Link to the Trove:
>https://mega.nz/#F!3FcAQaTZ!BkCA0bzsQGmA2GNRUZlxzg!vJsyAa5T
Relevant Items and Miscellany:
>http://pastebin.com/FQJx2wsC
Question of the thread:
>What is the best module you ever played in?
>>46275214
>On which day of the week? I believe I should be able to make it, but I'd have to get up at 5, which isn't so bad.
Well I was think either Mondays or Tuesdays. But if you have to be up at 5, the game may run close to that time...
>>46288424
>What is the best module you ever played in?
Fuck For Satan.
>>46288756
How was that? I've heard mixed things on it.
>>46288524
I mean, I'd have to wake up at that time in my time zone to make it. I think both monday and tuesday should work though
I should should be able to make some of the proposed times at least some of the weeks.
>work swing shifts
>>46289293
>>work swing shifts
Same. I'm on a rotation of days off and I tend to close more often than not but could open or work mid.
I'll have the Roll20 page up tonight. I've redone the map, started adding "zones" and hooks for each zone. We will be using Dark Dungeons though I'm slightly altering the cosmos but otherwise the game will be pretty much ran by the book.
Running this for my roomies tonight. We've never played LotFP, but I've been reading the rulebook quite a bit and think I have the system down.
Any tips for this module?
>>46289655
>>46288953
Pretty sure that anon was joking. I mean, FFS has a penis-shaped alien that causes gay orgies by mere presence. Doesn't sound like quality to me.
>>46289655
Don't. A save or die right at the beginning is ridiculous.
>>46289655
This guy >>46290082 has a point. Consider replacing "Save or Die" door with something, well, less deadly, but still harmful.
>>46290082
That's easy enough to change to a simple damage roll. Big deal.
Besides, if the player is dumb enough to grab a snake-shaped handle on a wizards door (right next to a plain knocker), they deserve it.
>>46290074
Not him, but it's actually surprisingly interesting.
>>46290430
Sounds like Raggi's Magical Realm to me...
>>46290457
Its dumb immature tasteless humor
lol giant penis monster
>>46290457
It's the module you take out when your players are being dicks to you.
>>46290082
how attached to a level 1 character 1 min into an adventure
>>46290457
>Magical Realm
That's NOTHING
Check out Towers Two. It has much more obscene stuff, like a whip made out of succubus vagina that latch onto faces, powered by "deathfuck" magic.
app.roll20 (.) net/campaigns/details/1336664/the-lost-lands-a-dark-dungeons-campaign
I at least have the game up. No image yet, no posts, but it is up
>>46291180
Thanks!
>>46291223
Welcome. I'm stuck at work for the next few hours, but I'll have the game ready for play in the next few days. Go ahead and petition to sign up
.
I asked in the last thread but it died:
What are some good homebrew skills to add to LotFP? The character sheet has 4 blank dice and i'd like to use them.
>>46291383
Ask you players what they'd like to see.
what is your favorite house rule/rule?
>>46291383
Two most common I see are "Arcana" which gives some kind of Use Magic Device ability to specialists and some kind of medicine/healing/leachcraft ability to represent scalpel-and-bandages healing.
I've also seen Naturalism which is basically a knowledge-style check for animals and nature shit, but it seems superfluous with bushcraft already being there
>>46292001
Depends on the system, but I pretty much always include the Shields Will Be Shattered rule - which basically says that in addition to the normal benefits of a shield, a player can choose to have their shield be shattered instead of taking damage. Obviously, this can only be used once per shield.
It makes them more attractive as an option, and adds a dramatic kind of quirk.
>>46292001
Personal favorite? Max health at 1st level. Beyond that I tend towards rulings on the fly.
Alright osrg, I'm feeling a weird siren call to go try out OD&D for an upcoming game.
What am I getting myself into? Is it actually functional despite the organization issues? What booklets should i actually use? Do I want to fool with chain mail rules? How necessary is chain mail?
>>46292412
Use chainmail for its combat system if nothing else - none of OD&D's books really detail a combat system, so otherwise you'll need to backport stuff from later games.
The main bits to peek at are the turn structure (near the beginning of the book) and the man-to-man combat system (near the middle).
Personally I'd recommend just using the first three booklets, so Men & Magic, Monsters & Treasure, and Wilderness & Underworld Adventures. And Chainmail.
You'll also want a dungeon of sorts to adventure in. The easiest would probably be to grab a Basic module of sorts and then just make everything do 1d6 damage. Something more "authentic" would probably be to draw up six dungeon levels, randomly stock them, and then toss the players into a short megadungeoncrawl. Have the session end when they leave the dungeon, and make sure they understand that when going in.
Of course, the most important thing to do before DMing OD&D is to read through the booklets. U&WA especially, but M&M has some important rules squirreled away near the beginning and M&T has, well, monsters and treasure.
Feel free to ask questions! Some of us can probably help find answers.
Does anyone have the full pdf's for The Fantasy Trip? I'm having trouble finding the 'Wizard' book and the microquests.
>>46291319
but how should I do the petition? When I follow your link my browser tells me I'm not authorized.
>>46293238
Hmm... One sec...
Says it could take up to 2 hours to list... Go ahead and go here
app.roll20 (.) net/forum/post/3159687/what-to-expect
Anyone have any of the OED books?
> Book of War
> Book of Spells
Are there any other good OD&D supplements outside of the originals?
>>46294741
A lot of things from Judges Guild are real good!
Any good OSR-oriented podcasts? Bonus points if it discusses DM side of things, like module reviews and campaign design.
Jeez, this thread seems really slow...
So I'm planning a West Marches style exploration game.
What are some good dungeons/modules that can be dropped into the wilderness that can be gotten through in a single/a few sessions?
Preferablky without massive, overreaching plots and world-changing events (I'd rather work those out myself according to the player's actions).
>>46296031
are you the guy who posted that neat map towards the end of the last thread?
>>46292001
Agree
>>46292270
I want to set up a sandbox/hex crawl kind of deal. Not sure how to start. Any example hexcrawls laying around out there? Or good sandbox campaigns?
How do you guys set these up?
>>46296676
go read Isle of Dread
>>46296031
Man West Marches is such a pet peeve of mine. I just hate that it's become the name for "how Dave and Gary used to play".
>>46297184
Why? Is it because you hate the name and prefer a different nomenclature? If so, what?
Or do you fundamentally disagree that "West Marches Style" is how they played? If so, what do you see the differences to be?
>>46296602
Nope, not me.
>>46297184
I know, but it's easier to say that than "multi-group exploration style game with a focus on old school sensibilities and ease of play".
>>46296676
Look up the D&D module X1 "Isle of Dread". Beyond that, hexcrawls are more than just travelling from hex to hex. Each hex should present something, whether that something is mundane like a river or small village or upwards to the entrance to a dragon's lair or wizards tower. Beyond even that, though, is the story: Though it is sandboxy, there is a penultimate goal - take out the Vampire Lords who have been menacing the region. The players need not even grasp the story at first but it makes itself known slowly.
Let's say the players encounter a goblin warren only to learn the orcs have been strong-arming them into attacking merchants. The orcs have allied with nearby bandit camp who then sells the loot "legally" in the towns further afield and then funnel the money to their master "the Bandit King". The Bandit King is using the funds to pay off some monsters to get him slaves to work in a deep mine shaft to mine out the precious metals therein to placate his desire for wealth for he is secretly a transformed dragon who has been running the long game to build up a treasure hoard unlike any other, slowly building a army of minions and monsters so that he may come to dominate the entire region.
