Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to first-decade, Gygaxian D&D, its faithful modern clones, and content created for use with them. Later editions (2e and newer) should be discussed elsewhere.Broadly, OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons played as intended by its creators from 1974 to 1983 — less emphasis on linear adventures and overarching metaplots 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. We also have two excellent beginner guides created by Anons with feedback from the thread that you can check for help:>n00b DM's Guidehttps://pastebin.com/EVvt6P0B>n00b Player's Handbookhttps://pastebin.com/XALkXkV0[NOTE: The link in this paste is currently not working; check the DM's Guide above for links to both guides]>Troves, Resources, Blogs, etc:http://pastebin.com/9fzM6128>Need a starter dungeon? Here's a curated collection:https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/94994969/#95006768>Previous thread:>>98372743>Thread Question:What are some clever tactical map choices your players have made?
>>98435873Haven't made one of these in a while. This stopped at some point, no idea why. Want to contribute to the thread but don't know where to start? Roll 1d8 (dice+1d8 in the "options" field) on the table below!Our OC gets archived at osrgcontent.blogspot.comTag your post with [OC] to help archive anon find it, please.>1. Make a spell>2. Make a monster>3. Make a dungeon setpiece>4. Make a wilderness setpiece>5. Make a magic item>6. Make a race-as-class>7. Make a 4-10 room dungeon>8. Roll 2d8 and combine.
>>98435914>This stopped at some point, no idea why.PDFs getting kill put an unfortunate choke on creativity across the entire board. Obviously, the results of this OC can be posted in a post, but things like this tend to become a casualty to the atmosphere.Also, the blog hasn't updated for three years, so there's that.
>>98435988well allowing pdfs would require programming to fix the exploit. something that requires effort.
>>98436003Correct.
Rolled 8 (1d8)>>98435914Ill bite
I'm looking for good adventure modules for higher level player characters. I'm looking for newer stuff as well as the classics.
>>98436362>ClassicsTharizdun. The D series. Arguably Tsojcanth.>NewBasically everything put out by Anthony Huso, except that one low-level sandbox he did. A few things in the No Artpunk III compendium, or whatever Prince called the collection of the contest entries.
>>98436362>>98436432Seconding Huso. I really want to run his city of brass and the orcus modules once my players hit high levels. I like how he envisioned the planes.
>>98436362Stonehell, and Ilse of Dread
>>98436915Stonehell is for low-to-mid levels, Anon.
If there's a starting village and a few hexes away there's a castle, what reason would low-level players have to go to the castle? What services or reasons would there be for them to go there?
>>98437095Is there a sprawling, forgotten dungeon complex under the castle that they can loot? Or is there a local lord sitting on top of it who owns everything? If it's the latter, can they kill his useless ass and turn this into a proper D&D frontier setting so they can loot the sprawling, forgotten dungeon complex?
>>98437095Homlet style "Some schmoes who were PCs a couple of levels ago are in the process of building it" could work.
I've been contemplating allowing my players to raise their attributes in some way. I saw that Unearthed Arcana has a system where you work towards raising your attributes based on a percentage that you grow each level? I also like this system from The Black Hack where you roll a D20 for each of your attributes when you level, and you can choose from between the ones you rolled over to increase.I considered having an option to pay for "Training". Maybe pay a fee based on what your attribute currently is, and each time you pay that it gives you a chance to roll a d20, and if the result is higher than your attribute, then you can raise it by 1. But I wouldn't even begin to know where to price such a thing...
>>98438343(Never mind, I found what I needed regarding training and downtime resources.)
>>98436362Misty Isles of the Eld is neat, I tend not t like point crawls but it works in this case.
>>98437095Higher quality supplies & weapons, sages & magical training, different rumours, more militantly capable recruiting, integrating the concept of domain play factions into early levels, someone who can afford to buy their loot if its unusual, a place to loot if they're feeling like it, visual high ground to scout out nearby hexes, courtly petitions, refuge from a wilderness encounter gone horribly awry, orcs they met in the dungeon will pay for intel on the castle's defences, princess is a cutie, scroll they found in the dungeon has map to a megadungeon in the basement. Lots of reasons.
>>98437182This gives me an idea.Has anyone ever run a adventure where something from deep in a megadungeon has struck up to dethrone a surface lord? The turmoil in 'local lord killed by dungeon decapitation strike' would kpen up tons of adventure opportunities.
>>98436934The upper levels maybe, but it's a 10 layer deep dungeon, and don't you dare tell me that layers 6-10 are for low level. Please try to keep up with the rest of the class and actually know what you are talking about before you spout off
>>98438343FOE dogshit. If you want them to get their abilities raised, have them find a Magic mountain or some other stuff, don't add in special mechanics to raise attributes as they level
>>98438987Currently running that. Nothing too revolutionary but gives me things to add and keep the game world lively. >large dungeon is tomb barrow complex of ancient race >dynasties would overthrow and entomb their rivals >ancient evil is waking up, some of the protective dolmens are damaged >increasing undead encounters on the surface world over time >tomb robbers making it worse by opening up wards >needs a suitable host body >party is delving for treasure and solutions, debating where to search for big magic powerIts not right under the starting town but its not far away.
>>98439341>don't you dare tell me that layers 6-10 are for low levelNo, those are for mid levels. And what are you so mad about anyway?
>>98439350Yeah, after reading more it became apparent that the best method to do this is through play. However, there absolutely were relevant rules for raising attributes back in the day. I found them while googling around. Though, the ways that they were doing it back then doesn't suit my game.I've decided to just do it the proper way, only allowing attributes to be modified through supernatural means that players encounter through play. A "Wish" spell, for example.I am going to modify my "EXP for Gold" rule to allow for training from higher level NPCs of the same class, but it requires gaining their trust first or doing a task for them.
>>98439885>However, there absolutely were relevant rules for raising attributes back in the dayPeople did all kinds of dumb shit back in the day. Everybody and their cousin came up with shitty houserules that broke the game *cough*2e*cough* Letting players easily raise attributes is just one of them. >"Gauntlets of Ogre Power? Who needs 18 strength when we've all got 18 or better already? Vendor trash!"
>>98439795I'm mad that morons like you spout stupid bullshit with no experience. Stonehell 2 is fine for high level play, cope and seethe, faggot
>>98439885>allow for training from higher level NPCsAre you actually retarded? Training is already a part of 1e.
>>98440987he was talking about training to raise attribute scores, not training to level
>>98440984>baseless saltOh, it's you again.
>>98439997There were even in the 1st ed, a lot of convoluted stat generation methods that we just trying to make players have bigger noomber.
>>98441505NAYRT but there's a distinction between chargen methods devoted to inflating noomber (which is still mostly bad) and in-game ways to make noomber go up. The reasons that being able to train stats is bad are that it's a new second improvement track disconnected from leveling (and thus from the incentive structures of leveling), that having a reliable way to improve stats tends to consume players' focus and PC resources, and finally that it creates a diegetic problem since there's no sensible way to raise the mental stats whereas everyone knows how someone would go about raising Strength and Constitution IRL.
>>98439885>>98439997>>98441505Having players sometimes find weird shit that just straight up gives them +1 (or -1!) to WIS or any other stat is a staple in plenty of well beloved CAG-adjacent modules (Khosura, Palace of Unquiet Repose, etc), no need for extra mechanics. I don't think it's all that FOE unless you go full retard with it.Regarding using Wishes for raising stats bear in mind the AD&D rule for this: raising a stat by 1 costs 1 wish if the stat is lower that 15 but 10 wishes if it's 15 or higher!
>>98441505I'm with the other guy, that's not a big deal. Starting with higher stats is no different than rolling a bunch of charactters and picking the best one. Taking any average character you rolled and letting them power up into the best characters is a different kettle of fish.
>another OSR campaign flattened by a player deciding it is "too stressful" and they want to play something else and no one else wants to play a game that excludes them
>>98441649>Having players sometimes find weird shit that just straight up gives them +1 (or -1!) to WIS or any other stat is a staple in plenty of well beloved CAG-adjacent modules (Khosura, Palace of Unquiet Repose, etc), no need for extra mechanics. I don't think it's all that FOE unless you go full retard with it.I don't think anyone was disputing the validity of weird stat-gaining items or other magical sources? Just training as a means of more or less reliable, always-available and (importantly) risk-free stat gain in exchange for time and/or money.(Also Khosura is full CAG if you ask me)
>>98441851RIP, Anon. It sucks when your player pool isn't broad enough to run what you want to.
>>98441505ESL retard, can you try actually proving your point? Show me where this exists, outside of the cavalier.
>>98441649>>98442023CAG are a bunch of loser incels, and EOTB is a confirmed pedophile.Try FAG, instead.
>>98441649>raising a stat by 1 costs 1 wish if the stat is lower that 15 but 10 wishes if it's 15 or higher!Always amusing to imagine a genie gradually losing interest as the hero spends all three wishes on bumping his strength.
