Thread for OPEN discussion on and about the 1981 Moldvay's Basic and Cook's Expert versions of Dungeons and Dragons and anything related to it (OSE, Labyrinth Lord, Basic Fantasy, etc).>What are your favorite house rules?>Have you plugged in and OD&D, AD&D, or BECMI rules/items to your B/X games? >What was your last session like?
How do you approach dual wielding in B/X?Some options I've seen are:>+1 to hit rolls>+1 to damage rolls>-4 -2 right hand/left hand to hit from ADND>Roll 2D6 and pick the highestAlso, do you prefer using 1D6 for all damage or the per-weapon based damage?It feels like for using the specific weapon damage, daggers get a rough spot for thieves that want to main them for flavor.1D6 helps this a little, but then needs 2H's to be buffed or there is no reason to use them (and daggers can also be thrown).Also leads to, how do you let 1H with nothing in the off hand have any bonuses? I've seen some people give them +1 to saves for having a hand free, and they can also carry torches, etc.
>>93147482The main house rules I patch in from earlier editions:- Secondary skills from AD&D, just to flesh out the characters a little bit without needing backstories or non-weapon proficiencies- Training to level up from AD&D, because that rule in combination with Strict Time Records is utterly necessary to make old-school TSR D&D work - Smaller ability score modifiers that don't generally exceed ±1, like you see in Holmes or Men & Magic, including no impact on melee from Strength (because it's not fair that a low Str should gimp fighters when low Int, Wis, and Dex have no effect beyond a negligible XP penalty on magic-users, clerics, and thieves)
>>93147910I went with the AD&D rules but with a homebrew proficiency system where one of the things they could buy off was dual wielding penalties.
>>93147910>How do you approach dual wielding in B/X?The standard rule for dual-wielding in Basic is found in the Rules Cyclopedia (you get one extra attack per round with the off-hand weapon that comes at −4 to hit, plus some extra wrinkles to do with weapon mastery if you use it).I prefer to instead give extra attacks every so many rounds: a fighter gets 3 attacks per 2 rounds when dual-wielding, a cleric or a thief gets 4 attacks per 3 rounds, and a magic-user gets 5 attacks per 4 rounds.(I also give fighters multiple attacks as in AD&D, 3/2 at 7th and 2/round at 13th, so if they dual-wield, I kick this up to one attack with each weapon every round at 7th, and 5/2 at 13th.)
>>93148791I was under the impression that Rules Cyclopedia was based on BECMI, not Basic. Either way, I think it's a good option.
>>93149050Meh. BX is just unfinished BECMI. Treating them as two entirely separate versions of the game just because some numbers changed on some of the tables and more grogs have a hard-on for Otus's art than Elmore's is a bit ludicrous.
>>93149103A curse upon your dice, Mentzerfag
>>93149174Swing and a miss. I'm a Stewartfag.
>>93149174>Purity spiral behaviorGo back to your containment thread.
ACKS has proven they could have just done CMI as level 1-14 content. In fact the smart option would have been to have CMI stuff as level 15-20 (well Immortals might stretch beyond) and be consistent with AD&D and OD&D.
>>93149207>Purity spiral behaviorYou would not *believe* how often this is touted.
>>93149743Oft?
>>93149743>>93149882I guess you guys want this to be a meme, but I can't find the joke, it's simple and true. You're the biggest hipsters on /tg/ and everyone can tell.
>>93149261The whole scheme should have been 1-3/4-12/13-19/20+. There was no need for Immortals since it ended up being a different game disguised as a tier off D&D. Master was also incredibly thin and could have added another 4-8 pages on becoming a demi-god and satisfy players that had an eye on divinity. RC is the apotheosis of BECMI, although I'll admit I can't remember how either handles mass battles so I can't speak to their quality.
My house rules have warped BX beyond recognition at this point, I wouldn't know where to begin.4 abilities instead of 6. What each ability affects is changed also.4 saving throws instead of 5.8 classes, two per Ability representing order and chaos respectively. I'll elaborate if anyone wants to gaze beyond the light into the darkness of FOE.
>>93150078What kind of sick degenerate fuck would want to discuss games on /tg/? We don't do that here, we just yell at each other for being on the wrong team.
>>93150078>4 abilities instead of 6.That's a bit extreme even for me. >8 classes, two per Ability representing order and chaos respectively.Interesting. I assume we're talking about variations on the core four. Are demi-humans just gone?
>>93149103The numbers only changed significantly once Companion set came out. Original Mentzer Expert was nearly identical with Cook Expert. Changes made for Companion were retrofitted to later printings of Mentzer Expert. Iirc, the changes were only significant for thief, and even then it was just the thief skills. Other thief numbers like save either didn't change more than half the time. In the less than half the time they did change three quarters of the time they were better by one, and only one quarter of less than one half of the time they were worse by one.
>>93150153Might: Knight/BarbarianAgility: Thief/OutlawCunning: Sorcerer/DruidWillpower: Priest/Cultist The order/chaos aspect doesn't affect character actions or behaviours, but it does come in to play with my domain rules later on in a way that can pit groups of players against each other. I tend to run campaigns that start as dungeon crawlers and end with wargaming between players controlled factions in a battle between order and chaos.
>>93150241How do you handle dual-wielding?
>>93150273Roll the damage die of both weapons, take the higher result. Only small weapons that deal d4 damage can be wielded in the offhand this way, so you are usually rolling 1d6/d8/d10 + 1d4 and taking whichever rolls highest (weapon damage is also house ruled).
>>93147482>What are your favorite house rules?Unified XP progression.2nd = 1k3rd = 3k4th = 7k5th = 15k6th = 30k7th = 60k8th = 120k9th = 240k10th = 360k11th = 480k12th = 600k13th = 720k14th = 840kOf course, this necessitates reworking the classes a bit.
>>93150577That's an interesting method that indicates which weapon you're hitting with, should it be important. It only boosts damage by about 0.3 of a point though, so it's definitely not competitive with a two-handed weapon's average 1 point damage boost. Generally speaking, a point of damage is worth a bit less than two points of to-hit, so neither does it compete with a shield (even before magic bonuses make the shield distinctly better than two-handed weapons).
>>93150740Speaking of shields vs. two-handed weapons, how do you guys make the latter not suck? Starting out, they're competitive. A point of damage is generally better than a point of to-hit, but with poor starting to-hit scores, a 1 point reduction in to-hits against you decreases damage output against by a bigger percentage than normal.Then, when you're looking at +1 swords and shields, things are still relatively balanced, because even though the shield is now improving your AC by 2 points and a +1 two-handed sword is still only giving you 1 extra point of damage over a +1 one-hander, a 2 to 1 ratio of to-hit to damage is about right for when your base chance of hitting isn't shitty.But once you get to +2 weapons and shields, two-handers are outclassed. 1 extra point of average damage vs. a 3 point improvement in AC. And it's 1 vs. 4 once you're talking about +3 items.Add to this the fact that magic two-handed weapons are rarer finds (B/X doesn't actually give figures on what percentage of magic swords found are two-handers, but I've never seen them be anything but a distinct minority, and AD&D sets the percentage at an abysmal 1%), and you're strongly incentivized to use a shield past a certain point.
>>93149103But the CMI part of BECMI is largely irrelevant. You're unlikely to get past level 14, and the game gets rather clunky by then in any case.
>>93148791>The standard rule for dual-wielding in Basic is found in the Rules Cyclopedia (you get one extra attack per round with the off-hand weapon that comes at −4 to hitThat seems broken. A starting character (19 THAC0) with a +1 strength bonus striking vs. an AC 6 orc, increases his average damage per turn by 45% by dual wielding (assuming he's using a d8 weapon in his primary hand and a d6 weapon in his secondary). In comparison, that same character would boost his damage by just 18% by using a two-handed sword.IIRC, AD&D imposes a -4 penalty on your off-hand but also a -2 penalty to your preferred hand. That might balance things a bit better, but it's obnoxious having two different penalties (especially since your weapons may have different pluses). I'd rather do -3 to both hands. That yields a 21% boost to damage per round for the character discussed above, but it's going to grow as his chance to hit gets better. So maybe -4 to both would be better.Really though, I think there are much easier ways of doing things.
>>93147910I've talked about this in /osrg/ a couple of times recently, but: roll an unmodified 1d10 for your off-hand weapon. On a 1 you hit with it, regardless of what happens with your primary weapon. Simple as.It feels weird not having the roll be modified by your enemy's AC in some way, but if, say, dual wielding gave you a +1 or +2 to your to-hit roll, that bonus wouldn't be further modified by your enemy's AC. So think of the 1d10 roll for your secondary weapon as a bonus (roughly equivalent to getting a +2 to hit on your normal roll, but doing the damage of your secondary weapon when that bonus is what means you hit).
How do you guys read the dwarf and halfling weapon restrictions?
