>Trove -- https://mega.nz/#F!3FcAQaTZ!BkCA0bzsQGmA2GNRUZlxzg!jJtCmTLA
>Useful Shit -- http://pastebin.com/FQJx2wsC
For LotFP, I'm currently building an absurd 10 room cave/dungeon that is ridiculously gonzo. Everything from potential laser rifles and mutagen syrums, locust-men, a door that opens into space. It's really fun, and the first I've ever made.
What about you?
HOLY SHIT GOBLIN PUNCH JUST RELEASED HOMEBREW RULESET
>>47135776
Not a whole lot. Just trying to maintain a steady game going through B2. I have been messing around with NPC stuff in Vornheim to develop the the residents of the Keep but that's about it. I want to work to put Dolmenwood just to the west of Keep but obviously Wormskin is detailing hexes in the middle of that map and not near that convenient road in the east.
>>47136209
This is true. Anything cool looking in them?
>>47135776
Trying to put together a KSBD/Dark Souls inspired OSR game with a custom class builder and new, flavoursome casts.
Coming up with new lore is somtimes difficult but system design is going well, basing it off LotFP with some inspiration drawn from Last Gasp Grimore. Currently in early playtestint stages.
I asked for some books with essential random tables in the last thread, and had Dungeon Alphabet, AD&D DMG, and the Judge's Guild Ready Ref Sheet recommended to me.
Are there any other books I should be checking out for finding good random tables? Any kind of random tables really.
>>47137570
Here's this. There's the d30 Sandbox Compendium. DCC has a bunch you could get ideas from; everything from Crit Hit tables to Fumbles to Magical mishaps. There's a newer Goodman product called Fifty 'Fantastic Functions for the D50' that I haven't seen. And Vornheim has some reeeeeeally awesome tables in it.
>>47137570
I can't remember the name but theres a Library of Magical Effects somewhere that is pretty lengthy. It was called Librams or somethings.
I'm indulging in some Gygaxian autism and writing up new armor categories. Mostly to fluff up the early modern aesthetic of LotFP.
Leather - 25sp - AC 12
Use the same stats for a gambeson, buff coat, arming doublet, etc.
Chain - 100sp - AC 14
AKA Mail. A mail hauberk with steel plates woven into critical points may use the stats for Breastplate, below.
Brigandine - 200sp - AC 15
A padded coat lined with interlocking steel plates. Use the same stats for a coat of scale armor. For twice the cost, a suit of brigandine can be crafted that looks like a very stylish article of clothing.
Breastplate - 400sp - AC 16
Use this to represent any partial suit of plate armor.
Plate Armor - 1000sp - AC 18
A full suit of plate. It requires about five minutes to don the armor, and requires the help of an assistant (such as a squire or henchman). Wearing the full armor when not on the battlefield or at a tournament is apt to draw attention; a bit like driving a Ferrari to the grocery store.
Plate armor includes an arming doublet—a padded coat to which the plates are buckled. When worn without the plates, the arming doublet offers the same protection as Leather armor. An arming doublet is considered an acceptable (if bold) article of clothing in polite society--the the point that aristocratic poseurs who have never seen a battlefield will wear it about town.
>for double the price, a suit of armor may be commissioned
>I may whip up a table to randomly damage armor and weapons when characters are reduced to 0hp.
>am I nerfing leather too much?
>>47139611
oops
>may be commissioned with ornate decoration or materials that will loudly declare the wearer's wealth and status
>ie a finely etched suit of plate, or a brigandine with an outer shell of rich silk and velvet
Is FASERIP an OSR system?
>>47139763
No. Only pre-2E D&D derivatives are OSR systems.
>>47139611
>>47139668
Sounds neat, although I thought the LotFP base AC was 12, not below (I presume 10?).
Prehaps you could also balance it with Dex AC bonus, with plate the higher tier armour not benifiting from it. I would presume it is harder to dodge an enemy in full plate than in a gambeson.
>>47139953
Question: where should I go for 2e discussion? Do we do that here?
>>47140097
He's full of shit, you can talk about 2e here. 2e is MORE in line with OSR than 1e is.
>>47140097
Yeah, here's fine. One of the first retroclones was OSRIC, and it's a 2e clone.
What's up?
>>47140129
I fucking hate 2E, but it +is+ OSR even though it had the shittiest art and boringest everything else.
>>47140129
>2e is MORE in line with OSR than 1e is.
>>47140162
>One of the first retroclones was OSRIC, and it's a 2e clone.
kek
Both these claims are nonsensical. Shame about /osrg/, we used to have a nice crowd and not shitposters here.
>>47139611
Have you looked at the modern armor in the rulebook?? Seems like you are redoing what Raggi already did here. (this is the new rulebook,not the grindhouse version)
>>47140162
OSRIC is a 1e clone. There are no real clones of 2e, mostly because there don't need to be.
>>47140202
Fair. I liked that it was boring at its core, though, because you could pile whatever else on top without breaking anything. Same reason I like Labyrinth Lord (and OSR in general).
>>47139763
Think of being a kid and being exposed to FASERIP after D&D and Gamma World (there wasn't much else around). I was this kid, and it was fucking INSANE. I think it is a totally, completely different type of game than anything that had come before, and should not be included in a definition of OSR. Good, bad or fugly, it's something else entire.
>>47140228
yeah, I can't look at it objectively as a system as I went as a boy from Holmes to Moldvay to AD&D and all it's brutality to ... ANYTHING other than 2E and it's fucking draconic lameness (which was TMNT, paranoia, WFRP, Cthulhu). It's genericfantasyness is what I defined all other games against.
>>47140277
Although worth noting that there are two retroclones of MSH available (FASERIP and Four Colors)
>>47140340
Totally understandable. There's a flavor for everyone. I cut my homebrew teeth on 2e's modularity, though, and saw a lot of value in that design approach.
Can I get some input/feedback on my gonzo microdungeon for LotFP?
>>47140655
I used bits from Green Devil Face #5, Dungeon Alphabet and random ideas.
I've been toying with the idea for a point buy style system for Magic-User spells for Basic/Moldvay, and what it might look like. Have any of you ever read of or made a system like this of their own?
>>47140896
Describe what you mean.
>>47140938
At character creation and level up you have a number of spell buying Resource Points. Certain spells costs more, like equipment in a store. Magic Missile would cost more Resource Points than Floating Disc, but less than Sleep, for example.
