/osrg/ OSR General - Times Best Sellers Edition

>>51633287
What I want it to be? REH Conan.

What it ends up being? Tales From the Tavern podcast

File: TheJabberwocky.jpg (719KB, 1065x1600px) Image search: [Google]

719KB, 1065x1600px

>>51633287
>What piece of fiction is most like the games you play?
Alice in Wonderland right now probably, since I'm running A Red & Pleasant Land. But I've also realized that I have a much easier time DMing dungeons with weird and impossible landscapes and bizarre characters rather than classic square dungeons with hobgoblins and orcs, so I think there's a bit of Alice in all my games.

File: Feelium suicide.png (32KB, 337x338px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 337x338px

Does anybody else get really jelly when they read other people's adventures, DM guides, or blogs?

How can they create, write, and present ideas so well? I honestly feel really bad about it. Why can't I be that good at this hobby? How do they even make it sound and feel so genuine and good? It's like a mystery that escapes me. It pisses me off.

>>51633456
Yes, a little bit. I think the two main reasons that they're good at it is:
1. They're old and have been in the hobby for a very long time, so they've perfected their art
2. They're actually incredibly hard working

I'm still working on both of those things myself.

Any tips on starting a megadungeon? I've got ideas for set pieces floating around and all the stocking tables and such ready but I can't get past the initial roadblock - don't have any kind of theme or background thought out and can't conceptualize opening rooms.

Just a few characteristics - successive generations of use from ancient civilization ala Cave of Thracia to more modern dungeons; mostly dungeon with some wider city ruins sections, minimal cave formations; small goblin village/market on second level; adventurer's boom town outside dungeon.

>>51634206
Is the ancient civilization stuff at the top and the modern stuff at the bottom, or other way around? Also, isn't that whole design a theme in itself?

File: 1467223743624.png (3MB, 3959x1733px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3959x1733px

>>51634206
>don't have any kind of theme
A mega dungeon is too big for a theme.
>or background thought
The Mythic Underworld as an anology for spooks and primal fear is pretty popular.
>and can't conceptualize opening rooms.
Dungeons should IMMEDIATELY branch out. First room should have 5-8 exits, side entrances should have 2-4.

>I've got ideas for set pieces floating around
Do as I do, and have set pieces floating around.

https://boards.fireden.net/tg/thread/51243124/#51244051
Wormholes make great 'instant dungeons' without a need for a purpose.
They're also dungeon segment to use as a connection between other parts of the dungeon.
The Ruins are above the Catacombs are above the Haunted Underground River system.
But the catacombs contain an Earth Wormhole (connected to the Tomb 2 days east (which also has a Fire Wormhole), and to an Evil Cult's Stronghold on the Plane of Earth).
The Haunted Rivers have a Water Wormhole (to Sunken Ruins off the nearby coast, to the Derro City 4 miles down, and to a Cursed Temple on the Plane of Water) and an Air Wormhole (to the nearby mountains, and to a village on the Plane of Air, and to a Windswept Valley full of Thunderbirds on the Plane of Air).

>>51634206
>don't have any kind of theme

Don't have one, have several. Megadungeons need themed sectors or strata to keep them interesting. Think like a theme park. Adventureland and Tomorrowland are different themes but clearly Disney.

File: 1922 - Francis Crease - Arabesque Trees.jpg (1MB, 1208x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1208x1920px

>>51633287
>What piece of fiction is most like the games you play?
C.S. Forester filtered through a strong dose of Clark Ashton Smith and L. Frank Baum. Add Lieber, Harryhausen, and Howard for spice - and to be honest, a little too much Lin Carter for anyone's good.

>>51633456
>How can they create, write, and present ideas so well?
I write. A fucking lot. I've written 6,000 words in one blitzing 7-hour session before. Most days it's only 500 words or so, which really sounds like more than it is - it's usually about an hour of pecking at the keys and listening to music after something inspires me.

Then I trim out all the useless shit. Then I run it past my wife, best friend/bro/GM partner in crime, and brothers for feedback. Then I sit down and read it to myself and reword any bits that don't feel organic. Then I condense it to post here. After that I expand it back to put on the blog.

Usually by the time I actually put it up on my blog it's been through 4-5 sets of eyes and heavily-edited. When I just dribble onto the page it looks like shit. Like, a scrawled mess of dirty words and meaningful "trigger sentences" that are there to remind me of important concepts as I work (otherwise I get lost in long rambling asides and never get any fucking work done). Being able to hyperlink is such a blessing, you have no idea.

On the other side of the coin, I've also been writing in some form or another for almost thirty years. Read Strunk and White. Read "How to Lie With Statistics" and "How to Write Like a Sociology Professor" for style tips.
Hell, just READ. Good writing gets under your skin; I love Twain's slangy familiarity, Vance and CAS's arched-eybrow density and sonorous word-forms, Baum's utter fucking insanity filtered through the eyes of a Good Girl who has no goddamned idea how much danger she's in. Howard is a racist git, but by God he can get your blood pumping. So can Forester.

Out of characters, so I'll give some short style tips in the next post.

>>51635662
>Think like a theme park. Adventureland and Tomorrowland are different themes but clearly Disney.

This, try to keep things changed up in feeling between the different sections. Also, warring factions within a dungeon never get old.

File: frank_frazetta_sacrifice.jpg (274KB, 962x1200px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 962x1200px

>>51636919
Tips:
1) Avoid "that", and especially "the fact that". They work as speed bumps in a sentence and encourage sloppy writing. Sometimes you need it (No, it's >that< thingy over >there<). Most of the time you can do without, though, and the sentence is better for it. If you need to explain something there is ALWAYS a better way. "Because" and "actually" can usually go too.

2) Never trust a spellchecker. Just don't. If a word feels weird, it's okay to look it up.

3) Avoid repeating the same words/phrases constantly. I do this quite a lot* in my drafts, which means it catches on my eyes when I'm looking at other people's writing.

4) Cliches are okay. Seriously. Just don't overuse them. They're like leeches; valid options for certain problems, but too many and the suck will overwhelm the best of us..

5) I prefer a friendly, breezy but semi-academic style when I'm talking to the reader. I shift to a hard, scientific and precise style for rules, and use asides to add in any elaborations or other extra information the reader may not need. On that note, SEPARATE THE GODDAMNED RULES AND FLUFF. When I'm using your work, I don't give two shits about the backstory (I already memorized that) but I can't work with the stats if I can't find the fucking things.

6) If your sentences take up entire paragraphs, you can probably break them down some. Check to see if there are similar points or ideas being made in other paragraphs. They might be worth fusing, which will help make the flow of ideas in your work more organic.

*I used "a lot" five times in this post before I went back and reviewed it.
And "because" three more.

File: fr_fuks_sake.jpg (36KB, 328x281px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 328x281px

So....I started playing AD&D last week. Holy shit does it suck. I know this is OSR central but I like OSR games, I just hate AD&D. First off, the sheer number of dumb-ass crap modifiers I had to write down everywhere, were just annoying. THAC0 is absolute wank. It is completely backwards, I don't know how Gary Gygax continued to make editions of AD&D without figuring this out. It's like inventing a back-wheel-steering motorcycle over and over, and not realizing how fucking retarded it is. First off it means you need to know a monster's AC to attack it, completely ruining the mystery of the creature's stats. The rulebook is written in legalese and I had to re-read a section 2 to 3 times to understand what the fuck it was saying and make sure I wasn't confusing what I was reading with some other part. Also no one in my group has any fucking clue where the ranged weapon damages are written down in the Player's Handbook, which is actually well-organized even if the writing is abominable. Wizards are weak as hell, and now I understand caster supremacy in 3.5... the game was written by butthurt wizardfags who were sick of being second-rate citizens. Gary Gygax had a full hard-on for fighters because he wished he could be one instead of a fat-ass. Fuck him. Are there any games that have the good aspects of OSR (simplicity, rolling for hit points, low damage, lack of feats / skills, high-lethality, rolling for stats with stats not being the end-all-be-all of your character and more a soft determination of who they are) without these stupid fucking 1950s war game rules that are written in lawyer-speak?

>>51637149
Have you tried AD&D 2e?

>>51637234

If THAC0 is in the book, he's using 2e.

>>51637149
>Are there any games that have the good aspects of OSR (simplicity, rolling for hit points, low damage, lack of feats / skills, high-lethality, rolling for stats with stats not being the end-all-be-all of your character and more a soft determination of who they are) without these stupid fucking 1950s war game rules that are written in lawyer-speak?
...B/X and a bunch of retroclones? How do you know what OSR is but don't know the OSR games that exist?

Other than that, I agree that AD&D is a pretty big mess. The most use I've personally found from AD&D is scouring the DMG for ideas. It's is definitely allowed to be discussed in these generals but I don't think you'll find that many anons interested in discussing it.

>>51637270
Except b/x is even worse. Half the rules are in chainmail and daggers are the best weapon to use because everything does the same fucking damage. Also ability scores are completely meaningless except as XP gain, the books are horridly formatted. Even moldvay basic just sucks ass. I liked Lamentations of the Flame Princess up until I read the race-as-class shit was in there and I dropped it like hot coals.

>>51636919
>>51637090

It's generic advice, but it's good advice. Thanks.

>>51637280
Alright, but you could always just remove the demihumans if you don't like them. I'm pretty sure even the creator, Raggi, does that in his home games. If you want race-and-class, you could always check out Basic Fantasy RPG.

>>51637149
I think THACO is absolutely fine and AD&D is great because you don't have like 100 modifiers to remember. The way for your players to work out if they hit something is to deduct their THAC0 from their d20 roll. Example, say I am a player and we're fighting a bunch of orcs. My turn comes up I roll 15 on d20 roll I minus that with my THAC0 (which is 20) I get 5 meaning now I know I can hit AC 5 or better. It's simple.

Pft who even plays a single-class human wizard? You either play an elf fighter/mage or you hit level 5 or 10 and jump into wizard.

File: dnd editions.png (229KB, 911x1470px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 911x1470px

>>51637280

No, not OD&D, Basic. Dude, please review pic related.

>>51637318
that looks like a good game, thanks. forgot i had that pdf.

>>51637380
>I think THACO is absolutely fine and AD&D is great because you don't have like 100 modifiers to remember.

Except you have that in 5e as well.

