>Trove --https://mega.nz/#F!3FcAQaTZ!BkCA0bzsQGmA2GNRUZlxzg!jJtCmTLA
>Useful Shit -- http://pastebin.com/FQJx2wsC
Previous thread (that 10 post abortion doesn't count): >>47550155 →
Humans, Elves, Lizardmen, Kobolds, Badger Men....
What do they eat?
>>47623190
>Humans
The same as in the real world. Dishes differ from nation to nation / culture to culture.
>Elves
Either more refined as humans, or they are vegetarians, or living plants that can drive roots in the earth to "eat".
>Lizardmen
Purely carnivores, including bugs, insects and worms.
>Kobolds
Giant mushrooms, roots, and bugs.
>>47623190
I've been poking around OSR, but I'd like to hear some shitty opinions about it.
What's good about it? What sucks about it?
Is it even worth a shit?
>>47623783
I'll just repeat what I've said before...
D&D is a lingua franca that enables you to easily communicate with a lot of people. If you say "I made a new RPG, what do you think of it?" chances are not a lot of people are going to go through the trouble to read over it. And why would they? It's serious investment of time just to learn the basics of what you're doing, and that time may be wasted, as your system may suck or just not be the sort of thing the reader is into. But with D&D you have already have a foundation, so that people don't need to learn things from scratch. So you can present a game that's D&D except X, Y and Z. Everybody's up to speed on the D&D part, so they just need to examine X, Y and Z. And they have a pretty good basis for judging those things you changed or added because they know the context well and can be like "X seems a lot more powerful than the rules as written, and would probably make clerics too powerful."
Why old school D&D as opposed to new school? It's simpler and more base-level. This makes it easier to work with. It also has historical significance in that it underlies and informs newer editions of D&D. So ultimately it's a better universal tongue. Plus, it's dead and buried, at least in its official, commercial form. This means that the rules aren't changing underneath your feet and there's been enough time for us to have some perspective on it (and not be in the middle of edition war shit-flinging).
>>47623190
>Humans
Like in the real world, plus potions and strange shrooms.
>Elves
Other elves or intelligent creatures.
>Lizardmen
Sludge, fleshy plants and things that get too close.
>Kobolds
Whatever is given to them, and whatever they can find.
>Badger men
Things badgers eat but more.
>>47623783
I like it because the rules are flexible and malleable and there's not a rule for every possible situation. I also like the focus on survival, item management and being clever with the stuff you have. I also find a lot of modules and rulebooks to have very good layout, be very thought out and very clever. Lastly I guess I like it because it encourages the DM to come up with a lot of crazy cool stuff and it enforces that the player characters are more than what's on their character sheet.
I guess one bad thing about OSR is that it is intentionally unbalanced, which is fine most of the time but can sometimes lead to not so fun situations at the table. It also requires quite a lot of work from the DM and players will also have to think and plan a bit more than usual.
I think it's worth a shit. It renewed my interest in RPGs.
>>47623190
Tell me about your fantasy heartbreakers /osrg/. What settings and systems are you working on?
>>47624577
Isn't it only a fantasy heartbreaker if you try to sell it as something new and original but it's just D&D with different words and maybe one new interesting mechanic?
Anyway, I'm thinking of making my system use the 1d100 level up tables that Zak Smith made or something similar instead of there just being a fixed increase in whatever depending on your class. I might also merge cleric and magic user together and have some spells be chaotic and some lawful, and using one or the other will bring the character closer to that alignment. Also alignments will be more important mechanically, perhaps in how magic items react to them or how saves work but not to decide how characters have to act.
>>47623190
>Humans
Similar to the real world, just add in monstrous ingredients. Probably some magical shit in the upper classes. Generally more medieval than modern, though, so lots of roasts and stews and stuff.
I dunno if pepper would be quite as prevalent in the upper classes given the ability of Clerics to prevent spoiled food from being an issue, but it'd probably still be a thing in some places for the flavor.
