Welcome to TODD! This thread is for OPEN discussion of TSR-era Dungeons & Dragons (OD&D, Basic D&D, and AD&D including 2e) and related games, such as retroclones and OSR-adjacent games (OSE, BFRPG, S&W, LotFP, DCC, C&C, etc.). Free discussion of house rules and modifications is encouraged. For the sake of clarity, B/X is the assumed default system for any conversation unless otherwise indicated (but please do feel free to indicate otherwise).>Do you make any changes to the way multiclassing works?>How do you handle switching out weapons?>What's one of your favorite monsters that doesn't get used or talked about much?>Is there a particular class you've just never been interested in? Why?
I'm all for nerfing elves, who are generally too powerful (though I can't speak for OD&D in specific, other than to say that deciding which class they are each adventure offends me on a conceptual level), but I feel like Swords & Wizardry White Box maybe goes a bit far.
>>932419258th Level B/X Elf: 250k XP, 8d6 HD, 3/3/2/2 spells, can use plate mail, shields and two-handed weapons8th level White Box (Variant) Elves: 320k XP, 5d6 HD, 4/2/2 spells, can't use plate mail, can't use shields or two-handed weapons and cast spellsThat's quite a difference.
Do you consider the effects of life expectancy and demographics in general in your game?What does the human population look like as a percentage of the overall population of "people"? Most games take a human-centric approach, but in a world with elves, dwarves, halflings, orcs, goblins, kobolds and so on, there are so many other peoples out there. Do humans drastically outnumber orcs? Goblins?
Does anybody have much experience with Oriental Adventures? I played it a very little, but we didn't really know what we were doing, and it was a bit of a mess for us. I'm wondering how well it works if you know your way around it.
>>93241984
I always kind of wanted to use the board to Dungeon! as a dungeon map and see how long it took the players to catch on.
Do you guys use character art, or do you consider that against the spirit of old school D&D?
>>93242079On a not-unrelated topic, do people play cross-gender characters in your group? I've played in groups where it's common and no big deal. I've played in groups where nobody does it, and it would be considered weird. And I've played in groups where it happens but it's considered funny and/or naughty. I kind of hate that last take, but I can roll with either of the others.
>>93242096In the groups I've played in guys never play female character (except one time because the DM kept pestering one player to try something different since he always, always, played an Elf Ranger so he made a witch seductress and played up being sexy just to cringe out the DM and stick to to him for being annoying about not wanting the player to play what he liked) but women have been about 60/40 between playing as female vs male characters. Women are less weirded out about cross-gendering - I'll let smarter men than I figure out why that is.
>>93242176>he always, always, played an Elf RangerThis is a good argument not to let players freely allocate their stats.
>>93241879trolls: the bane of all decency and civilization
>>93242079for OSR/adjacent if my character's doing well and makes it to 3rd levelish I'll usually draw or grab something based on what's happened thus far. if it's a VTT I'll throw it in and use it as a token instead of using a generic token, if it's physical I'll just show the table if it seems appropriatefor storyshit I always draw my own
>>93242079When would you use it? Like, just to hold up and show everyone what your PC looks like?
>>93242096in my group nobody does it, and yes it would be weird
>>93242328Well modernly you can just post images into discord or upload it to a VTT but back in the distant past players might draw pictures of their character on the back of the character sheet or sometimes even make a photocopy of art from a book cut out the part they want and use a glue-stick to put it onto their sheet if it was one of the one that had a box for character art. It genuinely astonishes me that you've never used character art. I've been in groups that didn't pay much attention to it but I've been in far, far more where they did.
>>93242096I just flip a coin for it when I'm generating my ability scores. It's about as relevant as a name.
>>93242357NAYRT, but as an in-person RPG player from the (relatively) early days, character art has never been a big thing in my groups. Occasionally, somebody will have a picture they'll show everybody and say "this is what my character looks like", but most people don't bother. It probably just comes from a lot of play from before the internet made getting art easy.
>>93242357You can, sounds fun and certainly doesn't hurt anything. I play tabletop in person - if a player wants to put effort into his PCs image he does it with his miniature.
>>93242379b/c /todd/ isn't a 2e thread. /todd/ just doesn't ban conversation of it, unlike /osrg/. But then again, you already knew that.
>>93242096Although I've had a mix of experiences, playing cross-gendered characters is something most of my groups take in stride, at least in more recent years (by which I mean the last two decades or so). I think there's a little bit of self-consciousness about it, and it ends up being a decided minority of characters (maybe 20% at the high end), but nobody else acts like it's particularly weird.
>>93242413>It probably just comes from a lot of play from before the internet made getting art easy.Most of my post was about character art from before the internet though.Public libraries were and are full of books with art that can be photo-copied or traced.>>93242424I think all of the Basic line character record sheets had a box for character sketches on it. I don't know if any AD&D sheets did but I can't image they wouldn't. So at least by the late 70's and early 80's there was some expectation that players would be wanting to draw their characters. Not saying you have to or anything but I take exception to the implication from you and the above anon that this is somehow a result of internet play and not something people have always been doing. It's certainly something that's always been a part of my D&D experience.
>>93242435He's just butthurt that when conversation of 2e is allowed it quickly becomes the default focus of the conversation because it's objectively the best TSR system.
>>93242529At best, I view character art as a rough approximation ("my character looks kind of like this), unless the art was specifically made for your character. Like, nothing I randomly come across is going to happen to depict my character that closely, and basing my character off art, rather than the other way around, seems kind of like I'm play-acting somebody else character, if that makes sense. Like, "I'm gonna be Legolas in this game!"
Why did 2E change the order of modifiers and ability score minimum/maximums from how 1E did it?It just makes it hard to generate non-human characters.In 1E AD&D, you apply the modifiers first then the minimum/maximums so the modifiers help characters fit into the range.In 2E AD&D you see if they fit the range then apply the modifiers, effectively reducing/improving any of the minimums/maximums again.
>>93242096>do people play cross-gender characters in your group?Sure, and it doesn't matter. I've got a man playing a woman, a man playing a man, and a woman playing an 'other' since that kind of goblin is a genderless homonculous. The players didn't think anything strange about. It's a thematic choice and given there are so few decisions to be made for customization why deny something as cosmetic as the sex of the character. It's a playing piece. It matters more what you do with it than what it is.
