Link to the Trove:
>https://mega.nz/#F!3FcAQaTZ!BkCA0bzsQGmA2GNRUZlxzg!vJsyAa5T
Relevant Items and Miscellany:
>http://pastebin.com/FQJx2wsC
Last thread >>45935036
Posted this in the last thread, but it immediately archived afterward:
A LotFP class I threw up on my blog, but I didn't want to link shill. So pick related. Feedback appreciated.
>>46011646
I like how you picked a niche and stuck to it. I would definitely allow my players to use this if they asked. It's a better way to play Helsing than the cleric.
However, while your approach to the D&D ranger archetype is well-put, I never actually missed the ranger in my games.
>>46011646
How specific would you have their choice in prey have to be? I see Magic-Users as a choice early, but later you have Sorcerers, now I haven't read LOTFP so they might be different but wouldn't MU include Sorcerers?
>>46011646
I'm not really familiar with LotFP (at all), but the impression that I've gotten from it is that the vast majority of enemies are going to be humans and that monsters are going to unique and horrible near-lovecraftian abominations. Hence the lack of a Monster Manual-equivalent.
Am I wrong with that? Because if I'm not, choosing "Human" as your favored enemy seems like an obvious choice.
>>46011825
Our settings tend to use the terms interchangeably. I'd let someone use the bonus against anyone who was casting magic-user spells, basically, but not creatures who have spell-like abilities.
How specific you want the category to be really depends on how varied your enemies are. In a ravenloft game, you might want to break down "undead" by type - vampires, ghosts, skeletons, zombies, whatever.. simply because undead comprise so much of the available enemies. In a more traditional D&D game, you could probably lump undead together as one big category. Part of why I want players to have to fight the thing before they can invest in it is so that they can only ever really invest in things that actually come up in game.
>>46011805
> However, while your approach to the D&D ranger archetype is well-put, I never actually missed the ranger in my games.
I wasn't really thinking about the ranger as the primary use for it anyway. I think duelist, witch-hunter, or undead-hunter are way more interesting. If someone wanted to use it for a ranger though, they could. Halflings still might be the better choice for that, given they get both bushcraft and stealth.
>>46011893
From the modules I've looked through, there's a lot of human enemies, a lot of undead, a lot of demons and abominations, and then there are just unique weird things.
You could definitely decide that "humans" was your favorite enemy, and that's not necessarily a bad thing - that's why I said they'd make for good duelists. The way the points work out on the prey mechanic, you get 3 you can choose at character creation, but you can only raise 2 per level. So you could keep two specific enemy types maxed out, or you could have one maxed out and the other two at half that.. or by level 5 you could wind up with something that looked like:
Magic-Users 5
Undead 3
Were-things 3
Elder Abominations 2
I could have sworn Torchbearer used to be in the Trove.
>>46013432
I think it still is...
>>46013471
I'm not seeing it. I have the base PDF, but I really want to give a look-see to the complete set.
>>46013432
>>46013546
It's under "OSR Misc", although I think there's just the rulebook.
>>46013683
Ah, bummer. Thanks anyways.
>>46013432
>>46013546
>>46013471
>>46013683
Adding a torchbearer folder under OSR Misc
>>46013885
Thanks troveguy.
>>46012030
The class is certainly serviceable. Whether it would be a useful choice in any given campaign is debatable. Like any specialized class, if their niche isn't available, they will have no chance to excel mechanically (as opposed to a generalist like a fighter or magic user).
Another good choice of "favored enemy" in a LotfP game would be "wild beasts" or something like that. I like the idea of the hunter who isn't necessarily a great soldier or swordsman, but is a wily stalker who can bring down dire animals and man eating beasts that make mince meat out of the duke's best warriors.
The only addition I can think of is that the hunter should have a chance to avoid being surprised by his quarry.
So if you drop five points in "favored enemy magic user", you can only be surprised by a magic user on a roll of 6 on a d6. This ability would max out at 5, so even the best hunter has a 1 in 6 chance of walking into an ambush if he isn't careful.
Maybe it would be too OP, but this could also be used as a "something doesn't feel right" skill.
>I don't hear anything
>It weren't a sound boy... after a while you just know when one a them things is about
Hey /osr/, I've recently decided to write a hecrawl for LotFP and I'd like your opinion. Espacially on my Points of Interest density.
Each hexagon is 2hrs worth of walking, red icons are points of interests that only the DM is aware of.
Ask/shit talk my map away.
>>46014514
I'd be fine with that. The prey mechanic works decently for LotFP where there are fairly standard enemy types that come up repeatedly: Humans, undead, beasts, abominations, magic-users, etc.. You might actually increase the number of points given if you're playing something more like Forgotten Realms where there are more numerous enemy types.
Alternatively, you could rip the prey-points mechanic out entirely and make the class specifically a vampire/witch hunter type. Instead of spending points, just apply their class level to anything undead in nature or chaotic in alignment in the same manner.
>>46015316
I'm actually working on a hex-crawl myself, so I look forward to seeing what you've come up with. Something I've been curious about, how do you actually begin play with a hex-crawl, traditionally? What do the players do in the first session?
>>46015417
I'm actually a newbie to hex-crawl newbie myself. The way I see it you're supposed to give them a little speech on what they know about the area and literaly plop them somewhere on the edge of the map.
But that might be wrong.
>I look forward to seeing what you've come up with
I could dump the little synopsis I wrote to start with?
>>46015500
sure! Might as well.
>>46015500
Please do!
>>46015316
Aesthetically, the map is fine. Presumably you'll also have a player map, or have the players discover things hex by hex.
I'm a fan of a more rough map for the player handout. The players needn't ever interact with the hex system. Instead of saying "let's hike six hexes this way to get to the necromancer's den" they instead think in terms of "if we walk two days along this creek, we'll come to a ruined tower".
Even better if there's enough whitespace for them to jot down approximate notes--IMO it's part of the fun when their information is a bit imprecise.
The density of points of interest is probably fine, depending on what they are. Almost any location of note should have a few things that only the GM is aware of, though.
Shit I have to get going. I'll be back in an hour with the synopsis. I'd paste it but its in a physical notebook.
Please enjoy some related art in the mean time..
>>46015316
Map is fine, but it should be way more than 2 hours of distance between hexes.
>>46016587
Thats something that always throws me. How big should a hex be for a hex crawl? .. How full should it be? How do you handle movement within a hex? Do you get out a smaller map to represent that hex's terrain or just put a whole mess of stuff listed as contained within said hex and let them roll randomly to see what they come across?
>>46016807
In regards to size six miles is best, but I lost all my images explaining why that is.
>>46016922
I know this one is good http://steamtunnel.blogspot.com/2009/12/in-praise-of-6-mile-hex.html
>>46015316
Deserts (I assume that's deserts) right next to farmlands look kinda weird.
>>46016807
>how big should a hex be
I've read the 6 mile rule before too.
>how do you handle movement within a hex?
What do you mean? If there's a complex tactical situation (like a battle between two large armies) you can map the hex down pretty precisely--there's a dry creek bed here, and a tower there, and here's a pass that could be a choke point, etc. You only need the detail your characters interact with.
I wouldn't map out a single hex in detail until it becomes necessary. Most hexes can be a single line of description--"A ruined tower squats on a bluff over the river. At any given time, 3d4 bandits are camped here with their horses and a hoard of stolen loot worth 500gp".
>How full
Up for debate. It probably doesn't make much sense to have a massive metropolis and a necromancer's fortress with a thousand undead soldiers in adjoining hexes. In most cases your players should be able to travel through most hexes without having to slog through an apocalyptic battle that forces them to rest for days.
I would argue that any given 6 mile hex should have *something* worth exploring, even if it's rather mundane and the players walk right by it.
>just put a whole mess of stuff listed as contained within said hex and let them roll randomly to see what they come across?
Wandering monster tables are a classic feature of the hex crawl. You have one table for each type of
You can also pepper in non monster encounters. I would not generate actual landmarks and other permanent features on the fly, but if you want to use a generator of some kind while building the map, that's certainly ok.
>a group of pilgrims with shaved heads and brightly colored robes
>a lost child
>a mysterious melody that seems to come from nowhere
>>46017290
oops
>each type of terrain
So a desert hex could have tribes of scorpion men and stone giants or whatever, and a mushroom forest could have oozes and myconids.
These are transient individual monsters or small groups--generating big permanent lairs in this way isn't necessarily verboten, but that can get wonky fast.
How are Carcosa's psionics in play? I'm not planning on running Carcosa, but its simple psionic rules look like they could be worth stealing.
>>46015802
>>46015717
Better late than never.
(Pls, no bully. English is a second language for me.)
"For years, the inner sea of Baldac has stoo in the way of the Holy Empire of Queneval's expansion. Its immense blue reaches acting as the guardian of its plentiful bounty: A massive range of fertile mountains, rich with minerals and ores. The Baldac's untamable nature can be attributed to several factors. Its unpredictable temper, its distance from the Empire's homeland or the fact that many believe it to be cursed. However, it is mainly due to the fact that most of the suitable farmlands are in very inconvenient places.
This problem was rendered moot with the construction of fort St.Kestrel, at a point where the Baldac is only a handful of miles wide. But alas, this would only serve to reveal how truly complex the problem of the Baldac was.
The Sultanate of the Azunites claims the southern side of the Baldac and therefor the mountains. The Empire and the Sultanate are currently disscussing trade agreements but no significant progress has been observed."