Does anyone have/ know where I can find hackmaster pdfs?

File: finalfantasyi_monster_gigas_ff1_by_yoshitaka_amano.jpg (129KB, 741x1000px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 741x1000px

>>51637234
D-Did you... not read his post?
>which is actually well-organized
>even if the writing is abominable.

>>51637783

I think he's trying to bait us. THAC0's not in the 1e book, but Gygax has nothing to do with 2e; "half the rules" of B/X are not in Chainmail -- B/X is complete in and of itself, OD&D has the option of using Chainmail, but does not require it.
The guy's complaints are all over the place.

File: Benjamin_faces_off_against_Flamerus_Rex.jpg (401KB, 1237x982px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1237x982px

>>51637783
I kinda spaced out because of the all the buzzwords and bad formatting.

File: Amano_Chimera.jpg (154KB, 1000x982px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1000x982px

>>51637149
>Wizards are weak as hell, and now I understand caster supremacy in 3.5...
>Gary Gygax had a full hard-on for fighters because he wished he could be one instead of a fat-ass.
Surprisingly accurate. https://youtu.be/7UjXi1HKjms

>>51637826
Sounds more like he doesn't know what he's talking about.
At least he seems interested in learning?

File: M2M.jpg (203KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1000x662px

>>51637280
You're talking about LBB, but whatever.
>Half the rules are in chainmail
Pic related is in CHAINMAIL. Also like 3 paragraphs on morale rules. That's it. The rest is in the LBBs.

And needing a separate game for some rules was even semi-excusable at the time.
D&D was originally intended as a CHAINMAIL supplement, to expand CHAINMAIL campaigns.
Where most session in the campaign were for CHAINMAIL.

>and daggers are the best weapon to use
Two-handed Swords are the best weapon, actually.
>because everything does the same fucking damage.
Everything does the same damage because some things make more strikes in a single minute (a combat round).
Because certain weapons hit more often, weapons deal different 'average damage'.

>Also ability scores are completely meaningless except as XP gain
Strength is Fighting-Man aptitude (stronger dudes hit harder even with less training).
Intelligence is Magic-User aptitude (smarter dudes learn more even with less to work with).
Wisdom (Cleric aptitude) has a last minute write-up* because Clerics were a last minute addition.
*Wisdom rating will act much as does that for intelligence.
Dexterity, Constitution, and Charisma actually do things.

>up until I read the race-as-class shit was in there and I dropped it like hot coals.
Race-as-class is something of a sacred cow, but it made sense initially.
Every race had a class (Fighting-Man for Man). Magic-Users were psuedo-Human. Contemporary MUs were...
Uh, Merlin (half-devil who lives backwards in time), Gandalf (not!Angel), and like 50 demi-gods from various mythoi.

It got silly when Clerics were added at the last minute.
If you're doing multiple archetypes for a race, you should do multiple archetypes fro several races,
maybe something like: Fighting-Man, Magic-Man, Templar-Man, Scout-Elf, Sorcerer-Elf, Fighting-Dwarf, Scout-Hobbit, Thief-Hobbit.
But there is such a thing as a 'stereotypical Elf.' Codifying races into archetypes isn't a bad thing.

Halflings level cap at 8 is too low, what should be the max level for halflings? 10, 11, 12 or 13? Remember human classes caps at 14

>>51638392
8 is fine. If you *really* want them to get a Stronghold, give them Name Level benefits at 8.

>>51638425
>If you *really* want them to get a Stronghold, give them Name Level benefits at 8
No, strongholds are a level 9 thing, my autism cant let them get one level earlier.

I'll take your answer as a 9, but I really think they should at least go to 10th level

>>51638503
>I'll take your answer as a 9,
Fine, but little guys cap at 8 HD.

>>51638572
>Fine, but little guys cap at 8 HD.
Of course not, every class caps at 9 HD, no exception.

>>51638392
Abolish level caps entirely.

File: D&D Masters DMs Book-500x500.jpg (59KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x500px

>>51638631
Mystics get 16 HD.

>>51638646
>Abolish level caps entirely.
There always should be a max level, I dont want characters to get to immortal level

>>51638659
First
>B/X master race

Second, mystics have 9 HD in the RC

File: Mystic.jpg (160KB, 964x1047px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 964x1047px

>>51638674
And they had 16 HD in BECMI.

File: Mystic.jpg (55KB, 456x728px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 456x728px

Wrong image, sorry.

>>51638664
I mean for demihumans. Capping off level at some point is just good sense.

I get that they're part of the "experience" of old school games, and they're a mechanism for explaining how demi-humans don't take over the world, but they were a half-cocked idea from the get go, and they commit that worst of sins of making experience and level actual world features rather than game mechanics that can be ignored in the background.

>>51638912
I think caps are fine, as I dont want elves to be full fighters and wizards, or dwarves to be just fighters but better

>>51638939
Well then knock yourself out man. I just think it would be the most effective way to answer your problem with halflings.

>I don't want elves to be full fighters and wizards

Up their experience requirements at late levels when the differences become glaring.

>fighters but better

Make fighters better.

Been playing LotFP and DCC the past few years. Considering going back to basics (literally B/X) for my next campaign. Run it by the book and play through tsr modules of the era.

Is it worthwhile to do so? Or are the modern updates from retroclones necessary fixes to old problems?

File: CouldNotParse.png (40KB, 346x358px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 346x358px

>>51639102
>to old problems?
To what?

File: XP Demihuman Alt (Basic D&D).png (60KB, 616x995px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 616x995px

>>51638392
Personally, I think that demihuman experience progression should be adjusted so that they are more level with humans, and then an XP cap should be put in place (under a million works pretty well, in my opinion--meaning 999,999 would be the cap). That way, classes that are balanced by more quickly gaining levels don't get screwed in the end by being limited to the same level as all the other classes. But if you're keeping everything else the same, I guess I probably cap halflings at 12 or 13--somewhere a bit lower than fighters and equal to or slightly above dwarves. It doesn't need to be perfect, especially not as thieves are effectively capped at the same level as wizards.

>>51638646
>>51638912
While I generally think that caps are a stupid idea, the caps for dwarves and elves are about right in B/X, assuming you using the de facto cap of 14th level for human classes. If there's a problem, it's that dwarves and elves reach their caps too quickly.

>>51638985
>Make fighters better.
What if we add feats for fighters?

>>51639209
>Personally, I think that demihuman experience progression should be adjusted so that they are more level with humans
When I say "more level with humans" I mean "more balanced in terms of power", which actually means being more off in terms of their actual level. Slow demihuman progression a bit, basically.

>>51639145
that's what old mate is asking
he doesn't know if there are specific problems, but wants to find out before they become a problem in game.

>>51639209
>I think that demihuman experience progression should be adjusted so that they are more level with humans,
I didn't understand

>and then an XP cap should be put in place (under a million works pretty well, in my opinion--meaning 999,999 would be the cap
Great idea

>>51638912
>Capping off level at some point is just good sense.

If you cap level at all then you need to recognize that the reason some characters progress faster than others is that a level has varying value based on what class you have, which means that more powerful classes should stop levelling sooner, while weaker ones should be able to level up higher to match them. All classes at cap should be roughly equal in power. Except halflings because fuck them hairy-footed hillbillies, mirite? J/K

Those of you who run LotFP, do you ever let non-specialists increase skills?
I'm thinking of a few, rare NPC trainers who can give the PCs an upgrade, maybe capping it at 3/6 (for non-specialists) in exchange for a whole lot of gold and time.

>>51639949
>do you ever let non-specialists increase skills?
As treasure. Find a rare book on the subject, spend a month of downtime (or a few months of background time), presto!
No more than +1-in-6 per skill per character.

The book doesn't magically disappear, but only one character gets to use it.
There's no in-game reason for that. Additional readers just don't 'get' it.

File: LotFP d12 Skillset.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51639949
I replaced the d6 skill system with a d12 one that adds ability modifiers to it's respective stat. I prefer it more.

>>51639949
I have various houserules that allow non-specialist classes to gain a skill point to one skill at level-up (amongst other options).

I don't recall if it is stated in the official rules, but I also rule that any character who has a plausible reason for being good at a skill (like their former profession before they started adventuring) then they would be automatically at 2-in-6. Further modified by any applicable ability score modifiers and situational modifiers.

>>51639145
What this guy said:
>>51639277

It's been like, 20 years since I played straight up B/X, but I started re-reading the books recently. I'm seeing some stuff that I think I'd immediately houserule. But once you start doing that, it is hard to stop and then you're not playing B/X anymore.

It defeats the purpose of trying to go back to the roots. But then again, I don't want to run into a seriously un-fun roadblock of a rule. Or at least know if its coming up so I can plan around it.

I dunno. What I'm basically asking is if it still holds up on its own, or if the clones benefit substantially from decades of hindsight and craft.

>>51640986

Having played it that way not too long ago, B/X works quite well straight out of the box with no adjustments. Use the saving throws from X, though, they're strictly better than the earlier B ones, which don't improve as you level.

File: 14222096_10208504250537828_5615582412909078588_n.jpg (39KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 480x480px

>>51639102
>Is it worthwhile to do so?
Well, it's an interesting experience. Especially if you do so as an educational opportunity, and run it without preconceptions of what the game is "supposed" to be - just using/riffing off of the books in hand. I really do suggest that you get B1 if you're going to run Holmes/Bluebox, though, since it has some of the actual rules inside the module.

I find a bunch of the newer stuff helpful, especially the formalized rules for encumbrance and retainers in LotFP and the slightly easier math for my numerically-dyslexic player. But it is in no way necessary to play, because God knows I did it with just the blue-book, B1, B2, and (three years later) a copy of the 1e MM and the Expert rules. Holmes is a clean, tight ruleset that's quite well-organized, and I personally prefer it. Mentzer/Moldvay/Cook all twiddle it a bit - but really any one of them is okay for pick-up-and-go gaming.

>>51639949
>Those of you who run LotFP, do you ever let non-specialists increase skills?
I give all classes a "class skill" that levels like a Dwarf's Architecture skill. They can swap it out for another at DM discretion (basically, just tell me something that would justify it and we're good). Skill points can also crop up as a "treasure" during an adventure. That might come in the form of books, trainers/mentors, devices (like a special puzzle-box that boosts your Tinkering to 3 if yours is lower and you play with it for a month), or as magical buffs (along the lines of the classic "eat a fruit, gain an Attribute point" tree). General theme is that you need to spend a significant chunk of out-of-game time working on it or risk nasty things happening to you. Just like a lot of other things, really.

