Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to TSR D&D, derived systems, and all content compatible with the above.>Trove:http://pastebin.com/QWyBuJxd>Tools & Resources:http://pastebin.com/KKeE3etp>Old School Blogs:http://pastebin.com/ZwUBVq8L>Previous thread:>>64559308What monsters do you never use, and why?
>>64578062The most honest answer would be 90% of the monster on dungeon level 4 or more because a campaign never lasts that long.
>>64578062Oddly enough, I don't find myself using dragons of any age or type. They're so overused that I want to make them feel special to the players when they appear, and I've never found the right moment / campaign to do that.
>>64578029>those "effects" are already in OD&DCould you clarify, please? I know the Chainmail combat system does weapon vs. AC type but like I say I'm trying to avoid effects vs. specific armour types, since I'd like the effects to apply to monsters as well as men.
>>64578099What's with this meme? Do people think everyone plays two sessions or something and then the group explodes or whatever? I've run games for years, and I've never had the sense that that's out of the ordinary.
>>64578137>in the textAxes can be thrownPolearms set to receive a charge>common senseDaggers can be hiddenMaces and clubs are best at smashing open chests and doors
Anyone have a link to the "what module should I run for beginners?" PDF? I can't seem to find it in the trove.
Planning my first homebrew campaign, set in Dark Ages England. Thoughts on my RE/WM table so far? I've based the structure off info from Hoover's OSR Reference pdf (in grey).The RE locations/scenarios can be placed anywhere on the map as players explore and a RE check is rolled. I also have some keyed locations not pictured. If a WM is rolled, it is assumed they and the party just stumble into each other in the woods or wherever. For RE checks, a 1 on a d6 is a table roll, and a 2 on a d6 is a sign/sound of a WM. Am I doing it right? Thoughts and advice is appreciated.
>>64578154>getting this worked by an anecdotal answer to an open question
>>64578223It's a question, not a burst of anger. The idea that no one actually plays D&D comes up a lot here.
>>64578219Also Here is my master table I've been using to come up with scenarios in case anyone is interested.
>>64578219Actually looks pretty good although I would take out "disaster-injury" unless you have NPCs who can twist an ankle. Even if injury goes against PC horse there is going to be sentiment about why they had no chance to prevent said injury. It will seem like railroading if you just say, "PC your horse stepped in hole and broke its leg" Be careful with accidents as well to make them things that are more outside player agency.
On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is characters being flat nameless pawns and 10 being full blown character acting, how much do you roleplay in the modern sense? How much is ideal to you?
>>64578219>>64578332>Gypsies in Dark Age Englandm8The Gwesturs/Gwesters were a thing but not Gypsies
>>64578464I find it depends on the group. If I have players who are good at roleplaying, and want to, then I go with it--maybe an 8, say--but I'm never interested in going full-on "what's my motivation, let's explore my backstory" stuff in D&D nowadays, and I've never been interested in the romance angle in RPGs. If they're not interested in any of it, I don't force it. My group now is basically a 4 or 5; I think I'd be happiest with a 5-6.
>>64578332Excel I assume? Again overall looks good. It pleases my OCD. Two suggestions: 1) save these as filler and don't make them primary focus, 2) where appropriate I would add a "something not on chart" category to force a little more "on-the-fly" thinking on your part. Charts are great but you don't want to be too dependent on them.
>>64578464From 2-8, roughly by level.
>>64578741I assume players start at 8am, have lunch 2pm, and rest at 8pm. So that's 2 6hr blocks. Figuring out what time it is between those is fairly simple. It's not like the PCs have watches.
>>64578464I feel like 2-3 is the ideal that OSR shoots for, or at least the kind of OSR favored here, the dirty worthless hobos die unmourned in a goblin nest kind. They mock the pawn style of play as a strawman but also shit on fleshing out characters or making them too "heroic". Character customization is bad, quirks are bad, doing voices is bad, and if you disagree you're a FOE. This is an analog roguelike with disposable and meaningless characters and you're a fag if you think different
>>64578741I usually assume when something interesting happens at noon or mid afternoon. IF i want to mix it up, i say at sunrise. For monster encounters, i follow the same rules, but if its an intelligent monster that is tracking them and waiting for them to sleep (bear, manticore) i give three perception checks to represent morning, noon and before night to get them nervous and thinking something bad is going ot happen. I do this randomly even if their is no encounter to get them on their toes.
>>64578862>see p.XXXXI really hope this your private shitbrew and not an actual published product
>>64578675>>64578439Thank you! I put the charts together because I have analysis paralysis when it comes to prepping. I'll stare at a blank sheet forever, but once I get some ideas flowing I can do all right. These help kickstart the juices, but I try to get better at improv during sessions. I planned on giving the players a saving throw or chance to react for the disasters, as in it's more of an opportunity for a disaster. And yes, excel is bae>>64578539>a fantasy land with monsters and magic>gypsies cross the lineDo tell of these Gwesters though pls
>>64578841>all that butthurtYou really shouldn't let trolls do that to you.
So I'm looking through the books in the trove, and I'd like the know who the fuck put Barbarians of Lemuria in there and what they were on to consider it OSR.
Oh, and on top of everything else, the zak hack is the worst ”osr” system there is
>>64579004>gypsies cross the lineOn that note, circuses are from 1770 but I have no trouble imagining them as far back as the french revolution.
>>64579110I'd like to know why all the NGR files are named Greek instead of Geek. The curator gives few fucks.
>>64579161Because Neoclassical Greek Revival is a real style.
>>64578953I think that's from the draft of BX Essentials' all-in-one book.
>>64579161The curator hasn't been around in over a year, he was last seen dicking around in Discord. Bytee's /O-S-R is the good one now.
>>64579004>Do tell of these Gwesters though plsI don't recall the particulars and I'm sure I even got the name wrong but IIRC they were Britons forced out by the Danes and became semi-nomadic
Where's a good place to get printed version of stuff like B2 and the old modules?
>>64579359If it's so good how come it ain't in the pasta?HUH?
>>64579486Your local copy shop, desu.
>>64578062How would you guys run a whale hunt? I'm going to run a pirate game soon and I want to give my players options for making ends meet beyond piracy, exploring, and/or hauling goods from one end of the waters to the other.In that same vein, what suggestions would you guys have for ways characters can try to keep their financial situation afloat? Whaling came to me because I've always had a love for age-of-sail whaling; I'm curious if there's anything obvious I've missed.
You asked Skerps last thread so I will not furnish you with an answer, False OSR Enthusiast
>>64579584 Pungent Truth Skerples just raked in a noisy, signaless (You).He's scouring for more this to put with the rest of his this.
>>64579730Wait, shit, my bad. You didn't link him. Well ... I'm not about to rerepost that (>>64579730) but you get what I mean.
>>64579764 for >>64579584I'm going to.closethe thread now. See you gents in maybe an hour.
>>64579548Off the top of my head they are also used for plotting unknown courses (sailing aimlessly for its own sake if you don't actually succeed) or you could try ice-breaking. Finally you could try to offer courses for the rich upper-class and show them the more dangerous parts of your setting (chances for shenanigans and making connections, but also losing a lot of opportunity if you succeed).As far as whaling goes I'm not sure how to help; I imagine it would end up taking most of a session no matter how you do it because back then they were real fights, not an industrialized chase/murder. You could run it round by round in a classic session but that seems like it wouldn't work out so well. Try turning it into a sort of mini-game, with one character running each boat?Not sure why you asked for Skerples the first time, though. Should have known that if anyone caught it then they'd just shitpost when you asked again.>>64579584>>64579702Mature. Really helping keep up that /osrg/ quality we're so well-known for.>>64579764>>64579784Learn to quit when you're ahead.
>>64579702I'm afraid not. I'm pretty sure I can come up with rules for whaling.>>64579548You kind of need to specialize for whaling. You'll need small boats, harpoons, whale-rendering equipment, and lots and lots of barrels. I'd recommend Oil and Ice: https://erenow.net/modern/oil-and-ice/ as a decent read on the subject.Figure out how much that equipment costs and how much a full cargo hold full of whale oil costs and you're good. You can only really whale in a larger vessel with no guns and a large clear deck, while piracy is ideally suited to small vessels with sloop rigs and a few guns, so it's not like they can do both.Hunting a whale is a communal effort so it's not really useful to run it as a combat. If you can find a pod you've got a chance to get a whale.
Is it rude if when running a sandbox you create a bunch of places for adventure but your players ignore them, focusing on mercantile endeavors instead?
>>64580192Nope. You made a sandbox; you can't be mad if people play with some of the toys and not others.
>>64580192If it's bothering you have the denizens of those locations begin to interfere with their businesses. Caravans begin to go missing, farms are being raided, the mines are being overrun etc. If your players don't want to go to the mountain, bring the mountain to them. Or, if they and you are enjoying it, just let them play a merchant sim. There's no such thing as wrong fun.
>>64580192The entire point of a sandbox is for them to do whatever. If whatever means biting obvious hooks, cool. If whatever means doing some dope merchant shit, then you best figure out a brief system for accommodating that.
