can you picture the journey from, say, Rome to Naples in anything other than Mercator abstractions? How about Rome to Marseille? London? Prague? There are tons of opportunities for encounters and adventures between historical points, whether international or just on the Italian peninsula. In a fantasy world a party might easily know something is to the NE, getting there is where the fun is.
>>92588837Exactly this, plus it adds a great layer of simplicity for the master, you always know the distance between two cities, not only cause you have a hexmap, but cause you have google maps.The same applies for players, this is fine on a historic sense, people knew in general how distant a place was, sure they had no idea about asian cities and what not, but if you asked a person for Naples how to reach London they would know how to do it or at worst know some rich dude that knew how to do it.
>>92588837>Why would it?You already know the large-scale structure of the world, as opposed to a campaign in which you don't know anything at all outside of a limited number of miles.
>>92587621those people aren't really playing games nigga. just run OD&D, everything will be ok.Into the Odd is a good game though; not sure why people keeps calling it OSR but is solid
>>92588945>journeys are boring if you have a map
>>92589386The fact that you felt the need to twist my words in that way only shows how insecure you are about your own personal preferences, Anon.
>>92587621>the OSR discordThere's at least 7 different rival "official" OSR discord servers, and at least 10 more ideological splinter groups and off-shots.There is no games happening there, unless you count gay group therapy, political masturbation, or shouting slurs in voice chat as games.>How do we save OSR?Go play D&D at the park with your real-life friends instead of sitting at your computer all day, you nerd.
>>92588945Did your pcs fall out of a portal or hatch from an egg?Why wouldn't they know basic geography? Even a medieval english peasant who never left his village in his entire life would know basic things like where france/germany/italy were and probably has general knowledge of the holy land and various historical sites. This information is probably very crude and perhaps innacurate, but he should even be able to give you general cultural stereotypes or act out a funny accent.Someone more knowledgeable(like say a travelling adventurer or mercenary) would know a lot more and probably even have seen a bunch of world maps and memorized the names and standards of a bunch of noble houses.
>>92589394ntayrt, don't really care about if your map is narnia or malta, but its weird people have shifted to arm chair psychology about anonymous posts so much over the last decade. The chances of them being even remotely correct are very low, but its an increasingly pushed thing. Other people's insecurities or whatever don't matter at all here, that's the nice part. On world maps, what I think >>92588837is getting at is that you can have a roughly mapped world and I've found be it fantastical or historical based the players benefit from having a general idea of where things are rather than no idea at all and a blank slate. >here be dragons >Eastern Heilopapacy etc. Similar to dungeon rumours. Not so sure about >>92588890everyone knowing where things farther away were in a similar way that we know currently but that there were roads, general ideas and the ability to figure it out as you went doesn't seem off base.
>>92589615>Even a medieval english peasantI'm not running a Tabletop Pitchfork Simulator, Anon. If the idea of a wholly unexplored world is novel to you, you know nothing about history, literature, or even early D&D.
>>92589713>wholly unexploredNot even if they're literal cavemen would this be the case.You can talk about unexplored frontiers, those existed all the time, but an unexplored WORLD has never existed since the dawn of man.And even those unknown frontiers would have names and general locations. Australia was named over a thousand years before it was discovered you know.
>>92589776>has never existed since the dawn of manFuck, hadn't thought of that. I'll have to drop 99% of the PHB, MM, and DMG, in that case. Thank you, Pitchfork Simulator Anon.
>>92590304You're Welcome. While you're at it drop this general too
>>92590464No, you, pitchfork simul fag.
>>92588744Fair enough, love historical but but personally I enjoy some of the funny names and pseudo-historic kingdoms. That sort of wanking is fun to me. I do draw the line at times and dates though. I could come with 12 months, that's super easy, but days of the week are where I draw the line lol so I just use real months too.
>>92590777>but days of the week are where I draw the lineNot that anon, but you could always just do what the Gregorian calendar does and use the names of gods or astrological bodies.>Sun day>Moon day>Tiu (Tyr's) day>Wodenaz (Odin's) day>Thor's day>Frey's day>Saturn's day (although personally, I always thought this should be thought of as Surtr's day)Obviously, you can and should substitute the names of your world's own gods. If you have any clerics of any of them in the group, or fighters, or PC's dedicated to them, the rest will fall into place.
>>92589645>everyone knowing where things farther away were in a similar way that we know currently but that there were roads, general ideas and the ability to figure it out as you went doesn't seem off base.I don't know in Germany, but I assure you, in Italy we have been using Roman roads since they were built, we know where they go and how much it takes.Add to this that Venetian people had such a massive commercial operation that they could reach all of the sea, you get the idea that people could travel and would often do so, rich people mind you. The idea that no one knows anything about their land or what's next door is absurd, they may have old information, imprecise information, but they know that what's the name of the other country, that they have similar stuff than we do and they speak a different language.>>92589713>even early D&D.This is the only case, if you want to run such a setting, feel free, makes everything more mysterious and cool and that's fine. >>92590828>>92590777>days of the weekLook up the names in italian/spanish then the names of greek gods. It's that simple.
>>92591088>Look up the names in italian/spanish then the names of greek gods. It's that simple.I mean, it's the same thing in English. Say "whoa den az day" out loud then look at the word Wednesday.
>>92591111Clearly favored by Odin get.