>>93242676I don't know, I just ignore them and allow players to make whatever character they like.
>>93242734B/X has long been the standard in OSR threads here (long before /osrg/ became what it is today). It's a simpler, more streamlined system, meaning it's easier to work with, and likely as a result, it's the basis of the most retroclones. 2e would make a bad default, because it's further from the center of old school D&D, it's more complicated with more optional material (not to mention supplemental stuff that significantly changes the game) that you'd have to remove to get into the context of another edition, and I'd be willing to bet good money that fewer people really know it (partly because there's a lot more to have to know). A B/X question is more likely to either apply universally to old school editions, or to at least apply to the whole Basic line, and maybe OD&D as well. 2e is at one end of old school D&D, and B/X is more squarely in the middle.
>>93242676I'm not sure I see a functional difference. There is a difference in the values but it's really just on paper.1e says, to paraphrase, you need to meet the minimum and can apply the modifier to do so but must apply it regardless.2e says you need to meet the minimum and then apply the modifier.The difference is that the 2e minimums where there is a modifier are one lower or higher depending on the score.The dwarf needs Con 12 and gets +1 Con in both editions. In 1e the minimum is 12, in 2e it is 11. The elf needs a Con 6 and gets a -1 penalty. In 1e the minimum is 6, in 2e it is 7.
>>932427342e is far less popular than B/X nowadays: what are you talking about? OSE is the de facto standard for old-school gaming of any stripe, even outstripping 1e, BECMI, etc.
>>93241866>Do you make any changes to the way multiclassing works?Yes, on level up you can gain a level in whatever class you want, as long as you have been roleplaying it since the beginning of last level.>How do you handle switching out weapons?Free action, no sense bogging down the game with those things.>What's one of your favorite monsters that doesn't get used or talked about much?Giff. They're brave and goofy and fearsome and I love them also as a PC race.>Is there a particular class you've just never been interested in? Why?Single-class Rogue. They're boring, but a one-level dip is fine for flavour. Although I think I still prefer a one-level Bard dip for most builds.
>>93242734Yeah I am not sure what the point of saying "B/X is the fault" is supposed to be. What purpose does it serve? I am fine with both removing it or making it 2e.
>>93242734>Why is B/X considered the default? It seems very arbitrary.B/X has the fewest permutations coupled with rules clarity. Both editions of AD&D are fairly convoluted by comparison and OD&D has either a lot of blank spots or is also convoluted depending on how it's been pieced together.>2e the default (since it's the more popular system)I think that could be challenged by the prevalence of OSE which is B/X in a new suit.>or alternatively just remove this partWhich is aIso a good option. I think the rationale of having a default system is that it dissolves the 'what system, depends on the game' type responses and allows conversation to start on common ground. Is that necessary though? My impression of these threads so far is that many people disclaim what system they are talking about if they pose a question.
>>93242874>B/X has the fewest permutations coupled with rules clarity.That sounds like the reason you like B/X, which is fine, but not an argument for why it should be the thread default, let alone for why we should have a thread default in the first place.>My impression of these threads so far is that many people disclaim what system they are talking about if they pose a question.Yeah that seems to be the case to me as well.
>>93242780It’s the maximums that really suffer. Particularly the Book of Humanoids.Half Orcs for instance, have a maximum CHA of 12, and a -2 CHA modifier. In 2E that really means a CHA of 10 when in 1E it remains 12.
>>93242874>I think the rationale of having a default system is that it dissolves the 'what system, depends on the game' type responsesBut does it really solve the problem*? If somebody doesn't specify, odds are higher they didn't read the OP and didn't bother to specify than they read the OP and thoughtfully didn't specify B/X because the OP told them they don't need to.Seems like it might actually even generate confusion the way it currently is.(*) Is it even a big enough problem that it needs a pseudo-fix in the OP?
>>93242905Yeah they decided to punish half-orcs for some reason. I think the ability score limitations are pointless and usually just ignore them. I do have a discussion before the campaign starts over whether to apply a global cap at 18 or to allow to overshoot.
>>93242839>Yeah I am not sure what the point of saying "B/X is the *DE*fault"
>>93242920It’s funny that 3E did that because the original 3E was made by mostly TSR remainders. So there were some critical ideas that evolved out of Skills & Powers + United rolling mechanics. Then proceeded to create a bunch of new mechanical pitfalls and breakdowns.
>>93242935Agree, there's a bunch of good ideas in 3e that are worth porting back to 2e. The Three Saves are another one. Much more elegant.
>>93242834>Okay but I am not sure what the relevance is, this is TODD.TODD is an OSR thread. It's about OSR and OSR adjacent games. Just because it doesn't have "OSR" in its name, like /osrg/, that doesn't mean it's not about OSR. And TODD is honestly closer to what /osrg/ started out as than today's /osrg/ is.>>93242834I don't see 2e being discussed more than B/X here, and even if it were, 2e has been out in the wilderness for a good while, and it stands to reason it would have more pent up stuff to talk about as a result.>>93242874>I think that could be challenged by the prevalence of OSE which is B/X in a new suit.OSE, Labyrinth Lord, Basic Fantasy, ACKS and Lamentations of the Flame Princess are all based on B/X. Swords & Wizardry Core is B/X adjacent (being based on the same parts of OD&D that B/X was based on). What does 2e have? For Gold and Glory? I don't think I've ever seen that actually discussed (mentioned, maybe, but not discussed).>B/X has the fewest permutations coupled with rules clarity. Both editions of AD&D are fairly convoluted by comparison and OD&D has either a lot of blank spots or is also convoluted depending on how it's been pieced together.This. It's the streamlined, base-level thing. It doesn't have tons of options and supplements that can significantly change it. It doesn't have lots of rules you'd have to strip away to get to another system. It's the foundation with the least amount of building on it.