How should I go about determining how much money people have to spend on card games in the tavern? There's a player in my group that likes to gamble, and I've come up with a little system for determining who wins in a game (Essentially playing a single hand of blackjack to determine how a whole night's games of poker go.)But I thought about trying to determine how much money one might be able to win. First, I think it would be more likely that values would be kept in silver rather than gold. I don't imagine people at a tavern having lots of gold on them for something that normally costs a couple silver. And I also thought about maybe rolling a d6 of silver for each patron in the tavern that night, ( but that raises a question of determining how many people are in a tavern on a given night.)Also, they asked if they get experience for the money they gain gambling, and my knee-jerk reaction was to say "No." However, the more I think about it, the more I think that it wouldn't necessarily be bad. They're not gaining a lot of exp from this, and they run the risk of potentially pissing off some thug or street tough... So I would say, sure.What do you guys think?
>>98443393>What do you guys think?FOE garbage
>>98441738> Starting with higher stats is no different than rolling a bunch of charactters and picking the best one. True, they're both munchkin oowerwank behaviour that should never have been encouraged. >>98441649Discovery and item based improvement is the way. Training cost spreadsheets just lead to increasing focus on town life, and shopping trips.
>>98442235The DMG is required reading anon. Its not even that far in, but you will have to actually engage more than just skimming the introduction.
>>98443393>xp for gambling Fuck no. >max win at gambling Silver standard. Average drink cost X 1D10, 25% chance its GP once per month, determine ahead of time and include in local rumours as Franz Four-Fingers had a big score and its burning a hole in his pocket, or otherwise incorporate game world information into the reasoning. Not my board. I did gluckhause as an option for a while, it was fun but time consuming. Timing it for when people want to take a break, drink, smoke, etc. worked but overall gimmick minigames don't seem to last long. This is fine.
>>98443393Could gamble vs rival adventurers. Abstract some cheating mechanic that the player and other gamblers could engage with, and a possibility that the losing party might seek vengeance.
>>98443570So you can't prove yourself, got it!
>>98443657Taht is really fucking neato.
>>98442030Yeah. And to make a new group, I'd have to abandon at least one long-term friend group that is pretty consistent. Which I've been considering, but it'd be hard to actually do.
>>98444819You couldn't get it with a bucket and two hands.
>>98446787Insanely childish post. Why dont you just cite the page number instead?
>>98445005Its a lot nicer than the one I made. There were a bunch of them for various larping and renfair stuff for a bit.
What's the /osrg/ approved game for Sword & Sorcery and Conan-like adventures of scantly clad barbarians?
>>98452353D&D, maybe with Scarlet Heroes and a single player
>>98452353BX>>98447360name one example or eat shit
>>98452353Personally I would want to use 7 Voyages of Zylarthen for this. However, the simple mechanics of OD&D aren't to everyone's tastes; in that case Hyperborea is a well respected AD&D clone with a sword & sorcery feel. Those would be my recommendations.
>>98452353Most of them can do that. The rpg formerly known as Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperborea, just Hyperboria now for some reasons, has a lot of the aesthetics and tone of conan-like adventure. The aforementioned Scarlet Heroes has another take on it, more towards the heroic hack & slash cover art but overall does a decent job of still being osr enough and playable.
>>98442778At least if you have 18 STR you get percentile increments from wishing it up. 16.3 DEX doesn't do shit.
>>98456550>16.3Retard
>>98442778I don't think players can resist the allure of wishes and stay practical.
>>98456846>doesn't know the rules for raising stats with Wishes>even though they were explicitly described earlier in the same reply chain
>>98457160yeah my b I was drunk as fuck and forgot about the 1/10th thing. P11 in the DMG, FORGIVE ME GARY
>>98452353https://www.grey-elf.com/hyborian-age.pdf
>>98452353ACKS does in fact work for that. You got you chainmail bikini rules, cleaves for cutting through mooks and Barbarians walk off what should be crippling injuries. To the point that our group jokes that the Barbarian player is playing a different game from the rest of us.
>>98441851Let me guess, this player's a woman
I had a friend who thought that "werewolves are only hit by silver weapons and magic" in B/X was stupid, and asked what would happen if he bound one up and had five people whaling on it with axes. How would you rule it?
>>98461511You can hack at them all you like, any wounds you inflict just close back up by magic.
>>98461511Increasing X:6 chance the hacking damages the bindings and frees the werewolf. Magic doesn't care if a player thinks its stupid.
>>98461540I would rule that werewolves are immune to damage unless it is Magic or silver. Why do you even think that a ruling needs to be made here, FOE?
>>98461540>>98461553What I figured. Thanks anons.One of these days his bitching is going to make me snap, lol.
>>98461581Ultimately you're the arbiter of the gameworld. This is both a great power and great responsibility. You have to make things clear to players so they can make informed choices, although this does not require you to give them complete information. You also get to include and rule on contextual elements like the bindings to make the gameworld more engaging, which does not necessarily mean easier. Like hacking at a bound creature freeing the creature. But also doing, for lack of a better term, a vibe check on the player group and seeing if a game with fantastical magical basis like werewolves being immune to axes and the rest of the world having strange magical items, elves and shit isn't a thing they want to do its not going to work regardless of what you rule at the table. But yeah, fuck that guy, sounds like a bitch.
>>98461573>werewolves are immune to damage unless it is Magic or silver No shit, sherlock. The anon's player is essentially asking "what does it mean that the werewolf is immune to damage? What does that look like to the characters?" and I gave him a sensible answer he could use the next time his group meets up. Why are you such a faggot? You smell of fish.
>>98461666Retard, he clearly didn't say any of that shit you mentioned. He didn't ask about the mechanics of the immunity, or how to overcome it. He asked what ruling we would make if a werewolf got attacked with non-magical non-silver weapons. And guess what: You don't need to make a ruling on that, because the rules are already clear on the matter. Fucks sake
>>98461666Maybe you have magic powers that let you see words that aren't there, but he straight up asked for what ruling we would make if a werewolf was tied up and attacked with axes. And such a ruling does not need to be made, because the rules are pretty straightforward on the matter: werewolves are immune to non-magical non-silver weapons.At no point did that Anon ask for an explanation of how immunity works, or what it looks like.
>>98461688>He didn't ask about the mechanics of the immunity, or how to overcome it.Because they weren't in question! >werewolves are immune to damage unless it is Magic or silverI know it, he knows it, everybody is aware, and yet you're acting like it's a surprise you're revealing to a shocked audience. >>98461719>I had a friend who thought that "werewolves are only hit by silver weapons and magic" in B/X was stupid,Fuck off retard
>>98461719>>98461688NTAYRT You don't need to make a ruling, but you get to if you want. If we want to be very literal about interpreting posts. Hypothetically if the idea were to make something up that quickly got across the idea of overcoming regenerative capacity, being a fairly common representation of werewolf immunity, you could do something like >werewolf regenerates 1/2 total HD+3 hp damage from non-magical attacks per round so it has a significant advantage, likely to the point of >just whaling on it with axes isn't going to be impossible but its not going to be easy. Really depends on how they want to run immunity. I don't think its something I'd do, I'm more likely to lean on describing the regeneration so it should be outright obvious that's not going to work but I could see going for a lower magic more gritty game doing it that way.
>>98461728I'm not acting like it's a surprise, it literally says that in the post I replied to. I'm saying that no ruling needs to be made on the subject whatsoever, because there is already an explicit rule that covers what happens when you hit a werewolf with a non-magical non-silver weapon. What he asked was the equivalent of >"What happens if a thief attacks an unaware opponent?"
>>98461728>Fuck off retardFirst off, you forgot the vocative comma.Second, if you are this booty blasted over being called out for being factually incorrect, maybe you should just not bother replying at all. >>98461732>but you get to if you want....yes? We are playing d&d, one can make all the rulings on something that they want without needing permission need to be stated? >If we want to be very literal about interpreting posts.So you're saying we should not take posts literally and we should just make up what we think they are saying, in our heads? If you want people to read your mind, then you should just say that, but people are going to take your posts at face value.
>>98461759There's no mechanical ruling that needs to be made, sure, but you have to make a decision as a DM about what you say happens when 0 damage is applied by a successful attack. Which is the whole point of the question. What do (You) tell the player when that happens? Do the weapons glance away harmlessly, do they bounce off? Or does it make momentary wounds that serve only to piss the werewolf off before vanishing? Or something else? Your description of the world can't be just "this is what the rulebook says.">>98461769You have the big dumb, anon, please stop posting.
>>98457089all wish-granting entities are now Wishmaster. Rings of Wishes spike in value.
>>98461769>...yes? We are playing d&d, one can make all the rulings on something that they want without needing permission need to be stated?Glad we agree thanks. >So you're saying we should not take posts literally and we should just make up what we think they are saying, in our heads? Weird reply to assume what others are saying when you're against it otherwise. You can interpret it however you want. Your responses will be interesting enough to respond to or not. You don't really 'win' a conversation here.