All this slowly builds out of them entering their first few hexes and finding a goblin warren, moving on and fighting some orcs in a orc camp where some of the same goblins are being held, etc etc.
This may or may not eventually lead to the players establishing a domain of their own in the end.
favorite OSR monster?
I'm going with pic related.
>>46300357
I really like lava children, creepy faced children with muscles and claws.
If a player loses his character fairly early into a session and its his only one, do you just have him roll up a new one real fast and just say "Hes been here the whole time!" or have the party leave where ever they are to find their new ally?
>>46300551
That depends entirely on the group and the player. In general, I have them roll up a new character and the survivors find the new character and they all join forces.
>>46300551
This is a big reason hirelings are good to have. It's very common for hirelings to get promoted to PC status. Even if the player doesn't want to keep the hireling, they can at least control the character temporarily to participate in the adventure.
It's also somewhat common for new PCs to be found as prisoners in dungeons, etc etc.
What is the strongest OSR monster? what is the strongest you/your players have defeated?
>>46301154
Not sure what the strongest is, but my party took on a mind controlled vampire dragon thing. Can't remember much about the fight, thing bit me and killed my character but my buddy playing a fighter killed it.
Does LotFP address dual-wielding, or do you simply house-rule it?
One suggested method was adding a Dual-Wield Skill. You roll a d6 with your attack roll, and if the attack and skill roll are successful, you add the number of d6 pips.
ie) enemy AC is 12. you roll 17 on attack (success) and the skill d6 rolls 2. Your character has a 4 in 6 dual wield skill, so the off-hand weapon also hits and you add +2 damage.
>>46301154
I haven't gotten the chance to play an OSR game yet, once my players wrap up their 5E game I'm going to DM either DCC/LotFP/RC for them
>>46301419
It mentions it, but literally just as "you can attack with either weapon." i.e. there is no advantage to it.
Our house rule has been that if you were dual-weilding, you make your attack roll as normal. If it hits, roll the damage die of both weapons and take the higher. On doubles, you add the two together.
I like the above simply because it's a dead simple way to do it that benefits everyone, but still makes fighters get more out of it than anyone else -- which is important because LotFP wants fighters to be the best at fighting.
I wouldn't be very keen on a skill-based system, mostly because it would mean only specialists got any use out of it.. which goes against the general notion that fighters should be the best at fighting.
>>46301656
thats a really good way of handling it actually. I might use that instead (one of my characters is a 'specialist' class as a far-east samurai, thus he has a kitana and a wakizashi dual wielded)
>>46297184
>>46297309
>>46297330
If west marches annoy you, what other ways are there to run a campaign without invoking some kind of over-arching plot?
How creative have your players gotten?
>>46303367
a player that couldn't buy weapons used a rope and two rocks as one
>>46303367
I had a player tie his sheep to a rope (he was a farmer, DCC) and just throw it into a room after the door was opened. Saved most of their asses a few times. Not the most creative thing, but they're new and I was proud.
>>46302708
Oh I don't have problem with the style of play, just the name.
>>46291132
Is there pdf of towers two in the throve?
>>46304197
I don't know about the throve
but its in the troveCunt Whip
Who has the original boxed sets of these?
>>46305259
The boxes have long since fallen apart but I still have all the booksand the white crayon you got for highlighting the dice.
Do you guys roleplay the process of hiring henchmen after creating a character? In a lot of OD&D games I see this is treated as part of character creation, henchmen being another kind of resource but not necessesarily an entity your PC interacts with at first.
>>46302708
Normally you'd call that a sandbox or hexcrawl. West Marches is a specific more abstract way of running a pickup exploration game.
Are there any books that would include good ideas about snowy areas from OSR? Something sort of like Frostburn (which was for 3.5e). Just looking for ideas for a campaign setting that is set in a world where the gods are dead and as a result the sun is dying. Post-apocalyptic feel. Snow everywhere, a bit more survival-y than most games.
>>46304197
Yes.You're welcome you cunt nuggets, buy it.
>>46292412
You're getting yourself into faster encounters and getting a while lot more done.
>Is it actually functional despite the organization issues?
It functions and runs streamline with just the basic rules. So much that my current group wants to play OD&D over anything advanced.
>Is it actually functional despite the organization issues?
It's easier to organize than everything after it.
>What booklets should i actually use?
If you wanna start from scratch then use the "Basic Rules". If your players are familiar with games then go ahead and start at 3rd level.
If you want to add a little more depth to characters and games then just find the rules cyclopedia. It's pretty much most of the old handbooks mashed together in an easy to read format. You have to remember they added lots of new stuff as handbooks were released and gave examples on how to retro actively add them to characters. The added stuff are rules variants usually and optional but are actually set systems in current rulebooks.
>Do I want to fool with chain mail rules? How necessary is chain mail?
They're not.
>>46305433
>Do you guys roleplay the process of hiring henchmen after creating a character?
I've thrown a few sidequests for characters that were close to getting henchmen.
It adds a bit more flavor to things when they're somehow achieved in some manor or another.
If the characters are started at high enough level then I just leave it up to them to explain it and fill in the details with whatever fluff they can come up with.
>>46301154
>What is the strongest OSR monster?
Probably something from the Immortals set, I'd reckon. Perhaps just one of the Hierarchs? They're pretty damn powerful.
Other options include the Dieties & Demigods, and maybe something from High-Level Characters? I'm not too familiar with those two, though.
>>46306073
>If you wanna start from scratch then use the "Basic Rules". If your players are familiar with games then go ahead and start at 3rd level.
That's not OD&D, that's BECMI. Or, well, Basic Dungeons & Dragons in general.
It's quite different from OD&D, really, although not always in an obvious way. Not to mention how OD&D+supplements is basically just AD&D.
>>46306073
>If you want to add a little more depth to characters and games then just find the rules cyclopedia
I think anon is talking about the original brown books, not the basic variants that came after.
>>46306523
> OD&D+supplements is basically just AD&D
AD&D isn't OD&D just like Basic D&D is not OD&D. Both are rewritings, where Basic D&D tends to reduce the material to a smaller, more streamlined package and AD&D tends to be as complete as possible.
>>46292412
If you want to play OD&D but you are worried about rules organization, you may want to check out the Swords & Wizardry OD&D clones. S&W Whitebox is a clone of the three core books, while S&W Core includes some material from the supplements and S&W Complete should cover most of everything. The major upside to using S&W over OD&D is the organization of the rules, while staying tru to the original.
>>46306594
Not him, but I'm curious if there's a retroclone that also takes over steamlined chainmail rules for combat?
>>46306623
I'm not aware of any in existence. S&W discusses a couple of combat alternatives, but these are more about different interpretations of the alternative combat system as presented by OD&D. From what I've read the orginally intended combat system (so the Chainmail one) yields an experience quite different to what we're used to in D&D.
>>46306660
I really wonder if there's a market for a retroclone trying to recreate the Chainmail rules. To aim for something closer to Gary's original home games.