>>93242874>I think the rationale of having a default system is that it dissolves the 'what system, depends on the game' type responses and allows conversation to start on common ground.Yeah. And there are plenty of times people aren't going to specify. Having a default lets people dive into things without having to beg for clarification. And sometimes, maybe the person will have wanted something specifically for a different edition and just failed to say so, but that's their fuck-up to correct. The thread should be less annoying without people asking "which edition?" nearly as much, and ideas for/about B/X are more likely to be at least somewhat applicable to other editions (since they're largely B/X plus extra stuff). It just makes shit easier.
>>93243028>TODD is an OSR thread.Who are (You) to say what this thread is or isn't? The OP says TODD, not OSR, and for an excellent reason: "OSR" is a stupid name, was always unclear, and doesn't mean anything anymore. I personally don't want to see this thread spiral down yet another gatekeeping / purity competition.
>>93241879Kill yourself, retard.
>>93241866I'd just like to say I like these multiple choice topic questions. Let's make it a thing while these threads persist.>>Do you make any changes to the way multiclassing works?Yes. Characters that are fortunate enough to be able to start as a multi-class are actually a custom variant. A single experience track, a single HD, a predetermined save track, and so forth. It works out to being an 80/20 or 50/50 mix of two classes. I also use a dual class variant. It's not as restrictive as AD&D but it's an XP sink. >>How do you handle switching out weapons?It depends on how I'm handling initiative but you'll sacrifice movement, your attack, or your position in the action order depending on the circumstances. I do like the effect of delaying actions to a Slow phase.>>What's one of your favorite monsters that doesn't get used or talked about much?Dire Corbies>>Is there a particular class you've just never been interested in? Why?Paladin. I think I played one when I was a kid. It clearly didn't make an impression if I did. My objections are primarily mechanical. They need a huge Charisma and then have a shrunken pool of henchmen to choose from because of alignment. The tithing and the alignment driven agenda. It's just very constricting. If I want to play a crusader I'll go with a cleric.
>>93242905I was only considering the PHB. A lot of that splat stuff later on is not terribly well-conceived. The Iack of playtesting becomes more apparent and you can tell where rules were eyeball design.
>>93243130I don't know about the process of writing the later books of 2e, but they work great at the table and I'm tired of pretending they aren't.
>>93242734>I would either make 2e the default (since it's the more popular system)In 2024? absurd.
>>93243073>Who are (You) to say what this thread is or isn't?The same troll that comes into every /todd/ thread so far. He got you again, Anon.
The troll wants this thread to be merely a 2e thread. He literally comes in and posts bs about 2e like >>93243142 and >>93242379 >>93242834so he can then say 'look at how much we love 2e here, this should be a 2e thread'. This is all b/c he's an /osrg/ troll who has said he will be forever butthurt b/c an anon kept wanting to mention 2e in /osrg/. Remember his 'Revenge' post last /todd/ thread that got deleted? Just try to ignore the troll.
>>93243191"He".
>>93243191>Everybody who disagrees with me is the same person and a troll.Nice try. I wrote the last of the three comments you quoted. Given the screenshot in>>93243199this means we are *three* different Anons. Either engage with what Anons say or ignore them (and optionally report them), you are only making yourself look stupid and butthurt.(Inb4 it's a coordinated attack from Putin's CIA discord troll farm in Islamabad.)
>>93243142>I'm tired of pretending they aren'tI can't fathom why you would in the first place
It's true that almost nobody cares about 2e anymore. Is there any noteable factor that explains 2e's decline in popularity from, for example, the mid-2000s to today?
>>93243367IMO, it sits at a middle road where it abandons almost entirely the dungeoncrawl focus of 1st edition in favour of big damn hero-style gaming, but provides you with nothing to support that style (in fact, in its selection of 3D6 down the line as its Method I and its nerfing of things like the paladin and ranger, it's worse at this style than 1st, at least mechanically). For people who want that kind of play, 3rd ed (and onward) seems to have been more attractive, since it really leaned into the "your characters are amazing and matter" idea.Basically it doesn't excel at / focus on anything, which doesn't take away from what it's capable of doing, but I don't think it's a coincidence that when people talk about 2nd they generally praise its support materials and its settings, not its core rules experience. It reminds me of LotFP, a game which says its a weird horror game but relies almost entirely on its support materials to provide the claimed vibe.
Alright, rate my "I got rid of clerics" thing:>Cleric NPCs exist but they don't go adventuring, they're like historical abbots and bishops, the church version of land-owning nobles, their services are available if one can find them but at either a price or a favor>The Cleric's role for PC parties is split into two new classes, one martial-leaning, the other caster-leaningThe Slayer is the martial-leaning one. Slayers are trained monster and witch (evil spellcaster) hunters. They're like a mix of clerics and barbarians: they get Turn Undead and magic resistance. They can't use arcane magic items, possible exception maybe being an arcane magic item crafted by a PC friend (they distrust magic items of unknown or possibly evil origin), but divine magic items are free real estate including scrolls so long as they're not evil. They receive no penalties for attacking monster weak points. They can harvest monster parts (stealing ACKS rules on this) and if using 2e-style XP get XP for doing that. They have a strict code of not involving themselves in mundane affairs (meaning, unlike a fighter, they can't become knighted or own land).(Cont.)
>>93241866Hmm. We should probably start linking to the previous thread if this is gonna be a continuing thing... and maybe also link to the trove and such, so nobody has to go to the /osrg/ just access that.
>>93243719The Sage is the caster-leaning one. Sages are wise men and women who practice the disappearing art of folk magic (inspired by protective/utility/niche spells of clerics and druids but not treated as divine). They learn to fight, unlike wizards, both because folk magic does not require intense study but also to protect themselves as they are not deists (they believe in fey spirits rather than gods) and so are in the current age branded as infidels by zealot extremists, many of them exiled from their communities. Folk magic is subtle and ritualistic: A foci is imbued with a temporary effect that is either one-use or lasts some days, for example a healing talisman might heal 1d3 each day worn until it runs out. The spells generally lean towards being the kind a wizard wouldn't waste spell slots on in an ideal scenario. Making a foci is like a cheap version of making a magic item, the limitation is that each foci is empathically linked to the Sage and his friends (useless if sold) and a Sage may only have a number of "active" foci depending on level of experience. Unlike wizards they have access to their entire spell list, but said spell list is randomly generated for each Sage and the spells are fewer in number. Sages can learn new spells by befriending other Sages. Like traditional NPC Sages, they have a chance to identify the powers of any magic item, narratively through lore knowledge. They can use most magic items, provided they have proficiency if using AD&D-style rules for weapons, but they must first identify the item and then foci-fy it, exception being they cannot ever use scrolls. Similar to paladins, Sages are not interested in wealth: they hand out gold past a certain threshold (or if we make them particularly hippie, bury the gold where no one can find it) and their spending habits are inconspicuous. If using 2e-style XP, they get XP for helping others with folk magic.
