/OSRG/ Zine edition

File: submissionguidelines troll gods.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

/tg/ gets shit done.
Help TroveGuy make our OSR Zine!

Email address for submitting to the zine:
[email protected]

File: zinechart troll gods.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>43486936

I'm working on a set of random generators for evocative setting fluff (gods, dungeon descriptions, cities, and NPCs). The general feel I'm going for is mix of Lovecraft's "Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath" and Lieber's "Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser" series. The generators are currently in a spreadsheet (hooray for randomized table-lookup functions!) and don't lend themselves very well to dice rolling unless you happen to have a d47 lying around; if I can get them trimmed down to useable form, do they sound like something /OSRG/ would be interested in?

>>43487564
For illustration, here's some output from the dungeon description generator:
>slumbering war machine beyond forgotten valley
>resplendent ossuary hidden within iridescent coast
>bleak maze beside rusted desert
>cerulean mausoleum hidden within nacreous plain
>wondrous pyramid beside bone valley
>flowering museum amid alkaline fen
>illusory mausoleum beyond crystal fen
>illusory library emerging from petrified coast
>sublime citadel amid silver tundra

And from the NPC generator:
>Valexanya of Morozia, a gaunt and determined male guttersnipe
>Tzalai of Chan, an androgynous and scatter-brained female burglar
>Fardar of Dora, a withered and arrogant male charlatan
>Meliz of Arslagu, a hideous and focused female warrior
>Arkasim of Zenthea, a muscular and sullen male burglar
>Hariush of Beerilia, a scarred and artless male warrior
>Isola of Dalchi, an elegant and degenerate female addict
>Peteni of Desilia, a muscular and greedy male thief-catcher
>Faraya of Inalan, a boney and devout female brute

>>43487639
Sounds great anon!

>>43487691
Thanks!

Here's some more from the pantheon generator:
>Lamat the Flayed, goddess of fear, beasts, and springtime
>Djehet, goddess of fertility, wintertime, and athletics
>Meskhet the Great, god of royalty, silver, and creation
>Ashkur the Overt, goddess of embalming, disease, and thieves
>Adristes, goddess of perseverance, death, and deception
>Eudora the Blind, goddess of darkness, the wild places, and agony
>Ellitti the Consumed, god of trickery, murder, and craftwork
>Nepwaret, god of machines, fire, and lightning
>Ishnanda the Undying, god of oceans, renewal, and beasts

And the city generator:
>Euphrozia, city of smoke and brass
>Tabojavyn, city of night and bone
>Lost Yaban, city of illusion and basalt
>Oyugutchi, city of marble and dreams
>Chaidu, city of verdigris and embers
>Undying Yaban, city of brass and bone
>Distant Pentheba, city of radiance and crystal
>Imperishable Zobia, city of night and chalcedony
>Peerless Beerade, city of knowledge and blasphemy

>>43486936
For image source, there are two options:
3.1.Public domain. Link us where you found it.
3.2.Get written permission from someone to use their image, and provide a means for us to
verify that permission. If we can’t, it gets held until the image is replaced or the person
responds.

Can I just draw them myself?

So hey OSR, thinking of a new way to do spell casting and magic.

Replace spell levels with spell schools. So at level 1, you get a spell school with a single cast. Level two, that school gets 2 casts, level 3 you get a new school with one cast and so on.

However some concerns over just using the old spellcasters table were brought up, and I agree. What's a good way to advance in spell schools? Remember the first spell school should always be the most powerful for the wizard, as it's grown the longest.

>>43487854
>Can I just draw them myself?
Go for it, anon.

>>43487564
don't trim them down, increase them till they are in a usable format, like say d100

>>43488989
I'll do my best! Most of the lists are around 30-40 items, so it looks like I've got some brainstorming to do...

>>43489163
using a d66 might be the way forward there. Roll a d6 for collumn and a d6 for row.

>>43489163
Draw from some material from Nine Princes in Amber, Dark Tower, etc. There's got to be some wiki's with interesting settings and such.

>>43489163
true, although one could also do something like d50 or d60, and just mention the appropriate amount of normal dice(like 5d10 for d50 or 3d20 for d60)

>>43489939
that's actually pretty clever

>>43490345
>(like 5d10 for d50 or 3d20 for d60)
The math is wrong here though.
The curve would lean too much toward the mid-range of results.
Instead, do something like d10 + (d6-1)*10
Not elegant, but eh.

>>43490345
you can get a surprisingly varied number of results on a table this way if you're okay with using (say) d5s and d3s.
5d10 isn't the same as d50, since you don't get results 1-4 at all and there's a massive bellcurve. On the other hand, positioning stuff you want to be more common in the centre of the bellcurve can be a useful tool.

>>43486936
>>43486988
Man it feels great to see the pdf's you made in shitty mac apps being posted.

>>43487854
That sounds great anon. Don't forget to colour them black & white.

That being said, Troll Gods yes won the poll in last thread with a 2/3 majority and so I think it's now oficial: the name for the zine is Troll Gods.

Good work anon. Let's work on those submissions, only 8 more days left to go.

>>43490669
>Don't forget to colour them black & white.
Ah I just wanted to ask about that. Grayscale or literally just black and white?

>>43490758
I will say grayscale. Our original inspiration has a few - a few really - grayscale images, mostly being pure b&w.

I can post that pdf here, if you want, but I think it's ok if you send us something with a little more variety in terms of (b&w) colours.

File: pegana.png (3MB, 2000x1239px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2000x1239px

>>43490574
>>43490606
well I'll admit math is a huge weak point for me, so I was just winging it with those suggestions

also posting a good map

Hey cavegirl, is the axe supposed to be a one handed weapon with d10 damage? Because that seems a tad overpowered.

>>43490758
>>43490912
But I'll add this: show us what you have, with some time before the deadline ends, even if that means showing a sketch or whatever. We might even come up with a solution that satisfies everyone. I'm saying this because (while I understand nothing about image manipulation) maybe pictures will need to be edited in order to fit the look of the rest of the thing. Contrast, saturation and those kinds of things I know nothing about.

File: dreammap-olderversion.jpg (2MB, 1440x960px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x960px

>>43490940
I fucking love the Dreamlands. Here's another map...

>>43490758
>>43490912
Greyscale is perfectly fine.

>>43491032
Yeah, go ahead and submit it even if it's just a sketch. I'm not above publishing sketches. After all, the whole look is DIY anyway.

>>43487854
> Can I just draw them myself?
Absolutely. You would, after all, be the person who created it. Presumably you would be able to get permission from yourself.

Can a game be OSR without being a retroclone?

>>43491503
I'd say yeah. "OSR" can describe a specific style of game system OR a specific style of play; you can play an old-school style game (i.e., one focused on exploration, puzzle-solving, and player skill) without necessarily using a retroclone.

I've been running an old-school adventure in Dungeon World. The party has infiltrated a ruined keep, fought of some goblins, and nearly gotten their shit pushed in by a couple of ghouls in a flooded larder.

Are Monks too 'fantastic' to count as being old school? Giving somebody a weapon-strong punch isn't too crazy for a class, right?

>>43491762
Outside of 0e purist faggotry, old school is pretty much everything before 3e at this point and they had some wild shit early on.

>>43491762
I don't think so. They're in the Rules Cyclopedia after all.

>>43491503
>>43491673
this is a debate that pops up from time to time. The consensus (as much as there is ever a consensus) seems to be that there is a line somewhere between. "OSR games" tend to refer to those that are more or less compatible with oldschool D&D (as well as a handful of others that are grandfathered in). Then we have a handful of games that aren't OSR themselves, but are definitely related to - Torchbearer and Dungeon World are considered this, as well as old school hack, warrior rogue mage, and a few other indie games.

