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).previous thread: >>93858085>What's your favourite race or class from an OSR or OSR-adjacent game or supplement?>How's your campaign going? What system are you using?>What's your favourite system for a quick pick-up game or one shot?
>>93925445>>What's your favourite race or class from an OSR or OSR-adjacent game or supplement?No favorites. I'll play anything and as a mostly-DM I can feature anything I want to.>>How's your campaign going? What system are you using?Pretty good, a little slow. The PCs are on the cusp of a huge treasure haul which is going to jump them up a couple levels. Good thing too, I'm getting tired of them being so broke and cautious about every little thing. A new ship, some new spells and equipment, and replenishing their dwindling pool of hirelings will set thing right though.>>What's your favourite system for a quick pick-up game or one shot?One-shots get Searchers of the Unknown. Four rolls and four picks, go dungeoneering. If I'm not in D&D mood I use Fudge or Risus.
I've been having issues DMing (and playing, frankly) Dungeon Crawl Classics with Wizards dominating encounters with excessive spellburn.I've been trying to think of ways to limit wizards a bit while still letting them, you know, DO stuff and have fun.Two things I'm thinking of:A houserule: You can only spellburn a number of points equal to your level as part of your action. This means that a level-3 wizard casting magic missile can only spellburn 3 ability-score points and cast immediately. If he wants to spellburn more, he needs another turn of "windup" spent cutting himself.This allows wizards to still do really big splashy spellburns out of combat, when they have time to do the full casting song-and-dance.My other idea is to give appropriate monsters some sort of spell resistance (other casters, spellcasting monsters, reality-bending eldritch beings, scary blackguard super-knights in spiky black armor). I'm thinking an aura that reduces all spell checks by 1d6 (or whatever dice).
also, a DCC thing:I put together a cute, short funnel almost entirely inspired by "Where there's a whip, there's a way." I tend to do things a bit more gamey than DCC's presented design ethos. I've played too much Darkest Dungeon and find myself stealing from it a lot.
>>93925445>What's your favourite race or class from an OSR or OSR-adjacent game or supplement?I've always liked the flexibility of an fighter/magic-user sort, like an elf in Basic. Fighters are short on explicit combat options, but can be a lot of fun when the DM is open to a bit of improvisation, even if that's just a plus or minus one here and there based on combat descriptions. But magic is colorful and has some profound effects, allowing you to break the limitations of what's humanly possible. It really takes your options to the next level. Still, the number of spells you have is limited (particularly at low level) and magic-users are very frail and limited in physical combat. Fighter/magic-user types give you a lot of play in both worlds. Frankly, Basic elves are too powerful, but even if they were nerfed to the point where they're on the level with a fighter or magic-user, they'd still be capable enough in both fields to be useful and fun.
>six posts>one is an obvious shitpost>thread is unironically dying already
>>93931281There's nothing much to be pleased, things were much worse before. I hope the thread finds a way to stay alive.
>>93931281Check in here a month later and the first post is still assblasted osrtards shitting their diapers.
>>93935215>the Coprophagia troll is /todd/ lmao
>>93928163I've not played DCC, but giving magic-users more flexibility does seem like it could be dangerous, even if it's risky for them.
>>93928163isn't spellburn compensated by elevating the crit fumble rate?
>>93925445>What's your favourite system for a quick pick-up game or one shot?I pretty much house rule everything, but if I didn't have the opportunity to do that for some reason, B/X would be my default. Well, it's the foundation of my house ruling as well, but that can be hard to tell.
Repeating my question from /osrg/:I'm looking for mechanics that help me run a rules-light colony sim similar to Rimworld between the GM and a single player. The idea is we do monthly summaries where meters, progress and events are managed, and maybe 1-2 important scenes played out (those don't really need rules at all).First thing that came to mind was Kevin Crawford's Domain and Scheme system, as well as The Quiet Year for events.I don't need a complete rulebook geared towards this, I'm fine just stealing some good rules and tables that do these things well.
Does anyone know what pawns these are? Deficient Master has them in his latest video.
>>93938159https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an5svmNA9sg&t=113s
>>93938152Sounds like an interesting idea. Wish I had something to offer you.
>>93925445>What's your favourite race or class from an OSR or OSR-adjacent game or supplement?There's nothing like the awesome power, and heavy responsibility, of playing an AD&D paladin. A unique and fun experience.
I'm having trouble figuring out how exactly this magic item works. Can anyone help me parse this:>Scroll of Seeing>This scroll is blank. When held and commanded to write, it will draw pictures of creatures within 100' in any area chosen by the user. Up to four different types of creatures can be pictured. The scroll will function once per day, regardless of the number of creatures pictured.Am I supposed to understand it as only working four times? Like once you've used it to detect a fourth creature, the scroll is filled up and no longer works?
>>93942732My guess is the scroll clears itself every 24 hours.
>>93942902Okay, so you think it works like:>Activate the scroll.>It draws up to four types of creatures within 100' of a point selected by the user.>It then goes dormant for 24 hours, regardless of whether any creatures were depicted.That seems reasonable and makes it a much cooler item.
Hey lads. Anyone here one here played, run,or even just read Bunnies and Burrows. I'm thinking about running it for a one shot and would like some more perspectives on it before I do.