>>93243719>>93243723Based 2e Anon is based.
>>93243719So... Slayers don't get spells then? They get some powers and the ability to use cleric items? They're essentially warriors/variant fighters, like Paladins and Rangers are? What kind of magic resistance do they have? Also, what kind of hit dice, attack progression and saves?>>93243723A focus. Foci is the plural form of focus.I think I've been trained to think of Sages as scholarly folk, so the folk magic and inability to use scrolls seems a bit discordant to me, but I'm not sure what other name you'd use (Mystic? Guru? Wise Man?), and maybe you don't have a similar issue. Anyway, the foci are basically taking the place of spell slots, or rather, they are the spell slots? That could work. If they're not fighty like Slayers though, and generally have lesser spells, what's making them a worthwhile class? I mean, how do they stack up to the clerics you're getting rid of? Also, XP, HD and attack scores?
>>93241998We used it a lot. Wu-jen is broken because of their spells, go figure. I would argue ninja is broken too because they can sorta dusl-class for free iirc or their requirements are very light
>>93242061Do it
>>93242079Yes, we use it sometimes
>>93243780Lost my reply. God fucking damn it. I'm just gonna briefly go down.Formula for cleric: fighter, but limited weapon selection, divine casting, turn undead, worse progression.Potential formula for Slayer: fighter, but limited armor selection, magic resistance, turn undead, worse progression.Regarding the Sage:As an older zoomer my conception of a "sage" is literally Gandalf from the movies. Wise folksy person of a dying tradition chilling with hobbits and not flashing spells like a D&D wizard.Regarding what does a Sage have that a cleric does not, if it was not clear, a Sage effectively has no leveled spells in terms of usage. He could use spells similar to Continual Light, Speak with Plants, Locate Object, etc. right from the get-go of level 1. The only limitation is how many foci he can have active, and the time/cost to prepare said foci. I'm using Ceremonial Magic from ACKS here as a guideline. A cantrip-level foci could be prepared immediately at little cost, for example.Re: progression. I don't know the exact numbers, my plan was to use ACKS 2e class building and then extrapolate that to AD&D. Magic resistance is like a thief skill, starts out low then gradually progresses.
>>93242096I did it once and she became one of my favorite characters. I can't say rp'ed a women well but my fellow players liked it ok. I didn't play out any weird fantasies so that probably helped a lot. I don't have any weird fantasies about being a woman anyway. It was just a role playing exercise to me and besides, I had an interesting character concept I wanted to try. She was a Ranger Falconer (2e Ranger kit) wild elf raised by wood elves when her family was killed by orcs
I'm just gonna say: it 1e>2e.
I'm a forever dm with a 38+ year campaign. I love TODD and the trolls don't even bother me. I just ignore them.
Trolls, don't get blocked.
>>93244034Is OSRIC a good retroclone or does it leave too much of 1E out?
>>93244201OSRIC is a bit soulless. Castles & Crusades and For Gold & Glory are much better.
>>93244008>Ranger Falconer (2e Ranger kit) wild elf raised by wood elves when her family was killed by orcsBased. The grog mind cannot comprehend how the superiority of a good character build with an interesting backstory contribute to a successful campaign.
>>93244254What? I like 2e too, I just think 1e is better. Fuck off with your baseless suppositions
>>93244264I was just called a grog though lmao
>>93244201It's good for a sane clarification of combat procedures and some other things, but it leaves out too much to be complete. Worth checking out but only in addition to the core books.
>>93244254Kill yourself, retard.
>>93244201OSRIC leaves out monks, domain rules, and settles on a straightforward (if simplistic) interpretation of the combat and initiative rules.FG&G leaves out specialty priests, the optional gold-for-xp and class based xp rewards, and a host of other little things (while weirdly including things from the splats like Weapon Style Masteries and playable goblinoids and monsters). Neither is really as complete as I wish they'd be.
>>93243721>link to the troveNot sure if you're talking about the one that ends in "ive" but if you are, please don't.
>>93242320>>93243104Just ignore it
>>93241879Actually, you suck.
>>93242734Troll. Do not feed.
What house rules do you make to flesh out the B/X thief?Their skills seem vague and not as well thought out as other classes.
>>93244607>oh boy the document updated>...
>two guardians with male pattern baldness block your party's way into the dungeonGenuinely, though, why does 2E so uniquely draw the seethe out of grogs? Is it because it was greenlit in part to cut out Daddy Gary? Eyeing both books side to side, there is a startling amount that is virtually identical mechanically between the two games. And the differences can be summed up by a paragraph or two (the most brought up of which making a rule optional, something that Gary already encouraged in 1E).Yeah the modules were mostly shit, but they were also shit under latter era 1E, and the trend just continued. I'm genuinely confused what the central point of contention is that gets everyone so uniquely riled up over it, especially when the actual playerbase is about as pitifully small and insular as 1E players are these days.
>>93245609There's no reason to specify 2e vs 1e unless you're talking about the differences. So obviously anyone who brings up 2e is defending not the system as a whole, but the problems with it.
>>93241866>>Do you make any changes to the way multiclassing works?I mostly DM AD&D and C&C. One of the better changes in 3e that I want to incorporate in my (non-3e) games is their multiclassing method, which involves taking a single class at any given level rather than 2+ at the same time. i.e., a Fighter/Magic-User might take Fighter at first level, and MU at 2d, making him a F1st/MU1st, at 2d level. I don't see any downside and it lets the player have freedom in whether he wants his multiple classes to advance roughly equally or not. I haven't tried it, but I am also considering a ruling that all demihuman races have a paragon multiclass, and give make those paragons particularly easy to play. Ex.: elven Fighter/Magic-Users, which essentially mimics Elf race-as-class. Why? Because I like traditional D&D and want to encourage the players to play traditional characters w/o dictating or limiting choices.Constructive criticism welcome - I know these ideas are not fully thought-out.