>>51640986
The major RC of B/X (Moldvay) is Labyrinth Lord and it differs only very slightly (someone post the info graph) and mostly in ways I think are either negligible, or I think are not, and all in a way that I find detrimental so I 'houserule' them back to B/X (e.g. Clerics getting spells on first level rather than second).

It's playable straight out of the box, the only reason I play LL instead of B/X is because I could obtain a physical copy much easier. OD&D might need S&W White Box or Delving Deeper to be ready to play, but B/X is perfectly usable and well organized as it is.

Though it's also the usual base on which not-retroclone OSR games are based off of, like LoFTP, if you want something that interprets it in a fresh light.

>>51639286
>I didn't understand
But you do now? --> >>51639273

>>51639209
>XP cap should be put in place [...] 999,999 would be the cap
You, sir, have no class. At least use a power of 2.

>>51639209
An XP cap of under a million effectively gives the following maximum levels...

cleric 16
fighter 15
magic-user 13
thief 15
dwarf 14 (13 by alternate XP rules >>51639209)
elf 11
halfling 15

If you wanted to cap things at slightly sooner, a cap of under 900,000 XP would give you...
cleric 15
fighter 14
magic-user 12
thief 15
dwarf 13 (12 by alternate XP rules)
elf 11 (10 by alternate XP rules)
halfling 14

Personally, I like the max levels for under 900k XP a bit better, but "under 900k XP" is less elegant than "under a million XP."

>>51643078
>Personally, I like the max levels for under 900k XP a bit better, but "under 900k XP" is less elegant than "under a million XP."
I suppose you could do a max of 888,888, which would give you the same results.

>>51644132
You could also change the xp tables to play nicer with your cap.

>>51633287
>What piece of fiction is most like the games you play?
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

No idea how to make it work w/ OSR though.

Oh snap! Misread that question as "would you most like to play"

>>51638392
Too low? If it was much higher they'd need a ladder to reach it.

What are people's thoughts on Beyond the Wall? I was leaning towards The Black Hack for my new players, but honestly this looks pretty awesome.

>>51649704
I think it has a pretty neat character and campaign creation system, but I personally am not looking for a story-heavy and character-developing game right now. I think that be the case with many other anons in these threads. I don't think I've ever seen anyone put in effort into critiquing it.

>>51637771
Please
I have no money

>>51637771
>>51651489

Have you tried the PDF share thread? >>51574159

Question about hit dice:

They say you get a new hit die and roll them to add HP every time you level up.

There are a few ways I could interpret that, I'd like you to set me straight as to what that means.

1. Start with d10, roll it for 8 hp. Level up, get another d10, roll it and add whatever I get to 8. so 8+6, for instance.

2. Start with d10, roll 8. Level up, get another hit dice. Roll both hit dice, get whatever number I rolled as my new HP. Ie 4 on one die, 6 on another for 10 HP.

3. Roll d10, get 8 hp. Level up, roll two hit dice, get 12, add it to 8 hp to get 20 hp. Next level, roll 3d10 to get more HP to add.

3 is the most direct interpretation I can think of, but it seems like It would cause MASSIVE hp gain even after a few levels. I mean, if a sword does d6 damage or whatever, and at level 4 you have like 55 HP, that seems like it would last forever.

What movies are "Appendix N" material?

>>51652007
The way I've always seen it played is as option 1. You roll each HD as you get it and then it's value is fixed.

>>51652007
1 is the general way of doing it.

I've also seen 2 being done, but with the addition that you only keep the higher number. So if you had 10 max hp but only roll 8, you still have 10 max hp.

>>51652007
It's ambiguous between 1&2, but the VAST MAJORITY of people do No.1.
No.3 is right out.

Other common options are:
• Reroll everything every level, keep your old total if it was higher
• Reroll everything every adventure (session), take what you roll

>>51652017
Ralph Bakshi's Wizards is a good candidate

>>51652017
Conan the Barbarian is a piece of garbageaccording to Gygax in Dragon Magazine

>>51652017
Conan the Barbarian
Heavy Metal
Labyrinth
Hammer Horror films
Mazes & Monsters

>>51652017

Maybe not exactly Appendix N, but check out Brotherhood of the Wolf, and a little indie horror film called "As Above, So Below."

File: crying indian.gif (619KB, 241x182px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 241x182px

>>51652290

Gygax wanted a real Conan movie, and got a Hollywood Conan movie instead. I understand his nerd rage, but it's still a good movie IMO, and is probably the best Conan we'll ever get.

>>51652114
definitely

>>51652290
>>51652753
I'm kinda torn on it. It's not really Conan as depicted by Robert E. Howard, but it's a great Sword and Sorcery movie and Arnie is fucking sick so I guess I actually just love it.

>>51652017
Tricky. Most movies that match thematically are just really fucking bad films.

>>51652017
Conan & Excalibur (1981) are my go to when it comes to films.

I still think Monty Python & The Holy Grail is the best representative of an actual game though.

>>51652753
Gygax wanted a DND movie as well. He thought it would do for fantasy what Star wars did for scifi.

A script was written, and he approved it. He even sang it's praises. Obviously it never got made due to TSR having money issues. Anyway, the script still exists. It's such hot garbage it's actually hard to explain how bad it is.

Let's just say Gygax's opinions on films belongs in the trash.

>>51638129
>Merlin (half-devil who lives backwards in time)
Just FTR, that backwards-in-time thing was invented by TH White, it's not in any other version of the story. I realize it was a popular version at the time OD&D was written, but sperg gotta sperg.

>>51652662
>Brotherhood of the Wolf
My blood brother.

>>51652017
Dark Crystal for strange post apocalyptic fantasy quest with cockroachmen and really well made puppets.
7 Samurai for building a party to defend the village, fighting 300 bandits and almost tpk
The bbc Gormenghast miniseries for sprawling insane cities and inbred nobility, sort of like vornhiem and bits of yoon-suin.
If you can handle it, On The Silver Globe for gonzo soviet planetary romance.

>>51652662
>>51653345
>Brotherhood of the Wolf
Honestly, probably the best rendition of "a really good adventure/campaign" I've ever seen although ironically, it's less like OSR and more like story/scenario based gameplay. But almost everything about the way the main guys behave is very RPGish. Also it's a fucking good film, of course.

File: beastmaster.jpg (43KB, 405x580px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 405x580px

>>51652017
The Beastmaster is pretty good. I mean, it's grade B, but it's still pretty good. Just the first one though. The second is an abomination and the third... well, I don't remember it that well, but I think it's just grade B without the good part.

File: beast_master_3.jpg (33KB, 307x500px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 307x500px

>>51654388

Oh yeah, I loved that movie, schlocky but fun. Trivia: It's kind of a loose adaptation of an old Andre Norton novel, though it must have gone for a serious run through the Hollywood rewrite machine -- it was a sci-fi story on another planet; the protagonist was a native american with a psi connection to his specially bred animals, who were different (more American) species, and there was a ton of other stuff that was different, though you can still recognize some bits in it.
I guesswith the big sword and sorcery boom after Conan came out, they reworked the whole thing to be more fantasy-themed.

File: shadevar.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Anyone here a fan of the Haunted Halls of Eveningstar or is it hated around here because Ed Greenwood = muh magical realm? Was first adventure ran as DM and at only 32 pages it's always bugged me, especially since it was 96 pages and Lorraine Williams cut it down for no reason.

So I always look for things that missed it. Anyone ever seen the shadevar monster? Big boss of a nearby area. The other big boss is mentioned in the FRQ1 itself, a nabassu in another area. Well, a third is a deepspawn.

But then there's this thing. Noticed it today, having originally come in a low-circulation (online) issue of Polyhedron. A real deal Eric L. Boyd monster. Found this from the place where the guy is posting cleaned sheets.

is there something like non dnd osr? like wod osr?

>>51652932
Gygax is pure kino. You just can't understand. It was gonna be great. Apologize.

Is it true what the guy a few threads back said? That Gygax did nothing but blow cocaine when he "went Hollywood" and that's what destroyed TSR? (the first time)

File: tumblr_n9hsuoczYV1r9lpmmo2_1280.png (1022KB, 971x546px) Image search: [Google]

1022KB, 971x546px

>>51652017
Been a while since I've watched this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSynJyq2RRo
It's riffing 3e, IIRC? still great tho

But, uh...
>>51652929
>I still think Monty Python & The Holy Grail is the best representative of an actual game though.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on that.

>>51654805

Not really, it's kind of a weird creation of WotC. They changed D&D significantly enough that the old playstyle was no longer workable under the new rules, and people wanted to come up with a way to publish new stuff for those old rules, and presto, OSR.
Most other systems have maintained a consistent style since their inception, and the few that haven't generally don't have an OGL that lets people fork the rules and recreate the olden days.

Traveller kind of has something similar with the Cepheus Engine, a clone of Mongoose 1e with some Classic bits.

>>51654758
IIRC, there was a power struggle between the director and the producer. The director wanted a more serious, deeper movie, while the producer wanted more lighthearted, cheesy fun. The director left after the first movie and claims that the second movie shows what the producer was aiming for. Given that, it's hard not to side with the director.

>>51652929
>I still think Monty Python & The Holy Grail is the best representative of an actual game though.
I weep for you.

What new shit in the OSR has got you excited? For me, Driftwood Verses looks badass.

File: Sengir_Vampire.jpg (77KB, 517x427px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 517x427px

>>51654805
>is there something like non dnd osr?
Some non-D&D retroclones include Cepheus Engine for Traveler, Heroes & Other Worlds for The Fantasy, and Platemail for Chainmail.

The OSR is really just a big D&D circlejerk. Not there's anything wrong with D&D, it's just the circlejerk gets pretty grating. There's a blog called Mesmerized by Sirens that actually looks at other oldschool non-D&D stuff.

>like wod osr?
Well, White Wolf abandoned nWoD (which is now Chronicles of Darkness by Obsidian Path) and is pumping out oWoD (now One World of Darkness) stuff again so there's not much of a reason for an OSR there. In fact, the general (>>51653222) is dominated by oWoD discussion.