>>43491762
Monk was introduced in Blackmoor in like.. 1975. They were a core class in AD&D. They are about as oldschool as you can get.

>>43491762
>>43491798

I feel like it depends on your setting. If you're running a generic fantasy setting, having masters of oriental choppy-socky running around makes little to no sense; if it's a little more pulp, it may be more acceptable.

IIRC, monks were added because one of Gygax's players had been watching a bunch of kung-fu movies and demanded to play as a kung-fu master; Gary threw the class together based on what he remembered of the choppy-socky flicks he'd seen.

>>43491503
there's a handful around, DCC is the most prominent example, cause while it uses the OGL it doesn't directly emulate any specific edition, there's also Mazes & Minotaurs which also doesn't directly emulate any specific edition(although it's two versions due have some similarities to OD&D and BX/BECMI/RC D&D respectively)

>>43491762
personally I think they're fine, I prefer having all PC classes being explicitly supernatural anyways, even if classes like Fighter and Thief aren't as flashy as say Wizard, they still do things that are clearly impossible for a non-classed NPC to do

>>43491902
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRotEfxpiJA

>>43491966
DCC emulates B/X, it's just failed to at least 11

>>43492202
*dialed, not failed

Anyone got the PDF of Hex Crawl Chronicles?

>>43491860
>>43491966
Let's say that there were games (and there were) that were vaguely like D&D mechanically but had an entirely different tone and style of play. If someone were to copy that playstyle in a game, is it still OSR? A lot of the old fantasy heartbreakers have very modern conceits and assumptions hiding amidst all the tables and tables of bullshit and OGL.

>>43492323
that sounds like something that needs to be judged on a case by case basis

>>43492345
It's usually clear what is OSR and what isn't, but the current definition feels entirely limited to "tables and spoken word dungeon crawling".

>>43492395
>>43492345
>>43492323
If you ask twenty people (even twenty publishers) what OSR means, they are going to come up with roughly twenty answers of what does and doesn't constitute OSR. The most common theme is that it's mechanically compatable with some version of pre-WOTC D&D. There are outliers where this isn't true, but it's more often the case than not and if you look how people market their stuff, "OSR" usually means "Compatible with TSR era D&D" to one degree or another.

You can argue whether or not this is a good thing, but it does seem to be how the phrase is used. I don't see that as a problem, really. It's a useful definition, and if I'm shopping for OSR products that's usually what I'm looking for - stuff that's cross-compatible with the general system. If you marketed your game as OSR but it had say.. Fate mechanics, I would feel like it was misrepresented. If it was an OSR game based on Gamma World on the other hand, it's still not what I was expecting from the term but I could understand why you used it.

A good case example is ZeFRS. It's a Sword & Sorcery clone of the 1980s TSR Conan release using that system. It's not a bad system. It's definitely OSR by any chronological definition, and even thematically it fits with the OD&D "explore places for treasure" vibe. And yet, I've not heard anyone refer to ZeFRS as an OSR game.

> but the current definition feels entirely limited to "tables and spoken word dungeon crawling".
I agree with this to a large degree, but I also don't think that's a bad thing. If I said "we're playing Call of Cthulhu" you'd know exactly what playstyle and genre we're talking about - what experience you can expect and how the game is played. If I say "I'm running an OSR game" and that immediately makes people think of a specific playstyle and methodology? That's good. It means everyone will be on the same page when they come to the table.

>>43488474

Any help with this please?

Reporting in. Just thought I'd give some updates:
I signed up Troll Gods as a blergspot. So once we have material to go, I'll dress the thing up and give it a home to live at. I'm also working on some cursed items for the first issue, because thats the sort of thing that makes me happy.

In Trove News, I'm repeating my quest for AD&D PHB/DMG pdfs that aren't broken. As mentioned previously, the PHB scans ive gotten all have holes in a page, and the DMG appears to be missing a page. I dont know if other scans actually exist anywhere, but it would be damn handy if we found them.

>>43493899
...Forgot my name.

>>43493927
It's TroveGuy.

>>43491018
>>43491018
That's correct. A decent hunter/neanderthal could get +2 strength, +1 damage off a stone weapon, and +2 damage off the Go For The Kill manoeuvre. So that's d10+5 damage on a hit with a one-handed weapon.
And, yes, that's intentional. Bear in mind that a starting character has a hitdice of flesh AND a hitdice of grit (and monsters are similarly tough), I've intentionally made high damage a little easier to get. From playtesting, the issue I've hit against is that the game /isn't lethal enough/, actually, and it's too hard to drop an enemy (or get dropped yourself) in one round.

File: spell school thingy.png (17KB, 1099x355px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 1099x355px

>>43488474
>>43493698
You're out of the area of simple tweaks and into the area of needing to put in serious work mathing out different options, which requires a level of dedication that you're unlikely to get from passersby. With that said, here's something I threw together. It's not perfect, but maybe will give you a starting point to work from / something to react to or against.

The idea is that you get spell points in each of your schools separately, and you have to spend 2 spell points to cast a 2nd level spell, 3 for a third, and so on. But in order to gain access to a level of spells in a particular school, you have to have twice the spell points there. So while it only costs 3 points to cast a third level spell, you don't gain access to 3rd level spells until you have at least 6 spell points in that school.

Off to the right, you see a table giving you a more standard breakdown of spell slots, assuming you always cast the highest level spells possible (and next to that, the standard magic-user spell progression in Moldvay Basic).

Flaws? Primarily that it's overly complicated. You have to track spell points in a bunch of different schools, which is okay, but you also have to track what level of spells you have access to. I'm okay with the first, but adding the second is kind of rubbish.

Another issue is that every school jumps to the next spell level at the same time, which is less than ideal. If you were to keep the same basic idea, you might want to stagger them a bit more. But overall, the progression isn't that far off from the original, which is good.

File: spell school thingy2.png (20KB, 1156x355px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 1156x355px

>>43494585
Okay, this is a much better idea, as it eliminates the spell points and twice-as-many-to-gain-access problem. A spell costs as many points as the level it is and you don't need a certain amount to gain level access (as long as you have enough points to cast a level of spells, you have access to that level). The problem is that once you run out of new schools to add, you run into problems, because you never pick up more spells, just higher level ones (or you do pick up more spells, but only lower level ones, depending on how you want to allocate your points). That's an issue that obviously needs to be addressed, but it's a tangible one you can sink your teeth into, and if you solve it, you've probably got a workable system.

>>43492323
See Pits&Perils, WhiteHack, Into the Odd, and Encounter Critical.

File: gamma world 2e.jpg (155KB, 636x822px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 636x822px

>>43493927
>>43493899
Not sure if you saw the link last thread, but here's 1st through 4th edition Gamma World (the old school stuff) in an organized format.

https://mega.nz/#F!z9wHCQwC!HCeMOum5467vvbTd2XwiMw

A lot of the material isn't the best of quality, but I'm working from what's available (and I did download a handful of torrents, and hunt around a good deal for individual files online). I assembled the maps from separate pages into unified wholes, but the image quality I had to work with wasn't great. The 4th edition Overlord of Bonparr, Unaligned Territories supplement is missing the table of contents and pg 3.

>>43494585
>>43494778

The original concept did not include spell access, but I appreciate the thought.

>>43495020
The spell access portion was simply to keep you from being able to cast high level spells too soon, but this one >>43494778 does away with the need for that (while creating a new problem).

>>43495514
He said related to

>>43495538
Ah ok then.

>>43495049

I see, but does it really fit getting a new spell school every level until level 5, or are you saying it works differently?