How do you run a large outdoor area that isnt a hex crawl? The valley in the beginning of Stonehell had me floundering last night. When an area is 300 feet wide, do you stick strictly to the distance traveled in turns? My players dont really even understand the concept of 'turns' they just kind of do shit. Maybe I should just make them read basic
>>92591565It's fine for turns to be a DM-facing mechanic and it's your job to adjudicate how their actions fit into the structure. I actually prefer doing it that way because it's one less game term for the players to have to worry about.
>>92591565>When an area is 300 feet wide, do you stick strictly to the distance traveled in turns?Yes.>My players dont really even understand the concept of 'turns'Tell me you roll for wandering monsters behind the screen without telling me.
>>92592342DM screens are for companies to make more money off faggots who have too much. i dont use one
>>92592617As if you needed a commercial DM screen to roll secretly.
>>92591565>My players dont really even understand the concept of 'turns'Okay, but surely they understand the concept of "roughly 10 minutes", yeah? I can't imagine running D&D without mentioning time at least occasionally. You never tell them anything like "Okay, it takes a few minutes for you to do that. While that is happening..." ? I don't know Stonehell but I guess I don't understand the problem you're having. If they walk across the valley you tell them what happens next like anything else. I also would not consider 300 feet a "large" outdoor area by IRL standards.>>92592504also what this anon said. The "crawl" movement speeds in dungeon crawls is because you're carefully and quietly moving through a pitch dark maze full of monsters and traps. You don't use dungeon speeds to walk across an open field outdoors.
Is there a resource for optimized 2e builds or play? Not expecting detailed tabletopbuilds style articles, something as simple as "don't bother with x because y is better" works just fine >buh that's nah how youse suppose tuh play!!1) I don't care 2) bullshit, any system is exploitable even if it's something as mundane as one option being better than another. I'm not forcing you to play how I want to play and you're not going to change my mind to play how you want me to.
>>92593346Oh I see, I apologize for misunderstanding the thread then but I do appreciate this graphic, might read up a littleWon't apologize for being a minmaxer tho
>>92593579>might read up a littleIf you already know 2e well, you might want to read Gygax's DMG, which is the best RPG manual ever written. Otherwise, B/X is the better place to start.
>>92593346But there are some 2e things worth having. For instance, the Campaign Sourcebook & Catacomb Guide
>>92593718>the Campaign Sourcebook & Catacomb Guide>Hickman-era advice on running campaigns>good
>>92574597>Dungeons & Dragons as played in the game's first decade
How do you make clerics work in a West Marches style campaign? Especially with troupe / stable play, and 1 week between sessions in game. I have a lot of downtime actiond available. Level 1 characters healing 1 hp a day will alsmot all heal, but the idea is that higher level characters will need time to recover, and can pursue downtime activities while doing so. Im thinking of saying that clerics need to pray the whole week to get spells, so they can't just spam healing spells during downtime. I already have introduced cure light wounds to my game, but I could possibly have the healing spells skip levels (have a cure at level 1 level 3 and level 5 cleric spells). I could also make it 1d6/2d6/3d6 being instead of d8s. Might do the same for Magic-User spells, which would really help for spells like Stone Shape that are downtime spammable.
>>92594391What rule system are you using? In AD&D there's plenty mechanics that force downtime, for example one of week bed forced rest after getting to 0 HP, diseases, and parasites. You could incorporate that into your campaign. I wouldn't reinvent the wheel before trying those rules that were thought exactly for what you are trying to achieve.>>92594054Nice find.
>>92592617I use an 8 Letter / A4 insert screen.Referee side I place custom notes and charts.Facing the players 4 connected artworks to set the tone of the setting.One screen for all games.
>>92594391>>92594426>one of week bed forced restAm I retarded? Meant "one week of foced bed rest"Also forgot to mention training time of one to four weeks every time a character levels up. All of that forces a party to wait up for a memember because of recovery, illnesses, and training (because they don't level up all at once, because you use XP for gold, because you are not a Hickmann2efag).
>>92594456>foced>memember Wtf. Sorry for all the retardation.>>92594432What do you use for the insert screen? Something you DIY'ed or commercial?
>>92594426>I wouldn't reinvent the wheel before trying those rules that were thought exactly for what you are trying to achieve.Yeah but diseases aren't the most common thing and relying on PCs to go to 0 hp isn't that common either. I mean it is but that means half the time they are dead (save vs death at 0 hp). Also I think the type of campaign I'm doing isnt that similar to what Gygax did, BROsr folks notwithstanding. I run a modified version of BX.
>>92594521>I think the type of campaign I'm doing isnt that similar to what Gygax didDoesn't have to be similar as long as one particular problem you are facing is similar to one particular problem that Gygax playtested heavily and largely solved. Do try to introduce forced downtime for training (independently of whether you have the characters pay money for training), recovering from 0 hp, and so on: It works.
>>92594391I don't think you articulated what the supposed problem is. If you let clerics cast CLW, PCs heal too quickly, so they'll get back to adventuring too quickly? If so this implies the only reason PCs have downtime is because they have low HP, which won't be the case for every PC after every session even if you have zero clerics.>>92594456As this anon says there are reasons for downtime that aren't low HP. And I don't see why you need a fancy justification for it anyway. Just tell your players that characters are expected to chill for a bit between adventures. What is the problem you're trying to solve?>>92594521>modified version of BXFrom whence came the Stone Shape spell and what are your concerns about it?
