Let's have a nice, tonally faithful thread without resorting to insults and accusations.>Trove:http://pastebin.com/QWyBuJxd>Tools & Resources:http://pastebin.com/KKeE3etp>Old School Blogs:http://pastebin.com/ZwUBVq8L>Previous thread:>>66162106What are the nations in your setting like?
In the actual campaign area they're mostly quasi-German with a peculiar lacing of Arthurian stuff.
Anyone got a good DM screen or quick reference for Labyrinth Lord?
I want to have multiple human kingdoms that are the scattered fragments of a once-great empire that had loads of underground cities. A small elven nation defended by elite commandos. A realm of rakshasas who are the most powerful faction but mostly keep to themselves. And a dwarven empire in the mountains spreading into the nearby hills of course. My dad's campaign setting had gnomes and kobolds have their own kingdoms, and loads of human kingdoms which each had their own languages, with percentage similarities between them so you could pick up bits of what they were saying if you spoke a related language. I thought that that was pretty cool.
>>66200735Tell us more about your dad's campaign setting, that's cool that you have that to go off. Did he ever give you his notes or anything?
>>66198731The only nation in my setting is the one the PCs are fleeing or have been exiled from. It is lesser men what find their fortunes in the soft belly of civilization.
>>66202368And what is the world like outside of it?
>>66198731There really aren't any large nations in the area, just tribes and small chiefdoms with unique cultural practices and languages.There is a large empire across a small sea but is far too concerned with protecting its own power to be out colonising the tribesfolk.Two of my characters (three if you include a dead one) are explorers from the empire and so they have a lot to learn from the 2 natives in the party
>>66200648Can you elaborate on that? I have an idea of what Arthurian stuff is like, but what about the quasi-German?>>66202718That sounds cool. Any real world tribes you model them after?
>>66203449>Can you elaborate on that? I have an idea of what Arthurian stuff is like, but what about the quasi-German?The German states in the middle ages were much more fragmented, decentralized, and generally internally messy than the English-French situation that's the common standard for how feudalism and society work. It makes for a much better model for a setting on the adventurer scale, especially in an OSR game, since petty and cantankerous egotism, robber barons, tenuous alliances etc. are more congenial to player psychology than having to obey a liege lord who will just hammer you down if you don't. It's also easier to fit the domain game into, since just seizing a castle by force of arms, for example, is, again, less likely to cause the king to come beat you up.Plus, medieval German architecture is top comfy.
>>66198731I have various nations, from anglo-saxon and germanic to slavic and Persian. I also have a number of "dead" civilizations. I like using real-world equivalents. :-)
>>66203449The setting is mostly based on pre-feudal Japan so lots of inspiration from there
>>66198731Starting to regret backing the rules tome. I only saved a few bucks of the eventual retail price, and I'm probably going to get reamed on shipping to the US. Wasn't really worth plunging the revolting depths of that site.
>>66205269A fool and his money . . .
>>66198731>What are the nations in your setting like?Haven't thought that far ahead. My players started out in a besieged village. They are currently fortifying it against bandit attacks. I suppose the nation has fallen into lawlessness in remote areas. It could be similar to Anglo Saxons/Romans/Danes/Normans in medieval England. A few large powerful tribal warlords and kings slapping the shit out of each other in a bid to gain control and territory, with the outlying villages caught in the crossfire. Perhaps I'll tie the bandit raids to the lack of order, and figure out a way to have the players choose a side.
>>66205398Would you like to buy a copy of the OSE rules tome? Only $55. [13 CHA]
Can someone, please tell me what edition this is exactly. As far as I know its AD&D I 1977 to 1988?
>>66205643Looks like Mentzer's BECMI
>>66205643The module is T1 Village of Hommlet. The logo on the other stuff is the Mentzer-era Basic D&D logo and the booklets appear to be the two parts of of Mentzer Basic and half of Mentzer Expert.
>>66205720>>66205857Thanks, guys. Whats the half of expert called that I am missing?
>>66198731Played a party of 2e Skyrider Paladins and arial combat is a blast and a half.>fly out to scout a village in distress>get there with the weather beginning to deteriorate.> plunge down oitnof the clouds to find the town fighting for its life>in the courtyard of the church stands a white dragon.>dive down for some back attacks>only one lands>22 dmg @ lvl 1>horyshet.jpg>dragon pursues>we take turns diving and forcing the dragon into head on attacks>wounded the dragon dives for the town and casts fog, obsuring the streets below.>one of of our party get one last attack as the dragon turns for breath weapon.>he misses the save and crashes with the dragon into the fog. >me and other party member fly to the church and climb through the bell tower.>assist clerics fighting below>secure church>head out into the fog with many supplies including holy vials of weapon enchantment, and potions for the defenders.>hear some comotion away from the main fight.>peasant running away from 4 zombies>we make a swift baracade with stalls and barrels >peasant escapes>companion holds the zombies off whike I try to light it up.>companion gets KOd because lol 6hp>drag his unconscious body to safty to heal and we lose the zombies.>we head to where we heard more fighting and meet up with defenders, give them health potion supplies.>they lend us a cleric to lead us to where our other companion crashed.>make our way to a market square>pegasus is defending his unconsious rider, a dozen zombie corpses strewn around fighting 3 more>help pagasus kill them>heal up comapion and as we finish up we have to make a saving throw>shop nearby blasts a part showering us with broken glass> ohfuck.exe>undead minotaur wearing enchated gauntlets steps out of the rubble. >we use enchanted oil on weapons>npc cleric gets annihilated by first attack>just rescued companion gets knocked unconsious again>pegasus gets knocked unconsious >oh fuck
>>66205857>>66206243Mentzer Expert is the only BECMI set that isn't divided into two books for some reason. All the other sets have a player's book and a DM's book, but Expert only has a rule book.
>>66198731I liked the wrap-around image on the cover.
>>66205643Looks like you are what they call an expert.http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?258419-So-what-is-the-difference-between-Basic-B-X-and-BECMI
>>66206363Fighting dragons in the air sounds awesome. I don't know how B/X handles flying, but I might put some air battles in our game.
Looking for blogs that focus on general theory and advice rather than custom content or house rules.The Alexandrian, Hack & Slash, and Jeff's Gameblog are the sort of thing I'm looking for.
>>66205525>[13 CHA]You're posting in this thread buddy. Your CHA score is at best marginally better than Alexis.
>>66207066It seems really complicated and it would be if you were a nazi for absolute distances but you can break it down to about how fast both combatants are and how many turns it takes to make a pass.
How do you do secret doors? Do you actually expect your players to like manually search individual lengths of wall, or do you give them a passive detection roll, or what?
What are some adventures similar to caverns of thracia? Trying to get some inspiration for a not quite abandoned ruined temple and cavern complex.
>>66206363>throw my broadsword>still consious buddy misses and gets KOd again>buddies pegasus shows up>minotaur grabs that one too>I get a back attack and kill him>revive friends again. >head to the front gate to help defenders>fight is over here and there are lots of villagers around.>wait a minute, there is no dragon corpse.>detect evil on group >3 evil villagers >a guard, a half elf woman and an old man> question them and no one seems obviosly a polymorphed dragon>take villagers back to the church, feed them and house everyone in the lower floor/catacombs.>buddy gets a tip off that the old man is a dragon and goes to confront him alone>dragon polymorphs inside crypt, crushing himself along with our buddy and all the villagers, burying them alive.>me and our other buddy escape the collapsing building and get airborne.>dragon crawls through the destroyed building and snatches 2 villagers>stop or they die>wedontnegotiatewithterrorists.jpg>squishes them>we kill him with 2 more lance chargesAnd thats how we destroyed a church and saved the day.
>>66207876Our DM usually will give visual hints if there are any secret doors, passive checks he will throw in something hidden if we roll really well.
>>66207971The Lost City, Jungle Ruins of Madaro-Shanti, Tomb of the Iron God.
>>66207876"I search for secret doors.""Where?"Rough 10x10 area, 1-in-6 chance of finding it if there's a door there (2 for elves), takes a turn (affects light, wandering monsters, etc.)."I tap the wall behind the bookcase with my staff.""It sounds hollow.""I push it.""It opens."No roll, little/no time taken, usually err on the side of the players if they have the right idea (exactly HOW the secret door works isn't that important).
>>66207876>Do you actually expect your players to like manually search individual lengths of wallA lot of players will say "I take a look at the wall" or "I search the wall". I have to ask them for more details!; ask them where they're looking, how they're searching. It all comes down to their interaction with the environment. I'm not going go make them describe how they search every ten-foot stretch of wall; but, at the same time, a player can't just say he's looking at the wall and expect a door to reveal itself to him. If he's tapping at it with his sword hilt, putting his ear to it, pushing at bricks, then he'll find it, no rolls necessary.
Let's talk about initiative.I use LBB with Philotimy musing with some B/X. So I have:1) Roll initiative2) First group move3) Second group move4) Missile 5) Magic6) Melee7) Clean-upIn most fight, in ends up in a big melee and the other phases (movement, ranged attack, etc.) becomes redundant and useless. Its useless even to reroll initiative since everything is about wacking in melee, so only that phase becomes important. Am I missing something? What do you guys do regarding this?