So, in the red corner you have the Santo Imperio del Queneval, Catholic fundamentalists with a visual aesthetic meant to mirror 1600's spain. And in the blue corner you have the Sultanate of the Azunites. Desert folk with strong national pride and GUNPOWDER.
>>46017164
The hash marks just mean that the land is used to support the adjacent settlements. Its doesnt have to mean crops it might mean herds of cattle or whatever.
>>46011646
I'd allow it but not allow generic "Humans" as prey. Both because it seems to overlap with stuff like Magic-Users and because it's just in general something that would make the Hunter superior to the Fighter.
I'd probably permit, say, "soldiers" or "fencers". Hell, why not "peasants" even. But just humans, generally? No way.
Looks good otherwise, though.
>>46018460
>immense blue reaches
>massive range of fertile mountains
Yeah, I'd use a larger hex size, if you want this to be correct. Think about it: your "massive range" takes six hours to cross on foot at its narrow end, assuming a x3 mountain modifier and a 2h walk hex. That's not that massive. Look at a map of the Alps, or (since you seem to be Spanish) the Pyrenees, or hell, even the Sierra Morena. Check out how many miles long and wide they are.
>>46018726
Like with undead, It really depends on how common you plan on the enemy being. If most of the bad guys in your game are human, then you might want to subdivide it by whatever category. If your adventurers are equally as likely to fight kobolds, orcs, elves, undead, elementals, constructs, magical beasts, trolls, ogres, giants, and so on then it isn't any more powerful than any other choice.
>>46018953
Yeah that was part of why I asked /osr/ for advice. I suck with scale and distance. So I'd assume double that, so 4hrs per hex, would be more reasonable. I'll probably change the wording of the synopsis since I'd rather scale down than up since its my first hex-crawl.
> you seem to be Spanish
I'm actually French-Canadian, but out of curiosity what did you base that on?
what's a setting, era, or concept you'd love to see OSR'd that hasn't been?
>>46015316
Well, here's something to consider.
The attached image is a shitty graphic showing all of the Points of Interest in Map One of the Wilderness of High Fantasy - red cities, green islands, blue castles, and pink lairs.
The math, if you wonder, works out to roughly one POI per six hexes.
Now, compare that to your own map. 20x20 hexes, so 400 total; if I'm counting the POIs correctly, you've got 39 of them. However, some of those POIs look like they're mostly ignorable - the nine small villages surrounding the castles, mostly.
Even counting them, though, you've got a density of 1/10th. I hope you have some good random wilderness encounter tables to make up for it.
Seriously, imagine a party travelling by foot between the two major settlements in the north. They're following the road, for expediencies sake. The distance is seventeen hexes, or two days of travel.
During that travel, they don't encounter any of your points of interest. Nada. Zilch.
The same goes for most of them, really - since travel by road is probably the fastest, that means that the map might as well just be a long straight line with a couple branches poking out towards the various POIs - the only POIs that look like you'd encounter them on the way to other ones are the various settlements that act as end-points for your road-bound journey, that stonehenge-like arch in the northern swamp (encountered on the way to the skull) and MAYBE one of the various symbols near the southern mountains (although they're sparse enough that they could easily be accidentally avoided).
While you may have a decent-ish density, I'm not sure if that map would actually be any fun to play on! You really need to do something about those roads. Maybe stick the ruins closer to them, rather than hiding them out-of-the-way.
>>46019367
That's a weird way to phrase it.
>>46019494
I realise that the roads dont lead to my POIs but ancient magic ruins and hidden temples wouldnt be near the roads or else they would be hidden or mystical. The idea was that the settlements would be hubs for loads of plot hooks that would hint at the locations of the POIs. So the party would search a handful of hexes for an exact POI while dealing with wandering monsters. Am I being retarded?
>imagine a party travelling by foot between the two major settlements in the north
Yeah I know that zone is sparcely POIed i'm working on it. This isnt even close to being the final version of the map. I litteraly started last week.
>>46019494
> That's a weird way to phrase it.
I was thinking in terms of genre, settings, cultures, and so on. I just came across Hoodlums & Hideouts, which is pulp superhero OSR. Godbound seems to be Exalted as an OSR. Stars Without Number is space opera as an OSR game. Ruins & Ronin is feudal japan OSR style
>>46019205
>I'm actually French-Canadian, but out of curiosity what did you base that on?
>Azunites
>Santo Imperio del Queneval
>Catholic fundamenatalists
>1600s Spain
Pretty much.
Also, my advice is that you specify distance, not travel time. Time varies (or should vary) by the PCs' loadout.
>>46020061
Santo Imperio is literaly Holy Empire Google translated and Queneval is a made up word lol.
Ok but if I do like >>46017034 suggested and make them 6 miles, my hex stay exactly the same size since the average walk speed is 3mph (so 6 mp2h). But you made it plain to see that my proportions are fucked. Now i'm confused.
How about 12 miles squares? It should keep the clean proportions of the 6 miles hex while making my map bigger.
Okay, so there's this cool little piece of text from the AD&D Player's Handbook I really like:
"Your character is unusual, exceptional as compared to the norm. This applies to abilities and funds as well."
It's under the Starting Money section,and I think it really says a lot about how the game was played.
Each character in AD&D and is unique, and flawed by the very nature of how stats are generated. Each one has a chance at becoming a hero or conqueror if they're lucky, and they're already pretty bad-ass even at first level.
I think that idea of heroic fantasy is one of the reasons AD&D is my favorite system, because it's go the grit and lethality of other old-school games, but it's got a lot of potential for a sense of epic adventure, as well.
>>46019367
To be honest? A game about mundane modern "adventures" like gang wars, black ops, terrorist insurgencies and things like that.
In reality, a port of Traveller would be easier, but I have some nostalgia issues because my friends and I made a (very awkward) homebrew game like this after GTA 3 was released.
>>46019367
Adventuring in the afterlife. Not literally hell though. Demons and shit get old after a while.
>>46020917
Requiem: The Grim Harvest
>>46020917
I've thought about something similar, albeit I was working on a mythic greece setting at the time. Journeys to hades are par for the course.
>>46020966
I'll check it out.
>Azalin the lich lord is launching another diabolic plan. He has allied himself with the entity known as Death, and together they plan to raze the domain of Darkon. From the ashes of this once-mighty land will rise a new domain - Necropolis, the land of the dead!
>For the citizens of Darkon, death has been an everyday companion, and sometimes a yearned-for end to suffering. However, now the cold comfort of the grave is forever denied these good men and women as they find themselves walking the land after their breath has left them.
Uh... sounds a bit too edgy for me (I mean, they even call the land "Darkon"). I was thinking more about mystical, fabled lands than dark, gritty, death, murder, demon, pain, evil, blood, skull-land. Thanks for the reference though.
>>46021777
>a bit too edgy for me
it's ravenloft, ffs
>>46021777
It IS way, way edgier than you could imagine. It is also weirdly punitive in places, like being undead is no protection from energy drain or having to roll to see if you become horrified at the sight of someone drinking blood.
There is also a tragically inbred mutant zombie child named something like Goy.
>>46020204
>Ok but if I do like >>46017034 suggested and make them 6 miles, my hex stay exactly the same size since the average walk speed is 3mph (so 6 mp2h). But you made it plain to see that my proportions are fucked. Now i'm confused.
Yeah, that's true enough. So, what you have to decide is whether you like the 6-mile scale better, or the scale implied in your fluff post. Either let the hexes be bigger, or rewrite the fluff so instead of YUGE EMPIRE THREATENS VAST SPACE it's "local band of toughs causes ruckus in immediate area".
Third option's making a new, much fucking bigger hex map. You could use the general outlines of that one and build a new one. (If you're using Hexographer, you can do it literally -- set the old map as a backdrop or whatever it is the program calls it, then use it as a guide to draw the new map over.)
>>46022584
> set the old map as a backdrop or whatever it is the program calls it, then use it as a guide to draw the new map over.
Isn't there some wizard that will actually fill in different terrain types if you just draw the outlines? I don't know if it's just a fill tool or intelligent programming magic, but either way it would help scale things up.
>>46022635
Don't remember, but for real it's not that big of a chore either way.
how did your first session went? did all your players die?
>>46022714
I've had a few "first sessions" with different groups. Usually after the first character death or two they figure out that they aren't playing 3e anymore.
>>46022714
First session: players find weird things, avoid fungus, obtain small loot
Second session: TPK from a numerically inferior force of kobolds
I've been seeing a lot of love for B1, B2, and B4, but why does no one talk about B3: Palace of the Silver Princess?
I haven't read the module myself, but from what I've read about it, it sounds pretty fantastic.
>>46023866
Well maybe you should read the module, then you'd know?
It was left half finished, with many rooms lacking any description at all. Apparently this is highly clever design thinking outside the box since it lets you write in your own stuff for those rooms.
>>46024359
B1 does the same thing, though, and gets a lot of praise for it.
I think it's a great idea.
Also, TSR recalled and re-released it in short order, partially due to content perceived as offensive, so it's got some serious coolness points of early-80s TSR thought it was over the top.
>>46024401
Also, sorry for the first sentence sounding extremely snotty.
>does the same thing
Eh... really? I mean, I recall a very vague hint that there could possibly be a dungeon under the Keep, which I am planning on running with at some point, but I don't recall much of the hostile/enemy content left to interpretation in B1.