>>92594477>What do you use for the insert screen?DIY inserts made with Photoshop / Gimp.It's very comfortable to revise what you need over time.>>92588739NTA, anywhere it's possible to talk about OSR-adjacent ideas that isn't completely brain rotted?Obviously, I don't want to off-topic this thread.
>>92594391>slop poster wannabe brosr is retarded, can't type, has bad ideasYes.
Anons, do you think there is an appetite among the OSR community for variant classes that ideas from various non-TTRPG source?
>>92593864It's Jaquays, it's gonna be a gem.
What benefits or effects on the characters should having feasts or particularly good food have?What about pipeweed?
>>92595024Not everything Jaquays did was a hit. Central Casting is a whole ton of dice rolls to get some pretty boring-ass characters, for example. That book in particular is from the 1990s era of new-school "theatrical" campaigning, I'm gonna assume it's shit unless somebody can give evidence otherwise.
>>92594391>how do you nerf cleric in order to force players into using sTaBlEpLaY? FTFY Nerfing cleric and shitbrewing the game to force players into using their "character stable" so you can play your blogshit version of OSR is FOE and you can GYG>>92594746It's funny because 1:1 time is there so characters can have time to heal and train but CLW steps on his precious "stable play" so he has to shitbrew cleric to "fix" the game.These faggots have completely lost the script on 1:1 time. It's become a cargocult.
>>92594391>can't just spam healing spells during downtimeThey can't just spam healing spells during downtimeThere you go, fixed it.
>>92595080Based Alexander-the-Great problem-solver
>>92595052It is indeed largely shit, full of anti-old school advice--and fuck all about catacombs, oddly enough.
>>92595135It's been my observation that Jaquays was really aces at dungeon design, but full of odd and bad ideas about everything else.
>>92595267I see what you did there.
>>92594391Characters heal 1d3 each day they don't do anything at all.Clerics at level 2 will speed up this process, this is part of the game.Characters need between 1 to 4 weeks to level up.Characters can't be in the places at once, strict time records are required to know where they are at all times.>How do you make clerics work in a West Marches style campaign?So to answer, they work as normal, they are just very useful for a big pary that wants to heal quickly, they still get spells at level 2 so the players will need to level them up.As others have said AD&D has many tables regarding infections and such to slow down the players if you so will, I haven't found them to be so useful.> Im thinking of saying that clerics need to pray the whole week to get spellsThis would be very retarded indeed, if you want slowed down magic look at the sources aka: Vance. There the wizards would prepare spells at home and then cast them for a whole adventure, which could last for days. Meaning they can recharge spells only back to the home base, not just by sleeping.
>>92595051>What benefits or effects on the characters should having feasts or particularly good food have?It mostly effects their reputation and retainers. More potential retainers to hire, negating or avoiding negative loyalty modifiers and adding positive loyalty modifiers are really the only mechanics you can play with here so you need to lean into the effects on the fantasy game world itself. Examples Throwing a feast gets attention both positive and negative. The local lord might now know your name and be willing to give you the time of day but the bandits are now trying to find your treasure cache.The retainers are gloomy that half of them died. That and the previous forced march is effecting loyalty by -2. Better break out that bottle of wine and say a few words in remembrance.
>>92575701>>92575717>>92575829>>92575834Stolen. Thank you
so I showed my dad the covers of the ol'e aD&D1e stuff, and he was like "I had that (Monster Manual), and that (Players handbook), and that (DMG), and that (Fiend Folio, all original prints)". so I did something nice by nabbing the bunch of BECMI D&D and aD&D1e stuff and loading it on his computer.He's gonna have some fun when he get's the time to look.
>>92595829Aww
>>92595327>Characters heal 1d3 each day they don't do anything at all.What if I make it 10 percent of their hp, rounded up? Or minimum 1 whichever seems better.
>>92596038Off topic, but that was one of the fixes I tries for long rests in 5e, when I was still fighting that system to make it more like D&D.
>>92596071Short rest: 8 hours of sleepLong rest: A week of downtime
what are some of the essential classic third party publishers?>Arduin>Mayfair>Judges Guild
DMs, how do you referee camping in the wilderness in B/X? What kind of factors do you take into consideration? What rolls for encounters do you make, if any?
>>92575768why not 3d6,but +1d4 in your primary score to represent training and being competent?
>>92596584FOE crawford has the simple rule of 3d6 down the line but you can change any stat to 14
>>92576015Sounds familiar
>>92576015that would explain why elves are so androgynous
>>92596683>>"Are arrows sorcery?:">"Borderline."I love that bit so much.
>>92595616Do enjoy brother. Id post the notes but theyre not in english.
What the hell does it mean to "telegraph" a trap? And how can this be done without stepping on the thief's toes and mitigating their find traps skill? I tend to skimp on traps because they never feel satisfying from my or my players perspectives.. but damn I have to be doing something wrong
>>92597336thief's ability to find traps is if they are inspecting a chest or or door for small mechanical trapsother traps, like something triggered from a pressure plate or a tripwire or whatever, anyone can find."you see a dark slit about an inch wide spanning the left wall of this hallway. the opposite wall is stained in blood.">I look inside the slit>I prod ahead of us with our 10' pole>I get down on the ground and crawl below the height of the slitetc"sprawled on the floor beneath the arch is the corpse of a bikini-armor-clad woman">I inspect the body"her front is riddled with darts, the wounds surrounded with festering green rings. most of the darts are broken beneath her body.">can I see the opposite wall?"it's outside of the range of your torchlight">I carefully inspect the floor to see if there's a pressure plate>I peek my head through the arch to see if there's anything it's hiding>I advance cautiously, behind my shield in the direction it looked like the darts hit her from
>>92597336>What the hell does it mean to "telegraph" a trap?Give contextual descriptive clues that a trap or special thing is in the area so the players and you can have fun messing with it. >And how can this be done without stepping on the thief's toes and mitigating their find traps skill? IRemove thief. Use traps as puzzles.