I'm also not really sure if I'm a huge fan of only getting one point every two levels.

I'm thinking of putting one of my race/classes up as a sort of preview of my game.

Make your choice, I'll get it up in time for the 'zine.

http://strawpoll.me/5932518

>>43495587
Getting a new spell school is necessary to have enough spells overall (note that the effective spells exactly mirror the spell progression in the original rules, at least if you are casting the highest level spell you can all the time), unless you add more spell points to each individual school more quickly, but then you have another problem. If you, say, add 1 point per level to the primary school, you'll be able to cast a 7th level spell by 7th level (rather than the 4th level spells you should be able to), and that's a huge jump in power. Unless, of course, you restrict access to spells like in the first spitball idea here >>43494585, but that's pretty clunky, in my opinion.

>>43495721

True, but the reason why I brought up the spell progression thing as not being important is because the spell schools were going to be less like schools and more like spells themselves; in that the number of casts or spells per day is actually for the spell school as being a certain effect.

For example; if a Wizard has a Hex school each cast of that school counts as a freeform Hex spell they can cast during the day. They can mostly make up what kind of Hex it is, that's the idea. Its to make magic more flexible. More powerful effects cost more MP, obviously.

>>43496292
Then you should probably not base your progression in any way on the one in D&D, as you're doing something fundamentally different.

File: thief.jpg (544KB, 720x1004px) Image search: [Google]

544KB, 720x1004px

Tell me about your Thief-Acrobat OSRG

>>43495625
Wow, all three options are tied up at the moment...

>>43497248
*Applauds*

those of you looking for art for trollgods, the british library flickr is an amazing resource, highly recommend that.

I'm liking these troll pictures so far.

What kind of articles are looking up for the first issue? Is the maker here and is he full or still producing?

>>43497248
>>43497330
>>43497413
>>43497513

too handsome

>>43497669

I like this one best thus far.

>>43497669
This, especially if you can have something disgusting ooze from its eyes without it looking like it's crying

I just downloaded all the Basic D&D moduls from the trove. Has anybody ever compiled them into a single campaign/megadungeon?

>>43497813
Bwahahaha

>>43497813

the yelling one is dope

all of these just look like trolls, rather than troll gods

>>43497856
Virtually all OSR and 3e pics of orc/ogre/troll/etc. gods look just like normal, if built, members of their race too, maybe big and (in the case of Gruumsh) cyclopean.

>>43497856
Suggestions on how to make the troll look godlike needed.

Is there a particular reason that the magazine's name is pluralized? Why not call it Troll God?

>>43497886
Hmm. If a devoutely religious troll clawed the face of his god into a dungeon door, how would he make it recognisable?

Maybe add an attribute: a wheel, a ceremonial stone axe. A body modification that tells a story we don't know: a scar shaped like a bird or moon. Maybe something impossible, like a chunk of face just hoovering around apart from its skull. I don't know.

Is there an OSR system where completely new players could have a character created and ready to play within 20 minutes if someone explained the rules to them? One of my groups is big on board games, but whenever I try and convince them to give DnD a go they hem and haw about character creation taking too long and being too complicated.

File: fox.jpg (200KB, 700x1000px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 700x1000px

>>43487564
>unless you happen to have a d47 lying around
2d8 can generate 36 results:
- 8 uncommon: 2.8%
- 28 common: 5.6%

2d10 can generate 55 results:
- 10 uncommon: 1%
- 45 common: 2%

3d6 can generate 56 results:
- 6 rare: 0.5%,
- 30 uncommon: 1.4%
- 20 common: 2.8%

I guess, I should make an article about this.

P.s. no captcha, batman tattoos are not eatable.

>>43497920
>Is there a particular reason that the magazine's name is pluralized?
Because it's being created by anonymous, which is legion, not a single being.

>>43497989
> within 20 minutes
Pretty much anything based on Basic D&D. Roll for scores, pick a class, buy equipment, done. The longest part of character creation is shopping for equipment, but there are a few different equipment generators out there that will give random starting stuff.

Even AD&D is pretty quick, compared to any later edition.

>>43497627
> What kind of articles are looking up for the first issue? Is the maker here and is he full or still producing?
We've plenty of room left for now. There's no real upper cap, since we're a digital publication, at least not until we get to the point where we're juggling several dozen submissions a month.

>>43497248
All of these look amazing. This guy >>43497413
and >>43497813 the yelling one are my favorites so far.

>>43497920
> Is there a particular reason that the magazine's name is pluralized? Why not call it Troll God?
I was actually the one who suggested it (albeit with my name removed, so people wouldnt take it as any kind of "official" suggestion.

I liked it plural for a few reasons. The first being that I can't imagine that trolls were devout monotheists, but more practically that "Troll Gods" sounds vague and alludes to a whole unknown pantheon. "Troll God" sounds like we're talking about a specific person.

Then there's this >>43498266 - it's made by a more or less anonymous group rather than any one specific person, and since the initials are TG one can always debate whether Troll Gods refers to some kind of fluff for an implied setting or the actual creators themselves - after all, the internet at large assumes everyone on 4chan is a troll anyway, no?

>>43487564
>>43498117
His best option is 1d6 + 1d8, for 48 results in the "d66" table format.

>>43491503
Yes, by not being a clone. Classic editions of D&D are as OSR as they come.

I kinda dislike the focus on clones, to be honest.

>>43491762
>Are Monks too 'fantastic' to count as being old school? Giving somebody a weapon-strong punch isn't too crazy for a class, right?
No and no. Don't forget that Gygax let Mornard play a balrog in Greyhawk.

Old-school isn't really about WHFRP-esque rat catcher hypermundanity, suffering and living in filth. The grit in it comes from the attitude to the PCs and to risk, the expectations on outcomes, things like that.

Playing a balrog is OSR, geting buttmad that your balrog got killed by a kobold and arguing with the referee isn't.

>>43495625
And Dwarf Elder is beginning to pull into the lead. Let's keep the votes coming. I'll end it later today at 1 pm EST

>>43499037
>His best option is 1d6 + 1d8, for 48 results in the "d66" table format.
Yeah. This one is perfect. You don't even need to mess with digit order - one die simply gets designated as tens and that's enough.

>>43491503
>>43499364
> I kinda dislike the focus on clones, to be honest.
You might as well say "I kinda dislike the focus on house rules."

B/x and BECMI or RC are the games that get mentioned most in these threads. The only clone that gets any real love seems to be LotFP, and the conversation about it is almost always "I dont like the edgelord shit, but it's a great B/x clone." S&W and LL get an occasional mention, but again almost always as recommendations over B/x or BECMI for clarity of writing or minor rules tweaks.

None of these are new games so much as a set of house rules for B/x or BECMI, and stuff from any one of them is cross compatible for the most part. It's all the same game.

On the other hand, if you want the thread to be more focused on core RAW D&D, gandhi that shit and be the change you want to see. Start up some good discussion topics.

Who is playing some variant of AD&D (instead of some version of Basic).

What draws you to it instead? What crunchy bits make you want to run it instead of bolting things onto Basic?

>>43499877
>And let's not even get started on how you all react to games becoming more popular and easily accessible.
I'm sorry, I believe you took the wrong turn. The 3e thread is that way. Good luck!

>>43499877
holy fuck those are some good drugs.

I think you're in the wrong thread, justicefriend. This isn't a thread for politics.

>>43499877
Wrong thread, dude, but yeah, that was good for a lol.

File: map_0412barrierpeaks.jpg (4MB, 1500x2883px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1500x2883px

>>43499835
>What draws you to it instead?
Some of the old school modules are the only reason I sometimes play AD&D. Expedition to the Barrier Peaks for example, that one is a blast.