The removed offensive content was making fun of other TSR employees.
Do you buy modules? What do you look for when you consider buying a module? With so much free content out there, why do people buy modules?
>>46025349
I like dead tree books. Fuck it if I'm buying an expensive laptop when I can buy hundreds of dog-eared modules for the same price.
Back in January some cool Anon was making some encounters. I got three: a forest, sewer, and village. Where there any others? If you're still here Anon, they're pretty cool.
>>46025349
I have giant stacks of RPG books throughout my house of no use. Might sell them off. Its a giant chore to reference anything in paper format and I will basically never do so.
It'd have to be something very attractive.
>>46025610
Thanks. The only one you're missing is the aquatic/demon ocean one.
I'd always like some ideas to make a new one though, it's been a while.
>>46024580
B1 is In Search of the Unknown, not Keep.
Also, there were apparently weird S&M themes in B3, besides the weird TSR employee monsters.
>>46026327
I apologize then, got confused.
>>46026443
No problem, duder.
The question still stands, though.
Palace got really good reviews from a lot of the magazines at the time
The only explanation for it being less popular is that it wasn't included in the boxed sets of Basic, but neither was B4, which is still talked about pretty often.
>>46026513
My theory then would be that B1 is more popular because the unassigned rooms seem intentional and that there's a guide to what you stock them with, and B2 mildly shills for B1 with the "Cave of the Unknown." With B3, its not clear how intentional it is.
>>46025800
Fairy themed cold north?
>>46026670
Sounds like fun, I'll start working on it.
http://www.geeknative.com/48948/osr-just-scarecrow-review-dd-5e-players-handbook/
what do you think that defines an OSR? what are the things you like more about them?
also read the comments from link related to see the basic fantasy creator opinion on this
>>46019367
something with Mecha in it as the main focus(kinda surprised there isn't one already in fact)
>>46020491
I agree on the modern part, disagree about the mundane part, should be plenty of magic stuff running around(heck it'd make explaining how the PC's are able to do all the crap they do, they have class levels and thus are varying degrees of supernatural now, even a 1st level Fighter would be the equivalent of 5-10 normal men in a fight, and that's merely without a weapon on hand)
>>46019367
>>46027281
i havent heard of that one. Is it any good?
>>46025800
Maybe a Rust-, Decay-, and Magnetics-themed wasteland table? I've got a region I'm building, basically as an excuse to use a version of the Flux Bug from Save vs. Dragon:
http://savevsdragon.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/new-oebx1e-monster-fluxbug.html
It's a region of rocky badlands under a weird magnetic influence where metal slowly rusts, plants wither, most normal animals flee, people start to feel slightly unhinged if they stay too long, and odd blue crystal flowers are the only vegetation that really thrives.
>>46027362
It's a mockup, not a real thing. There are some fantasy conversions of Traveller out there, though.
>>46027735
I could try it, but I'm normally more into setting-neutral stuff so I can shill my gonzo shit. I'll try it out though.
>>46027896
I don't see why a rust, decay, and magnetics themed desert couldn't be setting neutral. Not the requester btw. Nor do I see why that is opposed to gonzo.
>>46022584
I think I'll keep the 6 mile hexes and fuck around with how I write the fluff. Because the initial intent was YUGE EMIPRES have a small border conflict. The map only represents the conflict area but the actual land of the 2 nations are much bigger.
At any rate, thanks a lot anons, il work on disposing my POIs and i'll rewrite my synopsis so my scale makes sense. I'll be back with ver 2.0 eventually.
>>46027119
Is this the trololol?
>I didn’t like all the inconsistent, often unnecessary, rules nor did I like the fact you were simply handled a randomly generated algorithm which you had to guide through algorithmically challenging landscapes. That’s to say; I’m not a min-maxer.
This kinda shit gives me the impression of a man who's familiar with the smell of glue.
>>46025610
Could you post the sewer and village ones too?
>>46023866
I like it. I've plugged it before. It has a bit of a troubled publication history though, as the original, orange cover version got cancelled before it really got released (for either shoddy design or art that mocked/offended the TSR folks, depending on who you ask).
>>46024359
>It was left half finished, with many rooms lacking any description at all.
Not the revised, green cover one that would've been the one folks actually had the opportunity to buy.
Do you always do 3d6 in a row, or let the players put the scores where they want?
>>46027744
I am not the anon you are replying to, but my heart is now broken.
>>46032085
I let them either swap two scores ONCE, or go the Basic way of -2 in an attribute to get +1 in your prime.
Does anyone have or know where to find tables about poison effects? I'm thinking of changing the medusa to have different types of snake in its hair with different toxins, instead of it just being save or die.
>>46020402
BUT UH
OLD D&D ISN'T HEROIC
PCS ARE LITERALLY DIRT FARMERS AND HOBOS WITHOUT ANY SPECIAL QUALITIES
NOT MUH OLD SCHOOL
Anyone here running a game online who's interested in another player?
>>46030776
Original B3 was missing several maps, had bubbles as enemies, and general wasn't as good as the finished product.
I'd attach the PDF but I have a shitty connection, look at it here: wayback.archive-it.org/1213/20090602060955/http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20020121x7
>>46032100
You're not alone, last time that image was posted in /osrg/ a bunch of anons raged about it.
It's worth noting that the original B3 Palace of the Silver Princess is VERY similar to B1 Into the Unknown in how it gives "empty rooms" with space for the DM to fill in what's inside them - it uses the same template and everything.
Both go about in in the opposite way from how B4 does it - B1 and B3 give information about the room, but leave the contents up to the DM; B4 gives the contents, but leaves the specifics to the DM.
I'm pretty sure that B1 - and hence B3 - did things like it did because it wanted to teach new DMs how to stock a dungeon. It's that simple, really, and Basic was literally meant to introduce new people into the hobby and make the game more understandable.
Also, I think the bubble monsters might be based on a trap mentioned in Greyhawk? They're not that weird, either way - they're big bubbles that engulf you and disappear under water unless destroyed.
I think I kind of like them, to be honest? I might use them somewhere if I remember, they seem like they could be interesting.
>>46032306
1st-level OD&D Fighters are just generally better at fighting than the bog-standard "Normal Men" you encounter as Bandits, etc. - in fact, their design mirrors that of Chainmail's "Leaders".
The name for level 1 echoes this as well - "Veteran".
OD&D Magic-Users and Clerics hit just as hard as ordinary men, of course, although come B/X suddenly they're hitting HARDER since the "Normal Man" got his own sub-par line on the tables.
I get that you're just joking around, but I feel like it's worth pointing out to the people who actually believe your caps-locked post.
Although it is worth noting that how the game actually plays means that characters are still much less "Heroic" than in latter editions - you're better than the average schmuck, but that doesn't help too much. You're good at what you do, but you're not the protagonist of an action movie.
Looking for any other opinions on my alternate magic users system as detailed here.
>>46032306
sup ad&d 2e fan, why are you in the osr thread?
>>46033167
Magic Discus looks sweet. +2 AC and d8+1 free HP, for a first-level spell slot? With first-level hit point totals, that's pretty amazing.
>>46033396
The discus has its own HP, it's not added to the Wizards.
>>46027119
That's a pretty infuriating read, but it's cool to see the writer of BFRPG in there trying to set him right.
>>46033637
Yeah, but if the discus is taking hits for the m-u it's even better than free hp, because there's no overflow.
>>46033981
Well when you say it's good I hope you mean it's interesting/useful and not overpowered.
>>46015316
How do you guys make these nice hex maps? I've tried doing something with gimp but I never managed to figure it out, and all the guides I could find are massive pro style guides.
>>46033339
>one hundred posts of assrage explaining that 2E IS TOO OSR
But seriously, 2e gtfo
>>46034379
Hexographer, brodeur. The free version does pretty much everything you might want, I guess the pro one has more features, but I'm far from sure they're worth 32 dollaritos. hexographer.com/free-version/
>>46033734
Honestly the comments enraged me harder than the article itself. The article was just shilling (paid or unpaid, who cares) by some retard. In the comments he goes into full damage control mode, just completely refusing to admit he fucked the whole way up with no ladder; that's when I started wanting to cave his face in with a hammer.
>>46034474
Thanks!
>>46033981
>>46034110
Don't forget this article is once per adventure, not a spell per day. So if it breaks in the middle of a dungeon, it's gone for good.
I've read all the usual primers and definitions and blog articles, but I still have a question, /osrg/:
What is it about OSR that you like, particularly compared to new-school games? What specific elements make these games more appealing to you, as an individual?
Looking for honest (and hopefully varied) opinions, not trying to troll or start a flame war here.
>>46035957
I'm always drawn to back-to-basic approaches, reducing something to its core essentials. I like minimalism and simplification while maintaining quality. As far as roleplaying games are concerned, that's what draws me to the OSR.
>>46035957
I only just started to get into OSR, but I really like just how simple it is to play, both for the GM and the Player (players specifically). When I introduce new people into TTRPG's there always so much they have to learn and remember and the first, second, how every many more sessions is them just learning their class abilities (When I first got into TTRPG's I started with 4th Edition and wow, that was really something else) and the basic rules.
With rule-sets like B/X its just so quick and easy it blows my mind, I love it a lot.