>>92589126Out of all the Nu-SR games ItO is my favorite, I use it when I run games for my friends who are too Theater Kid to handle OSR
>>92596682Useful enough this one, however you can't beat Kevin for seemingly useful thing that turns out to be kind of bad game design.
>>92596682Don't disrespect Crawford
>>92599150Crawford is the most impressive product maker in >OSR<.With shocking regularity he repackages the same low quality ideas and sells them or people that rarely play them.
>>92596114More like>short rest: only regain HP through healing magic>long rest: restores 10% of your max HP; one long rest per day max>>92596584Sure, why not? As long as it's also -1d4 in some other stat.
>>92599333Checked.Who is this Crawford?
>>92595063>It's become a cargocult.It was always a cargo cult, there to excuse a few retards on tw*tter bad home games.>No I can't be bothered to prep, I'm running 1:1 time>No gonzo muppet shit is good, it's 1:1 time>Making players roll 17 different characters is good, it's 1:1 timeever and always it goes with the bros
>>92599837>using HP as meat points
>>92599852Kevin Crawford, author of Stars Without Number and various other games. I think that guy's off-base with "low-quality ideas," the guy's GM tools are hands-down the best around. And Scarlet Heroes kicks ass.
>>92600326Crawfor is up there on my personal list of contenders for overrated borderline OSR authors. Another one's the Alextardian.
>>92595063>>92600308You guys are so anti-brOSR that you're against multiple characters now? There's a section on it in the 1e DMG dudes. It doesn't have to be some gimmicky thing, it's a natural consequence of expanding your world and doing different stuff in different places especially if you don't have a lot of players.>Making players roll 17 different characters is goodFast character creation is touted as a feature of OSR and you're acting like it's some big burden.
>>92600481ok
My initiative system:Players act in order of Dex scoresI roll 1d20 for when my monsters go in that orderThoughts?
>>92600326>>92600481I think at this point he's been around long enough as a dtandad there's knee-jerk reaction and accumulated critique over time. Still a solid bunch of earlier products and tables with utility but WWN was the shark jump.
>>92600510>I don't care soooooo much If it's not important don't bother.
>>92600526>WWN was the shark jumpI can agree with this.>>92600534How much effort do you think it takes to post?>verification not required
>>92600519My thought is "effectively a d20 DEX check to see if they act before or after the monsters", which I guess is fine, but players would probably prefer to roll it themselves individually.
>>92600601wait, nevermind, if individual PC order matters, I'm wrong, it's not equivalent, and individual checks would make it more complicated for determining order of PC actions
>>92600519It's basically BRP.
>>92600610>>92600601Yeah my goal was to make it as fast as possible while still involving PC dexterity. Biggest downside I can think of is, some players won't get to act much if they have 5 Dex and it's a gank on a 1 HD creature. But that's just what happens sometimes and when I've played I've never complained about not getting a turn if it meant the monsters were dead and I wasn't. NuD&D is much more "experiential" than BX/ADnD when it comes to combat.
>>92600519Good luck using any individual initiative system for battles with characters, henchmen, and hirelings against large numbers of monsters.
>>92600637BRP or BFRPG?
>>92600643Because all the monsters go at once, in the first round I think it will feel like side-based initiative with three sides: 1) DEX winners, 2) monsters, 3) DEX losers. Could be rough for the losers as they will feel "cut off" from the rest of the group but I guess you have to test it. After the first round the distinction will blur because 3) and 1) will be acting back-to-back (even though there's an end-of-round division between them). I dunno, feels like a weird mix of side-based and individual initiative to me, but I am biased because I use side-based (1d6 vs. 1d6) and never want to go back to tracking individual order, lol
>>92600643So then give a class based initiative value that's modified by dex and penalized by encumbrance.
>>92600763BRP
>>92600580>effort posting appeal to captchaYou can stop any time.
The way I do initiative is homebrew as fuck. No initiative roll. Only a Morale roll for the enemy side. If they fail, the PCs go first with players deciding among themselves the order.I just feel like Morale is the more important part of initiative. How fast you are, what you wear/carry? It pales compared to how cohesive a party of enemy is, how impressed they are by the PCs looks/attitude/combat stances/visible weapons and armors and how strongly they want to fuck them over.But I'm weird. My players enjoy it. Some groups like to roll for the enemy side. Some like to not even see the roll.
>>92600956What do you use for the morale roll? I'm wondering particularly about mixed groups of enemies that have different ML ratings. And what about undead?
>>92600505Fast character creation is good. Having the option to play multiple characters is good.Forcing players to be stuck at level 2 for multiple irl weeks just to enfore le troupe play is retarded.