>>47140984
Sounds like you're unnecessarily tiering spells and introducing granularity, honestly. You can manage all of that on the backend by tweaking monster saves.
>>47140655
I really like the traps and the treasure, it really gives off a cool gonzo vibe. I think that the encounters are a bit too forgiving though for all the cool stuff that can be found. Shouldn't the adventuring parties and the locust savage have a bit more hit dice? Or maybe this is like a funnel adventure?
Some other stuff I thought about while reading:
In room 5, skeletal remains should also hang from the low ceiling. Something spooky should happen when you go through it, like the skeletons gently touching the adventurers or something actually dangerous.
In room 6, maybe some skeletal remains should be stuck to the wall, to telegraph danger and explain all the weapons n stuff lying around?
>>47140655
ok i read it and quite liked the idea but the fist problem i see is : the first room should not be the first room cause it will block the pc in the first room by proposing a problem without solution ... and they surely did not leave behind a fellow player in the first fucking room
the room 6 is nasty but you should add that the pc have the possibility to sever the limb glued to the wall (if it's can be done)
>>47141014
That's a fair point. I do mean for this to also allow characters to have multiple spells of a particular level. The inspiration from this came from looking at Burning Wheels spells system a bit.
>>47141291
Just do it the way 2e does.
"The one good thing that comes from your character's studies is his initial spell book. It may have been a gift from his school or he may have stolen it from his hated master. Whatever the case, your character begins play with a spell book containing up to a few 1st-level spells. Your DM will tell you the exact number of spells and which spells they are. As your character adventures, he will have the opportunity to add more spells to his collection."
>>47140984
I've discussed this concept multiple times (but a bit better) with my magical loadout system. Let players trade their levels of MU, or spells per day or points or spell slots or whatever you want to do, for things like minions, magic items made in their workshop, bonuses to saves and so on. The Fearsome Gods game system uses it quite well.
>>47141161
Thanks for the feedback! I based the Locust Savage's stats off the spider in Stargazer. I figured if its deadly enough there, it would be here as well. The odds of the second party coming to combat are slim, and was included less as a fight and more as a bizarre encounter (that can potentially lead to help/dead pc replacement character etc). You pointing out there being no remains in 6 made me realize I didn't write that the wall absorbs the player over a certain amount of time. Oops!
>>47141234
Room 1 is meant to be incredibly deadly. Convincing the second party to attempt retrieval is an option. Also the severing of limbs in 6 is absolutely a solution, but is up to player ingenuity to try.
>>47141424
it give me a "heavy metal" feel
i will use it as a heavy metal one shot
cool! Here's a slightly updated, finalized version.
>>47140277
Isn't Gamma World 3e related to FASERIP?
>>47140228
>There are no real clones of 2e
There is one. I don't think there's more than one, but there is one.
>>47142264
whoops. typos. last one, sorry.
>>47140896
https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?704733-B-X-My-further-magic-and-MU-tweaks
Bamp
>>47137141
I'd love to see the end product anon. Thanks for mentioning Last Gasp Grimoire-- checking that site out for the first time.
>>47148068
Yeah, Grimore is an absolute goldmine, particularly for citycrawling and magic class design.
I tend to be pretty flakey when designing stuff, with most never reaching the players, but this project has lasted way longer than most and I haven't run out of steam so outlook is good it might be complete one day.
On a tangential note, how do you do hit points /osrg/? Rules as written? Abstract points? Grit vs Flesh?
>>47148468
>On a tangential note, how do you do hit points /osrg/? Rules as written? Abstract points? Grit vs Flesh?
RAW.
I don't see any significant benefit to dividing hits into two separate pools. The combat in the game is heavily abstracted as it is. One die roll isn't meant to represent just one strike, and HP are supposed to be a combination of stamina, luck, and avoidance of killing blows, with death coming in the final hit at 0 HP.
There isn't much to be gained from splitting them, as long as you already describe combats in the way the system is supposed to be described. It just makes another thing players have to keep track of, for no real reason.
>>47149097
What about using the split pools, with damage to the Flesh pool triggering things like permanent injuries or resolve checks? Or having them regenerated by different things - simple rest can restore Grit, however medical attention is required for Flesh.
I also find it makes the whole abstracted nature of HP more palpable - there is a real, tangible tipping point where the players know the screws have really been turned on them, building a kind of growing tension in protracted battles.
>>47140896
http://bloodofprokopius.blogspot.com/2012/12/ye-auld-skool-spell-creator.html
How do I handle a situation where a player sends a dog or henchman into every fucking room to see if it's trapped?
>>47149352
>with damage to the Flesh pool triggering things like permanent injuries or resolve checks
That's basically a Death Spiral. They're generally un-fun shit that leads to frustration.
>I also find it makes the whole abstracted nature of HP more palpable - there is a real, tangible tipping point where the players know the screws have really been turned on them, building a kind of growing tension in protracted battles.
Know what else lets players know the screws have been put to them? Losing HP.
And I don't like protracted battles. I run a gritty game. Battles are messy, chaotic and blurry, and death comes fast and easy.
I think if you like super heroic blade poetry you should just play 3.P or something. They're much more suited to that schlock.
>>47150276
Traps only go off on a 2-in-6 at most. That's how OD&D handled it.
So roll the dice, if nothing happens, the dog or henchman didn't trigger the trap (either they don't weigh enough or didn't step on the particular cobblestone that sets it off). Just roll in secret for each person who passes through the area. When you roll a 1 or 2, trap goes off.
>>47150304
>>47150276
Also, make traps that can only be interacted with by humans. Think the golden idol in Indiana Jones.
If he tries to make his henchmen grab it, roll the henchmen's Loyalty, or just have the henchmen tell him to go fuck himself. Henchmen are risk takers but they aren't suicidal.
>>47150276
Just make your world a bit more alive. Player actions have consequences. Word begins to circulate that this so-called adventurer is always hiring new laborers, none of which are ever seen again. The rumor gets the attention of the captain of the nearby city guard who launches an inquest against said player character.
>>47150286
Protracted battles as in pursuits or defences rather than skirmishing, not 'super heroic blade poetry'. The whole grit system shows fatigue building up, players being worn down, diminishing their ability to fight. I will admit to utilising a certain degree of higher-than-usual player survival for thematic reasons, but fights are still far more bloody and lethal than 3.P.
