Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to TSR-era D&D, derived systems, and compatible content. Broadly, OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons as played in the game's first decade—less emphasis on linear adventures and overarching meta-plots and a greater emphasis on player agency. If you are new to the OSR, welcome! Ask us whatever you're curious about: we'll be happy to help you get started. >Troves, Resources, Blogs, etc:http://pastebin.com/9fzM6128 >Need a starter dungeon? Here's a curated collection:https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/86342023/#q86358321 >Previous thread:>>93962364Armies and mass combat, what's the biggest that a table you've been at as fielded? What's the smallest number of combatants you'd have before using your macro system instead of regular combat?
Who needs other thread covers when we have this one?
Maybe too soon too ask, but has anyone run Khosura? Any experiences with it or pitfalls worth mentioning? I really like the look of it on paper.
>>94019123EMDT? How have I not heard about it? Is it by Melan?https://emdt.bigcartel.com/product/khosura-king-of-the-wastelands
>>94007126>>94013664I only skimmed B/X Mars but it was made by an anon from here and might have naked pulp hero rules.
>>94019121Good point, you should go there and never come back.
Want to contribute to the thread but don't know where to start? Use this table.>1. Make a spell>2. Make a monster>3, Make a dungeon special>4 Make a wilderness location>5. Make an urban set piece>6. Make a magic item>7. Make a class, race, or race-as-class>8, Make a 4-10 room lair.>9. Make a trap>10. Roll 2D10 and combine.
>>93962828That was this guy https://themansegaming.blogspot.com/They have a lot of weird tables and I think are still active. Also from here.
>>94019152TY anon. Knew I would forget something.
>>94019132Yes, it's Melan's new big hardcover edition of the megadungeon he made way back during the early years of the OSR.
>>94019248Was it published piecemeal before?
>>94018820I've been thinking about the history of the OSR recently and have been trying to assemble a timeline of the noteworthy events. What am I missing?
>>94019405Nice timeline. Is there a reason for the abrupt stop at 2014?
>>94019277Yes in Fight On!. I don't know if all the material in the hardcover was in the magazines, though.
>>94019405>The DCC RPG game itself is 3rd edition at its core and thus discounted by some as not OSRFor fuck's sake, how many times do you retards need to be told that it's not OSR even by Goodman's own admission?
>>94019505Oh, so not by EMDT? Intredasting.
>>94019405If I were you I would starrt by reading the OSR history series on osrsimulacrum.blogspot.com.
>>94019405I think its worth noting the shift in one-page-dungeon contests over time. The earlier iterations had a lot more interesting and well made dungeons compared to art-style-only dungeons. There's a notable shift over time with that one. Interesting document, thanks for putting it together.
>>94019405>Melan said that “an introductory module should be among the best of the best”. Is his use of graphs to elucidate dungeon structure a first?Yes, Melan invented those graphs. It made a big splash when he first posted those and it caught on among quite a few people on ENWorld, although predictably he also got a bunch of pushback IIRC.
>>94019521It's the reddit rules: "It's OSR if you say it is!" and, in this case, the corollary to that: "It's also OSR if you say it isn't!"captcha: YJKYAY
>>94019405A pretty good list. Scanning this list might prompt a few new entries: https://campaignwiki.org/wiki/LinksToWisdom/HomePage
>>94019521To be fair, it was basically among the first on the scene and it does try to emulate an older style of play, it just houseruled back from 3.x instead of sideways from a Pre 2ed base.Honestly I consider it OSR, mostly on the strength of being there before the wankpurity of 'the first 10 years of the game'. Call it OSR or NuOSR the game has done more then 90% of the other games on the list, it emulates an older style of play (for the express purpose of selling modules even), high lethality other old school options (see character creation funnels). It's a great game and ignoring it is a mistake. >buhbuhbuh I need definitions my little mind can't operate without them. Have fun with that.
>tq; I think the biggest combat I've ran was around 50 or so combatants, and I ran it with the typical AD&D combat rules. The losing side ended up routing after two rounds of heavy losses, so it really didn't take too long. I would like to play around with more mass combat stuff and, if my players decide to lean more into that side of the game, domain politics and what have you. There exist opposed armies on my world map, and my players have spent most of this campaign in one of the contested states, but besides interacting with local leaders and commanders they haven't engaged too much with any of their doings. One player is currently working on clearing out a long-sealed tunnel that would allow a caravan of Dwarven craftsmen to head to the city they had worked to expand, so there will be opportunities for that soon.My question: do you use miniatures at the table? If so, how often? Even if I'm not busting them out for individual combats (which I tend to do, because I enjoy collecting and painting them), I have my players place their miniatures in a marching order at the center of the table during exploration so there's no ambiguity when things happen.>pic related. Some stuff I worked on this week.
>>94020024>honestly I consider my opinion more valid than the actual author's stated intent lmao
>>94019405Good effort - good concise writing. Consider including Necromancer Games for their slogan ('Third Edition Rules, First Edition Feel') and resulting decent popularity from the get go of 3e. Per their slogan, they mostly published nonrailroady modules, including megadungeon Rappan Athuk.
>>94019405I would not describe DCCRPG as 3rd Ed. to its core. But DCCRPG is off-topic here so not best place to hash it out
>>94020024You are right, of course. But the creepy censors who live here don't have enough to do (certainly not play games) if they think like that.
>>94020039Classic Ral Partha AD&D minis - nice! I love the Pit Fiend and Remorhaz from that line.
>>94020209These are actually 3d prints! I have a bunch of old Ral Partha stuff, and some sculpts from old RP employees who went on to other projects, but these are from a dude who mostly makes classic Monster Manual stuff.
>>94020024>it was basically among the first on the scene Yeah, but another scene.>It's a great game and ignoring it is a mistake.Advanced concept for you, get ready: Just because something isn't OSR, doesn't mean it's bad.Corollary: Just because you like something, doesn't mean it's OSR. Unless you're on plebbit or /todd/ that is.
>>94020184>But DCCRPG is off-topic here so not best place to hash it out/todd/ has failed so they're back in force.
>>94020024>it emulates an older style of playNo, it doesn't. It emulates a weird meme version of "older style play" that does not resemble actual old-school D&D. In actual D&D, wizards get to be powerful at high level, DCC fetishizes lower levels and punishes wizards for using magic.>muh greentext sarcasmEat shit and die, retard
>>94020106>megadungeon Rappan AthukWorth noting also that Rappan Athuk is a location in the original Wilderlands maps — oddly enough not map 6, hex 2711 "Ruppin Athuk", although obviously the same name, but>According to Bill Webb, the Rappan Athuk dungeons are located in hex 4526 of the Elphand Lands, near the edge of the lake.
>>94018820>tq Currently using Dragon, Lion and Pikeman Rampant, but with chits. The game.is built around units of 12 or 6 models but I've been roughing it out to 10-12ish men per chit for infantry and 5-6ish per cavalry. Warmachines and monsters vary but it's usually less.Mostly using it as campaign map domain play stuff and wargames with my friend that impact the rpg world. So if it's more than a skirmish it's happening on a battlemap with different rules. Putting together some Warmaster stuff but not sure if it will magnetize well.
>>94019123A bit too new for play reports to be out there, I would think. It only came out, what, two months ago? I have a copy but lord knows when I'll get to it.
>>94019405>>94019602Yeah, a lot of the work on this has already been done in that series, particularly the 4th and 5th parts.
Do any of you guys play online? What do you use? I've been running something theater of the mind, where I just stream a generic background image of the environment they are in + their character portraits on screen. Everything else is just handled over voice. It's going well, but I want a shared space to actually roll dice, show them shit I might draw, and have their character sheets so I can see them. Everything keeps pointing me to Foundry or Owlbear Rodeo, but everything I see that makes them good also makes them way more excessive.Plus, it would be nice if there was a way for whomever was mapping to be able to show everyone their map easily.
Anyone used the On Demesnes & Downtime or Demesnes & Domination books in their games? Both seem interesting, the latter seems rather replete with ideas
>>94020536Map tool is free VTT, there’s also stuff like foundry but they cost money
>>94020096I mean you can take or leave it but yeah, my opinion is way more up there then the writer who's just trying to avoid drama and keep selling books. >>94020391DCC is older then you are, again when you predate a lot of the foundational works for something, even if you don't match all of the standards that come later, you're part of that movement. >Same purpose as the early osr (Making an evergreen base system to sell modules under)>Predates the 'first 10 years of dnd' rule>plays like the kind of game that people missed after the launch of 3, expressly made to recapture that lost late 80's early 90's play style. Yeah don't give two shits what the author or the thread says. DCC is more OSR then half the trash that goes under the label these days.
>>94020229well I'll be damned
>>94019405Hackmaster has a lot of differences, most notably a d20 HD. The first clone was technically the Challenges Game System by Moldvay.JMal exiled himself because he couldn't deal with the heat from the failed Kickstarter.No mention of Google+ seems remiss as that was the major intersection of OSR traffic on many levels.Also, don't be a pussy like the nu-trove guy who folded to angry grog LARPers, this is YOUR work, stick with YOUR beliefs and let everybody else cope.>>94017854>Which PCs ascended?Off-hand, Murlynd and two others as detailed in the pages of Dragon Magazine as detailed under "Quasi-deities of Greyhawk". Now do the sneedful and present the evidence of domain play from Gary's game.>>94019521>>94019769>>94020184Don't like it? Write your own timeline.