>>64580192It's hard to tell players "okay, do what you want" followed by "not that!" It's pretty much inevitable with a sandbox game that some of your work will go to waste, which is why they'll always remain a niche style of gaming.I suggest making the stuff you're more excited about a) more well known in-world, and b) more attractive-sounding to explore. That will help. But in the end, it sounds like the players are having a good time, so don't herd them.
>>64580192Mercantile things do not give XP
>>64580339You score points through playing the game. That's the game they're playing.
>>64580192>some of your work will go to waste,>I suggest making the stuff you're more excited aboutAnother good idea is to end your sessions by asking your players what they want to do next session.And then putting the bulk of your preparation towards that.It's not a perfect solution, but it's a very efficient solution.
anybody familiar with boot hill? thinking about running a simple campaign for some friends using 3e and trying to figure out if i'm missing something in the work skills section. work skills are just a straight D20 roll under the skill, but you start with a maximum of 10 skill points, so is it just a given that players have like a 5% success at most of their work skills at the start of the game?i mean given the sad state of thieves in D&D i guess it's in keeping with the style, but it seems weird and i'm wondering if i missed something.
>>64580623No, the way it's written is that each work skill starts with a score of 2d10, meaning an average of roughly 11, so you have more of a 55% chance for most of their skills. The weapon skills give a to-hit modifier.
>>64580267How come my players aren't trying to plug themselves into the ecology of my megadungeon? I'm got all kinds of weird shit in there for them to exploit.
Coming up with a list of possible complications to randomly roll to spice up encounters. So far I've got>Heavy rain/snow>Hail storm>High wind>Dense fog>Avalanche/landslide>Collapse>Hidden trap>Third party involvementWhat other ideas do you have?
>tfw you will never get /osrg/ to work on a new fun magic system with you because they assume it is "trolling" or are so set on keeping the sacred cows they can't even imagine somebody else having fun without them
>>64581224I'd prefer to use a good magic system over a """"fun"""" one
Any good resources for a Far East campaign? Looking for some stuff from the blogosphere.
>>64581224This thread can FORE GORGON all it wants but I genuinely think that GLOG has a good magic system. I'm also fond of this guy's thing.
>>64581208Because you've given them insufficient reason to eat strange mushrooms and tame feral batpigs.>>64581224Probably best to just power through and write your own, then post it for people to abominate. >>64581209On a ledge, while climbing, in a stream (fuck streams), moonless night, forest fire, cicadas >>64581296Yoon-Suin is a great book in general. I like the Thousand Thousand Island zines but I think they're print only. Nice though.
>>64581296>wants blogoshit instead of TSR materialFORTY GUINEAS
>>64581272Same. Propose a magic system that isn't shit and I'd be interested, but all I see are variations on the same lousy ideas over and over, always presented as if they were something new and innovative, and it's always broken, useless, a pain in the ass to use, or very often a combination thereof.
>>64581381>blogoshit [...] of TSR materialPost a link to a detailed review of OA.
>>64581350>Yoon-Suin is a great book in generalI agree with that but I was looking for more China, less Nepal.
>>64581296>>64581424Here's a thing.
>>64581424Try Mad Monks of Kowloon? I think that's what it was called
>>64581343I know he's since spent a considerable amount of time attempting broad magic systems, but I liked his 2012 work more.http://www.paperspencils.com/legend-of-zelda-adventure-system-sage-spells/http://www.paperspencils.com/legend-of-zelda-adventure-system-notes-on-magic/
What system should I use for Veins of the Earth? My players are most used to 5e and 3.5. I’m considering hacking 5e or using shadow of the demon lords as they like character builds but am open to osr suggestions
>>64578953See >>64579243 I got it from these threads, pretty cool.
>>64579548When i get back from work, i'll give you the low down with some real life examples.
If ever a post merited "False OSR Enthusiast, get ye gone" it would be 64581640
>>64581763Why are you linking my old post from another thread here? I already asked it on this thread, you're wasting space and time by trying to make me look like a shitposter.
>>64581381>FORTY GUINEASIs this from somewhere? Because it made me laugh out loud.
>>64581779We have a tendency to make fun of people saying FOE GYG by using a word that starts with an F and another that starts with a G.FORTY GUINEAS is a fucking good one though, I got a cackle out of it as well.
>>64581523Mad Monks of Kwantoom, actually. The random dungeon generator is supposed to turn out vaguely pagoda-shaped dungeons, apparently.
>>64581640>Veins of the EarthUse LotFP, fag.
>>64581799Oh man, how did I miss that? Fucking sold.>>64581778If you want to get ahold of me directly, a blog comment is probably the best way as I check those at least twice a day. Just posting "oy skerps" here may or may not work.
>>64581640You probably shouldn't use a lot of stuff in VotE straight from the book anyways, it's best used for inspiration and to borrow certain concepts and subsystems. I think Patrick himself runs Into the Odd nowadays but the book's technically made for LotFP. It replaces or expands about as many LotFP mechanics as it features prominently, though
>>64581603>The player rolls 1d24 and if the result is less than or equal to the relevant ability score, then they succeed
>>64581799>We have a tendency to make fun of people saying FOE GYGJoke's on you, I coopted your anti-meme and have been using it addition to FOE GYG
>>64581640Veins would work better in 5e then 3.5, but that's because 5e is closer to TSR D&D in terms of stuff. A better plan would be to play any one of several OSR systems: I'd suggest something simpler like Castles & Crusades which they can transition into easier. Maybe ACKS if your players want to become the dirt covered iron fisted rulers of the underground.If you do go 5e, require the material components for the Light spell and have them be consumed. 1 hour of consequence free Light is exceedingly powerful in the Veins.
>>64581897Looks like we got us a meme-terrorist, boys.
>>64581640With Veins, you really need a system that has-simple inventory management-non-trival light and food production-a reasonable degree of built-in lethalityBecause people are going to DIE underground. Both 5E and 3.5 aren't good fits. SotDL, I have no experience with. Character builds aren't a terribly OSR thing. You might want to adapt Maze Rats. The background system could be adapted for OSR play and provide plenty of character options. Builds will come from mucking around with stuff during play.
>>64581911Light is only a cantrip in 5e because no one wants to take track of light sources in the kind of campaign that game is made for. Light and Dancing Lights were originally 1st level spells, just revert them back to that
>>64581986We could spend all day going back and forth, with us pointing out "this thing in 5e fucks up OSR gameplay" and you going "well houserule that out" but in the end, it's way less hassle to use a system built for the purpose than try to rewrite one that was not.
>>64581837>Mad Monks of KowloonThis is cool thanks.
>>64582040That was more or less what I was getting at, just hoped that the anon asking would realize it himself after having to rewrite a few spells
>>64581971SotDL is "What If WFRP was 5e"And it's meant for an all meat campaign, of which Veins is certainly not. Characters advance quickly because it's meant to be played over 13 sessions with characters rising from anonymous nobodies to Diablo 3 heroes over the course of that.
>>64582204>And it's meant for an all meat campaignLike, beef, chicken, ham...Sorry, never heard this term before. Although based on the next sentence it makes sense. That's fair. Diablo 3 heroes =/= Veins.
>>64581209Two encounters, already fighting each other.Monster unexpectedly erudite and garrulous.Monster/encounter is in uniform. Theres a lot more where they came from if defeated.Encounter offers trade or sale of something they wouldn't normally carry.Encounter happens on holy ground. Must avoid some action or be cursed. Toppling statues or crushing a certain flower, for instance.Encounter is obviously being watched or scryed on by some third party.Encounter happens as both parties are hiding from something that could take them both. Elder dragon or equivalent. Hostilities may still ensue.Innocent noncombatants on the battlefield.Enemy challenges the party to choose a champion for honorable single combat.As above, but wrestling, not armed combat.As above, but brightly colored masks and body oil are involved.Encounter can be peacefully resolved through heavy drinking.
>>64582082>5:Yeah, i definitely realized that issue. I was thinking at minimum id have to go through the spell list, revise/revamp that as well as restrict or remove darkvision from most of the races at a minimum, plus probably tack on an injury system. I was planning light spells to cost lummes for teh spell components to limit that. I am open to OSR for that reason, seems LotFP or into the odd are good choice. I'm not familiar at all with Into the Odd, but at least am familiar with LotFP.
Which do you prefer: Percentile magic resistance a la AD&D, or just a bonus to Magic saving Throws?
Finally done with the map, the "only" thing left to do is label everything
>>64582593And then weep when the players sail due east.>>64582520Bonus to saving throws.
>>64582747Then they sail off to YoonSuin's ocean and get to deal with its bullshit aquatic inhabitants
>>64582520>Which do you prefer: Percentile magic resistance a la AD&D, or just a bonus to Magic saving Throws?Percentile as a flat immunity, since many forms of magic don't allow saving throws. For bonus: monsters with a high percentile immunity, but poor saving throws.
>>64582890As is right and proper.
>>64582593I made this, it's going up on my blog co*s and s*lls next week
>>64582520Completely binary all or nothing results are probably the most boring way to do magic or magic resistance.