>>93942985I'm curious about it because it was so early. Peterson mentions it in The Elusive Shift. But Watership Down was disturbing to me as a kid so I'm not sure I'd like it.
Is Basic Fantasy RPG good for running custom settings? I'm planning on running a campaign set during the a fantasy version of the baltic crusades.
I got hooked by Umerica, but I have no experience with DCC. Should I just try it anyway, start with a simpler more basic thing to get the grasp of the system, or use the setting with some other system?
>>93944352Basic Fantasy is pretty close to Basic D&D, only with race and class split. It does boost clerics relative to fighters,* which is something you might want to address (fighters in Basic are weak compared to other editions, so you might want to boost them rather than nerfing clerics: perhaps by giving them +1 damage for every 3 levels they have, or by letting them attack twice in a round by accepting a -4 penalty to-hit to both attacks), but otherwise runs very similarly. This means it's geared towards adventures where resources (your supply of spells in particular) dwindle over time and is less suited towards games where you might have just one encounter in a day, as then magic-users can blow all their spells at once and then recover them. Magic is also core to the game, and if you're not interested in spells and magic items, you should definitely be playing something else. D&D is at its strongest when it's doing dungeon crawls. That's not the only thing it can do, but if you get too far away from it, you start trying to use a screwdriver to hammer in nails.*Giving them weapons that do equal damage and drastically reducing--though not eliminating--the predominance of swords amongst magic weapons.
>>93944379I've only just looked over DCC, and have no experience at all with Umerica, but if you were looking for alternatives, Mutant Future exists as a Gamma World-type game using Labyrinth Lord's system (which hews pretty closely to Moldvay Basic/Cook Expert D&D).
>>93944471I'll check out that word salad later, but Umerica is a really wacky gonzo world. Necromancers have zombies making twinkies, Disney has become a place of worship of this panteon of humanoid gods in a constant power struggle, Fort Nox is a temple where the priests dress like the idols in those green papers, alien historians are disguised trying to figure out what the fuck was the US. It feels more tied to reality than the classic Thundar gonzo style.
>>93938341nou
>>93938152An Echo Resounding is okay, might do what you're looking for enough you can fuck with. There was an older pbta project called Stonetop that had a lot of village centred gameplay that was a bit more in depth than The Quiet Year but I think it was abandoned. Might still be able to find it. Random events per month or whatever time frame could come from the Adventurer's Almanac. The solo games thread should have a bunch of oracles for that kind of thing as well.
>>93944508Fuck you too then bitch
>>93944803Seconding Mörk Börg, it's where OSR and more traditional oldschool styles meet, making it a good baseline to go from.
>>93942732>>93942902>>93942930You could also make it reusable - that is, once it gets filled up it stays that way until commanded to erase. Then can use it again.
>>93944580Thanks, An Echo, Resounding looks excellent for this. It can even handle nomadic tribes, which I wasn't sure would work.Funny how the solution turned out to be by Crawford again.
I was the faggot that was complaining about being a nogamer last week. I finally got 3 players. Quick, give me a good TSR module for 3 first level players
>>93949549I was thinking a oneshot. I'm eyeing up King's Festival atm
>>93949576For a one-shot you're usually better off using a light/NuSR system than D&D.
>>93948726>>93951006Maybe a fastplay?
>>93951006I was going to disagree with this but you are correct. A lot of the fun of D&D is the way that characters mature and you don't get that out of a one-shot. There's also the fact that 1st level D&D characters are really fragile so there's a notable chance the first encounter is also the last encounter if the dice aren't with you.>>93948726With a 1st level party you're going to want to make sure they are loaded up with retainers, like as many as they can afford. They're all likely to be 0-level mooks but every set of hands helps.
>>93948726Something from Judges' Guild Book of Treasure Maps 1 or N4 Treasure Hunt
>>93944508>I'll check out that word salad laterGamma World is the original, gonzo post-apocalyptic RPG released by TSR in 1978. It's based on its Metamorphosis Alpha (which was released 2 years earlier) and features the same kind of mutants and crazy technology but is based on a colony spaceship gone wrong.Moldvay Basic/Cook Expert is B/X, the second (1981) edition of Basic D&D (and the first one that's not essentially just a starter set that only goes up to 3rd level). It gets the most discussion of the old school editions on this board, and from what I've seen, far more retroclones are based on it than any other edition.Labyrinth Lord is an early (the earliest?) retroclone of B/X. With how closely it sticks to the original, it's essentially just 3rd party B/X with somewhat reorganized presentation.Mutant Future uses Labyrinth Lord's system to execute Gamma World's setting. It's basically Gamma World with Basic D&D's rules.
https://princeofnothingblogs.wordpress.com/2023/02/26/actual-play-like-unto-gods-pt-1-add-2e-unstoppable-force/Wtf is this superhero shit? Is this normal for high level osr play? It just sounds ridiculous.
>>93953368I don't know, I stopped reading at 2e.
>>93953368AD&D 2e is not OSR. Doesn't mean it's bad, many people enjoy it, but it might go a long way toward explaining your dissonance.