>>98461791>You don't really 'win' a conversation here.Not true, you win a conversation (or argument) when both sides arrive at an amicable understanding, and maybe learn something from each other.
>>98461796Already you're in a contradiction with your terms there unless you want to add that you can have mutual victory.
>>98461774>There's no mechanical ruling that needs to be made Yeah, that's exactly what I said, and you decided to have a melty over it. >>98461791Nobody said anything about winning anything. I said that if you make a post, people will interpret your words at face value. If you want to say something other than what you typed, try typing something else.
>>98461824>you can have mutual victory.It's the only kind there is for arguments and conversations. The common notion of "winning" an argument by browbeating the other person until they leave is more similar to the proverbial pigeon who "wins" at chess by knocking over all the pieces, shitting all over the board, and then strutting around thinking it won.
>>98461992>>98461973I'm glad we win! How's your game going? I've got players trying to get a small boat into the dungeon.
>>98462144That is funny, I floated the idea of bringing a canoe in our next delve because we found a lake of blood.
>>98462144Ghouls paralyzed one of the fighters and downed him. The party barely escaped with the injured fighter being fireman-carried by the 15 str muscle wizard while the others jammed a door with iron spikes
>>98459238Kek but no worries man. Maybe try to be less surly while drunk lmao
>>98461769>nyoooo you can't just reply to a post with related, relevant musings that don't directly answer a question in the poooostNAYRT but what the fuck kind of limp autism bait is this?
>>98462661>directly answer a question in the poooostWhat even was the question in the post?
>>98462714It was>I had a friend who thought that "werewolves are only hit by silver weapons and magic" in B/X was stupid, and asked what would happen if he bound one up and had five people whaling on it with axes. How would you rule it?And sure, Saltanon has a point that there's no real need for a ruling here: the rules are clear already. The werewolf is not harmed by this. Anon's friend's opinions about what things are stupid do not have a mechanical effect. But the point is, it's extremely retarded to get mad when people then start to organically converse about matters related to the question. In fact, it's *particularly* retarded in a case like this where the literal question has an obvious answer.
>>98462825I mean, he says "how would you rule that?" but clearly he doesn't mean "what is the rule?" because he just cited it.
>>98462825>Sure, he's right, but let me complain anyway! >>98462884>how would you rule that?By using the already existing rule. For fucks sake.
>>98463722>He must be asking for the painfully obvious answer>That he already mentioned he knew>I will say the painfully obvious answer then>I am so smrt
>>98463722>But the point is, it's extremely retarded to get mad when people then start to organically converse about matters related to the question. In fact, it's *particularly* retarded in a case like this where the literal question has an obvious answer.
>>98461553Based.>>98461540I think it should just plink off like it’s Superman. Fast healing is something else.Stay out of them slapfights yall.
>>98441641Uh, you mean education????
>>98441851nice, now you have an excuse to play a game that doesn't suck shit
>>98463722>I know this rule but how else can it be done? Is a valid and interesting question. Clam down.
>>98443393If I was stupid enough to run a game that models currency, I'd just have the player roll Charm or Intellect and win 1 gp per success
>>98464358>when you're so mad you shitpost at questions from 5 days ago lol
>>98461511you mean wailing?
>>98461774no you don't. you just tell them they did zero damage. it's a game, not a movie.
>>98463743yes, retard. USE THE FUCKING RULES.
>>98464354No it isn't.
>>98464364Who are you quoting?
>>98464420The little red arrows lead to the referenced post newfriend.
>>98464395Hipster take. >>98464354 is correct, and there is also the question of how you describe it, plus the question of DM ad-hoc decisions made for the sake of logic which is something that every version of D&D tells you to do. Why do you hate OSR discussion? What is your angle here?
>>98464817>Why do you hate OSR discussion? What is your angle here?They're part of the discord that hates chuds, osr, etc. They don't even play osr games see posts like >>98464344>>98464358
>>98464408Speakiing of "things nobody said," he didn't say "what rule should I use instead of the one in the book?" he asked "how would you rule that?" IE the application of rules, not creation of them. Are you really this dense, or is the guy above correct and you're just a discordfag here to shitpost?
The ACKS rules for magic item crafting are lame as fuck. I think that GEMS should be the basis of magic weapon crafting. Yeah you need other stuff as well, but I like gem magic. What do you guys think of this? The game ALREADY gives you random gems, and no one cares most of the time and it's just flavortext. However, if you NEEDED one particular type of gem to make the magic weapon you wanted, suddenly it feels a lot better to have it instead of having to buy it with some of your gold. Especially assuming you sell items for half-value normally. I'm thinking something like:>garnet = lesser flame sword = +1 fire damage per hit>ruby = greater flame sword = +2 fire damage per hit>quartz = ghost touch = full damage to ghosts>peridot = corrosive = +1 damage per hit and +1 damage per turn>sapphire = shock = +1 electric damage per hit, save vs stun on max damage roll>diamond could be for holy sword or just straight damage bonus>onyx would be for negative energy / soul sapping>pearls for generic +1/+2/+3? Not sure what gem is "generic" enough for that. Or maybe it can just be any gem of a certain value. Or a list of specific ones.Thoughts?
>>98464358>If I was stupid enough to run a game that models currencySo, B/X D&D, which is based around gold pieces and explicitly uses them to advance the game by having gold-for-XP? retard
>>98465800>no one cares most of the time and it's just flavortextNo, seriously, play an OSR game sometime. Gems are substantial chunks of XP and money in a small and light package that doesn't weigh you down. They don't need to have other uses if you're playing the same game we are, they're fucking awesome.
I seem to remember someone recommending a hexcrawl where City of Masks is one of the hexes. Does anyone know what that was?
>>98464336Education does not raise intelligence and arguably lowers charisma.
>>98464368NAYRT but no, "whaling" is the correct verb in that case. Wailing on someone would be like, clinging to them and crying loudly.
>>98465800>Thoughts?For inspiration, check out DMG page 26-27, Reputed Magical Properties of Gems.
>>98465801Please don't sign your posts. It makes you look like a child.
>>98466498Yeah, comes from whales smashing whaling boats to flinders.
>>98465966I understand that, but the type of gem doesn't have ANY impact on the game.>you find a 300 gp gemDone. You've just undone 299 gp worth of weight. That's it. That's all that matters. It doesn't matter what kind of gem it is.
>>98466624Why should the type of gem matter, beyond the fact that different gems have different values? And it doesn't justify building a bunch of shit out like "+2 fire damage" and "+2 electric damage" and "+1 damage per turn" which feels like a straight rip from video games, that makes me think you're not a tabletop gamer at all.
>>98466532Interesting. Any idea where Gygax got these from?
>>98466638Flaming swords and shock swords don't exist in D&D?The acid one could be a penalty to armor though, instead, as it slowly eats away at it. Or just be acid damage, I dunno.>that makes me think you're not a tabletop gamer at all.Bizarre conclusion. I just think an extra d6 of damage like in nuSkool editions might be a bit too much.
>>98466642Looks like a mix of traditional beliefs and game stuff he made up.
>>98466654>Flaming swords and shock swords don't exist in D&D?Have you tried reading the rule books? Spoilers: the answer is no. "Shock damage" is not a thing, fire damage is caused by fires and a couple of spells. In general if you haven't even read the rules first, you shouldn't be trying to homebrew up your own yet.
Hello all,I'm going to run a public game at my library. I've been reading through Scarlet Heroes and I really enjoy it and the Red Tide setting. Recently I decided that I can, after all, run that game at the library (hesitant at first but no one has taken up the challenge to be the DM). I think SH would be good to have in case only one other person shows, but if there are the maximum number of players present, say 5 as an example, how could I still play the game? Should I just use LL? Also I've been out of the loop for a few years so maybe LL has been supplanted as a good, generic BX clone.Thanks
>>98466642>Any idea where Gygax got these from?Not really but I would wager that somebody's done that work on K&KA or the like. Most of those things tend to have one specific resource, it's easy to forget now with ubiquitous internet access but in the 1970s this kind of information wasn't easy for the layman to get.Actually, come to think of it I have a vague lead in my head, some recollection of reading something tangentially connected. I'll get back to you or not, depending.
>>98466685>d&d doesn't have fire swordsLolwut...have you read the books?
>>98466772I've run Scarlet Heroes for 2 players but they're pretty powerful so its still osrish but noticeably different. Fun and you can easily use a lot of material but combat encounters are a lot less challenging, especially if the random encounters are smaller or there's a lot of lower HD monsters. More or less removes them from being a pressure when you have 2 characters doing dice HD damage with 2+ dice per round. OSE is a good reference document if you already know what you're up to. I'd say if there are more than 2 players switch to OSE. Having a bunch of premade characters on hand might help. They're easy to make manually or with a generator. There's a bunch of those.https://character.totalpartykill.ca/basic/https://dndcharacter.com/
>>98466865Sounds good. I think I have OSE sitting around here somewhere. I ran BX RAW so I'm aware of how to run and play. OSE will be a fine encyclopedic reference.