File: necrite.jpg (106KB, 392x316px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 392x316px

>>51655290
>The Fantasy
I meant the The Fantasy Trip

File: finalfantasyix_scene_battle_on_the_summit_by_yoshitaka_amano.jpg (424KB, 1000x736px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 1000x736px

>>51654805
Old School World of Darkness is a thing.
It's pretty much the same thing as New School World of Darkness, but it exists.

Old School Renaissance World of Darkness IS NOT a thing that exists.
>A game or supplement is OSR if interchangeable with OSR and TSR D&D.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For how often we get new people, that really ought to be in the OP.

>>51654805
People recommend Into The Odd a bit, and it's pretty damn far removed from D&D.

>>51655086
I weep for myself

>>51654958
You've never met my players.

I've learned to embrace it.

>>51654828
>defending gary this hard

lol no
read the script
laugh and cry at how shit it is

>>51654763
So where are all of these monsters being complied?

>>51652017
Big trouble in little china

>>51653970
>On The Silver Globe for gonzo soviet planetary romance.
Fucking wild movie. So good. Zulawski was a right beast

>>51655328
Wait, is it Old School Renaissance or Old School Revival?

File: locke.jpg (357KB, 1175x762px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 1175x762px

>>51655884
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>51655319
do you have H&OW pdf?

>>51655290

>the guy who dislikes D&D, the OSR, and everyone in it

Dude, why are you even here?

File: Crytogrinder.jpg (225KB, 700x1081px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 700x1081px

>>51655228
inorite? The monster entries and vibe look really dank.

I'm excited that Vacant Ritual Assembly is doing issues again, Wormskin looks cool, and I haven't even gotten around to reading ASE 2-3.

File: KnightsOfThorn.jpg (78KB, 582x467px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 582x467px

>>51655944
I don't because I bought the dead tree versions, but Cauldron #0 has some quick-start rules:

https://www.mediafire.com/folder/kc12z5tbxcbrw/Heroes%20%26%20Other%20Worlds

>>51656017
But I don't dislike D&D, I'm lukewarm about the OSR, and I only hate (You) specifically.

>>51655328
>>51655900
Amano's art is the best.

>>51656040
>I don't dislike D&D

Didn't sound like it in the previous threads you did your schtick in.

>>51656105
Not that guy, but there's definitely an air of
>OSR is just B/X D&D or LBB related stuff, anything else including your opinion is shit

Not terribly surprised about it, because the whole OSR scene does tend to attract some of the more groggy grognards. It does grate after a while, though. I mean, I love me some BECMI (yes, the whole kludgy thing) as that's what I grew up on, and it seems to almost universally get shit on here, so I don't really see a need to participate much because of that. Just because someone had an issue or two with a game doesn't mean they hate it.

One of the biggest things that you'll hear from people describing or advocating OSR games is the idea that they are about player skill, not character stats. If that's the case, what is player skill? How do you get good at being a player? What skills do you, as a player, need to learn?

It occurs to me that I've never actually seen anything addressing this side of the coin. How would you go about teaching new players to be good at being players in the "player skill" sense?

>>51655578
Well, as long as everybody is weeping... that's what really matters.

>>51656736
'Player skill' is mostly about feeling clever, though some of it is actually about being clever.
If you've ever gotten good at writing essays for a specific teacher, it can also be kind of like that (but for referees, not teachers).

>>51656647
>OSR is just B/X D&D or LBB related stuff

It's also AD&D, and BECMI is welcome too, even if it's not the popular Basic - and I don't see it getting "universally shit on," just a few people who, as you say had "an issue or two" with it. (Usually the Immortals set's weirdness and the stretching of Thief skills to ridiculous levels)

But this thread's not about everything that's old, just because it has "old" in the name. Would you think it's okay to go bother the Oldhammer threads about why they're not about Runequest, 'cause it's old and has hammers in it? Of course not, but this guy up there won't let it go.

The guy keeps coming back to piss and moan about how we're all a terrible "circlejerk" because we don't want to talk about The Fantasy Trip. I have to admit, it's irrational, but his attitude has actually made me less interested in TFT than I was before.
It's not so much a "circlejerk," as it is a bunch of people offput by his dire lack of interpersonal skills. And he's not making it better by coming back every few weeks to bitterly snipe at "the popular kids" who only want to talk about the OSR in the OSR thread like we won't let him in our secret clubhouse or something.

>>51656813
>Would you think it's okay to go bother the Oldhammer threads about why they're not about Runequest, 'cause it's old and has hammers in it?

Here's what the OSR is really like:
>Animation Enthusiasts create a Vintage Cartoon Renaissance movement that re-examines roots of the genre
>someone brings up Astroboy
>A: "Sorry, we only talk about WESTERN Vintage Cartoons."
>B: "Why?"
>A: "Because we decided just now."
>someone brings up Scooby-doo
>A: "Sorry, we only talk about Vintage Cartoons made BEFORE the 1970s."
>C: "Why?"
>A: "Because we decided just now."
>someone brings up WW2 Looney Tunes
>A: "Sorry, we only talk about Disney-created Vintage Cartoons."
>B: "Why?"
>A: "Because we decided just now."
>B: "So why don't you just call yourselves the 'Pre-1970 Disney Cartoon Renaissance' instead of using an inaccurate label?"
>A: "WOW YOU FUCKING SHITPOSTER GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD THAT WE ALREADY NAMED OURSELVES HOW DARE YOU WOULD YOU GO TO A HAMBURGER PLACE AND ORDER A FUCKING CHICKEN SANDWICH NUH-UH GO TALK ABOUT YOUR MODERN NON-DISNEY WEABOO TRASH ELSEWHERE"

>>51657293
>Because we decided just now

Horseshit. OSR has been about TSR D&D since the movement began ten years ago. Peddle your nonsense to someone who'll buy it.

>>51657293
The acronym OSR got shaved off of 'OSRIC', OSRIC is a system no one has ever played
Some nut-jobs even own a physical copy, presumably as a coffee table book
It was published to let people write not!AD&D modules and supplements
...for use with AD&D (dodging D&D intellectual property bollocks, basically)

>>51657293
/OSR/ is a discussion of old school D&D and related systems. They share common origins and have rule systems that are largely compatible. You're completely unfamiliar with Swords & Wizardry? No you're not. Not if you're generally familiar with old school D&D or other retroclones. You can just glance over it and pick up how it works very quickly, because most of the material is the same. Or you could just ask people what distinguishes it, and after being told a few things, you have a pretty good idea of whether or not you'd be interested in it. Not only that, but you can have a relatively informed conversation about these things from just that little bit of information, because you already understand the context they're in. "Single category saving throws? That's interesting. Let me consider how that would affect old school D&D."

Other, non-D&D derived games don't share the same basic system. If you start talking about Traveller, for instance, you can't just tell folks who are familiar with it a few things and expect them to be on the same page. So you'll end up with a different group of people who know enough about it to be able to have an intelligent discussion on it. So what purpose is there to shove it in the old school D&D thread? It would needlessly fragment conversation and probably result in fewer people who are interested in Traveller even seeing what you are talking about, because why would they come into a D&D to see if there was a Traveller conversation?

It makes no sense, and you just have to realize that "old school renaissance" is a label that's been applied specifically to D&D and not get autistic about what the words mean separately. Words and phrases can acquire new meanings. A red delicious is a type of apple and you shouldn't throw tantrum when people don't apply the name to tomatoes, which are red and delicious. Similarly you shouldn't get upset when a thread on burning CDs doesn't pertain to literally setting CDs on fire.

Grow up.

Pedants on the internet arguing over dumb semantics?

Well I never!

File: laughing-frog-img-r2-704x461.jpg (33KB, 704x461px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 704x461px

>T$Rcucks are so infatuated with a dead game that they're LITERALLY paying money for shitbrewed house rules and random generators created by hipster """artists"""

>>51657930

It's not really much of an argument when one side has solid points and the decade-long history of the OSR movement to back them up, and the other side has, well, whining like a little bitch about "circlejerks."

File: Amano_FFVI_Unknown_(Odin-).jpg (3MB, 1391x2013px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1391x2013px

>>51658023
Don't knock it until you try it.

So what do you think would be the differents between monstrous creatures and demons in a setting? Like, say you had a standard manticore and the Capra Demon or Stray Demon from Dark Souls in the same environment. What would be the factor that seperates the two?

>>51658145
Narratively speaking Demons are beyond our realm coming from hell and shit.

I try to make them freakier and more dangerous due to coming from a harsher environment.

Other monsters are more natural or made by wizards but are usually terrestrial.

>>51658145

I'd say the manticore might be hungry, and sure it might eat people, but it wouldn't be malicious about it. Demons ARE malicious and will cause suffering for no other reason that because they enjoy it.

>>51658145

This is kind of a specific thing but I think some people, at least me, portray demons as being kind of like half ghost and half physical in a way. Like a monster is totally physical. You slay it, that's it. Demons can come back, reform from fire and ash, turn into a spirit and draw dicks on your shield with its flaming finger.

File: XP.Values.Ultimate.Edition.png (56KB, 256x896px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 256x896px

2E creature experience point value charts have been fixed.

What's the consensus here on 5e's rolling with advantage rule?
I've seen it mentioned and adopted into osr games by a few bloggers.

File: XP.Values.Ultimate.Edition.150dpi.png (59KB, 400x1400px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 400x1400px

>>51658516
Woops that one was missing the invisibility modifier, have some extra DPI

>>51658686
I think the consensus is that it's good and it's weird that it took that long for that kind of rule to make it in.

>>51656647
>I love me some BECMI (yes, the whole kludgy thing) as that's what I grew up on, and it seems to almost universally get shit on here
Apparently we've been in completely different threads, because people calling the Rules Cyclopedia the best D&D edition ever are fairly common in the /osrg/ I've been reading.

>>51658050
Don't you mean the decades long circle-jerk and the decades of criticisms of it.

I was told to ask these questions here in another thread.

>What's the point of instakill traps?

>Or rather, what's the point of anything that kills a character outright with only one or two chances to avoid it?

>How does this get a player invested in the game?