>And I don't like protracted battles. I run a gritty game. Battles are messy, chaotic and blurry, and death comes fast and easy.
>That's basically a Death Spiral. They're generally un-fun shit that leads to frustration.
Surely a death spiral mechanic IS the way to create messy and lethal combats, a crack in the line resulting in a rapid escalation in lethality. I honesty can't see how you reconcile considering death un-fun and liking high lethality, unless I misunderstood something.
>Know what else lets players know the screws have been put to them? Losing HP.
I would agree with this, only once the players lose their HP and things get intense they are already, well, out of HP. Combat isn't as interesting if you spend it bleeding out on the floor.
I like the shift as things move into flesh as you can really get a feel for how the players get desperate. Those abstract points, that counter, it means something infinitely more visceral now and they know it. Mixing actual damage with an abstraction dilutes both.
Going to DM for four new players. They're somewhat apprehensive about RPGs and want pregen characters.
Thinking of running Labyrinth Lord for them, no advanced edition or anything, giving them a fighter, a thief, a magic user, and a cleric, and doing module B2.
One of them really wants to do minis on a map. Should I just get out some minis and a dry erase board and draw the room when combat happens?
>>47150562
Yeah just let them try it. My noob players were dead set on minis, then totally abandoned them by session 3 because they saw how much it slowed the game down. YMMV.
>>47140228
>>47142824
For Gold & Glory is a 2e Clone.
>>47150527
I don't find death unfun, I find Death Spirals are unfun for the players. Death is quick. When it happens it is over quickly and the player can begin moving on, thinking of a new character, get up from the table to go get a snack, maybe start rolling some stats. The pain is brief and they can deal with it quickly.
Death spirals on the other hand are a long protracted scene which often end up in the character dying anyway, but instead of ripping the band-aid off all at once, it's a slow agonizing torture for the player as they angst over the Will He/Won't He of whether their character will survive. And they often won't because of the very nature of the spiral.
HP are the only thing I need to make my players anuses pucker with fear for their characters. I don't see any reason to heap penalties onto them for engaging in fights. Fights are already a bad situation to be in in OD&D.
>>47150879
While I could argue that its cool to have a character retain the physical and mental scars of a fight gone wrong, I can see what you mean about it being unnecessarily drawn-out.
I think that what side of the fence you come down on depends on many second chances you want to give players, which in turn depends on whether you want a long-running party or a good old level one meatgrinder.
I used to go with the latter and use a single HP pool, but as I hope to experiment with a more 'epic' feeling game than "Hobos crawl into dark holes and get stabbed" I have moved to the split pools.
Not that theres anything wrong with lots of dead hobos, of course.
>>47140224
But anon, the shitposter was inside you the whole time.
>tfw thinking of my dads 1e books
>tfw reading modules like B1, B4, and the GDQ series
>tfw no group to play with
JUST
>>47143625
Is this the thing mentioned in the OP?
>>47151046
Induct your normie friends or go dig around in gamefinder.
Maybe we should have an OSR gamefiner section somewhere.
>>47151079
I think normie friends would be the way to go, especially with the GDQ series.
That way, Salvatore and his imitators won't have spoiled the magic of Gygax's "dark fairyland."
What's a fairly forgiving Basic D&D module for beginning players?
how does this seem, for converting LotFP/BX into a post-apocalyptic scenario:
Fighter = Wastelander
>+1 Attack per level, highest HD
Cleric = Lorekeeper
>shamanic, ritual & healing 'magics'
Magic-User = Artificer
>ability to use, repair and understand surviving old-world tech
Specialist = Ruinrunner
>invest points in skills
Elf = Mammal Mutant
>random physical & mental mutations, bushcraft bonus
Halfling = Plant Mutant
>random physical & mental mutations, stealth bonus
Dwarf = Robot/Android
>a set high HP, nightvision, no need to rest, can only be repaired not 'healed'
SKILLS:
>architecture, scavenge (bushcraft), climbing, languages, open doors, search, sleight-of-hand, sneak attack, stealth, tinkering, medical
SAVES:
>paralyze, poison, radiation (breath), tech (magic device), 'magic'
With a successful INT check, a non-Artificer can attempt to identify or use old-world tech (the latter with a large penalty of -4 or more).
Lorekeepers will still have leveled spells, but Artificers will be the only people able to freely use old-world tech (essentially, they only have 'magic weapons')
>>47151616
B1 In Search of the Unknown, perhaps?
>>47151802
1) Too dependent on pre-existing fantasy classes.
Maybe that's just me, but it's better to make everything from scratch.
2) SKILLS will, probably, work.
Though I think it needs some more thought. If you are playing not!Fallout you don't really need Languages, for example.
3) SAVES are horrible
Make those universal (S&W) with conditional bonuses.
Also, what kind of post-apoc are you thinkig about? I'm a bit confused by references to magic.
>>47152980
> Unconquered Sun
Did anyone try playing Godbound? %%Not necessarily in Exalted setting.%%
>>47153036
The image is actually from the old Warhammer Knights of the Sun. How OSR is godbound?
>>47153381
I'm talking about "Sol Invictus" on the shield.
> How OSR is godbound?
Somewhat. A bit like starting at level 3 (or 5).
Chargen seems a bit iffy, if you ask me. Power choice needs to be streamlined.
>>47153381
It's literally a B/X hack by the guy who made Stars Without Numbers and Scarlet Heroes.
>>47141350
Do you have it written up somewhere?
>>47150276
All good suggestions so far, and I will add that at some point he just won't be able to get more henchman. If he has multiple henchman, and they see the PC is using them as expendable meat shields, they're going to split ASAP and smear the PC in every town for a hundred miles.
Henchman in particular are NPC's with class levels, who are going along for a share of treasure and experience.
Less skilled hirelings don't sign up to do the dirty work, they just want to carry shit and go home.
Are there any online resources or similar with ideas for making the LotFP cleric more interesting? I just had a player give up his 3rd level cleric because he felt he never did anything in the dungeons and everyone in the party thought he was worthless. I know the cleric is great with undead beings but there has to be ways to make him interesting to play without that right?
>>47153886
On page 5, Raggi introduces a new character advancement technique:
All classes begin with the same baseline:
1d6 Hit Points
Attack Bonus +1
Parry: +2 Armor Class
Press Attack: AB +1, AC -4
Defensive Attack: AB -4, AC +1
Saving Throws 15 in all categories
At first level, and every level gained thereafter, roll d10 twice on the appropriate
table to determine what benefits are gained from that level. A player can choose
to gamble and instead roll d12 once. All results are cumulative.