>>46036219
>simple it is to play, both for the GM
>quick and easy
I get what you're saying in terms of the actual rules, but don't OSR rules generally have more bookkeeping, BECAUSE there aren't detailed rules to fall back on? Particularly for the GM.
e.g. keeping track of game turns and combat rounds, checking for wandering monsters, reducing defeated monsters from the no. appearing and so on?
A bunch of the modules I've skimmed through have special notes for the GM, to make a note of X or keep records of Y. In later games a lot of this seems to be in the hands of the players too, because it's handled by the rules as much as the GM, or it simply doesn't matter.
>>46025610
>>46025800
Any chance of downloading the other two pdfs? Thanks--
>>46036296
Checking for wandering monsters, keep track of game turns (essentially time) and combat rounds are all things you have to track in later editions as well, right?
May be I'm not the right person to explain this, I'm really not the smartest guy but I try.
>>46033339
>>46034407
dumb 1eposters
>>46036325
OK, I already found them. They are here: https://desustorage.org/tg/thread/44763043/
>>46036478
Not as much. I think wandering monsters became less of a thing over the years. Maybe there's some guidance somewhere, but in 3E onwards you try and knock down a door, there are no monsters in the next room, you fail? You just ... try again. And again. Or take the rule that you can just auto-succeed. Now the door is knocked down. No need for wandering monsters checks.
Of course a GM might decide it does alert monsters or throw some in there, but it doesn't seem like a codified part of the rules to keep track of. Same goes for game turns. "How long have we been in the dungeon?", "Oh, about two hours?" instead of checking off everything in ten minute turns (and checking for monsters every two of those turns).
Would anyone be interested in joining a LotFP hex-crawl? Newbie Referee, but I want to try this, but I'm lacking players.
Not to mention having an experienced one being able to point out my worst may help me a lot
>>46036652
Your right, I guess as the GM it trades more rules for "bookkeeping" (there is probably a better way to say that), which I'm fine with. That's how I see it, not sure about others.
>>46036855
What dates/times do you plan on playing?
>>46036922
Bookkeeping refers to literally keeping pages and pages and keeping track of a lot of information though. Imagine 3rd ed and its huge-ass monster statblocks
I fon't see how putting a few lines on a piece of paper to count time is bookkeeping.like you said, you're just looking for a better word so that's fine
>>46036991
Sundays from 3pm till the players are exhausted GMT +1
>>46037056
I could do that, when do you plan on starting and how would you like to get in contact?
>>46037248
Would be pretty cool. I plan on trying a one-shot or two first so I don't jump into something bigger and screw it up.
Is Skype fine with you?
>BOOKS OF SPELLS: >Characters who employ spells are assumed to acquire books containing the spells they can use, one book for each level. If a duplicate set of such books is desired, the cost will be the same as the initial investment for research as listed above, i.e. 2,000, 4,000, 8,000, etc. Loss of these books will require replacement at the above BOOKS OF SPELLS: Characters who employ spells are assumed to acquire books containing the spells they can use, one book for each level. If a duplicate set of such books is desired, the cost will be the same as the initial investment for research as listed above, i.e. 2,000, 4,000, 8,000, etc. Loss of these books will require replacement at the above expense.
So OD&D wizards get all spells at every level like clerics? That's pretty weird.
Monstrous HD.
I'm playing with the idea that monster HD should scale like player HD, with the number of HD being the monster's "level" for the purposes of saves, to-hit, and so on. For symmetry then, the size of the HD would be dependent on the actual size of the creature. Kobold or goblin-sized creatures are d4s. Man-sized are d6. Slightly larger than man or particularly tough combatants are d8 (on par with fighters). Big critters like ogres ("Large" sized) are d10s. Huge creatures d12s.. and something absolutely massive might have d20s.
Thoughts?
>>46037402
I would have to install Skype, but yes, I'm cool with it.[email protected]
>>46035957
The style mostly, I guess. I don't like character/story-based play at all, I like the "small scale wargame" style, and encourage the players to think of their PCs as chess pawns or wargame units: valuable as game resources, but not somehow inherently precious or something you can rationally expect to survive through the whole game. OSR's great for this, obviously. It's the only type of game designed for this style of play, and it shows: fast chargen, no big "build" options, no annoying storygame bullshit about motivations and blah blah. Just quick, simple, tight rules for fantasy adventuring. It's a game that knows what it's trying to do and does that well (unlike a lot of roleplaying games, which are incredibly incoherent about their purposes).
>>46037696
I'll shoot you a mail later today.
>>46037677
I've always liked the concept, but my problem is bigger creatures tend to get more HD anyway because they are bigger and stronger.
Rather, I would give bigger or smaller HDs to a creature who would fit, while not changing their actual hit dice number.
For example, a diseased or starving goblin gets 1d4 as their health. D6 for wild or runt goblins. D8 for soldier or adult goblins. D10 for elites or large, d12 for chieftains, alchemical roofed goblins, goblin demigods, etc.
Thus same scale works for all enemies, bandits cam be starved or elites. Dragons that are young or ancient wyrms, etc.
>>46037677
I had a similar thing thing in my abandoned not-quite-hack of World of Dungeons.
Except especially experienced monsters(like orcish warchiefs or really old dragons) were getting HDs one step higher.
Also, monster damage die was equal to their HD.
>>46037430
Also, OD&D Clerics have spellbooks.
Personally I like it, especially if you keep the spell list slim. Gets rid of some of the "character build" aspect Magic-Users have in, say, B/X. (Where they also automatically get spells, although in limited amounts.)
Do note that one of the things that Greyhawk changed was Magic-Users knowing all spells.
>>46037677
Doesn't really work. It makes weak monsters weaker and powerful monsters stronger. The HD system already takes creature size into account, so you'd just be double-mapping it.
>>46038030
> Rather, I would give bigger or smaller HDs to a creature who would fit, while not changing their actual hit dice number.
>For example, a diseased or starving goblin gets 1d4 as their health. D6 for wild or runt goblins. D8 for soldier or adult goblins. D10 for elites or large, d12 for chieftains, alchemical roofed goblins, goblin demigods, etc.
I'd counter that "elite" goblins should have more than one HD anyway if you really want them to be elite. It seems more consistent in my brain with the way PCs work to have goblins all have d4s as their hit die (or d6s, or whatever you decide goblin HD is), and then the "tough" goblins have more than one HD - which would also then improve that goblins saves, attack, etc.
>>46038086
>Also, monster damage die was equal to their HD.
I was thinking about that as well, though more as a rule of thumb than a normal rule.
>>46038086
Ah, here it is:
"Creatures deal damage equal to their HD size if armed, one die step lower if they are unarmed(if they have natural weapon, then tjey are always armed)
(1d4<1d6<1d8<1d10)
Typical human-sized creature have 1d6 HD size.
Smaller and/or weaker creatures, like goblins, have 1d4 HD size.
Stronger and/or bigger creatures, like horses, get 1d8 HD size.
Very strong and/or very big creatures, like dragons, get 1d10 HD size.
If a creature is experienced, ancient, dire, or outstanding for any reason, it gets +1HD and +half of it's damage die(i.e. orc chieftain had 1d8 damage, now he gets 1d8+4)
If it has mundane protection, like medium armor, it gets +1 armor.
If it has superior protection, like dragon scales, it gets +2 armor.
If it has magical protection, it gets +2 armor, and possibly immunity for something.
If it has more than 1HD, then set one of it's HD at max.
If it is undead, it gets +half of it's HD size(i.e. undead human gets 1d6+3hp)
For example:
Big Red Dragon is huge and has natural weapons - claws, fiery breath, and his toothy maw - and he's also an adult dragon.
His HDs are 1d10, his damage is 1d10+5, his hp are 10+1d10, his armor is 4(tough and magical scales) and he's immune to fire.
Rotten Skeleton Warrior is ravaged by time and is literally unarmed, but he's also undead.
His HDs are 1d4, his damage is 1d2, his hp are 2+1d4, but his armor is 2(for he is still wearing armor and he's undead)."
Important thing - all creatures were assumed to have only one hit die.
>>46036652
3E has an entire section in the DMG on wandering monsters on page 77.
Basically, it's a 10% chance rolled...
>Once per hour
>Whenever the characters make noise
>In high-traffic areas
And you can add/omit rolls...
>In cleared-out areas
>When the characters are leaving the dungeon
The DMG's dungeon design feels somewhat old-school-ish, actually, but AFAIK the published adventures don't really reflect that. Makes sense, though, what with the "Back to the Dungeon" slogan.
Then again, I'm not aware of any edition of D&D where the published adventures adhered to the DMG. 1E was filled with tournament modules and later story-filled adventures, OD&D generally assumed that you'd make dungeons yourself but the few published ones were a far cry from the megadungeons of U&WA, 2E was 2E, and 4E had some serious issues with the guys writing the adventures not actually understanding how their system worked.
Maybe 5E works better, I dunno. I haven't been paying much attention.
>>46038356
Also, I suppose that I should mention that 4E doesn't have wandering monsters for very good reasons.
You know how there's a combat focus, and how combats take more time than in TSR editions? That means that every encounter has to actually matter in some way - something that wandering monsters, by their very nature, don't.
Also it fucks with the math and 4E is generally more "heroic" and less concerned with the dungeon robbers playstyle that wandering monsters serve to discourage/counter - you're not going to be slowly pacing your way around looking for traps and secret doors in 4E. Or at least not in the same way that you would in 1E, which is the important bit.