>>94020505Where does one obtain those chitholders? They're magnetic, right?>>94020229Same question here: they're magnetic, right?No, wait, I mean where to obtain?
>>94020528Yeah, I thought the same. I hope to get into it soon, though, and I figured it would be good prep to read someone else's experiences if they were available.
>>94020741>when you predate a lot of the foundational works for something, even if you don't match all of the standards that come later, you're part of that movement.What? So Stonehenge is part of the Gothic Revival movement? And also the original Gothic movement? And also Rococo? And Baroque? And...
>>94018820>multiclassingDo you allow it as AD&D would so, what about this other method what you think?There are some classes available to all, you can spend 1000 EXP to gain the ability to take levels in another class, meaning you gain the first level of that class. Then you either divide exp equally or focus on one of your classes to level up. HP is rolled for each class, each level you pick the best result. If you are Fighter 3 (6,2,7 rolled) and MU 3 (1,4,2) then you have 17 HP.
>>94019121Only people with tasteHonestly, is it a requirement of OSR games that they "maintain a mechanical and thematic fidelity to the first decade of D&D", but also, have shitty artwork that looks like it was done by an intellectually disabled teenager for $25 worth of grass?
>>94020741>my opinion is way more up there then the writerUp your own ass, you mean
>>94020741>DCC is older then you areYour logic is of the finest /todd/ tier. Just because a game is (supposedly) old, doesn't mean it's OSR.>>94020970>Write your own timeline.Nou. I'll just point out the lies in yours and how you won't rectify them because your feelings matter more than facts do to you, and move on.
>>94020741>expressly made to recapture that lost late 80's early 90's play styleBruh DCC is absolutely not made to recover early 2e play, what the hell have you been huffing kek
>>94020970>MurlyndDo we know that he (who was named Merlin in the actual game BTW, Gygax changed it for publication) ascended though play and not just because Don Kaye died? I don't really have a slapdog in the slapfight between you and the other guy, but I feel like I read that this was a kind of memorial.
>>94019482I'm not sure what the events of the next ten years would be. I think the original movement ended at some point and we are left today with a marketing label. But if someone out there feels differently they can continue the timeline.
>>94020970>Murlynd and two others as detailed in the pages of Dragon MagazineMurlynd, Keoghtom and Heward. Leaving aside that they are below even the status of demi-god, they have not got there through gameplay. Murlynd was elevated in memory of his player who died IRL.Keoghtom and Heward are NPCs, as should be obvious from the fact that they break very basic game rules: They are both 20th level Bards without a single level in either Fighter or Thief, and Keoghtom is a non-lawful Monk.
>>94019602Great resource. Thanks!>>94019676> The earlier iterations had a lot more interesting and well made dungeonsI will note that.>>94020106Thanks. Rappan Athuk is worth including.> I would not describe DCCRPG as 3rd Ed. to its coreI'll change it.>>94020970> No mention of Google+ seems remissI'm not sure how to study what was on Google+. I wasn't even aware of the osr scene on Google+ until about 2017 or so. I wonder when that took off.
>>94021506>They are both 20th level Bards without a single level in either Fighter or ThiefThis is almost certainly not an "intentional rule break", just an artifact of the the fact that the Bard was originally an OD&D base class. Gygax added that bizarre qualification process to it when he brought the Bard into the PHB, but if you look at the Dragon original it's virtually identical to that class only minus the preceding dual-class requirement stuff. You could run it as a regular AD&D base class that people can just pick, straight out of the box.
>>94021580>just an artifact of the the fact that the Bard was originally an OD&D base classNo it wasn't, stop making shit up. And even if that were the case, doesn't change the fact that those are not PCs who ascended to divinity through gameplay.
>>94020970>>94021580>>94021595>>94021506In fact:>All of my players retired their PCs from general play when those characters reached the mid-teens in level.--- Gygax, in a Q&A thread on ENWorld.
>>94021595>No it wasn't, stop making shit up.It's in Strategic Review #6, Retard-kun. See for yourself. Page 11.
>>94021621NTA, but that's not even remotely a "base class." Do you not know what a "base class" is? Perhaps a retard-kun is you?
>>94021637A base class is one with a full level span and which is not a subclass of any other class (as a Paladin of a Fighter, a Druid of a Cleric and so on). The Thief was the first base class added to OD&D after the original three in the LBBs, and the Bard is another.
>>94021621>It's in Strategic Review #6So it's not a base class, the other Anon was right.Still waiting for the acknowledgement that the claim that Gygax had players divinely ascend was thoroughly debunked.Which will never come, like with the claim that DCC is OSR.Clearly FOEs from /todd/ are back in the thread.
>>94021656>base class>addedPick one, obakasan.
>>94021666>So it's not a base class, the other Anon was right.To the extent that early TSR had anything like a notion of canonicity, the Strategic Review is as official as the supplements. Is the Thief not a base class?>Still waiting for the acknowledgement that the claim that Gygax had players divinely ascend was thoroughly debunked.I never said anything about that in the first place though, I only responded to the thing about Keoghtom and Heward having Bard levels without Fighter or Thief levels. This was totally normal pre-AD&D. I don't feel the need to debunk, re-bunk, disavow or cancel any other claim or viewpoint.
>>94021656So no, you don't know what a "base class" is. Thief isn't a base class either, it was added in a supplement. Please go back, we don't need this level of stupid here.
>>94021688>the Strategic Review is as official as the supplementsNo. Just like AD&D does not include over a hundred Dragon Magazine issues with all of their shovelware classes as part of its "base" rules. *Some* content from magazines, like rule clarifications, can be considered for inclusion on a case by case basis. Definitely not everything.
>>94021677>>94021706Get, stay mad, I guess. It's not my fault or problem that you have a totally personal, nonstandard definition of the term "base class".
>>94021725>you have a totally personal, nonstandard definition of the term "base class".So "personal" there's at least three different Anons calling you out on your bullshit.
the only reason people don't like DCC is because it's mechanics are actually fun and mogs whatever useless grimdark B/X clone they're playing.
>>94021735Samefagging is unimpressive.
>>94021759>Everyone calling me out on spewing bullshit is the same person samefagging.Right.
>>94021789I mean, yeah. It's pretty obvious. There's no reason why three different people would all have the same completely idiosyncratic definition of the term AND get so assravaged about it they completely disregarded the actual point being made about the class. But hey, go off I guess. Nothing embarrassing about seething your lungs out in a Mongolian fly-fishing webinar.
>>94021815>idiosyncraticyou're the one redefining "base" to mean "anything published for a system anywhere"
Opinions on secret doors with no written tells or mechanisms to open. Are you happy with just rolling 1d6 to find them or do you add interactive components so players can find them through roleplay?
>>94021993Not at all. I gave the definition of a "base class" already, here: >>94021656I haven't said anything at all about "base" on its own. But again, this is irrelevant.
>>94022102Interactive components are nice the first few times, but it soon gets tiresome (on both sides of the filing cabinet) after that. For the occasional special door, sure, but otherwise, just let rolls handle it.
>>94022118>the definitionYou made up your weird definition, which I have never heard of in 40 years of tabletop gaming and nearly 20 years of coming to the charming little dive bar of the internet that is /tg/. "Base class" has always meant a class that is part of the base rules, not one that's taken from an expansion, add-on, or supplement, and certainly not taken from magazine articles by some guy.
>>94022102>Are you happy with just rolling 1d6 to find them or do you add interactive components so players can find them through roleplay?I would probably do the latter, but I don't really use prewritten modules a lot. This type of issue is one of the reasons I don't like to. I feel like the ideal purpose of a written module is to do all this heavy lifting on the detail work so I don't have to, but then when I read a module like that I usually get annoyed by all the detail bogging down the reading and making the module a slog to learn. It's a double bind for me.
>>94022102>Are you happy with just rolling 1d6 to find themVery. I run out of ideas very quickly for narrative trap and secret finding.>>94022118Yeah, that's a retarded definition.
In my campaign headcanon, there are some part of all "mega"dungeons that are connected. For example, there is a path from the Indoornesse in Castle Xyntillan leading to the Gardens in the Caverns of Thracia.It sounds very cool in my head, but should my players ever find one of these connections, do you think it will ruin the adventure for them, by experiencing it bottom-up?
>>94022173Apologies for the broken English, I am tired.
>>94022142>You made up your weird definitionNope.>https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=%22base+class%22+D%26DBut, again, your focus on this is totally irrelevant and actually a way to evade the actual point. Since my hobbies are tabletop and martial arts, I'm unfortunately very familiar with autists, and this is a classic autismal behavior. You didn't know there was an OD&D Bard, so you called me a liar for saying there was one; then, when I posted concrete proof of it, your ego wouldn't let you just admit you were wrong and didn't know what you were talking about, so you seized on some quibble of wording to claim you were *actually* right the whole time. I've seen it many times. And that's also why you keep harping on this now instead of addressing the original point: to derail the conversation so you don't have to go back to the real topic and admit that those two characters have Bard levels without Fighter and Thief levels because they're OD&D figures from back when the Bard was a base class originally published in the Strategic Review, and you were wrong about that.