>>66207711I have a British accent though, so that puts me over the average. You'd be surprised at what I can get away with saying in America.
>>66207987No fear, no painNobody left to blameI'll try aloneMake destiny my ownI learn to free my mindMyself I now must findOnce moreOnce moreIf I could flyLike the king of the skyCould not tumble nor fallI would picture it allIf I could flySee the world through my eyesWould not stumble nor failTo the heavens I sailIf I could flySo here I amIn solitude I standI've got dreams insideI need to realizeMy faith has grownNo fear of the unknownNo moreNo moreIf I could flyLike the king of the skyCould not tumble nor fallI would picture it allIf I could flySee the world through my eyesWould not stumble nor failI could ravage my jailIf I could fly
>>66209359>using somebosy's shitbrew fanfic instead of the LBB RAW/RAIthere's your problem
>>66207641The Angry GM is mostly theory.Pros:>Theory is generally put into practice afterwards>Methodical: nothing is ever written for the lulz, most articles explain why something is being worked on/explained>Some absolutely excellent series, including the only "let's build a megadungeon" how-to I've seen, with both theory and an example (currently on hold)Cons:>Absolutely horrible shtick: all articles are some combination of censored swears, faux-narcissism/anger/assholeishness/condescension, rambling intros, and more dumb stylistic choices.>I say faux narcissism but the dude is kind of an asshole even outside his persona.>It's all 5e stuff, though it's generally applicable to OSR>Some hit-or-miss articles lately. Specifically the second to last post he made about ruling for drama, not for what makes senseOverall worth checking out if you're willing to dig through the layer of garbage.
>>66209833Please explain. AFAIK, the same problem could occur with the Chainmail initiative system. There is still a melee phase where everybody will pile up and fight with all the others being useless. In Chainmail its less evident since people play more than 4 against 4 or something like that. But in D&D, especially low level adventure, I feel like it's all about melee (if it goes to combat without an unfair advantage, that is). Even if you use the simultaneous, it's the same. I'm using Chainmail 2e ed., see p. 5.
>>66198731Medieval Poland after the death of Bolesław III.
>>66209359I use similar combat phases, but I let whichever side wins initiative take their actions first in each phase. So Side A moves, then side B, then side A does projectiles, then side B, side A melee, side B melee...Movement is still important if someone decides to retreat from combat, missiles are important if somebody chooses to make it important, and making spells go last is really important.You make it sound like your party is nothing but fighters and clerics who don't wanna cast spells. Maybe your players are just dumb/boring? Or you're making it sound worse than it is. Combat doesn't always need to be interesting because you don't really want it to happen that often in the first place, and it also shouldn't usually take that long to resolve.
>>66210978I might be exagerating yes. My point is mostly this: imagine a party of 3 lvl 1 meeting 2 squeleton with shield and rag armor in a corridor. Two will engage, the other will most likely be a magic-user or something. He might throw stuff, but he's going to end up hurting his friends. So it's going to end up being two figther against two squeleton in the melee phase for multiple rounds because everybody keep missing and such. I take time to describe everything and the combat is still fun. My question is mostly this: at that point, do you stop using the other phases and keep cycling through melee in order to go faster, or do you still go through everything but make it seems a bit useless ? Based on a true story btw. Thanks for sharing.
>>66209359I use a single phase initiative system on D12 but add +3 for anyone making a missile attack that round. It gives me the effect of ranged attacks generally going first, without needing subphases (which I don't really see the value of). And players are continually finishing off their opponents and/or monsters are retreating due to broken morale, or players are running on fumes and looking to fall back, so there's constantly someone looking to maneuver or take advantage of that throughout a fight even as everyone as a whole is bogged down in melee.
>>66205269>Starting to regret backing the rules tome. I only saved a few bucks of the eventual retail price, and I'm probably going to get reamed on shipping to the US. Wasn't really worth plunging the revolting depths of that site.from what I recall the shipping isn't that bad, something like 15 bucks if you're just getting the Rules Tomepersonally I'm having another issue, thanks to my bank having issues with said Kickstarter being from outside the US I ended up getting charged thrice, so I've got to call my bank and see if that can be fixed
>>66209359>Let's talk about initiative.Group initiative or bust. It's quick, easy, and very liberating in terms of it never artificially forcing the PCs to go in the wrong order to accomplish something. The only real issue is how devastating it can be for nobody of your team to be able to act until everyone on the other team has gone, but that can largely be addressed by only giving everybody on the first team up to bat a 50% chance of being able to act in the first round of combat.
>>66210694>I'm using Chainmail 2e edThere's your second problem. Using LBB + Chainmail is a meme.
A question about B/X initiative, does the side with initiative go through the full combat sequence first or do they just act first on each stage?
>>66211705Initiative lasts a full combat round
>>66209359>>66211292>giving everybody on the first team up to bat a 50% chance of being able to act in the first round of combat.Wouldn't this mean that everyone would want to go second since the first team to do initiative loses half their actions? Or is this for surprise rounds or something similar?
>>66211802>Wouldn't this mean that everyone would want to go second since the first team to do initiative loses half their actions?You declare actions before you roll initiative. Read a fucking book.
>>66211802>Wouldn't this mean that everyone would want to go second since the first team to do initiative loses half their actions?Nope. Whichever team has just gone is always 1/2 a team's turn up on their enemies.Round 1:--1/2 of Team A goes: That puts them 1/2 a team's turn ahead--all of Team B goes: Which puts *them* 1/2 a team's turn ahead (a full team's turn minus the 1/2 a team's actions of their enemies = 1/2)Round 2:--all of Team A goes: That puts them 1/2 a team's turn ahead again--all of Team B goes: Now they're 1/2 ahead againAnd so on, and so on, with them alternating back and forth.But having your team go first is still an advantage because you have a greater ability to set the shape of the conflict, and to engage the enemy in a way that will benefit you (and maybe drop or disable a particularly dangerous enemy before it has a chance to act--removing a magic-user before he can fireball you, for instance). The second team, having already been acted against, is necessarily reactive.
>>66211800Yes but does the round work like:>group 1 wins initiative>group 1 moves, missile attacks, spells, melee attacks>group 2 moves, missile attacks, spells, melee attacksor>group 1 moves>group 2 moves>group 1 missile attacks>group 2 missile attacks... so on, so forth
>>66211910Oh, I wouldn't do that with the way I run group initiative as that would slow shit down. The advantage of having a more freeform group initiative, where the people on a team act in whatever order they want to,* is that things can proceed more organically. You don't get tripped up by a rigid format and are free to revise your plan of action according to the results of what your peer just did.*Which is pretty much just in the order in which they speak up, unless they're agreeing to a plan of action that requires a specific order ("let me cast a fireball first, so you don't get caught in the blast!"). Though I will admittedly prompt people in a particular initiative order, if only to spur action. Somebody else can still jump ahead of them, or they can choose to hang back a bit, but this forces everybody to make decisions rather than sitting around debating who should go first in a detached manner.
>>66212047have you tired reading the book
>>66212124you actually bothered replying just to not help at allLook, the way I read it it seems that group one takes all their actions then group two but I have seen some people run it the other way so I wanted to know if there is something I am missing
>>66212047>>66212181>Look, the way I read it it seems that group one takes all their actions then group two but I have seen some people run it the other way so I wanted to know if there is something I am missingGoing by the way things are laid out in outline form, it's pretty clearly the case that one whole team goes, and then the other. But I really don't see the point in rigidly subdividing the different actions into different phases if you're going to do this. I mean, there's some logical sense to missile attacks going before melee attacks, but D&D is hardly a realism simulator, and I'd prioritize quick and easy of "justifiably more realistic". There's much more of a point to subdividing when the different actions go if you have both teams act within a phase (Team A moves; Team B moves; Team A makes missile attacks; Team B makes missile attacks)--so much so that you begin to wonder if they just fucked up the outline layout and really meant to go with this method of alternating within each phase. On the other hand, this makes things more complicated and in so doing, slows combat down, which is a big strike against it in my book.Regardless, this is exactly the sort of thing that different groups of role-players have always done differently, so you're gonna have plenty company whichever way you do it.
Anyone play Whitehack? Looking for advice on how to handle some Miracles.
>>66211184That's not a bad idea. Declare action, roll 1d12, +3 for range, -3 for spells (or something like that). >>66211292I previously used d6 group initiative. It's fast and furious I agree, but I wanted to try something more "tactical" a-la-Chainmail. That's why I integrated it. I guess I might go back, IDK. >>66211954Regarding my previous comment, that's what I did before and it's a good system. I just thought going back to LBB+Chainmail was a thing.Anybody is actually using LBB + Chainmail can care to comment how they do it and so on ?