>>43499576
I didn't mean in the thread, actually, but it seems apparent that I was unclear. In any case, no gandhing needed.

>>43500442
Is there anything in particular about the modules that would be a pain to run with B/x instead of AD&D?

>>43499576
>The only clone that gets any real love seems to be LotFP
Bits of ACKS seem pretty popular too, actually. The domain management stuff there is rather lovely, but other bits of the system (proficiencies and LOADSACLASSES) are too 3.5esque for my taste.

>>43500731
Im on the fence about ACKS. Objectively, I think it's pretty good and does some neat stuff. It has a comparable number of classes to AD&D - particularly when you look at the demi-humans as just class/race combinations. AD&D also has proficiencies as well.. so that didn't throw me. I actually thought making proficiencies vaguely feat-like was a cool idea.

In practice though, I can't bring myself to actually run it because B/x (or LotFP) is so much simpler and easier.

>>43500473
> I didn't mean in the thread, actually
I guess if you're going for "in general" within the OSRsphere the reason that clones get all the press is that clones are things that are still alive. The whole reason that things like OSRIC exist is so that people could produce new material. It's an end-run around copyright.

If I'm writing a new AD&D module or supplement, i can't really market it as such... but i can definitely market it for "old school fantasy games" or under the mark of one retroclone or another.

>>43500664
I don't run it, I couldn't be bothered to convert everything over. Our group gets together, and when we finish one type of game, weather it be 3.5 or Deadlands or whatever, we vote on what we want to play next. So sometimes we go for the old modules and just use that system.

>>43497886


Take qualities of trolls, like regeneration, and amp them. The yelling ones, but the mouths have too many teeth, like they've grown in too fast and wrong.

The crown seems to work pretty well too. Maybe too grimdark, but you could bolt the crown into its head.

They all look cool, just some ideas.

>>43500839
Just try it out, it's a solid and fun system.

>>43495625
Alright, looks like it tied, but I'll go with Dwarf Elder. Five me a bit and I'll reveal it when done.

File: bubble shield.jpg (176KB, 631x419px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 631x419px

What system would you MOST prefer to see new material for in the new OSR zine?

http://www.strawpoll.me/5936612

>>43503782
Definitely systemless or tagged if you absolutely want to.

>>43503782
Couldn't submitters just add a line "suggested for___ system" with whatever they contribute?
I feel that narrowing down the system the zine is for is going to cut down on the amount of submissions that you get.

>>43503890
I was not suggesting that the zine be limited to a single system, but rather gauging what system, if any, would be the most sought after for new material.

File: LotFP-AC Conversion.png (34KB, 717x424px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 717x424px

>>43503782

I'd say politely ask that people to convert 'em to stock Basic where possible. Most clones that make any changes have tables somewhere to convert from that to their own setup. I know LotFP has one, pic related.

>>43504436

Cool. I like all three logos so far.

>>43504436
Can I has three Troll Gods?

>>43497248

Ugk the Strong

>>43497669

Drek the Cruel

>>43504436

and Thoz the Mad

>>43504436
Love it :D

>>43503782
I dislike "system less" because it implies that the stuff is all fluff. You can write something with mechanical impact and it still be compatible with all of the other systems listed

>>43504436
What are the four squares at the bottom?

File: vince.png (153KB, 404x269px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 404x269px

>>43503782
>Legend of the Flame Princess

>>43505197
Map symbols; the kind that might appear on a dungeon grid or wilderness map.

>>43505184
Do you mean that the description would provide numbers but not give a specific system that they could be used for? As in:

Troll:
STR: 14
CON: 18
DEX: 8
INT: 7
WIS: 9
Regenerated 1d6 HP every turn.

If that's the case, the numbers don't seem to have much of an impact because they can only be compared to other numbers within a system to have meaning.

>>43504699
>>43504783

Well, it is called "Troll Gods." The logo could cycle between the various gods: month 1 is Ugk, month 2 is Drek, month 3 is Thoz, and then repeat the process.

File: jason.vorhees.croc.jpg (87KB, 511x509px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 511x509px

>>43505430
That's badass.

File: all the fish.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Obviously WIP

Probably going to submit this for the zine as soon as I cleaned it up, added some much needed information, fixed the grammar.

What do you think?

>>43504436
oh, this one is great

File: TrollGods_Logo_5.png (620KB, 1208x1038px) Image search: [Google]

620KB, 1208x1038px

>>43504699
Yes.

>>43506045
that one is so, so good

>>43506045
I vote for this one!

File: TrollGodsFont_1.png (29KB, 591x477px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 591x477px

Font experimentation. This is the basic layout.

>>43506045
Best one!

>>43506045
*Starts the slow clap*

>>43506768
Serifs are great

>>43506908
I like this one the most, personally.

>>43506768
My two cents, I like this font the most, because something about it appeals to my sense of style from the 70s-80s. Like it looks like the font I would see on the cover of a module I would pick up from the time.

>>43505387
Actually, yeah, almost all OSR products are cross compatible. Even the oddball crits of DCC are still just hit dice and type based.

most OSR monsters are just AC, HD, and damage and a little else.

>>43504783
I like.>>43505430

>>43506045
Yes-s... My precious...

>>43505387
Not him, but:

1) more like this:
Troll (AC 4; HD 6; HP 27; MV 40; #AT 2; D 1-8/1-8; Save F6; ML 7; AL C; Regenerates 1d6 HP every turn)

2) all "orthodox" OSR systems are interchangeable and you can easily decipher/convert stats between them (as long as you know the original system the stats were created for).

Personally, I strongly disapprove of "systemless" as well. It doesn't make any sense to present data without any reference point. Even Advanced and Basic had differences.

If you don't want default system, at the very least you must have explicit declaration of the system your stats are for.

>>43499835
>What draws you to it instead?

1e fan here. Weapon vs AC, reach, and speed factor add so god damn much to the game, plus lots of great domain management rules. You could have a whole game that is just stronghold clearing.

I also really like the various muggle classes. Barbarian, cavalier, etc. Gygax is one of the few designers who put actual thought into what OSR martials need to be survivable, whereas most just go "fuck it, level 1 fighter is acceptable" despite it needing to utterly lean on the magic user and elf ftr-mu to survive at all.

>>43507447
>>43499835
Also, DMag has basically the best campaign oriented material for 1e around. Guidelines for joining up with and progression in a military, running your own Hogwarts or gladiator arena and other forms of domain management, an early take on martial maneuvers, lots of good shit.

I also like some of 2e but its too open ended, and there's less cross compatibility in 2e subsystems than between different fucking OSR games! In particular I like the high level options and the crit system.

So, I really want to run an old school dungeon crawl, but I looked at the trove and there's just so much stuff in there that it's a bit intimidating. Where do I start?

I'd really like something a bit lighter rules-wise, as I wing most stuff anyway. It's gotta be easy to homebrew for too, because I'd like to add some extra classes/monsters/stuff as I go.

Any recommendations?

>>43507602
Beyond the Wall. Each class gets a walkthrough for character creation, it's rules light, and is made to be able to be played as an entire adventure in the space of one night.

>>43507602
1) Choose system (personally, I prefer LotFP with S&W saving throws and some minor homerules).

Beyond the Wall is quite good, but somewhat lacking long-term.

2) Familiarize yoursefl with it (you might try solo adventures).

3) Run something not overly complicated (BD&D B2 module Keep on the Borderlands is traditional starting module, some recommend B5 Horror on the Hill).