It feels weird that people use their off-hand weapon for damage, when people traditionally dual handed with a main gauche almost exclusively and it's main purpose was for defense, parrying blows and binding the opponents weapon and rarely using it for attacks
B/X is bloated shit.
>>93150890It's kind of the same thing though. By better protecting yourself, you can be more aggressive. Parry your enemy's weapon and attack. But it could work to make it boost your defense as well. I would guess that there are two reasons why dual-wielding is normally implemented to either give you an extra attack or to boost your attack. The first is that it's generally more exciting, and the second is that it's a unique advantage. If it improves your AC (or penalizes your enemy's chance to hit: same thing), it's doing the same thing a shield does. If it boosts your chance to-hit, neither a shield nor a two-handed weapon dose that. Same thing if it grants you an extra attack.
>>93150948Yep. 128 pages is ridiculous. They should've shaved it down to 126 at most.
>>93150890I'm the 1d10 guy from >>93150874, and that attack can be used as a 1-in-10 parry instead.I still haven't settled on the exact parameters. It's obviously a boost if you can use it as both an attack and a defense, so you either need to choose one (though it can apply to all defenses, just as a boost to AC would), or play around with other restrictions. One way of going about things is to apply it as an effective saving throw after you are hit, so you don't give up your attack for a strike that would have missed you anyway. Another way is to let you defend and attack freely, but once you successfully parry or hit with an attack, that's it for the round. This is generally more powerful though, so it might should be scaled back (make it a 1-in-12 chance, for instance, though you're still probably coming out ahead).But regardless of the exact parameters, I think the idea is sound.
>>93150241For me, it's...Strength - modifies damage, strength checksFortitude - modifies hit points, fortitude saves Dexterity - modifies melee attacks, dexterity checksReflexes - modifies AC, reflex savesAwareness - modifies missile attacks, awareness checksSpirit - modifies reaction rolls, spirit savesSaving throws are single category, but modified by the appropriate ability.
>>93147482>Have you plugged in and OD&D, AD&D, or BECMI rules/items to your B/X games?The AD&D magic item tables are awfully tempting.
Are elves broken, and if so, how would/do you fix them?
>>93151195They are very good, but with the way they gain EXP being different they usually end up a level or so behind others, while being able to do multiple things.I've heard maybe limiting them to chainmail as the flavor of a magic user in full plate is kinda wonky.
>>93150740I split weapons in to 4 categories:Light (can be wielded in offhand, d4 damage)Medium (one-handed, d6 damage)Heavy (one-handed. d8 damage)Large (two-handed, d10 damage)Knights and Barbarians can use large and below.Thieves can use medium and below.Outlaws can use heavy and below.Sorcerers and Druids can only use light.Priests and Cultists can medium and below.So two-handed weapons get the d10.Dual wielding is as I explained.One handed you get to use a shield/torch.
>>93151373I would give 2 handed a d12. I have held a weapon only a couple of times but the amount of power you can generate with 2 hands against 1 is much much larger. but i get that you are doing this for balancing terms and not realism so it's ok i guess
>>93151373Spears need 2 hands. The way you described it seems like somehow only knights and barbarians can use spears. The most commonly used weapon of ye olden times.
>>93151195Remove elf as player class.
>>93151195Personally I think balanced classes are boring.Rolling stats and finding out you can make an Elf can be exciting. They level up pretty slow as well... I think they are fine as is.
>>93151423You're right, polearms get a bit more specific with the hands required to wield. But there is a weapon in each weight category for each weapon type (blade, polearm, axe, bludgeon, missile).Polearms:Light: QuarterstaffMedium: SpearHeavy: Halberd Large: Lance/PikeBut again, this is just my autistic homebrew shit.
Thoughts about this way to play?:OSE AdvancedUse B/X for examples of play1E Dungeon Master's GuideSandbox GeneratorDowntime and DemesnesYour own house rules to taste
>>93151423>Spears need 2 hands.I think you're mistake, both mechanically (they're not asterisked in the rules) and historically (the Greek dory, for instance).
>>93151446All you need is a 9 intelligence to play an elf, so it's not a very high hurdle. And elves aren't a full level behind magic-users until level 10/11, but they have the same spell progression, better hit dice, a better attack progression, better saving throws, the ability to use much better weapons, the ability to wear armor and use a shield, and some cool racial abilities to boot.
>>93151502Sounds good on my end, anon. I do have one question, unless you're starting with new-to-bx players, you won't really need the B/X books for examples of play. Unless I already answered this, why is that included?
A simple rule I like is requiring a 14 in the respective Ability to play as a Demi-Human. Makes them a lot rarer. I also don't allow players to choose a Demi-Human until they have had one as a retainer to a human PC. Makes them all the more special when there is a Dwarf in a party of 6 human fighting men and 2 magic users.
>>93151195My own take on elves:- cannot wear plate- spell progression starts off 1 level behind and falls an additional level behind each level they improve their THAC0That's for a unified XP progression in which fighters get either a damage bonus or the ability to attack twice (at a penalty). If you aren't doing something like that, maybe consider using the magic-user XP progression for them, and possibly limiting them to one-handed weapons (and no shields or casting is impossible).
Excuse me guys but uhm...what the fuck?
>>93151598Considering talking about homebrew or anything slightly outside of 1974-1983 is verboten in /osrg/, this shouldn't surprise you.
>>93151563>A simple rule I like is requiring a 14 in the respective Ability to play as a Demi-Human.Hmm. Switching things around so they need the scores to give them an earned experience bonus to play the class (only they don't actually get the experience bonus) would be an interesting way to play things. I still think elves need to be nerfed though.
>>93151598>>93151623I don't think having a different thread for each edition is probably the way to go, but /osrg/ defaults to B/X and has a stick up its ass, while this thread is based on B/X but allows for open discussion, so it's essentially the same thing, minus the stick.
>>93147482House rules...Thieves got d6 hit points.Initiative was staggered I think... Missile fire side A then side B, melee side A then side BI usually pull in some AD&D classes like druids.Hit points: d6Armor: None or leather.Weapons: Dagger, staff (d6) or sickle (d6).Saves as clerics.Spells as clerics. I would take the spell list from either PHB or UA if there was new spells there that would in time become iconic druid spells and pare them down to 12 spells per level to match clerics. I would feel it would be fair to give them more spell choices unless I did the same for other classes.Pet: Druids can bond with an animal with a HD equal to half their level round up. Shape change: Starting at 7th level, a druid can shape change into animal with a HD equal to or less than their level a number of times to their Wisdom attribute bonus. It is similar to Polymorph Self, but it is limited to animal forms.
>>93151430That seems like it's giving up too easily. It's nice to have a fighter/magic-user class. It's just that the one that exists is overpowered.
>>93151693I've been meaning to make a druid class for B/X, but I'd want to play around with the spells a decent bit, and that's a daunting task.
>>93151693>Thieves got d6 hit points.Thieves definitely need something. Their crappy armor and lack of shield use already makes them pretty squishy compared to clerics.
>>93151546Damn... man FUCK elves.Make them only able to wear leather and -1 to all saves.
>>93151727Yeah, you had to come up with creative ways to get around traps because damn thieves kept dying all the time.
>>93151710Spells aren't too bad. The main work is coming up with new animals as B/X animal choices have a lot of gaps.
>>93151727Yeah, NTA but I always used the AD&D HD for classes since 1st level is brutal, and just give them max instead of rolling:>Fighter 10 HP>Cleric 8 HP>Thief 6 HP>Magic User 4HP
>>93151598>>93151623>>93151685I'm loving the freedom here, but maybe the thread should be Classic D&D or something like that? It could still default to B/X, but that way it wouldn't be excluding other editions and encouraging them to make their own threads (which could lead to problems, including but not limited to threads being deleted). Just an idea.
>>93151623But oddly osrg has no problems shilling their latest osr heartbreaker filled with their own house rules. Don't let the dissonance bother you as it sure as hell doesn't bother them.
>>93151560My players would be new to b/x and I wanted to head off the screeching from grogshitters.
>>93151797That sounds a little confusing for people. I feel that B/X is popular enough and is probably the most played OSR game that having its own thread is probably fine.You'd get a lot of ''OSR IS CLASSIC DND! WHAT ABOUT LBB!'' and then the same arguments would happen all over again.If the thread dies it dies, if it lives, it lives.So far it seems fairly popular, and probably for a good reason.
>>93151812But regardless of whether you let things bother you or not, the hostility in /osrg/ leads to a chilling effect that reduces participation from other people. And at a certain point, it just feels like it isn't worth the effort.
>>93151821It's just a little weird that the more open thread is the one that, at least by title, is more narrowly focused. But whatever. I'm just happy to have a thread that's less stifling.