How do you guys feel about the 'new' LotFP spell casting system? It's somewhat similar to DCCs. I kinda dig it.
>>64583482It's possibly the least shitty part of the "lotfp 2e" preview in eldritch cock. I'd have to play it at the table to see how it went.
>>64582593Those hexes are 30 miles across but if you make detail maps at 3 miles a hex for the entire thing you will be able to sell them for five million dollars probably.
>>64583405I suppose that's a fair point.Especially since the nothing should really be the sole domain of magic immunity.
>zak gone>dicey DELETE THIS'd himselfIt's a pretty god damn good day, guys. I'm basically one achievement away from a platinum trophy, and that's getting someone to blow their brains out on fucking livestream. Anyone we can prod hard enough?
>>64583482More usable than DCC but I don't feel like rewriting my spell list and all the stuff available for it is Black Tokyo tier edgy-slash-/d/
Combat mimes. Good idea or the best idea?
>>64583526Nobody on /v/ takes posts seriously and I don't think kids go to /b/ anymore?You might find someone impressionable on /pol/ but it's mostly Jews LARPing as Nazis so you would have o sift through loads of drek.
Maybe if you got prodded up the ass hard enough the void in your heart would be filled and you no longer would need to litter this thread with your shitposts
>>64583526>achievement It's cute that you think you have power. Also, Zzarchov Kowolski deleting his blog too. Taking credit for that as well?
Outside of Fighters, M-Us, Clerics and Thieves, what class would you have written into D&D as a standard option?
>>64578841>disposable and meaninglessYeah, because Robilar and Mordekainen never changed the world of Greyhawk at all
>>64578841>Character customization is bad, quirks are bad, doing voices is bad,People saying that are idiots or trolls. Don't fall for the bait so easily.
>>64583482Just use the DCC magic system in your LotFP games like everyone else does.
>>64569773My man, I've only been skimming the last few threads due to the dangerously high levels of autism radiation, but this is good content. Thanks!
>>64579548The problem with whaling as a side job is that whalers were highly specialized ships with highly specialized crews, and they'd often stay out for 2-3 *years* at a time to fill their holds. Just biting a right now and then to pad your income in slow months isn't nearly feasible if you want to be marginally realistic about it.
>>64583865>The problem with whaling as a side job is that whalers were highly specialized ships with highly specialized crews, and they'd often stay out for 2-3 *years* at a time to fill their holds. Just biting a right now and then to pad your income in slow months isn't nearly feasible if you want to be marginally realistic about it.if you're talking about the big whales then yes, you could probably make a halfway decent profit hunting the occasional small whale though, keep the meat for the crew to supplement your rations, sell the rest when you return to portremember not all whales are XBOX HUEG, many are quite reasonably sized for your average schooner to hunt if they've got the equipment for it
Conflicted here guys...What do I do with my Zak S Lotfp books?He raped people and now his victims have come out. I can't use the books knowing this.
>>64583865Care to go deeper into detail of what a ship needs that makes it non-standard, or how you'd do a hunt? If the players doing a few months whaling to fill a financial void isn't realistic at all but I still want them to experience an arc of the dramas it might bring, would it be realistic for them to sign on to one for a season or something similar, assuming their luck goes poor and they're forced to hide their ship somewhere?>>64583975I suppose it's tradition to jump to big boys like Sperm and Blues when dicussing the expectations of whaling. What smaller whales would make sense to go after?
>>64583988You already gave him your money, dingus. Use what you've got, but don't buy any more.
>>64583988So don't use them? Look, it's not about our opinions of you, it's about your opinions of you. If you think you can't read or use these books without thinking of all the thing's Zak's done... then get rid of them. You don't need more crap in your house.
>>64583988This dude is right >>64584070 but on the other hand, what books by zak are you using regularly?
>>64583991>What smaller whales would make sense to go after?Minke and narwhal are both fairly small, but it's more about the specialized rendering facilities. Your ship needs to be made for whaling. Maybe, if whaling is just starting, you can do coastal whaling (kill it and drag it to a specialized port), but probably not.
>>64584070Seems reasonable. I was going to burn them.
>>64584212Do you think you'll be able to get any use out of them now without feeling kind of shitty?
>>64584095NAYRT, but I use Vornheim a lot and like to drop the Alice class into my LotFP games.We all knew he was retarded already, so I'm not surprised.
>>64584258Yeah probably. I never liked the guy (too mouthy) but some shit was interesting and useful.
>>64584276Well then you're good, I suppose. Though I think this recent stuff goes well beyond being a bit of a prick on elfgame forums.
>>64583991>Care to go deeper into detail of what a ship needs that makes it non-standardSeveral long-boats (usually 2-3 times more than the standard complement of a ship of the era) with trained and extremely ballsy teams of specialists on board. Strong rowers with a lot of endurance. At least one guy with keen eyesight that can follow hand or flag signals from the deck, as well as sight the whale breaching. A Harpoonsman, usually recruited from a Neolithic society that still uses throwing spears on a regular basis.Second, you need to be able to have a MASSIVE fire on deck and keep it going for days at a time. That means a firebox, and spacing out your masts so that your rigging doesn't catch on fire. Which means your helmsman and sailmaster need to be experienced on a whaler, to feel out the differences between them an other ships. Normally you don't want fire anywhere near a boat, because you're made out of wood and literally covered in incredibly flammable shit (waterproof = fire friendly). Now, theoretically, if you're on a migration route you can take a whale and drag it back to shore; look up "whaling stations". That means you can do it without rendering facilities on board, and it's how the Basques and Amerinds did it for centuries. But you have to do it quickly or else the blubber starts to rot and go rancid, and you can't render it once that happens. You also need a bunch of bulky hardware. You can rig the floats out of emptied stores barrels. Harpoons and the lines are somewhat specialized kit and you're gonna need vastly more than most ships carry. The huge amount of weight and space those are taking means that things like guns and any cargo that isn't food, water, or whales and whale accessories is a non-starter.
>>64584392This is all great to know, thanks. What about larger ships like frigates as opposed to smaller cutters or (relative to warships) smaller brigs?
>>64583633I wasn't saying it was true, just that it seems to be a popular sentiment here.
>>64583565Why the fug is he doing that?
>>64584488Not that anon, but I believe larger combat-oriented ships had much higher decks than whaling vessels, making conversion between the two difficult.>>64584574Oh don't listen to anon.>>64584607No idea, to be honest. It seems a bit strange. Was he close with Zak?
Fuck Zak and his supporters.
>>64584488The larger whalers >were< the size of frigates. Big ones. By the mid-1800's there'd been multiple battles between up-armed whalers, and some of them even worked as privateers in the off-season. Generally the smallest ships weren't used for long-range whaling, since you need a certain amount of space to hold the trying gear that lets you process the big whales. It's all a continuum though. A little Basque coaster from the 1600s is still a "whaler", but a much smaller and lighter ship than one of the big New England ships from 1810. Generally speaking ships got bigger and better-defended as the years rolled on and whale oil took over from a whole-fish trade (salting meat, rendering oil, etc.), then they got smaller again once the crude-oil boom replaced the demand and it was back to hunting for food.
>>64583581Elves, obviously. Otherwise Ranger.
>>64584701Fantastic, I appreciate the advice. Now the only thing left for me to really consider is how I might work a hunt in mechanically. Someone above (I think actual-Skerp, but who really knows) mentioned doing a single roll once you've found a pod to see if it goes well, but I had something a bit more involved in mind.
pound this fag in the ass>>64583416
>>64584872He's allowed preferences my dude.
>>64584600Lighten up, human, and stop letting trolls get to you.
>>64584842What about nicking Veins of the Earth's climbing rules?The grades of difficulty become the different hunt difficulties from "calm" to "hurricane". Roll 1d20 and compare to the lead hunter's stats in order (or some variant). Fail on Con, all further fails cumulative. Pass Con, only the next failed result takes place. Results include boat upsets, whales eating you, sharks, rival whalers, tangled in the line, exploding gunpowder harpoon to the sinuses, etc.
>>64584988>What about nicking Veins of the Earth's climbing rules?How about fucking off with your shitty hipster underdark splat shilling?
>>64584988I'm afraid I'm not quite grasping the mechanics you're trying to describe.
>>64584842>Now the only thing left for me to really consider is how I might work a hunt in mechanically.I use LotFP with a slight custom ship combat system, so you may need to adapt this.Steps: 1: "Whale" encounter rolled on the chart. Party can optionally get a bonus by rolling twice, but accepting >both< encounters if a whale shows up. Note that things like "Squall" and "Pirates!" mean you're probably not going to have whale times today.2: Sailmaster makes Seamanship roll to close without spooking them. • Party attacks. Usually you only get a couple rounds to engage the whale before it dives, so they'd try to huck multiple harpoons. • Whale dives, but has to surface every 2d3 Turns to breathe. • If successful, secretly determine number of Turns until whale bleeds out. There will be floats attached, which gives a bonus to the Surprise roll (see below). If unsuccessful, it may try to kill them or they may be able to sneak up on it again. • Reaction check. The two "friendly" results means the whale dives or flees at low speed, bleeding out at minimal risk. "Immediate Attack" is pretty obvious. "Unfriendly" = half-hearted thrashing (one attack) and a Nantucket Sleigh Ride (Seamanship check to keep from capsizing the boat, and a STR check for keeping the rope under control). "Indifferent" means a Sleigh Ride but no attack. On an unsuccessful harpooning attempt, any "Sleigh Ride" result is treated as an attempt to flee instead.• Make a Surprise roll for the whale when it surfaces. Winner gets to choose whether to be on top of the other for a potential follow-up attack, or attempt to evade. • Whale does 1D3 (small) or 1d6 (large) Ship HP on a successful attack. Players subject to collateral damage as appropriate. Once the whale starts bleeding, you have 1d4+1D8 turns until the sharks show up. Fortunately they're mostly disinterested in you. Mostly.