>>93953414Whats wrong with AD&D
>>93953503NTAYRT. He was talking about AD&D 2e, not about AD&D, nor did he say that there's anything wrong with it.
>>93953503Nothing.
>>93925445What's the best system if you think Gary Gygax types like a fag?
>>93953414asking from page 0, what are the differences?I'm just curious, not testing you or anything.
>>93958299fellas, is it gay to list the money, furniture and spices of every house in a town?
>>93958308Reply hazy, ask again on >>>/lgbt/
>>93954692AD&D 2e is AD&D, it's right there in the name.
>>93958651Being stupid on purpose is no way to go through life.
>>93958777It's a way of life on /todd/, though.
>>93958302>what are the differences?AD&D 2e is the bowdlerized dumbed down knock-off for the theater kid special education kids of Satanic Panic moms. If you want an actual list, there's a PDF shared a couple threads ago with hundreds of detailed differences that gets criticised every time it's posted for only listing a fraction of those differences and hence misleading people into thinking they are more similar than they actually are. I might look it up later or someone else might link to it. Or you might find it by searching the archive.
>>93959025so it's like someone assuming 3e and 4e must be pretty much the same when they're two independent games? or more like starting with X and trying to retrofit B?
>>93959080Not familiar with 4e, but I hear it's mechanically different from 3e enough. AD&D 2e has a superficial mechanical similarity to AD&D that is quite misleading.The core philosophy and the target audience are completely different. AD&D 2e gives a ton of advice on how to run the game that is diametrically opposite to how OD&D, AD&D, and B/X are supposed to be played.If you learn 2e or 3e or 5e and try to switch to OSR, you'll have to unlearn all of your habits as a DM. If you switch between 2e, 3e, and 5e, it's a matter of learning new rules, but running them pretty much the same way for the most part.So if someone learnt from AD&D 2e and wanted to switch to OSR, he'd have to unlearn everything about his core ideas of how to run the game.Imagine knowing how to play the guitar technically well, having only ever played rock, even professionally at the highest level, and then one day being told to go play in a jazz quartet. Or knowing how to breakdance and being asked to do ballet (or vice versa).
>>939591514e was a weird attempt to revamp the IP. It doesn't play the same, but it doesn't even have the same terminology. It's like when they grab a random movie and call it a sequel to a franchise or decide a game 80% done should be a Silent Hill. It creates weird discussions because it's like debating wether Shadowrun is a good or bad FATE.If you come upon that AD&D 2e comparison I'd like to see it, if I find it I'll post it.
>>93959197NTA. I remember that file as well, but I haven's saved it. However, I don't think it's particularly useful because it lists the mechanical differences between AD&D 2e and AD&D without explaining which of those are OSR-breaking and which are irrelevant.This document:>>93917361hints at it on pages 2 and 4, but it's still only part of a wider picture.
>>93958777So why are you doing it?
>>93959080No, it's nothing like that. Core mechanics of AD&D 1 and 2 are nearly identical. If you can play one you can play both with very little need for instruction. The major differences you'd note are THAC0 replacing the attack matrices, and more prominent bolt ons to the core system. While nonweapon proficiencies are from 1e, and they were not optional in Oriental Adventures, in 2e they are called optional but are presumed to be opted for. Psionics are not in the 2e core books and are very different especially as part of a new character class. You might not even miss them because they were very rare to come by for 1e PCs. Character kits were added to 2e in a pile of splat books.Smaller differences are that bards are now a class, not an option for a high ability score character with two classes fighter/thief. Classes like monk and assassin were eliminated from the rules for years until they came back in a source book for a campaign setting you might never see. Thieves in 2e choose which skills they advance in with level. Illusionists in 2e are run of the mill specialist wizards and specialist wizards exist. Druids and clerics are now priest subclass with spells granted by spheres, not druid as subclass of cleric but with its own unique spell list.The core remained the same, and many people who started playing before 2e hybridised 1e with 2e, particularly THAC0.Learning 3e wouldn't help much for 4e with 4e's use of daily/at will/encounter powers and healing surges all of which were vidya inspired magic powers for everyone. "Vancian" magic was dropped and replaced in part by rituals. The learning curve is much less from 3e to AD&D than from 3e to 4e. At heart 4e is very unlike every D&D game before it both mechanically and thematically.>>93959025>there's a PDF shared a couple threads agoMaybe that was in a different thread. There haven't been that many PDFs in todd and I don't remember a bunch of posts criticising a pdf for not going too far enough.
>>93960774>The major differences you'd note are character optionsJesus Christ you 2efags are really as good as WotCfags. Those differences (You) list say everything about (You) and how (You) run your games, assuming (You) do, and nothing about the core differences between AD&D and AD&D 2e.What (You)'d notice if you were into AD&D would be the DM-facing ones that allow you to play a Gygaxian-style campaign:- Retarded rules for XP, with XP for gold an optional rule that you're advised against using.- Most exploration rules omitted or broken, for example with dungeon exploration speed increased by TEN and wandering monster frequency reduced by 70% with a warning that it might be excessive (LOL), no rules for distracting monsters with treasure or food during chases- All or most of the rules for downtime omitted or broken (natural healing at triple speed, no diseases and parasites, no one week forced bedrest when going to negative HP, no recommendation that 1:1 time when no play is happening is "best").- No mention of players running multiple characters in the same campaign or adversarial play between players (that's actually discouraged / forbidden).- Poison lethal by default removed with other tables.- No weaponless combat.- No naval combat or underwater adventures section.- No wilderness encounter tables.- No dungeon encounter tables.- No urban encounter tables (no whores!).- No demihuman racial relations table.- No humanoid racial relations table.- No rules on how to make holy water.- Rules on lycanthropy reduced by 90%.(1/2)...
