I never really liked race-as-class.
Hell, I don't even like "class" as class. Class should be called profession or job.

>>97969969
is there a meaningful difference?
or is it just flavor?
which system specifically did you have in mind?

>>97969988
In terms of terminology. What components that make up a character can theoretically be chopped up and labeled in lots of different ways, but it's the whole calling what's a job or profession a "class" that feels weird.

Sure, if you look at some medieval hierarchies, soldiers and priests existed in different "classes", but aside from that it's actually pretty weird that "class" has become the standard name for classes.

>>97970014
aye
but by now that's just part of D&D and RPG heritage that can probably get traces to tt wargaming

>>97969950
Race as class. Limited classes.
OSR is about keeping things simple. Over-complicating things and trying to treat it like do-everything games is how you lose the old school flavor.

>>97970027
OD&D was originally advertised as a game where you could do everything.

>Fishfag creating a new hijack thread and samefagging furiously to make it look like it has activity.

>>97970014
Also note that before we got ad&d calling class a profession didn't make any sense
Specifically because of race as class

>>97969950
>pre-WotC D&D
You're confused: "AD&D" 2e is not OSR.

>don't want to see a thread
>hide thread
simple as
And you can have the hugbox you always wanted in osrg

>>97970061
>Also note that before we got ad&d calling class a profession didn't make any sense
Including race in class makes even less sense. Or, at least, it should.

I think that we ended up getting "class" because of naval terminology rather than societal terminology. There's a lot of wargame stuff that carried on inside of D&D long after it stopped being a wargame.

>>97970027
I recently tried running BFRPG that does race and class out of the box for a table of complete newbies and I was surprised how much it complicated chargen for them compared to just picking a class
I would never belive it haven't I witnessed it

>>97970078
Or you could just kill yourself, fishfag

>>97970091
I would politely but strongly disagree
It makes perfect sense considering the landscape of table top hobby art the time
You have different types of units with different capabilities, only natural to use the word class, in fact so natural I started typing "different classes of units" and had to correct myself to boot make it sound funny

>>97970020
>just part of D&D and RPG heritage that can probably get traces to tt wargaming
Every time I watch Monty Python and the Holy Grail, I can't help but think that the introduction of Tim the Enchanter was lampooning how Chaimail had basically taken "Artillery" and just renamed it "Magic-Users."
https://youtu.be/WObQK2vunAk?si=HJThapzGkpq-sEuf
Sure, the MP crew probably had never heard of Chainmail and D&D had only come out the year before the film, but I can't help thinking what I can't help thinking.

>>97970152
Hey if it works don't break it, right?

File: od&dfighter.jpg (35 KB, 287x390)

35 KB JPG

>>97970150
Class usually refers to distinctions made vertically rather than horizontally; ie. Upper/Lower classes, Older/Newer classes, First Class, etc.
Having "levels" be called classes actually makes more sense, and even the level titles reflect that.

>>97970014
Retard. Try playing games.

>>97970296
I play lots of games, but based on your posting style I'm betting your the person who doesn't.
Do you care to show us an example character sheet that you have used, to authenticate to us that you have ever played?
I will post mine in good faith after yours

>>97969969
They probably avoided calling it a job cause it would suck to go from a 9-5 and then play as another job.

File: ff5_jobs_guide_best_jobs_(...).jpg (190 KB, 803x570)

190 KB JPG

>>97970313
>meanwhile in japan, players can't get enough jobs and even want second jobs

>>97970122
Player decision paralysis is the primary reason why I got into Basic. Everything moves just so much faster when the players are not overthinking everything.

>>97969950
I want them separate. Race as class is a deal breaker for me. It's too limiting.

>>97970447
another thing (at least in how BFRPG does it) is that races carried over their bonuses but get class abilities on top of that.
like halflings get a hide ability just as they do in B/X but now can also be a MU or a fighter?
wtf goonerman?

>>97970122
I think it's because it limited Thier options in a bad way for them. It narrowed down the options too much.

>>97970511
Something has to make up for everyone thinking you have a midget/foot fetish.

On the use of lass, I honestly like the term archetype over profession or career

>>97970515
do you mean which races allow for each classes?
maybe it did

>>97970711
For many folks who grew up post Harry Potter, world of warcraft and other magical media, they don't view fantasy the way those of us who grew up with more sword and sorcery media did.

You didn't give them "an elf" you gave them an elf that wasn't able to be anything but a strictly defined straight jacket.

Everyone now days who had ever played any video game or know of them knows "pick race then pick class". And race as class confuses that known pop cultural rule. And the. They are like "why can't I be an elf warrior, or ranger" or what have you

If you want simple, you can just limit race and class. It cuts down on the choices but doesn't limit you as badly

How many fake pseudo-hijack OSR threads will fishfag spam in a desperate attempt to get around the facts that /osrg despises him and his constant attempts to rally a personal army to storm the gates and get people forcibly talking about 2nd ed have miserably failed? The world wonders.

I kinda wish those guys trying to build up that weird antagonism between OSR and modern games would stop.

>>97970947
All the stupid conflicts people try to oonjure up are so tiresome.
Edition wars are dumb. System warfare is stupid. The endless drawing lines and redrawing lines and making inaccurate generalizations just to fuel arguments, it's those sort of cycles that ruin communities and leaves only the worst people in them.

File: file.png (1.57 MB, 825x1165)

1.57 MB PNG

>>97969950
>race as class or race and class?
Based question!!

I think race-and-class, one of many brilliant innovations in ACKS II by Alexander Macris, is objectively the best option.

My favourite race-and-class is probably the Dwarven Craftpriest from ACKS II. What's yours, y'all?

>>97971041
ACKS isn't OSR. It's got feats for fuck's sake.

>>97971064
>ACKS isn't OSR.
First time I hear this. Why?

>It's got feats for fuck's sake.
Odd thing to say. No, it doesn't have feats.

>>97971064
Arguing about whether it's OSR or not is pointless, it's a shit game with shitty shills pretending to be its fans. They poison every place they're not banned from.

It'd be nice if there was a containment thread for them, but they seem to take a certain glee in showing up wherever they're least wanted. Which is basically everywhere.

File: file.png (1.14 MB, 1280x720)

1.14 MB PNG

>>97970987
>Edition wars are dumb. System warfare is stupid. The endless drawing lines and redrawing lines and making inaccurate generalizations just to fuel arguments, it's those sort of cycles that ruin communities and leaves only the worst people in them.
Thirteen minutes later:
>>97971064
Ironic.

(Sorry for the double post, I linked the wrong post.)

>>97971092
No edition wars, please. If you don't like a game, you can just ignore it. No need to create a flamewar around it.

>>97971092
>it's a shit game
You don't have to like it, but I do. I think it's pretty good.

>>97971076
>First time I hear this. Why?
Because it's basically anti-OSR, an overcomplicated game that isn't even trying to go for an old school style and instead is merely built off of B/X because the designer is a lazy hack who only knows how to endlessly add stuff onto a per-existing system (and ruin it in the process).

When Matthew Finch tried to figure out what the "pillars" of OSR are, the very first one he stressed was:
>1. Rulings from the gamemaster are more important than rule books.
ACKS is the exact opposite of that. It has rules just for the sake of having rules, making it a very clumsy game that takes ages to resolve anything.

It's also all about making and selling splat books, including something like three dozen classes and several times that in feats.

>>97971103
It's not a game though, just a grift. And it's okay to hate grifts.

Here is an interesting question, why do so many OSR folks dislike things like skills? My character is a INT 17 wizard, who is like 40 years old and studied in higher learning institutions, read deep in history and arcane lore. He is gonna know stuff, I the post won't.