>>43507602
well it depends, do you want to get a print copy or are you going to run it purely digital, that affects the recommendation

>>43507849
Digital. My FLGS rarely has any OSR stuff.

>>43507602
Basic Fantasy RPG is a great place to start. The rules are simple, and cleanly presented and the website is full of optional rule supplements if you want to get fancy. The best part is that everything for BFRPG is available for free on their website, and print versions are dirt cheap, like $5 cheap.

So here's a question.

Why do warriors (and most characters) roll for HP each level, but Wizards have a set amount of spell slots they get per level?
Why not make them also roll for spell slots?

>>43508039
Check Green Devil Face #5

>>43508039
The exact same reason wizards roll for HP each level.

>>43508039
Same reason warriors don't roll for THAC0.

>>43507957
well most OSR games can be easily obtained physically online(especially since most are available POD from Lulu or DriveThru), but yeah >>43508003 is probably right, of the modern ones BFRPG is the best choice for a beginner

>>43508327
>well most OSR games can be easily obtained physically online
Not living in the states, so the shipping is 40+usd

>>43508382
oh well that sucks for you then

>>43505387
This. >>43507391
If you've presented it more or less as:
> (AC 4; HD 6; HP 27; MV 40; #AT 2; D 1-8/1-8; Save F6; ML 7; AL C; Regenerates 1d6 HP every turn)
Then it's already compatible with every system that was listed in the straw-poll. I can take that information and run everything from proper AD&D to ACKS, LL, S&W, etc. The biggest jump would be switching AC4 to ascending AC (16) for games that use it, but if I'm playing LotFP im already used to that. If we provide the stats in more or less "generic D&D" fashion, then it will be applicable to just about everything within that family.

If someone wants to write up something that is specifically NOT D&D (boot hill, gamma world, star frontiers) then all they need to do is make a note of that in the description.

File: recovering health in doom.gif (1MB, 194x284px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 194x284px

So my FLGS is changing owners and the old one is having a big sale. buy 1 get one 50% off mix and match

and to my surprise there were a bunch of Old school modules. I know I could probably just get PDFs of all of these but I just like having physical copies

gonna back to tomorrow and pick up Expedition to Barrier Peaks. What should I pick up as a second? trying to stick to a budget.

Was hoping I could get some suggestions

>Adventures I recall seeing there

Tomb of Horrors
White Plume Mountain
Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth
Against the Giants
Village of Hommlet
Keep on the Borderlands
I 1-4
Castle Amber
The Lost City
The Ghost Tower of Inverness
Dragons of Despair
Palace of the Silver Princess
In Search of the Unknown
Assassin's Knot
Beyond the Crystal Cave
The Beholder Trilogy

>>43506045
I'm voting for this one. I think I actually like it's font layout best as well. With the more complicated illustration element, the relatively plain (but bold) font logo seems a good contrast.

It also goes best thematically, in a way. Part of the reason I like the logo illustration as much as I do is that it reminds me of something you would have seen in early OD&D or judges guild stuff - slightly over the top inks that weren't overproduced. The simpler font has that same vibe to it.

>>43505649
This is excellent. Keep it up!

>>43507602
Just pick a starting place and go from there. A lot of people will recommend different retroclones, but honestly you can't go wrong with picking up moldvay basic as your starting place. It's the better written of the various Basic editions, and it's broadly compatible with just about anything you will find in the OSR sphere. You can probably also find a dead tree copy online if you sniff around a bit.

>>43508039
> Why do warriors (and most characters) roll for HP each level, but Wizards have a set amount of spell slots they get per level? Why not make them also roll for spell slots?
Wizards and warriors both roll for HP. The primary benefit of level advancement for a warrior is THAC0. They don't roll for it. The primary advancement for Wizards is spell progression. They don't roll for that. No one rolls to randomly determine their class benefits.

If you really want to get into the balance of it though - warriors progress in their THAC0 automatically, where wizards have to find or research the additional spells they get.

>>43506045
All hail the Troll Gods. I'm going to picture it as a three headed troll god if you don't mind...

>>43509703
A three-headed troll god, perpetually arguing with itself.

>>43494999
Gamma world stuff is up and sorted.

>>43509766
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4SJ0xR2_bQ

>>43509766
Three one-bodied gods.

>>43505649
It looks great so far, looking forward to the finished version!

>>43509766
>>43510584

At one point it was three separate-bodied gods, then one three-headed god, then back again, etc.

So my last homebrew game died again, again, and again. I want to run something that could potentially attract a wider and more universal player base; so I decided on DnD.

However, I have no experience with DnD in general. What should I do?

>>43503782
Voted Other because I'd prefer the standard assumption to be Basic, with ascending AC added as is often done in OSR materials (the common form is "AC: 8[12]"). Basic expands much more readily to AD&D than one can mentally cut through the clutter in AD&D to Basicize, I feel.

Anything else should be accepted of course, but ought to be tagged with the intended system somewhere. ("Beef Hoarder - a new class for AD&D")

>>43511059
B/X or a B/X retroclone like LOTFP

>>43503421
Just need work on the tables now. Anyone point me to where I can hash up some for the 'zine?

>>43507602
Moldvay Basic. It's in the trove, a quick read, an easy system, and there were a shitbillion copies printed so finding one of them in reasonable shape on ebay's trivial.

And it's so easy to homebrew for that you'll start crying at the thought that you wasted time on other systems.

>>43509077
I'm personally really fond of Tsojcanth, but I think that counts as an offbeat choice. Best value for your money's Against the Giants, though -- I think.

Pretty well half of those are top-tier classics, though.

>>43508003
This.

>>43511276
Tomb of Horrors was the most expensive one at $29

Against the Giants is $19

Village Hommlet is $17

most of the others are $15

ended up getting the S1-4 off of Amazon for $20 bucks.

so its now Against the Giants and some other else.

they also had The Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun and the Dancing Hut of Baba Yaga.

>>43511105

Thanks, I guess. All you did was say the name of a system though, not very helpful.

>>43511781
B/X or Moldvay Basic is one of the easier D&D systems to learn.

has great modules like Keep on the Borderlands and Isle of Dread.

My favorite retroclone (Lamentations of the Flame Princess) is based off of it.

I see that Lamentations is very popular, but more than a few people rag on it without giving specific reasons. Is it disliked due to its mechanics, setting, or popularity?

People tend to like:
> Encumbrance rules
> The class balance
> D6-based subsystems

People tend to dislike
> The class balance
> The implied setting/modules ("too edgy!")
> The creator

>>43512099
very graphic content and the author is very unapologetic about it.

Death Love Doom is the only module that I feel lives up to EDGELORD buzzwords.

>>43512099
>>43512136

What if you don't like the race as class thing? What then?

Also having to switch between using d20s and d6s seems kind of annoying.

>>43512265
I feel like you don't have much experience with.. well. Any of these games.
> What if you don't like the race as class thing? What then?
Race as class isn't a problem specific to LotFP. It's something that more or less all Basic clones have, therefore it has nothing to do with an argument about LotFP.

> Also having to switch between using d20s and d6s seems kind of annoying.
Again, not remotely unique to LotFP. Basic uses 1-in-6 and 2-in-6 chances for a whole bunch of shit. The only thing he really did was switch the percentile stuff to also be under a d6. In effect, he made it one less category of dice to use.. but if you prefer using d6s, d20s, AND percentile rolls, go for it.

TL;DR - nothing you just said is a LotFP problem. It's a Basic D&D problem.

>>43505649
personal taste but it might be helpful to give the top row of each table a grey color background, or alternating row colors if you want to go that far.

>>43509077

>Expedition to Barrier Peaks

Good choice, brah.