>>93960774>>93961690...(2/2)* No rules for when, how, and whether gods and their supernatural grant spells to clerics based on the level of the spell.* Reduced memorization times for spells.* No rules for generating NPC parties.* No rules for generating wilderness strongholds.* No rules for random creatures from the lower planes (appendix D).* No random trap tables.* No random dungeon dressing tables* No rules for slaves or peasant revolts.* No rules for gambling.* No herbs, spices, and their medicinal properties.* No Appendix N.* No tables for determining the magic items of PCs started at levels beyond first.* Training reduced to an optional rule.* Demons and Devils replaced with entities whose names will give you flamboyant homosexuality.Attached is a PDF with a different list with only partial overlap with the ones I have given above.
>>93948726Update: yesterday I ran Tomb of the Mummy Priest in Swords and Wizardry for three players. They were a chaotic Dwarf Fighter (Tim), a chaotic Human Cleric of Andrew Tate (Clork), and a neutral Elf Elfblade (Scrungle) (as seen in Book of Options, so I could have a single classed fighter/magic-user). The dwarf was devoured by mummified alligators. We’re gonna continue in 2-3 weeks (when my friend gets back from South Carolina). AMA
>>93961757>AMA>chaotic Human Cleric of Andrew TateDoes he get any special powers?
>>93962017No. In fact, though I allowed him to turn undead (because I didn’t want to leave him with nothing or figure out how to do controlling undead), he only got the reversed version of each spell. Hence why he couldn’t heal Tim after the pit trap incident.
>>93962017>>93962085Same guy. It’s worth mentioning that all three characters were pregens
>>93962085Can he turn women?
>>93962215Well, he can now.
>>93960774Another guy here, I was thinking about something today. From what you've seen, have monsters changed too much from 1e to 2e or is it mostly just the XP values?
>>93962882Many, but not all, monsters changed significantly, Most notably giants and dragons got much tougher in 2e.
>>93963329Oh thanks, good to know.
Thinking of running either a one-shot or a long-shot for Halloween season, using it as an excuse to get my group off of 5e for once.Any good spooky modules?
>>93948726My favorite is B1. I recommend running it with the alternate map: https://dysonlogos.blog/2015/02/04/alternate-map-for-in-search-of-the-unknown/
>>93963864This one's good, but IMO the one that splits the first level into two floors is even better:>https://dysonlogos.blog/2018/04/16/return-to-quasqueton-map-1-of-3/(and the following two parts obv)
>>93963990I also prefer this one, but before you go insane like I did, do notice that Dyson intentionally omitted a few rooms.
>>93963601I like temple of the blood moth a lot
>>93959025>the bowdlerizedThat old chestnut, eh? Even in 1985 Dragon editorials Gary was talking about deleting half-orcs and making assassins an optional class in the DMG.
>>93959002Well, glad you found a place you feel comfortable.
>>93964158Was Gary also talking about removing demons and devils to appease screeching middle-aged frumps in 1985?
>>93964158>Even in 1985It's almost as if there's a reason /osrg/ stops at 1983.
>>93962215>>93962251turn or *control*.
>>93963601I think I'm going to run this one-shot this year. From Dragon Mag. #42.
>>93964211So Gary Gygax stops being OSR in 1983?>>93964194No he was cucking to them way earlier when he let DDG get renamed
>>93964399schizo reply
>>93961690>- No naval combat or underwater adventures section.>- No wilderness encounter tables.>- No dungeon encounter tables.>- No urban encounter tables (no whores!).>- No demihuman racial relations table.>- No humanoid racial relations table.couldn't most of that be covered by splat books or modules or some other add on? is it that bad to skip it from the core rules?
>>93964601>couldn't most of that be covered by splat booksSplat books covered much of what otheranon says 2e is missing and way more. For better or worse. The 1e vs. 2e differences are very little about the existence and/or absence of rules, and more about priority and emphasis. But that is nuance that this board has difficulty explaining and is best understood by actually playing both.
>>93964399>when he let DDG get renamedWhat was it originally meant to be called?
>>93964601>couldn't most of that be covered by splat booksOnly if you think it's splatbook material instead of core material.>is it that bad to skip it from the core rules?It's great to skip that if you're a 2etard who thinks it's splatbook material, it's bad to skip them if you're a grog who thinks it's core material.
>>93965603Fuck off, namefag.
>>93965774>2etardkek listen to yourself
>>93965691In od&D it was called Gods, Demi-Gods, and Heroes. When the material was re-editied and released for Ad&D it was called Deities & Demigods (DDG). The first printing contained Cthulhu and Melnibonean Mythos and which were both met with some legal action and removed for the second printing of DDG. I'm not sure of the year, I think it was '83, all of the core books were reprinted with new cover art and distinctly branded orange spines. On this printing DDG was renamed Legends & Lore. The content remained the same as the second printing of DDG.