>>93245391After watching that one video explaining how the old-school thief is actually supposed to work, I am ironically in favor of just scrapping it entirely. It's unsalvageable.>if a thief sneaks, and fails his sneak, he's still sneaking but can get noticed on a listening check, but if the listening check failed it's as if he succeeded, but if he succeeded normally, there is no listening checkWhat the fuck is this bullshit man. Somebody get the stick and beat with it whoever came up with this.
>>93241866>>How do you handle switching out weapons?If they want to drop the current weapon, then drawing out a new one is generally free. If they need to stow or sheath the old weapon, that + drawing new one is typically an action spent.
>>93245725>one video explaining how the old-school thief is actually supposed to workWhich video is that?
>>93245725Besides the convoluted procedure, it should be noted it has been observed for years now that, regardless of what RPG we're playing, the more stealth/notice checks are made in succession, the more a stealthy character is unfairly penalized, due to the way dice probability works. Basically being set-up for inevitable failure the player has no way to mitigate.
>>93245783https://youtu.be/jxP4iYTNd0E
>>93245725That doesn’t seem difficult to comprehend at all.
>>93241866>>What's one of your favorite monsters that doesn't get used or talked about much?Love these little balls of hot death and terror.
>>93245609>Is it because it was greenlit in part to cut out Daddy Gary?Yes. There also are a few grogs out there still mad at Gary over AD&D w/o Arneson. Sorting out which rules and editions make for better games, and which are cash-grabs that don't make for a better game, is something every DM has to do and I would say has had to do all along.
>>93245813Nope. Programming language doesn't belong in D&D.
>>93245725I think its pretty simple. How would you prefer PCs, thieves or any other PCs, sneak?
>>93245906That's pseudocode you dip, it's just a logical device.
>>93245934Don't care, keep that shit in the games for autists.>>93245928Simplest possibility? Climbing roll. For every X feet of sneaking make a check. Done.
>>93245964>hurn numbers hard >must be grogbad The most creative and forward thinking thread in the osr everyone.
>>93245813>Sneak fail>See if monster hears me>If he doesn't I'm ok, if he does I'm foundOH NO MY BRAIN IS GOING TO EXPLODE AHHHHH.Sounds pretty simple.
>>93245725Oh wow, thanks for this, it actually helps the Thief a lot.>I'm trying to sneak>Uh oh, I made a noise, did they hear me?I mean, you made it seem long and hard but it's really that simple.
>>93245811I don't know who this guy is, but he makes a bunch of false claims. For example: - That a failure of a Climb check necessarily means falling, as opposed to being unable to make progress;- That you get only one attempt per lock / noise / trap (edition-dependent, ambiguous);- That everyone can try to search for any trap (simply false, there is an implicit distinction between room traps and treasure traps, and only thieves can search traps of the second type); - That a failure to Disarm Traps automatically triggers the trap (debatable, edition-dependent);- The whole way he runs surprise vs. hide in shadows and move silently is just straight out of the guy's butthole.This guys is simply a full-of-shit moron with a YouTube channel and a fancy accent. Generally speaking I recommend learning the game from the books, not from random youtube videos. I know that books can feel a little challenging for some zoomers, but that's how TSR D&D was meant to be learnt.
>>93245964>games for autists>a thread for the 1974-1983 editions of a roleplaying fantasy game with elves and dragons where attacks are resolved on a combat matrix, the armor class is descending, and the fireball takes an understanding of volumetric math to properly resolve the effects of
I want to do a big hexcrawl. I've read that every hex needs a keyed site, but when you've got a big map filling in every hex is daunting. Should I just leave a lot of hexes empty and focus on big adventure sites?
>>93246297it's easier than it seems. just use an idea generator of some kind and link the idea to a theme of your setting in some waythe sites don't have to be some big fancy thing, it can just be a landmark if you're strapped for thinking of a way to add interaction to it
>>93245964>Simplest possibility? Climbing roll. For every X feet of sneaking make a check. Done.Does the thief gets a bonus on his check, as opposed to the fighter attempting the same sneak?
everyone's a fighter, everyone's a thiefI propose brute and rat
>>93246297The obvious solution is to just start with a smaller map and only add on areas when you need them. My philosophy is, and I may have stolen it from someone else, i can't remember at this point, what I call the Albanian Principle. If you need a land-area larger than Albania your world is too empty and too boring to be worth playing in. Albania is only, roughly, the size of Albania and it has all of the craziness of Albanian history attached to it. Albania is 11,100 sq miles. that's roughly 512 hexes or a 23 x 23 hex grid at 5 mile hex scale for ALL of Albania. Now 500 hexes might sound like a lot to fill in or make interesting but, like I said you don't need to do the whole thing at once, just the immediate area of adventure. One 5 mile hex has a land area of 21.56 sq miles. do you know how much adventure you can have in a 22 sq mile area? That's half the land area of modern Paris. If you did a 1 mile hex map of Paris the whole thing could be contained within a 7x7 hex map, Arc de Triumph, Louvre and Eiffel Tower included. For this reason I don't recommend big hex crawls, I recommend deep hex crawls. Quality over quantity.
>>93246963Muricans and Canucks (ie. Me) have a tendency to think countries are all fuckhuge. Walking takes a long time, even riding.
>>93246805Fighters can't sneak.Unless you want to make them able to, in which case, you'll need to make up something.
>>93242734>Why is B/X considered the default? It seems very arbitrary.B/X is the most popular OSR baseline, by a long shot. Lamentations of the Flame princess was basically B/X with some house rules and the first big OSR juggernaut. Right now the most popular system is Old School Essentials, which is also OSR based. This also feeds back into base B/X being popular. If someone doesn't specify, odds are they are talking B/X or B/X adjacent.> I would either make 2e the default (since it's the more popular system)AD&D 2E is by far the least popular OSR option. You probably live in some weird area with a bubble where people play 2E the most. That's kind of fascinating. Do they play base AD&D 2E? Do they play it with using all the Complete X handbooks? Are you actually playing hackmaster? Are you playing For Gold and Glory?