I remember going to a con about a decade ago, a vendor had just bought a fuckton of old modules the night before and put out boxes of them for sale. Said they were seven bucks apiece, he hadn't gone through them yet.

Egg of the Phoenix...YOINK

File: TrollGodsFont_All.png (242KB, 1440x3346px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1440x3346px

Which logo do you prefer? Stating why you prefer it in the thread would be helpful.

http://strawpoll.me/5940610

>>43512888
1 reminds me most of the under-produced classic era of D&D stuff. I vote 1.

3 is a close second.

2 is my least favorite. It reminds me of the Monster energy drink logo.

>>43512888
>http://strawpoll.me/5940610
Jesus Christ, that's helpful data

File: Tales of the Scarecrow.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Never mind me, just uploading a couple pdfs on here to download onto my tablet in a bit.

File: Fuck For Satan.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>43513324
Another...

>>43513324
>>43513352
Why not just use the trove link and download them all at once from there?

>>43513392
Because Mega.NZ's download system doesn't work on my Tablet's browser.

>>43511781
> Thanks, I guess. All you did was say the name of a system though, not very helpful.
Not that anon, but you're basically asking the exact same question as up thread here.
>>43507602
Your answers will be the same.

>>43511182
Bump?

>>43513352
Is that actually...

What the...

I don't even...

Troveguy, do you mind if a single person submits multiple articles?

>>43514922
go for it. Even if we decided that one person was dominating half of an issue, we could always print some in one issue and carry some over to the next. Submit away.

File: happy.jpg (186KB, 518x540px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 518x540px

>>43514947
This is gonna be fun.

Anyone know anything about Tunnels & Trolls?

>>43514947
Question! How SRS BSNS do submissions have to be? Lots of posters in other threads seem to associate OSR with Dark Souls-style grimdarkness. What if I want to submit a scenario where the players have to defeat the God of Jesters in a pie eating contest?

>>43515197

Tomb of Horrors as made by NERF

>>43515156

I've played it a bit. D&D's more ghetto cousin.

>>43515197

OSR can be gritty, but it can also be zany and over-the-top. Sometimes at the same time. See >>43499400

>>43511811
>>43512641

Would 2nd edition perhaps be something better to invest time into?

Also I should ask; Does 2nd Edition count as 'old school' or what?

>>43515595
that really depends on your tastes. I personally can't stand 2E but others say its the fucking best one.

pretty much anything before 3E or tries to emulate systems before 3E is considered OSR. IIRC

>>43512888
So far, I prefer 4.

Though, keeping map symbols in a row might be a good idea. Perhaps, shift "OSR Fanzine" to the left, or make a vertical group out of them in the upper right corner? My OCD demands to keep logo compact.

>>43515156
Yeah. Basically, early DnD with some bells and whistles. Also, T&T were concentrating on Solo adventures.

There should be T&T folder in the Trove (I think). IIRC links to archives were posted at some point and TroveGuy implied he will upload them.

>>43515595

2E is the last TSR edition, and the last edition that was cross-compatible with all the other TSR editions, so yeah. You can run Keep on the Borderlands in 2E with minimal changes, so it's close enough to count.

We need to make a FAQ, people.


>>43515595
>Would 2nd edition perhaps
In 1977 DnD split into Basic and Advanced.

Basic kept Races as Classes, while Advanced went with Races as Races. So you can go with 1st AD&D edition as well as 2nd.

> be something better to invest time into?
There is no "better". You'll be learning both systems. AD&D just has additional baggage. Rules are mostly the same and monster stats/modules are interchangeable.

I.e. simply start with BD&D and take any pieces of AD&D you want.

>Also I should ask; Does 2nd Edition count as 'old school' or what?
Depends on what you mean. There is "OSR-spirit" (any system can have it; I consider Traveller to be OSR in that sense, for example) and AD&D 2 is somewhat lacking it. And then there is OSR-compatibility. I.e. ability to freely move rules/monster stats between systems. AD&D2 fits here.

>>43507602
>>43511186
Moldvay Basic is a good choice. It's the basis of a large number of retroclones, so you can easily transition to one if and when you discover it does something in a way you prefer (or just steal the bits you like and continue to use Moldvay). Alternately, Labyrinth Lord is very faithful to Moldvay Basic, if you wanted something that's essentially old school Basic, but in print.

>>43508039
I've never been a big fan of the way hit points are done. I like to either give a set amount (high average usually works well), or possibly to roll from scratch each time you level, but keep your old hit point total if it was higher (and possibly adding +1 hit point to that total). I don't like the idea of somebody getting bad permanent stats due to low rolls. Of course, I also don't like the standard way of rolling for attributes.

>>43516022
>I like to either give a set amount (high average usually works well), or possibly to roll from scratch each time you level, but keep your old hit point total if it was higher (and possibly adding +1 hit point to that total)

This actually seems like the best way to do it, it encourages more realism to the characters and also tapers character growth off quickly. Better because now, essentially, leveling up may give you a chance to increase your max health a bit closer to a certain soft cap as opposed to just adding another dice onto it, which is pretty unrealistic no matter how you shake it.

I mean really, anyone adding a new hit dice per level is pretty unrealistic, just because this guy is level 2 that means he can take the axe to the face and survive? That sort of thing.

>>43512265
>What if you don't like the race as class thing? What then?
Basic Fantasy RPG is essentially Basic with tweaks, including splitting race and class, and using ascending AC with the d20 mechanic for attacks. It personally irritates me by being inconsistent in its level of revision, leaving wonkiness like percentile thief skills and old school saving throw categories, but you may feel differently.

Labyrinth Lord's Advanced Edition Companion is essentially AD&D's options (including split race and class) built on top of Basic's more streamlined core rules (less unnecessary clutter). It irritates me by not streamlining AD&D enough, and carrying over too much obnoxious clutter (racial ability minimums and maximums, separate resurrection and transformation survival stats, etc.).

>Also having to switch between using d20s and d6s seems kind of annoying.
Shit, old school D&D tends to have a bunch of different subsystems. d20, roll high for to-hit and saves. d20, roll low for attribute checks. d6 for surprise. d10 for initative. d% for thief skills. d6 skills are hardly going to make things more confusing.

But if you want things more standardized, check out Castles & Crusades. It uses the unified d20 mechanic of new school D&D (roll a d20, add your bonus, and try to overcome a target number) while otherwise retaining an old school approach. It's more-or-less based on a streamlined AD&D, though it makes enough changes that it's kind of its own game.

So I know its been discussed a few times in the thread but; alternatives to Vancian magic?

>>43516164
I think you misunderstand what I was saying. Normally what happens is that you've got 2nd level character with 8 hit points, and when he goes up a level, you roll another hit die (getting, say, 3) and add the result to his old hit points (resulting in 11 hit points).

What I'm saying is that you've got that 2nd level character, and when he goes up a level, you roll and total 3 hit dice (one for each level he now is) and replace his old total with that instead of adding to it. If, however, the new total isn't higher than his old one, you keep the old one (possibly adding +1 to the old one).

Now, I'll give you that the hit point increase in D&D is a bit wonky, but that's a bit of a different matter. And if you did what I think you thought I was suggesting, you'd have to revise a fair bit of the way the system works (at the very least, radically revising damage and healing spells).

>>43516396

Oh alright, I understand now.

Frankly the thing I suggested makes a lot of sense for a more low level, gritty and realistic game, but if you want more character strength then yeah that method would work fine too. Actually results in even stronger player characters because they get to reroll their shitty old rolls instead of being forced to keep them.

>>43516396
Isn't that exactly how OD&D does it?