>>97971144
I'm sorry, but your arguments don't make much sense.

>an overcomplicated game
Not sure what you think is "overcomplicated" about it. It's much less complicated than AD&D.

>isn't even trying to go for an old school style and instead is merely built off of B/X
You're saying B/X isn't OSR? That's also a very strange thing to say.

>the designer is a lazy hack
So what? He could be a child rapist, that doesn't make his game not OSR.

>When Matthew Finch tried to figure out what the "pillars" of OSR are
Finch is not infallible, and I don't think anybody gets to define what the pillars of OSR are.

>It has rules just for the sake of having rules
Sounds like you have a hate boner for ACKS. All of its rules are functional to its style of gameplay. There's no useless rules that I can think of in it.

>It's also all about making and selling splat books
Odd to thing to say in this thread: AD&D 2e has literally ten times as many splatbooks as ACKS II does.

>>97971151
Still no point in arguing about it. The shills are gonna shill regardless of what anyone says, so just ignore them.
It's not like anyone could look at the rules and not immediately say "what kind of super-autistic shit is this" after all.
These shills managed to get themselves banned from Reddit. Do you even understand how bad of a shill you need to be to be banned for it on Reddit?

>>97969950
>race as class or race and class?
Maybe it's because I started with WorC, but I never liked Race as Class.

>>97971174
I started at 2e and hate it as well

>>97971151
That's not an argument. The game is good.

If that's all you have, it just means that just have some kind of personal issue with the author.

>>97971173
Fair.

Fuck, look at him keep going, trying to lure people into an argument with him. What a shit.

>>97971173
>just ignore them.
Wiser words have never been said. If you don't like a game, just ignore it. You should take your own advice, though. Instead, you're making personal attacks against an Anon for making ONE post about it. You don't sound exactly good faith.

>>97971191
>trying to lure people into an argument with him
What? You're the one who's been trying to transform my simple post about race-as-class, that answered the TQ, into a flamewar.
>>97971092
>>97971144
>>97971173
You're a hypocrite.

>>97971173
NTA but they think getting banned from reddit and RPGnet as a badge of honor for some reason. It is in fact, best to just ignore them.

>>97971162
I like skills. In concept.

Don't like how 3rd edition did them (way too many, way too specific, way too imbalanced, not enough skill points for everyone), really hated how 4e built up the whole skill challenges idea (felt really forced and inorganic), and I have a lot of beef with 5e's skills (mostly because they had a relatively good idea in the playtest materials but it's now really devolved into characters having a +10 to skill rolls at 3rd level and other dumb stuff), but the general concept isn't bad.

>>97971162
>why do so many OSR folks dislike things like skills
I have no idea. Both OD&D, AD&D, B/X, and BECMI all already had skills implicitly in the system, as was shown in LotFP, that made them explicit. This is even before the introduction of non-weapon proficiencies in Oriental Adventures (I think it was the first D&D book with proficiencies).

I suspect it's just an excuse that the troll is using to flamebait.

>>97971219
>they think getting banned from reddit and RPGnet as a badge of honor
It kinda is, though. And I don't even like ACKS.

>>97971226
Yeah, I can understand mechanical gripes, those are fair. Many seem opposed to the very idea though.

On wotc play tests, They have this thing for having fun and often interesting concepts and mechanics then in the official release it's been made the most bland and uninteresting version of it they could manage

>>97971226
There's lots of OSR games that do skills right in one way or another: LotFP, OSE/Dolmenwood, ACKS, *WN... the list goes on. Even the 1e DMG had them implicitly with the random "backgrounds".

>>97971237
It's really not. Going to a shitty club is embarrassing enough, being too lame even for them is worse.
If a group was pre-emptively banned from Reddit, maybe you could argue that, but a group desperate to be there and banned for being too gay even for those faggots is nothing to take pride in.

>>97971162
If I were to steelman the argument it'd be something like "Skill should come from the player and their choices on how to interact with the world, your wizard might know the history of the world but he'd still need to refresh his memory by going to a library or the like on more eclectic details."

Personally I don't buy it, but I see the concern it comes from which is later editions and their "I roll for my character to not forget to breath" type skill lists and buildshenannigans.

ACKS-style 'Flat skills' works far as I'm concerned. Deep enough for a character to have some distinction ("I know religions.", "I know how to shoe a horse.", "I give the nastiest head!", ect) without being caught in the buildfagging trap.

>>97971232
I also have no ideas. In cane into gaming with other systems, that had skills. Then started d&d with 2e, which had a skill system itself.

I just don't get the opposition to the concept. But is very much a thing.

I really find it funny how lonely the /osrg/ trolls are that they have to show up here.

>>97971253
I think 2e style broad skills also work. Or broad skills as a whole. Games with a shooting or firearms skill don't need a pistols, long arm or heavy weapon skill for example.

>>97971253
>ACKS-style 'Flat skills' works far as I'm concerned.
Agree. They're also very well balanced, there's no game-breaking skill. And they work very well with NPC "specialists" to flesh out e.g. what an Alchemist or Sage can do, exactly.

They also serve additional purposes: It's a way to have ACKS have the equivalent of AD&D 2e weapon specialisation and specialist mages, but much better balanced.

>>97971263
I just hope they tire themselves out soon. It's unlikely though, because we are talking about the same guys that managed to get themselves banned from Reddit because of how annoying and obnoxious they are.

>>97971252
You're making that into a much bigger deal than it actually is, Anon. Anyway, like several other Anons have said, you can just ignore ACKS. No need to shit up the thread about it.

>>97971282
Please stop. Talk about games, not about reddit.

>>97971269
>Games with a shooting or firearms skill don't need a pistols, long arm or heavy weapon skill for example.
You can have both. ACKS, for example, gives some classes a list of specific weapons (for example, the Mage can use the dagger, staff, darts, and something else I can't remember), while most classes get classes of weapons: "Crusaders" (Clerics) get all blunt weapons.

>>97971269
Agreed. 2e gets a bit lost in the woods due to the number of splatbooks (And don't @ me about how Chaos Shaping, Cobbling and Local Dwarf History are all essential skills that absolutely need to be a possible pick that are 100% going to get as much use as Signalling, Swimming and Haggling, if you do you're a lying slut and I won't respect you), but they're a fundamentally decent idea.
Maybe some system will one day do a sort of "Major, Minor, Insignificant" skill system, but I've not seen anything like that yet.
I imagine a certain poster is going to get his entire asshole prolapsed out by the Lovecraftian horror of someone saying something nice about both ACKS & 2e.

>>97971282
They're adding posts to the post count, at the very least.

It's really pretty obvious what's going on, because they do this every single time. Whenever someone else makes a thread about OSR that they feel threatened by, they jump over to it and try flooding it with some flavor of shitpost (in today's case shill posts) so that they can simultaneously drive people away and also claim that the only activity in the thread had been their shitposting.

I guess we just sort of have to endure it. Maybe tap posts like these >>97971173 so that the trolls don't imagine anyone is fooled by what they're doing.

>Y-you're all just trolling and baiting, we didn't du nuffin', ree-
Meanwhile in the OP
>Isn't there an OSR thread already?
>No, current regulars of /osrg/ have made it clear they only want to see a specific subset of OSR games in the thread.
>This means the name /osrg/ is somewhat misleading but that's their problem
Don't talk shit if you can't take the hit.

>>97971311
What's ironic is that ACKS has taken a bunch of excellent ideas from AD&D 2e and improved upon them. Weapon proficiencies, specialist mages, weapon proficiencies, and so on.