>>92601019That's why I said it was homebrew. It's a Morale roll in name, but it's more of an alternative way of tolling morale.It for the group as a unit. if it,s a mixed group, it takes away cohesion in the rank and it makes the roll harder to beat. I always assume the PCs have their shit together. If they have NPCs unused to the group dynamic with them, that can make the morale roll of the enemies easier to beat.I also have a weird table to determine the number of rounds before rerolling initiative. It's based on how much the earlier roll failed/succeeded.
>>92601107Sorry about my fucked up ESL-looking post. I'm at my parents and I'm taking care of their PC while they are out, making updates and shit. Their dog is being a little shit and keeps trying to rape my leg lol
>>92600824That is a great idea, to include encumbrance. Thanks anon. I might add some weapon based modifiers as well but for characters who switch weapons a lot that could get annoying. >>92600956So zombies always go first?
>>92600637it keeps happening
How do I encourage smart play? I am with new players that don't check for treasure in less-than-obvious places or strategize in combat
>>92601638Write a bit of a rules list of tips and hints, then leave it on the table in play.After the fact point out some of the treasures they missed so there's a sense of opportunity cost.
>>92601666>>92601638Having and after action report of a dungeon after they complete it and showing all the secrets they missed is the best way. I do this usually when first running with newbies and the next dungeon they almost always get a lot more attentive and creative after realizing what they missed.
>>92601726Make sure to point out things they did well too. Everyone gets hype when you go:>Oh and that rope you avoided? You were 100% right to avoid it, it was a trap by the orcs made of razor wire, Jimmy saved you a lot of severed fingers
>>92601638For true newbies I think it's okay to outright prompt them with basic suggestions (making it clear those aren't the only options).>You hear footsteps approaching from the north hallway. You could investigate, yell something, set up an ambush, try to hide... or anything else you can think of. >There's a large wooden bookcase on the west wall, full of musty old tomes. You could spend a turn searching the books, or move it, or set it on fire, or...I have had success with this approach and didn't have to do it for very long.
>>92601726>>92601726>new players "completing" a dungeon>telling them what they missedThat had better be a mostly-linear training-wheels tutorial dungeon or FOE GYG. In a real dungeon it should be the opposite, with mysterious fuzzy boundaries and them wondering what was down in that pit or what was behind the door they didn't open.
>>92600719Good luck running a massive battle that is won by a coin flip. In all seriousness I'm not sure what I'd do for a larger battle with henchmen. Not sure if I'd make some as characters (i.e. having a Dex score) and have hirelings act on their score. My group hasn't hired anyone yet. Maybe they will when they run into the keep guarded by four 3 HD flying monsters.
>>92602066>coinNTA and I get that your system is more nuanced, but you're rolling 1d20 vs an ability score that has an average of 10...
>>92602066>Good luck running a massive battle that is won by a coin flip.If you use the AD&D rules for combat, or at least the parts that have to do with charging and the order in which attacks are made, that is not an issue at all.
>>92602188Yeah but with the spread of scores among a party it's very unlikely the entire group will go before a monster in most cases.
>>92601961I do oneshots sometimes anon
>>92602746okay, that makes sense, I take it back
>>92600505>You guys are so anti-brOSR that you're against multiple characters now?I'm against shitbrewing the game in order to force players into using multiple characters so the DM can play some trendy blogshit version of OSR.>There's a section on it in the 1e DMG dudes.There's 3 paragraphs on it and BrOSR "sTaBlEpLaY" is not what's described. There's also a whole section with advice on time in the campaign that the BrOSR ignores besides muh strict time records and muh 1:1 time.
When did aging penalties get introduced into D&D? Was it 3e?
>>92603055Gygax's DMG is required reading, Anon.
>>92603181I don't play AD&D. I'm sure it's got a lot of fine stuff in it, but the honestly terrible writing and worse editing means I'm never going to read it.
>>92603203You don't have to play AD&D, but if you refuse to read the DMG, FOEGYG. And no, your self-diagnosed ADHD is not an excuse.
>>92603265It really hurts you that people don't have to do what you want, doesn't it? You do not speak for this thread. Unfuck yourself.
>>92603284You deserve 3e.
>>92603291Perhaps. But I play B/X. And you can't stop me.
>>92603296>I play B/X. And you can't stop me.>>92603265>You don't have to play AD&DReading comprehension problem confirmed. Explains why you find the DMG too hard to read.
>>92602783I don't disagree about the shitbrewing but what I'm trying to say is that if someone talks about a stable of characters they play at different times, and you think "fuck BroSR" you are ceding territory. BrOSR doesn't own that concept no matter how much those guys use the term. What's next, "milieu"?
>>92603417>Explains why you find the DMG too hard to read.I never said that I find it hard to read. I find it to be so very poorly written than it's not worth my time. Gygax writes like someone that was absolutely terrified that someone might not think he was intelligent, and so he goes out of his way to demonstrate how erudite he is in his writing. The DMG suffers for this insecurity.
>>92603490I haven't read the DMG either, and it's retarded to say you should in order to play B/X, but Gygax's pretentious writing style actually might make reading it fun, as long as you weren't taking it too seriously/using it as a reference.
>>92603490>I find it to be so very poorly written than it's not worth my time.And 3e is worth your time?>>92603870>it's retarded to say you should in order to play B/XI never said you should read the DMG in order to play B/X. I said it because it's a fundamental piece of RPG history that prevents you from going "hurr durr 3e introduced age modifiers because I refuse to read the DMG".