>Elves
I tend to go for either cannibals or just gourmet, given their long lives. Never really saw too much sense in the whole vegetarian bit, but I guess it works for the "more enlightened than thou" archetype.
I just really like the idea of cannibalistic elves, though.
>Lizardmen
Beyond the cliché "man-flesh" option, I guess it really depends on what kind of lizard we're talking about? Like, you could have vegan lizardmen and bug-eating lizardmen and exclusive carnivores.
I think my personal "image" for them, though, is something of a mix? No eating utensils, really, just small tribes eating some kind of bug salad off a leaf like they're in the Lion King or some shit.
>Kobolds
Really, really depends on the type of kobold we're talking about. Personally I like to think of them as basically the hobbits of the goblinoids, so just lots of food in general? I figure that they'd eat anything they could get, and not be too picky about it.
So probably lots of big stews and soups and salads and other relatively easily prepared stuff that mixes a lot of varied ingredients.
Fuck, now I'm thinking of Kobold paella and I kind of like the idea.
>Badger Men....
Full-on Redwall. Eulalia, motherfuckers!
>>47624731
Sounds interesting. The heartbreaker comment wasn't serious.
The idea of using different spells changing alignment is interesting, but how would you measure it? Is it down to the GM to wing it or does each spell have a numerical cost to track?
Are there spells which draw on both and are highly corrupting a la hex/dark/deep in Dark Souls?
>>47623783
>Good stuff
I like the whole logistical dungeoncrawling puzzle aspect of it, although I understand that it's not what everyone's after in OSR. There's just something I really like about the thing where you descend into the dungeon and map it out and try your best to avoid fights and then do your best to get out again with as much loot as possible.
It's a very different game form modern D&D, and I find it kind of refreshing? Call it primitivism or whatever, I guess, but I like the whole elegant simplicity you can get in the lighter aspects of it.
It's also very much a game, which was an interesting thing to find out after the whole 3E/4E edition war thingy.
>Sucky stuff
Beyond the whole 3E-esque thing where a lot of people seem to try to twist the system into doing things that it's honestly not that good at, there's a lot of shit that's honestly just old and outdated and seems to just stick around due to some misguided nostalgia. THAC0, mostly, although there's a lot of varied mechanics that honestly don't need to be so.
Also, there's a certain inherent unfairness in the "standard" random character generation. Better rolls get you a better character, and in some systems that's way more apparent than others. In completely different ways, actually, because it's weird like that.
In AD&D if a Fighting-Man rolls well they can be a Paladin, which is honestly mostly just a straight upgrade. In Basic, a character who has good Constitution can have more than double the hit points than an equivalent character who got low CON. A Strength bonus to hit - randomly determined - can make your character as accurate as one with average strength that's five levels greater.
Honestly, I really prefer the OD&D thing where attributes don't really matter much? It's just that everyone seems to imitate the B/X -3 to +3 bellcurve.
Skill checks being roll-under-attribute also makes some characters ridiculously better than others simply because they player got lucky.
>>47623190
I've been thinking... what if Elves had to eat very little compared to the other races, but needed sunlight / starlight? Is there a way to make that an interesting mechanic?
>>47623783
>>47625238
Really, skill systems in general seem like something that shouldn't be in OSR? If people are so hung up on the idea of player skill rather than character skill, why even have those resolution mechanics rather than jsut allowing people to roleplay it out?
It's a bit of a pet peeve, to be honest.
>is it even worth a shit
I wouldn't necessarily tell you to go out and buy an OSR product, but I think it's probably worth a look at least? Just go to the Trove in the OP and try to navigate your way to something usable - Moldvay's Basic Set is probably the go-to thing, I feel, since so much of the other stuff is loosely based on it.
I'm not going to tell you what's worth your time or money, though. I just personally feel like it's an interesting relic of old that's perhaps got some worth to gaming in the modern day.