It's more in the style of AD&D 2e than B/X ar AD&D 1e in many ways. It's really sus for someone to (say that they) love 2e but hate ACKS.

Whoo, instant mask-off.

>>97971311
>"Major, Minor, Insignificant" skill system
That's what 3e did with feats vs proficiencies, and that's a pretty much guaranteed way to have the system be broken and full of build traps. It's much safer and easier to use just one system that encompasses all of those. ACKS, for example, has one system for what 3e would consider feats, proficiencies, and class powers.

>>97971330
You're the one shitting up the thread while we're talking about games here. You're a hypocrite.

File: Spoiler Image (678 KB, 250x272)

678 KB GIF

>Instant mask-off
You mean in the OP? I agree.

>>97971041
>proficiency throws
huh?
what is that 5e or something?

>>97969950
>>race as class or race and class?
Really depends. Simple game? Race as class. More involved game? Race and class.

>>97971390
>what is that 5e or something?
Why? AD&D 1e and 2e both have proficiency throws.

>>97971299
ACKs is a no go for me, but at lest they tried some stuff. Rather it worked or not is debatable

>>97971311
The players option books were also hit and miss, the core skills and power book was a mess but had some interesting ideas. The combat and tactics and spells and magic had some good stuff in them.

>>97971282
Oh no they got banned from reddit? Wow this really ruins their reputation for me, I could never trust anybody that gets banned from that website!

Shut the fuck up already you pathetic loser

>>97971390
No, 5e has proficiency bonus, but not proficiency rolls. That or 1e/2e

>>97971219
Because it most definitely is. Why are you even here bothering us if you want to deepthroat the people on those websites instead?

>>97971330
The thing I'm endlessly amazed by is just how... posionous they are. They're even willing to try and use "game discussion" as a form of poison, just by doing it in absolute bad faith.
There's literally nothing they can't ruin.

>>97971353
Shocked by how quick that was.

>>97971414
NTA and off topic so my only post on this, but is why someone gets banned that is important. They did this to themselvesm

>>97971347
>The argument has now become:
"Actually ACKSis based on 2E, so you can't hate 2E if you like ACKS!

What a desperately pathetic moron you are. At least you moved on from calling the game a flat Earth movement.

>>97971414
>>97971423
>>97971424
>>97971429
Stop shitting up the thread and talk about games. You can talk about ACKS and you can ignore ACKS, but please don't talk about people who talk about people who talk about people who talk about ACKS.

>>97971429
Obviously if you get it to themselves, you don't get banned from a website for not posting there you fucking retard.

And I don't care why they got banned from RPG net or why they got banned from reddit, those places are for scumbags like you, and since you care about their reputation so much, you should just go there instead.

>>97971451
>Actually ACKSis based on 2E
That's not what I said. It's not based on 2e, it's obviously based on B/X, but it did take a bunch of ideas from 2e that are not in B/X. Which is why I talked about "style".

Again: Specialist mages, weapon specialisation, weapon proficiencies. Outside of the core books it even has cantrips and orisons. That's all stuff that is directly from the core rules of 2e.

Prove me wrong.

File: 1289081168918.jpg (25 KB, 320x240)

25 KB JPG

>They're so bad faith, they're-
>Having normal, thread relevant discussions
>...just to fuck with me!

>>97971467
It's true that I am powerless, and it's also true that I don't like your behaviour. You're not doing anything you should be proud of, though. If you don't like this thread you can just go away.

>>97971454
ACKS isn't a game though. It's a shitpost spammed by trolls who need something that resembles a game to shitpost with.
It's kinda like the /tg/ equivalent of Kid Rock. No one actually likes Kid Rock, they just like that other people don't like him.

>>97971219
ACKS or Macris himself weren't banned on reddit though, that's just lies
certain rpg-subreddits banned ACKS

>>97971490
>It's a shitpost spammed by trolls who need something that resembles a game to shitpost with.
You're such a hypocrite. Talk about games.

>>97971490
It's technically still a game.
If they want to discuss it, let them. People kind of need to see how these guys shill, because it becomes that much funnier and actually look at the game and see how bad it is. The more they praise it, the more they reveal what kind of hopeless liars they are.

>>97971512
Talk about games instead of shitting up the thread, hypocrite.

>>97971489
I don't care about the thread, I don't like you in particular. I'm going to keep coming into these threads and shitting on the floor until you decide that you are done on this website
>>97971475
I'm not doing anything to encourage your delusions you stupid fuck

>>97971400
>>97971419
huh, the more you learn
I know those have weapon proficiency, but rolls/throws
can you point me to the exact pages/sections? ctrl-f did nothing for me

>>97971522
Hey buddy, do you really need to go everywhere people are going to actively avoid you? If you want to cockchug ACKS, do it in your containment thread.

>>97971489
You're learning why /osrg/ is so hostile towards this particular fuckhead in real time anon.
You're always welcome to come talk about OSR games over there with us if you like, instead of in the retarded gorilla pen that is this thread.

>>97971490
You sound like you're mad and making up a bunch of bullshit.
How in the world is a fully released and actively played rpg, not a game?

Here's the part where you cry about how you don't like it so much that it doesn't work, or the creator is so evil, or something like that?

>>97971537
>I don't care about the thread
Then just go away instead of shitting it up, please.

(taps sign)
>>97971330
>>97971173

Thieves or no? Personally I think it's way too big of a table/complicated of progression for OSR, and prefer to just let any character do thief skills within the fiction.

File: respect.jpg (129 KB, 1200x825)

129 KB JPG

>>97971537
>I'm going to keep coming into these threads and shitting on the floor
I didn't know you were a fan of OSR playstyle Ms. Herd
Respect

>>97971562
I like em. I actually think they're the class that benefits most from kits, because they have a lot of stuff to play around with.

>>97971539
>I know those have weapon proficiency, but rolls/throws
In both 1e and 2e they're roll under ability score on a d20, with a bonus of +1 for each time you take the same proficiency. They might not be CALLED that, but it's what they are effectively.

>>97971330
>we

>>97971567
Didn't Ms. Turd shit on the bed?

>>97971554
We have already established that getting banned from Reddit is a good thing, if you disagree then you are a bigger loser than we expected

(taps sign)
>>97971252

>>97971542
NTA or troll but this isn't true. You can only talk about a very small set of OSR stuff

>>97971571
>I'm personally here to make you miserable.
heh, at least you're honest, unlike the troll who acts like he cares about this thread and has been shitting it up with tens of off-topic posts about what happens on reddit and rpg.net.

I respect that, I think we could come to some kind of truce eventually, since you're being sincere.

>>97971539
I'll pull out my books later if I can. I may have the 2e PDFs as well. I don't have 1e however, I think I have some of the clones though

>>97971562
If you are using classes I think a thief/ rogue makes sense.

>>97971574
I think kits could really benefit from a modern rewrite. I have seen it done once but can't recall what the PDF was called

>>97971631
>I don't have 1e however
You're telling us you're literally too stupid to figure out how to download pdfs?

>>97971580
>>97971539
>>97971631
DSG page 23 is in picrel. The term is "proficiency check". The ACKS mechanics is different and the name is different, but the basic concept is there. I think pretty much everyone agrees that roll under ability score makes ability scores too strong important, so I think it was a right decision of later editions as well as ACKS to make it less dependent on those.

File: file.png (812 KB, 729x941)

812 KB PNG

>>97971660
Forgot to attach the image, sorry.

>>97971646
Kits were always such a letdown, because they had so much unrealized potential. I really wish the game had embraced them as more of a core concept, and not just something tagged on.