>>93245964All tabletop gaming is for autists. Go back to your cuck reddit, normie. Kill yourself.
>>93245658There is nothing that 2E does worse than late-era 1E, and the only thing early 1E does better than either is have better adventure modules. It's not "defending 2E's problems" so much as calling you a fucking retard for seething so hard when it's brought up.
>>93243367People still care about the settings that were made during its run
>>93245609>>93245896the problem with 2e is that it doesn't support the DM in running an old-school game at all. It is distilled trad gaming. It wants you to run the game like VtM. It's "toolkit" approach only works if you know 1e well enough to fix 2e. read the 1e and 2e DMG side by side. the 2e dmg isn't fit for toilet paper.
>>93245703>I don't see any downside and it lets the player have freedom in whether he wants his multiple classes to advance roughly equally or not.Well, it absolutely gimps multiclass casters.Level 8 magic-user spell slots: 3/3/2/2Level 4 magic-user spell slots: 2/2So if you're and 8th level character who put half your levels into magic-user, you haven't ended up with half the magical power. You have 40% as many spell slots, and they're all from the bottom half of the spell levels you'd have access to if you were a single-class caster. If you value each spell slot as being directly proportional to its level (a 1st level slot is worth 1, and 2nd level 2...) then the character with 4 levels in magic-user ends up with an overall magic power of 6 as compared to the 23 the single-class character with all 8 levels in magic-user has.
>>93245725I mean, it makes sense. The thief roll is to see if the thief makes any noise whatsoever. It's whether he's literally moving silent. If he doesn't make any noise, you can't hear him, so it doesn't matter how keen your hearing is. If he doesn't succeed in being completely silent, then he's sneaking like a normal person and can at least potentially be heard. He's still being quiet; he's just not silent. So you roll to see if anybody hears him. That's not to say that this is the most streamlined way of doing things, but I don't think it's terrible or makes the thief salvageable.
>>93247599With that said, I have come up with a fix in the form of bonus spells dependent on overall character level.So by this table and again valuing the overall power of a spell slot as being equal to its level (and ignoring 0th level spells), we end up with:8th level character, all levels in magic-user: 3/3/2/2, power 238th level character, 4 levels in magic-user: 3/2/1, power 10So in terms of magic power, this system raises the multiclass character from a 6 to 10, which is a 66.67% boost. That's huge, and it results in you being a lot closer to half as magically powerful as the single-class character (and it'd be a little bit closer with 0th level spells included): 43% as powerful rather than 26%. And of course, you'd have access to magic-user magic items and such.
>>93247500>the 2e dmg isn't fit for toilet paper.That is the thing I'll absolutely give you. 2E DMG is basically worthless and I can count on one hand the number of things I've gone back to it for. Whereas the 1E DMG is extremely useful and I regularly thumb through it even just for general inspiration.
>>93247204Only thieves can sneak? No other PCs can try to move w/o being heard?
>>93247363>calling you a fucking retard for seethinglet me guess.../osrg/ guy?
>>93247500>the problem with 2e is that it doesn't support the DM in running an old-school game at all. It is distilled trad gaming.Correct, which is why many of us like it.>the 2e dmg isn't fit for toilet paper.That's, like, your opinion, man. Grow up and accept the fact that different people have different tastes instead of feeling threatened by it.
>>93247948You're the DM, you decide.
How often do you guys start at higher levels for older games? Specifically 1e, 0e, and BX/BECMI.
>>93247956>is the /osrg/ in the room with us right now?
>>93242734>deleted for some reason What's up with that?
>>93246297>I've read that every hex needs a keyed sitelol no. Where did you read that? Its wrong and amusing no one else has said so yet but instead played along with the bad idea.
>>93248572I like to start at 3rd level.
So, what is the rationale for thieves being able to climb sheer surfaces without tools anyway? That's borderline supernatural. A Spider Climb spell with a slight chance of failure.
>>93249257The rationale is that your playing a fantasy game.Jesus Christ.What's the rationale for MUs being able to summon a fireball? It's almost like, MAGICAL.
>>93248572I just let them use ADND hit die and max HP at level 1.MUs get 2 spells at level 1.I find most people start at higher levels to get more spells or to not be so low HP, so this helps.
>>93249468The idea of a perfectly good game needing to also be a reality simulator has done irreparable damage to the hobby.
>>93249468Chill out, man. There's no need to throw a fit or make the thread unnecessarily hostile.>>93249257I think some people embrace an outright mystical level of ability for thieves more than others, but even if you don't, it's not hard to hand-wave things away as the thief just being really good--most of the time, sheer surfaces are things like walls and cliff faces, that aren't literally smooth.
>>93249468The thief can't use magic, "everything is magical" is WOTC shit
>>93248572>>93248791I think letting people start at 3rd level is fairly common. I do believe in giving characters extra hit points at 1st level, and letting them survive into the negatives, so that makes them a bit less susceptible to die from any one given blow that hits them. I also start characters out with half the number of XP required to reach 2nd level, so that the cost from going from 1st to 2nd level isn't the same as the cost for going from 2nd to 3rd (and so the individual cost to go up each level doubles each time, rather than the cumulative cost, because it's the former that's important).
>>93249548NAYRT, and they were being needlessly pugnacious, but I think equating superhuman / supernatural levels of ability with magic is a bad thing to do, and it's one thing that led the 3e fighter to suck so much dick, because they had to be "realistic" compared to other classes that could bend reality. Greek heroes had abilities that far exceeded what was realistic without having to be magical.
>>93249257Let me try this again. I apologize, I should have been much clearer:Does anyone know of D&D adjacent literature that this "thieves climb sheer surfaces without tools" thing might have come from?
>>93245609Look, the modfag is stirring up one of his oft-touted shit discussions again.2e, along with hickman manifesto is the reason that people want to GO BACK --i.e. OSR.Why can't you fuckers just enjoy 2e as it is, without in contrast to anything? It's not that shitty.
>>93241866I like this thread better than OSR. Its a complete waste to split the threads like this just because some autists won't recognize 2nd edition as being OSR, and its also hypocritical since they let all those indie heartbreakers slide.