>>46306702
Well, Chainmail on its own has been cloned under the name of Platemail:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8azW7IbtcxzZTkwYjQwNjctZGM4MC00OTcyLTg3MGItY2ZlMTE0MTRmN2Ri/edit?authkey=CObW0OgO
Integrating Chainmail combat rules into an OD&D clone however would be a first, I think.
>>46306789
Fascinating, I'll have to go through it once.
Is it a direct rewrite, or does it make some noticeable changes(besides using meters)?
>>46306934
I can't say I've read through it, so I wouldn't know about that. Judging from the layout it seems to have a quite different approach, though.
Does anyone know of any good grappling rules for an OSR? I like the simplicity of LotFP's method (opposed melee attack rolls, with strength modifier.. ties are decided by dexterity), but NPCs/monsters almost never actually have strength or dexterity scores, so it seems like it always favors the player more than it should.
>>46292877
I don't have the PDFs but I was gonna say that if you like TFT you should check out Heroes & Other Worlds and Dark City Games' adventures, both of which are based off of The Fantasy Trip.
>>46307253
Just use their hit dice.
>>46307852
A method I've seen involved having each side roll their total hit dice - so three 1d6 kobolds attacking a level 3 fighter would be rolling 3d6 vs 3d8, with each side adding up the total, but it seems like that would get annoying if a higher level character were wrestling a similarly leveled monster.
God I love Kevin Crawford's random tables and Tag system. So evocative and useful for any game. Here's the latest refinement of his Tag system. Roll some dice, get an evening and more of play.
>>46298048
Speaking of X1 Isle of Dread, I've been rereading it recently (planning to run it sometime soon) and I had a realization.
A lot of treasure on this remote, uncivilized island is made up of gold, silver and copper coins.
At first this weirded me out, as the people living on the islands don't seem to have the technology or willingness to mint coinage. Then i realized that the best way to make that cash make sense would be to describe it as a mix of ancient pirate treasures andcoins minted by the ancient Kopru empire. Cthulhubucks.
Just a thought to share, as I generally try my best to describe coinage found in some detail rather than in generic terms.
>>46292877
I uploaded my TFT stuff to mediafire for you, Anon.
https://www.mediafire.com/?liiomd155op66p3,defaspph4ek5d25,7td58btdxspcrub,ru0b8a21ctmifap,2ooiu3ecy5vqa75,ecocf2upx6u67fe,6mrwq5uixty6p31,59lglzaq988a7m9,jn2b3j31i37xly9,x8b2zykgkzp4my0,zxu53mmo23v3ihl,n246ux9ea64y8dw,pe8khmem9z381av,5ndd2eq3atj94r1,7df0bozox60q3a9,cclrbyvx8ofi07o,65vfucrog7z4pb2,l1ofexc5qw2ju56,gaawx9rbwy23bpk,mhs2866eioah975,s7uk0o48dtt8ipc,testg7n2bxxs7ze,rocgv4ih7rbldal
>>46308403
You are the best!
What would be good custom classes for LotFP?
I think a Sharpshooter is good. Someone who isn't necessarily good at physical combat, but has advantages with firearms.
I was going to say Pagan/Witch, but it seems like all you need is a name change for the Cleric.
>>46309435
Good with firearms is the domain of the fighter, and it should stay that way. As soon as you start making new combat classes you inevitably start taking things away from the fighter.
>>46309435
My favorite custom class is the "Differentiate Your Character From Others By Giving Them a Personality Instead of Relying on Stats and Mechanics" and while it works great, I think that the name is something of a mouthful.
>>46309435
>What would be good custom classes for LotFP?
The only good custom class would be a Psion.
Everything else is pretty much covered by existing classes:
>A stabby-slashy-choppy-shooty guy with To-Hit bonus
>A guy with weird and not-quite-predictable eldritch magic
>A guy with more reliable but weaker magic and undead turning
>A guy who is good at everything else(that's covered by skills)
>>46305755
I read the article and to me it looked like a hexcrawl, with a pickup group. How exactly was that guy running the whole thing? What made it more "abstract" then hexcrawl?
>>46310187
>How exactly was that guy running the whole thing? What made it more "abstract" then hexcrawl?
He didn't *use hex maps*. What he describes in the articles is a method of exploring by named regions divided by geographical features like rivers, mountains, and terrain shifts (eg plains to forest). Procedures were stuff like "search the spider-infested woods and you find the Spider Mound nest", not "0736. SPIDER MOUND NEST: 5 Spider Mounds, HD 6, can be confused with toupees, will scatter and cover the players if poked." He doesn't appear to have done anything more specific than add some landmarks to the region-blobs so people could say stuff like "we found a ghoul-infested barrow in the Cairn Hills, if you pass north of the standing stone in Deuteronomy Meadow you can find it easily".
It seems pretty similar to Kutalik's pointcrawling, in many ways.
>>46310453
That sounds like how modern games handle wilderness exploration only without skill checks. "players can make a survival/nature/whatever check to see if you find the the spider mound in the spider forest. if they succeed they find it if they fail they find it anyway but you are also ambushed by spiders"
why did the article get associated with hexcrawl?
>>46297184
>>46303821
What I think is funny about this is the guy basically independendly invented old-school gaming and everybody loves him for it, but as soon as you actually start talking about old-school D&D, half of the same people just lose their shit entirely and REEEEE their asses off.
>>46305433
>Do you guys roleplay the process of hiring henchmen after creating a character?
Honestly, I don't bother with "roleplaying" anything in the sense of acting it out. I mean, I let the players do it, but I'm one of those guys who runs D&D as a really elaborate small-scale wargame. It's like somebody acting out his terminator dying in Space Hulk or whatever: everybody has fun when they do it, but you don't do that shit all the time, every round.
>>46310586
>why did the article get associated with hexcrawl?
I have literally no idea at all. He doesn't describe a hexcrawl and never once uses the word "hex". He also explicitly mentions the players drawing a map on graph paper. That's what makes it annoying.
>>46310699
Well the thing is, the original article is pretty vague on how all of the map stuff worked behind the screen. Sure, the PLAYERS made their own map and all, but that's the case in a hexcrawl, too, if the GM doesn't show them his copy of the map.
What happened is that other people were inspired by his post and set out to do their own West Marches-like game, but because he never laid out how all the map crawling stuff worked very clearly, a lot of GMs just reached for the best known toolset for handling that stuff: hexmaps.
So West Marches created a lot of hexcrawl campaigns, and the two became associated, even if the original WM didn't actually use literal hexes.
>>46309435
If you're going to make a new class, you want it to do something that the others don't so it won't tread on their niche. Sharpshooter doesn't work so well as a class, because it could just as easily be a Fighter with a high dex bonus. Pagan is a religious persuasion, rather than a class.. but there's no good reason that a Witch couldn't just be a flavorful Magic User.
I'm not against adding classes, but I've only seen a few that seemed like they might be worth adding. Someone posted a witch-hunter class for LotFP a few threads back that was a neat example of creating a new niche without stomping on anyone's toes.
I'm hoping to start playing LotFP soon.
But I'm noticing a lot of criticism about the lack of a bestiary/larger price list.
Is there a more complete alternative game?
>>46311042
You can just drop in monsters from other games, just don't forget to adjust their AC.
>>46311042
Raggi didn't add monster stats so that the GM can run the adventures for any level adventuring group.
>>46311137
>>46311203
Fair enough, I'll look into it.