>>97971651
No troll, I am telling you I have no desire to download 1e crap. I find it worse than 2e, so Other than looking though it years ago and maybe having a clone for curiosities sake, I don't have it nor want it.

at this point i think we let the alt osr threads die to see what the osrg thread looks like after that happens.

>>97971674
They clearly grew into PFs archetypes and 5e's subclasses. I agree they were often meh or too weak but damned they were such a good idea

>>97971646
>>97971674
ACKS II has kits, it has rebranded them as "Templates". They're well balanced, flavourful, neither too strong nor too weak, and can easily be imported into AD&D 2e.

>>97971574
>>97971639
I think in my head, in B/X style dungeon crawling games everyone is at least kind of a thief. Do you mod anything about the tables or checks?

>>97971684
It will look the same as many of these threads have topics osrg hates, but they troll these threads anyhow. Sure there is the ACKs shrill and at lest one more who fucks with them, but they have gotten to the point every who disagrees with this is "fishfag"

File: file.png (1.03 MB, 1272x854)

1.03 MB PNG

>>97971694
>ACKS II has kits
Here's the Fighter ones

>>97971694
fucking lol.
>They're well balanced, flavourful, neither too strong nor too weak

See boys and girls? If you're enough of a piece of shit inside, even saying nice things about games will make you sound like a piece of shit.

>>97971695
I don't like BX, it's a bit too simple and has race as class which is an auto no for me. Honestly I can see everyone being a bit of a thief. Really the classes should all be reworked as I don't see why we must stick with those.

>>97971708
>They're well balanced, flavourful, neither too strong nor too weak
AYRT. What's wrong about that claim, exactly?

>>97971694
Templates are more collections of proficiencies, IIRC kits were basically sub-classes that changed how a class works, more benefit/drawback type deal similar to PF archetypes?

>>97971685
They first were spun into prestige classes, which was an interesting idea even if it was a horrible execution.
5e's subclasses was probably a better way of handling it, though I kind of preferred the way kits were a lot less dramatic. 5e really just has too much going on with everything, with each subclasss having ten abilities and additional spells and all that other nonsense.

>>97971722
Bear in mind that ACKS proficiencies are a little bit more powerful than 2e proficiencies. They're more powerful than the typical 2e proficiency and less powerful than the typical 3e/pf feat. So all in all the selection of a template is comparable to many kits.

If you want to make more profound changes than that, you can use the rules for custom classes instead. Those allow you to make arbitrarily large changes.

>>97971722
The ACKShill just wanted to bring up ACKS.

>>97971738
He's contributing to the thread with on-topic discussion, you're the one who's flooding it.

File: tap the sign.jpg (120 KB, 500x740)

120 KB JPG

>>97971330
here you go anon
use it wisely

>>97971738
>Everyone who likes something I don't is a shill.

>>97971749
Ironic, coming from the one who's flooding the thread.

>>97971746
No, you see, this general that's not a general created by fishfag who definitely isn't real is a hijack thread but not a hijack thread, and you're supposed to talk about any games here unlike the nasty-wasty /osrg but don't mention ACKS. It's all very straightforward.

>>97971749
Talk about games, hypocrite.

>>97971746
The things you do in bad faith are, frankly, disgusting.
Even game discussion isn't sacred.

>>97971729
Yeah PRCs were an interesting concept that just failed at being worth it. I fell like PF1e archetypes were closer, they swapped class abilities for new abilities and did a lot of reflavoring.

5es subclasses builds in gaps in classes to fill with those subclass abilities. To executions for the same kinda idea.

All I've got to say lads is you're all welcome to come talk about ACKS over in /osrg/ and leave the whining bitch on his lonesome in his containment thread.
Usually when he has a tantrum thread like this he'll spend days bumping it with inane, 1 life Q&A talking to himself.
Things are more lively over in the real thread.

File: artworks-000323322220-o2q(...).jpg (44 KB, 500x500)

44 KB JPG

>>97971064
OP here
Personally I consider it to be a modern generic fantasy system like many others, vagabond, draw steel, forbidden lands or whatever
but at the very least it is OSR-adjacent simply by the virtue of having base mechanics based on B/X
so it gets a pass

>>97971764
You think the guy who created this thread is also the one who's shitting it up by shouting at everybody who mentions ACKS?

I guess it's possible, but it's weird.

File: pepe_silvia_conspiracy_il(...).jpg (58 KB, 1024x415)

58 KB JPG

>>97971784
Every fucking one is to same guy to them. They have this crazy conspiracy and no amount of reason or logic will get past it

>>97971784
>Weird
The one thing you need to understand about the person we're talking about is that they've got borderline terminal levels of autism.
It doesn't have to make sense because they're not all there mentally.

>>97971764
>but don't mention ACKS
wtf are you talking about?
OSR-adjacent games are literally mentioned in the OP
at this point I'm almost certain that is some sort of false flag

>>97971783
>OP here
>ACKS gets a pass
Thanks, Anon.

>>97971792
I don't know. I think I'll believe the Anon who says he created the thread and ACKS is on topic. >>97971783
I guess the one who's shouting at everybody who mentions ACKS is another guy.

>>97971797
>at this point I'm almost certain that is some sort of false flag
Could be an honest misunderstanding. Let's not escalate this further and talk about games.

>>97971746
He's shilling a pretty bad game in a very untruthful, one-sided, and biased fashion that at best can be described as unsolicited advertising. Just about every positive thing said about ACKS in this thread so far has been pretty much a blatant lie, and that's ignoring that it's all coming from a small group of dedicated trolls who've come here to just flood the thread.

The problem is, of course, explaining about how bad ACKS is takes time and effort, and involved getting bombarded by the ACKS shills trying to deny and argue about every single point raised against the game.

It's basically become just a sort of endurance match, and the problem is that most people have lives and other things they care about, while the ACKS shills have more than proven that they can shill and brigade enough that even Reddit, a place where shills are a dime a dozen, said "Jesus Christ, fuck these guys, let's make them 4chan's problem from now on."

>>97971826
>He's shilling a pretty bad game
If you want to try to sound like an adult and sane person instead of as an unhinged child, you should try saying "he's talking about a game I don't like" instead and move on. It's not that hard, Anon. Just try to be reasonable and respectful.

>>97971826
unlike the osrg, in this thread it is expected that you can show the absolute minimal internet etiquette literacy
#1 being there are people that like shit you don't like
so if ACKS triggers you so hard you can always hide the posts and discuss the game you personally like

>>97971826
>He's shilling a pretty bad game
You've said it 30+ times already in this same thread. We've understood your point of view, why do you keep repeating it? You sound unhinged.

>>97971850
Boy, if you think he sounds unhinged now? Check the archives for the phrase "Ackshill"
240 posts. 18 months. And counting

>>97971856
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/ackshill/
jesus fitzgerald christ, you were not lying

>>97971843
>>97971846
If it were an ordinary bad game with ordinary fans, that'd be fine. Even fans with an ordinary level of blindness to their game's faults would be great.

But, we're not talking about ordinary shitposters. We're talking about pretty fervent trolls, who only know how to do anything in bad faith. If you're wondering why this thread is getting so many more posts compared to the /osrg/, it's because these trolls live and exist on spite, spreading misinformation, and trolling, and all while saying "No, look, we're the ones being good boys!"

>>97971870
Fun fact, the very first thread he tried that shit in is the one where he earned his nickname.
Autism is a hella a drug.

>>97971872
OK, so let me get this straight
your strategy of dealing with fervent trolls is to bite and feed as hard as you can?
maybe that's surface level of me but it doesn't sound like a good idea

>>97971872
>Every mention of a game I don't like is part of a trolling conspiracy.
Again, you're making yourself sound unhinged. Take a deep breath, count to ten, drink a glass of water.