>>51659609
The way I see it, and others may disagree, it's all about bringing information across to players, and having them act on it.
If there's a big danger, and everything is hinting at it, and the player decides to push the big red button anyway, and he still gets a save to get out of it alive, I'd say it's pretty generous.
The investment comes from the game world following its own rules consistently, and not shifting them around just for the sake of the character.

File: death checks.png (84KB, 1049x803px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1049x803px

>>51659609
OSR tends to be more about player skill than character skill. So you're trying to outsmart the dungeon. Good instakill traps are usually avoidable through more than a saving throw. A saving throw is, well... a saving throw. It's what happens if you've failed to detect the trap through observation and searching, etc.

Also, death tends to be a more accepted part of OSR. The lethality is higher and this helps make things "real". And if your character dies, that doesn't mean that all the adventures you had with that character are somehow invalidated. And it doesn't mean you can't remember the character fondly. Obviously, there are downsides to this, but then there are downsides to having a game with padded walls, where PCs are all but assured of living. That too can hurt your ability to get invested in the game.

Anyway, this is the typical OSR perspective on things anyway. I'm not necessarily completely in line with it though. I personally favor having some kind of death check to serve as an additional safety net--something that is definitely not normal in the OSR world--but then again, I feel like this enables me to really take the gloves off and be harsher on the party than I might otherwise be.

So I don't know. Make up your own mind about what you like. If you want, have two levels of saving throws vs. insta-death traps and such. If you make the first one, you're fine--same as always. You fail the first and you're all kinds of fucked up--maimed, comatose, violently ill, barely able to walk, all kinds of fucked up, etc.--and then you have to make another one or you really are dead.

File: 1453758653507.jpg (94KB, 617x800px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 617x800px

I have a question.

Does the technique of re-rolling all your hit dice apply to AD&D and AD&D 2e? And if not, do you think it would be a good fit?

It seems like a really good rule and I don;t understand why it is not still done in modern versions.

Dragon cover in trade and tribute.

>>51659809
re rolling when you level, I mean.

>>51659809
>>51659816
I've been playing since the early '80s (granted, with some sizable breaks in there) and I never saw the "reroll at every level method" until the OSR movement came around. I never played OD&D, but I think it was kind of ambiguous on the matter, like many other things, so people just interpreted it in the way that made sense to them (correct me if I'm wrong, OD&D folks).

Anyway, I think the standard way of rolling hit dice is garbage and see no good reason not to reroll from scratch at every level. I'd either do that or assigned fixed hit points per die (generally half dice size +1, or "high average", so that 1d6 gives you 4 hit points). But while I think rerolling at every level is widely embraced in the OSR community, there are probably a fair number of people who regard fixed hit points as heretical.

I just got a really dumb idea that may be worth considering.
How about making combat exchanges take a shorter duration - 1-2 seconds, with both sides getting an attack and defensive round.
You'd get an attack pool (for example it's 22), which you have to split up into both phases.
First would be rolling to see if you win initiative. If you do, you choose if you start in the defensive or offensive phase. Starting offensive, and putting all your points into the first attack may be advantageous, but is risky, as a failure will cause you to have almost no defenses.
Magic could work similar, taking a cue from DCC, with the Wizardry Pool being divided into 2 rolls: An Effect, and a Control roll
Effect would influence if you manage to cast, and if yes, how effective it is. Control would influence misfires, and corruption, depending on how bad the roll is.
Still playing around with the details, but does this messy explanation sound like something worth perusing? OSR is kind of all about meaningful choices, and it may be a simple way of giving meaningful choices in combats.

>>51659941
>How about making combat exchanges take a shorter duration - 1-2 seconds, with both sides getting an attack and defensive round. You'd get an attack pool (for example it's 22), which you have to split up into both phases. First would be rolling to see if you win initiative. If you do, you choose if you start in the defensive or offensive phase. Starting offensive, and putting all your points into the first attack may be advantageous, but is risky, as a failure will cause you to have almost no defenses.
I mean, there are games that have much more intricate systems than this, so somebody out there must like this sort of thing, but to me, it defeats some of the larger advantages OSR has: simplicity and speed. I'm not necessarily against an attack and defense roll, though I'm not sure D&D is ideally set up to do it, at least not without some mechanical tweaks. But once you get beyond that, I'd be worried about things becoming too cumbersome. On the other hand, you reference DCC, which strikes me as too cumbersome, so if you're into it, your standards might be a bit different than mine.

>>51660015
Well, I do like a lot of DCC's ideas, but I just don't see it working on the table smoothly.
What I have on mind should technically (at least how I envision it) not slow things down. I'll have to crunch the numbers though to see if it's worth trying.

>>51658868
The RC isn't bad, don't get me wrong, but it definitely pulls in a lot more from some supplements (i.e. the whole skill system chapter), and next to nothing from others (there's some really neat stuff from the Alfheim Gazetteer for elves focusing more on spells or combat). Not only that, but there's a ton of changes that need to be made to bring it into line with the actual BECM set itself (as seen here: http://RCerrata.redirectme.net though there are some suggestions as well), not to mention having to grab the completely separate Wrath of the Immortals set to cover the I of BECMI.

In that, there's definitely a push to make the Immortals more along the lines of 2e AD&D Gods w.r.t. Clerics, which I'm not a particularly big fan of. Screwing around with spells available is more my speed. Shit like allowing the use of daggers and Backstabbing like a thief of the same level (Alphaks), allowing the use of swords and daggers just in general (Frey and Freyja), or just a flat +1 to Intelligence and Wisdom, just 'cause (Rad) is pretty damn strong. And to balance it out, there are quite a few other Immortals that allow their characters to have Infravision, or maybe even something so powerful as Hear Noise as a thief of the same level or a swim speed equal to your normal movement. Sure, ability scores aren't as key in older D&D editions as they are in later ones, but a general +1 to two stats just because of the ̶G̶o̶d̶ Immortal you worship (which is completely arbitrary and rarely relevant from what I've seen) is a bit ridiculous. I'd rather deal with the weirdness of tetraspace and alternate dimensions (and all the cool adventures that may bring!) than deal with having player Clerics follow ridiculous ̶go̶d̶s̶ Immortals they may have never heard of (all of which are tied to Mystara, with few rules on making your own) just to get a sweet bonus or two.

So yes, I would consider the RC and WotI a completely separate entity from BECMI.

>>51659879
>correct me if I'm wrong, OD&D folks
No, you're totally correct. The reroll-at-each-level thing stems entirely from the circumstance that in the LBBs, classes don't gain even hit dice, they get modifiers and shit, like leveling from say 5 dice + 2 to 6-1 or something. This is hard to make sense of as a thing where you just roll your one new die (do I first subtract three from my current HD and then roll a die? Doesn't that mean I have a 1/3 chance of *losing* hit points?). However very few people even knew about the issue existing before the OSR brought people to light who were still playing OD&D or had taken it up eventually, and who had thought about this stuff a lot, like Philotomy. Only at that point did someone mention the potential alternative LBB reading, where you reroll all dice at each level -- applying that idea to any other edition than LBB OD&D is an explicitly OSR invention AFAIK.

>>51659809
>>51659879
I'm a fan of hackmaster's method where you roll a new hit die and add it at each odd level, and at each even level you get the option reroll the previous hit die and use that if it's higher.

File: Scalemail Don't Rock The Boat Unit Expansion.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I'm about 10 Units away from finishing up the expansion to Scalemail, the OSR of Chainmail, Don't Rock The Boat, and I decided to share what I already have done: the Units that can be used for regular Scalemail games.

>>51661869
Sorry for the ignorance, but can you pitch me Scalemail, and what it does differently?

File: Scalemail 2 point O.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51661988

Does anyone know how the "everyone is an adventurer" modification to LotFP works with Demihumans? It never mentions them one way or another and I'm not sure if the intent was to remove race-as-class or not.

File: 41b992dbad009c6e6b4dee89c76d272d.jpg (138KB, 564x854px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 564x854px

>>51662855
>Does anyone know how the "everyone is an adventurer" modification to LotFP works with Demihumans?
However you'd like, because it's a loose homebrew.
>I'm not sure if the intent was
God forbid the RPGcops kool-aid man through your wall to stop you from having your own intentions.

>>51663346
B-b-but what if I play it wrong and the OSR police kick down my door and arrest me for failing to hold to the spirit of old school gaming!

File: e16fcd7e2cc3e589492d392d65a6eb5e.jpg (64KB, 564x763px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 564x763px

>>51663648
The spirit of race-as-class died when they added Clerics (c >>51638129).
You can make it work, but it's a Sacred Cow to most OSR.

>>51663916
Who's most of osr?

>>51663916
>when they added Clerics
I don't get this, honestly. How is a cleric not ok, but a wizard is fine? Or are you assuming that a wizard is technically a race on his own?

>>51664170
>Or are you assuming that a wizard is technically a race on his own?
Not so much a separate race, but rather 'less human' than normal.

>>51664170
>How is a cleric not ok
The fact that people have been arguing about clerics (and alignments) since the 70s proves that they are inherently not ok.

>>51664270
Nah if you argue about it for long enough the debate becomes part of the fabric.

>>51664170
• African Blacksmiths (read: Witches (read: Werehyenas))
• Count Dracula (as written by Bram Stoker)
• Morgan le Fay (le Fay ⇒ the Fairy)
• Two-Spirits (bisexual Native American shamans)
yadda yadda yadda

>>51663916
I would argue that Clerics and Thieves are great for representing the flexibility of Humanity.

But I also have made it so each of the core races has at least 2 classes. Elven Wanderer being the default for Elves, Elven Rogue being a Ranger/Thief sorta thing for example. They have a little more flexibility but not nearly as much as humans.

>>51664375
>alignment debates are a sacred cow

osr was a mistake

>>51664999
Stop using that term.

Anybody got any good Mook rules for OSR games? Holding off waves of low HD enemies seems like a staple of classic fantasy what with stuff like the Mines of Moria and such. I'd like a house rule if it ever comes up. I recall seeing something similar in an old AD&D 2e manual but don't recall which one or if it was a good rule.