>>66209359>Am I missing something? Not really?I mean, if the players' tactic is to mash into a melee pileup, they have a right to use that tactic. It's certainly true that shooting is something that's typically only important when battle is first joined. That's fine IMO; that's as it should be. It's a bit odd that movement isn't a bigger factor, but again, if they opt not to, not a lot you can do about it.>What do you guys do regarding this?Nothing. Let them. Maybe exploit it with flanking enemies and the like. If you feel that the players often have no other *option* than charging into a crush, maybe try using larger rooms/more complex layouts so they can opt to try to circle around and the like?Oh, the other thing:>Its useless even to reroll initiative since everything is about wacking in meleeI don't follow your logic here, the initiative order is at least as important in melee as anywhere else in the round. Which group gets in the first volley of hits can make a huge difference.
>>66212500Oh, you're using Chainmail simultaneous combat? In that case it's definitely a situation where you'd expect movement to be the primary tactical consideration – but, on the other hand, you'd also expect morale to come into play pretty quickly.
>>66211292I do this except everyone rolls their class HD and on a 6 or higher they get to act in the first round. (MUs have d6 in my game). Not sure how monsters will work yet, probably just make monsters have a 2 in 6 to go in the first round and maybe make any monster described as "fast" or has the element of surprise go first instead.
>>66212515Thanks for the word. I think I've read enough in this thread to know that I am the problem. I will try to introduce more complex room and environmental concerns. Also regarding your question regarding my logic, I meant initiative once in melee. I might have misread the book, but AFAIK, melee is simultaneous no ? >>66212651Yes. Maybe I'm planing combat poorly (see my above comment).
>>66200799No he never gave me his notes. He had a human kingdom with a lot of halflings in the northern part, a mining town with a fortress on the way there, and a faerie kingdom much further to the north whom we were supposed to bring a faerie we rescued from a wizard's tower home to. He also had gnomes who had underground towns as well as aboveground towns, and an invisible wall around their kingdom, as well as tariffs we had to pay on gems we brought into the kingdom (we learned our lesson about "have you anything to declare?"). We also got robbed by fey at one point while we were sleeping, but they didn't take very much. The kobold realm was mostly neutral-aligned, kobolds were welcomed in the human kingdom even though they were kind of suspicious of them. Also there were dragonblooded kobolds and a kobold warlord who was forcing his will on smaller more peaceful kobold tribes. Our third adventure, we went to get some sheep back from the kobolds who had stolen them from a firbolg-led caravan. We got into a fight with the camp and things started to get dicey, it ended up a stalemate and we ended up negotiating the kobolds 30 gp to give the sheep back, which was quite a bit but whatever. Figured we could get it back later. The only person who actually died in the fight was a kobold from the village that had been taken over by the dragon-blooded kobold and forced to fight against us. So basically an innocent bystander.It was D&D 3.5 but I barely knew how to play so it felt OSR. I felt like it was on me to make the right decisions, and my characters weren't very powerful, best I had was a rogue with 20 Dex and that was the only 18 score in the party. Not minmaxed at all. We could barely take down a hippogriff at level 2. I miss that so much. I loved customizing characters but it's all become about "muh builds" and "you're punishing yourself if you play this class" so that's a huge part of what drew me to OSR.
>>66212815>I think I've read enough in this thread to know that I am the problem.I don't think that you should be this hard on yourself. I think that players often opt for very simplistic tactics and ultimately there's not a lot you can do about that without intruding on their player freedom.That said, of course it's good if you've been inspired to add more interesting layouts! that's always cool. Good luck, Anon!>I might have misread the book, but AFAIK, melee is simultaneous no ?Nah, sorry, that one's on me, I just missed that you were using Chainmail combat. You're absolutely correct, melee is rolled simultaneously in Chainmail, which is honestly much more realistic.
>>66212500>That's not a bad idea. Declare action, roll 1d12, +3 for range, -3 for spells (or something like that).Pretty close. I use -1 per spell level, which produces some interesting tactical choices once in a while ("I really need to get a spell off before being engaged; the slower, more powerful spell would be more useful, but also riskier"). The D12 gives me more room for mods, but keeps compatibility with any D6 mod designed for B/X (e.g. the halfling individual +1 mod becomes a +2).
What is a good adventure for domain-level play?
>>66212833>I loved customizing characters but it's all become about "muh builds" and "you're punishing yourself if you play this class" so that's a huge part of what drew me to OSR.My players and I are still stiff from other more complicated systems as well, it's going to take a while to loosen up. They want to roll the dice every two minutes. We're having fun though, so I think it will work out OK. I want them to have happy memories of adventure time with their dad.
>>66211260Oh that shipping isn't too bad. We'll also get the PDF + extras straight away. Maybe OSE guy will buy himself something nice with all the cuckbucks, like a really nice cup or a snazzy pair of monogrammed trousers.
>>66214240I just had a thought though, why don't these small publishers use international print on demand services with warehouses in each country? That would keep the shipping costs down for everyone.
Does anyone run a game online I could join?
>>66213964The main difference between designing a good dungeon and designing a good adventure in general is the level of abstraction in the elements involved and less prominent exploration/respurce management. For example, know how it's often said to not put secret doors into a dungeon if they're vital for advancement? In a social adventure, an NPC who a) keeps vitally important secrets and b) is very good at keeping those secrets is pretty much your "secret door in a linear dungeon" analogue. Once you get that, much of the same advice applies: wandering monsters become any sort of pacing tool you like to limit the timeframe, you want a non-linear layout, you want factions of NPCs with opposed interests, combat is never "mandatory" etc. The things that don't translate well are usually the few concepts actually particular to dungeon crawling.That you're bringing up domain-level play tells you quite a lot about the characters: they're wealthy and hardened landowners with a lot of clout within their social circles and likely a wide repertoire of magic bullshit. You just need to avoid writing scenarios trivialized by their resources and abilities. And given that they're likely to be pretty silly at that stage, you want problems with *no* optimal solution whatsoever, which you could think of as an extension of the "the answer is not on your character sheet" adage. Of course, that also means your players either turn into cutthroat motherfuckers (like Robilar before them) or the "player skill" aspect of gameplay slowly begins giving way to the character as the stakes become less immediate and more nuanced than dying because that chest you opened was trapped with a poison needle, but it's what you sign for if you get a character to levels that high.
>>66214483Alternatively you whip out the CMI and turn your D&D game into fucking Doctor Strange over 30+ years as your characters become actual fundamental aspects of reality and climb over 36 levels multiple times
>>66214483After success with proper dungeon design with non-linear layouts and emphasis on resource management you'll find you need to raise the level of the game to hardened domain-level play with motherfuckers who chain the characters to the wall and stuff warm poop in their mouths.
>>66214353Some anon was going to start a game of B/X Essentials on roll20 in a week or two. I would do it, but I already DM and I want to play. Are you interested?
>>66214573What's better, a dungeon designed like a DCC adventure that is physically linear but full of intentionally designed challenges or a chaotic dungeon that uses the Gygax stocking method, a random layout and a random encounter table?
>>66214337Because PoD quality is shit. Literal home printer paper. You might as well just print the PDF.
>>66215081This is the correct way to do everything. Right up to editing, typesetting, and publishing acid-free hardcover volumes of material comprised solely of vectors, no rasterization, bound in vellum.
I just realized what's stopping me from combining Anomalous Subsurface Environment and Ravenloft to create my own Vampire Hunter D ripoff. Absolutely nothing.
>>66214240>Maybe OSE guy will buy himself something nice with all the cuckbucks, like a really nice cup or a snazzy pair of monogrammed trousers.I'm pretty sure he's mentioned that he's going to be putting as much of the money he got into the books(and the other people involved with making them like the artists) as possible>>66214337>I just had a thought though, why don't these small publishers use international print on demand services with warehouses in each country? That would keep the shipping costs down for everyone.a lot of them do end up using DriveThru or Lulu for PoD, but some want a more consistent quality than what PoD can deliver>>66215081>Because PoD quality is shit. Literal home printer paper. You might as well just print the PDF.I dunno, most of the books I've gotten from Lulu and DriveThru have been of good quality(except for my first copy of Pars Fortuna that had several pages swapped around)
>>66214613Not him, but I'd be interested.
>>66214095I'm confused, are you their dad?>wanting to roll the dice every 2 minutesYeah that's annoying. Unless they are kids then it makes sense.
>>66198731Didn't really know where else to ask but has anyone ever messed around with The Burning Wheel? My cousin has them on his shelf and I liked the way the book looked so I was curious if anyone had any opinions on the system and if it's worth the read maybe some examples on how it functions.Thank you in advance.
>>66215830You're asking about one of the storygamiest storygames in the thread for old D&D. Might have better luck making a new thread
>>66215892Well thanks for the input, I'd normally just ask my cousin but hes deployed. I appreciate your time.
>>66215257>I just realized what's stopping me from combining an overrated hipster gonzoshit and an overrated Hammer horror railroadokay
>>66212436Miracles? Explain pls.
If you were gonna create an animal race-as-class for a regular mundane or simple animal, which one would you pick?
>>66218516A raccoon. Raccoons are cool.
>>66218713Way ahead of you, bub.
>>66219138That race would be a bit over powered. Cockroaches tend to be hard to kill.
>>66219209Make them antagonists then.