>>93151816Gotcha, then have them glance through those sections I suppose. Alternatively, toss them directly into a game of Keep on the Borderlands (or Chaotic Caves from BFRPG, which is my choice of game) and they should be able to figure out how the game works by grinding through that. >>93151812anything outside of B/X with AD&D cherry picked or AD&D RAW is considered FOE these days. Shame really.
>>93151869I'm anxiously awaiting my best friend to move in with me and us to find some local players. We are new to the area, but we are socially well-adjusted enough to find people from local clubs and stuff.
>>93151869In my opinion the OSR sphere has effectively splintered a while ago and it's unproductive to not just acknowledge this state of affairs. I understand the impulse of the OSR general to attempt to reel things back in so that the label still has any meaning but I think it's futile.
>>93151908Dogmatic grog vs. mork Borg FOE is a false dichotomy. I like OSE DND for it's more significant gameplay concepts, but I also believe that shit brewing is part of the hobby. That being said, I'd be happy to play b/x (OSE) raw, but I know that I will shit brew in time.
>>93151908It has kind of always been there. B/X and AD&D players tended to rag on each other. I was mostly a forever AD&D DM, but my soft spot for B/X as I felt it was a cleaner system and it seemed to attract less munchkins than AD&D did.
>>93151939I think the party is just kind of over, OSR was a moment in history (that lasted longer than the period it tried to emulate). The various groups within the sphere should simply clearly put forward what their own vision is for what they want to come next and guard those principles.
>>93149909>but I can't find the jokePeople like you never can.
>>93152038Baptism of fire has achieved gold level and consistently been the best selling game system outside of major publications since it released.You're not just wrong you're uninformed on the subject.
>>93152359I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I actually believe the community is growing and vibrant, but I believe the label has irreversibly lost its meaning.
>>93152359It does look nice and I am kind of tempted to get it if it wasn't so tied to Poland and if it was a little more generic. But I wouldn't be surprised if half the OSR community hates it because it was written by RPGPundit, then...a different half hates it because it was successful, then...a different half hates it as it changes some rule they see as sacred, then...Etc.
3 players. Give them each 2 characters, enforce retainers, or scale down combat encounters?
>>93150859That's precisely why I use fractional attacks instead of penalties. I don't want to keep track of a bunch of fiddly little d20 modifiers, but letting PCs make an extra attack with their off-hand weapon every second, third, or fourth round (depending on their class) is something they seem to actually enjoy keeping track of.
>>93152764Just ask and see what they would rather do?Some might get a kick out of playing 2 characters, some may not, in which case tell them they need to hire a retainer.
>>93152807>Just ask and see what they would rather do?Asking your players anything is akin to asking a woman what she thinks of your outfit. All respect & authority instantly lost.
>>93152764Games where players are expected to have multiple characters still don't generally ever allow a player to run more than one character at a time during a session. That's what retainers are for.
>>93152846For small groups, multiple PCs are just the reality that you have to face. But I would do it as your main PC and your first retainer. As far as rules wise, it was mixed.USING RETAINERS: Retainers are often used to strengthen a party which is attempting an extremely dangerous adventure. It is recommended that the DM not allow beginning players to hire retainers. New players tend to use retainers as a crutch, letting them take all the risks. If a dungeon is very difficult, the DM should let players have more than one character apiece before using retainers, at least until players are more experienced.
Sometimes I'll grab pre-made characters and have them tag along and ''watch the rear'' until they are needed and play them as GM in combat.Typically this stops after gaining a few levels.On the other hand, just find out what party size the module was made for and if you have a party half the size, half the groups of enemies or half the HP and HD of the enemies.
do your players rest in dungeons?
>>93153029It depends. "Hey our party is going to shelter in this one dead end room behind several doors in this section of dungeon that we have cleared out and we have spiked each door shut and we setting guard watches during the night..." Ok. "We are flopping our bedrolls down in the middle of this random corner and we are all taking the nap..." *rolls dice*
>>93153196You're getting a little paranoid.I know I was sitting on this thread even though that other general told me to make it if I didn't like their grognarding, I noticed someone made an ADND 1e/2e thread so I made this B/X thread. I noticed the Holmes Basic one after.You don't have to post in threads if you don't like them, anon. That is totally OK.
>>93152378>I actually believe the community is growing and vibrant, but I believe the label has irreversibly lost its meaning.When you phrase it like that I understand and agree.>>93152712RPGPundit manages to rub most everyone the wrong way but he knows what he's doing game design wise.Grab what you want from the system and play it in your own world?
>>93153196It's varying bits of stupidity on both sides. There was a lot of broken stuff in 2e with skills and powers books. But there are some interesting ideas in 2e like variable thief abilities, bard class revamp and weapon types if you like the idea of weapon vs AC in 1e, but felt it was too cumbersome. It's just silly to see the "Anything 2e is verboten!"
I run some pick up games locally, here are my house rules:>Dual wield is +1 to hit>2H'ers get +1 damage rolls>All weapons do 1D6 damage (actually RAW)>Max HP at first levelI keep going back and forth on per weapon damage or not, since daggers get shafted with 1D4 (but can be thrown).
>>93153534Also forgot:>When using one-handed weapon and the other hand is free, +1 to saving throws
Is OSE Advanced a worthwhile expansion on the original B/X rules? Looking specifically at the race/class separation rules but also if any anons have experience running/playing the system then I'd like to know how you think it compares to base OSE/B/X. For context I've convinced my group to swap from 5e to B/X and it's been an incredible improvement, everybody's loving the game, but I think at some point I'd like to play something with a little more meat on the bones.
>>93153029I allow them to, but there is an increasing risk of being ambushed by wandering monsters:- 10-minute rest: 2-in-6 chance.- Longer: 4-in-6 chance every hour.Additionally, there is a save made to see if the players become afflicted by a dungeon wyrd when resting longer than 10-minutes in one spot. So resting in dungeons is pretty risky at my table, but players can take that risk if they feel like it. But really these rules are so they keep moving and exploring, I prefer a quicker pace as I only play 2-3 times a month.Dungeon Wyrds:1. The character is rendered mute for 1d4 hours.2. The character is blinded for 1d4 hours.3. The character is knocked unconscious for 1d4 hours.4. The character loses a treasure item*.5. The character becomes intensely unclean.6. The character restores 1 hit point.*In my shitbrew treasure items are slot based separately from other inventory, characters can carry 1-10 treasure objects (painting, sculpture, vase, 200 coins etc). I have a few mechanics where the referee rolls 1d10 to allow interaction with the PCs treasure (and potential XP). I also use this when characters travel through a seedy part of town, chance to be pickpocketed (dirty peasants want your treasure).
>>93153566OSE Advanced is just some added depth and crunch from ADND 1E, and it's really easy to plop things in from it adhoc, or just accept it all and start running it as a kind of ''B/X Advanced".I know a lot of people take the classes from it, for example.I use the HP die from ADND for instance, which gives warriors 1d10, clerics 1d8, thieves 1d6, and MU's 1d4.
>>93153641What is the benefit for a 10 minute rest?
Do thieves fuck everything up in B/X? Tempted to ban it so everyone knows they can do thief shit. Also the thief skills table is way too much bullshit to write down.
>>93154129I use the BX rule with resting a turn every hour.
>>93154143It is a class that tends to attract the worst players. The worst I ever had was the girlfriend of one of my brother's friends and did she love to stir up shit with her thief and I knew if kicked her out I would lose 2-4 players.
Here is one of my favorite dungeons to use for newbies to B/X, looks silly but it's fun!
>>93154143I mean, it's a thief, they are really valuable outside of combat, probably the most valuable.Thief skill table is easy to print off and just see if they roll d100 under whatever their level cap is.The class itself is fine.
>>93152771Ironically, I'm in favor of replacing fractional attacks with two attacks made at a penalty to hit. Having different numbers of attacks in different rounds seems all kinds of clunky to me, and I've never warmed to it.
>>93152764If they don't want retainers, just stick some NPCs (glorified retainers) in the party with them. The NPCs won't technically be under their direct command, but will tend to be pretty deferential, so that it's close enough to the same thing.
>>93151373But like I said, dual wielding ends up giving you somewhere around a third of the bonus to damage that a two-handed weapon does. That's not necessarily a problem if you don't care about dual wielding, which isn't a primary way of doing things, but it does make it pretty useless.
>>93151939NAYRT, but I'm cool with discussion of the rules-as-written and playing things close to the book (though I will always personally be tweaking at least a few things). I think the dichotomy is not between people who play one way or the other, but between the folks who shout FOE at any discussion of concepts outside the one true way set out in the books (even if they're willing to tweak a few things themselves), and the folks who are open to making significant changes themselves or at least accepting of others who do so.
>>93154711Yeah it's definitely not balanced, dual wielding just hasn't been super common in my games even before this rule.
Is buying the ADND1e DMG good enough for plugging stuff into B/X or do I need the players handbook and monster book as well?