>>46311042
By alternative game, do you mean another game based on OD&D or another game with insane and crazy cool modules?
>>46311137
>don't forget to adjust their AC.
Related.
>>46311042
I've never really run into any problems with the LotFP equipment lists. It covers all of the basic adventuring gear.
If you really want more than that, extrapolate.. or grab the ridiculously exhaustive equipment list from the AD&D PHB and convert to a silver standard to match LotFP's default.
That said, I've yet to have it come up where we needed a price for something that wasn't covered.
As for monsters - any other game's monsters will work.
>>46311704
>silver standard
Is that a thing? Weird. It's not D&D to me if the gold isn't ridiculously devalued
I remember seeing a setting recently that had really nice player hex map downloads on its website.
The only other thing I really remember is that it had a scale of 1 hex = 5 miles (damn it).
I forgot who published it, I think their website was a burgundy color, if that helps some?
I really want to find it again.
>>46312179
Scratch that, found it.
Points of Light by Goodman Games (and it turns out the website is green).
I remember getting some pretty damn great scans of the City of the Invincible Overlord from here once.
Does anyone have any scans whatsoever of the player maps from the Wilderlands of High Fantasy? I've never actually seen a copy of the player maps, only the referee ones.
>>46312425
If you like this style of map, check out the Judges' Guild's Wilderlands of High Fantasy stuff. Goodman's aping the Judges' Guild house style here.
>>46312548
Isn't it in the Trove?
>>46312693
I thought it was too but I'm on my phone atm...
>>46311334
LOTFP is a B/X clone
where did the OD&D clone idea come from?
>>46312118
It doesn't really change much. The big difference is that a small chest of gold coins is a spectacular treasure instead of a day's shopping.
This also means you don't wind up with goofy denominations like platinum and electrum coins.
>>46312118
It is indeed thing.
>>46312693
>Isn't it in the Trove?
Not the player maps.
Also, the .tifs that are there aren't that great as far as scans go.
>>46312965
I suck cocks and wrote the wrong thing, my bad.
>>46315035
It's cool, it happens.
>>46312118
>Is that a thing? Weird. It's not D&D to me if the gold isn't ridiculously devalued
I've actually grown to prefer it. Not just because of "muh realism" but because it makes a bit more sense in terms of scale as well. Copper currency is used for small transactions, and gold is exciting.
If gold is the default, then silver is small transactions, and why would I waste time picking up copper? And as another anon stated, you then have to invent silly even more valuable currencies to serve as the "Exciting" coins.
>>46305259
How much of the content in these books was left out of Rules Cyclopedia / Wrath of the Immortals?
Is most of the missing information from things like Creature Crucible / Creature Catalog / Gazateer?
>>46308403
awesome!
>>46315762
The entirety of Immortals as well as the Artifact rules from Master and the tournament rules from Companion were left out of the Rules Cyclopedia.
Wrath of the Immortals has a highly rewritten version of the Immortals rules, as well as some IIRC only lightly rewritten artifact rules. No sample artifacts, though, I don't think?
WotI is pretty garbage IMO. At least Immortals works, for all its complexity; WotI doesn't actually seem to be written for player use. Pay 100PP to cast all spells at-will, for instance.
The Creature Catalog just has all the monsters from the modules, while the only rules from the Gazetteers that got into the RC are, IIRC:
>Skills (only a subset, though - perhaps from GAZ1? Not sure.)
>Some spells (clothform et. al., from Dawn of the Emperors)
>Magic item construction rules (GAZ2 Glantri)
>Magic building/vehicle construction rules (DotE)
And that's pretty much it, I think.
However, there's also some smaller differences between the RC and BECMI - some are good (wrestling and boxing get Weapon Mastery) while others are less so (maximum hirelings by Charisma is per PARTY rather than per CHARACTER).
>>46311334
Honestly, after seeing what people have said, I'm feeling better about carrying on with LotFP.
I'll be starting up a session in a couple of weeks.
Bamp
Hey /OSR/. How do you guys feel about a longsword that is so sharp that it reduces the victim's AC by one whenever it misses by 3 or less. Does that seem like a reasonable magic item? If not, what kind of downside would be required to balance it out?
>>46317854
I was never a fan of Greyhawk or Blackmoor... Personally never been a big fan of any published setting.
>>46318127
Just have it deal some damage on a miss instead. Less bookkeeping that way, with the same "fuck armor" flavor to it.
Also, of course, to me it feels a bit weird to have a sharp sword that reduces AC and also have two other separate Swords of Sharpness/Keenitude/Vorpality that DON'T reduce AC but instead have the whole "the severed part sails off in an arc" aspect.
>>46318233
Well its for a LotFP game. Those magic items aren't a standard so I dont think it'll be that big of a problem.
Guaranteed damage doesn't really fit the image I have in my head. I'd really like to do like pic related where the sword cuts through what ever you're using to defend yourself.
>>46318127
By "victim", do you mean the holder of the sword or the person being attacked by the sword? And by reducing AC, do you mean natural AC or just armor bonus, and is the AC reduction permanent?
>>46318701
>By "victim", do you mean the holder of the sword or the person being attacked
The target
>And by reducing AC, do you mean natural AC or just armor bonus
Umm. Both I guess. Any AC that is the result of protection from impact such as worn armor or the scales of a beast.
>is the AC reduction permanent?
Well logically you can replace your armor and any creature with scales tough enough to make a difference will surely regrow them in due time.
>>46318964
So I guess the idea of the mechanic is that whenever it doesn't hit but almost does, the sword slices up the victims armor thus making it worse?
I can dig it.
>>46318964
Too much book keeping and gamey. This could result in a situation where it hets to a point where only rolling a 1 results in a miss.
>>46319309
Well the minimun would be the base AC of an unarmored human AKA 12.
>>46318964
>>46319309
>Too much book keeping and gamey.
Agreed.
If it's a "weapon so sharp it cuts trough armor" just make it ignore armor and be done with it. Yeah, it's powerful but it's supposed to be unique, right?
>>46319365
Yeah I guess it would be simpler if it just ignored 2 or 3 points of armor. You're right thats much better.
>>46319365
This. It's much easier to handle both in game terms and mechanics.
I'm looking to start making my own dungeons in Photoshop, are there any good guides on how to give them that old school look?
>>46320516
Not specifically old school, but pretty:
http://rpgcharacters.wordpress.com/maps/tutorials-help/
>>46320581
I love their character sheets
>>46320946
Just took a look at them, and they are very nice.
>>46320516
how to give them that old school look?
Graph paper and pencils. scan them once you're done. Also, There was this one guy who posted a infodump on how to dysonise your dungeons but I didnt save it because I suck dicks.
>>46321252
Both guides are linked here >>46320581
The ONLY thing I don't like about Chainmail is the way it handles pikemen. It handles them in the most ass backwards way possible.
They don't get any special bonus against knights etc... instead, non pikes just plain can't engage set up pikemen at all. They can attack, but it won't do anything and it'll be one sided. Did I miss something?
>>46300357
Olive Slime. One of the best monsters around. They work as waste disposal and can't move except to fall on people. They are joined into a miles-wide plant hivemind, and you can use Charm Plant, Speak with Plants, etc. on them. They control Olive Slime Zombies, which can be very powerful and come in many forms.