>>93249664Your splitting the playerbase for no other reason than being an twat. There aren't enough users to support OSR and TODD, and TODD lets 2nd ed people post here, which means there are more people to draw from.You really just can't seem to get your head out of your ass about this.
>>93249664there isn't enough people to support a thread for every editions, you can't have a bx general, a 1st ed general, a second ed general, ect.You are all acting like children.
>>93249694>you start a thread to discuss games, including 2e.>shit mod stirs his oft-touted flame wars by bashing osr>gets called outHow is this about me?>>93249700then they should START talking about 2e, instead of shitting on OSR.
I love that this thread is stuck with 2efag now.>>93248572Depends on if you've got new guys joining an established party, or new characters coming in to replace old ones, or an all-new but high-level party being created. All of these have different requirements / perceived needs.Some guys like to insist on the new guys always starting at Level 1 no matter what, because it's fair and they'll catch up in no time at a rate of 1 level per session if there's any real degree of level disparity. I find this a bit harsh and just say any new guy comes in at the party's average level -1: no incentive for suicide, but no forcing a guy to potentially die a bunch of times because they're some 1st-level slob suddenly up against vampires.
>>93247956I haven't done anything in /osrg/ besides make fire-and-forget posts calling BX a baby game. So please, explain what you mean.
>>93249647I want to say that I remember Conan climbing a tower with his bare hands in one of his stories, but I could be wrong.
>>93249664>Look, the modfag is stirring up one of his oft-touted shit discussions again.Actually, some pro-2e posts have been deleted. In particular, the "why don't we make 2e the assumed default because it's the most popular edition" post is gone. Stop stirring up trouble.
>>93249726>then they should START talking about 2e, instead of shitting on OSR.You have to recognize that there's been trolling here (and on both sides of the issue). It can be a bit difficult to tell exactly where the line between trolling and people getting out of sorts is, but either way, you shouldn't feed the trolls or the conflict. Assuming you're not a troll yourself, please calm down and quit making things worse.
>>93249757>I love that this thread is stuck with 2efag now./osrg/ people have been trolling these threads, so it's hard to tell what's genuine autism and what's trolling.
Okay, so here's an idea for an obstacle. A hatch opens to a room that has a very high ceiling, and high above them is another Hatch, with no apparent way to reach it. On a pedastal sits a canteen that is an Endless Decanter of Water.The decanter of water can be used to flood the chamber and reach the elevated hatch above them.
>>93241866>Guillotine StairwellA hallow step triggers a metal blade sliding down two slits in the sides of the walls of this staircase. Roll to save vs. Death
>>93249575Observe the contradiction of Final Fantasy Dissidiahttps://youtu.be/INqI7UKfGsUIt makes no sense as the comment points out, in the context of D&D-based fantasy where villains are often high-level spellcasters fought by a team of heroes, for a high-level fighter to provide the same challenge as a high-level spellcaster.You cite Greek heroes, but said Greek heroes to my knowledge never fought anything close to a D&D-esque high-level spellcaster.You want the fighter and wizard PCs to be "equal"? Put a level cap on the wizard. But they're still going to be fighting high-level spellcasters at the end of the day, because that's just the way D&D is. Pandora's box was opened long ago, the game is fundamentally built around the idea of a high-level spellcasting threat as the ultimate challenge.
>>93250094That is generally a staple of older editions, high level spellcasters really did tend to outshine martial classes towards the later levels. But that is at least in part due to the fact that Mages are much more fragile, and have to survive earlier levels to get more powerful.
>>93250094>It makes no sense as the comment points out, in the context of D&D-based fantasy where villains are often high-level spellcasters fought by a team of heroes, for a high-level fighter to provide the same challenge as a high-level spellcaster.I think the rising power of casters can be a challenge to balance with non-casting classes, but I don't think it's impossible. A fighter who has around twice as many hit points, an AC that's potentially 13 points better (with plate mail +3 and shield +3), a better THAC0, better saves, access to magic items, *and* some kind of combat ability like striking twice in a round has some big abilities casters don't have. As far as a villain creating danger by changing the world / reality goes, a magic-user obviously has more tools at their disposal, but a lot of that is shit plot-level, and not that applicable to adventuring or the actual spell list magic-users have. And magic-users are a lot more susceptible to getting ganked by an unsuspecting attack than a fighter is, so they have their drawbacks too.Overall, casters do get out of hand at higher levels, but by limiting their spell selections (and not having world-changing spells) and not having them accrue high-level ones as quickly (or having some limitation to them, like they require extraordinary rituals or can only be cast once per month or per year, etc.), I do think it's possible to keep them reasonably in check. And as long as fighters are essential and not being completely overshadowed, the exact balance between them and magic-users isn't too important. And depending on the situation and the rules, a high-level fighter could potentially demolish a high-level caster in one-on-one combat.
>>93250245We (my group) played out many scenarios with the different martial classes vs spellcasters and honestly, the paladin was probably best for the job of taking on casters. Roughly 50/50 win rate depending on if the paladin won initiative or not
>>93250245I will say that the progression of 1 then 2 slots at the highest level you have access to, then jumping up to the next level and repeating the process results in a continually increasing rate of power increase, and it should maybe be slowed down past a particular point. Not only that, but as you get to higher levels, you're often gaining one or more lower level slots in addition to your top one, adding depth to your arsenal. Going from 11th to 12th level, magic-users gain a spell slot at their top two levels, and one at 2nd level to boot. While I've created progressions that slow things down a bit, I'm not sure I've ever seen a published old school-based game that did that, which I find curious.
>>93246297Creating a whole world when the players are going to explore just a tiny fraction of it is a huge time investment for very little return.It's best to instead create a series of encounters and present them to the players in the order that they make the most sense from the story perspective.
>>93248572I start them at first level with maximum got points and a feat. Humans get two feats because I've removed level and race/class limitations.
>>93250778There's no feats in 1e, 0e, b/x, numbnuts
>>93249687They also don't want to admit 2e's superiority. It has the clarity of B/X, the options of AD&D, and then a ton of character options. It's just the superior system.
