Welcome to Open OSR. This thread is for open OSR discussions of TSR-era D&D, retroclones, neoclones and broader OSR-adjacent and retro games.Discussions about what "OSR" means are unwelcome. Discussion of if 2e is OSR is also unwelcome and off-topic .You can talk about all OSR and OSR-Adjacent games without distinction here, so it doesn't matter.There is a general for those who want to talk about games strictly inspired by first decade D&D. If that is your preference, you can find that here: >>98372743Please do not engage with trolls.Previous thread >>98291369Thread Question:>> What was the last OSR product you read or ran?
No need for this thread. An Open OSR thread is arleady up.>>98378113This is a thread made just to confuse people, by the same guy who also makes the /osrg/ that the Open OSR threads are made to avoid. He got caught by forgetting to delete the (you) in the link back to the /osrg/ when he made one of these extra threads.There is literally nothing this guy won't stoop to.
>>98390769You seriously need to spam the board by posting a third fucking thread on the catalog? "It's not a general!", he cries,"It's not an osrg protest thread!"FUCK OFF FISHFAG
>>98390828Fuck off, fishfag. Quit posting these threads.
>>98390828No, that is a hijack thread from the anti osrg guy. Notice he used a different OP>>98390909Not everyone is one guy>>98390913Once more, not everyone is one guy.The other thread isn't an Open OSR thread. That is likely the core guy you call fishfag. Notice he used his standard "the osrg is evil " OP and not the boiler plate Open OSR OP
>>98390909>>98390913This thread was made by one of the /osrg/ trolls. Probably you, considering you want to blame it on your imaginary fishfag.You were already previously caught making both the /osrg/ and one of these threads with revised text, and considering you never learn, it's reasonable to presume you just did it again in an effort to split the thread or otherwise troll the board.https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/98227168/#98229136
>>98390909>>98390913/osrg/ anon here and the OP of this thread is right. Say what you will about him (and I can think of a few things), he's not Fishfag. >>98390828 and >>98378113 are Fishfag, this is just some hapless retard who somehow bought into the idea that 2e is OSR. So, still retarded, but he doesn't stink of fish, and the other thread is the aggressively trollish one.
>>98390939Once more no, I made this thread and made the original OPen OSR. The other thread is the hijack
>>98390939>your imaginary fishfagKekkkkkk and yet earlier today you were claiming that AzteCKS was Fishfag in the other thread and got BTFO for it
>>98390958>>98390961You're completely shameless.
>>98390967The 2bd is me, not the 1st. Once more, not everyone is one guy
>>98390967AYRT (1st post only) and not talking to you, Fishfag. I'm replying to my brothers from /osrg/, who are rightly frustrated by your tard antics. For your part, kill yourself.
I have the theory that the creation of millions of different OSR generals in this site and the forced toxicity are just a corpo move to confuse and disorganize the OSR community.Like, I bet it's probably a hasbro move to kill OSR at its core. I have no other explanation for this level of schizophrenia.
>>98392647That is a bit nuts. I started the Open OSR threads as I could not talk OSR in the osrg. The other guy had his own threads before he stole the Open OSR name and his whole deal is a forever war with the osrg.I just wanted to talk OSR stuff man, That's it. The others are because two groups are forever at war.
>>98392647>Like, I bet it's probably a hasbro move to kill OSR at its core.Its so much less interesting than that. Its internal /pol/ bullshit in an indi rpg scene filled with insane backbiters and assholes. Here https://archive.is/0Nv3cIts one of these folks or their proxy. They're legit mentally ill and ideologically motivated.
>>98390769I ran a few sessions of Knave a few months ago (life caught up and prevented me from continuing), and it was really enjoyable. I ran a couple of smaller dungeons, like the Tomb of the Serpent Kings mentioned in the /osrg/ starter dungeons. It is admittedly a very simple system, that the author outright states was aimed at being easy to get into for children, but I think after spending so many years with D&D, it was a major breath of fresh air.It was a lot of fun, and when I'm able to continue playing, I hope to add a few more players, run a few more smaller dungeons before dropping some hints about some megadungeons. I found Stonehell on this board a couple days ago, and it's incredible.
>>98393186Glad you had fun with it. I find it a bit too light, but it's good to try new things. I know Mausritter came out of that system and it seems like it would be fun to run kids though.
>>98393186I was interested in Knave because of how simply and focused it is. But is it compatible with classic D&D modules? Like it uses the same AC, hit dice and damage?
>>98393336You mean like OD&D and AD&D? No, I don't think it's directly compatible. I have yet to read through the original D&D stuff but don't they use things like THACO and suchlike?Here's a screenshot of the "quick reference" pages included at the start of the sourcebook.
>>98393351Based way of handling knowledge
>>98390769I just read some of ACKS "Before All Others" I hadn't had a chance to check out. I been liking it and can't wait for the full book to come out.
>>98392690>I started the Open OSR threads as I could not talk OSR in the osrgThis is pure nonsense. You can talk OSR in the /osrg/. That is its entire purpose.On the other hand. you clearly can't talk OSR in these threads. Just look at them.