Inspired by a jibe in the previous thread, how brutal would a modern firearm be in an OSR context?I really liked flintlocks in LotFP, especially their ‘single use per combat’ feature. But looking at the damage number, would something like an M-16 be squeezing out 5d8 damage per round?
>>94022245>calls other people autists>while sperging and >implying as hard as he can
>>94022245NTA. A class from a magazine is not a base class from the game. Nobody in his sane mind would claim that the Bounty Hunter (Dragon Magazine 52) is a "base" AD&D class.Just shut up please, you are single-handedly driving this thread to shit with your idiocy.
"base class" is 3e/Pathfinder newspeak anyway. OD&D, B/X, AD&D, all have zero "base classes" just like they don't have "skill systems" (1-2 classes have a skill-specific sub-system).
>>94022469>"base class" is 3e/Pathfinder newspeak anyway.Ah, that explains where the faggot is coming from, then. I am not really familiar with anything later than BECMI, so I was genuinely confused by the discussion.
>>94022479Same, it figures it would be from the weird world of charop-land, which is its own little bubble. I avoid those faggots and their shit hard. I had to leave a group because I was sick and tired of playing with guys who would only ever talk about what "builds" they were doing, it was so fucking dull.
>>94022430>>94022469>>94022479>>94022497Continued bitching about the part that doesn't matterNot really proving Anon wrong, are you.
>>94018820>Armies and mass combat, what's the biggest that a table you've been at as fielded? What's the smallest number of combatants you'd have before using your macro system instead of regular combat?Funnily enough our first mass combat was last night, It was a small skirmish of ~450 in total.It went surprisingly well, we tried doing both the ACKS Domains at War rules & the newer Imperial Edition ones.Imperial Edition is more abstracted but honestly? It's smoother and involves less fannying around. Plus the heroic forays mechanic is a blast.
>>94022564>the part that doesn't matterSemantics are the most important of /osrg/. If you don't care about proper verbiage and meanings than maybe /todd/ is more your speed.
>>940223991d6 fir handgun and 2d6 for muskets or similar. Cannonds do 5d6 or one dice more than catapults.
>>94022614kek
>>94022614truth, "I don't care about the established local jargon, words mean whatever I want them to" is /todd/'s whole thing.
One again I am humbly requesting an invite link to osrgcord
>>94022614>than
>>94022469I am pretty sure 3e calls it core class.
Why didn’t they add monk to OSE advanced
>>94023217It's racist or something
>>94023226>added black elves, black Dorfs, black gnomes as racial classes>monk is racist
>>94019405I'm going to say this once and I will not be responding to low iq posts or trolls. It doesn't matter if dcc or bfrpg were TRVE osr because it's just context for what was happening at that time. Both were related to the burgeoning revival/renaissance and are therefore worth mentioning.>>94020970It's a good read Anon cheers.
>>94018820I really love OSR stuff but to be honest, it wasn't the the systems that appealed to me, it was the art and aesthetic of it and I thought it looked really cool and gave it a try
>>94023518cool story bro
>>94022173If they're deep enough in dungeon A it won't ruin anything to end up in a similarly difficult area of dungeon B, unless the opening levels of dungeon B are very specific.
>>94021815>only one person thinks I'm a fucknugget Nope, just reading your base class bullshit now and you're full of it.
>>94022102Its much better if it has some descriptive characteristics, doesn't have to be mind boggling puzzles or whatever but if its just a random chance to keep exploring the dungeon skip that shit and reveal the damn door.
>>94024746>random chance to keep exploring the dungeonU R DOIN IT RONG as the saying goes. That's not what secret doors are for.
>>94024754>but if Learn how to read a full sentence.
>>94024766You shouldn't be doing that, random or descriptive doors. Your post implied it's fine as long you have a descriptive characteristic
>>94024807>ifread nigger
>>94024838Sorry I read what you wrote, instead of what you meant.
>>94024866Sorry you can't figure out either.
>>94024874So are we gonna fuck now, or what?
>>94021079>No, wait, I mean where to obtain?I'm pretty sure these are both by a guy who goes by the name "Stormcrow" on thingiverse. Fair warning: the dude is some sort of homo and it bleeds into some of his work (i.e. ftm barbarian with top scars) but his TSR artwork miniatures are really great stuff.>pic related
>>94023064kek
>thread was invaded by bitter semantic nitpicking burgers overnightWhat the fuck happened here actually? The 1920s called and wanted its pedantry back.>>94025040>top tier AD&D minis>but also, faggotryGood grief.
Does anyone know of any collections of old-school artwork? Preferably stuff that's high res or rare.
>>94025352>Good griefYeah it sucks
>>94023340What does matter is that it's Goodman himself who says that DCC is not OSR, not just "some people".
>>94025397I have a copy of Worlds of TSR. Highly recommended.
>>94024838Commas, Ameritard
>>94025456I'll check it out, thanks.
>>94022102>no written tells or mechanisms to openthe tell is good mapping
What does d12, d6 mean? Like in this table.
So how's that guy's Dolmenwood remix thing getting along?
Best class to play an archer who is skilled in parkour and is also competent unarmed martial artist?
>>94022399there are stats for ww2 guns in a module if you want a baseline
>>94025717>Dolmenwood remixIf you are talking about Dolmenwood uncensored it's done. Was just a couple of choice Find and Replace for a few terms.
>>94025696d6 as a coin flip (evens odds), for d12 as 1-12, or 13-24
>>94025724Wrong type of game. OSR is about challenges to player skill, not donutsteels.
>>94025717Dolmenwood uncensored? Last time he wrote he said he would be working on something else, but he'd take suggestions if anyone came up with them.>>94025736>Was just a couple of choice Find and Replace for a few terms.A little bit more than that, but not much. A few concrete things were backported from Wormskin. Page 2 of each book has a list of changes.
>>94025742Makes sense, thank you.
>>94019405>2005 (Jun 25) A post on dragonsfoot.org by “Guest”As far as I recall, it was Anonymous in those days not Guest. It's presented as Guest nowadays but that's a later change.>earliest reference to “old school renaissance” that I’ve found, and if it is the earliest, “old school revival” has priorityThe joy of English. Renaissance and revival can be synonymous however, they have distinctive meanings too and these are neatly exemplified by the two users you quote."Revival" was in reference to reprinting old editions as "collectors editions", like maybe sewn hardback compendia instead of individual stapled soft covers but no implication of changed content, just a call to revive the old school editions."Renaissance" was used explicitly in reference to Castles and Crusades and to what might follow. It was about the creation of something new though with historical design cues. Mechanistically C&C's greatest debt is to DND3, an effort to get rid of some old school dregs in favour of the mythical "unified resolution system", but flavourfully it was intended to imitate the old school experience.For anyone concerned with precedence/priority, that post announces C&C as leading the charge of OSR(en), as in renaissance C&C is definitionally OSR. This "first decade" line that youngsters bandy about today is OSR(ev) at best. Saying C&C is not OSR when it was the birth of OSR is a madness in the attempt to change the true history of the Old School Renaissance.>>>>94019521>not OSR even by Goodman's own admissionHe's your god is he? Next you'll claim you don't even like DCC. Whether or not his customers are old enough to have lived through the old school era is irrelevant as is whether they know what OSR means. Get off your high horse.Just as C&C was the first OSR game, that DCC might have a 3.x core is not a contradiction to the genuine definition of OSR(en).>>94020024>>94020203Elegan/tg/entlemen, nice to see non-rabid posters with above-room-temp IQs.
>>94024972
>>94026099>He's your god is he?You're the biggest retard we've had in some time, and you're up against some fierce competition.
>>94026129>>94026099nogames
>>94026099So yours is a blatant and clumsy /todd/ler attempt to rewrite the history of OSR just to troll /osrg/, and you will stop at nothing, even getting to the point of refusing to acknowledge that DCC is not OSR by Goodman's own admission.That your bullshit is allowed to stand while /todd/ gets special treatment by having its autosage limit manually removed is yet another proof of an attempt to topic-shift or take over this general.Yes, it is obvious to everyone that you are the very same troll who created this troll thread:https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/93913702/#q93913702
>>94026151>it is obvious to everyone that you are the very same troll who created this troll threadYep, of course he is.
>>94025758Actual people In real life do parkour. Adventurers shouldn't be able to do that?
>>94026099>C&C was the first OSR gameC&C may have been meant to be an OSR game, but it failed miserably at that, incorporating so much 2e and 3e bullshit that it was rejected pretty much from the day it came out, which is why and how we got OSRIC.Of course you'll deflect and deny this, because your goal is to rewrite history and troll here, not to contribute constructively to discussion or reconstruction of the history of the OSR movement.