>If you're wondering why this thread is getting so many more posts compared to the /osrg/, it's because these trolls live and exist on spite, spreading misinformation, and trolling, and all while saying "No, look, we're the ones being good boys!"
Funny thing to say, given how half of the posts in this thread seem to be yours.

>>97971883
You're right. I think there's enough "We know what you're doing, let's see if you'll keep doing it" posts already.

>>97971870
Oh and of course if you sort by oldest you can see he's been using the same arguments for 18 months.
If you're feeling particularly bold, bet you a beer you can't find a single thread in that 18 months where ACKS has been mentioned that he hasn't turned up in to throw a tantrum.
Like I said, there's a reason /osrg/ keeps telling this guy to fuck off.

>>97971890
Yeah, well, let's see if we have better luck than you guys. Thanks for the heads up, though.

>>97971826
>The problem is, of course, explaining about how bad ACKS is takes time and effort,
Not really. "It's an insanely bloated game for dickless accountants who've forgotten how to have fun," is ACKS in a nutshell.

>>97971890
while that is all true it's also true that a while ago ACKS got recommended in pretty much every thread asking for recs regardless of relevancy outperforming gurps
which is naturally annoying as hell
I recon some did this for comedic effect (guilty as charged)
but it was also pretty obvious that there were genuine posters, which could be also pinpointed by a strong reaction of calling them ACKShill, done both as a form of farming replies and out of genuine annoyance

>>97971889
don't make me tap the sign

>>97971897
>let's see if we have better luck than you guys.
I mean we've managed to get him to the point where he's out in the wilderness, creating threads like this about what a bunch of meanie poopie heads we are (Not saying he made this one since someone who wasn't him claimed to have made it)
Do wish you didn't include the "Isn't there an osrg thread already" part in the OP since it's a bit unfair on us, the /todd/ one works pretty well.
But I'm not going to shit up your thread over it. Hope you have a good one lads.

>>97971905
That's like saying "The Hindenburg had a rough landing." Technically true, but doesn't really capture the scope of what went wrong with it.

>>97970947
It's weird because it's understandable, whole movement kicked off because we looked at 3.0, saw little of the game we wanred to play and returned to tradition. The hobby in general could do with less arguing and edition warring though.

>>97971245
They don't even take the simplest step of making the cool neat stuff into Optional Rules and drop them somewhere in the DMG.

>>97971918
I've been playing it for almost a year. It's a pretty good system, no idea why you're so negative about it.

>>97971883
Strategy?
The fuck are you on about?
We're dealing with psycho trolls.
This kind of troll.
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/97969950/#q97971571
There's no strategy that works against that. That's not a normal poster.

>>97971955
nta
but I think it really looses any OSR feel of adventurers going into unexplored places
it takes a simple base and inflates it with unnecessary and alien to the underling core bloat
at this point you should have just made a system from scratch, not just staple new and new subsystems on top
it doesn't help that the layout is garbage and books suffer from a strict editor who would cut down with a firm hand all the needless verbosity

Alexander macris must be truly based to create a system that generates this much tranny seethe

>>97971986
>looses
You mean, loses, ESL
>any OSR feel of adventurers going into unexplored places
That sounds like a personal skill issue
>it takes a simple base and inflates it with unnecessary and alien to the underling core bloat
What is this ESL babble? Are you complaining that the game is too big for you to handle?

I've been playing it for about 3 years never had any issues

>>97971976
OK
why feed him?

>>97971976
Fuck, that was in this thread. That exact guy might still be here.

>>97970947
I needs to go further, they're nearing burnout on it and they'll move onto next thing, leaving people who actually play games to discuss that. its been building up for years.

>>97971952
I know! It's just hammered into all the neat shit has been made as bland as possible.

>>97971997
You might notice that guy is responding to someone saying "Please don't talk about ACKS being banned on reddit, it's irrelevant to the thread"
Now, which of these groups is more likely to tell someone requesting that to kill themselves
>The diehard fans
>The diehard haters
He's projecting bro. He made that post and now he's claiming the other side did because he's a shitbag.

>>97971997
>might
Bet you $1000 he's here and will remain here.

>>97971219
>It is in fact, best to just ignore them.
You are very very bad at this part. Like
>make half a dozen troll threads about it
bad.

File: 1746573413939958.png (63 KB, 706x674)

63 KB PNG

>>97971994
>ESL
Yes, so?
an american discovers EFL make up less than 5% of world population
>Are you complaining that the game is too big for you to handle?
I already said what I wanted to and the game in question isn't particularly interesting to me so that's all you are getting

File: file.png (31 KB, 1206x153)

31 KB PNG

>>97971986
> I think it really looses any OSR feel of adventurers going into unexplored places
What? We're going to unexplored places all the time. Why do you say that?

>it takes a simple base and inflates it with unnecessary and alien to the underling core bloat
It's true that it's crunchier than B/X. I strongly disagree that it's necessary or "bloat".

>at this point you should have just made a system from scratch, not just staple new and new subsystems on top
I don't understand this criticism either. I like that the base is B/X.

>>97971976
>We're dealing with psycho trolls.
>This kind of troll.
I'm one of the Anons who's talking about ACKS. That post was made in reply to me. Proof in picrel.

And yet you keep shouting at me and you keep insulting me and calling me "ackshill".

You're just as bad as that Anon, you're shitting up this thread, and you're a hypocrite.

>>97972004
You're really unhinged.

>>97972041
nou

>>97972041
It's very funny given the only person to ever post an actual full on play report in any of these threads is the person he hates the most.
He's like Lex Luthor ranting about how he could do so many great things if Superman wasn't around.
Except he's not doing those things and is instead spending all his time ranting about Superman.

>>97972026
You're one of the trolls that is following everyone who is trying to avoid you. I don't think anyone really cares how you managed to fuck up coordinating your shitposts, the key thing is you (or one of you) let himself be a little too honest. It really could only have been one of the /osrg/ trolls, because they're the only one's following anyone.

You have a whole thread where you can post your shit in peace. Why are you even here, if it's not that you're lonely because no one real is visiting your thread anymore?

>>97972026
>Why do you say that?
well the entire selling point of the system is that you grow out of going into unexplored places and start doing management sim shit, isn't it?
then there are rules, bloated with all this extra shiiieeeet, like several dozens classes, "proficiency throws", feats, it just loses all the snap-piness of old-school D&D
then there is the general "feel", some anon above confused a page from ACKS book as 5e, and you know what? it looks like 5e
or any other generic fantasy game
absolutely soulless and lacking character

I only skimmed through a pirated pfd and listened to some people who played it
but what I'm seeing, it's just not what I'm looking for

>>97972099
>start doing management sim shit, isn't it?
nta but being able to lead armies is what lets you explore even more unexplored places, like the wilderness.
The classes are all optional and the non-core ones are setting specific, which is what I like about it actually, personally at least.

It lets you basically create your own custom OSR settings rather than relying on what's already been written. If I want to run, I don't know, OSR arabian nights then most games would just be 'Repain the classes, make sure genies are 100% likely to show up, move on'.
ACKS lets me build from the ground up, I can do shit like craft custom classes (I'd want at least a 3 way split on fighter between Dervish, Horse Rider & Footman since Dervishes and Horse Riders are two culturally distinct groups for the setting, as different mechanically as fighter and thief), custom races (People from the city of brass maybe) and so on.
You might think that'd lose the snappiness but I think it helps cater the mechanics to the world setting.
Still, if it's not your jam, it's not your jam.