>>46038139
It's neat, but the Men and Magic spell lists certainly aren't slim. Vancian casting certainly balances it, but you still leave the magic-user with a lot of flexibility.
>>46038197
> The HD system already takes creature size into account, so you'd just be double-mapping it.
The whole idea would be redesigning the HD system. Then rather than having to give monsters ludicrous amounts of HD (elephants have 9 HD in BECMI, 11 in AD&D2e) you can start with size and then assess combat prowess the way you would with a PC.
how do you narrate a succes in a save against poison? ie a needle
>>46038676
Oh, I didn't get that you *wanted* to redesign every monster from the ground up. In that case I guess it's doable, although personally I don't see what's ludicrous about an elephant having 9 HD. (Particularly not ludicrous enough that it's worthwhile reworking the whole Monster Manual.)
What's standard hit dice for monsters in whitebox OD&D? I know it's d6 for humans, but is it also d6 for monsters?
>>46038683
Usually I just have them avoid it, e.g. if it's a needle trap or such it just misses. In the case where the poison's an effect from a successful hit with an attack, like getting bitten by a snake, it'll be something like jerking the viper out of the wound fast enough that the venom sprays harmlessly out of its fangs into thin air, or sucking the venom out of the woundyes, I know this doesn't work in real life, or else they just get palpitations and turn pale or something but weren't injected with a lethal dose.
I try to avoid that last type as much as possible, though, because I don't think makes good sense for someone to get poisoned and just HNNNNGH their way out of it. It's not verisimilitudinous enough for my milieu.
>>46038767
Yes, in LBB-only OD&D all hit dice are d6. And, in fact, all dice period are d6 except saves, the attack rolls in the alternate combat system for plebs without Chainmail, and (I think, offhand) rolls on the wandering monster tables.
Alright /osr/, you helped me with my shitty hex-crawl map, now i'd like your opinion on my shitty magic weapon. Ok, a magic rondel dagger called "Adrian's Pen". Its posessed by the soul of a frustrated artist. He was a latent sorcerer who, in his final moments experience such disdain and anger at the fact that people would only appreciate his work after his death, that his soul found a way to out live his body and latched onto the closest, sharpest thing available. A dagger he kept under his pillow out of paranoia.
Whenever the wielder rolls maximum damage, a hideous creature pours forth from the wound of the victim. It is randomly generated and has 1 to 6 HD and the victim takes an additional d4 of damage per HD of the creature. The creature acts upon its own will and is hostile to all forms of life, unless the wielder succeeds a domination roll. The creature rolls 1d20+HD and the character rolls 1d20+CHAmod (+lvl if magic-user). In which case the creature is under the user's control until it is dispelled, dies or wanders 100 yards away from the wielder. You can only control one creature this way at a time.
>>46038662
It's slim in comparison to later ones, mostly.
Also, remember that you can't cast low-level spells in higher-level slots. That limits the absurd flexibility of them a lot.
The spell selection is somewhat different as well - there's precisely three offensive spells in the first two spell levels (Charm Person, Sleep, Phantasmal Forces), for instance.
>>46038940
There's also some miscellaneous dice used for randomly determining spells for scrolls, retainers for castles, and of course the d100 is king of the treasure tables. And the d12 is used for determining sword intelligence, IIRC.
In play, though, the players pretty much just use d6s and d20s. I think there's some small exceptions, like Sleep, but I think most can be handled on the DM's side.
>>46039091
That fluff's pretty goofy, but the effect's great.
The one thing I'd say is, given that a dagger does d4 damage these wound-creatures are going to spew forth pretty regularly - maybe have them only last 7-HD turns? (That way, there's a tradeoff between power and duration which is pretty nice, plus it means that if an overly mighty monster comes out the PCs have *some* chance of fleeing until it dissipates)
>>46039214
>There's also some miscellaneous dice used for randomly determining spells for scrolls, retainers for castles, and of course the d100 is king of the treasure tables. And the d12 is used for determining sword intelligence, IIRC.
Oh yeah, true. Sword Ego's another d12, even, isn't it.
>>46039091
So it's a dagger? 1d4 damage, maximum damage 25% of the time?
Average damage 4,3125? Lower than I expected, to be honest.
>>46039253
Also, the owner's INT+STR is reduced by some d4s when damaged, making them easier for the sword to dominate.
Skimming through the items, there's also stuff like the Potion of Undead Control using d4's for the number of undead controlled.
>>46038756
> Oh, I didn't get that you *wanted* to redesign every monster from the ground up.
My system is getting hacked enough that it might be worth redesigning things anyway. Though, honestly with this setup it isn't hard.
"How big?" "How good at fighting?" The two combine to work out the monster's HP, to-hit, and saves, etc.
what is the best rule you added to your game?
>>46039225
Well I want the weapon to be some kind of proverbial "Double edged sword". Like every time the wizard busts out his magical shiv the table goes silent because everyone knows that it'll either be fucking radical or a total fiasco.
>the PCs have *some* chance of fleeing until it dissipates
Anon, art is forever.
>>46039292
Yeah well the advantage really comes from the demons it summons. Its not meant to be a weapon someone would wield all the time, but a gamble that the player takes when he's desperate.
>>46039214
That's true, but it also means that when they reach 3rd level spells they get fireball, and lighting bolt, and slow, and haste. That's pretty brutal.
>>46039091
The effect is neat, the backstory seems kinda lackluster.
I'd go with the creator instead being a writer who used dark magics to receive inspiration from the Far Realm, which imbued his pen with weird and eldritch energies.
>>46039091
To expand on >>46039225, here's a version written the way I might use it in my game (that's not to say it's better, just adapted to my tastes.):
SPIRIT SPIKE
This rondel dagger was enchanted by a psychic driven mad by projecting his astral body too far. Whenever the wielder rolls maximum damage, a hideous creature made of ectoplasm pours forth from the wound of the victim. It is randomly generated, has 1 to 6 HD, lasts for 7-HD rounds, and the victim takes an additional d4 of damage per HD of the creature from being drained of his spirit-stuff. The ectoplastic creature acts upon its own will and is hostile to all forms of life, unless the wielder succeeds a domination roll (the creature rolls 1d20+HD and the character rolls 1d20+CHAmod (+lvl if magic-user)), in which case the creature is under the user's control until it is dispelled, dies or dissipates. You can only control one creature this way at a time.
The dagger has no bonus to hit or damage, but counts as magical for the purpose of hitting monsters. At the DM's discretion, the ectoplasm ability may act as level drain on ethereal/incorporeal monsters such as wraiths, ghosts, and so on, draining as many hit dice as the created creature has.
>>46039594
>lasts for 7-HD rounds
Shit, that was meant to say turns, not rounds.
>lasts for 7-HD turns before dissipating harmlessly into the luminiferous aether
>>46039594
>the victim takes an additional d4 of damage per HD of the creature from being drained of his spirit-stuff
Thats a neat way to put it. But the d4 per HD extra damage was meant more to represent a physical creature ripping open the wound while beign "Born." But psychic ghost are also pretty cool.
>>46039668
Yeah, I totally got that your original idea was a completely different and much meatier one, I just preferred this kind of fluff due to not being that keen on the "art" angle. I also liked the image of a big plume of ectoplasm gushing out of the guy like jellied smoke and turning into a monster.
>>46039806
Well the art angle is mainly for my settings. Discussing the mechanic would be more constructive in my opinion anyway.
>lasts for 7-HD turns before dissipating harmlessly into the luminiferous aether
Ok I dont know why, but this screams new school to me. I feel like if there isnt a lasting penalty to failling the domination roll, players will abuse the dagger. I deliberatly made the monster permanent to counter act the 25% chance of activating the (very devastating) special ability.
>>46040019
>I feel like if there isnt a lasting penalty to failling the domination roll, players will abuse the dagger. I deliberatly made the monster permanent to counter act the 25% chance of activating the (very devastating) special ability.
Totally fair. I was thinking in the exact opposite direction -- didn't want the players regularly getting a permanent controlled beast. But I think your instincts are better in this case, because Charm Person pretty much already lets them do that.
>>46040096
>permanent controlled beast
Thats why I specified it cant go farther than 100 yards from the wielder. No one' not even the CE necromancer, is gonna want to bring pic related into town.
>>46039457
Well, yes. But they only get one of them per adventure. (Two at level six, three at eight, and four at 11 (name level).)
Remember, OD&D is all about keeping your expensive spell books looked up far away from the dungeon and wilderness. The spells are "per session", really, which makes a ton more sense.
Hell, in the first prints you could have the spells act truly Vancian prepare-infinite-times-a-day - the 1/day limit was only added in later prints, from what I can tell. In the first print it's pretty much just "per adventure".
Honestly, I think I prefer it that way.
>>46040178
Eh, toss a tarp on it and have it chill in the wagon.
Never underestimate the capacity for players to do stupid shit.
http://strawpoll.me/7093174
>>46040274
Yo, if they're dumb enough to treat a horrendous monster from beyond time and space with such little precaution then it wont be my fucking problem when it fucking attacks a kid or breaks into someones home to fulfill its indecipherable desires.
>>46040274
>Remember, OD&D is all about keeping your expensive spell books looked up far away from the dungeon and wilderness. The spells are "per session", really, which makes a ton more sense.
>In the first print it's pretty much just "per adventure".