>>51665365
From LBB through 2e, every TSR Fighting-Man ever has gotten up to 1 attack per level per round when fighting weak* foes.
*that's 1HD foes in systems where lv.1 Fighting-Men have 1+1HD, and 1-1HD foes in systems where they have 1HD

>>51665365
Scarlet heroes and Solo Heroes both convert damage rolls from the player to just straight up HD that's dealt to surrounding enemies of equal or lesser HD than the player while reducing damage from monsters. Its designed for having 1 player so it makes them mad powerful. Its kind of fun, but I wouldn't recommend it for more than 2 players.

I'm screwing around with some houserules (for LotFP). Was considering a group initiative rule;
Two sides roll, higher roll acts first. Characters act in whatever order they like (players can discuss tactics, which is fun for them).
Certain actions are considered "full round" actions. They must be declared before rolling initiative and resolve at the end of the round. If they get interrupted, you lose it. Applies to all spellcasting and a few combat things like aiming, charging and parrying.
ALSO, characters wielding 2-h weapons act at the end of initiative, after everyone else but before those taking full round actions.

Is this way too fucking compliated?

File: gaemdesign.png (20KB, 643x825px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 643x825px

>>51666250
Seems fine. Make clear that some things are going to happen basically simultaneously in the different sections and make sure you can sort that out.

>>51666849
Is there a context to that image or is it just an obscure joke?

>>51666985
Just made it to see if I got >>51666250's point and to show its not as complicated as they were worried about.

>>51667014
Oh okay. I read his post kinda haphazardly so I thought you were referencing something else with the image. Carry on.

My players found the hand of some monster in a bag stolen from a cult, what magic abilities or quirks it haves?

>>51667559
Pulling one digit on the hand down turns your arm into the monster's, pulling another turns your left arm. Then your legs, torso and head.

>>51667789
Also, the only way to remove the curse (other than the spell remove curse) is to cut off your hand, restarting the cycle.

>>51666849
yeah, you pretty much got it.

Pre-Initiative: Declare full round actions like spellcasting and charging. Ongoing effects like burning, acid, spells, etc take effect.

Phase 1) Normal actions.
Initiative winners act first in whatever order they like. Then the initiative losers act. 2-h weapon combatants may still move into position.

Phase 2) 2 handed weapon attacks resolve in order of initiative winners then losers. Ties broken by dex.

Phase 3) full round actions resolve if they weren't interrupted by anyone in phases 1 or 2. Initiative order then dex.

>>51667825
Excellent! That's going to work really well in play, presuming a player likely to fuck with stuff (and who doesn't have one those?).

File: XP.Values.Ultimate.Edition.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51658516
>>51658721
PDF format, maybe people can convert to PostScript / other formats and insert in their custom DM screens or something.

I want to make xp-for-gold a thing in DCC.

Would multiplying XP requirements by 1000 be enough to make it happen?

File: CVAT_hPWUAATZDs.jpg (60KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x600px

>>51668268
>maybe people can convert to PostScript
Have you... never opened a .PDF in a text editor before?
All the loops (etc.) get ironed out, but .PDFs *are* essentially PostScript.

File: zombie.gif (45KB, 278x438px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 278x438px

>>51668388
That is ENTIRELY a matter of how much treasure you plan on handing out.

>>51668828
Is it only that? The xp increments between levels is kind of different from other retroclones.

>>51668966
Not him, but yes its only that. How often they level is all based on how much treasure you hand out. If the xp scale is different just scale the treasure forward or back until its right. When using pre-written adventures it might be a little bit more work but its no biggy.

>>51669096
Alright, then let me ask the general another question:

How many years do you think it should take for a party to reach max level, assuming that they don't get killed first?

File: amano16.jpg (13KB, 196x330px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 196x330px

>>51669453
Let alone the level cap, characters tend to retire shortly after Name Level.

>In-game years?
That's more to do with average downtime length than anything else.
6 months feels like a good minimum, but I expect others would disagree.

>Out-of-game years?
That's more to do with your play schedule than anything else.
3-5 sessions to level 2, 5-8 between each mid-level, 10-15 for high-level?

Slower advancement as you level, faster advancement if you search out the hidden treasures, yadda yadda.

>>51668801
Only after converting it to PostScript do I look at it in a text editor though. Using pdftops of course.

>>51657558 ???

>>51672430
More or less accurate. The allegoric bullshit is new to the OSR, though, in dungeons such as Castle Greyhawk itself you'd wander through crazy bullshit designed by an insane wizard to challenge and annoy adventurers, like a living room where all the furniture is alive, just for the sake of the pun.

>>51668100
you should still have a diagram on the table for the players. It's a good idea.

File: The Frontier.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Lately I've been getting more and more interested in OSR games. I've started browsing blogs that have weird, cool alternate rules. There are creative and innovative ideas out there that still retain that OSR vibe. What are some of the most standout OSR systems, hacks or alternate rules?

Specifically interested in classless systems, alternate HP mechanics, fail forward/narrative dice mechanics, random world/encounter builders and inventory systems. One thing I wish to find in an OSR game is something similar to Apoc World's item tags, or something like PDF related.

>>51658023
the Arrows of Indra guy and Raggi are making shit modules and laughing all the way to the bank, so yeah

File: Denzi150205_1.png (36KB, 400x560px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 400x560px

GUYS. Guys. Little help here.

I want to make a game on RPG Maker using old 0D&D modules (that I loved to play in my youth), adapting when needed to allow as much freedom as possible to the player to deal with the problems presented.

I tried to make my own ruleset, but I'm failing. But I don't want to use a system with "dead" levels too, since it is boring for a computer game.

My understanding is that osr characters are tools from which the players can explore the world presented.

The game would have a main PC but the others would be that - tools, each doing a different thing that allows the player to interact with the world in a different way.

What would be the best OSR in your opinion to this?

>>51675946
>0D&D
>zero
>the number

OD&D 'editions'
• LBB
• OD&D (note the letter O, as in Original)
• Holmes Basic

Basic editions
• B/X (alt. Moldvay Basic or Moldvay/Cook Basic)
• BECMI (alt. Mentzer Basic or BECM)
• RC (alt. Rules Cyclopedia)

Advanced editions
• AD&D (first edition, ft. Gygax)
• 2e (new editions get the numberwang treatment from here out)

Rolled 3, 4, 6, 1, 5, 2, 4, 2, 6, 4, 2, 3, 4, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1 = 52 (18d6)

>>51673936
Rolling 3d6, in order.

>>51677851

>4 charisma

Yikes, you do not have a presence about you. People probably forget you're even in the room.

File: 12490_16.jpg (571KB, 600x809px) Image search: [Google]

571KB, 600x809px

Strength: 13, Intelligence: 8, Wisdom: 12
Constitution: 9, Dexterity: 6, Charisma: 4

>FOUR (4) in the GOAT stat
Whelp, that's probably a Magic-User. Just so it can die faster.
Bumber that I can't let Charm Person/Monster carry me though.
Actually... can you exchange hirelings with your party members?

>>51676072
>OD&D 'editions'
>LBB
>OD&D (note the letter O, as in Original)
Wat
Why would you separate these? I've never seen anyone call LBB distinct from OD&D.

>>51679860
LBB is the Three Booklets, plus CHAINMAIL
OD&D is the Three Booklets, plus Supplements

>>51676072
>>51679860
A double layer of nitpicking and shitposting.

Both of you need to stop and take a good hard look at yourselves.

To answer >>51675946
Go with B/X or a modern retroclone of it (Labyrinth Lord, LotFP, etc). Spaces out the incremental bonuses better than OD&D.

>>51676072
Why would you place Holmes with OD&D and not with Basic?

>>51680163

Not that guy, but Holmes is very different from later Basics, and is basically an intro to OD&D rather than a system you can run by itself.

>>51680037
>A double layer of nitpicking and shitposting.
Actually I only wrote that post to bump the thread. It was about to fall off page 10...

>>51680727

So you're the nitpicker /osrg/ needs.

I'm planning on running a modern fantasy OSR game. Should I keep track of every bullet or just keep track of magazines/reloads? I kind of like that so if players reload early they lose some of their potential ammo, but it's not super realistic.

>>51681506
A-Are you... asking us to tell you how much bookkeeping you feel like doing?
You aren't many things, but you *are* the foremost expert on your own opinion.

>>51681506
>Should I keep track of every bullet or just keep track of magazines/reloads?
Wait, how would you track mags without tracking bullets? How would you know when they need to reload if...?!

Running a non-funnel DCC game with 8 players tomorrow. How fucked am I?

>>51681506
>just keep track of magazines/reloads?
this seems like the best option

>>51681903
I thought this
>>51681700
then I saw this and it's an excellent point. If you're tracking shots anyway, may as well keep doing it.

File: scrap rifles.png (375KB, 804x550px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 804x550px

>>51681700
>>51681903

Well you keep track of how many bullets are in the magazine, then you drop it to reload. The idea being you only have to keep track of how many shots you made so far with your gun's capacity, which you can use counters or little dice for for ease.

When you'd reload you'd drop all your counters off and just check off one reload box of however many you have.

However I can easily see this being annoying or frustrating for players who want to conserve ammo, especially if its going to make enough of a difference for a more scarce part of the run, like deep within the spooky monster-filled hospital and all that.

Looking for some opinions. I setting up a new game for my group and I'm looking at BFRP and ACKs. Previously we were using Swords and Wizardry and something we really liked about it was having just one save for everything, can I just copy that into BFRP or ACKs and not worry too much?

>>51682538

Yeah, that's the nice thing about OSR, this stuff's pretty modular and you can borrow bits from here or there with ease.

>>51682443
>>51681903
>>51681506
Just steal Black Hack's usage die. Smaller weapons like pistols start with a small die (d6?) and larger ones start bigger (d10?)

>>51682443
That weapon art! Where is it from? I love it.

>>51683797

It's from the game Rust.

>>51638392
Level 4, because Bilbo never got any better at being a Hero.

>>51660960
>where you reroll all dice at each level -- applying that idea to any other edition than LBB OD&D is an explicitly OSR invention AFAIK.
This is kinda out there, but The Dark Spire (a Wizardry-inspired dungeon crawler for the DS) did the full hit dice reroll thing. TDS is very oldschool so the idea had to have been present before the OSR.

>>51683087
>usage die
But tracking the size of the usage die isn't any less fiddly than just tracking the ammo. In fact it takes more time, since you have to roll an extra die every time you shoot.

>>51684376

Yeah, a usage die works fine for stuff like lanterns or torches, but for ammo it's not very helpful IMO.