>>66214613I would definitely be interested, hell yeah man
>>66219209>That race would be a bit over powered. Cockroaches tend to be hard to kill.Cube-square law. Also: no lungs. I mean, we're talking about fantasy, so we don't need to pay a lot of attention to science, but there's no reason a man-size cockroach class would have to be tough to the point of it being unbalancing. I could see giving them d10 hit dice, and/or good natural armor, and/or some sort of damage reduction / resistance to certain kinds of damage (half damage from blunt, maybe).
>>66198731Please be gentle. Did a big update where I completely got rid of AC, HP, and rolling over.Damage applies to stats directly; armor gives DR; classes determine what stats you can re-roll, what special little things you get, and what armor/weapons you can use, and that's it; everything in the entire system is roll-under now.
>>66211135why are you spelling it like that
>>66219790>Upon receiving harm a character’s Constitution attribute is lowered by equivalent points. They may gain points back (1 per night of good rest) but cannot gain more in this fashion above their “resting,” Constitution. Characters hit may elect to halve the damage to Constitution, sending the other half to any of the other five attributes; to be determined by a random roll. When Constitution is reduced to zero (0), the character is dead; see below for further details on character death.Attribute damage is obnoxious and fiddly and being able to redistribute half of the damage you take to attributes other than constitution takes a system that's very simple (subtract damage from hit points) and makes it anything but (subtract half damage from constitution and adjust modifiers accordingly, then decide where you want the other half to go and adjust modifiers there). This might work okay for a computer game, but it's a clusterfuck for a tabletop.>When fighting, you test the appropriate attribute: Strength for melee attacks and Wisdom for ranged. A successful test means a successful attack. Are you directly rolling vs. your score on a d20 (rather than applying your modifier to a roll)? Because if so, that's all kind of broken, and it puts way too much power into randomly generated stats. A guy with an 18 can hardly miss.>Avoiding damage is appropriately simple: a successful Dexterity test means you avoid damage, parrying or dodging the blow as appropriate. A character can test to avoid damage once per round; fighting beyond your numbers is a fast way to a bad time.Wait... do you get a free parry/dodge every round? If so, an 18 Dexterity means that 90% of the time in a one-on-one fight, whatever your attacker rolls is irrelevant, because you'll block it regardless.
>>66219790>removed AC and HP>added stat damage and armor as DR>fucked up the class system>Please be gentleIs this a joke?
>>66220427>adjusting modifiers on the flyFair, I hadn't thought about it at all. Maybe I can find a way to get rid of modifiers too but if I insist on it I might as well not post it in /osr/ anymore.>fighting stuffAlso fair, this is more throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. I didn't over-write v11 and haven't sent my players v12 yet, so I've yet to REALLY fuck up.>>66220447I suppose it's more accurate to say "give suggestions for fixes or explanations for why you think the decisions are bad," like >>66220427 did. Though honestly the few points brought up so far already show why it's a bad idea, so I'm glad I backed up the old system.
>>66219790>arming sword does 1d6 damage>heavy armor gives you 4 points of DRThis doesn't work. With these stats, heavy armor would be completely deflecting any damage from an arming sword two thirds of the time, and even if you did damage, it would only be a point or two. Your average damage output on a hit would be 1/2 a point. And that's only if you hit.See pic for DR stats that work decently. Notice that a standard sword damage is two dice levels higher than you have it (1d10 rather than 1d6), the maximum protection afforded by armor is 1 point less (3 DR rather than 4), and that always inflict at least 1 point of damage, regardless of damage reduction.
>>66220511Going to save this, appreciate it.
>>66220495>Though honestly the few points brought up so far already show why it's a bad idea, so I'm glad I backed up the old system.I don't think the issue here is with the base ideas. Well, it could be that they don't work, but there's nothing wrong with brainstorming and seeing what you can come up with. The issue is that you need to do the math. If you come up with an idea, you need to not only ponder on what the consequences should be, but actually run some numbers.>Maybe I can find a way to get rid of modifiers too but if I insist on it I might as well not post it in /osr/ anymore.I think the problem here is with the attribute damage, and that you'd have to move a lot of other shit around to make it work. So the question is whether attribute damage is just something you thought might be cool (in which case: toss it), or something you see as a defining pillar of your game (in which case, you probably need to build the system around it, which means straying from OSR).>Also fair, this is more throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. You need a much smaller stat range than 3-18 if you want to make this sort of thing work (with an attack roll, then a defense roll). Rolling vs. stats of 10 would give a 50% chance to hit and if you do, then the defender would have a 50% to block/dodge your strike. Combined, those give you a 25% for you to land a blow, which is rather low, but not necessarily unworkably so. But as stats get higher (or go lower), that percentage drops, and things become problematic. Also, there would be an enormous advantage in ganging up on somebody in a system like this (and thus depriving him of the ability to defend vs. all blows), which could work in a gritty sort of game, but might not be what you're looking for.
>>66220511Some quick statistics on that. The percentages represent the average damage inflicted per round using the DR system divided by the damage inflicted per round going by the book. 111% therefore means that you'd be inflicting 11% extra damage per round in the DR system.
>>66220610To be honest it was more of a neat idea. I'm thinking it might be better to drop the idea, mostly because it was a novelty to make it less a blatant hack and more my own thing.
>>66220610Ideally, if you're going to do an attack roll, and then a separate defense roll, you want the former to have an advantage over the latter. Maybe the first gets the better of two rolls and/or the latter gets the worse of two rolls. In that case, a guy with a score of 10 attacking a guy with a score of 10 would yield: a 75% chance of succeeding on the attack roll and a 25% chance of succeeding on the defense roll, for a 56% combined chance of landing the blow. That's a lot better than 25%, but it does mean that not only are you always rolling two dice, but you're interpreting them different ways (higher of 2 vs. lower of 2), which may lead to mistakes being made (with, for instance the defender accidentally reading the higher of his dice rather than the lower). Another way of doing it would be to use different size dice. If it's roll-under, the attacker rolls a smaller die than the defender. This would probably mean using a d12 for the attack and a d20 for the defender (or the other way around for a roll-over system), which obviously means that you'd need to dramatically rescale the stats you're using.Ultimately, the math for having separate, individual attack and defense rolls is rather tricky, so it's not something you want to do unless you're willing to run a lot of numbers and fiddle around with the probabilities. It's not high level math or anything, but if statistics are foreign to you and you don't have something like Excel to lean on, it's probably something you want to avoid. (Though even for simpler stuff, you should always do some basic math to make sure your ideas aren't going to produce results far outside of what you're looking for.) Opposed rolls are a bit easier to balance though.
>>66220582>spiderHe is our hero!
>>66220415He's a frog. We have one or two frogulars ITT.
>>66198731What games a game OSR?
>>66221106What makes* damn
>>66221106>>66221211Broad compatibility and tonal fidelity with old-school D&D? Then we argue about the individual terms and acceptable levels of them.
>>66221106Can you run B2 Keep on the Borderlands in said game with only minimal changes. The degree of changes allowed is something people debate.
>>66219790What the fuck is this?>>Players may spend a light die (no roll, simply discard) to automatically pass any minor- or moderatelychallenging obstacle, trap, or puzzle; the spent die represents the time took. More difficult tasks may take more than one light die spent; GMs may declare this cannot be done for very important obstacles. For spent light players and the GM narrate the success of their carefully-used time together."
>>66223321Emergency feature if your players are fucking retarded and you made a dumb mistake like planning on them solving the riddle-door. Unless they brought a cart of torches, it's seriously diminishing returns since they lose a pretty valuable resource to effectively go past a speed-bump for free.It's never actually come up in my games. I wouldn't worry about it.
Do not respond to shitbrewers.
Maybe I’m missing the point of usage dice, but aren’t they totally antithetical to OSR when applied to valuable resources such as light? Gary’s mention of strict time records is a bit of a meme, but it’s true that the game kinda loses meaning if you can’t rely on the duration of light, spells, and so on. If you light a torch and roll its die, and immediately get a 1, how long did the torch last? Why did it only last ten minutes? Why did it take an hour to perform a single action? Are my spells still okay?This undermines your ability to plan and strategize on your expeditions. Also I would fucking hate being a player and needing to rely on something so unreliable.
>>66223789>Maybe I’m missing the point of usage dice, but aren’t they totally antithetical to OSR when applied to valuable resources such as light?You're preaching to the choir. Nobody here is going to disagree with you; seems like you're more interested in having a circle jerk of people responding to you then actually making a point.
>>66223789Yes, usage dice suck. It's a solution in search of a problem, introducing its own annoyances at the same time.
>>66223789I think they work fine, personally. The randomness adds a bit of tension and the dice acting as both a physical reminder and their own time-management--since it's all just one roll per call of use instead of tracking actual time--means it's one aspect of bookkeeping my party just isn't interested in. Different strokes and whatnot.
>>66223851Fuck you salty cunt, I was hoping maybe someone would point out how usage dice are useful. It takes a while to learn OSR basics, and even longer to learn which sacred cows are okay to kill. I’m totally cool with using any subsystem that might fly on the face of B/X as long as it doesn’t undermine the gameplahy loop or resource management aspect. Go be bitter about your shitbrew somewhere else.