I've mentioned in previous /osrg/ threads that arguably BECMI/RC uses this model as well. If you check out the Rules Cyclopedia, there's no particular information on how to regain spells.
Like you, I think it's the superior method whether or not it was intended. "Per adventure" removes any issue of spellcasters wanting to rest to regain spells, creating a 15-minute adventuring day, and/or taking over the game.
do you let your players make a background story for their characters?
i just let them if it is not ridiculous like "I am the son of a god that betrayed me now i am human and i am looking for revenge" first encounter in and they are dead
>>46032374
>Anyone here running a game online who's interested in another player?
I am not, I have been thinking about delving into these type of games though. With that in mind I am curious, what website/whatever are people using to simulate PnP RPGs? What are your experiences with using them? And, if I would delve into that particular world, are there ones with maps and minis visible on screen?
Any recommendations?
>>46041005
>do you let your players make a background story for their characters?
I will allow it as long as it fits the setting.
>>46041005
Ah, a lesson in humility and of how the gods are incapable of understanding humanity, and when forced to confront it are doomed to fail.
Ain't nothing wrong with that, really. Just don't expect backstory to give you any bonuses.
Then again, I'm an OD&D sort of guy. If you want to play as a Balrog you'll have to start as a young one etc.
Also, that guy literally gave you a license to have a literal god act as his enemy. Chew on that for a minute.
Really, though, the philosophy of "your backstory is level 1-3" is probably your best bet for backstory that actually means something and won't get burned up in a minute when Olaf Olafsson the Third dies to a centipede (much like Olaf the Second and Olaf the First).
From a player point of view, that is.
Another thing that I highly recommend using is something akin to OD&D's inheritance system (90% of all you own is inherited by your next character, if you designate an heir) - something that gives a mechanical incentive to not just being a random murderhobo.
Ok I dont understand this. The labyrinth lord manual states:
>Beginning at 15th level, a fighter gains
one additional attack per round. One further attack is gained
every 5 levels to a maximum of 4 attacks per round.
Am I retarded or is it a typo or what?
>>46042339
At level 15, the Fighter can attack twice. At level 20, they can attack thrice. At level 25, they can attack four times, and they don't get any further attacks.
Seems simple enough to me, although they could have put a "thereafter" or something after "every 5 levels" to make it clearer.
I'm mostly just basing this off of how BECMI did it, FYI.
>>46042473
But the table stops at 20th level. Also 15th level seems late to start introducing something like a second attack. Its waaaay after you get your stronghold/name lvl/whatever. It just seems backwards to me.
How do you handle a TPK? Do you just end the session, or just have them re-roll characters and start from the beginning, or just go to an entirely different adventure?
>>46042873
>How do you handle a TPK?
It depends on a lot of factors. Did they enjoy this particular "adventure"? If they did, have them re-roll. Did they perhaps die because of the final "boss", for instance, the adventure may very well end there. That is, it is context based. With that in mind, is there something bothering you about this? Because I have never considered a TPK a problem personally.
>>46042873
How much game time have we got left? Are they raring to have another go at the dungeon or would they rather play a board game or something? It's all circumstantial, all non-principle stuff.
>>46043335
>>46042987
Just overthinking/over-worrying, thanks for the replies.
>>46043621
>Just overthinking/over-worrying
That particular part is nothing to "overthink/over-worry about, it will come naturally. How is the adventure going otherwise?
>>46043754
Taking them through B1 at the moment, first time with RC for all of us, going well.
I like the random dragon table here http://oldguardgamingaccoutrements.blogspot.de/2009/04/d6-random-unique-dragon-generator.html
and I was glad to find the "full version" with much more detail here http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=39077
However, I didn't like the variety of dice and some of the aesthetics of the latter, so I made my own version using only d8s. It's condensed, but it still needs 30 or more rolls. And it uses variable hit dice, which is arguably bad style. And the 2 in 2d8 results will show up less than 2% of the time. And it produces limbless serpents a lot, but that's what I like.
Just watched The Witch.
Kept thinking about LotfP during the entire film.
>>46043888
>Taking them through B1 at the moment, first time with RC for all of us, going well.
Cool to hear it. How is it going for the party? Everyone still alive? Soon you will be creating megadungeons like the rest of us old fuckers.
Would anyone be interested in an online run-through of B/x module B-2?
I compiled the information from the official (green) 2E character sheet into a text file. The purpose of this is to keep as a reference for having my players make their character sheets on a blank sheet of paper during game sessions instead of printing out character sheets.
Am I missing anything? Any ideas to improve it? I just finished it, so I'm sure that it needs some tweaking.
http://pastebin.com/3vySBzsr
>>46045576
>Would anyone be interested in an online run-through of B/x module B-2?
That is certainly a cool idea. That is Keep on the Borderlands right?
>>46035957
I like how it's relatively simple compared to the WOTC editions, but still with the meaty crunch I need in an RPG(FATE and a lot of other Rules-Lite games hurt my brain trying to wrap my head around them as they tend to be too abstract), also the amount of content available, the cross-compatibility between editions and games, and how easy it is to tweak things without breaking the whole system(since pre-3E versions don't have a unifying mechanic)
>>46040560
personally I prefer the "Rest To Regain Spells and Other Limited Abilities" concept added in later editions, if mostly cause the alternative can be a bit of a middle finger to players, especially at low levels(similarly I tend to make some of the crappier 1st level spells into Cantrips of more or less unlimited use, such as Detect Magic, Light[but not Darkness if Reversible Spells are available], and Read Languages, and also give them a pretty weak at-will attack Cantrip, only does 1d3+1 damage but I figure it'll help a low level Wizard be able to contribute to a fight even if they don't have a more potent spell ready)
>>46041005
depends on the game and what level we'd be starting at, if it's Level 1(or even Level 0 if we were doing a DCC Funnel) I'd say keep it down to one or two paragraphs(if Level 0 then single sentance), if we were starting at say Level 5, then I'd allow them to be a bit more elaborate
>>46042339
>>46042473
>>46042554
personally when it comes to multiple attacks I think Fighters should get them a lot earlier and a lot more often(like say between level 3 and 5 for the first one, and gain an additional one every 3-5 levels afterwards), it's a good way to help combat Caster Superiority at higher levels(along with having good Cleaving rules, possibly some sort of Combat Stunts and/or Weapons Mastery rules, and giving Fighters the best stuff at Domain Level play)
>>46045896
Yes, it is. I've got a couple people on board, and am looking for a 6 person group.
Add me on Skype, if you are able to: beholder167
>>46045576
I am, if it's just a one shot.
Skype?
>>46045968
Skype name is beholder167
What are some good location-based modules, or just locations in general? Stuff like villages or wilderness areas that don't really have any "point" to them per se, but have stuff that still suggest possible hooks and whatnot?
I'm running a sandbox campaign, and I find that resources like villages you can just reference and use are very nice. There's plenty of dungeons (and I do use those as well), but these are a bit less common. They do exist, but I'm wondering if people have any favorites.
>>46035957
D&D is a lingua franca that enables you to easily communicate with a lot of people. If you say "I made a new RPG, what do you think of it?" chances are not a lot of people are going to go through the trouble to read over it. And why would they? It's serious investment of time just to learn the basics of what you're doing, and that time may be wasted, as your system may suck or just be unappealing to the reader. But with D&D you have already have a foundation, so that people don't need to learn things from scratch. So you can present a game that's D&D except X, Y and Z. Everybody's up to speed on the D&D part, so they just need to examine X, Y and Z. And they have a pretty good basis for judging those things you changed or added because they know the context well and can be like "X seems a lot more powerful than the rules as written, and would probably make clerics too powerful."
Why old school D&D as opposed to new school? It's simpler and more base-level. This makes it easier to work with. It also has historical significance in that it underlies and informs newer editions of D&D. So ultimately it's a better universal tongue. Plus, it's dead and buried, at least in its official, commercial form. This means that the rules aren't changing underneath your feet and there's been enough time for us to have some perspective on it (and not be in the middle of edition war shit-flinging).
>>46035957
Well, simplicity is one. But more than that, I actually honestly like the "Fantasy fucking Vietnam" -style of play, the overwhelming challenges and the fact that you neither can nor should just try to bash your numbers against the enemy's numbers and expect to win. I LIKE the fact that combat tends to be a shitty option, and working around that and being smart is what gets you the riches.
I enjoy the rush of high stakes and bad situations, and the exhausting victory of emerging from the meatgrinder victorious. Or at least as close to victorious as possible. I have honestly never played another game where victory has felt so earned and so good.
I also like the wide-open sandbox style of play our group does, and the fact that there's no DM agenda about what you're supposed to do or input as to what is a legitimate challenge. I like the problem solving aspect that brings, when you try to map out the obstacle, what it means and what it requires to overcome.
Of course, a lot of this has to do with playstyle and group preferences, but this is how my group plays OSR stuff, and this is what draws me to it. Fuck the expectation that any battle you find is going to be fair and victory is the default. Give me horrid death and a slim chance of ever-sweeter victory. Make me feel smart, lucky and superior for getting there.
>>46011609
Not sure if this is the right thread for it but I thought I might as well ask here
Does anyone knows if mystara ever got other setting books besides "Karameikos, Kingdom of Adventure"?
>>46035957
>What is it about OSR that you like, particularly compared to new-school games? What specific elements make these games more appealing to you, as an individual?