>>94026159>an archer who is skilled in parkour and is also competent unarmed martial artistAnon, that’s just a monk. Parkour can be resolved through RP. Use skill checks for extra daring-do , or if you’re really a shitbrewer, make up some sort of dice based stamina/ki/energy system for martial classes to implement fantastic actions (see mighty deeds from DCC or riff on magic dice from GLOG)
>>94019405>It uses the ascending AC of 3rd edition, which in truth is one of 3rd edition’s best innovationsDelete this.
>>94026614The whole file and comment thread is an elaborate janitor-enabled trolling attempt to push DCC and C&C as OSR, see here:>>94026151The fact that the only thing mentioned about BFRPG is ascending AC instead of XP for gold is another one of the trolling "gems" inside of it.
>>94026614
>>94026716I was 3 years old when 3rd edition came out, anon.
>>94025461The amount of backflips you're tring to go through to read wrong is hilarious.
>>94024972Not even with a rented dick. >>94026117You're not me. You can go fuck him and pretend it cool though.
>>94026758Bigger number equals better.You cannot refute this.
Dear osrg,Today I am going to a used book store to scour for old rpg books. Wish me luck!
>>94027087I like the matrices.
What prevents high level lawful clerics from going on a pilgrimage curing all diseases and removing all curses from the world?
>>94026159No, *you* shouldn't be able to mix and match character abilities and skills to create your OC dream character. If you want to play an archer, pick Fighter. If you want to play an unarmed martial artist, pick Monk/Mystic.
>>94027132Good luck!
>>94027132Good luck. Post if you find something good.
>>94027303There aren't enough of them to make a difference on more than a local level
>>94027303Their gods and their divine servants. Clerics don't automatically get to choose their prepared spells of 3rd level or higher.
>>94027362I dont say they would be able to erradicate bad things, but more that as Lawful agents, they should not waste a single day of their daily powers inside a fortress or a temple, but the optimal thing to do would be constantly searching for people they could help or their daily spell is wasted
>>94027435>as Lawful agents, they should be constantly searching for people they could help or their daily spell is wastedYour new age hippy cuck fatasy is not what Lawful means in D&D.
>>94026183>it was rejected pretty much from the day it came outAnd yet it's popular enough that Troll Lord can make 20 printings of the core books while OSRIC has to rely on POD. Curious.
>>94019405> The DCC RPG game itself is discounted by some as not OSRWhat the fuck is this? Doesn't this leave open the possibility that some people DON'T discount the game as OSR? The thought that anyone could think that DCC RPG is OSR is causing me to shit my pants vigorously.
>>94027362 There aren't enough of them to make a difference on more than a local levelThis is demonstrably false with simple analysis of data. The truth is that this is not done in most settings because doing so would destroy most of the tropes that frpg dms lean heavily on.Do the math using the following "facts" which are able to be sourced from the various 1e and 2e books. 1.approx 1 person in 10 can achieve levels in a class (skills and powers book)2.The assumption based on mortality in game 50% of all levelable pcs/npcs die before leveling...ie 50% make the next level 50% die3.Chances of cleric vs other class in randomly distributed pop (in dmg 1e pg 175 and 183 (18% of all level capable pc/npcs are clerics)4 perform extrapolation using excelThe numbers do not lie, you end up with tens of thousands of clerics capable of miraculous healing and curing all without needing spell components or costs in most cases.If organized and run in a coordinated manner (like by gods of good and law could) you'd have a health care system that would make modern medical care look like cave dweling neanderthals.Cure disease alone, once per day would do what the best modern doctor can do look sick. Add in all the cure wounds cure poison etc, and the clerics would be super effective. it comes down to dms being lazy with their data and not thinking realistically about the numbers.
Same dude posting classic style minis above. Airbrushed this handsome devil up yesterday. Excited to get him on the table. I'm gonna print up some clear red gems and magnetize them into the eyes. I think it would be fun to design a dungeon set in the aftermath of what happened after the events of the cover of the PHB. What happened to that party after they slayed the lizardmen and stole the gems?
>>94027658Dang, that's very cool.>What happened to that party after they slayed the lizardmen and stole the gems?Random encounter of 18 Hill Giants that wiped the whole group.
>>94023518I get what you mean. I much prefer the classic art to the newer stuff. Part of that, however, is the feeling of what they portray. The fantasy has to include risk in order to be enticing. I'm not at all attracted to the superhero slop thing, and the early art almost universally includes a sense of danger and risk that the modern stuff seems to eschew in favor of a straightforward power trip. Falling into a pit trap or getting held down and mutilated by goblins needs to be a likely possibility when you're dungeon delving.
>>94027704>DMG cover.jpgOh no, I'm a FOE.>>94027689>Random encounter of 18 Hill Giants that wiped the whole group.I was considering something like this lol. The party could happen across one of the gems miles away from the lair and be convinced or coerced to return them to the idol.
>>94027625just by way of extrapolation, if you have a small nation of 655,350 ppl ( a bit over 1/2 million) you'd have 11796.3 clerics1310.7 druids26214 fighters1310.7 paladins1966.05 rangers13762.35 magic users1310.7 illusionists6553.5 thieves655.35 assassins655.35 monks/1e bardsall spread across various levels with at least a level 16 topper. The point being is that 11k clerics are way way way more clerics than most dms account for and theyd chew through and plague, or health crisis like an army of miracle workers. Sure you can futz with the statistics some...but if you analyze the base numbers its still gonna be inescapable that the stats would support a radical rework of how youd have to treat magical healings affect on society. There would literally be next to no cripples, no major untreated illnesses, and clerics would be venerated as respected holy men and women with high social value.
>>94027625>>94027720> clerics would be venerated as respected holy men and women with high social valueWoah it's almost like you're playing a fantastic medieval adventure game! 11,000 clerics can't spam cure disease on a disease that quickly spreads to 110,000 to stop it. This is also retarded because 1) it assumes all clerics are sedentary healbots living comfortably and 2) it assumes that the evil gods and demons wouldn't make fantasy covid-19 just to fuck with them. You rail against the world-building of others, but fail at your own.
>>94027435>why not apply online-rationalist utilitarianism to this Bronze Age or Dark Ages setting>>94027625>citing 2e>>/todd/None of this analysis is relevant to OSR games.
>>94027625>>94027720This is some seriously deranged autist shit and if you approached me and told me to put this "data" into my game, or offered for me to play in a setting that took this "data" into account, I would laugh at you and tell you to fuck off.
>>94027625>>94027720Whoa, you mean that if you include poorly-thought-out, unplaytested »facts« from the worst edition of D&D, the results are bizarre?! That's crazy!
>>94027581>it's popular enoughJust because something sells doesn't mean that it's OSR, troll.>>94027611>Doesn't this leave open the possibility that some people DON'T discount the game as OSR?That's the whole point. It was pointed out to him that Goodman himself says that DCC is not OSR, and he rejected the fact.The PDF and all of his comments are part of a janitor-supported troll operation to topic-shift this general. Chances are this troll is 2ejannyfag's sockpuppet being revitalised. See here:>>94026151>>94026694
>>94027929>Chances are this troll is 2ejannyfag's sockpuppet being revitalised.PDF not written in the same style as the 2efag. Try again, conspiracy anon!
>>94027929>Just because something sells doesn't mean that it's OSR, troll.It does absolutely torpedo your argument about C&C being "rejected" though. Especially since they were making Gygax material.
>>94028099Here:>https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/93913702/#q93913702You push the idea that OSR is anything published between 2004 and 2013, even if its author says it isn't OSR.Here:>>94019405You push the idea that OSR is anything published between 2004 and 2014, even if its author says it isn't OSR.Sure, you are totally two different people, Anon.
>>94028099It was rejected by the OSR community, idiot. It's the very reason people started working on OSRIC, because they deemed C&C crap.
>>94028168The "OSR community" started working on the bootleg of AD&D that they didn't intend to be playable because C&C was bad even though regular AD&D could be bought on ebay for cheap . . . Sounds like revisionism to me.>>94028121More than one person can share an opinion. Is every anti-2e, anti-DCC, anti-/todd/ post also yours? I also disagree with both the posts you quote, because BFRPG and LotFP aren't OSR despite falling in those spans. You don't see me having an aneurysm when they get mentioned though.
Drawing the layout for a megadungeon was fun, and thinking about what lives there and how it's laid out... However, keying it is another story. I feel like this is gonna take forever. My game is tomorrow, so I have to get this done TODAY.
>>94028197LotFP is obvious OSR though?
>>94028391The system? Yes.The Modules? No.Also, it's OSR, but it's BAD OSR.
>>94027929> he rejected the fact.Hey conspiracy anon, PDF author here. I actually find it interesting that Goodman said DCC RPG is not an OSR game. I did not reject the fact. If there is anything in the PDF that claims that DCC RPG is a OSR game I am open to changing it. I don't think there is such a claim though. The purpose of the PDF isn't to define what an OSR game is, it was to give a timeline of what happened during the first decade of the OSR movement. The document mentions that 4th edition D&D came out in 2008, but I'm not claiming that 4th edition is OSR. Does that make sense, conspiracy anon?