>>92603914>And 3e is worth your time?No? I don't play 3e. I did for a while back when it was current. I play B/X, specifically Labyrinth Lord. I've played Labyrinth Lord since the revised edition came out.>... prevents you from going "hurr durr 3e introduced age modifiers because I refuse to read the DMG".I asked if aging modifiers first appeared in 3e, since as I said, I do not play AD&D. Pretending I said something I did not say isn't helping you look like anything other than a gigantic faggot.
>>92603181Why?
>>92603490>Gygax writes like someone that was absolutely terrified that someone might not think he was intelligentFor the 1e DMG, I kinda get this because a lot of the sections attempt to pre-empt disagreement and use phrases like "once these factors are considered, it is obvious that..." But I think it's more that 1) it was not trivial to publish updates, corrections, or addendums, 2) he was trying to create a reasonably comprehensive volume that covers a LOT of issues, and 3) he had plenty of experience with cheeky players trying to find loopholes. It makes total sense for him to lay out everything as clearly and strongly as he could, so it comes off like a treatise at times. I personally appreciate the effort and don't mind when someone comes at me strong with their opinions.
>>92604005It's the most groundbreaking RPG manual ever written, it describes the OSR way of playing in a way that nobody else was ever capable of (and I am including the OSR primers that are often very misleading), it has tons of useful and wacky tables and procedures that are extremely useful for whatever you play, many even completely system-independent, for example for no-prep procedural play, but not only.
>>92604013Not to mention no proper set of complete RPG volumes had ever been published before, since the 3LBB / OD&D were extremely confusing. Not to mention rules for ANY game that were longer than 30 pages or so. And he was talking to an audience that, in large part, had no idea what an RPG was in the first place.The man was breaking completely new ground on so many different fronts, judging his writing through the lens of being a WotC D&D kid makes absolutely no sense.
>>92604063>... judging his writing through the lens of being a WotC D&D kid makes absolutely no sense.Personally, I judge it on readability. His way of writing is incredibly annoying, often using several times the required words to convey the message. Also, I started on Mentzer Basic in... '89 I think?
>>92604034>AD&D1E DMG is the epitome of OSR>Including stories in your campaign isn't OSRAnd people wonder why /osrg/ is the laughing stock of the OSR.
>>92603453I hear what you're saying but I'm not against multiple characters or 1:1 time, I use both and will not sneed anything to the BrOSR or any other subcult of the OSR. My fundamental point is that their use of 1:1 time and multiple characters is not what's described in the DMG.
>>92604034>it describes the OSR way of playingSo it is worthless then, got it.
>>92603203I'm not an AD&D person either, but the DMG is more something to thumb through and get ideas than it is a properly organized instruction manual to sit down and read through cover to cover. The magic treasure section alone makes the book worth looking at.
>>92604411And honestly, I feel like looking through the PHB isn't a bad idea either. AD&D is pretty kludgy, but it has more detail than B/X, and it's a good source of ideas / options to selectively import into B/X.
Would a non-vancian magic system make a game not OSR?
>>92604649Correct.
>>92604649>>92604654To be clear, it would maintain complete mechanical compatibility with B2 and other modules published for B/X. The only thing different would be the magic system.
>>92574597>OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons as played in the game's first decade
>>92604649Do what the fuck you want, anon. No matter how many wails of anguish people here in the thread might emit, no one can stop you.
>>92604649Who cares?
>>92604693>>92604812compatibility != fidelity>>92604817nobody is trying to stop anyone, 2efag
>>92604818Someone that wants to make and publish a game that is mechanically identical to B/X except that it uses a non-Vancian magic system.
>>92604649If you remove a stone from a heap, is it still a heap?
>>92604891Is a heap of stones the right metaphor? Or is it more like a puzzle and removing something would make the puzzle incomplete?
>>92604836>a game that is mechanically identical to B/X except that it uses a non-Vancian magic systemThat's not a game, it's a house rule.
>>92604967It's a bit more involved than a house rule. A house rule is critical hits and critical fumbles. I'm talking about removing spell slots entirely and going with another rate-limiting mechanism for spellcasting, adding a system of ritual magic (NOT like what they call rituals in WotC D&D editions), and overhauling the way summoning works.
>>92604991make it a custom class before you make a whole game
>>92604991What about compatibility with existing B/X modules? How much conversion work would be needed to run them with your new system? That should give an idea of how big of a change it really is.
>>92605088Theoretically, no conversion work would be necessary. Monsters that have spell-like abilities list the number of times they can do them per day, and spellcasters would use the new rules to cast their magic.
Why shouldn't all magic swords be sentient. Normalize sentient magic swords by default as the reason to pick a fighter.
>>92605122Because it's more work for the GM. It's like a pet. It's a one-player-facing bit that the GM has to perform.
>>92605122>Why shouldn't all magic swords be sentient.That's how OD&D do.
>>92605122Yeah, nothing says cool magic item like the words "normal" and "default".
>>926051751) Player controls sword-fella2) Sword-fella psychically communicates with player3) Sword-fella only talks when he's not sleeping4) etc.>>92605186Based>>92605194Which is why you've removed every class but the fighter right, fag
>>926052301) Just means the player is just themself, which is boring, so they won't do it. 2) Still requires the GM to communicate. It's even more boring than the sword communicating out loud.3) Not sure I understand this one. The sword only talks when the PC isn't sleeping? So during the adventure? Or the sword sleeps most of the time and only talks when awake?Again, this doesn't change the problem that a sapient sword adds to the GM's burden without providing a lot of payoff. Especially if there are multiple sapient swords.