I was about to answer this question and then I realized that my answer was already perfectly stated. We should have a game sometime 46037740.
>>46037740
>The style mostly, I guess. I don't like character/story-based play at all, I like the "small scale wargame" style, and encourage the players to think of their PCs as chess pawns or wargame units: valuable as game resources, but not somehow inherently precious or something you can rationally expect to survive through the whole game. OSR's great for this, obviously. It's the only type of game designed for this style of play, and it shows: fast chargen, no big "build" options, no annoying storygame bullshit about motivations and blah blah. Just quick, simple, tight rules for fantasy adventuring. It's a game that knows what it's trying to do and does that well (unlike a lot of roleplaying games, which are incredibly incoherent about their purposes).
>>46035957
Because I like games.
I'm into Fantasy Role-Playing GAMES, not Fantasy Drama Classes.
I do care about number crunching, rules and math, because I want a game with good design. "If it's not in the rules, it's not in the game".
But I also love simple design and gonzo, weird fantasy.
OSR rescues that idea of "RPGs are still GAMES in the end" and that's what I love about it.
What OSR version has the best replacement for the "thief"?
I never liked how the class worked in any D&D edition prior to modern ones.
>>46046514
LotfP by far.
>>46037740
I'm with you there.
I really dislike modern systems (and players) tendency to forget the "GAME" part of roleplaying game. We're here to play a game, and have fun, a story coming out of it is incidental, not the main objective. Some more modern systems you might as well not even have rules since everything is just narrative shit.
>>46046412
you
you are my nigga.
Wanting good game design should not be such a rare thing in a hobby with "game" in the title.
>>46046358
It had a whole series in the form of the Gazetters.
>>46027119
What a fucking prick. What I especially like here is that he describes "minmaxing" as randomly designed characters, and then endorses the three editions where center stage is your character build (3e, 4e, and 5e)... ie minmaxing.
>>46046962
I just realized I fucked up the question. I mean to ask if mystara got other setting books for AD&D. From what I can see in my physical book they were updating the setting for AD&D, including shocking twists like "alfheim taken over by shadow elves" and "thyathis empire falls" and of course "gran duchy of karameikos now kingdom of karameikos"
Gazeteer is for Basic
>>46046815
Exactly. The fact that "gamist" is an adjective people use when describing certain systems is really weird to me.
I feel like OSR is very similar to the "new retro" wave that most indie developers ride.
It's about making games that are games. Not "communal story telling", not complex narratives, not performing (not that there's anything wrong with those things), but just games.
Systems that try to be simple but still about the rules themselves.
You wouldn't ditch the rules to any other type of game and simply "wing it", otherwise you're not really playing that game at all. Although you can (and should) build upon it and make it more fun for you and your friends.
That's what OSR does in relation to RPGs, I feel like; and I absolutely love it.
>>46027119
Old school RPGs, to my mind, provide character advancement on the basis of finding wealth first and fighting/story rewards a distant second, and emphasize player skill in terms of playing the game.
New school RPGs, to my mind, provide character advancement on the basis of fighting, overcoming challenges, storyline, character development, or participation, and emphasize player skill in terms of how good you are at optimizing the character before you even show up for game day.
I find the latter category to be almost unenduringly tedious nowadays. From White Wolf to Wizards of the Coast to Fantasy Flight Games, I find the new school mindset to drain all the fun out of roleplaying, and I've been RPGing for at least 20 goddamn years, probably more.
>>46047111
And note that this is a VERY narrow definition of old school, which summarizes OD&D, B/x, BECMI, 1e AD&D, and stuff of that nature I admit.
>>46027119
>nor did I like the fact you were simply handled a randomly generated algorithm which you had to guide through algorithmically challenging landscapes. That’s to say; I’m not a min-maxer.
Yes, because the essence of min-maxing is having shit randomly-generated for you. I mean, what better way to exploit a system?
>>46047078
>It's about making games that are games.
I wish more people would just accept that. I mean, it's fine to want to make a big narrative, but remember it's still a game.
>>46040495
I can see why someone would, but honestly my favorite thing about OSR is that I don't need the minis and the 5-foot-moves and all the other nonsense.
>>46047111
>>46047111
>New school RPGs
Your definition of "new" RPGs is endearingly stuck in the past.
Modern RPGs are running away from mechanical stuff like builds and optimization and focusing more on narrativism. There's no more "skill" to be found anywhere, it's just about telling a story. See dungeon world, 13th age (which despite being based around D&D 4e is a lot less rules-heavy)
D&D 3e and 4e aren't modern anymore granpa. 3e is still alive as a zombie in pathfinder but it's as fuck old already.
>>46039091
That is one neat DooM reference right there anon.
I'm definitely stealing it for my LotFP
>>46047282
I'll never understand disliking miniatures. They look nice, make fights less confusing, and combats more interesting. You're already playing in a table, anyway, whether a real one or a virtual table like roll20.
>>46041106
Roll20 is the most commonly used, and it's free. Some people have been using Tabletop Simulator as well, but it's less "virtual tabletop" and more virtual table with a physics engine. It also costs $20 or so
>>46041005
Basically this guy >>46041245 I always tell players not to come up with too much backstory for new characters in OSR. Instead, give them broad strokes. Like, one to three sentences.. and let the rest show up at the table.
>>46047293
How is Pathfinder a zombie? It is live and well.
>>46047293
Incredibly tiny niche games that are irrelevant whether financially or, more likely, in terms of community size are irrelevant. 13th Age, which is just 4e with dryer crunch,
And builds and optimization are definitely the Eternal Doctrine of modern RPGs. FATE's Aspect system is definitely no exception. The trick is then to think of aspects that are as deceptively broad but seem humble.
>D&D 3e and 4e aren't modern anymore granpa.
5e, Exalted 3e, and the latest iteration of Star Wars RPG and Dark Heresy 2e FFG churns out are all modern and as optimization/build focused as ever.
>>46047411
I meant it as a "3e died and was brought back to horrifying unlife in the form of pathfinder". Though it sounds insulting when I think about it.
>>46047438
>with dryer crunch,
is nothing revolutionary. Hell, 4e has heavy doses of narrativism (elites, minions, solos, dailies, and encounters are all justified in narrative terms) already.
>>46047326
> combats more interesting.
I'm going to have to disagree. If I wanted to play a tabletop skirmish game, I would go play a tabletop skirmish game. That's not a bad thing. I played mordheim for years. I like tabletop skirmish games.
On the other hand, when I'm playing D&D it's all about imagination. I want to be picturing things in my head. I want players to be picturing things in their head. Every game I've been in that uses minis has created an immediate shift. As soon as combat breaks out, we start playing a tactical board game until the fight is over, only then go back to roleplaying. It goes from "what do you do?" as an in-character thing to "I can move my piece four squares."
With OSR being as rules-flexible and abstract as it is in places, I'd much rather keep the whole thing abstract and narrative.
>>46047509
The moment fireballs and lightning bolts show up I feel regret at not having minis.
>>46047509
>If I wanted to play a tabletop skirmish game
you mean like original D&D?
>>46047532
D&D was more of an RPG module for a tabletop skirmish game, I wouldn't even describe 4e as just a tabletop skirmish game let alone OD&D.
>>46047527
I've dealt with it before and I haven't had much trouble with it. There does come a point where there is so much shit going on that it's helpful to do a quick sketch or something to keep track of where everything is, but we generally haven't had much trouble with it.
As an added bonus, we play the old way where a player in the group is doing all the mapping by description. If we were using minis, I'd have to have maps prepared for wherever they might fight and those maps would then wind up correcting the player's maps, which defeats the whole point of player-mapping.
>>46047438
>5e
>more optimization focused than 2e
>>46047532
> you mean like chain mail
FTFY
Original D&D was a different beast from chain mail, but used the chain mail rules. Some people used minis, others did not. We can definitely learn something though from the fact that the chain mail combat system was abandoned almost immediately in favor of the alternate system, even by the elder grogs and writers of the game.
>>46047573
>I've dealt with it before and I haven't had much trouble with it.
I've dealt with it for at least 8-10 years. I didn't have "trouble" with it, but these are very dangerous, very powerful spells where placement is critical.
I also don't expect player mapping to be fun and find it virtually impossible to get players to leave the wilderness to go into dungeons except if coerced. Plus, BIG BEAUTIFUL MAPS
>>46047580
2e doesn't really have much you can optimize in the core rules. By the time Skills & Powers and all that crap came out the entire company was drowning anyway.
That said, 2e on the fringes of what most people look at as OSR anyway and in pretty well every way marks a major departure from the design of all of the previous editions.
>>46047580
You'll notice I excluded 2e from what I considered OSR due to the emphasis being on killing shit and frou frou nonsense like "overcoming challenges with spells," and even then individual XP awards are an optional rule.
I don't personally think many people played it that way, I can't imagine many 2e campaigns that went by RAW surviving (exactly how probable is it that Rath can survive to hit level 2 when killing orcs at 15 xp a pop or what not.
>>46047608
> I also don't expect player mapping to be fun
My players dig it. It helps cement that the exploration aspect of the game, and adds another layer of player skill. You can tell where several of the old modules were built around player-mapping as an assumption as well, because they are occasionally constructed in such a way as to be deceptive to map. Slopes that gently descend so players are tricked into going into deeper levels, hallways that seem like they are doubling back when they aren't, etc.