>>64585040Ah, well, have you read VotE? It's got the full explanation there.
>>64576417>How many sessions should it take to get from 1 to name level?>>64576480>Depends on your session length and game style, but it seems like ~15? Maybe a bit less, maybe a bit more?Say what? I've never done XP anywhere close to the book in my life (mostly because I'm lazy and I'd rather just throw the PCs however many points feels appropriate for what they've just accomplished / looted), but isn't the estimate that folks get about 1/4 of their XP from monsters? If that's the case, let's make some calculations.Going by B/X, a 1st level character takes about 2,000 xp to level (taking fighters as our baseline), 3/4 of which will be gained through treasure and 1/4 of which will be gained from monsters. So that's 500 XP to get from monsters. A 1 HD monster like an orc is worth 10 XP. So we're figuring you need to kill about 50 orcs to go up a level. That's 50 apiece. So if you've got 4 people in your party, we're talking about 200 orcs. For folks who have a single hit die worth of hit points, and 1 spell at best. And remember, if you die, you have to start over from scratch. Even if we say that 1st level is twice as challenging as the average level, and thus give people 4 sessions to level up, it still doesn't seem remotely realistic to me. 50 orcs per session for a 4 person party with no party deaths?
>>64585077>isn't the estimate that folks get about 1/4 of their XP from monsters?It's much less than that.
>>64585043I appreciate this, it seems a more "ship-scale modified fight," feel which was kind of the direction my gut told me to go.>>64584988>>64585055I'm going to look into this for an option though, thank you for the suggestion.
have you considered whaling on the moon
>>64585006He wants Pa back. Bad. But doesn't understand why he was cast away in the first place.
Why do people attempt to argue with zak when he's clearly more intelligent than them?
>>64585263No idea. He's won every internet fight he's ever been in.And he has no idea that might be a problem. He's dumber than rats.
>>64585285How is the fact that he's intelligent enough to win every argument bad?
>>64585306Because winning an argument isn't the same as being right.
>>64585204You might as well be whaling on the moon.
>>64585077Killing 200 orcs by cunning plans, and not by straight up combat, is pretty feasible. Assuming the GM counts those as XP, etc. And getting a huge haul of treasure via cunning plans is also entirely possible.
>>64585055>>64585107I have a lot of problems with that system. In practice I find that it leads to massive, catastrophic failures very quickly. Either nothing bad happens at all or everything goes wrong at once depending on character's stat rolls. And if you don't have a 17 or 18 in multiple stats, there's a good 20-30% chance no matter what you do that you're just fucked outright. Most of those tables have an effective "death" result.To Patrick's credit, he advises only rolling the Con check when things are already going pear-shaped, but the system just feels mechanically "off". It's just too unforgiving on a 3d6-down-the-line setup. If you >do< use it, I'd suggest switching over to 2d10 or 1d8+1d12 instead of 1d20. That will tone down the absurdly high chances of >everything< going wrong from 25% or more down to a more reasonable 3-15% depending on your method. Also removes one of the auto-success results, but frankly I'd be okay with that.
>>64585327Give me one argument where he wasn't right
>>64585384>Killing 200 orcs by cunning plans, and not by straight up combat, is pretty feasible.In two or three sessions? And not as a one time, "you did exceptionally well" sort of thing, but as the average performance of your party?
>>64585399A lot of the time (and this will vary group by group), players have some means of mitigating catastophe, from spells to potions to just plain weirdness. At low levels, yeah, you're gonna die.But as a core system for a, god help me, "skill challenge" 4E style, it's not horrific, provided you customize the results.>>64585402Now I know you're trolling, but I don't think the arguments around this post - which he said wasn't a threat and everyone eventually gave up on - went particularly well long term, for example. It's aged like fine shit.
>>64585442>In two or three sessions? And not as a one time, "you did exceptionally well" sort of thing, but as the average performance of your party?It's possible. Not likely, but possible. Now you have to understand that if they pull it off one session they're just as likely to kill themselves with applied stupidity the next, but I refuse to underestimate either their cunning or their sheer bloody-minded idiocy.
>>64585456>It's aged like fine shit.Shit actually ages pretty well. It stops getting worse and then gets better than it started pretty much as soon as it dries out, and from then on it's practically dirt.
>>64585477This man knows his shit.
>>64585327Okay, Skerples, I gotta ask: What is "Winning an argument" then, in this case? What is it?
>>64585661I think he means "shouting the other person down until the leave, so you can strut around and claim victory." IE the internet definition of winning an argument. I'd call it losing an argument. As opposed to "work things out with the other person to discover the truth, even when it means admitting you were wrong" which is what I would consider winning an argument -- it's not a zero-sum game.
>>64585661Being objectively right, outsmarting your foe. You claim that he has "won, but was not right", but you have shown no proof. I have proof here: https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/6jm3pt/but_when_theres_no_rules_for_it_youre_not_playing>inb4 le redditDoesn't matter which platform he's on, he's right.
>>64585661Ok, are you in a relationship? Have you ever disagreed with your partner over some trivial thing, like whose turn it is to take out the trash?It's possible to win that argument. You could find the security camera footage of your backyard and play it. Or you could, through verbal power of argument, just bring your partner around to your point of view. Or if you want to get dark, you can go with intimidation, threats, begging, etc, etc. Whatever works. Whatever lets you win.But at the end, I don't think that's makes you right. Rightness is seeing that there's something bigger than just proving your point by any means necessary.That's what arguing with Zak is like. He can pull off all the tricks and spin all the messages, he can demand definitions and steer conversations, charm, wheedle, flatter, gaslight, sockpuppet, and threaten with the best of them. I can't win any argument with him. But I'll be fucked if he's right.
>>64585727>>64585725>>64585718Thanks for the answer bros. It's been a very fucking weird day.
>>64578207Just forget about modules and do what the books tell you: make a dungeon yourself. Tournament modules are not good D&D, and 95% of published modules are essentially tournament modules.
>>64585742He's right. I bought them all anon and they're filled with +1 swords and little to no detail.
>>64580339>>64580192This is the answer. Once again you have created a problem for yourself by creating your own shitbrew rules without understanding what you are actually replacing. The exp rule that gives experience from getting treasure out of dangerous places is the most important incentive in the game, and you chose to replace it with handwaveshit. It’s your own fault and you can’t complain.Stop tinkering with the game if you are too dumb to understand the design.
>>64585808You're both assuming he gives xp for it. He never mentioned that.
>>64583988Alright you can stop with this virtue signaling already. This is an anonymous board for fucks sake, no one gives a fuck about your social justice points. You can go to reddit for that.
>>64585826He obviously is because his players keep doing it. It’s that simple.
Only thing left to do is label the rivers and the label the module locations, then the "Expanded" accidentally too wide Greyhawk hexmap will be complete, other than that everything's there
>>64585846>I'm right because I don't want to be wrongHow about you wait until 64580192 comes back online before you heckle him?
>>64585836Hey, anon, did you consider for maybe one second that he's not doing the crazy, irrational thing you're accusing him of, and is instead just honestly a little weirded out by owning a bunch of books written by a dude who sexually assaulted women? Or do you believe that people don't ever feel like that about these things, they just pretend to for political bragging points (that he can't possibly get because he's anonymous)?
>>64585878>DERPI can tell there is a lot of socially inexperienced men in this thread who are speaking about the whole Zak situation. If you've never had a pack of angry women tear each other apart over you for sleeping with all of them then I could imagine how it'd be easy to tune into the screeching. Every girl who is "coming out" against Zak sounds like an upset former fuck, you can just hear it from their language. Not one of them has a genuine claim of abuse other than supposed insensitive language or reporting having witnessed him LITERALLY raping people. His only crime is being the only successful member of a bunch of washed up whores.
>>64585868He already said he gives them ’points’ for doing it.
>>64585894I was >>64580406. I was not >>64580192.But I shouldn't need to say the post's authors differ. Their sentences flow very differently.How about you wait until 64580192 comes back online before you heckle him?
>>64585886>I can tell there is a lot of socially inexperienced men in this threadWhat gave it away; the 4chan logo? Come on Zak, you're done. You really can't minimize this as a lover's spat. There's just too much consistency, most of it backed up by people who've engaged with you online. >"successful"Like hell.
>>64583988As much as I like to point at Zak and laugh, what does it matter to you who wrote the books you're using? If they're useful, use them. If not, don't.