>>66223480Hello fuck buddy! I hate these fucking retards and their riddle doors too! We understand diminishing returns and resource management but the retards don't. I like the smell of your pοοp. I didn't have any toilet paper this morning so I had to use my hands. I should wash my hands.
>>66223905I just think it breaks immersion, as silly as that feels to say. Is it still one roll per turn, or is it like once per time-sensitive action (which given spell durations and wandering monsters, should be EVERY action)? I’m just trying to understand.I don’t mind usage dice as an alternative for spells, for example (as a supplement to the MU’s vancian, not a replacement) because that lets the spellcaster last longer in the dungeon while not being overly unreliable (for the most part). Starting MUs already only get one spell per day, so you’re gambling to come out even anyway, if that makes sense.
>>66223951>even longer to learn which sacred cows are okay to kill.The only scared cow that's okay to kill is character xp. Player xp is better.
>>66223789I stopped hardcore tracking resources years ago and the games have only been more enjoyable for it.
>>66223789I wouldn't go so far as to say totally antithetical, but you're right in that they have many serious flaws as normally applied and badly undermine immersion.That said, they do work for some things, just not what they supposedly work for, that is, cutting down on bookkeeping (since you still have to track the die size and roll every turn it's a bit more of a pain in the ass to track, not less). In that sense they're a failed design; they don't do what was on the spec sheet, at all.What they ARE good for is introducing uncertainty. Applying them to things like torches, which are broadly predictable in terms of burn time, or arrows, which the character can easily count, makes no sense, but they can be fruitfully applied to wands, for example, if you don't like how mechanistic it feels that the wand basically has a clip and might as well have a counter on the side.>>66223951Don't let the cockchuggers get to you, bro. It's the price of doing business on 4chan, unfortunately.
>>66223951Have you tried salt on warm pοοp.
>>66224509Eat my entire asshole. It lasts 5 turns. Make sure you write it down.
>>66224554Takes 50 minutes to eat your ass? Lose some weight you fat fuck.
>>66224648if you spend an ass eating die you can do it
Well, I've finished DMT. Both weirdly relieved and kinda nervous. Ah well.Anyway I made a game and now I'm going to shill it and you can't stop me:https://cavegirlgames.blogspot.co.nz/2019/05/hello-mission-control-this-is-agent.html
>>66219981Yes, and also your smell is over powered
>>66226368Sounds a bit like the movie Inception. Pretty interesting.
>>66226368Sounds interesting, but it just sounds like a homebrew, not an actual product. Hopefully more comes up to warrant a buy.
>>66226368It's not really my cup of tea in terms of genres, but your description of the rules is interesting, and I do like to see somebody who hangs around here doing stuff (or *more* stuff, in your case), even if my sense of camaraderie with /osrg/ isn't what it used to be. So, uh, I guess: good luck.
Are there any rules for a bit more crunch in combat?Specifically, I had a player say that he wanted to parry and maneuver behind his enemy with the hope of gaining a bonus to his next attack. I can visualize what he was attempting, but I said that sort of thing is already incorporated in the attack roll vs AC...but it did get me wondering there are any rules out there for such a move?
>>66228916If your combat is sufficiently abstract, it can simply be visualized as part of the regular exchange. That's just the moment when your successful attack matters; especially if you go for the whole "one minute combat turns" shit that seems to be from the oldest of oldschool material.If you want more blow by blow combat, just ask the player to roll a second attack; if the second attack hits, then the special effect takes place. If only one attack hits, maybe the attack lands and deals half damage or just a regular attack instead of the special move, etc. Also, I would just consider letting it happen if the character was a high level Fighter with high dex, since the baseline for character competence increases based on their class and level. Or you can simply refuse the players request, and just tell them that this is a cool roleplaying moment but not represented in game rules.
>>66228916>Specifically, I had a player say that he wanted to parry and maneuver behind his enemy with the hope of gaining a bonus to his next attack.I'd probably make him a tad harder to hit (maybe +2*) and if his opponent missed him, he'd get +2 to-hit on his next attack, and maybe +2 damage as well.*About half the bonus to AC he'd get if he just defended without trying to set himself up. If that's only +2 in your game, then I'd only give your guy +1.
>>66228916This covers special attacks, but not really the particular instance you're bringing up...It's a good idea to base chance of success on your chance to hit (since your special attacks will be competing with regular ones, and using a different method could make them either definitively better or worse, meaning they either get used almost always are almost never). Since special attacks are usual more powerful than regular attacks, you can pair a d6 roll with a normal roll to-hit, ruling that you must pass both rolls to succeed.d6 target number (# for roll-under system / # for roll-over system):no roll necessary = roughly the same as an ordinary attack5 down / 2 up = slightly better than ordinary attack (20% better)4 down / 3 up = significantly better than ordinary attack (50% better)3 down / 4 up = twice as good as an ordinary attack (100% better)2 down / 5 up = three times as good as an ordinary attack (200% better)1 down / 6 up = six times as good as an ordinary attack (500% better)Thus, if you rule that disarming your foe is roughly as powerful as a normal attack, then just make a to-hit roll, with success indicating a successful disarm. If you want to disarm somebody like that *and* cause damage in the process, then it's obviously going to be twice as good as an ordinary blow (because you're doing ordinary blow damage as well as something you previously decided was equivalent in power to an ordinary blow), which would necessitate a 3 down (or 4 up) roll on a d6.What's slightly better than an ordinary attack and what's significantly better? Just use your best judgment based on the effects of the maneuver. Make a ruling and see how it plays. If it's too weak or too powerful, then adjust it the next time it happens. You are not obligated to be consistent. You do not have to come up with a rule that applies each and every time somebody is tripped. You are simply deciding on the way it works this one time, under these particular circumstances.
>>66227933>my sense of camaraderie with /osrg/ isn't what it used to beWhy not? I've only been following this thread for a few weeks, but it's pretty great other than the shitters you get in every general.
>>66228916Okay, let's look at this in a bit more detail and dissect what's going on here. The primary part i that the player is surrendering an attack this round in order to get a better one next round. Secondarily, he may be getting a bonus to his defense this round.In terms of balance, you could just move the player's attack to next round, giving him none this round, but 2 on the next one. Of course, it doesn't sound like he wants to have 2 attacks, but rather 1 extra-effective one, so just having 1 attack for double damage would yield the same average damage. Of course, making an attack later rather than sooner is usually a detriment, so this isn't looking like a very good option from the standpoint of mechanical balance.Giving the PC a limited bonus to his AC (maybe +1 or +2) on the round he parries could even things out though. That seems about right: boost your AC slightly this round and surrender your action, and next round you strike as normal but inflict double damage if you hit.Of course, there's an issue of narrative to consider. If the PC gets hit by his opponent despite his parry, it doesn't seem like he should still get a bonus to his attack. If you decide to take away his bonus if he gets hit, that means the bonus needs to be bigger (since it's not coming into play as often). One thing you could do to achieve this is to give a bonus to hit as well as to damage. So that maybe things could work out like this: +2 AC this round and surrender your action. If your opponent's attack misses you, your attack against him next round gets +2 to hit and does double normal damage. That may seem like a lot, but you're giving up an attack to get it, and it's negated if you get hit.
>>66229774What cesspool have you been hanging around in that the constant FOEGYG-shitposting doesn't get to you?
>>66229774I don't want to go off on a rant, but let's just say that /osrg/ was once much better.
>>66229785Another approach is not to take away the PC's attack but simply to have him hold it until after his opponent strikes. In that case, the only thing you're giving up is attacking first, and maybe +1 AC for the attack you're parrying, and +1 to-hit on your follow-up attack would be appropriate.If you lose your follow-up attack if you get hit, then you'd need to boost those numbers. Maybe +2 AC for the parry, then +2 to-hit and +2 damage.Whatever you do, you don't need to do a perfect job balancing things out, because you aren't making a universal rule for the game, and the next time a player attempts to do something similar you can tweak the numbers or use different rules entirely. (Also, if people repeatedly try to do tricky things in a fight, they become more predictable to enemies, and their maneuvers become less effective.)
>>66229719I think maybe you mean me?>>66228916I don't think there are rules, and there's a serious problem with this maneuver, which is that anyone who isn't menaced by another enemy will in fact just turn to face you as you circle; it's much faster and easier than the circling itself. I would not really allow such a move in a 1-on-1 fight unless the opponent creature was very, very slow or ungainly, not because it's OP but because it simply doesn't work. However, if the guy is already fighting one of your bros, moving to flank or hit him in the back is the best fucking thing you can do, a bread-and-butter tactic. This should be fairly automatic to do (since the outnumbered guy must face one of you or else put himself at worse risk from both) and grant the usual strike-from-flank or -behind benefits. The main remedy, in turn, is for the outnumbered to charge one enemy and try to put one of his opponents in the way of the other. This is hard, especially without exposing yourself to harm, but it can be done.
>>66210537You know, everyone was shitting on his article about letting players gamble (taking extra risks for extra rewards), but it's really not far off from the example for grappling that gygax did where you have all grapplers roll all their hit dice.It basically seems like as long as you keep the probabilities similar, it ends up just speeding up the process of combat and had the added bonus of also being more dramatically satisfying.