File: Incredulous Black guy.jpg (156KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 600x800px

>>51638392

>level caps
>race-as-class

File: Do you not.jpg (50KB, 500x313px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 500x313px

>>51684548

>>51680163
Holmes Basic seems like a transitional game to me, with one foot in OD&D and the other in Basic.

>>51684724
You're thinking of Moldvay's Basic Set (in the absence of Cook's Expert Set).

>>51684376
Just roll them both at once. Its the same motion.

>>51684376
Then use the Star Wars ammo rule: Natural 1 = you're out of ammo

File: dcc stuff.png (420KB, 2036x982px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 2036x982px

>>51675946
>I tried to make my own ruleset, but I'm failing. But I don't want to use a system with "dead" levels too, since it is boring for a computer game.
You mean levels where you don't get any new powers, etc.? Because if so, then maybe OSR isn't what you want. OSR tends to be bare bones and classes don't usually have much in the way of powers and such (outside of spells, that is). Still, you might want to look at something like DCC, which has some neat ideas but too much crunch for my taste, at least for an actual, live game. With a computer game, a lot of my complaints would disappear. Pic is a somewhat out-of-date sample of DCC's crunch (thief skills use a d20 now, and not d%).

I always thought the rules to Baldur's Gate sucked because they were based on AD&D, which are flat and boring without DM fiat and improvisation. By contrast, 3e worked comparatively well as the basis for Neverwinter Nights, despite being a complete clusterfuck of a system to actually role-play with. Why? The crunch gave you shit to play around with, and the game could be carefully tailored to make things work. A CRPG is, after all, incredibly confined. You can't really get creative with your powers or tactics, and the rules are stripped down and tweaked to give you what works in a computerized environment anyway.

>>51684774
>Implying that Moldvay's Basic set isn't full Basic.
I'd argue that B/X is the most Basic that Basic got. BECMI had enough extraneous material that it started to inch towards AD&D.

>>51681623
>You aren't many things, but you *are* the foremost expert on your own opinion.
Shockingly, I find that this is frequently not the case. At the very least, people will often not know why they don't like something. For instance, the campaign you're playing in tends to either have numerous enemies, or numerous companions of one sort or another (summoned help, NPC allies, animated dead, etc.), resulting in one of your players getting bored because he doesn't have enough of the action. And after all that waiting for his turn to come around, he feels his turn is over before it barely begins. So there's a problem with some rather obvious solutions: reduce the number of non-PCs or find a way to selectively expedite their turns (and failing that, expediting everybody's turns so that things come around to you faster might work too). But your player might not even really know why he's unhappy, and when you ask him what's bothering him, he might just say "turns need to be longer so we can do more", which will likely only make things worse. But he doesn't know that, because he doesn't even realize what the problem is. People can be incredibly unaware. Just sayin'.

>>51681737
Not very, it and LotFP are my favorite games relevant to this general.

DCC may have alot of charts and bits but it's evocative of the vision of DnD it seeks to be and is worth the extra effort.

>>51684507
Agreed. Usage dice are good for when you want to create *uncertainty* in how much of a resource there is (How long does this torch burn? How many doses of potion is that in the jug? You can ballpark it, but not know for sure), not for speed or ease of use.

Bimp

Has anyone made a magic system similar to DCC for any other retroclone? I like a lot of things about the system but it's slowing down my game, and the magic system is something I don't know if I can play D&D without anymore.

>>51693580
I kinda made something similar, by keeping the spellcheck rolls, but generalizing corruption tables and making the spells just have 1 factor that grows with the roll.
It's just... not really written up besides my actual notebook.

Its not in appendix N, but I'm reading the Iliad and its got some funny stuff re osrguments.

>throwing rocks does mad damage
>fighting men wear leather armour instead of plate to sneak around
>everyone makes offering, prays, talks to gods aka fighter and magic user only
>superheroes killing 1hd doods all over the place

Not trying to stir shit, its just making me crack up imagining people calling bullshit on Ajax throwing a gigantic rock for more than d3 damage.

File: linkdx_conceptart_3MnYz.jpg (238KB, 650x528px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 650x528px

>>51693619
>It's just... not really written up besides my actual notebook.
Post pics/scans.

File: dungeon-075bw.jpg (1MB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x2000px

Do you guys make you own maps, or swipe them from other sources?

File: Grave Of The Angel.jpg (926KB, 1237x1600px) Image search: [Google]

926KB, 1237x1600px

>>51694797
I tend to look at other maps for inspiration and steal/incorporate the parts I like into my own.

Random generators are good too, just for getting a basic shape and then modifying as need be.

I probably won't use this one 100% as is, but its really cool and I'm going to loot it heavily.

>>51694797
How do you keep track of a map like this? Its too confusing.

Would you show it to players or they would have to draw it?

>>51694985
Not that guy but its has numbered sections to make it less confusing. That's the dm map, and they have a book or index cards or notes or whatever that corresponds to the numbered sections. There's a lot of them, but its not hard.

My players really like making their own maps. Showing them the dm map is a thing we do at the end to look at the differences and laugh about it.

>>51694960
Is that a Dyson map? I love his stuff.

>>51695276
I think its from Dungeon of Signs. Dyson's maps are dope too. There's a lot of material to look through with just him. The Sky Full Of Dust is another cool blog with a bunch of maps if you haven't seen it.

>>51694282
>people calling bullshit on Ajax throwing a gigantic rock for more than d3 damage
>tfw they don't know bout my girdle of giant strength
>tfw hurl stones like a small catapult and give no fucks

>>51693619
I hope you keep working on it! Would really like to see it.

>>51695442
>It was Telamonian Ajax who first killed his man
>Sarpadon's comrade Epicles, hitting him
>With a jagged piece of marble that lay on a heap of stones
>You couldn't find a man alive now who could lift that stone with both hands
>But Ajax swung it high and hurled it
>With enough force to shatter the four-horned helmet
>And crush Epicles' skull inside. He fell

D8 at least

>>51695820
Catapults do a lot more than d8 damage. I'm not sure what exactly they do in Chainmail, though. (That rule about throwing originally came from the LBBs.)

>>51698644
Catapults insta-kill anything with less than 3 HD (read: non-heroic), and uhh, it's kinda ambiguous what they do to anything else.

>>51699065
If I was going to make up a number it would be 4d6+6 for a range of 10 - 30 with an average of 20.

>>51699368
The catapult rules in chainmail have a useful range and impact area, also structural damage. I think it was like 4d6 or something. So you're not far off with the damage dice.

Is there a magic item compendium for 1-2E D&D?

I know 3.5 has one but I want the older shit. Also I don't mean 2E's book of artifacts; that's too high octane. I just want piles of magical items.

>>51701631
I think there's a book that serves as an index.

>>51701631
Supplement 3 Eldritch Wizardry has a bunch and a neat thing for generating random abilities for artifacts/items.

Lots of stuff on blogs too. I like these ones, but pmuch every blog has something like it.
>http://dungeonofsigns.blogspot.ca/2015/01/forty-fallen-empire-magic-items.html

>>51701631
Encyclopedia Magica volumes 1-4

>>51701878
>>51702091

Thanks lads.

>>51702091
>it has no magic items from most of 1994 nor all of 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, nor 2000

>>51702377
While you're not wrong, realize that the EM is over 1500 pages and covers virtually every magic item that existed in AD&D from official books, campaign setting, guides, Dragon Magazine, etc.

It's literally the best official single compilation of old magical items. If you have a better one I'd be interested in looking at it.

>>51699065
I own it and have used it extensively for ideas. That said, a good two thirds of it is crap.

>>51703103
I've got every copy in original faux leather as well as backup copies of some. It was my favorite since I bought the first the same month it came out and I did the same for the next three. You know what was hard? Waiting all that time for fucking SWORD and then you finally get to 3 but the last of the book, the late-S section, is all fucking SPELLBOOK. What a fucking waste, they knew they were about to drop the Wizard's Spell Compendium. So then more waiting for Big Blue and the swords.

But slade made the Encyclopedia Magica. It's not like the Spell Compendium which is all tight and edited and official changes to spells were made and everything updated just right while Jon Pickens oversees all. It was slade smoking drugs and adding items word-for-word. Also cool, but easier to replicate. So maybe when this big secret project for the other is finished, it can turn to that. Harder to organize by category, that was some rigor I tell you. Everything in its place, and every source listed also. The table / index was kind of funny, just assigning random values to everything. Same with weapon / armor etc. determination in the body of the books. Just equal values, hard to get a long sword +1. Might as well roll a Baba Yaga's Hut. Color sections for full duplication, and bind with a little bookmark. Rounded corners, etc. Nice books. Need a final volume I think.

>>51703399
>he doesn't want a Baba Yaga's hut

Shit adventurer.

>>51703399
>The table / index was kind of funny, just assigning random values to everything. Same with weapon / armor etc. determination in the body of the books. Just equal values, hard to get a long sword +1. Might as well roll a Baba Yaga's Hut

What compendium has the rollable index chart in it? This is all I really want.

>>51703425
Big Blue.

>>51703770
Isn't Big Blue a Talisanta book?

Any advice for someone starting out OSR, I have the rules cyclopedia and was thinking of starting a campaign with my gaming group. I am planning on running a hex crawl and slowly introducing my players to the setting. I don't particularly care for non-human races so was wondering what advice you might have when it comes to dealing with race as class. The setting itself is a dying world setting, where the more powerful gods seem to have forsaken the world while the petty deities swindle and make pacts with mortals in exchange for offerings and worship to avoid fading away. I am planning on running Keep on the Borderlands to introduce the players to the system and give me some time to flesh out the surrounding area a bit more for them to explore later. I would also appreciate any advice you might have on integrating a module into your own setting.
Thanks in advance.

File: T&T.jpg (85KB, 385x617px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 385x617px

Hey, years ago I bought pic related from a book exchange and recently started reading it. It seems neat.

Anyone have any experiences with it or can elaborate on its major strengths and flaws?

>>51703299
You own a catapult and you've used it extensively for ideas?

>>51705608
Pro: Fast, simple, witty writing

Con: Very abstract, numbers-go-up game, once you get out of combat (slightly more complex than D&D) you have to deal with the bizarre on the fly rules for everything else.