>>98393186>I ran TOTSK with Knavekek, meming hard
>>98390932>"the osrg is evil " OP moar like osrgtards are retarded OPand that was the original OSR thread OP text before you tried hijacking the idea of a separate OSR thread pic very related, earliest OSR thread OP vs "Open OSR todd 2.0" derailing attempt appearing half a month later
Is it difficult to make a custom race in ACKS II? I read the JJ rules but they seem complicated with XP calculations. Because I don't really like race as a class yhat much they're all just going to be classes with "Elf" rank 0 and max level 13 or whatever. ACKS looks great but I hate how hard it pushes for its gay auran empire setting, so I must make my own custom elves and dwarves.
>>98393577I don’t know what to tell you anon. I ran the tomb of the serpent kings for a couple of friends, using Knave. They found a spellbook of Pacify in the tomb and used it to befriend the basilisk, before looting the rest of the tomb.No meme, it was a fun afternoon. I don’t even understand what you are implying really, is it really so hard to believe? Why is it so unbelieveable that some people actually engage with the hobby?
>>98393672Not particularly, but it approaches building custom classes the same way it does everything. If the JJ rules seem obtuse, check out the ACKS catgirl 3rd party supplement that was posted a while ago. He walks through how and why he built the classes as he did, and the example might prove useful to your understanding. He also gives examples of racial templates to add varying levels of catgirliness to characters.
Is 4e OSR? If not, why?
>the /osrg/ guys posting in this threadThey really just always make the same exact type of meaningless chatter posts whenever they're not spamming shitposts.They are so souless.
>>983942004e can be run in an OSR way, but it is not inherently OSR. Given how combats are staged at per encounter and per day rates, combat positions require a baseline number of PCs filling slots, and that gold nor Training give XP, the inherent fundamentals are different. That being said, I'd rather enjoy a West Marches approach to 4e, but it would take considerably more effort on the part of the DM. It's doable, and I'd love to try someday. But posts for the sake of engagement-bait demean everyone's dignity.
>>98393351NTA but that stuff is just basic attack bonus.which I am unsure if knave has
>>98393644 Those are different threads, but thank you for confirming he hijacked the name
>>98394242You know it's the osrg trolls when they talk of the troll game or ask something really disingenuous
>>983942004e is the most anti-OSR D&D version imo, because1. The mechanics of character abilities don't make sense in the game world, or from the perspective of the characters (why can the fighter take less damage from an attack exactly twice per day?). This makes it difficult to get immersed as a player or make rulings as a DM. It's clearly designed to be used out of the box without the DM modifying stuff.2. The focus is about tactics (specifically combat tactics) and not strategy. The carefully planned set-piece encounters preclude resource management and differing approaches to encounters (not only entering combat in a more advantageous way, but avoiding it altogether or fleeing when it goes wrong).Also the specific differences >>98395312 mentions. So yeah, 4e is about as far as OSR as you can get in D&D. Even 5e is closer.>>98394200You know who else is posting something meaningless that has nothing to do with games or OSR? You. If you see someone who's probably a troll, you can respond to them seriously on the off-chance they aren't or that seeing the response could be interesting to someone (like I did), or report them, or ignore them. Doing anything else fills the thread with useless noise.
>>98395419>2. The focus is about tactics (specifically combat tactics) and not strategy.Might be worth pointing out that tactics are present in both play styles but 4e's tactics are largely based on character combat abilities where as earlier tactics are more about marching order, movement speeds, how to retreat and inventory use. There's strategy to both as well, its just measuring different resources with very different gameplay loops and goals.
>>98395363>the troll gameLMAO imagine being so salty about ACK S that you can't even use the name
>>98395363It's really funny what this thread looks like when you have the "ac*s" and "f*shfag" auto-hide filters on.
>>98395419>4e is the most anti-OSR D&D version imoSometimes people forget that the OSR started the same year 4e was released. I'm not saying that's the only reason, since it was also the year Gygax died, but the movement was definitely bolstered by how much of a departure 4e was.
>>98395706Thus proving that the OSR is about all pre-4e editions!
>>98395695It is, the trolls won't stop trolling but blocking those two things helps a lot
>>98395706It was mostly due to some odd timing and things just aligning. Eariler or later and you may have gotten very different results. Somethings just land at just the right time.
>>98395455I was using tactics in the broad sense of moment-to-moment decisions. But yes, if we mean combat tactics that are in some way based on reality, there's plenty of that in OSR combat.I disagree that 4e features the same amount of long-term strategy though. The only resources you have in it that go longer than a battle are daily powers and heals.
>>98397793>I was using tactics in the broad sense of moment-to-moment decisions.Deciding if you're going to no-knock and fireball a room or spike the door and gtfo is a moment to moment decision. Only played 4E once, didn't really like it. It appeared to have HP, activities per day, encounter, GP and build based character progression that are all resource management from a strategic side. Its for a gameplay set up and goal I don't like and the amount of fucking about is significant for minimal payoff as far as I can tell but its got strategy to it.
I never played 4ecmyself I went Pathfinder before I ended up going back to 2e, but 4e is set up very video game like, it's more like a tactical wargame than an RPG from my read of it
>>98393501When's it due out?
>>98393672Difficult, no. Complicated, yes.
>>98401757September, I think. Rules are being revised, final book edits, that sort of thing. Previews out for backers right now.