>>64585953You wish I was Zak. Just a fan who is tired of women henpecking men to death over conjecture when they no doubt wanted the cock. The sad part is I know Zak would NOT stick up for me if I was on the block but he's just a product of his clown environment I guess. We shall see how 'done' he is but in reality Zak is probably supported by dumb southerners like me who never gave a shit about a scene anyway.
>>64586039> We shall see how 'done' he is but in reality Zak is probably supported by dumb southerners like me who never gave a shit about a scene anyway.It worked for Nixon, maybe it'll work for Zak.>Just a fan who is tired of women henpecking men to death over conjecture when they no doubt wanted the cock.A bastion of empathy you are.
>>64582520Massive ablative save bonus
>>64583988Can you drink cashew milk or use your iPhone without an existential crisis?Same dif
>>64585105Not if you go monster hunting
>>64586139This guy gets it. You’re a hypocrite if you selectively adhere to social justice.
>>64585727It is the greatest trick of the devil to convince his enemies you're an asshole
>>64586172Welcome to life. There are probably a handful of monks somewhere who live without hypocrisy but all the rest of us have to muddle through somehow, being kind to dogs but eating cows, etc, etc, et fucking cetera. Deal with stuff on a case by case basis.
>>64582520>Magic Resistance as actual protection that degrades>Add total magic resistance to saving throws, plus blocks spells of level equal to magic resistance or less>Once a spell is blocked or a saving throw is made successful using the bonus; lowers magic resistance by the spell level>If the spell cannot fully be blocked (level 3 fireball versus 2 magic resistance)- drop one die worth of damage per spell resistance or elements of spell; such as blocking a rooting or stunning effect, or ignoring the flame spell's ability to ignite you, etc.>Once this is done, all magic resistance is purged for that day; this includes racial and magic item based resistance.
>>64586139>or use your iPhoneAfricans dying over cobalt is a non-issue.They're not dying to bad labor practices, they're getting shot over who gets to sell it.
>>64585886If you're not him you're doing a good job of presenting him as a washed-up loser all too ready to justify bad behavior as an inevitability of living a liberated lifestyle and not an opportunistic predator.
>>64586039Nothing of value to contribute: the post
This is the internet. It’s word against word. No one knows what is real. Now can we end this discussion about Zak?
>>64586314Nope. It's gonna have to run it's course. Sorry, bruh
>>64586314Lots of words from lots people who have plenty to lose vs. the [as yet unpublished] words of someone who has everything to lose and will do anything to win a fight.>No one knows what is real.I'll vouch for several pieces. Obviously, not all of it, but there's just so much there and so few possible interpretations.>Now can we end this discussion about Zak?Any time. Like I said, he's done.
>>64586339Nah. The report button exists luckily.
>>64586314No, because Zak really is here right now attempting social engineering. Set up a filter to block posts mentioning Zak if you care. And don't remove the filter for a week or so.
>>64586363Again, you don’t know this. Just stop.
Whether we like it or not e-celeb drama is part of the OSR. It's not desirable, it shouldn't be encouraged and the best move is to block and report.The real FOEs are the famewhores and opportunists. And to them I say GYG.
>>64586439Some times you've gotta FOEWhere everybody knows your na-a-ame
>>64586293>presenting him as a washed-up loser all too ready to justify bad behavior as an inevitability of living a liberated lifestyle and not an opportunistic predator.And? Hilarious how I hit the nail on the head so hard. It's both all at once, degenerate environments breed hostile relationships. Being around cam girls and trying to form a normal life was hard in my experience. Will someone making accusations about someone I don't know on the internet prevent me from buying a book I enjoy? Nah not on your life bud.>>64586310ironic.
>>64586460Maybe the true OSR was the FOEs we made along the way.
>>64586468Demon City when?
>>64586468>in my experience.t. Zak
Hey jerkoffs, I don't know if you noticed this, but there has never been an incident in the history of 4chins where telling someone to stop talking about something made them stop talking about it.Ignore and/or filter, and talk about the thing you do want to talk about. Shitposters only shitpost because they know you're reading it.
Normally I don't talk about this shit. But goddamn, y'all, do some research instead of letting your biases choose your sides for you. Zak has always been a sleazy, narcissistic, fucked-up little weasel using identity politics, e-peen, and his day job as a shield whenever someone challenges him. Basically the exact opposite of the old-school 4chan ethos, aka "the reason why >>>soc exists".He also writes the odd bit of absolutely brilliant shit, like using additional information density in dice rolls through orientation, drop charts, all that. Scenic Dunnsmouth wouldn't exist without Vornheim, and it's one of the best things the OSR has produced. Not all of it's good for gaming, and some of it's complete garbage. But I read up on, and bought, Vornheim, R&PL, and the new DFD >already knowing< that Zak was all that fun shit from the first paragraph. It's blatantly evident just looking at what he posts on his website, let alone his behavior elsewhere over the last six years or so. Knowing that Gene Roddenberry was a fucking rapist doesn't stop Star Trek from being fun, or somehow make it off-limits. Nor does their current virtue-signalling death spiral somehow make the work better.Now I need to go pay my fucking Joesky tax, but I'm gonna have a drink first.
>>64585866This is really fucking cool anon.For some reason I had never noticed how fucking huge Greyhawk was.Thank you so much for sharing.Could you provide the hexographer file?>accidentally too wideWhat do you mean?
>>64586701>absolutely brilliant shitNone of that shit you named is especially new, interesting, or useful.Especially DFD which not only is A. a negadungeon (the very concept of negadungeons is shit) and B. a copy of another module; it also manages to be worse than the original and linear as fuck
>>64586662Here we have a standard example of gaslighting. The attacker (or Bereaved as they prefer to term themselves) ATtempts to turn the discussion away from named discretions and back to the genral topic.How many miles in a hex? 6? 1 4 each side?
>>64586745I struggle with DFD. The art is really cool.The content is kinda wanky. It looks so metal
>>64586801Run the Lichway, and perhaps add some of the better stuff from DFD (the cabin is honestly the best part of the adventure IMHO)
You know, lately I've been leaning towards pointcrawls rather than hex crawling, because with hex maps travel is so abstracted that a mountain range is not 'an impassable wall you have to find a way around', but instead becomes a reduction of your speed. There's no "go east from the Tower of Silken Lights and then take the Deadwind pass, but beware the Terror Trolls that live there!'.Hex maps could still be useful, but I'd lay the pointcrawl over it.
>>64585866This is why I come on /osrg/
>>64586898Yeah I feel this way too. In play my PCs would just sprint to the nearest point they thought was interesting while all the while I'm basically delaying their fun.
>>64586898So I take it you use neither cliffs, nor major rivers or mountain chains as part of the hex world building?
How much wilderness area around my megadungeon should I include for the sake of an open table? I figured I'd have maybe a ring three hexes deep in all directions, and populate that with a few smaller dungeons/points of interest, perhaps tying in a few of them to the dungeon itself.Basically I want to know how much is enough for a good balance between "too little be worth bothering with ever" and "so much it makes it more interesting than the actual dungeon"
>>64586961I don't know what you're talking about, anon. All I'm saying is that a mountain chain in a hexmap only means that you're going to move at half speed, while you have to actually find a way around, over, or through in a pointcrawl. That is, travel in a hex map is extremely abstract, it automatically factors in the 'time cost' of finding a route into your movement speed.That might be fine if you're doing something with extreme amounts of outdoors travel (e.g. the Silk Road or somesuch), but perhaps a pointcrawl is more suitable to smaller region play.
>>64587100I'm talking about not limiting your hexcrawl maps to area (what the predominant terrain is, for example) and point (towns, lairs, ...) features, but also use linear (rivers, mountain chains, cliffs, roads) features to hinder, help and steer travel.Passing through a major river, even if it's just a simple blue line cutting through a hex, shouldn't be simply possible without a boat or magical means, and in the same vein passing through a mountain chain (which, again, might just be a thin black line passing through a hex) shouldn't be possible without major investment in time, equipment and/or magic.
>>64587100nayrt, but I don't see why you couldn't just add impassible elements to a hex map. "This mountain chain is fucking fucked, you can't get through it". Or, you could just hybridize hex- and point-based exploration. "The Chilled Crags are impassible, except for the dreaded Valley of Tears, rumored to be home to a vicious ogre clan! But it might be the only way to get to the capital on time to warn the princess..."
Is there a website which condense down the race and class requirements like 5etools does, but for AD&D?1st edition AD&D not 2nd, that I can get off the CD.
>>64587173>>64587163I guess you can do that, but using the standard 6-mile hex, there's no way there isn't a way to pass through within 1 or 2 hexes. If you actually have a fuckhuge mountain range (see Crystalmist mountains in >>64585866 ), it starts to become a bit ridiculous. It might be more a problem of scale rather than hex-vs-point though.>t. I live close to a particularly sheer (though relatively small) mountain range, and though you might deviate from your path on a 'hourly basis', I don't think that would be enough to change your 'daily' path, or even get you out of your hex.