>>98466839There are no swords in B/X or AD&D that deal "fire damage," as far as I can tell. You're welcome to cite a page number, but a "No U" is not very convincing when you appear to be unfamiliar with the game in several other ways.
>>98466918None of those anons. I think the dmg and its era were before a strong codification of damage types, if we look at Flame Tongue it describe specific ways it does damage on account of its fiery nature but not in standardized >all fire weapons do this manner. So if I were to rule a gem integrated crafting system, I'm not I dislike crafting systems in general but, having the gems be specific to the outcome would make sense to take even further than whatever >+2 fire damage means maybe something artsy like the higher value of the gem giving you more syllables to describe the effects of the enchantment. The DM then has the responsibility and privileged of arbitrating how the magical weapon effects different creatures based on their characteristics.
>>98466992>think the dmg and its era were before a strong codification of damage typesYeah, I first encountered that kind of thing in video games, where having a computer deal with all the cross-effects of multiple types of damage and resistances made it feasible, unlike putting all that shit on a poor, overworked DM who has more important things to do.
>>98467005>unlike putting all that shit on a poor, overworked DM who has more important things to do.I kind of like that sort of on the spot adjudication and the flexibility it brings but ymmv. The prep for osr games is very light after you get a dungeon of decent size done.
>>98466797Thanks I'd be interested to see.
>>98467042Codified damage and resistances aren't good for on-the-spot adjudication and flexibility, though?
>>98467100Can't tell if the >though? is making it more like >codified damage and resistances are good for on-the-spot adjudication or if you've misunderstood that am saying >I don't do codified damages and resistances so I have more flexibility for on the spot adjudication.
>>98467122It's the latter, I thought you were implying they were good for that.
>>98467137Reading over my garble, I can see how you got there. Thanks for clarifying.
>>98466918Expert, p45. "Damage from this sword is treated as fire damage"Hey, bozo, next time you go spouting off the handle like am asshole, maybe you should actually know what you are talking about first and take your own advice: read the books.
>>98467630Alright anon, you've got me there. I'll admit that I'm not very familiar with B/X.
>>98466918>>98466685I made up a damage type, so what?You think that extra damage from fire would be able to work on a fire elemental? No. Common sense was used more than explicit rules back then. I just wanted to add a damage type to make it clear.
Questions!>Can OSRIC 3 be used as like a second source to get an understanding of what Gary intended in AD&D when the wording in the actual AD&D books isn't completely obvious?>If so, what areas of OSRIC don't do a good job re-explaining the original meaning from AD&D?>Are there areas where OSRIC 3 just copletely abandons the original AD&D rule(s) in favor of its own?Thanks in advance, anons.
>>98470513>Can OSRIC 3 be used as like a second source to get an understanding of what Gary intended in AD&D when the wording in the actual AD&D books isn't completely obvious?No, not really. OSRIC 3 is full of Matt Finch's shitty house rules (completely unannounced as such) and has basically totally detached itself from any notion of being an AD&D reference. Besides that Stuart Marshall never had any access to Gygax when he wrote the original OSRIC, AFAIK, so its ability to probe his genuine intent was never above "careful reading of Gygax's Q&As".>Are there areas where OSRIC 3 just completely abandons the original AD&D rule(s) in favor of its own?Yes, there are a ton. The best resource on this is Beau Rancourt's post about it on his Substack.
>>98469917Regardless of that, your homebrew is still shit designed to solve a theorycrafted "problem" that your players never had, probably because you don't have any
>>98471159>Nigger shown to literally have not read book they were mad at Anon for not reading accuses others of nogames lol get out of here with this shit. Buddy can add fire damage as a category and it doesn't corrupt the Nouminal B/X or something.
>>98465800Hack & Slash Compendium II has a bunch of tables for different gem types you might find useful.
>>98470513>Can OSRIC 3 be used as like a second source to get an understanding of what Gary intended in AD&D when the wording in the actual AD&D books isn't completely obvious?Not really? I've yet to find a better explanation on AD&D combat segments or surprise than the one in OSRIC, that alone is worth the "price" of download IMO, but the game is not afraid to deviate from AD&D or Gygax when it feels it needs to. One of this edition's objectives was to settle rule ambiguities and it shows, so feel free to use OSRIC as a reference on how other DMs might rule things out in AD&D but not as a faithful reader's companion to translate High Gygaxian.>Are there areas where OSRIC 3 just copletely abandons the original AD&D rule(s) in favor of its own?Plenty of them and, to be honest, sometimes for the best. Grappling has been massively improved, gold to silver is 1:10 rather than 1:20, optional AAC and many, many more. I think we covered many of the changes on the newbie guide on this very thread.Even if for whatever reason you do want to run AD&D RAW my advice is to read OSRIC first (far more approachable and easier to parse) and then jump back to AD&D with a better understanding of the basics.
>>98471216"Fire damage" was never the point, dumbass
>>98471357Your "point" is to be a shit in everyone's cut. Good job, point made.The benefit was you demonstrating you have no ability to keep up with the shit you spout.
>>98471357What happened, was you claimed that there were no weapons that delt fire damage, and then accused people saying otherwise of being nogames that haven't read the books.Except as was demonstrably proven by expert page 45, fire swords deal fire damage explicitly. You yourself are the one who needs to read the books, and is a nogames. You already admitted your error, just move on and stop trying to save face
>>98471357You're right, the point was that you claimed to be an expert, and then got btfo so hard that you decided to double down when it was revealed that you have in fact not read the books at all
>>98471333checked>Even if for whatever reason you do want to run AD&D RAW...My intention was to learn it RAW, and then decide if I wanted to muck with anything.>... translate High Gygaxian.This is the main use case I wanted OSRIC to serve. Oh well.
>>98471357>>98471402>>98471407The point was not that anyone needs to have an encyclopedic knowledge of the books, as you guys are trying to imply here, but rather that you should have at least read them and have a basic familiarity before starting in on making homebrew shit, which the anon upthread clearly does not. (I will point out that I'm not the one proudly displaying some shitty homebrew here.) It's true that I did not know there was a mention of "fire damage" in B/X as I'm an AD&D guy. But that's not relevant to the original point, it's a nitpick. The issue is that his "problem" the homebrew is intended to fix (gems are boring!) is theorycrafted bullshit, and his homebrew is half-assed, vague, and bad. You guys trying to play "gotcha" aren't even approaching the vicinity of the original point.
>>98471683>The point wasn't me trying to tell them to read the book I haven't read I swear! lmao Keep going.
I'm looking for good random tables of random motivations for random encounters with intelligent creatures. My goal is to use these to supplement reaction rolls, the positive ones mostly, that by themselves do not mean much unless you know more about the context.E.g. robbery, threaten and demand a toll, escaping/chasing, looking to exchange news and information, seeking a job, raiding, patrolling, looking for creatures to enslave, transporting goods, looking to trade, seeking help, wounded ill or cursed, and so on.
>>98471701You can seethe and mald and no-u all you want, I made my point and your deflections haven't even touched it. The discussion's going nowhere at this point, so I'm out, have fun with your anger problems.
How long is a round in Shadowdark, exactly? Like some rounds seem to be an abstraction of "a short amount of time" like a piece of combat, but then crawling rounds are longer? How do you treat a mage spell that lasts 10 rounds, for example?
>>98471857NuSR games are off topic. But yes, you're right that it's shitty and makes no sense.
>>98466992
>>98471874This infographic is worthless, you are nothing to the real Infographic Anon. Also I'm almost certain it's a troll post.If not, git gud and learn how to make infographics that actually contribute something.
>>98471874Yep, confirmed. That second quote isn't from AD&D at all, it's from 2e. Take your non-OSR zombie edition and fuck off out of here.
>>98472026Ah, so that's the angle>post shitty homebrew>it gets shit on>"look, /osrg/ hates homebrew!">"Also 2e is OSR!"
>>98471867But what do you actually do for a spell that lasts 10 rounds? Apply that to both combat rounds and crawling rounds?
>>98472209He doesn't do anything, because he doesn't play badly-designed games for recovering 5heads, and neither should you. Go make a shadowdark thread if you really need an answer right away
>>98472283Kill yourself, Fishfag.
>>98472062I honestly don't think the homebrew anon is Fishfag. The ichthyosexual's just opportunistically using that to make another shitty attempt at forcing his non-OSR garbage. I don't even get why you're so mad about the homebrew, why shouldn't Anon make a gem-based system for magic items? Reminds me of Manseanon's old stuff. The Reputed Magical Properties of Gems list in the DMG is also meant to be used by the referee as an aid to choosing relevant gemstones for use in the crafting of magic items among other things.>>98472209Ask where it's on topic, guy. In here you might as well ask how Shadowrun 4e combat works or something. We don't know, it has nothing to do with this thread.