File: hit points rolled from scratch.png (8KB, 315x293px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 315x293px

>>43516543
>Isn't that exactly how OD&D does it?
Other than the bit about keeping your old total if it is higher (unless that got added in a supplement or something), I think that's the consensus. OD&D is a bit vague about it, but that's what it seems to indicate. Overall, I really like the way OD&D does hit dice, between that and the fact that all hit dice are d6s (and tougher classes just get more of them more quickly).

>>43516481
It's not as significant a boost as it might seem, and mostly works to even characters out.

>>43516661
That table is based on keeping your old score if the new one isn't higher, rather than keeping your old score +1 (not that that would change things much).

Relatively new player here, in a group that plays mostly AD&D 2e. Are there any systems that implement magic in a more modular way instead of having huge lists of spells that do very specific things?

File: Wizard Apprentice 2.jpg (163KB, 974x821px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 974x821px

>>43516738

I tried to give a few ideas earlier in the thread, but one concept you could try is something like related;
>>43494585
>>43494778

Each Wizard starts with 1 spell point in a single school. This school can be anything relating to your world; elemental magic, a DnD style school, hell it could be Harry Potter style magic with wands. You grow in power in your first school at the biggest rate, then you get a second school. The second school, remember, is not any stronger or is not level 2 magic, its just a new school. You use up multiple spell points to make bigger effects.

For instance, lets say my character is a Pyromancer. At first level, he has 1 Fire Magic point. This means he can cast a single spell relating to magical fire, such as a fire breath or fire bolt or commanding a fire or opening a path in a fire for escape or any other number of ideas.

Then at level 2, he could get another fire magic. He could combine these two points for a greater spell, or spread them out as 2 level 1 effects.

Finally then at level 3, however, he can choose to take a new school. Let's say he's a defensive person anyway, so he takes Abjuration or shielding spells. Now he has 2 fire magic points and 1 shielding magic point per day. As these grow, his power in Pyromancy will ALWAYS be the highest, and therefore his first school will be his most powerful.

Personally I love the idea for this system but it needs a lot of work. Such as some kind of incentive to not take new schools for the really focused Wizards. Additionally; to keep the people who aren't fans of rules lite narrative gaming, you would need to construct a large amount of charts relating to what each point in a spell could do or lead up to.

If you need ideas on how this could be done, you could check out Ars Magica, which has great guidelines for how elemental-based spells could grow in strength and usage for just about any effects you could think of.

>>43516368
What aspect of Vancian magic bothers you? If it's having to prep lists, you can just let people cast every spell they know once per adventure / day / whatever (while obviously limiting the number of spells they can know). If you want to also limit the amount of magic somebody can throw around at one time, you can say they can only cast 1 spell of each spell level per scene / chapter / half hour / etc.

If what bothers you is having an expendable resource that brings the adventure to a screeching halt once it runs out, let folks regain a limited amount of spells with a limited rest. For instance, you can regain as many spell levels as the top level of spells you know. Like, if the highest spells you know are 4th level, then you could regain a 4th level spell, a 3rd and 1st level spell, two 2nd level spells, or four 1st level spells. If you want to be more restrictive, you could say that you can regain a spell of your top level, or maybe that you can only regain a number of spell levels equal to your top level of spells minus one (minimum of 1?). And if you want to keep things from getting out of hand, you can limit the number of rests that people take per adventure / day / whatever. Regardless, it provides a compromise between not letting folks regain spells, and letting them sleep and regain them all.

If your problem with Vancian magic is more fundamental, and you object to the concept of spell slots of different levels, that's a bit trickier. People have created mana / spell point systems, but I'm not convinced that D&D works very well with them (though I'll admit that I lack much in the way of experience, and am talking more about my gut feeling).

>>43515595
>>43515662
AD&D 2e is alternately loved or hated because it is essentially the biggest mechanical and thematic departure in the TSR D&D family. On the surface the core appears to be a streamlining of 1e AD&D in many ways, and much of that is fairly good. When you start digging in, you notice there are a lot of changes in feel and tone. This is the edition designed to be more mom-friendly. They removed a lot of things that could be considered morally objectionable - half orcs are gone because implied rape, and assassins are bad guys thus no longer player characters. They removed any references to demons and devils, and TSR policy at the time was basically "avoid anything that could feed idiots." Simultaneously, the gygaxian prose was replaced with more concise rule book language. While certainly making the book easier to reference, the two combined to make the game seem more sanitized and "for all ages" approved than previous editions.

Mechanically, this shift in feel was accompanied by a change in the game's focus to a more "heroic" game. Previous editions were based on the gp = xp standard, awarding very minimal xp for monsters and such and making the main incentive to get in and out with the loot with as little conflict as possible. 2e greatly expands the amount of xp awarded for defeating monsters and other goals, which changes the emphasis and expectations some. The modules that we're coming out at this time also began a strong shift in focus to more story-oriented play. Dragon lance was a huge seller in no small part because it finally hit that LotR "we are a band of heroes on an epic quest" note, where earlier material was based on more classic S&S "we are tomb robbers out to get rich."

Cont..

>>43515595
>>43515662
>>43517669
This is also the edition where TSR finds itself competing with more fantasy RPGs. There is an idea that the hobby is maturing past simple class/level as a character mechanic. TSR's own Conan game (still available as a clone called ZeFYRS) was entirely skill based and fairly successful. Runequest and other skill based games were nipping at their heels, so TSR decided to implement skills into their 2nd edition. This resulted in non-weapon proficiencies being a thing. This is another development either loved or hated. At the time, many players embraced the idea as allowing them some newfound customization and depth - but from a modern perspective most OSR types hate it for adding a whole bunch of mess for no real gain mechanically.

Then you get to the splats. Because of new management and bad business practices, TSR printed out more material for 2e than at any point in its history prior. This is mostly because it needed the revenue from the next splat printing to pay for the last splat printing, desperately struggling to stay ahead of mismanaged debts. This itself may not have been bad - many of the more beloved settings come out in this time - but the owner simultaneously forbade play testing on company time, and thus so much of what was released was unbalanced or outright broken. This is where the infamous Skills & Powers books come in, or the class kits.

Interestingly, this also marks a change in marketing philosophy. Previous editions actually warned players away from reading just about anything but the PHB. There was an idea that the players shouldn't know too much lest they spoil their own experience. 2e on the other hand begins to market directly to players and the expectation slowly shifts to "everyone should be buying books."

Cont..

>>43517735
For players returning to D&D from later editions, 2e seems like the beginning of the end. With its seemingly clunky and forced skill system, poorly balanced power creep, and endless splat books, 2e looks in hindsight like the precursor to everything people hate about 3e.

There were a lot of good things about the edition - clarity in writing, streamlining of some mechanics, some of the best fluff produced - but it suffers a lot from guilt by association. Add to that that the popular attraction to OSR is "old school dungeon crawling" and 2e is actually the edition least geared for and focused on it.

So whether you like or hate 2e largely depends on what you want it to do, and what games you were exposed to beforehand. For me at least, 2e doesn't do anything I wouldn't prefer to use Basic for. Your mileage may vary.

>>43517761
Weren't Basic and AD&D released roughly around the same time? Basic being the "dumbed down, kiddie version" of the Advanced product?

>>43516368
>alternatives to Vancian magic?
General categories:
- spontaneous magic
- spellpoint-based magic
- skill-based magic

Beyond the Wall magic has cantrips, spells and rituals.

>>43517815
AD&D had 2 editions. 1st was released simultaneously with BD&D. He is talking about 2nd edition of AD&D that got released after Gygax has left the building.

>>43517859
Oh, right.