>>93966849if you squint the 2 kinda looks like an R though
>>93967450>removed for the second printingI think I remember there being several printings, with progressive incomplete removals, only from the third or fourth one. But I am nitpicking.
>>93963353I think you've thanked him too soon.>>93963329>Many, but not all, monsters changed significantlyA while ago I did a small sample and found no significant difference for the majority of monsters.>Most notably giants and dragons got much tougher in 2e.I skipped over dragons because of the way they are presented very differently in MM and MC. Giants did get tougher by 4 HD apart from stone giants which went up by 5 HD from 9 + 1 – 3 to 14 + 1 – 3>>93962882My small selection of common monsters compared the 1e MM entry to the 2e MC entry. Dragons were more complex that I felt like looking at. Giants different as noted.Orc, Mind flayer, Goblin, Owlbear, Satyr, Troll, Wight, Wraith, Cockatrice, Imp, Invisible Stalker, Kobold, Lizard man: all the same.XP isn't given in MM Ant lions went from around 935 to 1400 xp. They otherwise have the same stats btw way, same move, same attacks, same HD, same int etc.Cave fisher went from 125 to 175Eagles went from 70 to 175Mudmen 56 to 175Nereid from 272 to 975The only significant difference I found was for Duergar who lost their psionic abilities as psionics weren't part of 2e at launch.Based on those first couple of figures I thought maybe 2e had bumped xp by around 50% to account for the changes in how xp was awarded but the last two are over 200% increases.The majority of those monsters I looked at didn't change from 1e to 2e, only giants got tougher, and duergar are probably easier without psionics.
What's the best / least worst lite / NuSR system for a one-shot, or a series of one shots with little to no connection between them?
>>93964262The Mansion of Mad Professor Lumlow is a favorite Halloween one-shot. I've run it four times over the last 25 years and its been a blast every time.
Does anyone have BX or OSE-compatible stats for Githyanki?
>>93968053Look to the B/X Elf or OSE AF Drow for inspiration. There is no strict reason for conversion between B/X, AD&D and OD&D. If you must align the statistics to fit one of those sysems, then use AI.
>>93967450>removed for the second printing of DDGIt was after that.First printing had them.Second printing had them and a Chaosium acknowledgement note.Third printing and I think fourth too didn't have them but did have the acknowledgment note.I think the note was not in fifth.> I think it was '83>new cover art and distinctly branded orange spines. On this printing DDG was renamed Legends & LoreIt was 1985.
>>93961690>>93961705You're not making a good case for why 2E isn't just a highly compatible game, but also strictly better. Removing useless bloat is a step in the right direction yet the core skeleton of play is so much the same that you could mix and match characters in campaigns without issue. I should know, I was actually there.>Look at my list of changes!!!As I said, BLOAT. Bloat that the vast majority of people who filled out the Dungeon Magazine questionnaires avoided using.You larping newfags who wish you were alive for the heyday would beg for kicks in the dick if you thought it made your game more old school.
>>93967963Says the faggot giving a reddit-tier rebuttal. Play more games.
>>93968121>You're not making a good case for why 2E isn't better. That wasn't the intention, I would never make cases on matters of taste.The point was to show that 2e is in the line of Hickman-style games (like 3e and 5e), rather than in the line of Arneson/Gygax-style games.So if you're a proud storyfag, as you clearly are, you'll consider those changes good. More power to you, go for it.
>>93968123>Play more games.You're clearly not following, he has already said that he plays 5e here:>>93927899
>>93968123>>93968143Sorry I should have said he plays *traditional* 5e.
>>93967960Well he legit wasn't lying about giants and dragons. Thanks for the more in depth look, the XP value changes were half expected, 1e just had a calculation listed including XP per HP or something.When I asked, it was because I heard a lot of monsters were largely compatible. So if I wanted to give stats to certain monsters for say, every edition, depending on the monster, I could just use a single stat block for 1e and 2e, listing both XP values, right?Also, because I found stats for Mandragoras for 1e, and was wondering if they could just stay more or less the same.>>93968121A lot of those things aren't essential, and that anon looks like he was overreacting, but I wouldn't call it bloat. It's nice that the basic books covering all sorts of bases. The weaponless combat thing legit looks useful. I think the Monstrous Manual for 2e might have had some dungeon encounter tables, though? It does sound familiar.
>>93968117I was just going to use Elves, but I was wondering if anyone had converted a version with the psionic abilities.