>>92605230I cannot figure the connection between "if sentient swords are common that makes them less cool and special" and removing all classes but the fighter.
>>92605266NTA but I have a sentient sword in my campaign. It doesn't communicate often (it's been very pleased with it's current user so far) and it doesn't communicate in sentences only emotions that the PC feels emanating from the sword. If the player does something cowardly it may communicate it's distaste and lower it's damage output as punishment. It really doesn't waste any time or tax me as a DM. It took half a cigarette break to explain how the sword communicates and that was it.
>>92605266>1) Just means the player is just themself, which is boring, so they won't do it.You dare question the roleplay potential of controlling an ancient artifact able to impart its wisdom, pass on the knowledge of its previous owners, and speak in a voice DIFFERENT from the PC?! Fool, it is the ability to utilize its potential that separates the legendary fighters from the dungeon fodder!>Still requires the GM to communicate.In some works of fiction, psychic communication is instant. In other words, the only thing the Referee has to communicate can be conveyed in simple terms. "Your sword-fella senses danger ahead.">Not sure I understand this one. The sword only talks when the PC isn't sleeping? So during the adventure? Or the sword sleeps most of the time and only talks when awake?Whatever pleases the Referee the most. A sword-fella might not be awake when not in battle, for example.>>92605309>If any player can choose to roll an Elf or MU, then it's no longer cool.This is YOU. FOE. GYG!
I gave my players a sentient sword that wanted gold, gold, gold, a bunch of sessions ago. They had it for one hour before the wielder got killed by a wight and the rest of the party fled and never returned. Now they're about 50 miles away from the hex it was in so I can barely even do anything fun with it.
>>92605431You gave yourself the gift of a Wight that is obsessed with gold though, so that's something.
>>92605460Yeah, all the way-ass over there, and only really threatening one backwater settlement the PCs hated because the beer was rancid and overpriced and it didn't have a blacksmith.
>>92604013>>92604063I've often felt what the previous anon said, but you make good points and cause me to revise my opinion for the most part. It should also be said that the LBB doesn't have the same verbosity and tone.
>>92605502Wight and PCs want to go the same place, the one with lots of gold. Maybe they even have lots of gold already. Just have it show up when they capture a big hoard.
On the topic of class features a dream team hodgepodge of bad ideas just for fun>Wizards can use their standard selection of weapons PLUS one-handed swords (but not magic swords, because let's be real magic swords hold a grudge against them). Heavier weapons are maybe too clunky for spellcasting, but realistically there is no reason why a wizard couldn't wield a basic ass arming sword, the kind used as a sidearm historically. Also they can partially wear armor (half AC) but other wizards will mock them>Speaking of weapons and fighters, weapons now each have some unique feature. Off the top of my head, only daggers can be used to backstab (if you don't want to make a sound that is), maces and hammers can damage armor, and then the usual, swords are vanilla but can be found magical, polearms can poke from afar, etc. axes might be effective at splitting open organic barriers and armor such as scales and wood (I'm asspulling here, zero clue on the historical context of axes in war)>Clerics, on account of being broken, must recite some kind of prayer before casting, which takes up a turn. Players playing clerics must themselves recite a prayer or risk wasting their spell. Logically, chaotic clerics require sacrifice (but does anyone even play chaotic clerics unironically?>No thieves. If a player insists, they must write something like a cover letter addressed to a Thieves' Guild, explaining the good reason for their absence from regular criminal duties. If the letter is rejected and the player still insists, they will play a basically disgraced gone-rogue thief that can't enter cities because the underworld wants his or her head (also all thief connections are useless on account of that)
>>92605593>It should also be said that the LBB doesn't have the same verbosity and tone.This is true, but the 3LBB are also mostly incomprehensible if you've never heard of RPGs before, let alone wargames, and all you have is the 3LBB. They're often difficult even now that we have the gift of hindsight.
>>92606080You are repeating yourself
>>92574597TQYes, this is mine
>>92604649There have been plenty of games that fall under the broad scope of OSR that use non-Vancian casting. The specificity of what constitutes OSR to /osrg/ is not something you need to adhere to if you want to write a product to put on the market or play at your table.Here's a short list of broadly OSR games or products that may or may not be on the acceptable list for /osrg/ that use non-Vancian magic.-Wonder & Wickedness / Marvels & Malisons - completely compatible with B/X-Beyond the Wall / Through Sunken Lands - magic system easy to graft onto B/X-LotFP Vaginas Are Magic / Eldritch Cock - designed to replace the LotFP magic system which is about 90% true to B/X where it matters-Worlds Without Number - not compatible out of the box but broadly accepted as OSR outside this generalThis doesn't even touch on the host of classes that have been designed to be adherent to B/X and AD&D like B/X Game Options and Old School Classes to name a couple. Point being don't pay attention to what a bunch of screeching nobodies say is or is not OSR. Exploration, resource management, acquisition driven experience advancement, procedural play. Those things matter. The loudmouthed goobers that dominate /osrg/ when it comes to what you do with your game or the rules you create aren't relevant.
>>92605408>You dare question the roleplay potential of controlling an ancient artifact able to impart its wisdom, pass on the knowledge of its previous owners, and speak in a voice DIFFERENT from the PC?! Fool, it is the ability to utilize its potential that separates the legendary fighters from the dungeon fodder!It's a fun bit, but it's still a bit. It's still CPU cycles on the GM's overworked brain.It's like a pet in D&D. Fun when a player gets it, usually forgotten two sessions later.>>92605348This is a good method.