>>93250802It's bland af
>>93250792NAYRT, but there's no need to be a dick.Even if what they said doesn't apply directly to the editions anon asked about, it could provide a general perspective and is at the very least a tangent off of what was being discussed.
>>93250802Fuck off, troll. /osrg/ is way more uptight than we are. You should go back there.
>>93250792You grogs are so smart, you can even tell the difference between an official rule and a houserule. Foes reel back in awe.
>>93250809That's the setting's DM's job, not the ruleset's, so glad you concede the point.
>>93250825>Everybody who prefers 2e is a troll and must obey my orders on where to post.Okay Karen.
>>93250873Anybody who trolls about 2e is a troll. I welcome actual 2e discussion here.
>>93248572I start them at first level, but with maximum HP and point buy ability scores (75 points).
What do you call an "arctic" hex? How is an "arctic" hex different from say a tundra hex?
>>93245609Idk man I think most of these people are upset over drama that has nothing to do with them. The only gross thing about it was the shitty scheme for the monster manual. You had to buy individual monsters? That would make me seethe for decades. Everything they bitch about they could house rule away but. As we all know rules lite systems are the most dogmatic right
Been thinking about how to make a customisable referee's screen in the style of the AD&D Combat Shield.Came across these: clear menu covers. They fold out into three panels. I've found them in A4 and A5, unfortunately they only come in portrait (would prefer something landscape like OSE's referee screen).Worried A5 will be too small/narrow, and A4 will be too tall. Why can't more restaurants have weird A4 landscape menus? ;_;
>>93251273>Everything they bitch about they could house rule awaySure, but it would be house ruled in the wrong direction. They'd be better off house ruling 1e to be like 2e than the other way around.It's almost like 2e came after 1e and written to correct the problems it had.
>>93250817You're right. I apologize
>>93250842Thanks. Putting feats in 1e sounds horrible but you do you
>>93250892>all tautology is a tautology Gee thanks grog.
>>93250849You wish. You just say shit like that because you're projecting. Look at the 2e DMG and tell me it's as interesting as the 1e DMG. Go ahead and lie on the Internet
>>93250825>the suburban fake politeness imported from reddit is way less uptight! lmao even
>>93250778This is some good bait though. 8/10. Minimalist but egfective.
>>93251675What the fuck is 4chan's problem with Reddit, damn. These fuckers live in your heads RENT FREE. Let it go. Do something productive
>>93250765Yeah about 5 in a row is a dungeon. Your dragon doesn't even need 16hp.
>>93251662Oldschool Grog Rules Enforcer Enjoys Gatekeeping Games.
>>93251688Yeah, I don't get it either. The level of discourse on r/osr is so much better than the one on /osrg/.
>>93251674>Random harlot tables and rules for spying that avoid actually playing the actual spying are interesting.Sure grampa.
>>93251749I don't give a fuck what you play or how you play it. You want to play a crossdressing transvestite attracted to furrykin while transversing a dungeon in a wheelchair, GO FOR IT. I don't understand why you would want to ruin 1e, 0e, bx/BCEMI, or whatever with feats. Haven't we had enough of that shit with 3e, 4e, and 5e? But please, keep being a faggot. That's just going swimmingly for you
>>93251777>Two random ass tables prove me rightSpergotronic bitch, shut the fuck up about what you know nothing about. Big kids are talking now, faggot
>>93251800This is basically the pfficial FoeSR thread. So idk what you are doing here.
>>93251800>suspicious lack of 2e mention>ignoring the multitudes of clones and indies with feat supportWeenie /osrg/ Jr. is down the road bud
>Finally let the try-hard historians have their thread in peace>They come into the thread they told everyone to make to leave them alone to troll and false flag everything and pretend to ''honest'' postersHow sad and pathetic, is it because they miss having people to shit on?Pathetic.
>>93251800>>93251818>>93252024>>93252046>>93252050This general is for OPEN discussion. If free exchange of ideas threatens your fragile worldview, it's best for you to avoid this place.
>>93252046I have all the complete players handbooks to etc. Kiss my rotten roody poo ass. At least I know what 2e's drawbacks are unlike you faggots
>>93252407Cry about it more if you can but I don't think it's possible
>>93252407What "free ideas" did that post contribute to, exactly
>>93251800>I don't understandYou're halfway there. Make some effort, grampa.
>>93252488Stop treating hipsters like they're old.
>>93252482If it didn't contribute any ideas, why are people reacting to the ideas it's contributing?
>>93252499This? >>93250792>There's no feats in 1e, 0e, b/x, numbnutsIn response to someone saying they use feats, not even specifying what game they're playing, not even specifying if this is a houserule or part of their game by default.What "ideas"? This poster doesn't belong here.
>>93251749I like what this thread could become, but this is gay.
>>93249897> some pro-2e posts have been deletedthat's the same modfag, he deletes 2e threads. because he wants OSR to include 2e.
>>93251342A 3-ring binder is all you need. just turn the page, anon.
>>93252582>not even specifying if this is a houserule or part of their game by defaultAre you stupid or what? There's no feats in TSR D&D, so it's obviously a houserule. If you're curious about how they have implemented feats, ask that. But of course you feel too threatened by the idea someone might have a good idea to ask an honest OPEN question about it.
>>93251342That's actually a good idea.
>>93251342I've always just paperclipped my papers to existing screens. It's the ghetto solution.
I like this chart and I wanted to share.
>>93251696So many veiled references
>>93252997>There's no feats in TSR D&DThere are. In 2e.>askThat grog didn't ask shit.
>>93253798How would you convert Council of Wyrms to ACKS?
>>93253888Proficiencies are not feats. If that's your definition, then 1e and BECMI have feats as well.
>>93253934There are literally feats (just not called feats) in the splatbooks for each class.
>>93254031>There are literally feats (just not called feats)Okay, then by your definition there are "literally feats (just not called feats)" in 1e and BECMI as well.
>>93254206Have you actually read the splatbooks.
Anybody have Khosura: King of the Wastelands yet? Or any kind of previews. I'm getting close to pulling the trigger. I usually like the author's stuff and I like the sales pitch on it.$35 shipping and a $90 total is pretty nasty for something that won't have a pdf release for months.