>>93151518>RAW b/x only no homebrewlol okydokie >only greeks Spear fighting with 2 handed spears is quite common. Having rules for using it with 1 or 2 hands would be a workable idea ss well. >>93151462Makes more sense. >I'm sick of this masterworks spear pike shit
>>93151685/osrg/ defaults to /b/x lol on what planet?
>>93151695Its not. Fight or use magic. Snowflake character classes will be the doom of ye.
>>93151685>>93151623>>93151598They don't want you to know this but /osrg/ also allows open discussion. I know it looks like a full-time hipster thread and there's a few posters who want it to stay that way but you can actually use it to talk about games if you want.
>>93154973So dump the cleric too is your stance? I’m all for that.
Moldvay's basic rules are better than the Cook expert rules. The casting restrictions introduced in the expert rules just renders MU's useless. Having to inform the DM BEFORE initiative that you want to cast a spell is just stupid, and removes any strategy from combat.
>>93154143I've heard people suggest that you should let everyone do thief shit, and then your thief skills simply give you a flat chance to automatically succeed at thief shit and bipass any related complications. So a thief who fails their thief roll can still fuck around like any other character.
>>93155575Signal to noise though. It’s easier to have a conversation when there’s not a stream of knee jerk counter arguments that fragment the initial line of inquiry and speed the thread to autosage.I’m not saying conversation is impossible in /osrg/ but if it deviates from the acceptable, which is sometimes arbitrary based on who is responding, it ends up circling back to same talking points: anything but RAW is FOE, X isn’t real OSR, this falls out of the 74-83 timeline and is therefore off topic.But this thread isn’t /osrg/ and maybe discussion of /osrg/ should be deemed off topic in the future so we don’t drag all of that dysfunction into a new space.
>>93155663Nah, talking about your purity spiral here seems like the best bet.
>>93155607>yeschad.jpg
>>93155855So you’re here to participate in bad faith. Got it.
>>93155663>which is sometimes arbitrary based on who is responding>discussion of /osrg/ should be deemed off topic in the future so we don’t drag all of that dysfunction into a new space.lol
>>93155873Goes around comes around.
>>93155613>having to plan ahead removes strategy b/x brain for babbies at work
>>93154825You NEED TO BUY OSE AND OSE ADVANCED 5 TIMES IN HARD COPY WITH DIFFERENT COVER ART
>>93155613First, the DM is supposed to be impartial. Second, it part of how the initiative system worked. You got your whole round before an opponent could do anything. Without this, no caster is going to lose a spell. They will always chose not to cast if they are hit in combat. I could see the change, but it does make casters more powerful. It probably wasn't an issue in Basic as you only had 2nd level spells at most. In Holmes, if a magic user was "attacked" they couldn't cast at all. Assuming he meant melee, but who knows.
>>93155663>so we don’t drag all of that dysfunction into a new space.Anon they're here already.I see where you're coming from but if you want to have a B/X general then you really are condemning /osrg/ to be a full-time hipster thread. And if you can ignore the grumbleposting here then why can't you ignore it there? I think you're going to have the same problems while also dividing the discussion of old D&D.
>>93155905You’re drawing a lot of assumptions about who posts what and where. Seems that all the shouting of ‘go make your own thread’ isn’t about keeping /osrg/ within the confines of its self-described purview but is instead just another vector to attack other posters with the shield of anonymity.Some anon, not me I assure you, decided to do as suggested and make their own thread where the conversation was not dictated by /osrg/‘s particulars and here you are shitting on the conversation.What is your motivation other than venting your spleen?
>>93155916How does one plan around random chance? If you lose initiative, the DM, if they're playing properly, will target the caster. MU's in b/x already have such few spells. Losing your only spell at L1 because the die roll didn't go your way seems pretty silly. At least if you get to decide after initiative, you have a meaningful choice about whether or not you want to use your spell slot. More rules doesn't equate to more strategy.
>>93155855>>93155873>>93155905This is probably one of the guys who told you to make your own thread because B/X houserules are off-topic to /osrg/. Now you've made your own thread and he is mad.The fact that there has been so much participation here is quite damning, it means there are a lot of people who want to talk about OSR games but not in /osrg/. But I don't think that making a new general is going to solve the problem. I think the only way to solve the problem is to ignore nogames and talk about games.
>>93155984You're drawing a lot of assumptions too smart guy. No one has to tell anyone shit or justify anything to you, or anyone else here. Some anons would want it to be elsewhere, some don't. Not everyone has the same motivation from minute to minute let alone day to day or post to post. You seem like a smug cunt so fuck you.
>>93155962A DM does need to be impartial, BUT, the DM does also need to play the monsters sensibly. Even semi intelligent creatures know to go for the mage. Losing your spell due to combat damage is only mentioned in the expert rules. The basic rules already have quite a few major casting restrictions. E.g. you can't take the movement or attack action. If you're unable to use your hands due to hold person, or your ability to talk is taken away using a silence spell, etc.
>>93156061The participation is copy past of the 2 handed weapon discussion already had. Same shit, different channel. Multiple anons too.
>>93155993Don't stand in front if you're a wizard harry. If losing the initiative is such a kick in the nuts that's more a problem with the initiative system at all. Having it be a coin toss about who gets killed at level 1 due to low hp is overall crap design. But you can deal with that by doing simple things like getting into cover, screening your magic user, etc. The strategy you lack isn't in the rules as autistic wording, its in the descriptive terrain and actions of combat.
>>93156082You see? They're categorically opposed to talking about games, they only come here to perform an identity.
>>93156073>i’m here to be an asshole and no one can stop me because i’m anonymous Thank you for clarifying your position.
>>93154150So necessarily every hour there is an additional 2:6 minimum chance of random encounter? >slot based separately from other inventory Interdasting. Is other inventory also slot based on a different track and scale or is it some other method?
>>93156118>thinks performing an identity matters here lmao even
>>93156104Did you forget about missile weapons and their ridiculous range? You also can"t take the movement action during the turn you cast a spell, so getting into the right strategic position could take several rounds. The initiative system is fine as it is. Combat is supposed to be high risk. However, clever plays like casting sleep or light to avoid combat are not really viable using the cook expert spell casting restrictions.
>>93156151>so getting into the right strategic position could take several rounds.>this has no strategy!!!! >combat is suppose to be high risk >no not liek that tho >spell casting as raw is a failstate i don't even what you want anymore
>>93155993Would it be better if you didn't lose the slot until the spell went off?
>>93156175That is one possible solution. Most spellcasters can't take even a single hit though, so I usually just stick with the spellcasting rules from basic.
Choose my fate>Buy print OSE Tome>Buy print AD&D 1e DMGI have the B/X omnibus printed already, so I'm on the fence with OSE.
>>93156166have you actually played b/x before? Try playing a MU using the expert rules and see how far you get. You might even gain some insight into b/x and be able to contribute constructively to this discussion.
>>93156299ose is a great rules reference but it lacks flavour, just bet the basic and expert pdfs and print them yourself, lower page count and more flavour. its a win win
>>93156299If you have B/X already you don’t need OSE. The DMG is a more valuable resource.
>>93156299DMG. You already have all of OSE in B/X.
>>93151502I'd use McClure's Wilderness Hexploration instead of Sandbox Generator, or at least in addition.
What do you guys think about letting the Cleric roll 1D8 and the Thief roll 1D6 for HP?
>>93156302Nah bump that.At level 1 MU's get 3 spells and a spellbook, read magic is a given passive ability. They start at HP 4 and don't have to roll.How you like that.
>>93157261That’s allowing the cleric to bite even deeper into the fighter’s end. Why not just give the thief d6? Saddling them with d4 when they’re more active than the other bookworm classes is just kinda shitty.
>>93157320I guess I should say the Fighter gets D10 HP.
>>93157336It’s not that radical a shift. It works out to an extra hp per level for a higher die. I don’t know how impactful that is after 3rd level or so. At lower levels it can make the difference between dying in one hit or two. The biggest difference is in fighting monsters who tend toward less hp and lower damage in B/X.If your primary concern is survivability at lower levels and the consequences of later levels aren’t as important then go for it.
>>93157303Now that would be truly OP. Every Tom Riddle, Dick, and Harry would be playing MU's.
>>93151598Don't let the OSRfags lie to you, the purity spiral is real and they're the worst offenders.
>>93157303I'm almost okay with that. Spells like Sleep and Charm Person are too powerful though. But having 3 spells more on the order of Ventriloquism or Magic Missile wouldn't be so out of bounds.
>>93158755I know you're a troll, but I'll respond anyway. Despite it's supposed narrower focus (just B/X and not OD&D, Holmes Basic, B/X and pre-Unearthed Arcana AD&D), this thread embraces more open discussion and thus is less "pure" than /osrg/.