>>93968214>Thanks for the more in depth look, You're welcome.>I could just use a single stat block for 1e and 2e, listing both XP values, right?Pretty much yes. There might be differences in certain magical effects and psionics. "Number appearing" is often very different between versions. For example goblins, 2e says up to two dozen which is a similar number to that found in the 1e random encounter tables, but the 1e monster block is 40 - 400, like a village full.Unless you mean the 85 xp + 3 xp/hp calculation given in the stat block, the 1e xp calculation for homebrewed monsters doesn't appear to be consistently followed by publications. That table is on DMG page 85.Taking the cavefisher as an example, MMII says it's worth 85 + 3/hp. It has 3HD so it should have the + 3/hp but with one special ability its base xp value would be 35 +15 = 50. A 4HD monster with one special ability would have a base XP of 60 +25 which is 85 but then it would have +4/hp. It's the only one I've looked at recently so maybe I just picked the wrong one to test, or maybe it was the right one.2e has the same process in DMG page 47 with an updated Table 32 appearing in MC Ravenloft II which incorporated psioncs.>I heard a lot of monsters were largely compatibleThey absolutely are. Mostly copy-paste for the stat blocks and often for the descriptions with just a couple of word swaps. Case in point, compare the first sentences from 1e>The beholder (eye tyrant, sphere of many eyes) is most frequently found underground, although it infrequently will lair in desolate wildernesses.and 2e>The beholder (also known as the eye tyrant or sphere of many eyes) is most frequently found underground, although it will lair in desolate wildernesses from time to time.>that anon looks like he was overreactingSure does.>Monstrous Manual for 2e might have had some dungeon encounter tablesMany, but not all, MC had encounter tables. Monster Manual did, I don't recall if Monstrous Manual did.
>>93925445Do you guys know if there's more classes or races for shadowdark somewhere? some homebrew even?
>>93967450>On this printing DDG was renamed Legends & Lore. The content remained the same as the second printing of DDG.Okay, I have to admit that's profoundly homosexual. But apparently Gygax had already been removed from decisionmaking when the orange-spine printings were published; he was always insistent that he had deliberately chosen rugged covers for the AD&D books so they could stand up to table use, but the Blumes wanted to save money on binding to increase the profit per book.
>>93968118>It was 1985.Huh, okay. My orange spine PHB actually says 6th printing, 1980 and MM2 was first printed in 1983. I’m not sure that they changed any internal text on the orange spines though because the DMG says 79 and still references the original cover art.
>>93968876Oh, that's good to know. When you look a bit through the XP value rules of both editions, it's pretty straightforward, so it shouldn't be much trouble. >For example goblins, 2e says up to two dozen which is a similar number to that found in the 1e random encounter tables, but the 1e monster block is 40 - 400, like a village full.Yeah... Monstrous Manual for 2e had a similar absurd example, I think it was orcs that had something like hundreds on a random encounter.
>>93973048Sorry for the ambiguity by including too much quote text. I meant Legends and Lore was only first called that in 1985, but it may have been late 1984, maybe with a 1985 street date. You are correct about orange spines from 1983.>My orange spine PHB actually says 6th printing, 1980kek Every copy of PHB from 1980 through 1986 said that. They only fixed it in 1987 when it jumped from 6th to 11th.There are at least four ways you can tell the 1980 date and 6th printing is a lie for your copy.Orange spine PHB didn't start until 1983.With an orange spine your cover art is pic related which is from Easley in 1983.There was at least one printing with the "face in a circle, TSR like it was written with a calligraphic nib, inside a rounded rectangle" logo after the 1980 printing so yours would be 7th at the earliest (but yours is 9th or later).The TSR outline logo, also pic related, on your cover wasn't used until mid 1982.>DMG says 79 and still references the original cover artYeah, TSR was not good at edition notices and acknowledgements and fixing back cover text. I think DMG used that same line about 1979 until 1987 despite adding several pages of text and correcting some errata.
>>93973824>think it was orcs that had something like hundreds on a random encounter.Thanks for that, you're right. I looked it up and it is the same value as MC1, not something changed for the hardback reprint. It was copied right out of 1e MM so looks like an oversight when changing the principle of what that number represented in 2e stat blocks. 1e DMG uses the more reasonable value 7-12 in its encounter table.I wonder why TSR wimped out by using 3d10 x 10 instead of a more manly roll. I must have never used orcs as a random encounter in 2e because I'm sure I would remember the joy of>okay, how many are there?>gleefully roll 30d10>>93968214>if I wanted to give stats to certain monsters for say, every editionOut of curiosity, what would you be working on that that you want stats for every edition? Sounds like quite a project.>Mandragoras for 1e, and was wondering if they could just stay more or less the sameImo, yes, they could. I had a pretty good search and I couldn't find 2e mandragora in any MC or supplement. There's a half-HD manikin made by a wizard from a mandragora, with the severe penalty that when the manikin dies its creator permanently loses the same amount of hp, and mandragora are in later editions but they're very different. Pretty obscure monster. Fun choice.
So... do you prefer AD&D or B/X and why?
>>93977674I hate crossposters so goddamn much it's unreal.>ChildKiddie D&D>non-childTrue AD&D™
>>93979406>True AD&D™Translating for /todd/lers and newfags: He means Gygax's AD&D, not the 2e knock-off.