Barkburrs are also cool. They are like nature's facehuggers, and turn orcs and evil people in the woods into druids, trees, and all sorts of other things.
Both MM2, good for a Long Afternoon On Earth meets Invasion of the Bodysnatchers scenario.
>>46306789
>>46306934
Platemail is most definitely not a clone, any more than AD&D is a clone of B/x. It is a very vaguely kinda Chainmail-ish RPG, but only vaguely.
>>46321939
>Did I miss something?
How long pikes are? It's supposed to simulate the fact that if the pikes are set it's real hard to get close to the soldiers to hurt them in melee. What you do instead is shoot them, so then you have cavalry blocks to deal with the musketeers and boom, the pike & shot era. (In a strictly medieval period you shouldn't have pikemen in the first place.)
>>46322250
>It's supposed to simulate the fact that if the pikes are set it's real hard to get close to the soldiers to hurt them in melee.
I'm perfectly aware of what pikes are. I'm saying that its goofy as hell that pikes don't have any particular strength against knights in Chainmail, its just "you can't fight them," but there's nothing anti cavalry per se about them. In M2M they may be good at killing horses, I suppose.
Doppelsoldners were intended, albeit not always with great results, as a way to engage pikemen without using ranged attacks.
>>46322529
>there's nothing anti cavalry per se about them.
But... there IS nothing anti-cavalry per se about pikes. Non-pike melee infantry (sword-and-bucklermen, say) can't fight them either.
You're kinda putting the cart before the horse here, I think: many other games do give pikes an advantage against horse to simulate the comparative effectiveness of pike blocks versus cavalry relative to other types of infantry, but that anti-cavalry bonus is just another way to simulate how real-life, actual pikes level the playing field between infantry and cavalry. All Chainmail does is reach the same end goal by a different and arguably more sensible (real-life pike blocks weren't used as a sort of anti-cav bombs) route.
>Doppelsoldners were intended, albeit not always with great results, as a way to engage pikemen without using ranged attacks.
I'm aware of that. But the way they were deployed in real life was as part of pike blocks, and I think Chainmail also assumes landsknecht/pikemen units have a pike-and-doppelsöldner mix composition. I think the fact that a guy with a zweihander is in no way prevented from fighting a pikeman in M2M bears this out.
Anyone here played Shinobi and Samurai? A retroclone without the basic six stats is an interesting read, though I fear the martial classes are too samey at low levels because of it. The companion supplement does add a skill system to help with that, though.
http://taxidermicowlbear.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/7/4/23742956/shinobi__samurai_1.1.pdf
http://taxidermicowlbear.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/7/4/23742956/shinobi__samurai_companion.pdf
Anyone ever ran/played in a really high level campaign? I'm talking 20+ (such as the end of the Companion and beginning of the Master set for BECMI or other games)? How did those go?
>>46322049
Yes, I got confused by the description otn the Taxidermic Ownlbear retroclones listing:
> 27th Edition Platemail is a retroclone of the Chainmail miniature combat rules whose fantasy supplement lay the foundation for OD&D. Rules for magic are available as well.
>>46323995
Huh. That's interesting though not really what I would want from a game...
>>46323677
is ACKS in the trove?
>>46324445
should be
>>46324445
It is.
>>46291180
Just another bump for this
>>46319415
literally a sword +3
>>46324512
>>46324576
Found it
Got so used to seeing it named ACKS that I forgot it means "adventurer conqueror king".
>>46324609
no, it's a sword +1,+3vs armored opponents. A bit different.
>>46324621
still mechanically boring as fuck.
A sword that ignores armour, but won't allow it's wielder any is way more interesting. Also less book keeping
>>46293538
And then this.
>>46318127
Sounds good to me! I wouldn't use misses by 3, though, that's kinda arbitrary and hard to remember. I'd say, if the weapon *would have hit* the person if they were unarmored, then the AC granted by their armor gets cut down by 1, starting with destroying any shield they may have.
I'm pretty sure the other anons complaining about it being fiddly are either distracted by that arbitrary 3, or they forgot to compare it to the complexity of a typical spell. It should be fine from that perspective.
What do you guys think of dungeon world?
I found my love for OSR after playing dungeon world(not that dw is an OSR but i found about this games, and played BasicFantasy and BX) i was also thinking in using modules in a dw game
>>46324881
I'd say about half the thread loved DW and the other half hates it.I'm in the second half.But then I hate Vincent Baker in general. Seclusium was utter dogshit.
>>46324954
why do you hate DW? or just Vincent
To the Anon that requested the Fae North Encounters, it is finally finished.
It took a long time, I battled two seperate flus and had a lot of days at work but I finally finished it. I'm now open to new requests, I just hope you enjoy it.
>>46324972
Vincent because he's a bad designer with the world's cuntiest fanbase, DW because it's a product of a bad designer with the world's cuntiest fanbase.
Or to put it another way, I just find the whole Apoc World base design misbegotten in the worst way, and it seems to attract exactly the people I'd least like to play a game with ever.
>>46324996
just curious , what do you find misbegotten in apocalypse world?
Favorite OSR game?
Personaly favorite is a tossup between Basic Fantasy and ACKS
>>46325654
D&D
>>46325654
AD&D 2e
>inb4 not OSR
>>46325654
probably ACKS, although of the OSR stuff I own physical copies of, only one I don't love is Stars Without Number, which I personally find to be quite mediocre
>>46301656
>>46301419
I find it weird that dual wielding is usually ruled to augment attack rather than defense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc8akxwI56s
If you can't be bothered watching the video I'll summarize: You don't use both weapons to attack and kill the person you are fighting more faster. They are used simultaneously, one makes an attack, the other controls the opponent's weapon. The weapon used to control the opponent's weapon should be shorter than the one making the attack to prevent them from getting tangled or both of them being controlled by the opponent if they are armed with a heftier weapon.
Practical dual wielding is basically the same as using a shield, except it can't block projectiles and is mostly useless unless your opponent is armed with some manner of practically sized sword. You can kill someone with your shield/off-hand weapon if you get the opportunity, but really you're using it primarily for protection/control.
Apart from honor duels and entertainment, dual wielding only makes sense post-gunpowder, where nobody bothered to carry a shield anymore because bullets would go right through them, but you might get into a street fight with some foppish asshole rake so you brought along a dagger to aid with defense.
>>46325746
>nobody bothered to carry a shield anymore because bullets would go right through them
It's not really that. A bullet goes right through a dagger too, so it's not relevant — if anything, a buckler's a better defense against firearms. The issue is what type of weapon the main sword is. In the medieval period the arming sword was used, and then the buckler's a shoe-in as a defensive sidearm because arming swords almost solely rely on the cut. However bucklers are absolute shit at deflecting thrusts, so when swords transitioned to longer and more thrust-focused blades, daggers gained in prominence until in the rapier era they were ubiquitous and nobody carried a buckler. You can see this transition during the sidesword era, many treatises are mainly sword-and-buckler-based, but the dagger creeps in more and more (and the dagger itself becomes increasingly complex in design).
>>46325705
Hey, I love AD&D 2E. Sadly the guys I've played with recently with it all want to try and play it like it's 3rd edition style "dungeon bash".
>Told about a dragon in the nearby hills.
>My character wants the party to stake the place out, figure out if the dragon has a routine and strike when it's most vulnerable
"lol, nope! We're just marching in!"