>>94028391>Skill systemNot OSR>Special snowflake ACNot OSR>No bestiaryNot OSR>lolrandumb SummonNot OSR
Thoughts on BX Companion?
>>94026183C&C predated the OSR, it was part of a wave of OGL "let's take the 3e rules and tweak them to feel more like earlier editions" games. The whole premise was flawed and pointless, and most of those games are entirely forgotten at this point. C&C is only remembered because Gygax wrote some things for it. As a system, it is entirely uninteresting, apart from the fact that, as you say, it was rejected so fiercely that it could be counted among the reasons for the launch of the OSR movement.
>>94028197>Sounds like revisionism to me.We're not responsible for your mental problems. OSRIC was explicitly created as a way to publish material for AD&D 1e without violating trademarks and copyright owned by Hasbro, because they didn't want to publish their stuff for C&C, because it was shit.>Is every anti-2e, anti-DCC, anti-/todd/ post also yours?NO. IT WAS MINE! I AM THE FINAL BOSS OF /OSRG/ but you don't have to fight me, because OSR isn't about "fightng bosses"
>>94028613>>Skill system>Not OSRMaybe>>Special snowflake AC>Not OSRThat's retarded and you know it>>No bestiary>Not OSRThat's retarded and you know it>>lolrandumb Summon>Not OSRLeaning in that direction, yeah. 1/4, you need to do better
>>94028613>nooooooo you can't just come up with new B/X spellerinooos!!!!!
>>94027797>citing 2e>>/todd/innacurate.osr assumes that tsr was the authoritative source for the game and its guiding structure..period. Further osr assumes that the 1st source/statement on a topic is the authoritative statement unless a new official statement from the games creators is made. S&p was the first actual statement about leveled characters population statement that 1 in 10 of a population is levelable is the defining default rule of thumb, your own worldbuilding can vary this, but it is what it is. You not liking this is irrelevant. If you can find a statement from anyone in the strategic review, d&d, dragon, dungeon, or any other source that precedes this, go for it.
>>94027881Its actually not poorly thought out. Gygax's personal games/campaigns were fairly on point for this. The problem is most gamers assume partity of the fantasy world with our own. That since we had deprivation and misery in our own middle ages that the same would be true in the fantasy setting.
>>94028914Skills & Powers is a garbage book, and you're a garbage person for dragging that shit in here. Even rabid 2e fans won't defend that pile of horseshit. GFY
>>94029033Cry harder. Its still the defining source material statement from tsr and your tears on this point are duly ignored..
captcha: rst0ys
>>94028914>osr assumes that tsr was the authoritative source for the game and its guiding structure..period.Wrong>Further osr assumes that the 1st source/statement on a topic is the authoritative statement unless a new official statement from the games creators is made.WrongNothing after Gygax's ouster is in any way authoritative.
>>94019482>Is there a reason for the abrupt stop at 2014?Maybe we should call the stuff that came out after 2014 "zombie OSR"? The OSR didn't exactly die after 2014 since there are still these rotting corpses shuffling about.
On one hand I kinda prefer it when the good/evil side of alignment gets dropped in favor of just the Moorcock-style law vs chaos, but on the other hand a lot of games that do it seem to go with a rather dumb law=good and chaos=evil interpretation
>>94029405Bait yet again, D&D Law/Chaos are not Moorcockian but Andersonian, which means yes, Law = Good and Chaos = Evil.
My players are only level 2, but they're already beginning to build their own base of operations. I did the math, and for simply converting some old ruins they found into a stronghold, it's going to cost them about 20,000 gold. (This just covers reinforcing the walls that already stand, then rebuilding the walls that were there before, putting a roof over it, redigging the subfloors, and repairing all the things inside that are damaged by centuries of decay. I've taken into account that they have about 29 workers on staff that are going to help with the building, and then there should also be a fee for delivering the supplies. How should I go about pricing the furnishing?
>>94029972>How should I go about pricing the furnishing?Look at the ratio of (modern-day price of furnishing) to (building a brick and mortar house) and scale it 20,000 gold. You can't be too far off.
>>94029972>How should I go about pricing the furnishings?I'd ballpark it as ~20% of the cost of the building for some really bitch basic shit.So, 4,000 GP is enough to fill every room, maybe an extra thousand for safe delivery if it's out in the middle of fuck-nowhere.Don't forget to include furniture loot going forward. If animal crossing has taught us anything its that players are a slut for a nice carpet.
>>94029999>if it's out in the middle of fuck-nowhere.It's only about a mile outside of a stronghold on in the wilderness. They had to get permission from the local duke and had to swear to come to his aid in the event of a crisis or attack. (It was funny because that whole session was just them doing negotiations with the duke and the local council of nobility, and I was afraid it would be really boring, but my players said that it was incredibly fun. I've never done dialogue or NPC interactions well, but they said it was like they were playing in Game of Thrones or something. /osrg/'s advice on RPing noble characters really helped me out.)
>>94029999>Don't forget to include furniture loot going forwardI always include nice furniture, but the players seem to not see it as treasure, even after I've hinted at it. Maybe this will open there eyes when I tell them that they'll be paying essentially two level-ups for tables and couches.
magic helmet that gives AC as full plate and obscures the wearer's face in shadows, but causes intense pain if your primary muscle groups (arms, chest, thews), precluding gaining AC through other armor, or if you have less than 13 strength. a masked bascinet of dark steel with a pair of ox horns on the sideenemies in combat with the wearer make any morale rolls at -1
>>94028311You need 20 rooms max, don't over prep
>>94030061primary muscle groups are covered* fuck >>94030041>>94029999honestly I can never get my dudes to take furniture treasure. I give them a gem-encrusted throne they just spike the doors and sit there for 7 hours prying gems off of itsmart, I guess, BUT awfully lame, and it did diminish the total value
do you have tips for a circular dungeon? I'm trying to make a big tower and everything I come up with looks like shit. I'm fine with examples to copy from too.
>>94030116Honestly, best thing to do with these is either talk about it OOC afterwards or suggest they take someone along who can value goods.It's fun to dissect dungeons afterwards, both the good and the bad.
>>94019521DCC is dogshit anyway with that 0th level funnel crap. For someone claiming inspiration from Gygax's Appendix N doesn't look like he read any of it if he thinks that's how any story there played out. And the magic system isn't remotely close to what sword & sorcery magic is.Anyway anons what's your pref for OSR? Don't think my locals (5e types) would learn high gygaxian to play AD&D
>>94028826Coping LotFPissant>>94028859Type an essay explaining why a spell that can randomly flood all landmasses in the world at 1st level is a good thing
>>94030120Make it huge and fill it with square rooms
>>94030235>a spell that can randomly flood all landmasses in the world at 1st levelSounds awesome! Which game has this?
Children yearn for the dungeons
>>94029972This guy >>94029999 is surprisingly on the ball relative to official rules with his guesstimate, possibly due to the beneficent influence of quads. IIRC Cook Expert suggests adding 25% to the cost of a stronghold as an easy approximation to pay for windows, tile roofs and floors, and furnishings, so you don't have to calculate that shit in OCD detail.>>94030061Ox horns? You mean bat wings, surely.
>>94028613Is this trap OSR?
>>94030459No, it's just asinine bullshit
>>94030459successful bend bars check/10
>>94030509Nah, to me it just seems like something a dickhead wizard made to turn his prisoners into cash Now I'm imagining late night TV commercials urging neighboring townships to empty their prisons and send the criminals to prisoners4cash.com>>94030524I would permit this to work
>>94030061I read Death Dealer too
>>94028761>C&C is only remembered because......its still in print, never stopped, and Troll Lord Games has been its ongoing and successful publisher for 20+ years. Hate C&C all you want, but every time you say its 'forgotten' and 'rejected' is just a lie. And please don't try to explain yourself yet again on this topic - we get it.
>>94028761C&C is solid as "AD&D: HD Remaster". The only real complaint is the SIEGE engine breaks down with high level difficulties since you never really improve as you face higher level challenges.
>>94030597do you really want to meta post about thread lore? just let it be. Talk about OSR games.
>>94029424I'd argue that by the time of D&D the Moorecock outweighed the Anderson, while the opposite was true in the Chainmail days.
>>94030680Yeah, definitely not absolutes. D&D (non-A) even said that Chaotic doesn't necessarily mean evil (but often does)
>>94030670Shitting your pants vigorously about which edition other people are using is a long standing OSR tradition. K&KA seceded from dragonsfoot so they didn't have to read posts about B/X. The irony is that early OSR material was mostly written for B/X clones. OSRIC was a dud. So you could make the case that AD&D 1e is not OSR.
>>94030589nobody gives a shit, go make a C&C thread and see for yourself
>>94030680By AD&D maybe (although given you can be Chaotic Good it's pretty obvious that Chaos isn't Moorcock's Chaos there either), but OD&D, no. The forces of Law are the forces of good and the forces of Chaos are those of evil, see for example a Chaotic Cleric being an Evil High Priest.>>94030757>K&KA seceded from dragonsfoot so they didn't have to read posts about B/X.Wrong, they seceded because Dragonsfoot allowed 2e discussion at all, on its own separate subforum.