>>93158928ntaIn AD&D you get one offensive, one defensive, and one utility spell. Seems reasonable that a guy who spent so much time learning magic that he can’t wear armor, swing anything heavier than a dagger, or take a punch should have more than a single trick up his sleeve.
>>93157303>>93158928>>93158954Are we just talking about a 1st level magic-user knowing 3 different spells, or having 3 slots to cast spells? Because there's a world of different in terms of power.
>>93156302Nobody plays a M-U,.just play an elf.>>93157303Just play 5E at that point
>>93158974I assumed it was three spells to choose from. More than one casting per day at 1st level is game changing in B/X.
>>93150791My own take is to A) shift magic weapon bonuses entirely to damage--so that a +1 sword gives you +2 damage and +0 to hit--and B) increase the bonus to two-handed weapons by 1 point. So while one-handers are getting +2, +4 and +6 damage, two-handers are getting +3, +6 and +9.
>>93158943You're literally agreeing with me. You either lack the ability to infer context is blinded by your biases or you're not smart enough to be in this conversation.
Alignment variance for monsters, yay ot nay?Some monsters in the DMG have variance in their alignments. One that springs to mind are the cloud giants.Thought that this could be done to most monsters to add some variety to encounters. The three pronged alignment of B/X would work great. Just use a d6.
>>93159535>DMGoff topic, GYG
>>93159554Fuck off, troll. Not only did the opening post stress that it was an open discussion, but it also asked whether we plugged in rules and such from OD&D, AD&D, or BECMI.
>>93159554>>93159951This, by the way, is one reason I'd rather have a broader rubric for the thread, as I was saying in >>93151797: classic, traditional, or whatever D&D, rather than specifically B/X (even though B/X is the thing I'm personally focused on). Trolls are gonna troll, but I'd rather there be as little ambiguity as possible, so they're clearly in the wrong, more easily reportable, and less likely to confuse randos, casuals and such, who aren't paying close attention.
>>93151761>[druid] Spells aren't too bad.It's just a lot of stuff to iron out, if you want to rework things to your own satisfaction.
>>93154943I have no issues with having rules for both 1 and 2 handed spears, but I was reacting to the universal statement "spears need 2 hands", which is simply not true. Not only did one-handers exist, but they were significantly more common.
>>93154973I'm a big fan of gishes: fight a little fight, cast a little spell, get down tonight. They just need to be at least somewhat reasonably balanced.
Can you use "point buy" rules in instead of rolling for stats? I'm really interesred in B/X as a dm but sadly my players will never play a game where you "randomly generate" your characters
>>93147482Lmao.Did you boys get in a fight with the osr general?
>>93160037You can do whatever you want, and if that's what it takes to sell the game to your group, so be it, but I'm not a big fan of point buy in an OSR context and would try to see if they'd swallow some type of "random but fair" method of generation (card draw, randomly allocated arrays, etc.) before going straight to point buy.
>>93160089Anon they are pathfinder fags, 2e at that. Playing that shit makes me somehow miss dnd5e
>>93160095Maybe you could sell B/X as a quick pick-up game? Like, if people roll up characters really quick, you run an adventure today.
>>93156151>Did you forget about missile weapons and their ridiculous range?Speaking of which, I was toying around with the idea of reducing ranges within enclosed areas. I guess the easy way to do it would be to take the AD&D approach of feet inside vs. yards outside, but it could potentially be more sophisticated, depending on how much clearance there is. I'm trying to imagine throwing javelins down a hallway though, and I definitely don't see getting much range on them.
>>93159554>>93159976I don't know how more clear I can be with OPEN discussion and asking what other systems things you've put in B/X games.You don't have to post here, or you can make your own thread.Thanks.
>>93156838Thanks for the suggestion. Will look into it.
>>93161093>formal boilerplate thanks like a corpo bitch Too bad its not your thread. If you want to curate the vibes go back to redshit.
>>93160048They threw a tantrum and left but are discovering life on their own is hard and the people are meaniepoos.
>>93159997That's because you're a fag. Pick a class, play the game, discover magical items and capacities during play. Or keep armchariing the shit out of it to be a 'creative'.
>>93160037Anything can be OSR maaaannnn just do whateverrrr.
>>93160037Just give a fixed stats array and allow them to arrange as they wish
>>93159990This is a good point. I suspect before shields there were spears which would make timeframe wise 2 handed spears more common historically but get what you mean for the time period >fantasy ye olden agesin question.Having rules for both seems like the best bet.
>>93159535If its not X its not welcome. You can openly be retarded and people will say so.
>>93156302Skill issue. Get good, acquire scrolls.
>>93161245>>93161317Please go back to your containment thread. This is for open discussion on B/X and any modifications anyone wants to do.Or you could stay and just keep complaining and trying to run things off track.
>>93161274Roll for how many points they can use to spend on a variety of arrays.
>>93161317>If its not X its not welcome.>>93147482>Thread for OPEN discussionDid you think you were in another thread?
>>93159976>>93161093>>93161361lmao the purity spiral of definition already
>>93161366>>93161361>go away this is for open discussion! jej
Thoughts on DCC? I hear its really good for OSR.
Which BX/5e hybrid is better to get started, Shadowdark or Five Torches Deep?
>>93161413Honestly neither are very good, I would feel bad recommending them to you. What kind of thing are you looking for in a system? Or are you set on a 5e/OSR hybrid? I would throw Dungeon Crawl Classics out as a wildcard choice if you are willing to step beyond the binary.
So this general is for the open discussion of OSR content, without the 'FOE GYG' and purity spiralling?And the original OSR general is for specific first decade systems and the preservation of a specific play style?The names of the generals sort of imply the opposite is true. But it's a minor gripe, I'll be posting in both regardless. Godspeed fellow FAGs (Fantasy Adventure Gamers).
>>93161751Yes, that seems to be the case.
>>93161720Why, what's wrong with them? I've been told those are the best options? I want the best of both 5e and B/X, so lots of options for character creation (races, classes, feats, backgrounds, and so on), but also the old school feel and esthetics.
>>93161975I stand by DCC in that case then.Shadowshart is an influencer-driven new age cash grab, a siren song of shite luring in unsuspecting 5e players with promises of the mythical 'old school' your dad used to play. It's insubstantial, bland and not worth anyone's time.
>>93161975Shadowdark is very bad mechanically. The way it mixes 5e with oldschool dnd fails completely.5 torches deep i dont even remember about but it was bad.Between the 2 you would be better to play even Fantastic heroes and witchery or Castles and crusades.Unfortunately only the DCC guys and maybe Hackmaster have managed to make something that i consider a cross between oldschool and new dnd and not be abominably bad
>>93162191>I stand by DCC in that case then.Uhmmm but can I make a gish in DCC?>>93162475>Fantastic heroes and witcheryWhat's that?>Castles and crusadesIsn't it basically AD&D? Too much crunch for my taste.
>>93162681It's a lesser known osr game with loads of classes and options but still a lot of an oldschool feel.Castles and Crusades is basically 3rd edition dnd but downtuned a lot making it feel much closer to Adnd 2e than 3.5.DCC is the same, but i a completely different way.The very first gish was the elf. Any oldschool system can run a gish race/class even if you have to homebrew a little to include said class
Fantastic heroes and witchery is great. It also doesn't feel like it's missing anything rule wise, unlike a lot of these OSR-lite games such as Shadowshart and 5TD.
Running a B/X game for some friends this weekend, just have 4 people coming over with drinks and pizza for a one-night dungeon crawl. They've never roleplayed, and I've never gotten to actually run an OSR game. Will just be running them through a dungeon floor I whipped up. Should be fun! Any tips to prep me or them from folks who've done similar?
>>93163456Don't stress the crunchy stuff, if they have never roleplayed before. If starting at level 1, I'd max out hit die instead of having them keep rolling until they get above a 2, alternatively, use the AD&D hit dice maximum for these classes:d4 Magic-userd6 Thiefd8 Clericd10 FighterHave them roll a couple of characters, or have NPC standbys of your own to help them out in a pinch.If starting at Level 1, throw the MU a bone and let them get 2 spells at least to feel more impactful on the game and really hype how powerful the spells are.Remember the goal isn't to make people suffer (unless they like that) its to have fun.Good luck and godspeed!
>>93163673Great character considerations. Despite me stressing just how quick chargen was, they all just want pregen'd so I'll probably just do a straight forward party of all 4 classes (should I bother including the racial classes?) and let them pick. Definitely will use the AD&D HD maxes since it's so new to them
>>93163456Would it be fair to say that the fate of everyone's happiness that night rests solely on your shoulders and yours alone? Is there zero room for error on your part? Must you be the perfect DM in order to guide your fledgling players to the light of old school gaming in a way that is rewarding and engaging? The answer to all of these is yes. So don't let the pressure get to you, but by god don't let yourself down. There's a lot riding on this. We will be watching closely.