>>64578154>think, not knowTo be this naive, lucky boy
>>64587298There might certainly be a pass, but that's when you start requesting the players to roll to find it, then some more rolls to deal with actually using it, no matter if it's guarded by ice giants or simply needs a day of climbing. If they don't, or don't want to waste time, they are free to try and walk around the mountain chain.Basically: Linear features are as important as area features. The shitty support for them in tools like Hexographer is the main reason why I don't use them.
>>64578207Tomb of the serpent kings is the go to, I think it's free. I found it ok, but underwhelming. The other guy is correct though, write your own one page dungeon it'll be more representative of the things you're likely to run, maybe have a look at five room dungeons tooAlso lost city is also highly regardedIs this for beginner players or a beginner dm?
>>64587327I'm not sure I'm really getting my point across.On a 300 mile-long mountain range there's going to be hundreds of passes and roads through it. Trying to map this is bound to make you go crazy.If you're dealing with super long travels, you're better off rolling with the abstract (which does not preclude having 'random events' such as "a great stone cliff blocks your way; do you attempt to climb or do you look for a way around?"). For that, hex maps work really well.If you're dealing with 'how do we get into the Sacred Stone Plain of the Frozen Fire that's somewhere in this [1 or 2 hex-big] mountain chain', it makes more sense to map it out more thoroughly and concretely, and for such things a (smaller-scaled) pointcrawl is more apt.
>>64580192When running a sandbox set clearly established boundaries and expectations of scope. Even sandboxes have walls
>>64587389I'm not sure I see the problem. That "Secret Stone Plain of Whatever" has an entrance within one of the hexes. That entrance is, for example, a mountain pass guarded by ice giants. To find it (unless it's designated as the obvious feature of the hex), the PCs need to search through the hex and pass whatever rolls they have to - and those are obviously harder to do when in a mountainous area. For my games, I usually go with 1d6 (modified by weather and PCs) of "exploration points" per day, and you either find such a feature when you gather up enough points, or when the random encounter roll tells you you stumble upon it. Once the party finds it, they will generally find it again with simple orientation checks. If they make a map while exploring, all the better.That mountain pass is a start of a linear feature - the way to the actual plain. It's essentially a road-like feature, and as with all roads, it can pass through other places until it reaches its destination, junction off and so on. And the PCs are free to leave the road at any time and explore the hex further, using the exploration rules.All that works just fine in a hexcrawl, as long as you don't forget that linear features exist and need to be used.
>>64587419nayrtThat game makes my brain made of fuckDamn Luke Crane!!Damn the Burning WheelMiseries&Misfortunes await us all
>>64587355But remember to triple the treasure values
>>64585471Technically, it's possible for the PCs to detonate a nuke in the dungeon, killing everything in there and all getting to one XP short of level 3. But I think there's a a point where one has to accept that something is practically impossible unless the GM specifically sets up a scenario where it can be done (IE giving them the nuke).
Does it make sense to have strength only add to a melee weapon's chance to hit, and not to damage?I know some games already do this, I just personally think it's a bit too powerful for strength to increase damage AS WELL AS chance to hit. Maybe it's a bit dumb but only having to-hit works better for lower damage and health numbers.
What's the difference between gold:xp and *xp for objectives*, if the value of 'objectives' is communicated to the player when they ask and the establishment of said 'objectives' stems from a consensus between players and DM?
>>64578062Beholder, sorta'.I have a unique creature that has the abilities of a beholder, but looks like a mish-mash of manta ray and jellyfish and guards access to a deep level of a dungeon.I never use drow (too specific to a particular campaign, hate the 'they all have +23 weapons, but too bad! PCs can't get them!' mechanic).No medusae (gorgons, etc. though) no real reason.
>>64587988Yeah, +damage is extremely powerful. But I do think that d8 HD for monsters kind of takes into account that.With OD&D d6 HD capping +damage at +2 or even +1 is pretty sensible.
>>64587988The B/X books explain that a higher strength also translates into fighting skill because all D&D characters use their natural talents.
>>64587988I houserule that only fighters can add their strength mod to damage too, everyone else can only add it to their attack bonus
How is your shitbrew coming along?
>>64583991>I suppose it's tradition to jump to big boys like Sperm and BluesIt's not, actually, Whalers would take sperm whales in the 19th century but that was considered a dangerous pastime even then, because male sperm whales, unlike most whales, will fuck your shit right up if you piss them off. Blue whales are too large to take with any pre-gasoline technology and they react to being harpooned by diving, so your boat just gets sucked under. They're the epitome of DO NOT WANT for a whaler.The right whale, on the other hand, is literally called that because it's the right whale to hunt.>>64584392Excellent post but you left out the characteristically XBOXHUEG crow's nest, unique to whalers so that a guy can sit up there literally every moment of daylight.
>>64585866>Everything's there, it is what it is
>>64587988Just spitballing here but you could theoretically try to make more stats important by making both ranged and melee weapons to hit with dexterity/agility but melee damage uses strength while ranged damage uses wisdom (to represent the actual aim and feeling where the shot goes).
>>64588369I ran a game with it last Sunday, and it went well. My players seem to be looking forward to this coming Sunday, and I've already got a few one-page adventures ready for them.
>>64585886GTFO Zak.The most annoying thing about this whole debacle? Your work was ugly pretentious drek that wasn't useful for games BEFORE all this came out, but now that it's out, saying so just sounds like jumping on a bandwagon.
>>64586701Finally someone said it, fuck this drama bullshit. Now the theme of the day is some crippled skank taking revenge on her manipulative asshole ex. Zak is an asshole in real life and online, well fuck me sideways I didn't expect that shit. And if anyone thinks she's not spinning the story and making herself look innocent then you're a naive retard. They are both assholes, from a community of skanks where a healthy relationship is pretty much impossible.
>>64578219Very nice indeed! I love to use tables to aid in almost every aspect of campaign design and play. :-)
How do you make weapons distinct without making combat cumbersome? I need to figure out something that won't make the combat a slog, I want as little extra bookkeeping and dice rolling as possible.
>>64580192First, I must say that >>64580204, >>64580257, and >>64580267 have the right idea here. Second, I think you're overthinking this a little. If your players "want" to play the campaign that way, adjust to their playstyle by making adventures for"them", but keep to the OSR ideals when doing so. For example, xp is awarded for treasure gained from "dangerous"situations (i.e. life threatening), or avoiding said situations by use of cleverness (or even parleying). You could easily create encounters (random or otherwise) that challenge their notion of "business" here. Perhaps some of their business endeavors are with monsters, maybe even unknowingly. I'm sure you'll think of something good in the end. Just be creative (and a little devious). :-)
>>64578219>Hoover's OSR ReferenceIs this CDD4? Otherwise kindly provide a link please.
>>64589881>How do you make weapons distinct without making combat cumbersome?Have you considered that this might not be necessary? If you remove the instinctive need to have different weapons feel different, what do you *really* get out of swords and axes being distinct?On topic:This is a decent way to do it and the only instance of Weapon vs AC tables I would ever use https://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/02/proposal-weapons-vs-ac.htmlOther ideas:>reroll damage on 1>ignores X points of AC (armor)>expanded crit range>bigger/smaller damage dice>one die category smaller but with +1 to damage (same average)>2d4 instead of 1d8
>>64583794My sentiments exactly. Just breezing through the last thread required me to be in decontamination for an hour or so. :-)
So I'm working on a homebrew, and while I'm not tellin' you nothin' yet cause I know how much you like to be surprised, I will reveal that I'm making some pretty big changes to certain elements and mechanics.So I'd like to ask - What elements are necessary for something to be true OSR, other than backwards compatibility? Are there any rules or concepts that, if removed or modified, would just render it completely FOE?
>>64590218>What elements are necessary for something to be true OSR, other than backwards compatibility?None. Anybody who tells you otherwise is conflating his vision of what's 'good' and 'bad' in OSR into the definition.For example, ACKS has a proficiency system that's pretty fucking close to feats, and I think that it is terrible way to do them; but it doesn't make the game any less OSR.
>>64590218>What elements are necessary for something to be true OSRLevels, hit dice, XP, classes, XP for gold, random encounters, reaction checks, charisma, hirelings, vancian casting, time, gold standard, descending AC>Are there any rules or concepts that, if removed or modified, would just render it completely FOE?All of the above
>>64590218Asking about such things are pointless and in bad faith. They will only start arguments and in the end it is utterly meaningless as nobody can stop you from posting something here if their personal interpretation does not fit with your own.The general rule of thumb is "material compatible with TSR D&D with minimal conversion". Even that rule isn't perfect as many things require conversion to your own houserules, and many games have changed up the meaning and usage of common rules that other documents don't use, but you should use common sense and best of all just post it.I will now ask politely that nobody else reply to this or the post this one is quoting, as a pointless argument is neither desirable nor on topic.
>>64590218>So I'm working on a homebrew, and while I'm not tellin' you nothin' yet cause I know how much you like to be surprised, I will reveal that I'm making some pretty big changes to certain elements and mechanics.I'd very much like it if you posted your ideas instead of inflammatory questions, anon. Some of us aren't assholes.