>>66207641I like Rotten Pulp, but he doesn't put much out anymore.
>>66230371This is the best fucking post about maneuvers and flanking ever. I like the smell of your pοοp and I like the look of the ass it came out of.
>>66230371>I don't think there are rules, and there's a serious problem with this maneuver, which is that anyone who isn't menaced by another enemy will in fact just turn to face you as you circle; it's much faster and easier than the circling itself.NAYRT but I was reading it as more general maneuvering and not literally "I block his attack, then walk around behind him". As GM, I try to give the benefit of the doubt to players on such things, and interpret them in the way that makes the most sense.
>>66230618That's how I was reading it too. I'm saying that working around someone is unfeasible in the course of normal fighting. The closest things I know of are thrusting on the pass to the inside and thrusting with a girata, both of which are rapier-specific techniques and dependent on the nature of that weapon – and neither is really a move around the guy, but rather voids of the body.
>>66230689My interpretation would be that he just isn't attacking straight-on, but moving diagonally forward and striking at his exposed flank.
“Parry and maneuver behind” anon here. I like all your suggestions and think they have good merit to use. I’ll have to play around and see which seems smoothest in my games. Another thing that got me thinking was watching the Brienne vs Hound fight of GoT. They swordfight, punch, kick, tackle, slam each other into boulders, maneuver, move through the crags. I wonder how to mechanically represent that type of cinematic combat without making it overly complex, but more than just DM narrating the fight as such.
>>66231272>swordfightAttack roll>punch Attack roll>kickAttack roll>tackleAttack roll>slam each other into bouldersAttack roll>maneuverFluff, everyone maneuvers in combat>move through the cragsMovement
>>66231373He said>more than just DM narrating the fight as such
Lemme ask about turn undead for a minute.I heard from this general that Turn Undead used to just be holding up a cross/holy symbol and it makes the undead creature unable to attack that character. Do it for three rounds in a row and the undead will run away.I really like this concept, but I have a few questions about it. Namely, why wouldn't characters do this every time? Should the undead get some kind of saving throw? Is there a limitation beyond just carrying the symbols around?
>>66231415three rounds is way too long. Most fights are over by the fourth round.>why wouldn't characters do this every time?They can, and they should. Turn Undead doesn't always work however, since you're still rolling for it.
>>66231415http://boggswood.blogspot.com/2014/08/turn-undead-are-we-getting-it-wrong.htmlThis post details the limitations in the version of the ability you're mentioning. Apparently it still requires a roll by the user, the undead might or might not get a saving throw, and the protection is only given fully to the person who held it up in the first place
>>66231415>I heard from this general that Turn Undead used to just be holding up a cross/holy symbolSounds like a fanfic. And even if it wasn't, there's a reason Arneson and Gygax decided to make a class-exclusive power.>>66231565That is literally detailing an exception that only applies to vampires.
>>66214679They create experiences different enough to make a comparison meaningless, but the latter will probably be more representative of the OSR, even if not necessarily great (random generation is best used with moderation)
>>66231272Once you're doing grappling, all bets are off. I've never seen a grappling system I was happy with, and I have trouble conceiving of one that isn't either silly or overly complicated.
>>66231652You've got it backwards. The bulk of the post is about the general cases and it has a note at the end about the rules for vampires, which are more lenient. The anon who asked didn't specify vampires
>>66231272Just do modified attack rolls for unusual moves.Grappling relies on slightly different set of skills and abilities than just normal weapon combat. Give more of a bonus for strength, for mass, and for certain advantages (like being a dwarf, short and squat is useful like a sumo wrestler).
I'm looking for Fire on the Velvet Horizon but don't see it on the trove. Anyone have it?
How do I run wilderness adventures? With a strong procedure, random encounter table and environmental/weather concern is it possible to run a fun adventure outdoors or will the party be blindly groping in the wilderness?
>>66231669How do you design a good dungeon?
>>66232078check the O-S-R thread in the PDF Share Thread
>>66232078It almost definitely is in Bytee's trove, probably not the old and busted ones in the OP. I couldn't fetch it from the good one within a couple minutes though so you'll be better served by looking for it on IRC. That's where I last downloaded it. Instructions are in a appropriately labelled image in the share thread.
>>66198731Lumbridge, Varrock, Falador, Al Kharid, Draynor, Edgeville, Port SarimI never had membership :(
>>66232275There's gotta be some reason the party's going out into the wilderness; otherwise, yes, they're just blindly groping, no matter how good your random generators.Ask them what they're after, or give them a reason yourself.
>>66232275What's the difference between a wilderness adventure and a hexcrawl?
Have some OC. Alien and alien environment generator for when your players mess with the fabric of space and time.
>>66234545You are a mega, mega faggot homo piece of shit for stealing my idea before my project is finished but thanks for the OC it's pretty good.
>>66234595When did you start drafting your idea, because I posted the original (very unfancy and unedited) version in this thread on Jan 2nd.Not that it's the most original concept in the world of course.
>>66231565>>66231652Boggs is a really dubious source because his reasoning is always super, super motivated. He's got some sort of pet fantasy theory that Arneson created every important part of D&D, that Arneson's original game was somehow purer and better and Gygax ruined it, and is obsessed with recovering this imaginary game. He's constantly trying to fix earlier dates for Blackmoor, has a theory nobody else credits that Blackmoor didn't use Chainmail -- against the direct testimony of Arneson himself -- because Chainmail is a Gygax product, etc.I'm pretty sure this psychology is literally described in mental health references but I can't remember what the term is. Either way, it's weird as hell.
Is Stars Without Number an okay system to run a 40k game in?
>>66232275>How do I run wilderness adventures?>>66232311>How do you design a good dungeon?These questions are way too broad for the scope of a 4chan thread to provide good answers to them. Benoist has a long thread on TheRPGsite about how to make a megadungeon, have a look at that.
Guys, what's a good post-apocalyptic OSR book? Looking for adventure ideas, loads of random tables, extensive equipment lists, not too extensive rules.
>>66229796I have one weird trick -See shitpost, scroll past, reply to something engaging.On topic - going out to buy some more dice today. What's the minimum set for B/X?
>>66237041For just you or for everybody at the table? I guess the latter is less of a concern these days. I mean, I guess you could make due with a single die of each type, though it would get really tedious when you rolled fireball damage. I'm trying to think... AD&D has a number of spells that require different kinds of dice, but I can't think of any B/X spells off the top of my head that don't use d6s. So you could probably make due with a handful of d6s, and one of the other dice (including a percentile die, or extra d10). As a player, I mean. I personally wouldn't want to go without two of each size (except the percentile die), just in case (though you can always roll the same die twice, I don't like to have to resort to that).As a DM, you have to contend with monster damage and monster hit points, and I generally like to have three of each die size, with a couple extra d6s and d8s thrown in. Anymore than that, and things start getting cluttered. Any less and you may have to reroll the same dice an obnoxious amount.
>>66237038Gamma World, Mutant Future
>>662370411d4, they’re not used much5d6, lets you cast a fireball or lightning bolt or whatever without rerolling individual dice4d8, for monster hit dice (if you generally roll for their HP, otherwise like 2d8)2d10, percentilexd12, does anyone even use these? I cut them out of my game4d20 so you can roll multiple attack rolls at a timeThese are just ballpark estimates of the bare minimum, I could be off, misremembering spells and whatnot.
>>66238040>xd12, does anyone even use these?Because they don't get a lot of use, I make a point to make a lot of tables 1d12. Rumours, treasure, random encounters, monster characteristics.
Is DCC as convoluted as I fear? My group wants to start playing an RPG again and they're interested in DCC, but I'm not familiar with the system. LotFP and BFRPG are about as complicated as I want to run.
>>66230506>it's really not far off from the example for grappling that gygax did where you have all grapplers roll all their hit dice.Got a source on this example? I like the sound of grappling rules that don't just boil down to a strength contest. Grappling is cool and I want to see it happen more.
>>66238040>xd12, does anyone even use these?For B/X, no, I don't think the game uses them at all. I like them, however, as they let you take anything made for d6, heavily expand the available design room, but at the same time easily maintain compatibility by simply doubling old modifiers. A D12 is still a large die that's easy to read at the table, though. It's pretty sweet.
>>66212436I haven't actually played it, but try describing the problem maybe? It doesn't seem like it's played in here very much
>>66238579http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2013/06/on-original-grapple-rule.htmlThere's also a lot written on the internet modifying/simplifying this rule. It seems like a pretty popular one.