>>97972099
Look, you don't have to like it, but your criticism betrays the fact that you're not really familiar with it.

>the entire selling point of the system is that you grow out of going into unexplored places and start doing management sim shit, isn't it?
Not at all. It has extensive rules for exploration, both on land and on the high seas. Domain stuff is optional and up to the players. The rules are there, but you don't have to use them.

>then there are rules, bloated with all this extra shiiieeeet
Let's see...

>like several dozens classes
All the classes but six are optional.

The vast majority of race-classes are in a 1:1 correspondence to specific race+class combinations from AD&D 1e/2e. So there's effectively fewer race/class options than in AD&D 1e/2e.

>"proficiency throws",
D&D
AD&D 1e/2e have them too. So do BECMI and the Rules Cyclopedia.

>feats
There's no feats in ACKS.

>some anon above confused a page from ACKS book as 5e
Not really an argument.


>absolutely soulless and lacking character
>I only skimmed through
Yeah, sounds like it.

But in addition to being unfamiliar with ACKS, you also sound like you have a distorted view of old school D&D that doesn't take into account of how 1e, 2e, BECMI, and RC worked.

>>97972098
Look, I don't know if your conspiracy of shitposters exists. Perhaps it does, but I'm not part of it, and in any case you're a hypocrite because you've been shitting up the thread non-stop since it started.

Please talk about games.

>>97972181
That's the secret anon.
He's not being a hypocrite, he's here to shit up the thread. Raving about how Bill the King sent his ACKS posters to fry his brain with airlooms is how he does it.

>>97972022
Ew, actually esl? Disgusting. Please go back to a website built for your third world hell hole

>>97972168
why

do

you

type

like

that

???

you have greentext every two lines
that's enough to break down the text

>>97972208
>Please go back to a website built for your third world hell hole
Where do you think you are?

>>97972099
>you grow out of going into unexplored places
No? You still go adventuring, domains just to give you stuff to do when you aren't
>Several dozens classes
It has less options than core ADND, bozo
At this point I can't believe a thing you say and I'm just going to assume you are trolling

>>97972211
It's called formatting, retard, and it's only difficult for people who have poor reading comprehension and analytical skills

>>97972181
>I'm not part of it

You do understand there's no reason to believe anything you say, right?
You're part of a group of pretty consistent and dedicated frauds and liars, and are even right in the middle of being a fraud and liar. Also, more than one person has been calling you out, so you can quit it with that bit of attempted gaslighting as well.

Go fuck off back to the containment thread you've already killed. Or, if you're just an innocent guy looking for wholesome discussion about his favorite game, fuck off back to the containment thread you killed, you terrible liar.

>>97972236
well it's difficult for you to get it right so I guess you are correct

File: file.png (521 KB, 900x600)

521 KB PNG

>>97972269

>>97972269
ACKS won

>>97971162
I hate thief skills.

They're awful.

>>97972349
A solid half of the groups I've played with had no idea how thieves worked or house-ruled the shit out of them. If I hear one more "fix" for them, I'm GONNA FREAK.

>>97972395
All thieves get a free trained animal sidekick that can speak thieves cant
It gives their thieves skills a 15" reach, but is also required to act as lighthearted comic relief on occasion.

>>97971660
>>97971671
genuine thanks anon, however is DSG OSR? it's 1986
just joking

>>97972349
That's fair, I have played a lot of D&D over the years and I think moving them to just general skills was the right call.

>>97971245
I'd really love for them to publish some of the information they gathered during their playtests. D&D should be like government agencies, where after a certain period of time they have to make certain previously confidential material available to the public.

I just want to know what people were actually telling them and how much they listened to those people. Also, if they still have the old TSR files, I'd love to see what Gygax was coming up with while he was working on his version of the Manual of the Planes. I don't think it would have been all the great, but it definitely would have changed every edition that followed it considerably if it had ever been finished/published.

>>97972269
Ironic.

>>97972470
They throw away so damned many good ideas. I fought there is anything left from early TSR days. I recall Lisa Stevens from Paizo talking about the sphere mess TSR records were. If they didn't track finances well, there is no hope they kept other stuff.

>>97972449
I don't agree
I mean if we are talking generic systems, sure go ahead, and that's the approach they were going for it would seem
>play anything with best role playing game in the world (tm)
But it sucks ass as a generic game, and I'd rather play a game that knows what's it doing, e.g. old school d&d
And for old school d&d thief is an important role

>>97972521
>"remember everyone, STRICT RECORDS must be kept."
>"you mean for our company finances?"
>"lol no, for your imaginary gold and torches, silly."

>>97972644
I just think the thief can be batter done. Hell unless your high level your gonna suck at most of those "theif skills' by the rules anyhow

>>97972708
Yeah, from the things she said it was a mess that she got stuck digging though to see how the fuck they went bankrupt

>>97972521
The TSR-era wasn't even (archeologically speaking) all that long ago, and the really unfortunate thing is that each year that passes, it's gonna be exponentially more difficult to get a clear and objective view of how these games were made. Especially with many of the early designers dead or dying.

>>97972731
>how the fuck they went bankrupt
I think Gygax buying a Los Angeles mansion using company funds might have been related.

>>97972767
Yeah, I am glad I got to speak to some of them on Dragonfoot chat years ago. The truth is, most of that era was like the wild West, most of them didn't know shit about publishing and business and they kinda stumbled though it.

If the shape of the finical records are anything to go on, I bet they just tossed shit.

>>97972773
It was mismanaged for a long time, but he was gone long before it went under.

>>97969950
>>97971330
This is just yet another fake /osrg/ hijack attempt. Mods, please delete this thread.

>>97972773
The amount of embezzling and criminal mismanagement was probably comical; cartoon villain levels of greed.
I'm still amazed TSR managed to sink itself. They had a product that printed money with no meaningful competition in its primary market.

>>97973018
That's the issue, they were they own competition. They produced at least 2 competing games, and at least 11 competing settings.

It's why Wotc and Paizo only support one fantasy ruleset at a time and few settings.

>>97972415
Oh Anon; that poor thing is going to die, so much.

>>97969969
Profession doesn't really work imo because a fighter could be town guard, state's expeditionary army, militia, mercenary, self-employed adventurer, or a bandit--but thieves could easily be bandits too, and wizards could engage in some banditry. There's a distinction there between what a character does for a job and the mechanisms they can use to do them. Class in regards to people does mean social stratum and academic unit but it at least carries the meaning of a group of things sharing a number of common characteristics in a way that profession doesn't so easily allow.

>>97973891
Archetype could work, some games go that route with naming

>>97973093
I've heard this explanation before, including directly from WotC designers working at the time who had access to sales data, and while I believed it for many years, I've actually become a lot more skeptical about that contributing all that much to TSR's fall.

They weren't going crazy with the smaller lines, and while many books sold well under projections, that's a fairly ordinary business gamble for a publisher and would still have positive knock-on effects by being able to expand both the catalog and the audience. They were relatively small gambles, and even though many of these were terrible gambles even without hindsight, the more popular settings should have been more than able to keep the ship afloat.

The expensive gambles were board games, card games, dice games, comic lines, and similar products, and the different setting lines weren't really involved in these aside from the most popular ones. And, these seemed to uniformly sell poorly. TSR had never managed to establish itself outside of RPGs (and DL/FR novels), despite endless efforts, and these projects drained TSR's cash severely while they relied on the RPG sales to finance everything amidst some really shady credit practices. And, when they couldn't print RPGs because they couldn't pay their printers, TSR died.

It's much less a story of "we cannibalized our own RPG audience" and more "We wasted so much money on expensive side projects that never developed into anything (and no one gives a fuck about Buck Rogers)."