Spell slots must immediately be assigned a level. A character can never have
more spell slots of a particular level than the number of slots of the previous
spell level (first level slots are not restricted).
Cleric
1. +d6 Hit Points
2. +1 Attack Bonus
3. +1 Parry Armor Class
4. +2 All Saving Throws
5. +4 One Saving Throw Category
6. +2 All Saving Throws
7. +1 Spell Slot
8. +1 Spell Slot
9. +1 Spell Slot
10. +1 Skill Point
11. Results 1, 4, 7, and 8
12. Results 4, 5, 9, and 10
>>47153658
He made a PDF, I saved it.
>>47154083
Man, that d12 is quite a gamble. You have a 1 in 6 chance of getting 4 upgrades, and a 5 in 6 chance of only getting a single upgrade, half the d10 method. That means for every 6 levels you'll average 9 upgrades, versus 12 for just using the d10.
>>47153886
goblinpunch.blogspot
.com/2013/12/towards-better-cleric.html
>>47154083
Those save adjustments should be written - not +.
>>47151802
You might want to take a look at other OSR post-apocalyptic games like Mutant Future or Other Dust for inspiration. They are offshoots of Labyrinth Lord and Stars Without Number, respectively.
Anybody check out the Peridot zine yet?
>>47148468
>On a tangential note, how do you do hit points /osrg/? Rules as written? Abstract points? Grit vs Flesh?
Whenever combat begins or damage would be dealt the player rolls their hit die. The die is adjusted up or down by the CON bonus and damage is dealt. If that die should be reduced to 0 it is removed and a new one is rolled, adjusted and the remaining damage is applied. Of course the player only has as many hit dice as their level (I haven't used this system for level above 10.)
It's pretty much Carcosa rules with consistent die size.
Healing magic can be used in combat to boost the result of a die or outside of combat to recover a die.
>>47148468
I've never had cause to complain about simple HP. I see the argument for splitting it into something like "spirit points" and "meat points" but I'm not sure it's worth the added mechanical baggage.
As long as I'm using a system without HP bloat.
And some of the fringe cases (like 100' drops that would go directly to "meat points") are a relative rarity.
Attributes.
Which ones do you prefer? How many should there be?Do we really need Charisma?
>>47163806
Charisma is the henchman control attribute, which makes it really important if you're OSRing in the intended way.
>>47163818
Well, it's still one use only.
Something like
> Influence (Charisma, Social Status, Reputation)
makes more sense to me.
>>47163967
Skills & Powers has Charisma's subabilities be Leadership and Appearance. Leadership controls henchmen, Appearance controls NPC reactions.
Social status isn't connected to ability scores, and shouldn't be. The way Al-Qadim handled it was fine.
>>47163967
>Well, it's still one use only.
The same goes for a lot of attributes, though. Just look at Basic, where Intelligence gives bonus languages and is a Prime Requisite and Wisdom doesn't even do anything other than being a Prime Requisite. Hell, Charisma affecting henchmen amount, henchmen morale and reaction checks means that it probably does more than any other stat.
Charisma didn't become a dump stat until 3E, you know, and that was entirely because they dumped hirelings and morale and tied reaction checks to a skill.
>>47164064
>Social status isn't connected to ability scores, and shouldn't be.
Truth. Should every single king really be highly charismatic?
>>47163806
My homebrew combines all the mental stats into a single score (Intelligence). Well, sort of. It's more like it combines Intelligence and Wisdom and ditches Charisma, in favor of making any possible checks stat-less. Then again, I never was much interested in turning adventures into expeditionary commercial ventures with henchmen and whatnot.
>>47151802
>>47156935
I am also doing something like this, but instead my game is more 'lost world' in a way. Instead of Post Apocalypse people get lost and are forced to live in a strange city in the middle of an endless wood where it is always night time.
I'm not sure if the game should have classes yet though, or what exactly the mechanics should be. I am probably going to be using something like Into the Odd as a base though.
>>47164064
> Social status isn't connected to ability scores,
It isn't.In DnD.Should I call myself TravellerAnon?
> and shouldn't be.
Why not? Your abilities are (at least partially) influenced by your origin. Being born as a Baron is different from being born as a Peasant.
Should you approach a watchman and introduce yourself properly, his reaction will be very different. Same goes for your hirelings.
Why not approximate this all in one simple stat?
>>47164096
> The same goes for a lot of attributes, though.
Well, the question was about all attributes. I specifically mentioned Charisma because I was thinking about it.
>>47164108
What of the other stats?
>>47164096
> Truth. Should every single king really be highly charismatic?
Shouldn't every king be _influential_?
Even if we use Charisma/Influence for Loyalty checks alone, henchmen will have more loyalty to their king, rather then to some merchant, even if both act, look and pay the same.
>>47164280
>What of the other stats?
They're the same. It's just a 4 stat system now: Strength, Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution. When I started banging everything together I came to the realization of how much less important the mental stats were in my games, overall.
>>47164339
I'm going the other way. Strength and Constitution got rolled into one stat: Toughness (the rest are autistically correct Awareness, Cognition, Dexterity, Willpower). I decided against adding Intuition (for now, at least).
>>47164386
I often roll Strength and Constitution into Might (sometimes Brawn), but in D&D, they're too important for this, at least how we play. I also often use Awareness, but the point at which I add that is the point at which I start reshaping the game rather dramatically (awareness and wisdom have never been a very good fit, in my opinion, not least of which because it doesn't seem like clerics should be the most alert motherfuckers around). And Willpower? Maybe rolled into some sort of Spirit / Presence / Authority stat, but I find it easy enough to improvise and possibly make stat-less rolls. Things like bravery and such, when there needs to be a roll for them, I tend to handle via stat-less level-checks (on which fighters get the better of 2 rolls).
>>47164339
>Strength, Intelligence, Dexterity, and Constitution
Hi GURPS.
>>47164280
Does Social Standing actually do anything in Traveller apart from in chargen?
>>47164746
Of course. Social checks of all kinds use it.
Haggling, finding information, leadership checks and dealing with bureacracy/nobility (unless it's about legalese/protocol - i.e. Education).