>>66231272Cavegirl's rules on dueling, I think, are a cool way to introduce some of this stuff. Basically, when you have two characters fighting, they get a few combat options they pick secretly at the start of each round: Push, Parry, and Feint.>Push: aggressive attack, bonus to damage, "beats" Feint>Parry: defensive attack, bonus to AC, beats Push>Feint: sneaky attack, bonus to hit, beats ParryEach option "beats" another. For example, if one duelist pushes and the other feints, the one who pushes gets the bonus to damage, but the one who feinted gets nada because push beats feint.The neat part, I think, comes from how the options don't just beat each other, but they also get bonuses, so you might have a nonarbitrary reason to pick, say, "Parry" if you're low on health. (But if your opponent knows that, you have to think about what they might predict!)It doesn't really go into the grappling stuff (so, tackles or slams) but since they're rather abstract, you could rule that hitting the other guy with a sucker punch (as opposed to your sword) might count as a kind of "feint," thus giving you a bonus to hit -- unless the other fellow anticipates that you're going to be sneaky and hits you first!http://cavegirlgames.blogspot.com/2018/06/duels-in-osr.html
>>66238366absolutely basedthe d12 is my favorite die, I unironically love how it rolls and wish I had more chances to use it
>>66198731>What are the nations in your setting like?The campaign's set in the remnants of a once strong and centralized kingdom that fractured a century or so ago after the last king died without a trueborn heir. His brothers each carved out a piece of the kingdom for themselves, and what was once a united kingdom is now five, though they're kingdoms in name only and are more like city-states than anything.The concept of the nation doesn't exist yet, and all of the city-states speak more or less the same language. Culturally it's very similar to Bretonnia from Warhammer, with the nobility being obsessed with the ideals of chivalry and knighthood, though it's a lighter take on the subject. The peasantry isn't quite as oppressed, the nobility not nearly as stupid, and there's far more social mobility than Warhammer has it.
>>66239187I like that. Its a good excuse to have a relevant unifying culture and language across multiple locations, while showing the fracturing kingdom into city states might signal to players that they can carve out their own piece of the pie as well.
>>66237038Other Dust. It's the same rules as Stars Without Number, just post-apocalyptic.
Are there any OSR games that have no dedicated caster classes? I've had a mind to try for a more low-magic (or at least magic that's more subtle than fireballs and the like) game one of these days but I feel like limiting player options to Thief and Fighter would end up being kind of boring and would go against the tone that OSR is supposed to capture.One idea I had was making it so everyone can use magic, it's just that magic is more based around rituals and the rare magical item rather than spontaneous casting, but again I'm not sure how to implement that without making every character feel the same.
>>66198731Who is the guy in the picture? With the gem eyes?I've seen him in all the old material but I don't know who he is
>>66239466If your game doesn't have casters it's not OSRthem's the breaks
>>66239562>Who is the guy in the picture? With the gem eyes?That's the lizard king, Gem Morrison.
>>66239678Well damn.I know 2nd Edition was big on historical settings that didn't have magic at all, and maybe kits will give enough choice for players to be satisfied?
>>662397652e's historical settings were really bad though. A lot of self-indulgent play-acting bait.
>>66239466Cut the cleric, merge features of the thief and MU, cut down the spell list and heavily restrict what spells are available, possibly down to ONLY utility spells that don’t make thief skills redundant, then make thief skills explicitly magical. Let the fighter keep all of his shit. That’s hopefully a good starting point.
>>66239796>cut the most useful class and turn the second most useful class into the most useless class
>>66239844That’s basically what he’s asking for, yes
>>66239466I don't think that OSR is structured very well for a setting without casters. Maybe play something like RuneQuest / BRP or Barbarians of Lemuria?
>love for d12sThis pleases me. This is probably going to sound highly autistic but I've always thought the d12 is the perfect die from a rolling perspective. d20s have small faces and won't stop rolling; the d12 has nice, big faces that accomodate chunky numbers, and it rolls just the right amount.
>>66240128My problem with the d12 is precisely that it rolls too much. And also that I basically need to invent uses for it which means they basically just take space in my dice bag. Relegating the small handful of d12 rolls to other dice lets me carry extras of other dice instead.
>>66240208>My problem with the d12 is precisely that it rolls too much. This. Most d12s are considerably more rolly than d20s, and they also do this thing where they change direction. Precision d12s are worlds better than the normal, tumbled ones though.
>>66238734Bizarre that nobody in that discussion seems to realize that the rule is for Chainmail Mass Combat and not for the ACS and that's why it never showed up again.
>>66240468Still a good rule outside of Chainmail though
>>66239466This is sort of my game, but it's probably too high fantasy for your taste. You could just write it up to be less magical at your leisure though.
Hey guys I need some help. Reaction table. I like and I use it. But sometimes I lack creativity, I'm pressed in time, I am tired, etc. etc. Is there any good resources out there, ideally sub-tables, where you can get more juice out of it to get some fresh interpretation of the results of the 2d6. Thanks.
>>66198731>What are the nations in your setting like?Ireland, Scotland, Wales, England, France, Italy, Spain, and North Africa lmao*dabs*
Here's you low-magic OSR>Fighters are unchanged>Thieves lose all skills except Pick Pockets, Hear Noise, and Disable Traps>Magic-Users cannot use magic. If they talk about magic publicly then 10-100 peasants will arrive to lynch them>Clerics have no spells and cannot turn or command undead>there are no magic items>there are no monsters except menThat'll be $1.99 + tip
>>66241652That's not low-magic. That's no-magic, retard.
>>66241763Beggars can't be choosers. You take my shitbrew and you'll like it.
>>66241652Speaking of thieves, how useless are 1st level thieves in b/x? They have like a 10% chance of succeeding any of their skills
>>66241763It's time for you to experience the magic of a warm pοop in your mouth.
>>66241854Fellow trash connoisseur I see.
>>66239466Just pick one of the various conan based games. They all more or less support ritual casting and spells which are more about having the right ritual ingredients (sometimes blood magic or even human sacrifice), the right casting conditions (the stars must be right!), and right casting location (some sort of magic circle or magical leyline).Plus you get to utilize S&S art, which is the tightest shit.
>>66242040You're not wrong. It amuses me how much old-school D&D derived from both Tolkien, Howard, and Lieber and yet D&D really wouldn't handle any of those settings particularly well out of the box because of how necessary casters are to the game.
>>66241819Totally useless. If you want their skills to be useful then the whole system needs an overhaul. LotFP’s specialist is alright for this, or you can just boost all skills by 10-20%. Some also treat thief skills as a sort of saving throw in case you fail to be careful and use the skill when you should, or you can use a thief skill IN ADDITION to using the same mechanic others would receive (percentage chance to hide in shadows as normal, and also a 1-in-6 chance to avoid detection, aka the surprise chance).There’s plenty of options.
>>66242040>>66242198It's a fucking game, no one wants to collect 100 rat asses (or 100 period discharges from 70-year olds) to cast invisibility.
>>66242283The fuck I don't want to collect 100 rat asses for a spell.
>>66242283Calm down retard, nobody's taking away your magic missile.
>>66242283>imagine have such shit taste you can't appreciate material components
>>66242198>because of how necessary casters are to the game.No class is "necessary". A group could have all of a single class with any class if they want. It just informs the DM as to the type of adventures the group can go on.
>>66242040>>66242198>>66242283>>66242355>>66242380You all have a critical lack of imagination.
>>66242559Shut up, furfag. The reason D&D didn't use "genre-authentic" spellcasting is because it's boring as shit. Might as well delete spellcasters entirely as a PC choice.
>>66242040>the right casting conditions (the stars must be right!)But this doesn't work because you guys are lazy and don't track time. You're like Jeff "uh roll some dice and the stars are right i guess" Rients.
>>66242665This. Genre magic would basically be for downtime or dungeon prep only, other than the odd trick. Magic as it is in D&D is actually usable while playing - what some might call “gameable”.
>>66242665>>66242761>>66242795This is some seriously embarrassing samefagging.
>>66242761Who? sorry, don't care who your boyfriend is
>>66242795>Genre magic would basically be for downtime or dungeon prepAh yes, just like in Earthsea or that little known gem the Dying Earth by Vance. Especially poignant observation because you NEVER see wizards in Conan doing anything without Batman levels of prep time
>Diversity in the OSR is a good th-
>>66242665I'll be over here enjoying some actual good magic systems while you flounder around with your shit then, lmao
>>66242899That's like 50 cents at a print shop who cares
>>66242981>trivialising the work of femme game designersGo back to /pol/
>>66243046>femmeWhat even is this? Why not just say "woman" or "female"?
>>66243337to talk about OSR and OSR-related topics
>>66243046desu, that somewhat sucks. Had good art.
>>66243046They took down the 3rd printing of Swords and wizardry? Finally some good news in OSR
>>66243046Almost like words have consequences. Next time think what you say.
>>66243337Asking a question like that is like challenging the abyss to a staring contest. Best to just say yikes and move on.
>>66242761The hell I don't track the stars movement. I have a spreadsheet for each planet's position during each day of the month for a 5 year cycle
>>66243506I think the position of all your data is off by 90 degrees.
>>66242040>>66243506Doing it right anons.>a spreadsheetSame. I have a complete lunar calendar for all 3 moons, as well as other phenomena such as eclipses, comets, meteor showers, what constellations are visible and where, etc.It's not just useful for obvious reasons, but also to determine ambient night light, and when certain monsters come out, or tribals perform raids, etc.