>>64590218honestly, my metric is 'can I run Keep on the Borderlands with this?'This covers the unstated assumptions as much as the specific mechanics, imho, so...
>>64590218People can say "backwards compatibility," all they want but no one ever says what has to be backwards compatible: in my experience it's just the monsters and dungeon mechanics that need to be compatible with a minimum of fuss, and that's not a big deal to manage. It's why some OSR and OSR-likes can go so far off the rails (relatively speaking) and be considered workable. ACK and GLOG and BFRPG and anything else bound to piss off "that's not /my/ TSR!" assholes is still mechanically compatible with what the players will be interacting with, at the end of the day.How the player-characters themselves work doesn't matter as much. You see it even in these threads: every now and again someone asks how races work (whether or not to add a small template, just a reroll and simple thing, or full-on race-class) and no one can give a clear answer. That's because so long as your players are still capable of interacting with OSR modules with a (relative) minimum of fuss, you're fine.For real though, ignore all the FORK GUIDOS going on around here. Change up what you want and if YOU can run modules you want with it, then you've succeeded in making YOUR brew.>>64590324I appreciate your asking politely, but your answer is not the only one. You are, quite literally, not my fucking dad.
>>64590487I largely think that so long as a given mechanic has the same impact, changing the specific procedures is fine.Like I don't care how you do reaction rolls, so long as when a module says '+1 to reaction rolls' that refers to a thing in your homebrew that will have the same sort of impact. It can be pretty loose.
>>64590487>ACKS and GLOG and BFRPG Anon, I mostly agree with you but you're making a big leap here. Both ACKS and BFRPG can run TSR adventures without a hitch, but GLOG is about as compatible with TSR D&D as 3.5 or DCC is.>"that's not /my/ TSR!" assholesBut yeah that's just fucking stupid. There's a strange cult-like worship of the rules and 'playstyle', made worst of all by the fact that 90% of that was made up by new-school migrants and that the very core of the OSR emphasizes the opposite.
so all those people asking "how much of an asshole does zak need to be for people to get sick of his shit?"Turns out the answer was 'raping mandy'. That's what it takes to do something. Interesting times we live in.
>>64590487>pretending the GLOG is on the same OSR tier as two B/X bootlegsGet ye the fuck gone
>>64590592>made worst of all by the fact that 90% of that was made up by new-school migrantsThis so much. If I have to see one more post arguing that the OSR is about 'nameless pawns dying in forgotten dungeons' I'll slap someone to death with a copy of Men and Magic.
>James [Raggi] is one of the most interesting and daring writers *period*, no matter what school of gaming you like.-Mike Mearls
>>64590604You're missing my point. I'm not saying whether or not it's on the same OSR tier I'm saying that it can still be used to run old modules.It might take a bit more twiddling (but honestly, not all that much) to make it all work, but for all I know Spongebob-up-there's homebrew could require just as much. But so long as he feels comfortable doing it, then he's got something that works.The only thing about GLOG that relatively jumps the shark is its class-template system and the way magic dice work. Personally, I'm a fan of both, and only the magic system kind of locks out other spells without more involved interaction.Frankly, the only part of the system that's straight garbage is the wound system. Why Skerp couldn't go with an easier idea on how to roll death/dismemberment, I have no idea.>>64590592I disagree with it being that far off the mark, but appreciate the agreement on the pseudo-cult we have going on in this community. It's really weird.
>>64590664At the risk of looking like I'm trying to start shit, I _did_ think that's what OSR is about, sorta kinda in a way.Or to be more precise, I always interpreted OSR to, in essence, be about some chucklefucks going down into goblinoid-infested fuckholes so that they can gain treasure and fame, with the explicit intent of either earning themselves a title greater than "some chucklefucks" or dying in the attempt.
>>64590717OSR is about the story being written in the moment by the real threat and real reactions of what's happening around your characters, not written with a grand sense of fantasy-novel adventure baked in like modern games are. You can still have that fantasy-novel adventure, but it's going to happen around you and because of you, not in spite of you.
>>64590696>it can still be used to run old modulesI can run an old module in Tunnels & Trolls, WoD, GURPS, AFMBE, FATE, 3e, 4e, 5e, and Savage Worlds. That doesn't make them OSR.>inb4 y-yeah but you have to convert thoseMagic dice and the retarded class templates also require conversion.
>>64590693 I hear Mearls used to do some genuinely good work for 3.5 and that he's a pretty big grog, which kind of makes me wonder how someone that prominent in the industry can be so clueless about RPG design, his own fieldNot strictly related to his liking of Raggi but still
>>64590769They do require conversion, but not as much. And a lot of the shit you'd have to convert with the other games you mentioned--character health, damage, attributes, ability to hit and avoid being hit--are all more or less the same, or are compatible enough that you can change it on a moment's notice.The spirit of the game is there, and while there are two systems changed up enough that you might actually have to do a bit of work before meeting with your players, it's not nearly enough change to justify throwing it into an entirely different general/community.You're making mountains of molehills, and the gut reaction for people to do that is why this particular community can be so utter garbage.
>>64590187I want more tactical choices for players. I mean, I know there is a simplicity to having an axe and a sword be effectively the same and only difference is flavor for the player's imagination but at that point why not make all the weapons do the same damage and use damage dice based on class instead of the weapon? And I'm not saying that's wrong but If you make weapons so similar to facilitate flavor then why fuck over the player who finds a thief with two daggers cool but a sword has a higher damage die so he has to use a sword or gimp himself.Basically I find the classification of weapons mainly by damage dice unsatisfying both from the perspective of creating tactical choices and from the perspective of facilitating flavor. It's a lose/lose in my opinion. I'd like a more balanced approach, I don't mind a dagger being weak in combat but I'd like there to be some advantage to picking any weaponThanks for the suggestions though, they seem interesting, I'll have to test them out in play.
>>64590717That's because the OSR movement and TSR D&D has been kind of co-opted by the dungeoncrawling crowd.I don't think they ever wrote down in the rulebook that the only possible campaign is 'chucklefuck delve'; quite the contrary, actually - they tell you that your imagination is the limit. Who says you can't go fight in a war (X10), explore an island (X1), take part in city intrigue (B6)...? Of course, as written there's strengths and weaknesses for the system: perhaps it isn't the most indicated for a intrigue campaign full of balls and social gatherings instead of fighting (or is it? roleplaying is key); but limiting D&D to 'megadungeons' is wasting it's potential. Personally I'm most interested in wilderness exploration and kingdom-building.
>>64590769Magic dice, fair enough. Mostly to convert new spells though; a scroll of fire ball is still a scroll of fire ball.What part of the class templates needs conversion to run a module? I think you're confusing difficulties in converting CHARACTERS to converting modules.The GLoG has similar design assumptions and subsystems (movement, timekeeping, encumbrance etc.) to TSR D&D which absolutely isn't the case for most the systems you mentioned.And monsters require no conversion that you can't do in the fly. I know skerples uses a 1e monster manual at his table.
>>64590874I wrestled with the same issue as you before settling on OD&D's d6-for-all solution.>I want more tactical choices for players. I mean, I know there is a simplicity to having an axe and a sword be effectively the same and only difference is flavor for the player's imagination but at that point why not make all the weapons do the same damage and use damage dice based on class instead of the weapon? I advocate for this solution, but instead using a flat d6 for all weapons regardless of class. For two-handed weapon use you'd roll a d8 instead , and dual-wielding lets you roll two dice and take the best damage. [my shields add +2 AC]>And I'm not saying that's wrong but If you make weapons so similar to facilitate flavor then why fuck over the player who finds a thief with two daggers cool but a sword has a higher damage die so he has to use a sword or gimp himself.>Basically I find the classification of weapons mainly by damage dice unsatisfying both from the perspective of creating tactical choices and from the perspective of facilitating flavor. It's a lose/lose in my opinion. I'd like a more balanced approach, I don't mind a dagger being weak in combat but I'd like there to be some advantage to picking any weaponI agree entirely.
>>64590902Now, I agree with you that it should be JUST dungeon diving with the occasional tower ascending to spice things up, but at the same time I think one has to accept that, as a ruleset, that's kinda what it accomplishes best. I might be opening up a can of worms by bringing this whole thing up again, but I'd argue that it's weird to be playing a political intrigue game in a system that has no mechanical backing for this kind of game, and instead merely doesn't prohibit it. Would you say, then, that OSR could be defined as "RPG that doesn't prohibit any style of play, but gives rules for only specific styles" ?
>>64590981>flat d6 for all weapons regardless of class.>two-handed weapon use you'd roll a d8 instead >my shields add +2 ACThis seems like it'd make two-handed weapons pretty sucky, a potential one or 2 damage more seems like a horrible tradeoff for a whopping 10% off of your chance of getting nailed, in a game where getting nailed is often the end of the game. The only time I'd use a two-handed weapon in a system like that would be a polearm to attack from the back line, and even that wouldn't get pulled out unless I'm 100% sure there is no chance of getting flanked.
>>64585866This is fucking awesome.Whats the hex size on this map?