>>47164326
>Shouldn't every king be _influential_?
Not necessarily. There's been quite a few Kings throughout history that have just been seatwarmers.
What's the best OSR system for a game with low or no magic, and definitely no PC casters?
>>47165117
OD&D without the fantasy critters and magic items and with Chainmail combat could probably make for a good session or two, I feel, but that's definitely not the intended playstyle.
Hell if I know what OSR system would do low-to-no magic best, though. Beyond the various sci-fi systems, that is, but that's kind of cheating.
>>47165076
You missed the point.
If basic social ability is measured in Influence, you should not expect it to be expressed in Charisma alone.
One (especially king) does not need to be charismatic to be influential.At least, more influential than an average peasant.
>>47165117
> What's the best OSR system for a game with low or no magic, and definitely no PC casters?
ACKS would be my guess.
It still has some things to go for it when you take away the magic stuff.
But - yeah. It'll be boring.
>>47164853
>dealing with bureacracy
That's just Admin. DM -3 if Admin-0, DM +(level*2) if Admin-1 or greater.Which version are you talking about? I'm running off CTrav.
The copies over at Noble Knight Games sold out a long time ago.
Anybody knows where to find it?
>>47165344
> That's just Admin. DM -3 if Admin-0, DM +(level*2) if Admin-1 or greater.
Is this Classical? There are several editions. I'm mostly Mongoose (1st edition, so far; haven't tried 2nd yet).Advocate too, by the way.
>>47165117
Not sure if D&D is what I'd go to for a something like that. Maybe go with Barbarians of Lemuria or something in the RuneQuest family. If you really want to stick with D&D-types, then you probably want to go with something a bit more towards AD&D so that there are enough non-caster classes to give you some variety. Maybe Castles & Crusades? One of the things it does that I wholeheartedly approve of is to take the spells away from classes like Rangers and Paladins (and Bards, for that matter). Granted, Paladins still heal people by laying on hands, cure diseases and so forth, so depending on how strict you are about magic, they might not make the cut. But even if you dropped them, you'd still have Fighters, Rangers, Barbarians, Thieves, Assassins, Knights and Monks to choose from.
>>47165344
> Which version are you talking about? I'm running off CTrav.
Oh, wait. Now I see.I need more coffee.
Mongoose. I didn't really have much of an experience with other versions (I think I might've played the early ones a few times, but I don't remember much).
>>47165513
Yeah, Classic. Specifically, the '82 single-volume version.
>>47165518
>But even if you dropped them, you'd still have Fighters, Rangers, Barbarians, Thieves, Assassins, Knights and Monks to choose from.
But if you're okay with some mystical powers as long as they fall well short of what a true casting class would have, then that add Bards and Paladins to the list.
>>47165117
Lamentations of the Flame Princess, everyone is either a Fighter or a Specialist. You can run historical games with it. It has a neat Appendix on early modern armor & firearms. Otherwise it's pretty setting-neutral since this is an option, so you can make whatever you want with it.
Also the three little brown books (1974) without the Magic-User or Cleric, everyone is a Fighter, there are no skills. It's as fiction-first as it comes.
If you want badasses, Barbarians of Lemuria is great, but it doesn't do zero-to-hero, it's badass-to-kings-of-the-world in scope, though it doesn't have any rules for politics, but I think that's what happens eventually in a campaign.
Or you can run it as proper sword & sorcery.
In any case, Barbarians of Lemuria is great, but it doesn't feel like D&D, and it doesn't play like an OSR product (according to either Bats in the Attic or OSR Primer definitions).
Is OSR general agreeing on their definition of OSR?
>>47165117
B/X? Maybe ACKS.
Honestly something not OSR would probably be a better fit.
>>47165927
>Is OSR general agreeing on their definition of OSR?
Why wouldn't an OSR game be a good fit?
>>47165545
Well, depending on situation you can use different characteristics with skills in MgT. It's a "rulings not rules" territory.
Social Standing is explicitly used as an example in Admin, Advocate, Broker, Carouse, Deception, Diplomat, Leadership, Persuade, and Steward skills.
>>47165938
Spells are an important part of OSR. 2/3 the original classes were casters, and D&D is pretty high magic (albeit less so than it later became). And without the caster classes, the class system starts to feel like maybe it's not worth the bother. And if you dispense with classes, what does that leave you with?
>>47166094
Carcosa has Fighters and Sorcerers, and I don't know anybody who likes to play Sorcerers. And it works, there are various ongoing campaigns around.
Into the Odd doesn't have classes, and is still an OSR game.
OD&D is a fantasy kitchen sink, with robots, dinosaurs, giant [anything], lords that joust and wizards that send people on quests, and magic plays a big part, that is true. Though D&D works without magic. The original game states that the set of rules presented can be fucked with to get the appropriate feel you want.
If you take LotFP, which doesn't have monster lists or magic items in the core book, and strip away the casting classes, it still work without a hiccup and still has a lot of matter.
>>47166094
Of course, it would take much more effort (at least for me) to run a historical game, but there is also the simple possibility of running a low-magic or no-magic world that simply isn't ours. Warband's setting for exemple doesn't have any magic in it, but the premise? You play a band of morally ambiguous mercenaries who do war, skirmishes, politics and exploration -not as a gameplay thing, but still-, and you eventually rule your own turf. Seems pretty D&D to me.
>>47153507
>Power choice needs to be streamlined.
How much more streamlined can you get than "here's the list, pick three"?
>>47153886
I think the Cleric is the easiest class for newbies because it has a built-in drive: alignment.
Playing a Lawful Cleric? You have an opinion on stuff. You actively seek to destroy evil, or at least protect civilisation and order.
Playing a Chaotic Cleric? You have another opinion on stuff. You're gonna be up to shenanigans and schemes, or you're gonna be doing things that will bring consequences.
Rogue-types, which is to say Chaotic characters are driven by simple things, like greed, lust for power, etc.
Also, put in kickass religions, cool weird angry gods, describe blood soaked altars and miracles and shit. If you need inspiration, the old testament is full of crazy shit like the adventures of Samson or David. Even the "wise" guys like Abraham are badasses.
>>47151802
I once did a very functional Cyberpunk game with LotFP using the Fighter, Specialist and Magic-User as is. MUs were reskinned Deckers and all their spells had a techno-babble explanation but basically worked the same.