>My guy sneaks away right when they march in
>Party wipes
"Anon! The fuck?! Why did you run?"
>"You fuckers were the ones who just barged in, no strategy and didn't know the dragon had a veritable kobold army,"
"You're a dick, we could have killed it if you stuck around."
>We were level 4
>>46325746
>I find it weird that dual wielding is usually ruled to augment attack rather than defense.
Honestly, augmenting your defense does augment your attack by allowing you to be more aggressive for the same amount of risk. So giving you a bonus to-hit works just as well as giving you a bonus not to be hit, especially if the rules for melee in general give you some ability to fight more aggressively or defensively, shifting your modifiers around a bit (maybe getting +2 to AC in return for -2 to hit when fighting defensively, for instance). Though I would agree that the standard "each weapon makes an attack" way of doing things does seem contrived.
>Apart from honor duels and entertainment, dual wielding only makes sense post-gunpowder, where nobody bothered to carry a shield anymore because bullets would go right through them
Actually, I'd argue that it makes some sense for adventuring as well. If you're crawling around twisty tunnels and caverns in the dark, toting around a shield might be cumbersome. And a secondary weapon can go from stowed to ready in hand quicker than a shield can.
>>46325821
>A bullet goes right through a dagger too, so it's not relevant
But a shield is more cumbersome and why bother carrying one around if it doesn't do you enough good? Meanwhile, carrying a dagger around really isn't much of a hassle.
>>46325821
>A bullet goes right through a dagger too, so it's not relevant — if anything, a buckler's a better defense against firearms.
My point was that nobody bothered to carry shields because guns were dominating, not that a dagger is a better defense against bullets somehow.
Otherwise duly noted and good post.
>>46301419
+1 to hit. If you hit on the dot, you hit with your secondary weapon.
Alternately, you roll to hit like normal, but when you hit, you roll damage for both weapons. Whichever one gets higher is the one you hit with.
>>46325857
>But a shield is more cumbersome
Nah, it's not. Sure, a big fuckoff viking or hoplite shield is, but the civilian sidearm shield is the buckler, which you just hang in your belt almost exactly like a dagger and which weighs roughly as much as a dagger. I guarantee you it's not more of a hassle than a main-gauche.
>>46324648
>mechanically different
Too much book keeping
>slimed down concept
Its boring as fuck
Damnit, i love you /OSR/ but you guys are maximum grognards sometimes.
>>46322250
Pikes IIRC are supposed to be between 16 and 22ft. in length, with the average of the era being 18ft.
>>46325835
That's not an edition thing, dragons are genuinely tougher in 3e over 2e over 1e. Taking on the strongest dragon in MM1 possible was listed as an example of what a level 5 party could do, with play example, although they did mostly die.
>>46325654
Basic Fantasy for me, if only due to the sheer amount of supplements and how cheap it is to supply a whole table with copies of the book.
>>46328114
Just ordered 3 copies of the new book and all but 3 of the adventures (have those 3 already) and my total came to under $30! You weren't kidding!
>>46325654
Mashup of B/X, LL, and LotFP but also pulling monsters from AD&D1e.
>>46326263
I have to agree with him here though. The effect is stronger, but it has a big drawback. And both are related thematically.
The original idea was too much focused on mechanics, instead of looking at the fictional standpoint.
>>46324601
I'd like to join, but I wouldn't be able to hit the time until maybe an hour afterwards. And I'm pretty sure that wouldn't fit you guys.
>>46291383
I use Surgery (heal up the number shown on the dice on a successful roll, or else deal 1 damage on a failed roll), Brokering (know the exact accurate value of treasure, exchange rates, on a successful roll, and stuff), Lore (Identify the magical properties of an item/place/person on a successful roll) and Dabbling (used to activate magical items and so on without needing to be an MU or cleric. Bad shit happens on a failed roll).
>>46329418
Sorry to hear that, anon.
>>46301419
there's three things you can do with your secondary hand.
A shield or other defensive item gives +1 AC.
A second weapon gives +1 to hit.
Both hands on your weapon gives +1 damage.
>>46326263
I don't mind a little book-keeping, but I hate it when things introduce additional fiddliness. The "Within three" rule would mean I would have to remember to examine every roll for how close it missed, which is incredibly clunky - doubly so when you realize "within 3" is the same thing as saying -3AC (which some systems already do) or +3 to hit.
> Its boring as fuck
How is "ignores armor" more or less boring than "a miss becomes a hit if it's within 3AC"?
Has anyone ever played Castles & Crusaders? Is it any good?
>>46331128
No the anon i was replying to said it was boring as fuck when you reduced it to a +3 sword. I was just pointing out that people complained my weapon was to complex, skimmed down and then proceeded to say it became boring.
What if it reduces AC if you would have hit an unarmored opponent. For example, you roll a total of 15 but the monster has AC 16 so you missed but still beat 12 so you remove 1 point from its AC. This isnt that complex to process.
>>46329312
I already have a drawback that I wanted to implement though. But i see your point.
>>46331306
The only point you'll see is the point of my sword as it pierces your skull!
>>46330673
The problem there is that +1 damage simply isn't as good as the other options.
>>46331837
Yeah that may have sounded a little dismissive. What i meant is that I hadnt really considered that having thematic link between the power and drawback of a magic weapon makes for a better magic weapon.
>>46331842
unless an enemy has, say, resistance to damage and so needs you to smack it with high damage since low damage is just shrugged off; for example, look at a monster that regenerates 1 hp a round.
Plus, the +1 damage is /on top of/ the high damage dealt by two-handed weapons already.
>>46331842
I dunno, +1 damage is +25% or so on a weapon that does 1d8 damage while +1 to-hit needs you to be against a TN of 17 before it gets +25% damage. And given that the traditional TN to hit AC2 at level 1 is 17, and that you're not unlikely to get to-hit bonuses from elsewhere...
Of course, the more damage you're doing by default the less +1 damage actually is. If you're a B/X Fighter doing 1d8+2 damage per hit, +1 damage is only +15% (comparable to +1 to hit TN 15).
How many levels 1 do you need to defeat a lvl 20 fighter ?
>>46332600
going with becmi because it's what I know.
I'm pretty sure at this point you're only hitting on a 20 what with magic armor and shield and stuff. A level 20 fighter would have 10d10+10hp+con bonuses. Assumoing +1 con bonus thats 10d10+20; So an average of 75? So you need 20 level 1s to guarantee
1 hit. Assuming they're using an 1d6 weapon ranged weapon, and thats 3 damage per 20 guys.
I'd say about 500 guys would probably kill that level 20 in one round of missile throwing.
Considering multiple rounds of combat, and how many guys he can kill in one round, that's too much math and I give up
This was all done in my head so feel free to correct me.
>>46332752
I suppose it depends on what those level 1s actually are, and what stats they have. What if they're all magic-users with magic missile? Because that's a lot more reliable than a 1st level fighter with a bow. Of course, if we do have 1st level fighters with bows then what's their Dex? A +3 to hit from Dex would change things quite a bit.
>>46332998
I'd say that if you're using massive numbers, you shouldn't calculate on having anything more then average stats.
Because although yes, some of those 500 fighters would have 18 dex, that must also means some would have 3 dex.
Averaging it out, ends up with no bonuses.