>>64591023Whoops, that it shouldn't be just a dungeon diving*
I feel like I keep lurking in these threads to find some magic on button that will make me totally confident and ready to play, but I never will actually find it. All my questions and desires are answered in my head, in my head, and I don't need anyone else as my taste in fantasy and "wordlbuilding" have been very well honed over 9 fucking years of /tg/ shitposting, wiki trawling, and creative writing.I can literally already make dungeons. I know like 3 OSR rulesets- and I know like twenty rulesets for other games too. I just don't have a group.Why am I like this?
>>64591023>as a ruleset, that's kinda what it accomplishes bestIs it? I mean, obviously, it's great at dungeoncrawling. But have you ever seen a system that does wilderness exploration better? Or fuck, mass combat? Have you ever even seen a system that gave you an army as a reward for leveling up?>but I'd argue that it's weird to be playing a political intrigue game in a system that has no mechanical backing for this kind of game, and instead merely doesn't prohibit it.As I said I'm not arguing that if you want to run 'political intrigue in the court of King Chucklefuck' your best option is an OSR system. Although... what mechanical backing is needed, really? What's stopping you from running B6 and pulling a Capuleti vs Montecchi kind of deal? Just like you don't need to roll Persuade to talk some goblins into not fighting you, you don't need a roll to secure a truce or such. And if you did... homebrewing is pretty easy. Obviously the game works best in a campaign where the players are meant to slowly grow in power somehow as they explore. I haven't ever seen an attempt to deviate from that, though I would be interested in seeing an OSR game with a much flatter progressionOverall I'm simply lamenting that the OSR has forgotten that D&D is more than simply dungeons and shows outright hostility to anything else; and my biggest complaint is that wilderness exploration is very often neglected.
I think I'm finally starting to be somewhat satisfied with my slightly modified OD&D item list and houserules for weapons. Encumbrance is meant to be strictly enforced with this and all damage is d6s. Also note that there are two moves per turn in OD&D so encumbrance matters quite a bit. My intention is to use this for a high medieval, low fantasy style game.
>>64591085A +1 to damage gives you about an additional 16% chance of nailing the other guy with one hit.
This is the best map.
>>64591211You need to get ouf ot the mentality of waiting for opportunities and in one where you make your own. In other words, just fucking start a campaign
>>64591211>Why am I like this?Because you let yourself.Prep for 30 minutes, starting now.Invite a few people you know to play.There.
>>64591238Playing intrigue in OSR would be basically playing freeform
>>64590815>Waah waah I can't discuss my off-topic games hereWhy the fuck is this general specifically so infested with these retards? Does /5eg/ get faggots who are mad that they can't talk about their GURPS or 4e homebrew? I don't get it.When /osrg/ was at peak comfiness it was much harder on this kind of shit, but in the sense of not responding or taking the bait; that's the only thing that's gotten worse and is genuine garbage, tards actually getting baited by the aggressive shitposting.
>>64591272Source? This is actually a lot of fun ideas strewn about, looks fun.
>>64591470Yeah. Pretty much anything else is, too.
>>64591482What need did you see to stir the pot again after 40 minutes of silence?
>>64591527The problem of freeform is that it's just improv acting. The dude playing a scary warlord type might be really mild-mannered in real life. The entire cast might be supposed to be experienced courtiers, but the group probably hasn't had much contact in politics or debate in general beyond trying to organize a potluck at the office. If the system has your back to cover that sort of dissonance and allow character skill to not be directly proportionate to player skill, that's not a cause for worry. Otherwise it can ruin campaigns
>>64586961Did you use a mapmaking program for this or just photoshop? Looks kickass
>>64591731>The problem of freeform is that it's just improv acting.I don't know what drugs the RPG scene in general is on, but when I started playing nobody told me I had to be Humphrey Bogart to roleplay.To me, saying 'I praise the king's magnificent palace and explain our request' is as valid [or even more so, because I find excess acting cough critical role cough slighty 'embarrasing' so to speak] as going 'O great King of Kings, the splendorousness of your dwelling inspires tears of awe in my heart of hearts!' I also use reaction rolls liberally to determine how 'convincing' one needs to be, so sue me. You could argue that some players might not think of flattering the vain king, but they might not figure out stratagems in a dungeon either, and we're all about player skill here.
>>64588369It's going very well. I've even managed to have it playtested (and goddamn it's amazing the things you miss despite a million readthroughs that come up almost instantly when you start an actual game).I wish people would post more of their own here.
>>64591815A semi-professional map making program - QGIS.
>>64591893It's one thing if it's an occasional element of the game, it's another if you're going to spend a good chunk of most sessions doing it. If you say something like>I praise the king's magnificent palace and explain our request'That just offloads the work onto the GM to make the interaction flow smoothly despite you being almost precisely as vague as it was humanly possible to be. And if you can make it work regardless you probably would be pretty decent at actual improv actingThere's a reason why we have a combat system. It's not that it's supposed to be very accurate to real hand-to-hand combat or that, by itself and run perfectly RAW, it is exciting/fun or anything like that. It's something that comes up often, is highly impactful to play and which most people playing likely have next to no experience in. That is also the mentality between having social mechanics if the tactically relevant conflict in your game is almost completely social
>>64592060the mentality behind*
Don't worry anon, I'm already selecting an appropiate reaction photo for when it happens again.
>>64592152They deleted the post they did because it was straight-up /pol/-bait would be my guess.Telling what is and isn't shitposting in a general's culture doesn't work unless the mod is familiar with that particular general community.Go to a general for a game you know nothing about and tell me which of their arguments are shitposts and which are people just disagreeing. For example:>zak e-dramaEasy to tell what's genuine argument and what's shitposting, but if you don't like the idea of discussing talking heads in the larger OSR community it all feels like shitposting.>dcc and glog shillingDCC and GLOG are consumed happily by people in the OSR community beyond this general, and some of the people in this general enjoy them. Just because YOU don't like it doesn't make it shitposting.>foe hugbox propagandaTell me which of anything you don't like is actually genuine shitposts and I will name you a butthurt baby incapable of having incredibly-narrow TSR-based discussion because you are EXACTLY the bitch-cult that we were discussing above.Don't like it? Get fucked. It's not going anywhere.
>>64592152Spicy tip, posts that recieve enough reports are deleted automatically.
>>64586714I'll make a blog or something and post the hexographer file for everyone to hack apartThe East is way too damn wide, which I could pass off as "Haha but I meant to do that so people could slot it their own stuff" but it's more like I got done putting in Forests and realized it was too late to fix without redoing a ton, see pic and compare to my map>>64589234The gist of what I was saying, ye>>64591119Hexes are 10 Leagues (30 miles) each according to Gygax
>>64592152>>64592244"incapable of having discussion *beyond*, rather. The point is your opinions are just that: opinions. What's more, no one actually cares about them.
>>64592256>according to gygaxI'm under the impression that despite his opinions, most people here operate on the "six-square miles," principle.For example using six-square miles my setting is about the size of Egypt, which is about where I want it. How big would it be if each of these was 30 miles?
>>64592322I'm pretty sure only the immediate area around Greyhawk was used for his campaigns and the rest was filler, that spot on the map is near the center and has every variation of environment around it conveniently in one place, that'd make more sense for size scale
>>64592256>The East is way too damn wide,Oops, yeah, now that you say it...
>>64592477It'll be our little secret anon
>>64592256>Hexes are 10 Leagues (30 miles) each according to GygaxI think I quite like this. Makes overland travel more abstract, and once you actually get where you want to go you can reasonably 'zoom' inside the hex and have a 'map inside the map'.
>>64590760This is probably my new favorite description of OSR. But I also love the ability to put everyone's content together with Duct tape and then adding my own and playing it for an experience that is truly unique and truly ours even if we're running a mountain of modules stapled to a homebrew map made in hexographer.
>>64592600th1s p0st is h3ll4 l4m3
Which alternate methods of awarding XP do you use?
Remember that time a janitor took us out of autosage after the new thread was made and everyone got really mad at OP?The risk of that happening today has passed. Someone go make the new thread.
>>64585866I don't want to discourage you, since you're clearly having fun, but there's already a 30-mile-hex map of Greyhawk over at http://www.scruffygrognard.com/gh.htm - You just can't post it here since /tg/ doesn't allow high resolution images (it's 142 Mpx).
>>64592322>I'm under the impression that despite his opinions, most people here operate on the "six-square miles," principle.So did Gygax in play, from what we can tell. The Greyhawk continent map just has to be on a larger scale because it's a continent map. That part's not weird. The part that's weird is that he calls things counties and duchies that are bigger than any medieval European state.
>>64582593I was confused at why so much of the landscape is grassland then I remembered Gary was from the midwest and American geography =/= European geography
>>64578062Sorry guys to get in your thread, but i have been wandering for a while what's going one here.Are this games good for people that started gaming only a few years ago? What can I expect compared to modern games?
>>64591269How much of a buff is it on average with 2d6 take the highest? 10, 20% more?
>>64594813>Are this games good for people that started gaming only a few years ago?They're probably better for newer players tbqh>What can I expect compared to modern games?More character death, less mechanical options, more distinct subsystems, better gaming