>>93977540>I had a pretty good search and I couldn't find 2e mandragora in any MC or supplement, and mandragora are in later editions but they're very different. Pretty obscure monster. Fun choice.How are they in later editions? It's hard to find.For a while I had been looking for some monsters that didn't get a lot of love. I decided to look up "Alraunes" thinking they were some kind of greek myth monster, just to find out that was just the german name of the mandragora root which got used in a horror book. Also had been playing Odin Sphere, which featured some walking mandragoras, which was a coincidence.From what I could find, there's a no-stats version of the root in 2e which just does the screaming version when you pick it, but no longer fights like in 1e.>Out of curiosity, what would you be working on that that you want stats for every edition? Sounds like quite a project.It's not that much of a project, really. I thought if Dragon Magazine ever came back, would be a way to submit something in a way that could give everyone something to be interested in. Like, try to stomach 5e for a bit, let someone else stat things for 4e if they cared enough, and provide stat blocks for every edition that mattered.I've also been trying to collect stats for fun obscure monsters for 2e, and I guess with a bit of calculation it could be a treat for 1e players, too.
>>93938159called Peeples, but they seem to be wearing lego hats
>>93977674I play OD&D. D&D starts getting worse with Supplement 4 Greyhawk. B/X at least is at least has the advantage of being written by an actual writer, but it still has too much of Gygax's slapdash junk in it.The story of AD&D is Gygax getting bullied by his players into adding whatever they wanted and then rushing all his wild ass notes out to try to win a law suit.
>>93980629>Supplement 4 Greyhawk
>>93958299>What's the best system if you think Gary Gygax types like a fag?unironically Darkbad
>>93979621>t. a newfag with a brain of a toddler.
>>93982697The seething bump that keeps /todd/ alive.
>>93983187>/todd/>aliveLet's be real, this thread is about to hit autosage again and won't gain 150 posts before that. And that's despite several anons in /osrg/ admitting to deliberately giving it artificial respiration to keep it alive. This is a fucking ghost town. Even Smugchud seems to have abandoned us in favor of shitposting in /osrg/ again.
>>93977674The REAL /todd/chad plays only Mörk Börg
>>93980504>How are they in later editions? It's hard to find.Websearch. :)As a monster that doesn't get much love it might not have been core product identity. The references to it I found were from Necromancer Games and Frog God Games, the latter of which I think is the successor to the former. They've both released a book title Tome of Horrors, the former, with sequels, for 3e/OGL d20/Sword and Sorcery, the latter for 5e.Mandragora is the genus of M. officinarum, the common mandrake. I suspect they called the monster mandragora to distinguish it from the plant mandrake.TSR used mandrake in Mystara as one of a family of drakes. As the name suggests drakes are dragon-like. They can shapeshift to humanoid form, with mandrakes shapeshifting to humans. There's also the Man-Drake, from Dragon no. 156, which looks like it was played for laughs as a drake (duck) that can assume handsome, stupid human man form around the full moon and get constantly rejected by swanmays.>It's not that much of a project, really.>>describes hard workThat is a nice idea.
>>93986067I don't post in /osrg/ at all because, for example, I have been using non-weapon proficiencies for thirty years. Theoretically this is the thread for me but every single post of mine or even with my name on it in this thread has been pruned by the schizo janny so... Yeah, kind of feels like a big waste of time I could be spending combing Living Greyhawk materials for the session after next. My favorite player wants to do a Rhennee arc.
>>93925445>>What's your favourite race or class from an OSR or OSR-adjacent game or supplement?tiefling adnd2epicrel was brilliant imonow they're so lame
>>93988369>TSR used mandrake in Mystara as one of a family of drakes. As the name suggests drakes are dragon-like. They can shapeshift to humanoid form, with mandrakes shapeshifting to humans.Oh yeah, I bumped into that one but kinda didn't count it for obvious reasons.>Mandragora is the genus of M. officinarum, the common mandrake. I suspect they called the monster mandragora to distinguish it from the plant mandrake.Yeah, but since this is a medieval fantasy game, I'd just assume those are all closely related. You know, all mandragoras are equal, but some are more equal...>Tome of HorrorsOh that's fair, I was only counting more "official" content, but since those have Gygax's name on them, it's at least close.I also found again the 3e Ravenloft take that I had somehow bumped into once through google. They're shambling mounds, which grew out of people who died infected by some special algae.>It's not that much of a project, really.>describes hard workIt's more of a pipe dream. I kinda don't expect WotC resurrecting Dragon, or doing it in a way that would appeal to old timers. I heard they were re-releasing OD&D, for instance, but don't expect them to support it any further.
>>93988369>>93988552"Mandragora" is just the Italian name of mandrake, from the Greek "μανδραγόρας" through Latin "mandragoras". Where the Greek word comes from is less clear."Mandrake" is an Anglicisation of that word, possibly through Dutch, using a folk etymology of man+drake.Biologists re-latinised the Italian word back into Latin to make it into the genus name.
>>93989166>Mandragora" is just the Italian name of mandrake>Biologists re-latinised the Italian word That Modern Italian shares the nominative singular of the word from doesn't mean it came from Modern Italian. Mandragora is Medieval Latin, ie it predates Italian, derived from classical mandragoras and it was the Latin name that was given to it in 1753 by you know who, at least you should know who; that you say "biologists" named it says you don't know.Italian wasn't even universal on its homeland of the Italian peninsula in the middle 18th century. Proposing that a Swede of that time who was raised learning Latin instead turned to the Italian name and then back-translated that to end up with a nominative that just happened to exactly match Latin, a language with which he was already familiar, but Latin wasn't the immediate source of the word he used is insane. As a case in point, ginger is genus Zingiber, which matches closely both Classical and Late Latin zingiberi and gingiber but is somehow quite remote from Italian zenzero.Gygax lists herbs and their ascribed medicinal uses in Appendix J meaning he had some access to a book or other knowledgeable source about herbalism. The thing about herbal books is that they list binomial names to avoid the confusion that comes from local names. Herbalism is from where Gygax got mandragora. If you check out the MM you can see where he couldn't resist using other (pseudo-) Latinate names.