That said, magic users could do much better. guaranteed 3 damage per spells means 38 castings and the fighter is dead.
>>46332600
>>46332752
>>46332998
>>46333145
How is a lvl 20 in OSR compared to other editions of Dnd lets say 3.5 or 5e
>>46333188
I'd say the pure 3.5e fighter is simply weaker comparatively. He has more hit points, yeah, but everything else in the world at this point is much more dangerous then he is.
All other classes are very much stronger in D&D 3.5 though. It's just the fighter that got shafted.
>>46332020
Ah no, anon, it didn't sound dismissive. I was just goofing around. You're alright.
What's a good alternative to the standard OSR fighter's "unworthy foe" ability? I think it opens an artificial gap between 1HD- monsters and those with 2HD+.
>>46332445
>+1 damage is +25% or so on a weapon that does 1d8 damage
That's not how math works though.
>>46333707
It helps to know that it's just a legacy of Chainmail's Fantasy supplement - normal men (and goblins, orcs, elves, etc.) fight in mass combat as per usual, but when two "fantastic" creatures (Heroes, Wizards, Dragons, Balrogs, Giants) fight eachother they fight one-on-one on the Fantastic Combat Table. The fantastic critters also usually fight as multiple men in mass combat against normals.
OD&D then continues with this, by virtue of inheriting Chainmail's combat system. More explicitly, the Attack/Defense Capability of monsters is that they get one attack against "normal men" for every hit die they have.
The "unworthy foe" ability, as you call it, is just a consequence of playing as the "individual" units in a mass combat wargame - each Hero is just one guy, while one Light Foot is actually ten to twenty dudes depending on scale.
Also, do note that only OD&D and AD&D actually had the ability - B/X lacked it entirely, while BECMI had a replacement of sorts in the double whammy of Fighters getting multiple attacks against enemies they can hit on a 2 and getting bonus damage if they can hit them on even less than that. (Note that this doesn't let the BECMI Fighter engage with large groups in the way that the AD&D one can - it's quite a bit slower!)
>>46333951
You go from averaging 4,5 to averaging 5,5, so a 22% increase - sorry for using the wrong number.
Also, I was assuming an OD&D-esque lack of strength modifier, since that's a huge unknown variable that can bring it down to +13% in the case of a 1d8 weapon with a +3 strength modifier.
>>46334039
Huh, that's some cool information there.
>>46333707
read up on ACKS version of the Cleave rules, in my opinion they're the best version I've ever seen as it's not regulated by Enemy HD
>>46335060
I am now implementing ACKS cleaving into my game.
Why does a 10' by 10' area take 10 minutes to search?
>>46335501
You know those times when you lose something to the point of wondering if you've misplaced it at another person's house. Yeah next time that happpens take note of how long it takes you to find it.
>>46334039
>The "unworthy foe" ability, as you call it, is just a consequence of playing as the "individual" units in a mass combat wargame - each Hero is just one guy, while one Light Foot is actually ten to twenty dudes depending on scale.
To nitpick, its more than that -- a Hero (L4 fighting man) actually counted as his level in units of the same type, so 80 guys in 20:1 scale. They really did get their level in attacks.
>>46333707
I favor not having it be about the 1 HD interpretation, but to simply have a distinction between mundane and fantastic opponents. The latter is mainly a confrontation of class and level against monster type, the former is mainly a confrontation of weapon type, armor type, and numbers/levels.
>>46335560
Infinitely long if it's not in my 10' by 10' bedroom, about 3-4 minutes if it's in someone else's 10' by 10' bedroom.
>>46335640
>about 3-4 minutes
Maybe its just me but sometimes I can fail to locate my phone in my room for upwards of 15 mins. Granted those are extreme cases. Maybe i'm just fucking retarded.
>>46335679
Use the internet to ask your friends to phone your phone.
It's like elves' magical ability to detect secret doors, except here it's technology. Shouldn't take a meaningful amount of time, at any rate.
>>46335833
Thank you for confirming my last prognosis. But the phone is a bad example. Lets say you where going to propose to your SO. You bought a ring and shit but you lost it. How long until you are certain with 100% accuracy that it is in fact NOT in your room?
>>46325654
>>46325705
>>46325835
The proper form of "OSR" is True AD&D, consisting of every piece of printed material released under the imprimatur / imprint TSR through summer 2000.
OD&D, all forms of D&D, both AD&D editions. A core edition can be selected and optional rules drawn from this hefty canon to create one's optimal play experience.
>>46335425
>>46335060
Currently on a trip, with only my phone on hand. What's the short version if you don't mind sharing?
>>46335921
Well I'd have to find my SO first, and that will take about 10 years, not 10 minutes.
>>46335501
Short version - because dungeon exploration is broken up into turns, and each turn allows you to do basically one thing.
Long version - because you're literally spending 10 minutes searching every nook, cranny, examining every brick and crack, combing through all the clutter, etc because if you miss something important it could either be a secret passageway to fabulous wealth -- or it could be a the telltale signs of a trap that will kill you and your friends. It pays to be thorough.
>>46335978
Not that anon, but I just looked it up:
Basically any time you kill/incapacitate an opponent, you can make an extra free attack against another opponent within 5' of the first. The number of free attacks is capped at your hit dice.
Weirdly, this is exactly what my group was already doing. So I guess I approve by default.
>>46325654
Whitehack
>>46336172
Thanks a bunch, Anon
Sounds interesting. Not sure if I want to implement it just yet, but it sounds simple enough to not really break much if anything.
>>46336318
> break much if anything.
we've been doing it for a while. It's a nice bonus when you're fighting multiple higher-level enemies, but that extra attack isn't enough to overthrow balance. On the other hand, it does help the fighter chew through mobs, particularly weaker monsters like Kobolds.
Someone in the OSR community has so many resources already available - OD&D, rules from Dungeon magazine, Dragon magazine, two editions of AD&D, at least three editions of Basic D&D..
And then in the retroclone world, basically every edition has a clone at this point or games based on it, as well as a few games that are tweaking said clones to something more specific: LotFP is weird horror, Mazes & Minotaurs is greek mythology, SWN and WhiteStar are scifi..
Is the OSR market "full?" Is there really any place for newer games at this point? Would you ever spend money to buy or support a new OSR system? What would it have to offer to make it worth both parting cash and making you switch from your (likely already homebrewed) current system?
>>46336434
I'm going to be a dick and say D&D 5E seems like the best of all worlds. You can run your OSR games in it, but with fun, modern mechanics that appeal to pretty much any player. Skill checks are the only thing I'm iffy about, but of course you can tone those down if you want.
As for pure OSR games, I think the market capped a while ago. The only thing left is to explore other genres (like Stars Without Number did).
>>46336531
I looked through 5e right after the PHB scans came out. I can't say that there was anything about it that satisfied my OSR itches. It doesn't seem like it would do anything better than OSR editions already do, and it has a lot of crap attached to it that I have zero interest in.
> Skill based
> Proficiencies to juggle
> Ability scores are too important to 3d6
> Feats/character builds
> Menagerie of special snowflake races expected
> NPCs have massive stat blocks
By the time I stripped everything down to do what I wanted it to do, I'd be playing a streamlined AD&D again.
>>46336767
Fair enough. I just think the game system itself is simple and back to "the GM is boss" that it's clear their correspondence with OSR authors really paid off.