>>66242899It better than having you around
So all this talk about low magic settings has gotten me thinking. What if we reduced the power of spells (see pic for weakened B/X spells) and maybe combined it with a slower spell progression for a moderately low magic game? Magic-users could then be boosted a bit to compensate for having weaker spells: maybe they can use d6 weapons and wear leather armor.
>>66243539Sorry, I have a low intelligence
>>66243899Forgot the dice
>>66243869Oh, the spells in blue remain unchanged.Here's a sample slowed spell progression, where you gain a new level of spells every 3 levels rather than every 2.
>>66243919Low intelligence indeed. It’s okay anon, we all have our brainlet moments.
>>66243869It depends on the spell. Some utility spell, like Hold Portal, I wouldn't change them. See Conan the Destroyer: there is a fight between two mages on a hold portal spell, and it's freaking awesome IMO. But IDK if I'm ready to get rid of effective combat spell and such. Maybe try it out and come back to us ?
>>66239466This isn't casterless but they are definitely toned down
>>66239791And you know because you've played them, not because you're erecting strawmen to support your claims 2e isn't OSR, the easiest contrarian shitpost seen in this general.
>>66245421I didn't say 2e isn't OSRI said the historical splats were trashYou don't need to play every trash splat to know it isn't get
>>66236452Excellent recommendation, thank you.
Can DCs work well in an OSR game?
>>66241652Why would Thieves lose lockpicking? I don't get it.
>>66245666It's a shitpost. Also he's almost certainly in the "Thief skills are le supernatural" meme camp that should be ignored and disregarded every time they rear their ugly heads.
How the hell should I run traps and thief skills in BECMI? Do you still have thieves describe exactly how they disable traps along with rolling their remove trap skill or is it something they can use to bypass roleplaying?
>>66245733But Anon, I too am in that camp. The evidence is clear that that's how they were meant to play. It's just that even under those assumptions, lockpicking is clearly one of the *non*-supernatural skills, certainly at least as mundane as disarming traps.
>>66241652No hit diceNo classes either, anything other than fighter is magic. Everyone has 1 hpNever level up. Levels are magic.Sometimes npcs are wizards or shit.
>>66245747If they describe it aptly enough, then no roll should be needed. Sometimes there's no obvious solution and a roll is called for.
>>66245747I agree with this guy: >>66245785 but you could also use that analysis which the guy produced on... I think Stackexchange of all places?, and that Norman incorporated into OSE, where a careful reading implies that the Thief skill is for detecting and disarming small traps on chests and the like, whereas pure play is required for large ("room") traps.
>>66245877That makes a lot of sense and it is a useful distinction for play.
>>66245770Sometimes the thing you have in your mouth is a warm poop.
>>66246022Sometimes the poop you poop in your mouth is a warm poop.
>>66245998I went ahead and found it for you, so you could read the rationale yourself. Here:https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/108477
Rolled 16 (1d20)[DM stares at you]
Need a one off dungeon for a single player, with possible hirelings. Any suggestions? I will just make one up on the fly if I have to.
Rolled 6 (1d20)>>66246244I roll to save against Stare Rape. (I assume that since this is a fate worse than death, the Poison/Death Ray save applies.)
>>66246308Any of the Trilemma adventures should work. http://blog.trilemma.com/search/label/adventureI liked Full Dark Stone. There's also a KS up if you want to get a fancy book.
>>66246328You suffer a very long stare, withering your sense of self down to a stalk. You feel reduced, demeaned, and ashamed. There are four others around the table looking at you now. The room is silent. A doorway to the east leads outside. The room also contains board games and puddins.
>>66246437Hey that was quick, thanks a lot. This thread is awesome.
>>66246165Thanks. I think all character classes should have access to unmodified level 1 thief skills (excepting climb sheer surfaces)
>>66246468Sometimes it's a bit shit, but so it goes.
>>66246468Going to do Haunting Of Hainsley Hall from that blog. Little man has always been into spoopy stuff, I blame GC Luigi's Mansion. He's going to love it.
>>66246589That makes me happy. I wrote that one. Let me know how it goes. It's not a particularly conventional dungeon but the playtest was a lot of fun.
>>66246556Sometimes you ask for a tootsie roll and you get a warm pooop in the mouth.
>>66246649You really need to shop at a different candy store. That's on you.
>>66246619Oh, you're the Tomb Of The Serpent King guy. Well done, I can't wait to run it. I'll do a quick play report on here after the session tomorrow.
>>66246692That I am. Hope it goes well. If all else fails, add a group of unscrupulous thieves scoping the place for use as a hideout or a spot to bury their ill-gotten gains (or latest victim).
>>66246731I'm thinking Spectres from B/X Essentials might be overpowered for a single low level player.
>>66246791Yeah, are Ghosts in there? If not, AD&D ghosts work pretty well. Just drop the possession angle (unless that seems fun). I usually run damage as "either 1d8 cold damage or target ages 2d20 years, target's choice".
I noticed that there are good & bad source of magic icons in hexographer? Was this a Mystara thing or were they ever explained in depth?
Any osr books have any stats for dinosaurs?
>>66220295Should I post the Opossum class?
>>66247375I'm not opossd to it
>>66247348The Monster Manual has a bunch. The Rules Cyclopedia has general dinosaur types (Aquatic: Small, Large and Armored; Land Carnivore: Small, Large and Flying; Land Herbivore: Small, Medium and Large).
>>66218516Octopi>gotta stay moist, or something>not very fast or durable>highly intelligent>can change color and squeeze into tight spaces>eight (8) (VIII) arms to hold items/shields with, count'em
>>66246856Aren't AD&D Ghosts even more hardcore than Spectres, like several times higher HD and shit? Maybe I'm confusing shit but I remember the rules for them being absolutely demented.
>>66246791Spectres are basically supposed to be Nazgûls. (Originally Wraiths were, but then those kind of became a more standard-issue spoop and they had to go one bigger for Ringwraiths. I think the pre-Tolkien-purge editions of the LBBs make reference to this.)
>>66247578I'm not sure. Sometimes I get confused and end up with a warm pooop in my mouth.
>>66247607>WIGHTS: Barrow Wights (per Tolkien)>SPECTRES: These monsters have no corporeal body which makes them totally impervious to all normal weaponry (but can be struck by all magical weapons), including silver-tipped arrows. (The Nazgul of Tolkien now fall into this category rather than as Wraiths as stated in CHAINMAIL.)>>66247578Yes
>>66247375I already wrote these up with a Raccoon, but I'm not opposed to see how you'd do an Opossum.
>>66247578The progression of incorporeal undead goes:Poltergeist (FF)ShadowWraithGroaning SpiritSpectreApparition (FF)Ghost
>>66247607Nazgûl is a lich, Bozo. Here of old was the witch-realm of Angmar. Who's the witch-king? That's right. King fucking lich. They couldn't use the word witch because it's fucking gay. A witch is a lich. Nazgûl are lich.
>>66245650Yes, why not? There's functionally no difference between rolling a d20 and meeting an arbitrary number than there is rolling a d6 and doing the same.For consistency I would probably convert all previous d6 rolls to d20 rolls though. And it does make sense what with attack rolls already being resolved by d20 rolls.
>>66247809I'd not thought of this but you're really correct
>>66247348World of the Lost by LotFP
>>66247809Gygax disagrees. Go peddle your fanfic somewhere else.>>66247801You forgot Haunts, the Kobolds of incorporeal undead.
>>66247392>>66247713>>66248295OpossumanRequirements: Minimum CON 9, Maximum CHA 12Prime Requisite: DEXHit Dice: 1d6Maximum Level: 8Allowed Armor: Any appropriate to size, including shieldsAllowed Weapons: Appropriate to sizeLanguage: Alignment language, Common, MarsupialishOpossumem are small bipedal marsupials. They are cowardly and will often attempt to flee or "play possum" when outnumbered or near death.AbilitiesCombat: Opossumen may use any type of armor, though it must be tailored to their small size. Similarly, they may use any weapon which is appropriate to their stature. They cannot use longbows or two-handed weapons.Defensive Bonus: Because they are so small, opossumen have a lower Armor Class (-2 bonus) when attacked by creatures greater than human sized.Minor addition:Offalovore: Opossumen never go hungry so long as organic material is lying around. Rotting meat, decaying plants, string, paper, and all manner of meals await the Opossuman and his legendary lack of a discerning palate. Opossumen may consume such matter rather than rations and survive in conditions that would fell lesser heroes.Weakness to Constructs: Opossumen must make a save vs. Paralysis at -2 when confronted with any construct, golem, vehicle, or large mechanical object traveling at any speed toward the Opossuman. If the save is successful, the Opossuman resists his natural urge to stand stock still and let the object roll over him. If the save fails, the Opossuman is rigid with fright and hisses ineffectually as he is crushed under the object or golem, and takes a number of damage dice equal to the number of hit dice of the construct, or the structure points of the vehicle (if any). Rolling traps deal their normal damage as indicated. If reduced below -4 hit points, the Opossuman is not simply dead, but has instead been reduced to reddish, foul smelling paste.This was created by my two friends as a joke.
Is Outdoor Survival in the trove ?