>>92604649OSE Carrion Crawler already does this.
>>92606723>OSR can be anything you want it to be, if you just believe in your heart!lol fag
>>92606908Yup, that's exactly what I said without nuance or context. You win all the internets for today. Congratulations, mark it on your calendar.>April 24, 2024: today I told the FOE to GYG
I'm a bit late to the convo, but whatever method you use, the correct outcome is for initiative to allow for one side or the other to act first, for two reasons.1) Simplicity and speed2) Combat becomes like a puzzle and a threat in one, if you can't move all your pieces to counter the threat before it gets to go, you're not really engaging with the puzzle part. It's why Fire Emblem and Persona 5 combat is fun, you don't need to worry about a system that is 'fun' for the monsters.Surprise rounds get you there to, but alternatively you can just have it all the time. If you decide to rush into a monster's lair without a specific way to gain surprise (another puzzle), you likely risk a 50/50 roll to get rekt.
>>92603490Most things aren't about arm chair psychobabble. Get over yourself. You'll be shitposting here for longer than it would take to start reading.
>>92604106>personally I judge on using a fuck load of commas and ellipsis for no reason while pretending I care about concise writing. You stupid cownigger.
I'm trying to read Whitehack but the jargon in the intro is already losing me. What do "freeform patches" and "minimum collective adaptations" mean
>>92606617Is pretty good. A bit verbose for me but that's a personal preference. With that much text I'd suggest bolding the key elements of each encounter area. It helps with the parsing.Area 15 Gelatinous cube doesn't seem to have any treasure. It's suggested in the text >Undigested within the cube is and then nothing in the description or on the room matrix.And the room matrix is great. A snapshot of the creatures and treasures in the dungeon. Well done. That Guardian Familiar though. That's a motherfucker. I've used them shits in the past and my players routinely end up terrified of housecats. All for a Nolzur's Pigments too. Just sayin'
>>92606723All four of those are fine here and have been regularly discussed since they came out. You are not unfairly persecuted by the grogs for your shitbrew. Its because you're shit and have a shitbrew.
>>92607735>freeform patchesOn the spot rulings>minimum collective adaptationsHouse rules that don't disrupt the core precepts of the game would be my best guessWhitehack is pretentious twaddle. I thought it was going somewhere when I read the first two releases but when the author hadn't given any further elucidation by the 3rd edition I couldn't be bothered. Apparently there's a 4th edition but it's just a reformat from what I understand.There's some concepts in there but as a game that works without >freeform patches>minimum collective adaptations it's a failure IMO
>>92607770Once again, completely missing the point. Thanks for chiming in though.
>>92607858Was your point "I am smug and condescending, and should probably go to reddit where those character flaws are lauded?"
>>92607851I started reading it because characters getting automatic advantages on rolls they're good at, and roll-under but higher is better, sounded fun to me. It's needlessly complicated and the example play is onions though. I don't think I'm gonna finish reading.
>>92604649Im trying out a sort of homebrew casting system in my WB:FMAG which replaces daily casts with a roll-to-cast mechanic with setbacks for failure with deplete resources from the caster and/or his party, partly stolen from Platemail. So far so good t b h
NEW THREAD>>92607977>>92607977>>92607977
>>92607890No, my point was you, specifically you Anon, are a tumbling dickweed without anything worthwhile to contribute. Not sure how you missed that.
>>92607903Yeah man. If it's not grabbing you or is actually turning you off on a quick read through don't waste your time. There are dozens of other games out there that work without pompous language and DIY rules gaps.
>>92608000I'm not the guy you were responding to before, I chimed in because you've contributed virtually nothing yourself but smug and sneer, and hurfing and durfing about how bad this place is and how you shouldn't listen to anyone here. So I am left to seriously wonder why you don't fuck off.
>>92608160Because as a man of many facets I can decry the tone of the /osrg/ reactionaries and offer sincere and useful advice to posters that have questions about procedures, technical details, and the lore of the game I have been playing since 1981.Cry. Harder.
>>92608191>Because as a man of many facets I can decry the toneJesus christ, we're approaching Reddit levels that shouldn't be humanly possible. Are you actually an AI trained on reddit shitposting?
>>92608202yes
>>92608208Well, ok then! Nevermind, lol.
>>92606723>Point being don't pay attention to what a bunch of screeching nobodies say is or is not OSR.Everything you like is OSR, Anon. Just be yourself, as special and beautiful as each snowflake.
>>92608943>screeched nobody
>>92607858You don't have a point. You're not even very sharp.
>>92601314>So zombies always go first?They're way slower, so they always go last. Initiative rolls are for similar in speed creatures in my games. So PCs always go after creatures that have unnatural speed.My zombies are shambling btw So the initiative makes sense in that context. But they are also very hard to kill. Limbs will act on their own if cut off.
>>92610969So the zombies are a special exception to the morale = initiative house rule?
>>92574999PHB11 and DMG9 make good arguments. The PHB tells us that players should have above average scores, and decades of gaming has borne that out. The DMG presents 4d6, drop lowest, arrange, as Method I.
>>92576180Barbarians normally had a bunch of superstitions that prevented optimal play and limited item access. I've no idea of the 9d6 drop lowest 6 was subject to that.