>/osrg/ has its threadly argument about 2e againit's been years now man, please can we just give it a rest? if you wanna discuss 2e make your own thread, it won't kill ya
>>94030824But it will kill the illusion that anybody gives a shit about 2e. Trolling on /osrg/ is the only way to get responses on the subject
>>94030824This is happening literally because the separate thread is dying. Whoever started that thought he would be able to suck the life out of this thread in favor of his more permissive one, but the opposite happened and the last /todd/ was extremely close to dying after 6-8 posts from lack of replies. So it's back to trying to slide /osrg/ again, unfortunately.
>>94030814OD&D seperated good and evil from the law vs chaos by the Holmes Basic version, didn't it?
>>94030924Holmes basic did, but B/X and BECMI went back to just law/chaos/neutral. It was just AD&D that added good/evil
>>94030814>although given you can be Chaotic Good it's pretty obvious that Chaos isn't Moorcock's Chaos there eitherMoorcock's universes run on the idea that the triumphs of either end are ultimately unlivable and inhuman- where the Lords of Law would create a sterile, unchanging void, and the Lords of Chaos would have existence be a meaningless ever-changing primordial soup. There's room for good on both sides, but someone who you could describe as lawful good or chaotic good puts their morals over the cosmic struggle, and/or tends to be pushing against a world that has tilted too far to one end of the scale.
>>94030824Minimum 25% of the discussion in /osrg/ is what constitutes OSR and the 2e schism is a pillar of that conversation. If you remove that you erode the illusion that conversation in /osrg/ is robust or meaningful in the majority. You also remove the self-perception that /osrg/ is important enough to be under constant attack from outside sources, see >>94030856.2e discussion is in effect /osrg/ propaganda because it allows the orthodoxy to hold their position in the light while decrying an enemy position as bad or wrong. 2e is more effective in this regard than any of the plethora or nuSR games because those entities are inconstant in their visibility and are more difficult to brand as heresy since 2e is a direct corruption of the writ of Gygax.Because the dogma of what OSR is cannot be consistent it is a requirement that there is something that OSR is not. You see this in the discussion of the clones that were instrumental to informing the original movement where even the orthodoxy cannot maintain a consistent position amongst themselves.
>>94031137What's it like to be so up your own ass?
>>94031166He’s right tho
>>94031182No, he's not, and you should crawl out of there, you don't want to know what he crams in it
>>94031137point of the thread is to discuss elf games and this guy's over here talking about orthodoxy and propaganda and shit like he's doing a high school literary analysis on a george orwell book
Hey, /osrg/, it's /srpgg/ here.What game would you suggest for a Norse-themed, Viking Age and low magic setting?
>>94031452You should check out Vikings & Valkyries. It's not a D&D derivative but it's fairly simple and free. No physical copy available.
>>94031563>Vikings & ValkyriesWhich led me to Mazes & Minotaurs.>picked up the whole set for free on DTRPGThanks Anon!
>>94031812Cool, enjoy. It's a really fun and well put together game for a non-commercial enterprise. Goddamn shame there's no POD option.
>>94028391This thread needs to be renamed Knights and Knaves Alehouse General, for sure. The cringeworthy obsession this general has with its own definition of OSR would be more palatable if anything creative came out of it.
I want to make my own Vermin Volume style critters. Mini's and all.May I?
>>94032135There was a way more consistent stream of OC from this general when it was less obsessed with drilling down on what is acceptable conversation.
>>94032206And it was a lot better when /todd/ wasn't dead and people weren't continually marching in here to argue against the definition in the OP, the way they're doing again. The solution is for those people to fuck off somewhere else, because there's no shortage of places out there that accept whatever as OSR.
>>94032227Yeah, /todd/ is the problem. Sure thing.
>>94032243No, /todd/ was a solution to the problem of assholes like you who want to change the thread's definition and will shit up the thread to get your way. When it was running, this thread was better, but now you fags are back to wring your hands about how bad it is that we have a clear and simple definition of what is OSR that hasn't changed in a fucking decade. Piss. Off.
>>94032265The definition of OSR as used by /osrg/ changed several times before you even started posting here, newfag.GLOG was once considered on-topic!
>>94031812>Mazes & Minotaursisn't that the Tom Hanks movie?
>>94018820Jesus, OP, that art is uglier than anything even TSR put out in the late 70s
>>94032348Mazes and Monsters
>>94032316Whoa whoa whoa is GLOG not considered OSR anymore
>>94032359Don't disrespect the racoon. He's had a rough day.
>>94032348>Mazes & MinotaursMazes and Monsters1982Part of the satanic panic movement of the 80's targetting D&D.If I told you I watched it on television when it first aired, would you believe me?
>>94032316Garbage Fire Anon was a saint.
>>94032372Try to play it and find out Spoiler: It's unplayable FOE garbage, basically the poster child for shitty nogames-theorycrafted rules
>>94032403what does that acronym mean?
>>94026203>You shouldn't because.... YOU JUST SHOULDN'T, OKAY?!
>>94022399>But looking at the damage number, would something like an M-16 be squeezing out 5d8 damage per round?It should. But you should play another type of game imo.Anyway:"Ehm-Six-Teen", the "Long Wand", the "Wand of Small Arms", "Power Word: Coult's Arms are Lithe":Save vs. Wand, 2d10 base damage +1 for every point you fail your save by. Any ancient ballistic vests left over from a past age of "progress" confer saving throw bonuses. (Full Auto mode))Of course, only a crafty ape can figure out or a *Legend Lore* spell can reveal how to toggle single/burst fire.
>>94032396I remember him, and his burning hatred for GLOG. He sent me a selfie once, let's see if I can find it. Oh, here it is!
>>94032959I'm pretty sure this is what you were looking for.
>>94025724>archer who is skilled in parkour and is also competent unarmed martial artist?AD&D monks can become proficient in Crossbows.>fool, he picked the trap option / 1970s flavor of the month class
>>94030757>K&KA seceded from dragonsfoot so they didn't have to read posts about B/X.False, It's because they wanted to exclude the "2etards", actual term they use on that forum.
>>94033007It's hilarious because Dragonsfoot put them in a subforum ghetto, but that was still too much for the K&KA people, they didn't want those 2e faggots anywhere near them. And then they have the temerity to prance over here and say "2e has always been OSR teehee"
>>94033007I guess you are right, it has been used twice. Once by a guy who is "irked" by the term tho.
>>94033060>Dragonsfoot put them in a subforum ghetto, but that was still too much for the K&KA peopleBased. There's many discussions on the AD&D subforum of DF in which people bring up 2e randomly, so I can see how it can get annoying.
>10'000 Clerics in a large fantasy realmSince that anon was using AD&D, we have to keep using AD&D to its logical conclusion: >NPC alignment10% for each of the nine, except "neutral" which is 20%. As there are "no Clerics of neutrality" (PHB), 2'000 of the initial number are not Clerics at all! Perhaps they are either Druids or Acolyte rejects.Which leaves our kingdom of 600k with 3'000 good aligned Clerics, CG, NG, LG, to do selfless miracle work.But what about the 3'000 EVIL Clerics, LE, NE, CE, intent on SPREADING diseases and suffering? Surely the authorities seek to prevent that in most cases, so let's assume their efforts neutralize the works of only about 1'000 good Clerics. >Spells per day"High level NPCs would have high stats, otherwise how could they have risen to such heights?" (DMG). Thus let's say if they are able to reach 5th level, where Cure Disease becomes a possibility in the first place, they have 17 Wisdom, thus one extra 3rd level spell per day.As the other anon assumed the 10'000 to be at least level 1 and ALIVE at the height of their carreer, let's assume only 50% of any given level or thereabouts stop levelling up completely once they reach a new level, we can do some quick maths:5'000 C1 Acolytes2'500 C2 Adepts1'250 C3 Priests625 C4 Priests312 C5 Curates, only 104 are good aligned, and only 68 being effective at curing, with 2 cures per day156 C6 Curates, 35 effective, 3 Cures78 C7 Lamas, 19 effective, 3 cures39 C8 Bishops, 9 effective, 4 cures20 C9 High Priests, 5 effective, 5 cures10 C10 High Priests, 2 effective, 5 cures+ Ten more HPs of various levels, 1 effective, 6 cures That's only an UPPER LIMIT of 375 cures each day. In a 600'000 people area that's 1:1'600. Good luck curing anything at this rate.All that is happening in a world with Undead, Demons, evil Humanoids, heckin' Dragons even, etc. Disease is the least of a fantasy realm's concern.
>>94033191Did you account for Skills and Powers? Because it's the OFFICIAL RULES, anon! I bet there's a feat or prestige class or something that lets you cast way more cures per day at level 1 or something.
>>94018820>true fidelity to the spirit of OSR requires artwork that looks like it was done by a high school student
>>94033219Yes.
>>94033208>more cures per day at level 1 or something.I must admit that the original Anon in this discussion had a blurb about Skills and Powers in his post. I should have let the matter rest by ignoring the Two-fag bait, but the rest of the thread to engage in is about this asinine >2e/my 2e-adjacent NuSR heartbreaker is totally OSR, you guiseanyway.I apologize if my mannerisms have caused you distress.I am distasteful.