>>98472310>I honestly don't think the homebrew anon is FishfagI wouldn't say he was, he absolutely lacks that energy, he just seems like a regular shitbrewing faggot. But the sudden aggressive defensive posting that concluded with "2e is osr" shit is a different story.
>>98471239thanks I'll check that out
>>98471159I have players you stupid fucking faggot.The "problem" is that the gem types dont' really add much to the game.This is an opportunity to add depth to the game.Go fuck yourself faggot. Anytime someone resorts to "nogames" as an argument you can tell it's 100% IMAX-tier projection
>>98472369>add depthAdd builds, more like
>>98472238>>98472310I don't really want to make a new thread for one question. I'm sure someone in here is familiar with Shadowdark.
>>98471683>The issue is that his "problem" the homebrew is intended to fix (gems are boring!) is theorycrafted bullshit, and his homebrew is half-assed, vague, and badIt's a rough draft you stupid fag.>theorycrafted bullshitThis entire game is theorycraft you fucking virgin. It's imaginary.
>>98472380>Add builds, more likeNothing about it adds builds you retarded fuck. You don't even know what a build is. >>98472358>But the sudden aggressive defensive posting that concluded with "2e is osr" shit is a different story.I didn't post that. Nothing about that homebrew is objectively bad. You just got assblasted that someone added a type to damage. As if it means anything.
>>98472022It compares pre-WotC D&D's handling of Flametongue to post-WotC D&D's handling of Flametongue. It is an excellent summation of how WotC handled D&D wrong from the moment they bought TSR. The fact that you couldn't see that tells me that you can't rotate breakfast and in turn are not capable of being a part of any discussion, let alone a comparison of AD&D and Wotc's GURPS Dungeon Fantasy knockoff.>>98472026Why are you mad? This infographic compares pre-WotC D&D and post-WotC D&D design sense which, if you're as old and autistic as I am would recall, is the original (though no longer current) definition of OSR.As this infographic was made well before the galvanization of modern OSR, it has nothing to do with whatever bitchfit the retarded faggots of >>98472283 and crusade.>>98472296 are having.
Yep, there we go
>>98471683Go fuck yourself, stop hiding. You are the one who explicitly claimed that fire damage wasn't a thing in bx, let alone weapons that do fire damage, you got proven wrong and instead of being humble and moving on you have decided to act like a childish bitch
>>98472398No, fuck off. You could use the same excuse for posting about GURPS or Bubblegum Crisis or any other non-OSR game.
>>98472439Kill yourself, Fishfag.
>>98472479I copped to that, you're the one still seething. hours later. My point was never "fire damage doesn't exist" anyway, that was a secondary thing related to my aesthetic distaste for the damage categories, which you keep trying to force into being the centerpiece of what I said, all because you clearly can't handle criticism.
>>98471797>>98471683Nigger you are the one that told people they were wrong and that they need to read the books, please commit a violent suicide>>98472398Eat shit, troll
>>98472509>Nah, if you come in acting like an expert and being an asshole to other posters, when you are proven categorically wrong, you lose absolutely any respect or validation that we might get to anything you say. Just give up and wait for the next thread
>Fishfag is back to trolling /osrg/ at a time of day when he assumes there will be no jannies activeKek, getting desperate, huh? Latest retarded slide attempt not working out for you? Dead thread again? Damn, hard to believe that you would fail once again. After all, you've only blown it like two hundred times before!
>>98472514I told him his shitbrew was bad and that he appears to be unfamiliar with the game, my opinion of which hasn't changed. Me not knowing a specific item in B/X is not at all the same thing as him thinking his totally-existing players are going to find gems boring. And since you want to harp on this shit, "this sword counts as fire damage" is different from "add +2 fire damage/shock damage to your sword" (And then deal with multiple damage types on a weapon) The latter is the result of a half-assed homebrew attempt that clearly needs a lot more time spent on working it out before you show it to people and expect them to applaud.
>>98472534Nah the claim youare was that no weapons dealt fire damage in bx, and told people to read the books. No one respects your posts anymore, bro. Move on.
>>98472493Shadowdark is generally considered an OSR game. Regardless of whether it is according to this thread OP's definition, I'm willing to bet there's a good chance someone who sees "OSR" in the title, and is interested, would be familiar with Shadowdark. If you don't like me asking a question about it you don't have to respond.
How much does it cost to hire someone to identify a magic item?
>>98472503Literally insane.
>>98472636I don't know what the price is that's listed in the actual book. I've always had a flat rate of 100 gold to identify an item that has a normal magical effect (This covers the costs of whatever magical materials are necessary for the wizard to experiment with the item, in addition to whatever profit he would gain from providing the service.) However, even afterward, if the item has some unique effect that can't be described by a single quality or spell, then simple identification may not be enough and at most the wizard can point them in the direction of where more information on the item can be found. (Usually sending them on a quest to a specific location in some dungeon to find old scrolls or art describing the item's effect or legend.)
>>98472636Looking through my 1E dmg doesn't bring one up but that could just be using a dead tree book and a quick flip. I feel like it should start at about twice the material component for the identify spell (200 gp since Identify uses a 100 gp pearl), which can and should be haggled by the PCs.
>>98473429Incorrect! I can see how an ignorant person might think the rest are, since they're derivative of the OSR movement, but 2e in particular is obviously and inarguably not OSR. This is even clarified in the OP so there won't be any mistakes about this.
>>98473722Troll GYG, and kill yourself.
>>98472630>Shadowdark is generally considered an OSR game.It is not. Please stop posting about unrelated games in this general.
>>98473948Please stop posting blatant lies. Shadowdark by it's design is an OSR game, not only in philosophy but gameplay. lies of this level are trolling
Can someone go to the mods and ask them to return to keeping a constant eye on this general? It's obvious that Fishnigger is just pushing the limits to see how much trolling he can get away with in here since his latest hijack attempt failed again, and is gleeful to find that his shitposts aren't being instakilled anymore.
>>98474011Osr is a dead hobby
>>98473948Literally Google it and look at every time it's called an OSR game. It's the second sentence of its Wikipedia entry. You're free to not think it is, but that doesn't mean other people don't.
>>98474124>GoypediaAnon, I...
>>98474135Not an argument
>>98473948Shadowdark is generally considered an OSR game and that's just a simple factAnd that is undoubtedly the correct opinion - it's from an indi designer/publisher- it's all about B/X gameloops (more B than X, but that might change with the new kickstart, haven't checked that one out)- in fact it follows B/X gameloops so closely, I would say it's basically a bunch of houserules that streamline resolution mechanics- the adventures and additional materials are all very old-school simulacrum as well
>>98472636If you wanted to hire my M-U PC, she'd expect:- the price of a goldfish (or 100 gp pearl)- a fee for her time- and danger money in case the item turns out to be cursedNo girdles, no swords, too risky ;-)
>>98474176Look, I don't give a damn about your game whose only achievement was being written by a lesbian—in fact, I barely know it—and I don't give a damn about this general either or its autistic distinctions between OSR and non-OSR. But citing Wikipedia as your primary source is next level kosher status.
>>98474124This thread is not for you to try to argue your unrelated games into. Kindly take your bullshit elsewhere; you can start a /nusrg/ or anything you like but leave it out of this general.
>>98473949It's not OSR and never has been.Go fuck off back to RPGnet.
>>98474165>indiYou do realize that when you use idiosyncratic spellings like this you become instantly recognizable, right, troll?
>>98474176>The current OP is based purely and exclusively on a misreading of Matt Finch’s opinionsThat's totally incorrect, Matt Finch has absolutely nothing to do with it. The OP is based on a consensus of thread regulars and nothing else, as hard as you seethe about it (and keep trying to force the irrelevant Finch for some bizarre reason).
>>98474251>>98474176Fuck off fishfag.Reminder to report fishfag posts for trolling, since his "I'm never coming back here, guys" thing has obviously worn off and the mods need reminder that a compulsive troll who should have been permabanned years ago is, shock of shocks, trolling again.
>>98474251>muh FinchNo, that never happened.>reeeeee fake consensusKill yourself, Fishfag.
>>98474273I don't think the problem is the lack of reporting, I think whatever janny was keeping a careful eye on the thread has just stopped for whatever reason and that needs to start happening again (because it's the only thing that thwarts this nigger troll, you literally cannot permaban him because he'll just change his IP). He's always going to attempt to push the boundaries, constantly. His fake /osrg/s, his ridiculous "Open OSR" thread which he's now abandoned exactly the way he did with /todd/ when he realized people weren't abandoning /osrg/ for *that* thread, and so on. The only fix is to be on his ass constantly and manually remove his posts as soon as they're made, unfortunately.
Nobody cares about the opinions of finch, or other websites. Fuck off, fishfag
>>98474301It's not relevant. Fuck off back to troll-land, scumbag
Good to see adopting an idiosyncratic definition of OSR and splitting the thread has stopped all the arguments
>>98471857Sounds like its a bad game if it doesn't distinguish clearly between a combat round and en exploration turn. I suggest playing a better game it was based on. There's no reason to use a retroclone or nusr ripoff after about lotfp unless you want a specific side genre like mutant future.Talking about someone's house rules and how they can work is fun. Paying for someone's bad houserules is retarded.