Monster Rating is a cool concept if the damage calculation a bit hard to work with.

>>51705477
>I don't particularly care for non-human races so was wondering what advice you might have when it comes to dealing with race as class.
Elves become fighter / magic-users (spellswords, mageblades, whatever you want to call them). Drop the obviously racial abilities (infravision, immunity to ghoul paralysis, etc.) but keep everything else the same. Don't worry about making them too weak, because honestly, they'll still be the most powerful class in the game.

Dwarves and halflings are basically just fighters with a few tweaks like really good saving throws, so you can drop them without really taking much away from the game. You could maybe make a Scout class based on halflings, or some kind of Dungeoneer class based on dwarves, but I'm not sure either is as easy a fit as converting elves to mageblades/spellswords/gishes.

>>51705477
I too am just starting OSR, haven't even run a game yet. I was wondering what you'all suggest for handling specifically out-of-combat skills. I don't mind a bit of abstraction or handling things with attributes, but my players are very much the type to want to improve their characters' skills. Now I know what you're thinking-- just tell them to improve their attributes-- but they always want to practice things that are rather difficult to quantify with attributes alone: forging documents, running a business, crafting things, disguise, etc.

How would you suggest I handle this? I saw a thread or two back a guy asking about porting a skill system into an OSR game that lacks one, but I wanna be sure that's really the answer before I do something like that. So uh, I'm open to creative solutions.

>>51707290
>forging documents, running a business, crafting things, disguise, etc.
Will these skills often be used by the PCs, or will it just be a one or two time thing? Will these have mechanical benefits or is it just for roleplaying purposes?

If these things are integral and stuff you want to focus your campaign on, you need a system for it. If they're just events in-between what the game actually is about, for example dungeon crawling, then it's less likely that you need skills or even rules for it.

>>51707673
Good point. I typically steer the game in the direction the players want to go in, and in the past it has been at about a 2:1 ratio. That is, about a third of the game is intrigue and social interaction with the other two parts being dungeon crawling or dispatching baddies. It probably necessitates a system of some kind.

File: Starbucks Metal.jpg (18KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 236x236px

THREAD! I AWAKEN THEE!

FROM THE LAST PAGE, RISE!

File: ODnD_Underworld_and_Wilderness_Adventures.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51710615
Question about OD&D Necromancers:

When a Necromancer becomes a Wizard, and they start hiring dragons/Balrogs/taverns/basilisks, are they "too cool" for their old chimarae/manticores/lycanthropes/gargoyles?

File: OD&D Setting.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51710734
>taverns
*wyverns

>>51710769
I would think not-- I mean in OSR don't you make all the rules anyway?

>>51710769
I dunno, hiring a living tavern seems pretty kickass too me.

>>51710734
They'd totes keep them. Like a strange zoo or monster funhouse for adventurers to die in.

>>51710734
You could run it that way, but I can think of a couple pretty cool variants: either they use alchemical processes to transform gargoyles into flaming balrogs, chimeras into wyverns (or maybe a chimera is a kind of fetal/larval stage which splits when it grows, into one dragon or wyvern, one basilisk, one lion and one goat?) and so on. Or else they drive out/release the old monsters, and that's why there are so FUCKING many lycanthropes in the woods.

>>51711618
>Like a strange zoo or monster funhouse for adventurers to die in.

Usually in a maze under their territory, huh? Sure keeps the solicitors out.

How come Iron Falcon (http://ironfalcon.basicfantasy.org/) is hardly discussed over here? It seems like a really tight clone of OD&D (LBBs + Greyhawk, I think)

>>51711652
Hey, you need some subterranean defenses to keep the sappers from digging a mine under your castle walls.

>>51711702
Probably just doesn't have a big enough installed base, so to speak. The stuff that gets the most traction in /osrg/ is usually the D&D editions themselves, LotFP, and DCC. ACKS and Basic Fantasy are often mentioned but rarely discussed -- LotFP probably gets boosted past its player base in amount of discussion because Raggi's haters are really prevalent and spittle-shouty, plus his rules changes have become a kind of modding gold standard, even for people who don't use them.

>>51711702

Never heard of it. The answer to "how come X isn't discussed here" it usually "because there's nobody to talk it up." or more often "because it's not OSR and so it's off topic."

Iron Falcon sounds cool, though, like Swords and Wizardry, but more faithful to the original rules. I'm down with that.

>>51711652
My (>>51634500) excuse is Ethereal Wormholes.

Not too many things fly on the Elemental Planes of Water and Earth.
∴ Water Vortices and Earth Vortices see little traffic in the sky.
Not too many things burrow on the Elemental Planes of Fire and Air.
∴ Fire Vortices and Air Vortices see little traffic under ground.

Wizards build towers/dungeons for safe and easy crossroads to Inner Planes.
They still need to stock up on traps and wards, mind you. But not nearly as many.

Is Raggi still planning to remove dwarves and elves from LotFP?

>>51711702
Am skimming through it. Actually pretty damn good

>>51711702
This has to be one of the cleanest clones of OD&D I've seen so far: ordered it right away

>>51712420
He's not making another edition, is he?
If the answer is no then no. I know he takes them out of his own games because he runs stuff set in the real world but with fantasy shit.

>>51712420
>>51712549
He is making another edition in a couple years apparently. And I've read that he's planning on removing demihumans and clerics to make the game fit his own style of campaigns more.

>>51701554
The best you can ever be is OK taste? very cynical

What are some good Monster Manuals to pull creatures from for LotFP? How would they best be converted, as I have to account for stuff like the fact that only fighters get Attack bonuses.

>>51712584
Ewww gross

Oh well, you can still use the older editions if that bothers you. Kinda how this General came about actually.

>>51712727
Lusus Naturae and Fire on the Velvet Horizon. Also the original monster manuals and the fiend folio.

Check the lotfp referee book for how to make monsters.

>>51694797
My current Wilderness map is a remake of Blackmoor under a different name I reconstructed in Hexographer. Most of my Dungeons are from One Page Dungeon and a shit ton of modules I snatched from the Trove and then I got courtly stuff from some Pendragon books. Good game

>>51712868
>remake of Blackmoor under a different name I reconstructed in Hexographer

Willing to share this?

>>51712868
>My current Wilderness map is a remake of Blackmoor
The nice foldout map that fits with the rest of the WIlderlands maps, or the one that's in the actual FFC book and looks totally different?

>>51633287
> What piece of fiction is most like the games you play?

In my finer moments, it's a mixture of HP Lovecraft and a trashy, campy fantasy novel from the 70s.

If I had my druthers, it would be as epic as Dragonlance, as torturous and down to earth as Conan, and as deep as Lord of the Rings. Alas, I lack the talent and time to fulfill that dream.
However, I'm looking for a decent-sized dungeon crawl to place in a ruin that I put on my hexmap and then blanked on what to actually put there.

>>51712899
When I get home to my PC in a couple days.

Sorry mate, I've been posting via phone the last 2 days.

When I get back do you want it blank with just the land or you want me to keep my notes and names?

File: 1977_Blackmoor.png (477KB, 1516x1088px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 1516x1088px

>>51712899
>>51712906
This is what I used as a reference.

>>51712989
No worries, no rush
Feel free to post either or both
Learning to use hexographer and it would be cool to see what you've done

>>51713059
There is more stuff here for it too

http://blackmoor.mystara.net/gallery.html

>>51713059
>>51713098
Thanks

>>51713076
Yeah, I'm not great at it otherwise, I would have made my own maps, but I fear my lack of understanding of geography.

>>51713059
>>51713098
Huh! A Thorf recreation of the foldout map. Neat!

File: Crossbowman.jpg (122KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 700x700px

A thread or two back somebody had a tasteful, pseudo-feat system. I only saw the one they made for fighters but I forgot to save it. Could anybody repost it, or at least post stuff like that?

>>51713634
Was that the one along side +2 to fighting styles every 2 levels, with each of you styles capping at +4 across various bonuses?

File: Kettle Helm and Padded Coif.jpg (104KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 800x600px

>>51713702
It may have been, I'm foggy on the details. I'd know the specific one if I saw it, but I'd take any imitation.

File: Roman_parade_helmet_2nd_century.jpg (45KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 450x600px

>>51713762
>>51713634

Seeing these makes me wonder, what are some of this threads favorite helmets?

File: Lilties-Concept.jpg (94KB, 980x300px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 980x300px

>>51714502
Bucket helmet.

File: 1380s Armour 4.jpg (273KB, 525x700px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 525x700px

>>51714502
It's a cliche pick, but the pig-visor is just so neat.

File: visored_barbute_large_1.jpg (63KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x500px

>>51714502
Got one of these, they're pretty neat.

File: sugarloaf-helmet-3.jpg (76KB, 1024x1366px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1024x1366px

>>51714502
>>51714694
My second favorite.

>>51714694
Visored barbutes are totally ahistorical AFAIK.
But they're my favorite too

File: 1486146622309.png (507KB, 2339x1654px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 2339x1654px

>>51713634
Here's... something. Might be what you were thinking of?
If not, I'll do a proper dig for what *I* was thinking of when I get off work in an hour.

File: 2-bronze-helmet-with-griffin-crest.jpg (850KB, 1000x1403px) Image search: [Google]

850KB, 1000x1403px

>>51714502
bird crests best crests

File: corinthian-helmet.jpg (174KB, 912x1600px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 912x1600px

>>51714502
A Corinthian helmet with the right proportions looks menacing as fuck, but it's so easy for them to get screwed up and just look goofy that I can't say I like the type in general.

>>51714782
That's it, actually. Thanks bud.

>>51714782
>>51714866
My question is: Is there more?

Dead game, dead thread

File: Fighter descrption write up teaser.png (39KB, 592x435px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 592x435px

>>51713634

>>51714990
I remember one person suggested scaling [He Who Fights Monsters] to monster HD instead of Fighter level, and the creator said, "imma use that"
They haven't updated the graphic since then though. But otherwise no, at least not for that specifically.

>>51715117
Ayyyy... That's the one I was thinking of.
t. >>51714782

>>51715139
>>51715139
New thread

>>51715090
>the thread is in autosage
>this implies that the game is dead
???
?
?????

I think you'll probably want to go to the doctor and get your bait gland checked, it doesn't seem to be working the way it's supposed to.