>>93991494Thanks for the correction, I connected the dots poorly based on what I knew. Should have thought of Linnaeus, but for some reason I assumed it must have been named later by somebody else because I incorrectly discarded the possibility that the word might already have changed in Latin from Classical to Medieval/Late times.
never player 5e, but decided to check out its monster book to steal content fromand wow, it's way better than the monster sections of any of the osr projects I've seen.like, every page has at least several specific usable details that you can make an adventure aroundmeanwhile, osr monster descriptions are likestat blockbasic description of monster appearancespecial attack explanationthat's itcompare the 5e entry for Basilisks and osric's or whatever.you don't need to pay $30 for the monster overhaul book either, half of that shit is in the 5e monster manual already
>>93993374>didn't read 0e>didn't read 1e>didn't read 2e>needs 5e slop to be "inspired"Very cringe of you
>>93993374>you don't need to pay $30 for the monster overhaul>instead, pay $50 for the 5e monster manual, which contains half of the same shit!lmao
>>93994184The 5e monster manual is easily pirateable with a casual google search, unlike a lot of big name indieshit.Somehow wotc is less anal about their copyright than "indie creators".
>>93994264I found a pdf MO in under 5 minutes
So is this like the shitposting version of OSRG? I’ve been off the internet and out of the loop for a while I grabbed shadowdark on a whim because someone mentioned it a couple months ago, and I’m an impulsive consoomer — I think it’s cute for what it tries to do. If I were trying to get Normies/5e people into OSR I think it’s be great. But if I’ve got OSE I don’t see why I’d use SD over that. Maybe it makes me a shitheel but I stole adv/disadv from 5e in 2015 and never looked back. Thanks for reading my blog post
>>93994264Maybe Hasbro thinks of it as some kind of advertisement they can let slide, and indies don't have that luxury.(Of course, for people who ARE into D&D, looking at 5e is no incentive to buy)
>>93995127>I grabbed shadowdarkFantastic game, let us know how it goes!
>First ACKS mass combat tomorrowWish the crew luck lads. They're getting ambushed by a bunch of dream monsters.
Why does /osrg/ hate shadowdark
>>93995765We don't hate it, it just doesn't belong in the thread because it's not an OSR game.
>>93995127I ran a Shadowdark funnel for my table a couple months ago and everybody really liked it. Before that they had only played DnD 5e with me, but I've been trying to get them in to other systems. My hope is to run DCC with them eventually.but yeah Shadowdark was fun and easy for the players to understand
>>93995920Right on anon >>93996261Nice! I’m hoping to run a game for my normies soon, I just got arcane sword’s solo guide for some OSE adventures myself
>>93925445Is Dungeon Crawl Classics TODD?
>>93996797It’s in the OP. I don’t see much discussion around it anywhere but people must be playing it. Not a fan myself, the dice chain and magic system aren’t my cup. I would really like to play Cybersprawl Classics though. It looks like the kind of game that could turn into hardcore ultraviolence and I would prefer something simpler than the overly complex standards of CP20XX or Shadowrun for that.
>>93996797Absolutely.
>>93988347I've actually started a campaign with my friends for it! We've already had:>The party following a lump of sentient bog moss as they had nothing better to do>The Alchemist chopping off the Skinwalkers hands (don't worry, they grow back) to get goodies from the Bog Witch>The Dead God's Prophet offering everyone and everything a sip of "locally sourced" mercurial blood>Theological Arguments over whether or not it is more faithful to let the world fall into ruin or help it along>Kicking the absolute shit out of a pack of Dire orangutans and harvesting their intestines for more Witch goodiesIt was great time, looking forward to next weeks session.
Did one of you guys make this? It looks like something I would write but I can't remember if I did or not. I drink.
>>93996797Is it Mörk Börg?No?Then I think not!
>>93997413Speaking of which, if anyone needed a good way to start an MB campaign; this module is basically B2 but for Mork Borg. Really helped me bolt on new stuff to expand the scope.
Huh, is the 7day autosage no longer a thing?
>>93988471>tiefling adnd2e>picrel was brilliant imo>now they're so lameindeed, in this chart and those pages they are fucking half-fiend spawn.
>>94001022>jannies have actually removed autosage just to try to keep this thread competing with /osrg/
>>94001022Hush hush you're not supposed to notice the thread is going great
>>93961705A lot of that is just shit gary tossed into the DMG to pad it out.
>>94003177You're entitled to your stupid opinion, 2e/wotcfag.
>>94004668local rule #1
>>93961705>2. Method I for generating ability scores changed (from 4D6 drop the lowest arrange totaste) to 3D6 down the line, which is expressly stated to be the defaultMan 2e is fucking hardcore.
>>94001022>>94001461>>94001774lmao