For exemple, Sleep is just a mass wireless hack of a bunch of peoples' brain chips so that they suddenly shut down. For physical spells, like fireball or floating discs, I just wrote down "nanomachines". The tech level was on par with the Ghost in the Shell movie.
Which is to say, yes, I believe it will work fine.
You should check out Carcosa, it's basically post-apocalyptic sword & sorcery in space.
>>47165501
It's nowhere to be found as far as I can tell, I did some searching for it a couple months ago.
There isn't much to it apparently so don't pay large amounts for it if you come across it. A dude at rpg geek did a review on it (https://rpggeek com/ thread/ 1100755/ cake-paragon-truth-compared-lie) Remove the spaces
>>47167437
Thanks. Save vs Total Party Kill did one too, although with censorship on for shit & giggles.
I don't have the ability to pay up big bucks for anything anyway, but if I can find it for twenty something or less, I'd like to have it, even as a collector thing.
>>47167187
> How much more streamlined can you get than "here's the list, pick three"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis
It should be a list out of 5-10 choices. Or a random roll. Human brains don't handle lots of options well.
Frankly, I'll accept a game as an OSR only if a complete newbie can make a viable character in 5 minutes or less. Well, either that or he is already playing during chargen (i have a weakness for a good lifepath generation system).
- MgTravellerAnon
>>47167578
>Frankly, I'll accept a game as an OSR only if a complete newbie can make a viable character in 5 minutes or less.
So not AD&D, then?
>>47167578
5 minutes or less? I've been playing for almost ten years, and as far as D&D is concerned, here's the ones that do it :
OD&D, Blue Holmes, Moldvay's Basic, Mentzer's Basic.
That's it.
That's a lot of retroclones though.
>>47167659
AD&D isn't OSR, it's old. Old School if you like.
Seriously guys, I'm starting to think nobody knows what OSR even means.
>>47167684
>AD&D isn't OSR
For what reason?
>>47167684
>Seriously guys, I'm starting to think nobody knows what OSR even means.
Yes, we do. In fact we know both the real definition and your definition, which is:
>Stuff I Like = Objectively Good tier
>Stuff I Don't Like = Shit Tier
In particular, criticizing AD&D as non OSR is particularly retarded since by the time you use enough OD&D books to use it without Chainmail, it already greatly resembles AD&D.
>>47167684
> best OSR games are retroclones of OD&D, Blue Holmes, Moldvay's Basic, Mentzer's Basic.
Yep. That's about right.
I mean, you may have your own preferences, but those are mine.
>>47167751
> For what reason?
He explicitly told you: it's not the "R" (Revival/Renaissance/...) of OSR. At best it IS Old School.
>>47164064
>Social status isn't connected to ability scores, and shouldn't be.
Social status is fine as an ability score. See: Traveler. I wouldn't necessarily add it to the basic six.
>>47167684
>I'm starting to think nobody knows what OSR even means
Why don't you tell us your definition so we can all laugh at you for it?
>>47167830
Fair enough. But what about OSRIC? Is that OSR, given that character creation's not a 5-minute job?
Module recs for Into the Odd, plz.
>>47167830
>He explicitly told you: it's not the "R" (Revival/Renaissance/...) of OSR. At best it IS Old School.
An old school edition of D&D is to OSR games like a thumb is to fingers. A thumb is sometimes included as a finger and sometimes set apart from them. OSR games can be applied broadly (to include actual old school D&D) or narrowly (to include only new school games based on old school D&D). In the former context, think of OSR games as being the games favored by members of the old school renaissance, which certainly includes old school D&D, itself. In the latter context, they're like games made by those people--new school games based on old school D&D. Usually the broader definition wins out because there's no good term for "old school D&D and its new school derivatives produced as part of the OSR movement".
>>47167881
> But what about OSRIC? Is that OSR, given that character creation's not a 5-minute job?
I don't consider it a "playable OSR". I treat it as a collection of game mechanics you can use without fear of being sued directly by WotC/Hasbro lawyers.
>>47167838
Influence is your Status plus persuasivness/style (you know, regular Charisma things) and personal reputation. Basically, I removed all magical bits from Charisma and added all general mundane things that affect Social rolls.
Also, I'd like to know your preference of basic abilities, if you don't mind.
>>47167962
> recs
Decipher Script check failed.
>>47167846
>>47167881
To me the Old School Renaissance is not about playing a particular set of rules in a particular way, the dungeon crawl. It is about going back to the roots of our hobby and seeing what we could do differently. What avenues were not explored because of the commercial and personal interests of the game designers of the time.
-BatintheAttic
I think this is a good definition, though the OSR Primer goes in more depth.
>>47167751
Because it's old school, not revival.
>>47167805
I never said anything was good or bad, I'm not criticizing AD&D when I say it's not an OSR product. And yes, OD&D with supplements feels a lot like AD&D, but I don't see your point here. I'm not arguing that any edition of the early fantasy game is good or bad here.
>>47167830
I'm not saying those are the best, I'm saying they have a 5 minute long creation. I'm sorry if my post sounded like I was judging those various games, I was just trying to see what /osrg/'s definition of an OSR game is, and I still haven't seen that.
>>47167881
Of course, OSRIC is a retroclone of (If I'm not mistaken) AD&D, so it qualifies as a game being part of the Old School Revival.
>>47167962
There's the free oddpendium somewhere, but that's about it. In the Trove I think. Also the author's blog has useful stuff.
>>47168069
Now this is the kind of thing I was looking for. I didn't think of it that way, but it makes sense, yes. If I said "an OSR game is a type of procedures -old-school type of play, like hexcrawl or dungeoncrawl, for exemple, with player skill instead of character skill- associated with a game that supports said procedures", aside from calling me a pretentious fuck, would you say it matches your description?
Mike Mornard for exemple says playing OD&D isn't "OSR" per say *for him* because he's been playing since the beginning and never *went back* to D&D.
It is true that people in the OSR community enjoy playing old school and old school inspired games. Cont.
>>47168270
Cont : I'm begining to think we're taking this the wrong way. What if OSR is just a way of playing, and the community that likes this (broad range of)way(s) of playing?
Dungeon Crawl Classics has no old-school mechanics, but functions as an old-school game and is considered part of the OSR.
It's not a retroclone though, it's a fantasy heartbreaker (and that's OK, I'm not saying it's good or bad, I'm trying to be exact in my words).