>>93163771that's what the beer & pizza is for
>>93163741You don't have to bother with racial classes unless they just want to for some reason, but it seems they are letting you pick so that should be no problem.If they end up loving it, here are some quick oneshot one page dungeons I've collected to keep the party going:gofile (DOT) io/d/BnAwnS most are pretty good, I like ''The Tomb of the Skeleton King'' for beginners.
>>93163456Keep it as simple as possible. They're here to get mad loot and stay alive if possible, nothing more nothing less.I'd use a readymade module like hole in the oak, but you're more than welcome to use whatever you got in hand.I'd say make it a tiny bit wacky.
>>93163805Oh my bad missed that, yeah you'll be fine.
>>93163456>>93163741Make a dozen viable pregens (armor if applicable, two weapons, 5 rations, 6 torches, three useful items and d4 gold coins) but leave out the ability scores.Half the fun is rolling your stats and end up with a mediocre fighter who still gets a lot of cool loot despite everything!So let them roll scores and then choose a fitting pregen (shopping for equipment is always the lamest part). Have a list of 100 or so names on hand to roll on just in case, both for you and your players.Give each a hireling/follower of some sort: fighter gets a squire (d4 HP, shield, d6 weapon and a large sack), others get a normal human (1 HP, d4 weapon and a small sack) or maybe a pet (tired mule, skinny monkey or old dog, 1 HP and d4 damage attack). Ideally, make a bunch of hirelings in advance, name them, and let the players pick one randomly. Hirelings reduce risk of character death (if they die first) and give a backup character if the main PC dies.Also, have a small hex map for the area around the dungeon/town, and slap in an old monument very close nearby (ideally, the hex between base and dungeon) where the mage can find a random extra spell, as well as a few other interesting features (enchanted fairy tree, pond with a gem at the bottom, bloody offering altar, alternative dungeon entrance, huge footprint, grazing deer, merchant camp) in case they want to explore between delves.Have them start at the entrance of the dungeon with the explicit goal to find treasure and avoid fights.On your part, have a sheet for notes and time/turn tracking (torches burn for 6 turns, sixth turn in dungeon is always taking a rest and light new torches), roll for random encounters, and roll reactions. Don't be afraid to hint at possible dangers ("the passage looks SUSPICIOUSLY well kept"), since they are new, but be fair. You should roll openly unless it's a hide or listen roll.Finally, post your dungeon, I wanna see.
>>93156838I tried finding this online and only found a snippet about heraldry and broken links.
>>93164244>McClure's Wilderness HexplorationLiterally copy and pasted into Google.Amazing.
An old school hex crawl about finding the Third Bognadoff Twin
How do you all approach alignment as a language? Or do you even bother with it?I have to say, I ignore it completely, and it seems like a pretty bad, or not thoroughly explained, mechanic.
>>93165283Yeah I ignore it as well. Every being on the planet knowing a special clicks and hand signs language they instantly forget if they change alignment seems stupid
>>93165283Alignment language? No.Secret language tied to faction or allegiance? Yes.A lot stems from AD&D but examples are things like Thieves’ Cant, Druidic, and the like. Members of a Lawful church might know Liturgic. Chaos cultist might have a Black Speech or Infernal Tongue, and so forth. They don’t have a hard tie to alignment, which I hardly use anyway, and definitely aren’t forgotten if you change allegiance. Too much mental gymnastics with that one.You can’t learn a secret language during creation unless it’s explicitly designated by your class. Gotta join a faction or find some turncoat willing to teach you.
How fast do you level your players?I know gold = exp but if I'm making dungeons, what does this look like at level 1? Is there an easy way to do it/calculate it?
>>93167233I usually stock for six fighters to get enough experience via 80% treasure and 20% fighting to each gain a level, per dungeon level. 6*2000=12000 total, 12000*.80=9600 gp worth of treasure, 2400 XP from encounters. I don't include wandering monsters and their potential items in this calculation.I have a PDF of various dungeon stocking methods but I cannot seem to find it. If I do, I'll post it.
>>93165283I tend to either ignore the alignment mechanic altogether (though things can still be unholy or holy), or interpret it as civilized vs. wild/savage. Neither of those lend themselves to alignment languages, even if I didn't think alignment languages are really dumb, which I do.>>93165426Thieves' Cant, Druidic, some kind of secret church speak, etc. are all fine.
What's your favorite rule/change introduced by a retroclone or OSR-adjacent game? I'd imagine that Lamentations of the Flame Princess's d6 thief skills would be high up there. Swords & Wizardry's single-category saves?
The superiority of swords to other weapons gives other classes a boost over clerics and wizards, but it's pretty boring to funnel everybody (well, 5 out of 7 classes) towards the same weapons. Why level the playing field as far as weapons are concerned and just give fighters bonus damage (or some other kind of bonus)?
>>93167820I forget which one it's from but, if you roll 20 to hit, you roll again and if you get a 19 or 20 you instantly kill whatever you were targeting, be it a goblin or a god.If you don't roll a 19 or 20, then the damage die is double whatever you roll.
>>93167841Just use the RAW 1D6 all weapons.This only hurts 2H, which you can give a +1 to damage rolls.Makes every weapon useful.Also remember weapons can be used as tools, in a pinch.
>>93167841This >>93167867 but i ve also taken this a step further with for example daggers having a small penalty to hit against heavily armored, swords dealing 1 extra damage against unarmored opponents, etc.2handed deal 1d10 but it's ok as a trade-off because i have also made shields better (because raw they kinda suck which is the opposite of real life)
>>93167844I like doing max damage, plus another damage roll, and roll up on a max result on that.
Has anyone played hexploration on foundry vtt before? wondering if there are any good add-ons to get or anything.And I'm also confused on if you would let the players see the map as they uncover stuff or not.
>>93161368
>>93159020>More than one casting per day at 1st level is game changing in B/X.Yeah, but 3 Magic Missiles don't seem too broken compared to 1 Sleep.
>>93167233>>93167437Pay special attention to the part where Lungfungus says to put open (unlocked) treasure in rooms.Especially important if your players are new or simply bad.
What do you do with the mountains of gold you're raking in if you're not interested in the whole domain management / command a small army thing?
>>93169654Change game.
>>93169695You mean play a different game, or alter the game so maybe there's less gold or something?
>>93170060Potayto potahto.
>>93170060>alter the game so maybe there's less gold or something?Assuming it's the players that don't want domain play not the Referee, that would negatively impact the other players.If the referee doesn't want to run wargames and domains then sadly >>93169695 is right.Try dolmenwood or Errant, maybe.
>>93169322This is a fantastic PDF, thanks anon.
>>93169654Then the game is over, they won, the end.Roll new characters.It's kind of like saying ''My friends aren't interested in end game material'', which is fine, but... thats where it goes.You can keep running dungeons or use imagination to find gold sinks, otherwise it's... The End.
>>93170863>>93170917Domain play, aside from pretty much being a totally different game, doesn't actually get much attention in the rules, so it seems weird to me to see it as vital. Plus, you're raking in embarrassing amounts of gold well before you reach domain-level play. I guess the eventuality of domains gives an excuse to squirrel away gold, but unless people are really focused on and looking forward to getting domains, I don't know that that makes much difference.>>93170863>Assuming it's the players that don't want domain play not the Referee, that would negatively impact the other players.If some people want domain play and others don't, that's obviously an issue, but assuming everybody's on the same page, why not do something like adopt a silver standard (the kind where prices remain the same)?
>>93168875There it is again. Purity spiral on purity spiral. Just let people use words omg.
>>93167233Pure milestone levelling. I just make up a number and tell them when they've completed enough quests.
>>93161751No, its a new rehash with the same people, same problems and pretending its not. The gognativie cisonnanse is insane here.
>>93171364>>93171343That guy just recommended milestone leveling and he won't get screamed at.It's very different, stop crying wolf.
>>93171185Whats the most gold you ever got as a player?Whats the most gold one of your players ever had?If it's a hypothetical just play the game...
>>93171420Our DM made up stuff for us to spend gold on, like people selling magic items, and the cleric's church asking us to help fund the reconstruction of a temple that god sacked. I guess it worked, but it felt a little forced and not in the hands off spirit of OSR. We also had enough money that it didn't feel very valuable to us, or I doubt we would all have given substantial amounts to the rebuild a temple. It did come in handy as a base of operations though.
>>93171343What milestone do you use? BBEG? Or something like end of adventure/dungeon?I stick to EXP because I think it's a fun novelty that some classes level faster than others.
>>93171375Its a shitpost you dummy. Watching the osr scene and then this place go through the same cycles is absurdly hilarious.
>>93164341Dude... Why don't you open the link? It only shows the heraldry section which is 14 pages long. Unless I am missing something.
>>93171778>because I think it's a fun novelty that some classes level faster than others.>novelty wut
>>93171185>if some people want domain play and others don't, that's obviously an issue,Play wargames that effect the game world with the ones that do, don't with the ones that don't. Works fine.