>demi-nuke kills half the trollpostsWell, I'll take it. Thanks janny, appreciated. You should've started here though:>>98471857>>98471874
>>98474326What does the Flame Tongue thing have to do with anything?
>>98474320Well, I don't know for sure if it does distinguish between them or not. If it doesn't, I do think that's a bad decision, because even if more might be happening per second in a combat round than a dungeon turn, that doesn't mean *everything* is happening faster, which would be required for it to be a useful abstraction. The most obvious thing is that torches don't burn out faster, although in Shadowdark they burn out in real time anyway.
>>98474329That infographic (besides being functionally worthless and uninformative) is a troll because it quotes AD&D 2e, which is a deliberate way to try to push 2e into the thread or else just to try to score points on the thread in the belief that posters here would not know or notice. Since he got called out on his childish shit immediately the troll opted for a full spergout instead.
>>98474329It was made by fishfag in an attempt to slide 2nd ed into the conversation. Not obvious at first, but immediately obvious when the post was called out for including off-topic info and he responded with all the usual fishfag lines.
>>98474314Problem would solve itself if the salty bitch would just give up his crusade
>>98474336(And to clarify, I'm not saying the entire discussion before then was trolling, that's impossible to determine without the ability to see poster IDs. It was a pretty obnoxious argument but basically just in the style of your typical fa/tg/uy sperg. That imagepost though is an obvious troll, and from that point on Fishfag just started regurgitating his usual retarded canned talking points.)
>>98474343You can't expect the insane to be sane. He will continue until he is institutionalized, range-banned, or picks up some new thing to schizo rage against, like widespread refrigeration or CIA gangstalking.
>>98472636Around 1 week of a sage's time, 100gp/day. I'd adjust how many days based on the sage's major and minors. If you have one on long term employment its just part of their monthly.
>>98474333Yeah that game is dog shit and completely off topic for this thread, please go somewhere else.
>>98474351Refrigeration prolongs the lifespan of e. coli bacteria and that's what's behind the massive increase in IBS *which is what causes trannyism*, Anon! The CIA promoted refrigeration to infect Fishfag with trans thoughts and that's why he chopped his dick off! It's not a laughing matter! Revenge on chuds!
God damn it feels good to see all of those deleted posts. I've said this less than a handful of times in the 20 years I've been on this website, but: MODS==GODS
>>98474373Yeah, props for quick action.
>>98471745I tend to use a very simple one I got from here ages ago and elaborate with more detail based on the creature, but I have found having a decent cluster of ideas about what different monsters on the the encounter table could be up to and nesting that in with a D4 or something similar can be fun without making too much clutter at the table or slowing things down too much. Elfmaids & Octopi has way more tables than anyone will ever use but there's good stuff there if you want more specific details. I don't remember if he specifically tagged these sorts of posts with a term that makes it easier to search through but here's some I randomly pulled. https://elfmaidsandoctopi.blogspot.com/2020/11/d100-dark-lords-commands.htmlhttps://elfmaidsandoctopi.blogspot.com/2016/09/d100-things-off-duty-devils-do.htmlI mostly skim them and take the ones that seem the most interesting and turn them into a much smaller table.
>>98474314It was actually really nice until whatever this spergout is, its because the totally not a general open thread has been so dead they're talking about 4e dark sun. You can tell the shadowdark guy is at best an idiot though if they're saying shit like >I have not actually read the book I'm here to argue with you about like >>98474333and then goes on about how there's no need to distinguish between time frames when that was their initial question.
>>98474391NtaThere is another motivation table that I'm trying to find so that I can post it for the other guy, but it has you roll a die and the size of the die is based on the intelligence of the creature, with increasingly higher results having more complex motivations
>>98474400I never said there was no need to distinguish between time frames.
>>98471745Missed this question earlier so props to >>98474391 for highlighting it. Besides his suggestions I would recommend the JG Ready Ref Sheets, which contain a lot of material of this nature. Most obviously the encounter chart right at the beginning of the book, but also things like the guards rules on page 14 which has a table for determining what the guards want with a party of PCs they stopped, or the "Attack Reasons" on page 16. A lot of the stuff is formatted in a clunky way, but even if you don't want to use it as-is you can probably winkle a lot of good ideas out of it for reworking according to your own preferences.
>>98474400>You can tell the shadowdark guy is at best an idiot thoughHe's also a troll, probably the same faggot playing a second line (notice they appeared in the thread at the same time). Fishfag is always wanting to force off-topic NuSR games and shit like that into the thread and bitch about the scope.
>>98474402>dice size based on intNeat idea, gets a bit harder if they don't have stats though. Was it based around >non>animal>semi>low >average >high>genius categories like in the MM or a stat?
>>98474416Nigger the options are you either asked >>98471857 here or started trolling about a game you haven't even read as described >>98474333Fuck off.
>>98474402I *think* that's KLOWN's encounter table you're thinking of, but I can't swear to it because I don't have it saved. It should be somewhere in here:>https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/username/Kindly%20Little%20Old%20Warrior%20Noble/ext/pdf/
>>98474437It's not based on numerical intelligence, it's based on their categorical intelligence
>>98474442You must have misunderstood me. I said I didn't understand whether rounds erase the distinction between time frames. I asked if they DID do that because I didn't understand, and said if they do then it's a bad idea. Literally the opposite of what you're accusing me of.
>>98474528So are you both of the linked posts?
>>98474437Found it
Whether meta or directly, both of you just stop discussing Shadowdark, please. It doesn't belong here.
>>98474549Yes.
Dear Janny.Much appreciated. Thank you.That's all
>>98474528Shadowdark is off topic, fuck off, retard
>>98474580Okay. So, a few ideas. Shadowdark is a badly made game if you can't distinguish between time frames in a clear way or the spells don't reference them properly. The don't have to be exact but having something you can easily work with consistently instead of your clear confusion is not hard to do, B/X did this and it was for 10 year old american kids. That it has the irl torch time meme is not a good sign. Ge better at articulating your question. The chances of anyone here having read or played Shadowdark are low. I'm sure not going to go read it to help you out given how garbage you've been thus far. Either port a better game's time onto it and remember STRICT TIME RECORDS MUST BE KEPT or continue flailing around with your /osrlop/ game.
>>98474628Neat, its a variation on the one I use but they do different sized dice instead of 1-3D6 and elaborated on the higher end a bit. Mine could be the variation really, no idea who or when it was from.
>>98474665derp, wrong link >>98474561
>>98474336The flametongue post predates /osrg/. It is in no way related to your shcizophrenia.
>>98474637>Ge better at articulating your question.No one else misunderstood it and you haven't identified any wording that was confusing. I articulated it fine.
>>98474894... no one else answered it except telling you to eat shit and die. Might be a hint to rethink your approach.
>>98474958What we he do that for? After all, you're still giving him the (You)s, dumbass
>>98474966Optimism at the very low chance they'll get the hint. (you) can have one too!
Been playin' OSR D&D with my siblings recently (And it's been going really well.) My little bro wants to play a class that's essentially a monster tamer. He wants to be able to catch low-level monsters like goblins or kobolds, and train them up to become stronger over time.Is there a homebrew class out there that does this? Also, how do I level up monsters? do they just get levels in one of the regular adventuring classes?
>>98475068From an old PDF of homebrew classes that used to get posted on /tg/:[2] Kobold Keeper (Minion Master)HD- d6saves- As ClericEach level you gain a 1HD minion such askobolds, goblins, rat-men, etc. They are utterlyobedient to you, and can be expended to triggertraps, as a distraction, etc.You have a magical aura which attracts theseminions and lets you command them. If yourminions die, make a d20+Charisma modifier eachday you are in an area where your minions reside,if you roll 11 or up you get another minion, up toyour level in maximum.If you get additional hirelings or minions beyondthis they do not have the magical and fanaticalloyalty your class minions do.
>>98474203>every post with a typo is one anon's worklegit insanealso not an argumentnot that there is an argument to be madeAlmost any rule/gameloop there is in Shadowdark is basically >Take what is already in B/X, but let's update the resolution mechanicIt's an OSR game
>>98475068>Is there a homebrew class out there that does this?I might be really boring but they don't need a class to have hirelings and henchmen. They need to have charisma and good ways to induce the monsters to side with them. They're basic creatures, food and treasure work well. Then they level up and gain experience as henchmen would. The mechanical differences between a goblin an a halfling are minor enough I would use that as a base and throw in goblin vision.
>>98474958I don't care if people tell me to eat shit and die. They can feel how they want. I do care when people accuse me of saying something I didn't.
Last month I asked for a hexcrawl and someone posted one. I remember it was a fairly small area with a river or coast to the north, and they recommended one of the hexes be the City of Masks. Does anyone have any idea what hexcrawl that was?