>>94033272No distress, I just found it amusing. Your effortpost was a fun read, and appreciated.
>>94030235>NOoooOOO you can't have magic affect the world that's not allowed!!11this thread is full of retards who think that DnD is an analog video game
Newfag here, I'm completely lost on where to start in terms of various OSR content. I hear terms like B/X Moldvay/Cook or Holmes, OSE, ADND and wanting to know which of these is an ideal starting point, the differences between them and the pros/cons of each of them. The general thoughts of the OSR seem much more interesting than modern DnD but am a bit over my head in what exactly to look into first
>>94033191picrel>Disease is the least of a fantasy realm's concern.Isn't that where the conflict and crisis comes in?>Plot hook: there's a disease spreading like wildfire in his kingdom and the king is tasking (YOU) on how to stop it.
>>94034229>Newfag hereWelcome aboard. I got a lot out of this PDF attached when I started hanging around here with these anons.I'm an oldfag who got started in B/X M/C, but more of a nu-OSRian::cough::shadow::cough::dark::coughOrder a meal at the Inn. Enjoy your stay. You know the drill.>don't feed trolls.
>>94019521I really like DCC and enjoy running it, but it's true that it's not really OSR. Maybe in spirit? But not really, when you get down to it. And that's cool, there's no problem with that. I'd like to run B/X soon, but I've gotten my players hooked on DCC recently lol.
>>94034290Thank you anon, this pdf is perfect
>>94034229Start with B / X (Beginner / Expert Moldvay). Run Barrowmaze.Avoid reading tons of books, systems and intermixing between them.Simply play B/X for a year and then come back.
>>94034229Welcome newfag. You already got great advice here:>>94034290and here:>>94034407>Start with B / X (Beginner / Expert Moldvay). Run Barrowmaze.Or Stonehell. Or both, placing Stonehell somewhere in the Duchy of Aerik (e.g. in the mountains next to Bogtown) and allowing players to pick where to go in each session.
>encouraging people to run modules instead of making their own shit by cannibalizing premade stuffI hate how you faggots are all about consooming instead of making something on your own
>>94034407is there an actual, meaningful difference between like B/X and something like OSE? Like why would a newfag pick one over the other?
>>94034649B/X contains examples and teaching text, OSE is strictly a reference with better formatting and very little in the way of explanatory writing. Someone unfamiliar with TSR era D&D might have a more difficult time with OSE.It comes down to the choice of who you want to give your money. WotC who are actively trying to destroy tabletop gaming or Necrotic Gnome who are trying to make a buck off of legacy D&D.
>>94034649>>94034446You can for sure run OSE + Stonehll instead of Barrowmaze. >>94034940Is exactly right, you'll miss context and learning.You could learn from B/X at home and run OSE Classic with the little book they sell, I did too for a while. It's great.
>>94034940I guess the only annoying part is there doesn't seem to be a DM screen for B/X (there's a BECMI one, and then AD&D obviously) whereas OSE has one. I kinda like the presentation. I played basic in 1991 or thereabouts but quickly went back to AD&D 2e because we were like "why play basic when we're playing advanced"
>>94033066>perhaps that why I feel irked>If your someimagine not knowing how to type every time you called someone a retard in a place with archive posts
>>94034229Welcome aboard!Read and learn B/X, run OSECaptcha: markg
>>94035645I'm just noticing the typos as any asshole would, I'm so used to reading /b/tard that it took me a moment to consider that 2etard could be seen as pretty insulting in a different context like saying it to a 40 year old in the 00's.
>>94035062>I guess the only annoying part is there doesn't seem to be a DM screen for B/X whereas OSE has one.I don't understand what you are trying to say --- or rather, I think you are the one who doesn't. B/X and OSE are the same game. On OSE DM screen is a B/X screen, and vice versa.>quickly went back to AD&D 2eOh, I see what the issue is, you're from the special education class.
>>94036273I mean it was 1991, AD&D was out, why would we play "basic" when we could play "advanced"?Also, I was specifically talking about B/X not OSE, so maybe you have a reading comprehension problem/
>>94035062You can use an OSE screen to run a B/X game. I’m pretty sure the only difference on a screen would be OSE referencing ascending AC but it is side by side with descending AC so it just means ignoring a column of information, no changes required.
Imagine needing a screen to run Kiddie D&D
Imagine needing to comment on someone’s choice of on-topic game in the /osrg/ thread
>>94028611Hi PDF anon, not that guy. Why include it if the author doesn't consider it OSR?
>>94030102>20 rooms maxfuck off
>>94032186NO! jk you can do it anon. I believe in you.
>>94037284If the author doesn't consider it OSR then why did the author via his company tag it under the OSR category on drivethrurpg?
>>94032206>this place gave me more free shit back in the blahblah None of the other anons posting stop you from making content and posting it, or from playing games and doing play reports, or anything like that. Pretending a board or general is your private cool stuff factory doesn't help make more cool stuff.
>>94037329>Anon discovers that marketing isn't honestWait 'till you find out about politics
>>94032316Glog was never, not even once, on topic. Fuck off.
>>94034590Post a dungeon you made anon.
>>94034940You can just print B/X, or AD&D and put it in a 3 ring binder. You don't have to give money to much anyone except the printer if you don't want to.
>>94037329Because they're a liar. Make note of that in the pdf I suppose.
>>94037371He's not wrong that we used to be more tolerant of vaguely "related" stuff like that, but he's leaving out how discussion of their shortcomings and the persistent shitposting by various proponents of those systems who were enraged by said discussion eventually hardened opinions against them. My opinion at this point is they have nothing to offer this thread, and they should take it to another thread. Which they've done on various occasions, whereupon they proceeded to prove that they have nothing to offer to anyone, not even each other
>>94037352It has nothing to do with getting free stuff. It’s a barometer of how people are choosing to engage. I contributed my share of OC at the time. I won’t bother now because a) I see very little value in the opinion of this general in it’s current state, b) I still malinger in this general as an antidote to the shit attitude levied against noobs with genuine questions, c) there’s the occasional bit of information that pops up here regarding a product I haven’t heard of. Like Dolmenwood Uncensored, I knew someone would do it, I figured this would be the place, and I wanted to see what the result would be.
>>94037397That’s true, you can run anything off of pirated pdfs, but I figured that option is implied about everything. People that want physical copies should be aware where their money is going.
>>94037411Perhaps there should just be a monthly /foeg/ for people to get it out of their systems. I think that there are a number here who implement heretical houserules or lean ever so slightly into story-sinning, but overall keep it all firmly planted in the spirit of fantasy adventure gaming, they keep these elements behind closed doors.
>>94038003>fantasy adventure gamingSorry chud but this is /osrg/, that's /todd/ territory.
>>94038003NTA. FAG/CAG (Fantasy/Classic Adventure Gaming) are two new acronyms that the K&KAfags have recently adopted in place of "OSR", because obviously they haven't learnt the lesson of how easily a very vaguely descriptive acronym can be taken over by FOEs.
>>94038145However, unlike the trembling OSRfags who skulked behind obfuscating verbiage lest the ghost of Lorraine Williams snatch their peepees, CAGchads came out of the gate swinging with clear definitions that mention AD&D.
>>94038145OSR is even more vague though. That's why there's always people who ask if traveller or even runequest are on topic here, and why the OP got the thread definition put in it. I just said that because the LBB says fantasy adventure game, because the term rpg wasn't around then.>>94038095My appologies for rustling your jimmies
>>94037597I've heard necrotic gnome is pretty "woke" too (some crap with dolmenwood changing "minstrel" to "bard" cuz some yuppie got offended about blackface minstrel shows) but I guess they're the lesser evil overall.
>>94035062> I guess the only annoying part is there doesn't seem to be a DM screen for B/X Making your own is an excellent learning exercise
>>94038491Lesser evil than WotC certainly.I think NG’s choices about the alterations to Dolmenwood were motivated more by market viability than political action. It’s always unfortunate when someone decides to exchange artistic integrity for a grab at some cash but it’s less corrosive than rewriting history you weren’t party to and actively destroying the credibility of a venerated brand you were meant to be stewarding.For all of the things NG could be condemned for they did revitalize a broader interest in old school D&D and provided an avenue for it to be obtained outside of WotC’s official material. That’s a net positive in my book.
>>94025717>>94025736>>94025812Oh I've been interested in looking at Dolmenwood but didn't realise there was any censorship issues with it. What's the go there?
>>94039201The author changed some significant thematic elements due to patreon input, so audience capture basically. It’s self-censorship and it isn’t as impactful on the setting as some claim.Broad strokes:The goatfolk have been made less hostile and malevolent and been made into a default PC race. Medium impact, reversible by reverting to Wormskin material.The Witches are no longer sexually bound to their gods and do not groom non-witch females for similar sexual servitude. Medium impact, reversible by reverting to Wormskin material.Minstrel renamed Bard because it offended some snowflake’s sensibilities who has no context of the actual history of the word. Trivial impact, trivial to reverse. Actually the one that pissed me off the most because it is factually wrong.There’s some other minor stuff and the DW:U creator included it in his change logs.