Labyrinth Lord or OSRIC are retroclones, in the sense that they are more a restatement of previous editions with a different (better?) layout that is useful for the authors because it allows them to publish modules on their own.
My two cents.
>>47168104
My view on basic abilities is that they're wholly up to interpretation. For example, in OD&D, especially when using the Chainmail rules, I like something like:
Archery, Horsemanship, Mechanics (crossbows, siege engines, ships, etc), Stamina (mostly for armor), Leadership (charisma-as-written), and Linguistics (intelligence-as-written). Without going into too much detail, its something like, 12+ lets you use "Heavy" stuff within a given category, 10+ "medium" stuff, 7+ "light" stuff, anything below that and either you can't use it at all or only poorly (for example, without Horsemanship 7+ you can't even use a light warhorse in combat, but you can still ride a horse or a pony as appropriate through calm situations).
Debatably, the class restrictions could be translated as that magic users probably all have archery & stamina 1-6, dwarves probably all have horsemanship 1-6, clerics probably all have archery & mechanics 1-6.
Mounted archers use lowest of archery and horsemanship (or mechanics for crossbowmen), armor uses stamina for on foot, higher of stamina or horsemanship
A 15+ gives a one step improvement (typically (moving as a med. horse as a heavy horse, firing as per a light xbow with a heavy xbow, etc), or a +1 when no apparent advantage could apply.
And why? The logic here is that in core OD&D, your stats have very little effect and that's a GOOD thing (imo), the main impact is your equipment. And if using OD&D+Chainmail, its a HUGE plus to be a Heavy Horse Hero, or HHH as I like to call them, that's really what matters. Str 3 doesn't give you a to hit or to damage penalty in core OD&D, so I don't have stats directly affect your char beyond that.
They may seem closer to weapon/nonweapon proficiencies of other editions but imo that's how it makes sense and keeps them as a big impact without wrecking your char if they're low.
In another RPG, I might eschew ability scores completely, and factor them completely into race, class, and age.
>>47168325
I think 'fantasy heartbreaker' should be reserved for stuff that doesn't strive for 100% transparency that "Yep, this is just mongled D&D."
>>47168270
> I'm not saying those are the best,
I am saying this.
I said RPG needs to have 5 min or less to be accepted by me as an OSR.
You offered DnD editions that fit this.
I said - yes. Retroclones of those editions are good OSR games.
> I was just trying to see what /osrg/'s definition of an OSR game is, and I still haven't seen that.
In the immortal words of Barbossa ...
>>47168487
>They're more like guidelines
This explains a lot.
>>47165938
I just think that there are non OSR D&D derivatives like Iron Heroes and 4e that support things like non-magical healing better.
I mean low magic/no magic is just so broad I could suggest a half a dozen systems off the top of my head, but I figure talking about non-OSR systems would have been better left for another thread.
You faggots sound like those kids arguing what is and isn't 'true punk'.
>>47168382
>>47168104
And further, I think influence does sound good, to get to the point. My only real pet peeve is when people combine something extremely punishing like 3d6 6x, with MASSIVE stat creep. AD&D doesn't bother me too much necessarily as we usually get workable stats, even with 3d6, and stat penalties are very soft (con doesn't go below a -1 iirc, except at VERY low levels). Most chars won't have a penalty or a bonus to anything relevant, I think.
What really aggravates me is when an RPG reaches the level of say 3rd edition (3: -4, 9: -1, 13: +1, 18: +4) and still uses 3d6. These people haven't thought it through at all.
A -1/+1 seems minor, yeah? But a PC with -1 to combat rolls and hps is basically half the combatant of a PC with +1 to combat rolls and hps! Which would be fine if ability scores were mostly how PCs advanced, but they're not.
For people who like super high randomness, I would personally just advocate letting people roll 1d4-1 for starting level. That way, you're still showing extreme favoritism to some PCs, but at least they can work through it.
Barring that extreme, however, I don't think you can really fuck up too badly with ability scores.
>>47168683
>supports things like non-magical healing better
I'm all for rerolling HD at the start of a session (which usually is in a town or other secure place), so as far as I'm concerned, there's no need for magical healing aside from as a quick patch-up after fights if the Clerics rolls this way, and I've always felt that it's the best way to make the Cleric feel like a healbitch. I do agree that there are a tons of ways to do no/low magic without D&D, it's not and will never be The One Way to do [anything].
But yeah, it's a bit off-topic and anon asked for an osr game that did it well.
>>47168722
There's no arguing actually. A few people exchange ideas, other people lose their shit. Nothing special here.
>>47168722
This shit seems to come up every thread. It's really not complicated.
The whole OSR shit started to people could publish new material for old games they liked without getting assfucked by copywrite. This led to OSR systems.
Their whole function was to be compatible with Old School D&D.
>>47168825
That's retroclones. Retroclones are intertwined with OSR but they aren't the same thing.
>>47168825
Yes. But then, AD&D, or any actual old d&d game isn't "OSR". It's just Old-School. That's the same issue as people calling Basic "OD&D" when OD&D is the little brown books and its supplements, which is pre-Basic D&D (which is called Classic D&D if you're talking about Blue/Red/Black/BECMI/RC).
I think it helps discussion to be on the same page on things, and these things just confuse the matters.
Same way as how "balance" is used on /tg/, which can be a pacing thing, a spotlighting thing, a videogame gimmick strapped on RPGs, and really anything that one wants to describe as related to the word.
If people lose their shit on making up pronouns like zee or zey and the likes, why don't they lose their shit about this?
>>47168926
Nah, >>47168825 is right actually, it did start with retroclones and as a way to produce D&D-things without having issues. Thanks the OGL license and Wizards of the Coast.
A more interesting angle : when does your house-ruled home game becomes a retroclone and stops being X edition of D&D you were playing?
It's the pile of sand thing.
>>47168997
When you make the conscious decision to have it no longer be classified as D&D. For example, 3e's Unearthed Arcana or 2e's more strange splatbooks can make for a game that is far more different from the base game than many retroclones.
>>47169059
OD&D plays very differently from Basic.
AD&D plays very differently from those two.
AD&D2 plays very differently from those.
D&D 3 plays very differently...
I could go on all day, though all of those games, and retroclones too, qualify as D&D in my book. Labyrinth Lord is D&D. LotFP is D&D. DCC is D&D too.
But Warhammer isn't D&D. Nor is Rolemaster, or even Hackmaster.