>>98475068There are two issues with this. One is that a class entirely based on, effectively, souped-up henchmen risks becoming extremely weak if his henchmen die off. The other is that as Anon says a Magic-User can more or less already do this, with Charm Person, Charm Monster and reference to the henchman morale and loyalty charts.The advancement thing is unspecified in old-school D&D and you'd have to devise rules for it yourself, but certainly, simple things like a goblin advancing along the monster to-hit and saving throw tracks as it gains HD (= levels) seem both reasonable and straightforward.>>98475356Suicide booth, now.
>>98475436>muh Shadowdark again lmaooooNo but seriously, fuck off. If you want to discuss Shadow Shadow Bo Badow, start a separate thread for it, don't shit up this unrelated one.
>>98475453I'm not looking for Shadowdark content, I'm looking for a specific hexcrawl that someone else posted ITT. I don't even think the hexcrawl was designed for Shadowdark, City of Masks was just one of the hexes someone recommended. I'm only including that detail to help find out what it was.
>>98475471Okay, well, you already asked two days ago: >>98466251 and got no answers, and checking Plebs suggests that nobody has in fact mentioned such a hexcrawl ever on /tg/. Which implies that you're either remembering the wrong website, or deliberately full of shit and trying to create a conversation about some off topic product you're already familiar with by pretending ignorance in the hope of getting others talking.Either way, take it to a dedicated thread about Shadowdark or start a /nusrg/ or something.
>>98475495I did search for mentions of it on desuarchive and didn't find any, which is why I asked, because I thought I might have misremembered what they said somehow. But it is possible, even likely at this point, that I'm remembering something someone recommended somewhere else.
>>98475471Nothing turns up on the archive, so I'm not sure you're remembering that part correctly.
The RAW in OSE for "I want to check for traps/secret doors" is a 1/6~ chance rolled by the DM. I hear a lot of people talk about not doing that but a narrative check instead, like the whole "I'm going to pour water on the floor and see if it reveals a trapdoor" or "I'm going to twist and pull on the moosehead on the wall to see if it opens a secret door"Which do (you) guys do when you play? The latter sounds interesting but it also sounds like it gets really tedious after a few times.
>>98475591I allow the players to choose. If they say "I search for traps" I roll the 1/6 chance and mark off one turn. If they say something specific, like "I'm going to put pressure on each flagstone in this area with my pole" then it takes (probably) half a turn, and if they were correct in guessing the trigger then they automatically find it, otherwise they find nothing.
>>98475591I lean mechanical, but once in a while narrative can work fine. I find narrative breaks down with things like seemingly featureless lengths of wall or floor (too little to work with), or rooms with a great number of things (too much to work with).
>>98471857>How do you treat a mage spell that lasts 10 rounds, for example?hope the following helps>Minutes Pass.>Effects with a duration of rounds expire. That should help you. You can also discuss SD in the open thread >>98463171
>>98475591figuring shit out and describing what you do is the gamethe mechanical 1/6 is a fallback in case the players are all out of ideas
>>98475591>sounds like it gets really tedious after a few timesIt will get old after a while, sooner or later players will just want to get on with the crawl
>>98475356Dude fucking shoot yourself instead of shitting up the thread
>>98475068Just use the fucking charisma rules for having henchmen, why do you need to create some type of OC donut steel?
>>98476152Hanged, ESL retard. Also it's always cute to watch you turn you getting btfo by the mods into some kind of victory
>>98476134Kill yourself already, Fishfag.
As obnoxious as he is, remember that this ineffectual trolling is a sign that Fishfag realizes that he's lost: he's started to digest that his latest hijack attempt isn't working any better than all the other ones and people aren't going to migrate to his retarded "Open OSR" not-a-general like he was hoping for some bizarre reason, and he can't think of any better plan than to come back in here, sperg out about it, and get his posts deleted.I'm guessing he's going to attempt to post a fake /osrg/ again once or twice out of desperation, but fundamentally, what we're seeing here is his death rattle. He's out of options. His attempt to slide the thread and redefine OSR has failed, totally.
>>98476134Why don't you actually contact the mods on IRC and ask them what they think about this?
>>98472630>Shadowdark is generally considered an OSR gameFrom the Arcane Library site:>Shadowdark RPG is a love letter to classic fantasy RPGs!>It has a bit of the "old school renaissance" in it, but it might even be better to call it an "OSR-like," as Ben Milton from Questing Beast has done... because it's not really trying to be anything at all, except my favorite version of the game.https://www.thearcanelibrary.com/blogs/shadowdark-blog/all-about-shadowdark-rpg
>>98476789LmaoThis is like Joseph Goodman stating that he doesn't think DCC is old-school. What next, Zeb Cook declaring 2e trad newfaggotry? Going to be real hard for trolls to keep their shit up at this rate.
>>98476898I remember release day for the 2e PH; there was a line out the door of the game/comic shop. The only time I ever saw that. Everyone bought it out of curiosity and hype. We had no idea the contents, apart from that preview flyer. I don't remember anyone abandoning 1e completely for it, instead of cherry picking bits out of it for a number of years, Maybe after we lost a lot of players to that dumb card game. It was fun poring over it with my friends/players that day. A few months later,the 2e DM's guide was such a huge disappointment/downgrade from the original.
>>98435873I haven't played since the early '90s due to everyone going off to school and losing touch, until the past few years (I avoided looking at any new material all that time). I'm like a time traveller. If I DM'd for you, you'd experience what it was really like to play the game in the '80s, that is to say, often, but not always, entirely different depending on the group. A lot of what I see with younger people trying to reconstruct the vibe of those times doesn't match up with my memories, so it's pointless to argue how things are precisely supposed to be.
>>98435873Due to the marketing push, kids in elementary school started playing B/X in the early '80s, and then quickly discovered the AD&D hardcovers at Kay Bee, Toys R Us or the Christmas catalogs/wish books, so a lot of players through the '80s were also playing a blend of B/X and 1e. Or any combination of B/X, 1e, BECMI, and 2e. Or parts from other publishers. For instance, those MERP and Rolemaster crit tables saw a lot of use for laughs.
>>98477174>>98477191Points 3 and 5, also no one asked
>>98435873Oh, and this notion that play styles radically changed post '83 for the rest of the '80s is nonsense. More narrative styles were in addition to, as opposed to replacing. If anything, the pure hack & slash style of the mid to late '80s get overlooked. I had players at the game shop on weekends who didn't care for meticulous, incremental dungeon delving nor wilderness or domain and world travelling/building scenarios. They just wanted to immediately be squaring off with waves of monsters, not caring about the setting, or backstories, or even the details of their characters apart from the numbers and XP. I always wondered why they didn't just play war games???
>>98477253My first DM came from a mid 80s hack and slash culture. Generally the only decisions we made were what class to play, what to spend gold on and what spells to cast (if that's an option). I'm pretty sure he was making up the nonsensical dungeons as we went. I liked 3rd edition D&D way more than what he was doing and it was why I didn't get into the OSR for so long after it started, because I thought it was like what he did.
>80sWrong decade, nerds
>>98477363A decaxe is 9 years, actually. Foegyg fishfreak.
>>98477174>I haven't played a game in over 3 decades >anyway here's my bullshit lol
>>98477208The greybeard retirement board is not an authority.
>>98476360It's baffling how remorseless he is about all this bullshit.You think at some point he'd just go "Fine, they want their thread to not include 2e, I can go elsewhere for that", but no, he has to be here, shitting things up for us.
>>98477764Classic troll. In his own 2e thread he just gets no reaction, because nobody else wants to discuss 2e and the thread dies. In here he gets reaction and abuse, like a naughty toddler
>>98477764He's genuinely severely mentally ill. That much is very clear at this point.
>>98478093See, this is the kind of shitloss that indicates that you're mentally ill.
>>98477253For the love of GOD try to learn something about where you are before spouting off. The shit that you're saying was all addressed like eighteen years ago.
>>98478093>CNC lostYou got us, Fishfag, we all hate automatic machining! Everyone in the OSR is a manual lathe operator. What an embarrassing reve—wait, what?Absolutely barking mad.
>>98478185No, you, you obviously have no idea what this thread is for. If you don’t want to discuss how D&D was played and what modern players can learn from that then you need to fuck off.
>>98478093All anyone has ever asked you to do is make a different thread for your off-topic game, and you've decided that no, it's everyone else whose wrong and you are the God-King of /tg/.Fuck off retard.