>>93171835Anon, I'm going to take away your internet privileges.>>93171854I meant more that it's fun, not that it's a novelty, my apologies.
>>93171887There's likely something to how osr plays compared to modern games that makes it exciting and novel to many. I just wasn't sure how some classes leveling at different rates factored into that. Is that not a thing in modern dnd?
>>93171904I think mainly the novelty is gold = exp.There is still exp in 5e, but it's calculated differently.I will say most 5e DM's I've met do milestone leveling and not exp, as it's a headache and can leave other people feeling ''left out'' even if their characters are stronger at lower levels than others.
>>93171904>>93172008Gold = XP means that you're responsible for your own progression.You have the agency as a player.Find enough gold to buy a treasure map,make an expedition to the location, try to find the treasure, or don't,just go somewhere else, it doesn't matter.Hexes lock distances and negates handwaving travel time. It allows for organic content discovery with random tables.>>Anyone that wants to can and should do milestone leveling<<but in terms of game design it's cutting a core aspect of the game out and replacing it with "mother may I?"
>>93171887Lol wtf, I'm retarded. Thanks.
Any decent rules for Fatigue out there?
>>93172687-1 to hit -1 to damage if you don't rest once every hour in the dungeon.
Making my own dungeon, what's a good BBEG for level 1 B/X'ers?
>>93173671Look at a chart and select an appropriate monster.
>>93173724Hey cool idea, what chart.
>>93173780The one in the book you fucking retard.
How much of a hex map should I create for starting a campaign? should I just do a chunk of hexes to begin with and then expands sessions go on, or do you guys suggest having a whole continent made and then fill them in as the sessions go on.
>>93175129Look up the article called "Just three hexes">>93173671BBEGs happen randomly in dungeoncrawls.Structure your monsters on a list like this:Roll 2d4Result - Monster Hit dice2 - 4 HD3 - 2 HD4 - 1 HD5 - 1 HD6 - 1 HD7 - 1 HD8 - 3 HDJust pick your favorite 3HD and 4HD monster, now you have some roaming BBEGs for your first floor.
>>93175224>>931736712d8 if you want reduced odds, obviously. I'm not typing it out as an example.
>>93173780The one in the deleted post you fucking retard.
What AC should monsters have for 1st level characters? 8? 7?
>>93176270The ones that are given for the 1 HD monsters you find in the book? A medium has AC 9 and a veteran has AC 2, but those are admittedly set according to the PC classes, and AC 2 is kind of obnoxious for people with a 19 THAC0 (at a 20% chance to hit, your chance of missing 7 times in a row is greater than your chance to hit with any particular attack). That's one reason I think THAC0s should start at 18 instead of 19, and always improve in 2 point jumps rather than having that weird 3 point one from 17 to 14, so: 18, 16, 14, 12, 10 rather than 19, 17, 14, 12, 10. That change makes a significant shift vs. heavily armored enemies for low level characters, but doesn't make nearly as big of a difference vs. less heavily armored ones (if you had 20% chance to hit that +5% means you're putting out 125% as much damage per round as before, while you had a 40% chance, the percentage boost is only half as much at 112.5%). But I digressI think you can take the 6 AC of goblins, hobgoblins, orcs, bandits and such as standard for starting monsters. As you start looking at slightly tougher monsters (2 HD rather than 1), AC 5 becomes more common, though there's obviously some variance at either level. Past 2 or 3 HD, there really isn't that much of a plottable AC progression. High HD creatures are more likely to have ACs that are at least a bit better, but it's not predictable purely from level, and overall, there really isn't that big of a shift.
>>93177131Reading a book for children island fo zoomers, understand pls.
>>93177185Let people ask their questions. Even if you can flip through the book and see what ACs 1 HD monsters have, maybe people here know why some work better than others, why you should weigh some monsters more heavily than others, or that the book probably made ACs a bit too high or too low. Sniping at people really doesn't accomplish anything except to make for a hostile thread, and when it comes down to it, I'm okay with dumb questions. Nobody is forced to answer them after all. You can just roll your eyes and move past them without comment.
Show me your dungeons, cowards.
How do you tweak crossbows so they don't entirely suck?
>>93177870Get rid of Slow for one. It doesn’t make much sense given that they already fire every other round. I don’t think increasing damage is the way to go since bows only do d6 also. If you want them to be more enticing give them an additional +1 to hit at short range. There is also an argument for allowing a loaded crossbow to be fired before initiative is rolled but I’m not sure how I feel about that in the scope of B/X’s simple system.
>>93177870Can be used by NORMALMAN so they have a ranged option besides slings. Can be held (and fired) with one hand, but requires two to load. Can be passed to an NPC or PC who can use their action to load it.
>>93178003>Can be held (and fired) with one handSome sensible points but you lost me there. Cross bows are not little things. They're a hunk of wood with a heavy metal bar and a strong metal hoop at the far end. The trigger is a long lever on the bottom that you have to squeeze without changing the aiming point. You might be able to fire them with one hand but you won't aiming them and the place they might be hitting is the ground about 10 feet in front of you because your arm is too tired to hold them up.
>>93177870>>93177955>>93178003So my own approach has been to increase crossbow damage and allow people to rush the process of spanning and reloading, allowing them to shoot in the same round at a penalty. 2d4 or 1d8 damage and a snapshot at -4 to hit is the range I'm playing around in. Giving snapshots a flat 2-in-6 chance of failing is more controlled (since the size of the penalty, percentage-wise, doesn't vary according to your initial chance to hit), but it's kind of obnoxious to demand an extra die roll.
>>93177870Make all crossbows into repeating crossbows: Two shots per round, six shots magazine, two full rounds to reload.
>>93177307Show me yours and I'll show you mine big boy
While we're on the topic of crossbows, some interesting things...Crossbows in the Basic Set don't have a reduced rate of fire. That's only introduced in the Expert Set as an optional rule. So I guess one way of making crossbows competitive would be to just ignore the optional rule, though it seems a little silly for crossbows to be as quick as bows without incurring any sort of penalty.Crossbows and the spanning method they use aren't discussed at all in B/X. Mentzer's Basic Set says only that "A crossbow is similar to a normal bow (long or short), but is held horizontally and shot by pulling a trigger, which releases the string." and doesn't discuss spanning. It parenthetically appends "Lt." to the crossbow entry on the weapons and equipment costs table and the missile fire table. Interestingly, there don't appear to be any notes on it taking more time to reload.Mentzer's Companion Set adds heavy crossbows, which it describes thusly: "This is very similar to a light crossbow, and it fires the same missiles (quarrels). Light crossbows are made of wood, but a heavy crossbow has metal limbs, increasing its strength for better range and damage. However, it is heavy, takes 2 hands to use and is slower; a character with 18 strength can fire every round, but any weaker character can only fire it once every 2 rounds, because of the time needed to string it." It doesn't specify a spanning method.
>>93179676It isn't until the Rules Cyclopedia until things are clearly delineated:>Crossbow, Heavy: This is a missile weapon consisting of a tough bow (like a small bow, but smaller and sometimes made of metal) laid cross- wise across a stock with a trigger. It fires stubby arrows called quarrels.>Heavy crossbows are bulky, requiring two hands to use, and are slow to reload. A character with 18 strength can draw back the string with one hand and fire every round, but weaker characters must point the crossbow nose-down on the ground, brace it with one foot, and draw back the string with both hands in order to reload it; they can only fire it once every two rounds.>This crossbow is a two-handed weapon; the wielder of the weapon may not use a shield and always loses individual initiative to characters not using a two-handed weapon. Halflings and small nonhumans such as goblins cannot use this weapon....and...>Crossbow, Light: This weapon is similar to the heavy crossbow, but smaller. It also requires two hands to load, but only one to fire.>This crossbow is a two-handed weapon; the wielder of the weapon may not use a shield and always loses individual initiative to characters not using a two-handed weapon. Halfling characters and small races such as goblins cannot use this weapon.So even the heavy crossbow is hand-spanned, which seems weird to me. I'm okay with crossbows being hand-spanned, but if they're limited to that, I wouldn't have heavy and light varieties. Even with just a single crossbow entry, I'm okay with a belt and hook spanning method, with or without doubler pulley. Spanning times for those are competitive with hand-spanning, and they were both introduced in the High Middle Ages, which is my rough guide for what's acceptable in terms of historical time period.
>>93179676I forgot to add that, interestingly, the crossbowman entry on the Mercenaries Troop Type table in Cook Expert is as follows: "Crossbowman (chain, heavy crossbow)"So maybe there was originally intended to be a light/heavy crossbow split and it just got left in? Or maybe somebody was looking at AD&D or something, and forgot to drop the "heavy"?