Why or why not?
>>47169143
I wouldn't say Warhammer (TT or the RPG) is really a retroclone. The RPG is more of ... a heartbreaker? Am I using the term right?
Hackmaster is definitely close to 2e though, closer than DCC is to... something.
Anyway, in my opinion, its definitely taxonomic. Retroclones and heartbreakers and such are a bit like moons, and most fantasy vidyas and such are D&D inspired, or inspired by those that were, so they are like satellites. Some of which are maintained, and others of which serve their commercial function and are left to float as debris. Warcraft 3 and WoW have big time inspirations from D&D, both in general, from Dragonlance Adventures (both plot wise and the way it pioneered races as having a limited set of allowed classes, often specialty classes, with + to this and - to this), and some very specific elements of 3rd edition (WoW's humanoid vs undead classification and how forsaken count as the former and thus lose immunity to hold sleep and charm comes to mind).
Making it a matter of taxonomy may seem petty, but I don't agree. D&D's the biggest thing in the fantasy genre, and so people look to it for what to expect. Its a joint experience which forks off all over the world on varying projects.
Part of this is also how D&D is itself many genres stapled violently together, and in many cases individual classes were based off a single fantasy character.
>>47168950
"balance" and gender neutral pronouns carry ideological baggage.
OSR is just a rough category that's useful for hobbyists who want to throw a loose rope around a variety of writers, games, content, etc. Nobody's pride or identity (should be) at stake.
>>47169143
Well that depends on what your definition of "is" is.
Your subjective ideas about what D&D "is" don't really matter. If you asked my grandma what we were doing while playing WHFRP, she'd say "oh it's that deeundee game".
If we're trying to be precise, then if it doesn't have "Dungeons and Dragons" on the cover, and isn't published by the person or company that holds the rights to the IP, it ain't D&D.
>>47169326
>I wouldn't say Warhammer (TT or the RPG) is really a retroclone.
Me neither.
>Making it a matter of taxonomy may seem petty, but I don't agree. D&D's the biggest thing in the fantasy genre, and so people look to it for what to expect. Its a joint experience which forks off all over the world on varying projects.
Do we agree on the idea that saying "we're playing D&D", even without knowing the edition used, triggers a specific set of expectations?
>>47169342
I agree with you, and the grandma's point of view is a great consideration, as it brings up the idea that "RPG" and "D&D" are basically the same thing for a lot of people, which brings me back to the "set expectations" thing.
>If we're trying to be precise, then if it doesn't have "Dungeons and Dragons" on the cover, and isn't published by the person or company that holds the rights to the IP, it ain't D&D.
If this was true (in effect*), then it would defeat the whole purpose and realisation of OSR things.
* : while defining D&D as "Dungeons & Dragons(tm)" is obvious, what does it mean for you to play, say, Labyrinth Lord, or OSRIC? Since those are extremely close to the original material, save a few house-rules and reinterpretations, I'm pretty sure they qualify as D&D-as-set-of-expectations. Like you could run a Labyrinth Lord game with gamers that don't usually play D&D, call it D&D, and they wouldn't necessarily notice the difference.
I DM LotFP for casual gamers, and they call it D&D.
I think the OSR has such variety around the same formule *because* D&D is a very broad category of games. Though I'm holding lightly to this idea here, which is why I ask so many questions -again, not trying to piss off anyone here, it's genuine curiosity about how different people see the game-.
>>47169514
>Do we agree on the idea that saying "we're playing D&D", even without knowing the edition used, triggers a specific set of expectations?
Yeah, I'd say so. Virtually everyone knows what D&D is, a lot of it thanks to WoW.
> then it would defeat the whole purpose and realisation of OSR things.
Well its like how people in Texas call basically all sodas "coke."
>>47169547
I don't live in the US so that's surprising to me. Though I can relate to this with stuff like Kleenex, Freezer and Scotch for tape.
Well, it has been interesting, I gotta go now. Thanks for being civil, anons.
>>47169547
>>47169514
And this post wasn't very helpful, so I will add that stuff that isn't quite D&D still orbits D&D, so you will still basically get the jist.
>>47169629
Have a good one.
>>47168950
> If people lose their shit on making up pronouns like zee or zey and the likes, why don't they lose their shit about this?
I prefer to believe it is because OSR people are the sort of people that don't lose their shit because of inconsequential things.Don't mind me. I prefer to be in denial if I'm wrong.
>>47168997
> A more interesting angle : when does your house-ruled home game becomes a retroclone and stops being X edition of D&D you were playing?
I guess it's the point when it's easier to just make the rulebook from the scratch, rather than to keep adding houserules to the existing.
>>47169720
I lose my shit 24/7 on 4chan, just not here
>>47169742
You are a were-OSR person then.
>>47169742
Wow, you should probably cut down on the 4chan then. Call it a "shit retention program."
>>47169514
>Do we agree on the idea that saying "we're playing D&D", even without knowing the edition used, triggers a specific set of expectations?
These days I'm pretty sure that said expectations are more heroic fantasy set in the Forgotten Realms, to be honest. Dungeoncrawling is also part of it, I suppose, but logistical dungeoncrawls haven't been the expectation since at least 2E. And megadungeons, despite being roughly as D&D as you can get, don't really factor into the expectations much on account of published adventures following in the footsteps of tournament modules.
There's so many versions of what's "D&D" out there that it's hard to know what exactly people are expecting, to be honest. Especially since 3E onwards were so popular and have extremely varying styles. Grab a 3eaboo, a 4rry, and a Nextbeard and toss 'em into an OD&D megadungeoncrawl and I reckon that most of them will feel like that's not what they expected.
On the other hand, throw 'em into a Dragonlance-esque adventure path and they'll probably all feel at home to some degree.
D&D has changed.
>>47150276
Dogs bark at character. Bad human!
>>47151802
>world trade center still standing
HAH, WRONG
>>47165117
Whitehack could work, since none of it's classes are inherently Magic in nature, even the class that lines up closest to Wizard can easily be something mundane
>>47168408
I'd say it should be reserved for games that try to be better than D&D but fail miserably at it
Does Trove actually have Neoclassical Geek Revival rulebook?
There are only modules, but that's it.
>>47163806
My group only uses STR CON DEX INT CHA
We don't have clerics because we play a Dragon lance type of setting, so we felt it was better to just add WIS to INT
bump