How bad is removing Raise Dead and any other resurrection methods from a new game? I don't like the mechanics it enforces (abandon dungeon to search for cleric, having to make up a place for a cleric to be, instead of following the normal game, etc)
>>94039471Meh. Some people think it’s integral to the game and enforces downtime. I don’t use it because I encourage character stables and henchmen advancement. It sucks to lose a med-high level character but it’s rewarding to get other characters to that level.You seem to have thought out your reasoning why you don’t want it. Follow your heart.
>>94039201https://pastebin.com/Q8fE7HPH
>>94039471Did you try to use the AD&D limitations on it? Survival check, permanent irreversible Constitution loss. I find that that, coupled with high level NPC Clerics not being easily available for the service, keeps the whole thing reasonably well in check.
>>94039471>>94039772Also aging for the caster in the case of Resurrection. And arguably increased chances for Psionic encounters if you count raising as a form of curing.
To win the princess' hand in matrimony, you accepted the challenge to defeat her other suitors in one-on-one combat in the arena. Little did you know before accepting, her suitors are the King's best man-at-arms, in full harness. How does your PC fare?
>>94040126Why didn't the king use the princess to secure a political alliance? Does he not know what princesses are for?
>>94040126If it's an honorable duel, they won't be wearing armor unless you wear armor. And as the challenged party you should be able to pick the weapon used, so pick something they're not good at>>94040165Also this, but maybe it's a weird local thing or some clerical prophecy to avert the doom of the kingdom, who knows?
>>94033324>there is a cock and balls in the same picture
>>94039471Removing it is a terrible idea but its your game, you do you.With the maximum raises limited by con, components and properly restricted availability (also alignment restricted),It will be plenty rare.
>>94040126>To win the princess' hand in matrimony, you accepted the challenge to defeat her other suitors in one-on-one combat in the arena.No, I didn't, Faggot Master. Now where's the dungeon?
>>94039471Unironic FOE GYGAll that IS part of the "normal game"
>>94031452Wolves Upon the Coast
>>94040330It says "You're a real bro, you're not trying to shove your junk in my face like this annoying fag over here" It's a common sentiment on the 4chinz, where half of all posters are OPs or other assorted fags
>>94039471>How bad is removing Raise DeadI find it spiritually comforting knowing that all of the miracles performed by Our Savior are available as cleric spells.
>>94040976Nonsense. Just off the top of my head, Mark 11:12-14 and Matthew 17:24-27.
>>94041415>Mark 11:12-14>Jesus is hungry>sees a fig tree>it's the wrong season, so there are no figs>"Fuck you, fig tree!"That's not a miracle, that's just Jesus bullying a tree
>>94030924Holmes Basic is arguably an OD&D starter set, sure. I meant the LBBs specifically, though I was unclear about it.>>94031015>Moorcock's universes run on the idea that the triumphs of either end are ultimately unlivable and inhumanSure, and this is very clearly *not* the morality of the LBB Law/Chaos axis – instead, it's quite apparently the (older) Law and Chaos of Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions, where Chaos is represented by the literal Nazis and Law is humanity in general and the Paladins of Charlemagne in particular.As for AD&D, there's not much suggestion there either that a victory for Law or Chaos is an unlivable sterility; on the contrary, the outer planes, for example, imply quite the opposite. (The Lawful Good plane is an ordered, "civilized" paradise; the Chaotic Good plane is a wild and bucolic paradise – both quite anthropocentric.)Sorry for the slow reply to this. I got b& for an unrelated post.
>>94041554>where Chaos is represented by the literal NazisNot true, Holger uses them in an analogy where he describes Law vs Chaos as like a cosmic Axis vs Allies thing, but at no point are the Nazis said to actually embody Chaos.
>>94041913Hm, I could swear I remember Morgan or somebody else articulating that the Nazis are part of a push by Chaos to conquer the other Earth. It's been a while though, I have to make speace in my stack to reread it, I guess.
why should I do 3mi hexes over 6mi hexes?
>>94042020So when your players are near the edge of a hex, you have to describe what's in that current hex, and the next one over, and the ones past that because the horizon's 3.5 miles away at sea level. Oh and if they're up really high, it could be a lot more
>>94042020If you are playing an all hobbit campaign, they can see to the hex edge in any direction provided they are standing in the middle.
>>94042091
>>94041497>That's not a miracle, that's just Jesus bullying a treeWhen you or I bully a tree, it's bullying a tree. But when Jesus does it, it's a miracle. It gets expanded on in Matthew 21:18-22>Now in the morning as he returned into the city, he hungered. And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.>And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, How soon is the fig tree withered away!>Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.Look, a lot of stuff happens in the bible, and not all of it makes sense, but this is a canonical miracle and Clerics, as far as I know, can't do it. Let alone the tax-paying fish miracle.
>>94042119Ah, you didn't cite that part, just Jesus saying "fuck off and die, tree!" and then that was that.
>>94042080Cant I just tell them the apparent hex terrain based on edge, with normal visibility?
>>94041913>>94042012"The same fight was being waged, here the Nazis and there the Middle World; but in both places, Chaos against Law, something old and wild and blind at war with man and the works of man"Pretty blatantly calling Nazis chaotic here.
>>94034229right here.
>>94042462Yeah, that sounds about right. Thanks for the quote, Anon!
>>94021724Holy shit, what a stupid quibble this is, even dumber than the tarding about terminology. The whole reason this subject even came up is that Gygax was using the class in Greyhawk folio material and then it was included in the PHB, what more do you need to call it official? Imbecilic.
>>94042567>what a stupid quibble this isAnd you felt the burning desire to add your own stupid opinion onto the pile, huh?The argument was over the usage of "base class" for a class that was not part of the core rules, because that guy was using charop-land's definition in here, where people expect the older definition. Also Doug Schwegman's OD&D Bard is not Gary Gygax's AD&D Bard, and there is no mention of a Bard in the Greyhawk supplement for OD&D, so it's not even a supplemental class in OD&D. Gary's Bard is official, Doug's is not.
>>94042666>I am simply going to continue to be dumb for no reason because I am embittered by my own stupidityAlright, Satan, but you might want to compare Schwegman's Bard to the PHB Bard. They're quite similar, cleaned up wording and the addition of the qualifying process aside.>there is no mention of a Bard in the Greyhawk supplement for OD&D, so it's not even a supplemental class in OD&D.This is pure nonsense. You're saying material in The Strategic Review isn't supplemental material for OD&D? What's it supplemental material for then, the Koran?Staggering how a person can be this dumb and wilfully ignorant. That's why I weighed in on this and my mind continues to be blown by your angry, retarded seething.
>>94042691Strategic Review articles sent in by fans are not official supplements. Keep hurfing and durfing if you like, but it's not going to make it a base class.
>>94042728You're not even talking to the same anon, you idiot. I'm not interested in any wack semantic disputes, just calling you a mong.
>>94042728kwab
>>94042728We've thoroughly established he's a stupid embittered troll. You can stop replying now.
>>94027625>1.approx 1 person in 10 can achieve levels in a class (skills and powers book)1 in 100 for the real game, even 3rd edition (forgive me for mentioning it) brought it back to 1 in 100, proof that 2e had a bad idea
>>94041415But what about> Mark 11:12-14Slay Living (the reverse of Raise Dead)> Matthew 17:24-27Gate in an angel to plant the stater: "When casting the spell, the cleric must name the demon, devil, demi-god, god, or similar being he or she desires to make use of the gate and come to the cleric's aid."
>>94037299>20 rooms max>fuck offFor your first session of running a dungeon, then you make more after.Count the number of locations your players visit during play.
>>94039772I tried, but i find the solution worse than the problem. The survival check is OK but the aging for the caster makes it hard to justify in game that a caster want to raise them (and in the end is just putting a "bag of 1d4 resurrections" for the players.... until the altruistic caster dies). Interrupting the game until they find said cleric is still there. Maybe if the Raise Dead caster is a PC it can work, but until level 10 the gameplay is hampered by that resurrection race and im fucking tired of it. And if they want to disdain the dungeon to search for a cleric in the outmost end of the map I cannot really denying them that.
>>94040126depends on the level of the best man at arms
>>94043971>but the aging for the caster makes it hard to justify in game that a caster want to raise them Exactly, they need to earn it by helping the faction.
>>94042119>>94041497>even The Christ gets hangryThis is comforting
Reading through the AD&D 1e books.. man I get Gygax was a visionary but stuff in Unearthed Arcana is a real WTF was this guy smoking kind of moment. No wonder most people don't consider UA to be good. Yikes.
>>94043285Wait, so Jesus used miracle to get Gate to get an Angel to have some money...?What the fuck?
>>94037597Is printing it off not a physical copy? You can have the thing you want, without giving money to people you don't want to. Its not hard. If you want it to be a fancy consumer bookshelf product you're more interested in the appearance and social posturing of the purchase than playing the game.
New thread>>94045397>>94045397