> and find it virtually impossible to get players to leave the wilderness to go into dungeons except if coerced.
> I'm currently running a hex crawl based on exploring the ruins of a lost countryside. So far the trick to getting players to willingly explore dungeons has been to emphasize that dungeons and ruins are where treasure is. There's plenty of wilderness stuff to discover, but dungeons are where the money tends to be hidden.
> Plus, BIG BEAUTIFUL MAPS
Yes. Big beautiful maps are lovely. But if I prepared a big beautiful map for every single location where players could be expected to get in a fight, I'd have no time to actually produce content for the game.
>>46047641
I played in a 1e game for seven years that didn't use gold for xp. You had you really work to level up, but I got two characters up to level nine, and like five others up to level eightish.
>>46047686
How did you guys get xp then? Just killing monsters?
>>46047694
Pretty much, plus some bonus xp at the end of each dungeon, although I have no idea how that was calculated.
>>46046412
>>46046815
>>46047078
>>46047270
You people are being overly pedantic and elitist about your choice of game style.
Simulationist games, Narrativst games and Gamist styles of TRPG are all equally game, to claim otherwise is erroneous. They are engines used to keep the 'game' of imagination fair and running smoothly, you seem to mistake these alternate methods as being corruptions or 'not games' on your gameplay.
>>46047776
>thread full of grogs 2cool4Pathfinder who wallow in nostalgia has elitist attitudes in it
SHOCKING TRUTH
>>46047776
>You people are being overly pedantic and elitist about your choice of game style.
>Simulationist games, Narrativst games and Gamist styles of TRPG are all equally game
Yeah, that's what we have been saying in all those posts. They are all games. What I was complaining about is that people try to act like they aren't "just" games.
Shit, that other anon even said that the term "gamist" is weird to him, and I agree I mean, they're all games anyway. How can a game be more of a game then another game?
If you got elitism from those posts maybe read them again? Cause I think you read them wrong the first time.
>>46047723
That sounds rough. Honestly though, gold as XP is my favorite part of this whole thing because it emphasizes that the game isn't about fighting monsters. Once you make that distinction, the game becomes more about creative problem solving. If that means fighting the monster, sure, but if you can avoid it, so much better.
Look at the dragon hoard example. If you get xp for killing monsters, then there's no way you'll fight a dragon until you're ridiculously high level or you have some kind of massive advantage. If you get xp for recovering treasure though.. it MIGHT just be worth trying to sneak in and out without getting caught.
>>46047890
The simplest version I've gotten of the GNS theory is that it's about priorities. Narrative priorities are "we want to tell a story." Simulationist priorities are "we want this to be realistic model for something." Gamist is about overcoming challenges and problem solving. You do things because it's a game to be won or a problem that has a correct answer.
By that definition, OSR does tend ot be more gamist than some other RPGs because the whole idea is basically "here's a challenge, figure out how to overcome it and get your reward." Compare this to Burning Wheel, where failure is actually an important part of how the game is meant to be played.
>>46047876
Well, since you come at this place with this attitude, I'll just say it
If you think it's a "nostalgia" thing you're retarded
Pathfinder is a shit game. It is badly designed, the rules are terrible, and it is honestly the worst version of D&D available. 5e, 4e, anything is better than that garbage.
No one should play that piece of shit. 90% of "bad shit happen at game help /tg/" threads can be solved by "don't play 3e/pathfinder". People like to say "don't play D&D" but that's wrong. It's 3e that has all the shit.
You like 5e? Great. You like 4e? Kinda rare here on 4chan but also great. You like pathfinder? I automatically know you're a retard.
>>46047950
Well, without gold for xp you still go and fight that dragon or whatever, just for the love of gold. And to pay for your training costs. And to replace the magic items that got blown up when the dragon breathed on you, because that was a thing (any time you failed a save you had to roll a save for every magic item. It was ridiculous, but I played in that game for seven years, so I guess it wasn't that bad).
>>46048028
>And to pay for your training costs.
It's been so long since I've played AD&D I had forgotten about training costs. Man. That was a thing.
>>46047962
There are literally hundreds of alternative systems to Pathfinder but grogs like you don't go to them, you go to yet another edition of D&D because muh childhood/adolescent fun and muh brand loyalty.
Stay salty.
>>46048129
>There are literally hundreds of alternative systems to Pathfinder
And they're all great.
I have nothing against them. I play D&D because I like D&D. I also play plenty of other systems, like heroquest, runequest, gurps, dark heresy/only war, shadowrun 5e, and several jap games my favorite of which is log horizon.I tend to frequent the generals of shadowrun mostly, if you see a guy defending min/maxing there it's probably me.
you're profoundly mistaken if you think people who like OSR only like OSR.
>>46047876
Some people are into OSR for nostalgia, others are into OSR because it tends to work much better, being designed by gamers for gamers.
I have serious, serious doubts that the people here who like OD&D are nostalgia driven, for example, or were even around then.
>>46048129
>>46047876
it's funny to me you accuse this thread of elitism and then act like a massive elitist yourself.
>>46047595
I'm heavily skeptical about the supposed rarity by which OD&D was used with Chainmail, and even if it was true its not clear it works better.
>>46048239
>I have serious, serious doubts that the people here who like OD&D are nostalgia driven, for example, or were even around then.
Fuck, looking at wikipedia, Basic D&D was released in fucking 1977. Anyone who thinks that OSR fans are nostalgiafags seriously overestimates the age of the average 4chan user.
>>46048296
Yeah really. My order was pretty much 2e->3e->BECMI->4e->1e and leaning towards something along the lines of OD&D.
>>46048341
I started with 3e (in fact it was the very publicity generated by 3e launch that made me start RPGs), and then went ->4e->basic D&D. Though I still play 4e.
>>46047038
Glantri, Kingdom of Magic was the only other one, IIRC.
On topic, I'm going through the various BECMI extra books (Gazeteers, AC, Creature Crucible, etc), and I'm noticing a ton of neat rules scattered throughout. Stuff like Armor-as-Damage-Reduction from Dawn of the Emperors, piecemeal armor from Orcs of Thar, etc.
Does anyone happen to have a list of what extra non-class-related rules are in what books? I want to see exactly how crunchy we can get with BECMI, and having such a list would help cross-reference rules and books.
>>46048393
I would still -play- 4e.
>>46036479
nah, 1 sucks, but it's still better than the lol-you-are-worthless-farmers shitpile of 2.
>>46038356
>Makes sense, though, what with the "Back to the Dungeon" slogan.
3e was meant to be a return to classic dungeon crawling, they just fucked up the design and testing hilariously badly and had a major caster fetish.
>>46048296
Started with 3.5 as a player, currently as DM of a 5e campaign when it ends i hope i can run a BasicFantasy one
>>46048445
gazeteer for glantry and shadow elves has rules for RADIATION MAGIC
mystara was a crazy place
I say "was" because radiation magic slowly kills the magic of the land and so mystara inevitably* ends up as a radiation blasted hellscape with only dwarves inhabiting it (because a crazy immortal made the dwarves of rockhome resist radiation).
*Unless your players go back in time and destroy the nuclear reactor from a crashed alien starship before the immortals of the sphere of energy transform the nuclear reactor into a immortal making machine, but then the principalities of glantry cease to exist.
>>46048448
4e is fun to play. I'm still mad they never made more monster books after they figured out the math properly with monster vault and mm3
>>46048533
Agreed. I mean, you can still make new ones on their new website, but it's just not the same...
>>46046514
OD&D pre-Greyhawk.
>>46048296
One nostalgiafag checking in. My first RPG was the Finnish translation of the red box, my second was the Finnish translation of the blue Runequest box with the two people on cover (Avalon Hill 3rd Edition, I think). And I still have both.Both acquired in 1988.
>>46048760
you started playing D&D when I was still a baby
You're too old to be on 4chan grandpa
>>46048793
Show respect to the greybeards! It is from them we can learn the way.I was born in 87
>>46048518
I don't necessarily consider Mystara inherently doomed, though use of radiance magic, or at least the one in the magocracy book, isn't necessarily the inevitable world wrecking force, as potentially, say, three uber mages failing to ascend using it a century could protect the world from magic draining.
Its all very Gen Urobuchi to me.
>>46048760
I started playing somewhere around '82, GMing Moldvay Basic (I was technically introduced to Holmes Basic first, and made a character in it, but never really got to play). I still remember when I first heard about D&D. I had the Dungeon! board game and was told that D&D was like Dungeon! but you made your own boards on graph paper.
>>46048910
I suppose. It's just that the world already starts at 50 rads so it gives the impression that more is inevitable.
The shadow elves are being duped into building another nuclear reactor so that might doom everybody too.
>>46048518
>but then the principalities of glantry cease to exist.
eh wouldn't be hard to assume that doing so couldn't be done in a way that wouldn't affect the present outside of halting the spread of Radiation Magic, wouldn't be the first time in fiction such a "Paradox Free" time fix has occurred, heck I'm pretty sure I've seen it in D&D somewhere already
>>46048972
The other thing being that the rate of rad accumulation is based off the number of wizzads n sheeit, and so if there's a bajillion wizards tapping into rad magic, there will be inevitably plenty of failed immortality candidates that wind up An Reactoring. Probably Mystara's worst shot at survival would paradoxically wind up being that only a few rad suckers are around.
HOL UP YOU TELLIN ME WE WUZ REACTORS N SHEEIT?