>>47624016
I'm just gonna go out here and say that OSR is a very different type of D&D than what people might think of when they actually hear about D&D. Hell, I'm pretty sure the modern image of D&D is much more founded in the post-Dragonlance era, with it being a thing for High Adventure and Heroes and whatnot.
There's a lot of difference between that and subterranean fantasy fuckin' Vietnam!
When was the last time you saw a depiction of D&D where people started at the entrance to the megadungeon, and spent the entire session inside it mapping it out? When was the last time you saw a depiction of D&D where the experience came from treasure rather than monsters?
Also, as a more specific complaint,
>It's serious investment of time just to learn the basics of what you're doing
Man, it hardly takes any time at all to learn the basics of good light-weight systems. This attitude is honestly one of the worst things to come from 3E's popularity - the idea that since the only RPG you are familiar with is so complicated and took so long to learn, so must everything else.
Which just isn't true!
>>47625352
It's a flavorful thing, really, photosynthesis.
However, as a mechanic I'm not entirely sure. Especially in regards to existing mechanics. It's kind of weird in how it interacts with the whole dungeon exploration thing - not needing rations means that they can explore indefinitely outside and generally have less of a logistics issue inside, but that also means that they're "starving" the entire time they're underground in the dungeon. Ordinary parties can have long, risky exploration in the depths of a megadungeon or the Underdark, trying to make ends meet with the rations that they have, but these clorophyll-elves can't.
Also, for a specific mechanics weirdness, this has a strange interaction with the whole "throw food at intelligent monsters to escape" mechanic.
It's not much of an issue if you're building the rest of the system while keeping in mind that elves don't need much food and like the outdoors, but shoving it into an existing system seems like it could be a gamebreaker. In a bad way.
Works as a flavorful thing for less logistics-focused campaigns that don't have you exploring underground for long periods, though!
>>47625486
Thank you for the reply. I was thinking that it isn't that Elves don't need to eat, they just eat less. Perhaps underground, they need to eat more since they don't have access to sunlight / starlight?
>>47625529
Cont. (kinda just stream of thought right now)
The advantages of having an elf with you when delving are marginally offset by them simply consuming more resources basically.
>>47623190
>Humans
Stews, soups, pasta, rice. Game.
>Elves
A lot of fish and greens.
>Dwarves.
Mushrooms, bread.
>Dragonfolk
Game, fish.
>>47623783
>The Good
Generally speaking, OSR games offer simple mechanics, a semblance of balance, as well as brutality and association with fun memories / settings / supplements.
>The Bad
The aforementioned simplicity is not always a good thing.
I am not a big fan of most OSR systems saving throws.
>The Ugly
They can be a bit too similar, honestly. There's too many OSR games out there, I would prefer it if we had half as many, but twice the amount of supplements.
>>47625557
Yeah, but does that mean that they consume more resources than humans when underground? Because otherwise that's only a downside when compared to the above-ground Elf.
Also, given how the "standard" rations are bought by the week, I'm not entirely sure how relevant it'd be either way.
It's flavorful, though, I'll give you that.
>>47625723
>They can be a bit too similar, honestly. There's too many OSR games out there, I would prefer it if we had half as many, but twice the amount of supplements.
I think I'd be alright with the current amount if there was more innovation and less retroclones, to be honest.
I don't see much value in something that's a clone of a previously existing game that you can still find on eBay or whatever and then just altering it with a few houserules.
>>47625723
>>47626025
I wonder why someone hasn't made some kind of "pick and choose" book that's just filled with all the changes and houserules that exist all over OSR blogs. People will change any ruleset to fit them better anyway so why not just hand them ideas to help fix problems they might have?
If a character eats a poisonous mushroom unknowingly, do they still make a saving throw against poison? or is it too fucking late because it's in their body?
>>47626908
Do saving throw, if they succeed either they puke it up or it turns out their liver i amazing.
>>47626025
>I don't see much value in something that's a clone of a previously existing game
Most of the retroclones were released to give a basis for releasing adventures and whatnot without having to obtain a license from another company.