The AD&D PHB gives light crossbows a rate of fire of 1, and heavy crossbows 1/2. Since bows fire twice per round, they're both slow. As a side note, AD&D really screws thrown weapons other than daggers (ROF of 2) and darts (ROF of 3), by saddling them with only 1 attack per round, when they already suck compared to bows.Neither the PHB nor the DMG seems to contain a description of crossbows or the spanning methods in use. The DMG says "Due to the lack of leverage and something to "push" against, it is impossible to cock a heavy or medium crossbow while levitating", despite the fact there is no entry for medium crossbows, only heavy and light.The 2e PHB says:>Crossbow: Strength bonuses or penalties do not apply to crossbows, since thes are purely mechanical devices. The hand crossbow is easily held in one hand and cocked with the other. The light crossbow, also called latches, must be braced against an object to be cocked with a lever mounted on the stock. The heavy crossbow, also called arbalest, has a powerful pull and must be cocked with a cranequin (a simple winch or lever) that comes with the weapon. One foot is placed in a stirrup at the end of the crossbow while the cranequin is worked. All crossbows fire quarrels or bolts and the correct size must be used with each weapon.I have issues with that.
So I guess the sort of rules we're comfortable using for crossbows depends on the types of crossbows we're envisioning, with regards to spanning methods. Hand-spanning and belt-spanning are pretty quick, so I'm comfortable allowing crossbows using these methods to shoot the same turn they're spanned (albeit at a penalty, as described in >>93178957). If you're picturing windlasses or cranequins, a rate of fire like that just seems ridiculous.
I've been thinking about giving demi-humans a choice of 2 classes each, unique to them. I have some ideas going into this, but if you were gonna do it, what would you pick? In most cases, I would think, it would mean adding one variant class on top of the one in the book.
>>93180086ACKS does this
>>93177297Maybe the should read, think, then ask. Let people be critical.
>>93180086dwarven war priest, halfling thief acrobat, elven mystic
>>93180132I recall that. I'm trying to figure out where I hid my copy.
>>93180146I think the other two classes are pretty self-explanatory, but what does an elven mystic do?
>>93178003Surely a normal man would have an easier time with a bow than a sling.
>>93180167some nature magic on a wizards progression tables. an alternative spellcaster. a mix between the druid and the wizard like the gnomes have the illusionist in adnd
>>93180196Cool. Makes sense.
Alternatives to level caps for demihumans?
>>93180516xp penalties for progressing past certain levels, so you could have a 13 level halfling but it would take A LOT of xp and it would be unique in your game world.Anything from a 10% penalty (the reverse of bonus xp for high stats) to a 20-25% is fine because high level xp requirements are very big
>>93180516Just don't use them because they're retarded? Elves advance as MU, the rest as FM.
>>93180691But elves are already better versions of magic-users as it is.
>>93180720The level caps ARE the drawback. MUs will see greater heights in long-term play. Elves level slowly and cap lower but have access to EVERYTHING and unique roleplay opportunities through monster languages, racial dynamics, etc.
Man, I'm pissed I didn't notice this thread before venting my piss over in the /osr/ thread.Screencapping the discussion I had and bringing it over here in case anyone wants to say anything.Feels wrong to screencap my own posts but hell with it, I'm not wasting what I said on that lot if there's a thread of people who'll actually discuss it instead of parroting FOE GYG at anything which isn't a direct quote from 0e.
>>93180760>The level caps ARE the drawback. Yeah, that's why I was asking for alternatives.
>>93181197That was a lot of text but am I gaining that you just want to change what people get EXP for? Then do it.Even if it's not in the book, those grogs ignore all the quotes from everyone involved in OSR DND telling people to modify the system as they see fit.B/X says encumbrance is optional, and I don't like it, so I don't use it in my games. That is literally RAW. The other thread will have an aneurysm over it not being in a game.Same for per-weapon damage, I don't use it, but I can see why someone would, I don't care, it's your game, and your players, why would I?This thread is for relaxin' and playing games.
>>93181197I don't know what proportion of trolls to narrow-minded assholes have ruined /osrg/, but it's been pretty awful for pretty long now.As far as replacing gold for XP goes, I think it can be tricky. Gold is nonperishable, divisible into small amounts, and ubiquitous as the main pillar of a monetary system that virtually every intelligent being uses. When you start talking about slaves or converts, those are such big things, they start to seem more like milestones... or at least a step in the direction of them. That doesn't mean you can't run a good game with them, but they do make things trickier, and they are transformative, potentially resulting in a pretty different game. Because of that, I'd approach them with caution and probably expect to have to patch things up and readjust them when they don't turn out quite how I'd planned. At the end of it all, you may end up with something new and comparatively unique, which is cool, but it's definitely not taking the easy road.
>>93181642Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if it is just 3-4 dedicated trolls trying to shit the place up.Such is life.
>>93181197lmao>I don't know why its such a shitshow >gets so mad they have to post about it in other threads they made to get away from it You're making your own problem.
>>93182733You do see the irony of you lurking and replying to this right?lol.lmao.
Do you guys do anything to make thrown weapons less sucky? I basically just find it more interesting for more different weapons to be viable, and thrown weapons have some pretty big restrictions. They take up significant space, being one-and-done attacks. They have shitty maximum ranges, and are taking penalties at ranges where bows and crossbows are still receiving bonuses. They don't even do more damage than arrows and bolts, or have any effects that would make them otherwise worthwhile. Javelins are particularly insulting, inflicting only 1d4 damage and, at least in B/X, not having any greater range than spears.
>>93159976Open OSR?
>>93185615Free OSR maybe. FOSR.
>>93159976The reality is, /osrg/ is /BX/ general.
>>93185653Yeah, but it's not likely to get a name change. And I'd to have B/X tainted through association with that thread. B/X is the edition I'm most interested in and I'm not a closed-minded asshole or troll.
>>93185580Most thrown weapons have the versatility of also being melee weapons so in the simple manner of B/X combat they have their own niche. All ranged weapons get +1 to hit at short range so having a melee weapon that you can throw can be advantageous if you’re not a great melee fighter.Javelins are pretty bunk but they’re also light. I don’t know what their encumbrance is off hand but you should be able to carry a lot of them. Point being if you start laying more advantages on weapons that are roughly balanced then you have to build up the whole weapon system. I’m all for that but there are lots of moving parts and thrown weapons are just a few of them.
>>93185580For my part, one thing I've done in the past is to give thrown weapons the better of two damage rolls. And javelins should clearly inflict 1d6. Spears should really do 1d8 and be competitive with swords, but be only improvisational thrown weapons, thus not getting the better of two rolls, and having shittier ranges than javelins.
>>93185760>Most thrown weapons have the versatility of also being melee weaponsThis is true, but also a bit silly. Weapons optimized for hand-to-hand combat aren't optimized for throwing. Regardless, their interoperability might make them useful in a pinch, but not as a main line of attack, and even then, it somewhat depends on how generous you are at letting people swap out what they're holding, since B/X doesn't really trouble with such things. If you can freely trade out your spear for a bow and still attack that round, then it doesn't much matter than a spear can attack in melee or be thrown. In fact, since spears and hand axes inflict shittier damage than swords, you're better off switching between a sword and bow, assuming you can freely do so.
What are your favorite death and dismemberment rules?
>>93186280IMO dismemberment rules are a terrible idea. The PCs will become cripples, and players will not like that. Would you?
>>93186388NAYRT, but dismemberment could provide an alternative to death (perhaps literally allowing people to pick), and one that could potentially be eventually healed through whatever shenanigans. With that said, I've never really used them myself.>>93186280I've done crippling wounds, which is just to roll a body location and then apply penalties to actions that require it's use, but I don't have anything to offer in the way of dismemberment. Do you have anything you like?
>>93186388>>93186480I'm not using any, but my players have expressed an interest in using it to soften death a little bit. One player suggested the goblin punch rules but I don't like that it adds a new "wound point" mechanic. There's a huge amount of options, a lot of which I think are too complicated/fiddly for my liking, so I thought I'd ask here for something more like a table, like 1d6 hit location 1d20 this is what gets fucked up sort of thing.
>>93186530Is the idea to replace death with a crippling wound, so that the PC can go on instead of just dying?
>>93186566My plan right now is to use the AD&D hit point system, 0 is unconscious and bleeding out, -6 you take a lingering injury, -10 you die. I fucking love random tables and want one for lingering injuries.
how about Castles & Crusades?
>>93187270What about it?
As this thread has hit bump limit, I've posted a Tradition D&D thread to hopefully recombine the splintered OSR edition threads into a single one that's more free and open than /osrg/.>>93187986>>93187986>>93187986
>>93188024*Traditional D&D, obviously
>>93151598It's one retard who made 5+ threads in response to osrg saying his houserules were shit, no joke.
What tools do you guys use for mapping? Wanna plot out loose ideas before drawing it on graph paper
>>93190864Literally just scratch paper.