Sometimes it's not quite enough (e.g. the playtest had more guidance on "exploration turns" and becoming lost and encounters at a distance, classic old school stuff that was since removed), but overall I think it marries old-school with new-school in a fun way that /osrg/ should check out.
My main problem is with all the cool features every class gains at every level. Sometimes one new spell or a +1 to hit should be enough. 5E is a bit too sexy sometimes.
>>46336767
> Skill based
Can be cut out. Then again weren't skills around by the mid 80's in some fashion?
> Proficiencies to juggle
Just add a simple bonus to various checks, not really "juggling" any more so than, say, weapon mastery is.
> Ability scores are too important to 3d6
They have a standard array and you can just say "roll 3d6 and suck it up".
> Feats/character builds
Feats are completely optional and I have seen far far fewer character builds than normal.
> Menagerie of special snowflake races expected
All but 4 are optional and the PHB even says as such.
>> NPCs have massive stat blocks
Not nearly as big as 3.P and not as over the top as 4. Hell you could trim a lot and still make those enemies work. Personally I still like the way the stat blocks work since they detail little things that make encounters more than just 4d4 goblins, now there are (again optional) rules to make them dodgy little fucks.
>>46337017
Sure, but after I've stripped all that out, what is it doing better for me than other editions?
I never said 5e was objectively bad. I said:
> I can't say that there was anything about it that satisfied my OSR itches
> It doesn't seem like it would do anything better than OSR editions already do
>>46337017
>Can be cut out. Then again weren't skills around by the mid 80's in some fashion?
Greyhawk was a mistake.
>Not nearly as big as 3.P and not as over the top as 4.
Here is a Goblin.
(AC 6; HD 1-1; hp 4; #AT 1; D 1-6; MV 20'; Save NM; ML 7; AL C)
Also,
>4E monster statblocks
>Over the top
Also also,
>5E
>Morale that works
>Pick one
>>46336531
nah 5E is the epitome of mediocre, also I'd say there's still room for more OSR systems on the market
>>46337380
> nah 5E is the epitome of mediocre
That's sort of how I look at it. It's not a bad game, I just don't have a purpose for it. If I want dungeon delving or OSR style play, I have a ton of options that are better fitted for the kind of game I want. If I want to play something either more heroic-questy or story-driven, there are games that do that better than D&D.
> I'd say there's still room for more OSR systems on the market
So what would you look for? What would convince you to spend money on or play another OSR game over whatever you're playing now?
>>46336434
The OSR work needs a solid cyberpunk game. And not just some addition to some sci-fi OSR, but a standalone book. And bonus points if it keeps the aesthetics of 80s cyberpunk.
>>46337491
example of better heroic-questy games?
I'm in big need of an adventure for my players. I need something else like tower of the Stargazer, ie) dungeon-esque, filled with plenty of opportunity to use skills, solve puzzles, set off traps, and filled with plenty to keep them interested. Preferably with slightly more combat opportunities than Stargazer offers.
I'm gonna use LotFP but I can easily convert whatever. Suggestions?
>>46339104
Castle of the Mad Archmage has some unique things. It's in the trove under "OSR Misc".
>>46338834
It depends on what you want out of a hero-questy game.
It's not my go-to of choice, but I'd sooner play AD&D2e for a heroic quest game than 5e. Burning Wheel is one of my favorite systems for story-based fantasy games. Dungeon World played as World of Dungeons is pretty decent too. Barbarians of Lemuria is one of my favorites if I want something lighter.
Runequest is great, if you want something more traditional. I've been looking into The One Ring as well, which has some neat content.
>>46339104
Death Frost Doom.
Just throw in more mummies.
>>46339760
This, so much this!
>>46333707
I use a slightly homebrew version of the ability. Instead it just uses the highest enemy HD against your level.
>If your level is lower then monster HD or equal; get one normal attack
>If your level is higher; one bonus attack per level over HD
So at level 2, your fighter gets 2 attacks against goblins. At level 3, 3 attacks, and so on. Level 4 fighters would get 2 attacks against level 3 foes, etc.
The best part about this is the fact that it is very clearly based on the HIGHEST enemy HD, essentially the leader. Therefore the Orc Warchief with an extra hit dice becomes a lot bigger of a problem because now your warrior can't cleave through the hoard as easily.
>>46321252
>>46320516
To really capture the look I think you should go really harsh on the contrast, it gives you the old school poorly scanned map style better. See attached edit.
>>46340476
idiot self forgot to attach
>>46340314
That's a damn good rule.
>>46340496
A shit that looks super crisp. How did you do it? Because I just digitized graph paper.
Do you ever allow players to buy magical gear (besides the odd potion of healing or such)? Like if the mage wants a broom of flying? Or the thief a cloak woven from shadow? Or the fighter that mystical sword? Or for the cleric to purchase that reliquary of the saint that heals over time?
>>46341587
In my opinion I think it is best to base it on the setting, but I also personally think its good if players can but SOME minor magical thins. Really good stuff you'd either have to find or get from some demigod Black Smith guy after doing him a favor like marrying off his daughter who is also a mountain or something.
Basically the reason why I like minor magical gear or items to be available is because it can help make the world feel alive and also makes interesting stories. For example in a dungeon you find a cup. If you put liquid into the cup, it dissolves slowly and leaves behind nothing except a powder that is identical to the liquid's non-water based properties. So you see it and you think, why was this made? Was this some kind of prank item? Some helpful tool for an alchemist? Etc. If magic items are more rare or unusual, then these sorts of things would feel out of place for being common.
Plus, it always gives your players something to throw their money at. Like the snake charmer's flute that actually works on all snakes, and then when that player later gets locked in a python pit and actually pulls it out, it's a great moment.
>>46341587
I waffle on this.
I hate the idea, but I know the pain the players feel when they pick up their fiftieth barely magical dagger because that's what the dice gods wrought.
I like the idea of assembling a custom grabbag table of "cool" stuff that can be inserted to replace other more boring (or just useless) items that may come up
>>46341587
Well, in my upcoming game players will be able to buy potions (capped at around 5/month until they get the market rolling for it). Magic is rare and most magical items will be gained from plundering the depths or taking on mighty foes. However, since there will be a magic college in the largest city of the realm, buying a magic enchantment can become possible in later parts of the game but still extremely expensive.
Odd ball magic items will be found too (I just thought of a top that never topples and a rug that rolls up on command).
>>46343708
>Odd ball magic items
You should add the classicest magic item
a broom that cleans by itself
it should also have 1% chance of going berserk if any imprudent sorcerer apprentice mess with it.
>>46343766
Adding
>>46341587
Actual arms and armor, I pull inspiration from my old AD&D DM and have them require very expensive, very rare magical metals to be forged in the first place. Yeah, a magic sword /can/ be bought, but you not only need to find enough metal to forge it, but also someone with the tools and skills who can work with that. Good luck.
However, I do allow more mundane magical items to be found at market, stuff like >>46341940's magical cup. I'm also a fan of healing items being more readily available, whether bandages that heal 2 HP per day, or theriacs that may heal 3d6 HP but require a save vs. poison to keep down, or any number of other things other than just "healing potions". I find this leads to less thoughts of clerics as healbots, though I tend to be far enough into the homebrew spectrum that clerics don't exist as such anyway.