They also serve as a loss leader. Give away the game and sell the supplements. LotFP has done pretty well with this model.
Also, I dunno about you, but in my area, a Basic boxed set goes for about the same price as a full set of 5e core books.
>>47627027
>Also, I dunno about you, but in my area, a Basic boxed set goes for about the same price as a full set of 5e core books.
Looking at eBay, the Buy It Now prices for Moldvay's set seem to be 20-30$, with Mentzer in a similar range. Adding Expert to it probably increases it a bit.
Also, of course, the PDFs for both B/X and the Rules Cyclopedia go for ten bucks on dmsguild.
Point on the loss leader thing, though.
>>47625238
>In AD&D if a Fighting-Man rolls well they can be a Paladin, which is honestly mostly just a straight upgrade.
Is it though? You lose a lot for a couple of low level spells.
are there other LotFP modules similar to Tower of the Stargazer in being a pure dungeon/tower-crawl? or one that you can highly recommend, even for another system?
>>47627794
Grinding Gear
the God that Crawls
>>47627355
Things they get:
>Detect Evil
>+2 to all saving throws
>Disease immunity
>Lay on Hands (2hp/level, 1/day)
>Cure Disease 1/week/level
>1" Protection from Evil (keeps out enchanted/conjured creatures, evil enemies get -2 to hit and give +2 to save)
>Turn Undead as Cleric two levels lower
>Magical heavy warhorse (intelligent, 5HD, AC5, MV18")
>If you get a Holy Sword, you get a goddamn continuous 1" Dispel Magic around you
>At level 9+ you get a few Clerical spells
Things they lose:
>May only have 1 suit of magic armor, 1 magic shield, 4 magic weapons, and 4 other magic items
>Only get to keep enough wealth to support yourself in a modest manner, pay henchmen, servitors and men-at-arms, and construct and maintain a small castle
>10% tithe
>Can only have Lawful Good henchmen, associate with Good characters, and adventure with Neutrals on a per-expedition basis if it furthers Lawful Goodness
>Will take service or form alliances with Lawful Good Clerics and noble Fighters
>Do not get the Fighter's men-at-arms at name level
>Need roughly 150% XP of Fighters to level up
>Get one less Weapon Proficiency than Fighters
>May never use poison, even if non-Assassins are allowed to by the referee
I think that's pretty much it? It looks like a damn good deal to me, but I guess I could be wrong.
It's not THAT huge, I guess, and there's definitely downsides to it, but generally it seems like the benefits outweigh them pretty heavily?
What's yer current party looking like?
So what are all your opinions on megadungeons? Are they good, bad, are they even something you'd be interesting in playing in?
>>47629850
I'm thinking of making one right now. I haven't played or ran a game like that in so long, it sounds fun.
Hey, I keep seeing these threads and now I've gotten curious. I'm wondering, what's a good place to start with these old games? I've got the AD&D books, but I'm just wondering what's cool in the trove? Is Lamentations of the Flame Princess any good? Also any general recommendations?
>>47630020
LotFP is definitely cool. If its heavy metal horror vibe doesn't appeal to you, then at least it's rules are excellent, and it's home to many fantastic modules.
Labyrinth Lord has tons of stuff available for it, and it a pretty authentic Basic D&D clone.
Beyond the Wall does a good job of blending more modern narrative ideas into old school D&D, and has some of my favorite implementations of the concept of race-as-class.
>>47629850
I have nothing against them in principle, but going through them square by square in D&D exploration turns can become tedious as fuck. I come across a lot of people who seem to fetishize them just because of the fact that they're big, but they don't really do anything else to make them interesting or fun to explore.
>>47630586
Isn't the whole idea to make them fun and interesting to explore?
>>47630113
Well I'll take a look at all three, thank you kindly!
>>47631186
If yer looking for the perfect introduction to OSR, run Tower of the Stargazer with LotFP.