>>97973891
"Profession" getting muddled up with mundane jobs is a good point, but at the same time there's been plenty of mundane jobs turned into clases. Hell, a Priest is just a straight up job. Thief is kind of one...

>>97973891
Compromise: All Adventurers are technically Bandits.

File: Hyperborea.jpg (990 KB, 1814x2274)

990 KB JPG

Been running this for a month now. My Players love it.
They had only played 5e, FFG Star Wars and Shadowdark. Glad to run a game I actually like.

>>97971162
PCs lived rough on their wilderness treks, fire building was something you assumed PCs could do. With NWP in OA it was make a check and take 30 minutes if you had flint, steel and tinder. It was a barbarian skill meaning most Oriental characters couldn't take it. No mention of what you did if you didn't have fire building NWP. It was changed in WSG so that a PC with the NWP didn't need those things but could start a fire without them. You might assume that your PC could start a fire if you had those even if you didn't have the fire-building NWP.

I had a quick glance through a few books just in case I missed it but if it's in there I again didn't find where it answered the basic question of what if you didn't have a NWP. Does every NPC farmer have the agriculture NWP? How many times did a farmer take it? Probably not important for most games but it spends about one paragraph on success and failure mostly distributed between a carpenter making a house and a farmer farming so it looks like the writers thought farming was important as an example. If you're going to spend a NWP slot on animal husbandry you better be mating animals left, right and centre better than Joe Bloggs down the street who's just trying to get his hand in for the first time.

tl;dr
It hugely limited the skills your PC had, made you check to do things that your PC could just do before, and didn't explain what to do if you didn't have the NWP.

>>97971232
>the introduction of non-weapon proficiencies in Oriental Adventures
It was. OA gave every proficiency its own independent chance of success. This was changed in DSG and WSG so that instead of a common base chance for everyone, NWP success depended on ability score.

An overlooked rule in DSG is that NPCs who make a living by using their NWP can advance in levels, 1 xp per 2 gp earned. It is theoretically possible to meet a 20th level gem cutter with 20d4 hp because it doesn't set a limit for NPC hit dice, just says 1d4 per level.

>>97974096
I'm in support of that so long as it doesn't interfere in any way with their murderhoboing.

>>97974203
Never read it anon
Tell me what's cool about it

>>97974203
Seconding >>97974648, I'm only interested in games with cool cover art.

File: osric3.png (56 KB, 1407x894)

56 KB PNG

Do sub-page tables overflowing to next page give you the ick?
I definitely got the ick from picrel

>>97974648
>>97974663
I really, really like the setting. I always preferred the Pulpy, weird, rough around the edges sort of Dungeons and Dragons, than the more modern heavily epic/high fantasy influenced thing that's often marketed. Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea (Just Hyperborea for short) fits strongly in the weird pulpy camp. The world is very much in the vein of Robert E Howard, Fritz Leiber, Jack Vance, and Edgar Rice burroughs. It's got lost continents,savage worriors, evil magic, eldritch cults, ancient ruins or forgotten civilizations. There's a real exotic element to the types of adventures you can do with the setting. My Players are more used to stanard fantasy settings, so it's made the game feel a lot more mysterious I'd say.
As far as gameplay and mechanics, It's very much in the vein of AD&D. That's my favorite edition of the game (both first and second) so I took to the system naturally. I always really like the classes, there's like 27 of them, some really uniques. The game doesn't have demihuman races (some of my players were disappointing by that) but the potential backgrounds and classes makes up for it. You call play as a Pictish Runegraver, or a Atlantean priest, or a Cimmerian cataphract.

>>97974894
ah, so the game comes with a setting?
does it have hexmaps, random encounter tables of great substance and things alike?

>>97974203
>hyperborea just means far north

>jungles and loincloths

>>97973973
It still make sense to me, sure the other bad calls didn't help. But look at it like this, they always ordered the same size print runs for an x sized product. Ravenloft books got the same run size as a FR book on its 3rd reprint. And look how many boxed sets they did, there are reasons no one does those any more. Many where sold as a lose.

Think of it, they had 11 product lines and in the end didn't have D&D players. They had FR players and DS players and Ravenloft players and those guys didn't buy books of settings they didn't play.

It was a lot of bad calls, but the money out was really too much for the return and it wasn't the one off things doing the constant monthly drains

>>97974203
I like what I have seen of the system. It's 2e based from what I can tell, but redesigned. Hell it may take ideas from multiple systems. I find the classes and world interesting

>>97974231
Eh we did that anyhow in 2e. We assumed you could do stuff that you would need to do like fire, but those guys with the NWP were like real outdoors men who knew all the tricks

>>97975754
Ravenloft was actually decently-sized in the 90s. While not comparable to FR which was the leader by far, it had its following and more importantly was still worth gambling on because it was trying to position itself as competition for VtM and to otherwise capitalize on the 90's vampire and goth crazes. The big misstep was thinking players wanted to kill vampires and not be them/have sex with them.

>>97975785
Yeah, I am just using RL as an example. But man they had 11 active settings. All churning out the same sized print runs and many books per year. That was the lessons Wotc, hasbro and Paizo took away from it. And it reflects in how they moved forward for near 30 years.

They still take chances on the oddball stuff. But they have a core of solid products that are not fighting each other for an audience

>>97973973
This and they were competing against emerging markets of electronic entertainment

>>97975799
The print run sizes were ironically not begin enough, since some couldn't even recoup the design costs. They really needed to focus on expanding their audience to make their lesser settings worth the cost of development, and they instead were trying to expand into different markets with products no one had any reason to have faith in.

I still don't think it was necessarily a bad strategy to throw multiple settings at the wall and see what stuck, it's just that the "what stuck" phase didn't really get a chance because TSR ruined its own finances with cash-hungry experiments, and went bankrupt before they could cull the weaker settings, which in hindsight they probably should have done much earlier.

If WotC had paid proper attention to how TSR fell, they wouldn't have had that whole thing where they kept trying to make Magic into a Planeswalker-focused IP (where the planes were to be less important than the core cast that visited them), with several failed board games, war games, phone games, cancelled show ideas, and a flood of other products outside their proven money maker [legalized gambling for children]). Now, they've gone the other route entirely with a focus on just printing cards for settings with established fan bases, even if they don't control those IPs.

WotC following a "multiple setting adverse" strategy with 5e is currently leaving money on the table, with many popular 5e kickstarters and DM'sGuild products as evidence of that, with millions of dollars going into 3rd party campaign settings.

>>97975771
ACKS has solved this problem by having an Adventuring proficiency that covers all the basics (essentially what everyone in B/X can do by default), and then other proficiencies allow you to specialise in individual activities. I think it's pretty elegant.

>>97974231
>Does every NPC farmer have the agriculture NWP
ACKS has a list of professions, from farmer to sage and alchemist, and for each profession a list of proficiencies, usually four. So yes, all farmers would have "labour (farming)".

File: Screenshot_20260501-18074(...).jpg (238 KB, 835x371)

238 KB JPG

>>97976177

>97976122
>97976177
Stick to shilling in the /osrg/. No one is going to fall for your shit anywhere else.

>>97976199
From how he talks about his game, I don't know if he's even capable of not sounding like a gay shill.

>>97976199
I'm not "shilling" anything, just talking about a game that I like. Also, you need two ">" signs to quote a post correctly. Welcome to 4chan.

>Thread full of low IQ morons that refuse to read the DMG, but think they are high minded enough to alter the game without ruining it.