>>98477735It’s okay to say “we’re playing with strict rules (that my GM made up because old D&D never had strict rules)”. It’s okay to say “we hate in-character thinking”, or “our DM never describes anything because it’s just a gamer”, or “we use game systems from other games (like ACKS) to handle things that you are supposed to resolve by playing pretend (like shopping/selling trips). Or “you can’t have a satisfying game without domain play”, or “give full XP for gold even when it makes you level too fast and you have to sell your ass for training cost”, or “you aren’t playing real D&D unless it’s an open table and everyone has three or more characters and you don’t use modules”.If you say “this is what the creators intended”, or “people played like this in the 80s”, that’s retarded I don’t blame you for saying it. I you’re saying it in the right thread at least, so now we can discuss it. The problem is that thry don’t want to discuss the OSR and they don’t want anyone else to discuss it either. The OSR on 4chan is heavily astroturfed for political purposes (to focus on the political identities of game designers past and present).>>98478093lol
>>98478345>I started another thread and you all came and-You mean those threads you started with an OP along the lines of "Those fucking Chuds over in /osrg/ won't let me talk about 2e in their OSR threads when it's clearly OSR, they're baby eating pedophiles who drew a cock swastika on the moon with their secret nazi space laser. Anyway, let's have a not-general to try and edge them out"I wonder why people had a problem with that, truly am a mystery for the ages.Funny how no one except you had a problem with /2eg/ being a thing, or /nusr/ or /todd/ for that matter. All of them got 'Go forth, god speed and watch out for the angry retard who'll try to bring your threads down with shitposting'Which is exactly what happened to all 3, funnily enough.Again, louder and clearer this time so you really understand it: Fuck off retard
>>98478328Again, it's not actually "his game". He doesn't even know the rules to 2e. He just wants to force it here because he thinks OSR players are chuds or some shit and that wrecking the understanding of what OSR means on 4chan is somehow going to own said chuds.
>>98478364Oh I know, don't worry. I'm fully aware of his bullshit.I was the one who pointed out he didn't even know Raistlin was a PC way back when.
>>98478268>Lurking more will confirm that we aren’t allowed to discuss the history of the game in the OSR threadNah, you can discuss the actual history of the OSR all you like; what you can't do is spam your personal made-up schizo history, especially not without getting derided for it.
>>98478373Lmao, I remember that. "In what modules?! Name one!" Incredible scenes.
I was planning to make a campaign set in Karameikos using modules B6 The veiled society, B5 Horror on the hill and B10 Night's dark terror, in that order, while using the gazeeteer 1 The grand duchy of Karameikos to support the setting and give more insight into the political landscape if the players are interested in that.What are your thoughts about Karameikos and Mystara in general?I think it's not the most inspired setting but whatever, at least it's OSR and there's lots of published content for it for BECMI (though I plan to use Rules Cyclopedia). I still wish there were darker settings with published adventures in them for OSR, though.Maybe i'll check out birthright...
>>98478364>>98478376>Being happy to learn new things about the old D&D games that you came here to discusslol, can you imagine?I mean, can you actually?
I don’t see myself ever using real-time torches, or even expecting PCs to return to town before the session ends, but I’ve been wrong about that sort of thing before.
>>98475068OSR Pokémon has been a long time coming and somebody is going to make money on it. It’s possible to mimic old D&D in basically every way except that the only treasure is friendship. But that game hasn’t been made yet so here we are.>>98475150Wow, excellent post, funny how it was completely ignored. Can you tell us more about the source?The conventional /osrg/ advice would’ve to play the game as it is and see how that treats you, and I’m glad that this has already been said, but it’s still badass to immediately post on-topic game design.
>>98478400Karameikos itself is *okay*, but most of the gazetteers are ass cancer. A lot of tardmaxxing and pretty much ruining the OG Known World. If you don't think it's inspired yourself either I don't know why you'd waste time on it. Birthright is resoundingly non-OSR though, as well as easily the most shit setting TSR published, so that makes me think you're just trolling, tb h.
>>98478630>I don't know why you'd waste time on itI'm still looking for better settings to play in.>Birthright is resoundingly non-OSR thoughUff I thought it was 1e, you are right. But it didn't sound that bad in itself, like, I like the low fantasy and politics focus it has. What setting do you recommend for OSR play personally? I was looking for something dark and with political intrigue, and can be low or high fantasy, I don't mind.
>>98478400>What are your thoughts about Karameikos and Mystara in general?I love it. I've played in Mystara ("The Known World") since 1984 or so.
>>98474462Gross. I'm very happy that weirdo finally decided to stop posting forever
>>98477174Holy shit we don't give a fuck if you haven't played the game in 3 decades, just because you played wrong and you were a child, doesn't mean people have to play wrong nowadays. You are obviously some type of tourist, with a retarded opinion, so fuck off and go back to where you came
>>98477735"I played the game wrong when I was a kid and my memory is from 3 years ago aren't very concrete anymore, but let me tell you about why this place that I just showed up to randomly, is completely wrong about the things that they are able to define for themselves!"Holy shit you are a worthless fucking retard
>>98478729Great, completely off topic, especially since you chose that specific year to bring up. You are obviously a troll.>>98477174>entirely different depending on the group.Great you already seem to understand what we're talking about, your group was wrong. >The young people I see Free tell, how many young people do you see playing osr, how often do you watch them, and how often do they play? Would love to know these facts to see what your actual credibility is.Also without a doubt, back then 30 years ago you were playing second edition, so we doubly don't give a fuck lmao
>>98477191Is this some type of chat GPT post? Nobody gives a fuck about your ramblings, dude
>>98478857>Your campaign isn’t OSR unless it actually starts before 1984lmao, tout tout motherfucker.
>>98478726>But it didn't sound that bad in itselfNo, on paper Birthright doesn't sound conceptually fucked, it's the execution that's an abomination.>What setting do you recommend for OSR play personally?For me, I like the Wilderlands, but it's not really a setting filled with political intrigue, kek. I don't exactly know what would suit you but probably making your own setting is the best way forward. Steal some maps and change the keys is probablty the easiest way (or use e.g. the Wilderlands whole and just add the politics).
>>98478817Kill yourself already, Fishfag!
>>98478861>>98478910>>98478817Fuck off fishfag
>>98477365https://www.youtube.com/shorts/yziUGnxFzVw
>he's desperationspamming the general againFishfag crying uncontrollably behind the screen, you love to see it. Could still use some janitorial services in here though.
>>98479017>the WilderlandsDidn't know about that one, but sounds interesting. Will check it out for sure. Thanks!
speaking of maps, is there one similar to the Outdoor Survival map that has more of an aquatic slant? Maybe a series of island chains and archipelagos?
>>98474427>JG Ready Ref Sheets,I could only find the first one, its got a charm to it but you were right, the format is clunky.
>>98479176Potato quality image because the full size one is too big. Dyson's Autumn Lands is a generic fantasy coastal hex map. Not so much a retro visual but might be useful.
>>98479180>I could only find the first oneOh, yeah, it says Volume 1 on the cover but that was the only one ever released. If you found a PDF of that you got the whole thing.
>>98479176Depends on what you mean by similar. The same art style? Unfortunately not, the OS map was never really replicated in art style, not for D&D, anyway. You might be able to convert it into a set of Photoshop brushes or whatnot, but you'd have to do all that work yourself AFAIK. The same basic geographic features but with a higher waterline? Never seen anything like that, but it's the sort of thing that could very well exist. Same rough size but mapping an aquatic region? Oh yeah, tons of those around.
>>98478455Off topic, fuck off
>>98478890You pretending to be retarded and reductive doesn't really help your argument
>>98478455>or even expecting PCs to return to town before the session endsI don't really expect this but I encourage it. Tends to work out that way with occasional pauses in the dungeon but more often than not we get to a good spot after 3-4 hours and stop the game there. The irl torch time meme is a gimick for conventions, which could be cute there but not a thing I would do in a long term game.
>>98480019>The irl torch time meme is a gimick for conventionsIt doesn't say that in the book, which is off topic for this general, so please take this pointless discussion of retarded mechanics elsewhere.
>>98480019>The irl torch time meme is a gimick for conventionsno, its part of the game, and it's shit, and the game is shit
Motivations Anon here.>>98471745Thanks for the answers, lads! I will go through the tables and use them to make my own.>>98474391>I tend to use a very simple oneGood one.>>98474427>>98479180>JG Ready Ref SheetsRight, I forgot about that one. Thanks for the reminder and the screenshot.1/2
2/2 Hope I didn't miss anybody. Love you guys.>>98474561>Motivations d4/d6/d8/d10Very nice, I had something like this in mind.>>98474462>I *think* that's KLOWN's encounter table you're thinking of, but I can't swear to it because I don't have it saved. It should be somewhere in here:Found it! 4chan thinks it's spam, though, so look for this file id in the archives of you're interested.1556340642199.pdf
>>98481504>look for this file id in the archives of you're interested.>1556340642199.pdfI for one can't find this either on Plebs or Desu. Don't know what I'm doing wrong, but is it possible you could link the post it's in instead?
>>98481504>look for this file id in the archives of you're interested.>1556340642199.pdfLink to the post:https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/65906275/#q65923164
>>98481527Sweet, have that, thanks Anon!
>>98481504>Very nice, I had something like this in mind.Thx, I honestly dont know the source
New thread:>>98483580>>98483580>>98483580