>>97976218
He's definitely trolling, probably because he noticed how there's too much discussion going on in this thread that isn't about how much of a bunch of retarded faggots the trolls that hijacked the /osrg/ are.

>>97976199
>>97976218
Please stop shitting up the thread and talk about games.

>>97976252
Shut the fuck up. Want to "solve" our problem? Stay in the thread you killed instead of coming to the threads made by people who just want to avoid you.

>>97976199
>>97976218
>>97976236
The only one trolling and flooding the thread is (You). Anon made a completely on-topic and acceptable post. Please stop.

>>97976270
I don't take orders from you. Report my posts if they offend you.

>97976252
>97976273
You don't belong here. Did you notice how instantly you were recognized, even as you now try to pull a "no i'm the one who belongs in a thread made just to avoid me" bullshit?
Stay in your containment thread, and leave the rest alone.

>>97976177
>>97976193
Do you use this for PC backgrounds as well?

>>97976122
>ACKS ... Adventuring proficiency that covers all the basics
>what everyone in B/X can do by default
Just how it should be in a game about adventuring through wilderness and dungeons
The more I hear about ACKs the more I see it is a genetic medieval fantasy rpg and not an OSR game

>>97976295
The /osrg/ is dead though. Please, please you gotta let us take refuge here, there's no where else we can advertise anymore.

>>97976307
Not by default. Classed characters are assumed to be "professional" adventurers, so they get Adventuring like mentioned in >>97976122, one Class-specific proficiency (E.g. all thieves get streetwise), and two more proficiencies that the player can select or roll for. These last two proficiencies effectively make up the equivalent of an AD&D 2e kit.

However, if you hire an ex-farmer as e.g. a porter and he later levels up and gets a Thief level, he will retain his four proficiencies and only get Adventuring and Streetwise. Not the extra two.

>>97976309
>genetic medieval fantasy rpg and not an OSR game
What's a genetic game and how is it different from an OSR game?

>>97976309
>"Well the game codifies what PCs can and can't do rather than falling into the expert's curse trap."
>"That's a problem."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSeAbS_E1wk

>>97976363
So ex-farmers get more proficiencies than professional adventurers?

>>97976329
>let us take refuge here
>by generating the same thread-killing chatter we flooded the /osrg/ to death with

How the fuck can losers talk so much about a game and never manage to say anything interesting is beyond me.

>>97976382
They do, but those two extra proficiencies "use up" two extra proficiency slots that PCs usually fill up with focused training in downtime. So it balances out.

>>97976122
I frankly don't care what ACks does or does not do. It's not a game I have any interest in at all. I would appreciate it but ya stopped recommending it to me.

>>97976382
Adventuring is basically a freebie for anyone with PC levels. It's the "You're not a turnip farming yokel who cums, shits and farts at the same time when he sees a HD1-1 Goblin" ability

In other news
>/osrg/ is deaaaaaaaad
Given how long you've been bitching about it, /osrg/ should be hitting enough undead HD to qualify as a lich by this point.

>>97976403
Considering you'd rather troll/shill here than post there, even you agree it's dead.

>>97976309
NTA and zi think ACKs is trash, but it is an OSR game. Just not a good one

>>97976414
It's a BrOSR game.

For some reason, BrOSR make a special exception for it and include it in the games they play/recommend/blatantly shill.
https://jeffro.wordpress.com/2015/12/09/why-acks-is-one-of-the-best-rpgs-on-the-market/
https://bdubsanddragons.blogspot.com/2021/11/bdubs-essential-guide-to-patron-play.html?m=1

Since the /osrg/ has become the de facto containment thread for the BrOSR on this board, it probably should be kept there along with the rest of the BrOSR ideology.

>>97976403
>It's the "You're not a turnip farming yokel who cums, shits and farts at the same time when he sees a HD1-1 Goblin" ability
kek
It's also the ability that lets you look for secret doors and not get lost in the wilderness. Until he gets a class level, the hired farmer NPC would not be able to search for secret doors, and would easily get lost in the wilderness. Makes sense for somebody who never left his farm in his life.

>>97976436
>https://jeffro.wordpress.com/2015/12/09/why-acks-is-one-of-the-best-rpgs-on-the-market/
Jesus christ this guy sounds like the biggest fag ever.

>>97976414
Fair opinion. It's not for everyone, it's crunchier than many want.

>>97976436
Just because the BrOSR like a game, doesn't make it an BrOSR game. By that logic, AD&D is a BrOSR game too.

>>97976436
>BrOSR make a special exception for it
Who the fuck cares.

>>97976478
>>97976485
The BrOSR ideology is all about being a funless shitbag who tries to proselytize a form of playing games that's closer to a tax audit than an adventure. And that's ACKS to a T, hence why you're here shilling and shilling hard.

>>97976485
He does, very much so. He's obsessed with the BrOSR and their subhuman ways.
Everything in that faggots life is guided, defined even, by the moral compass of "Am I owning the chuds?"
Don't believe me? Think it sounds crazy?
Look at how absolutely bootybothered he is because people are having a normal, casual conversation about something he considers to be branded with the Mark of Caine.

>>97976501
>mask off
Go back to your /osrg/ thread you think is not dead.

>>97976500
Define "shilling". I'm just talking about a game that I like.

>>97976500
>The BrOSR ideology is all about being a funless shitbag
Who the fuck cares?

>everything I don't like is shilling
Very convincing argument.

>>97976501
>Don't believe me?
I just don't really care what his reasons to shit up the thread are.

>>97976478
AD&D is not a BROSR game, but playing AD&D in a weird way that over-emphasizes bookkeeping and a weird pseudo-historical interpretation of the rules is definitely BROSR.

The motto of the BROSR is "we're here to play games, not to have fun." It's less about enjoying the game as a genuinely entertaining experience, and more of playing the game so you can tell other people that they way you play is the proper and correct way to play.

>>97976461
It's both too crunchy on things I don't care about and not enough on things I do. Also any game with race as class is an auto no from me.

File: file.png (638 KB, 768x894)

638 KB PNG

>>97976559

>>97976560
>ACKS is not crunchy enough on things I care about
Well, that has to be a first! For example?

>>97976560
I actually like really crunchy games, and that's why I think it's trash. It's got really bad crunch.

>>97976604
What kind of crunch do you like, and how is it different from the ACKS one?

>>97976615
Jesus christ you're desperate.
Has the dead /osrg/ really made you THIS lonely?

>>97976625
Ah, so you were making shit up. Naive of me to assume you were posting in good faith.

>good faith
lol, this fucking troll has absolutely no shame.
Go back to the /osrg/ you dumb loser.

>>97976642
I'm just going to say he's right about one thing.
You can talk about ACKS without dealing with this retard chewing dogshit loud as he can to try and drown out the conversation over in /osrg/

>>97976673
Whatever gets you /osrg/ trolls out and staying out, great.
If shitting on a shit game spares us your presence, then that's no skin off anyone's back.
So, commit to your "I just want to talk about my favorite game like a good boy!" bit and go talk about it in the thread you killed.

>>97976673
I appreciate the invitation, but since we're discussing the similarities and differences between how ACKS and AD&D 2e handle proficiencies, I don't think it would be appreciated or appropriate.

Also, to be completely honest, I like AD&D 2e, so I don't particularly feel like yours is the thread for me, most of the time.

>>97976414
>>97976367
nah.. it's a generic medieval fantasy game
it is clearly aiming to do everything and it clearly isn't focused around the core OSR gameloops of exploring dangerous environments
the example above speaks volumes

>completely honest
Yo this guy went from zero shame to negative shame.

>>97976602
Couldn't tell you off hand,its been a decade or more. As I said race as class is an auto no for me.