>>43517815
Basic is essentially a polished up version of base-level original D&D, while AD&D is the successor to original D&D with all it's supplements. Somewhat because of the names, many people have, over the years, assumed that Basic is, indeed, the kiddie version for beginners. I must admit that I was one of those people, at least when I was young. I mean, of course I want to play "advanced" because it denotes a higher level of skill, right?

But while having expanded options (more classes, more spells, etc.) can be nice, AD&D also has baggage. For whatever reason, core, base-level D&D tends to be better put together than the other stuff, and much of the material AD&D adds is derivative, but not as good. And AD&D adds a lot of needless clutter and restrictions. Racial (and gender) maximum and minimum attributes. System shock and resurrection survival percentile scores that are almost always 5% apart. Percentile strength. Each race has a list of individual adjustments to thieving skills. Each race has class caps that vary based on how high their prime requisite ability is. Even the same spells tend to have more moving parts and more shit to calculate.

Basic doesn't have any of this bullshit, and is more streamlined and easy to play as a result. Yeah, your options are more limited, and that can definitely be a drawback, but being simple and easy to use is not a flaw.

>>43517945
Its easier to play, but also loses a ton of depth. The loss of speed factor, reach, weapon vs AC, casting time and spell interruption all take their toll.

"Basic" and "Advanced" sums up the differences between the two quite nicely.

>>43517815
Yes, but the post you're referencing is SECOND EDITION AD&D.

This anon has a lot of it right. >>43517945


The D&D product cycle is a little counter-intuitive. OD&D was actually more complicated than Basic by a decent margin. By the time you add in the supplements and some stuff from Dragon magazine, you basically have AD&D already. The selling point of AD&D1e was mostly "all the rules in one place."

Basic was first created as an introductory module to AD&D1e (Holmes Basic), but went on to be its own game. It did suffer some from the image of being "the kid's version," but through modern eyes most people actually enjoy it specifically for it's simplicity.

>>43518040
> Its easier to play, but also loses a ton of depth.
Yes and no. I find that in practice, people who actually want stuff like speed factor, reach, etc find it way easier to bolt those specific systems onto basic than to wholesale adopt AD&D with its percentile strength, stat and level restrictions, etc.

>>43518088

>I find that in practice, people who actually want stuff like speed factor, reach, etc find it way easier to bolt those specific systems onto basic than to wholesale adopt AD&D with its percentile strength, stat and level restrictions, etc.

Or you could remove the stat and level restrictions, which are applied once per character, rather than adding the stuff that is tweaked once per combat.

Likewise, I have no idea what the hatred for percentile strength is based off of. Exceptional str and con are a nice treat for warrior type.

1e also has the advantage of probably the best XP calculation system for monsters around.

>>43518112
That could be an argument of personal preference, but at least for me it's easier to start simple and add on what I want than start complicated and start removing things.

The biggest deciding factor is probably how someone feels about class-as-race. I find the AD&D class/race setup to be kind of wonky. The stat/level restrictions are kind of a balancing factor, but in practice they awful and usually ignored. Without them though, any demihuman is flat better than playing a human.

Class-as-race has the advantage of being easier to balance and manage, but I can see where some people might find it limiting. ACKS actually has a nice solution to this, but I've yet to have it come up in my games.

Question. How do I calculate HP from just hit dice?
A lot of OSR modules just say something like "6 Hit Dice"
How does it work? d8 for each hit die? or does it depend on creature type?

>>43518379
Depends on the edition, I think. I know that LotFP has it scale based on creature type or size.

In at least one edition though, I think it is a blanket d6 per hit die, randomly rolled when you encounter the creature

>>43518379
> d8 for each hit die?
This.

IIRC the only exceptions are Original D&D rules (d6) and dragons had some special rules for determining HPs in AD&D 2.

>>43518165
>Without them though, any demihuman is flat better than playing a human.

That's flat out untrue. While noone would reasonably agree fighter-caster elves and half elves are balanced without some mitigating circumstance, gnomes, dwarves, and halflings PAY OUT THE NOSE; they're around half speed (just imagine if in 4e, dwarves, halflings, and gnomes had speed 3, BEFORE armor penalties!), and are restricted to smaller weapons and smaller mounts.

Even fighter-clerics and fighter-illusionists of the short folk are balanced fine without level limits due to them being effectively immobile.

>>43518379
>>43518500
Just in case this gets relevant.

HD[X]+[Y] means X Hit Dice plus Y Hit Points

File: AD&D 2E - an OSR view.png (148KB, 996x1015px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 996x1015px

>>43517669

Capped for excellence.

>>43518547
.. My first screencap. I'm so proud!

File: dcrawl naga2.jpg (157KB, 560x742px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 560x742px

>>43518539
Also, to get a good idea of how crippling having, in effect, the slow condition of 4e permanently in effect on your character (unless you wear leather or less, which means basically any monster will tear you apart -- very dangerous with the hordes of instant death creatures in OSR), play Dungeon Crawl as a naga of Cheibriados for a bit. They have only a small speed penalty, comparatively, but they just plain can't outrun most foes and it is very dangerous. An OSR derf in plate mail basically has to hope enemies will come to him, and if his party ever has to flee, he's going to involuntarily have to hold them off so they can escape.

>pic is a naga, but not of Cheibriados

>>43518539
> That's flat out untrue. While noone would reasonably agree fighter-caster elves and half elves are balanced without some mitigating circumstance, gnomes, dwarves, and halflings PAY OUT THE NOSE

We're in agreement then that elves are unbalanced. Dwarves don't have any weapon restriction, though they might have speed/mounts as an issue. I don't give a lot of weight to movement speed as a balancing factor, if only because the party tends to move at whatever speed the slowest member does and we never played with minis and grids or anything that movement speed per round became a huge deal.

I agree about gnomes and halflings getting the short end of the stick, but they always do.

Either way, a dwarf fighter is going to be better than a human fighter of even level, and elves are going to be better than anyone. Balancing methods within a class/race setup have been discussed quite a bit, but I haven't seen any that struck me as more elegant than just adopting race-as-class. I'm definitely interested in discussion/suggestions though.

>>43518681
>We're in agreement then that elves are unbalanced.

Without level limits and in 3d6/6x anyway.

>Dwarves don't have any weapon restriction

In some versions of OSR (BECMI) and in some AD&D publications they are said to.

>I don't give a lot of weight to movement speed as a balancing factor, if only because the party tends to move at whatever speed the slowest member does and we never played with minis and grids or anything that movement speed per round became a huge deal.

Your entire party being completely unable to maneuver with regards to any sort of remotely aware enemies or escape anything that can brave, say, a line of splashed flaming oil is a pretty hefty issue.

>Either way, a dwarf fighter is going to be better than a human fighter of even level,

Other than that enemies have no particular reason to engage him in melee. Some DMs and some OSR editions may permit him to use a bow that is taller than him (okay), since he is never going to catch anyone in melee who doesn't want to fight him in particular, but one should hope fights are in big open areas for his sake.

>and elves are going to be better than anyone.

In 1e, they advance slower than their peers early on and are limited overall later on. In 2e their level limits are a bit more generous, at the cost of basically never getting to cast wearing armor and no specialization, and so they are essentially just squishier, slower advancing wizards. Its not a particularly big deal. Assuming we're talking fighter mages, anyway.

>they always do

I'm not seeing anything disadvantageous about gnomes vs dwarfs. They seem to combine the best features of elfs and derfs, stealth, spellcasting, save bonuses, etc. with the drawback of dorf style immobilization.

>>43518818
> In some versions of OSR (BECMI) and in some AD&D publications they are said to.
I glances at my AD&D1e book before posting, but didn't see anything to indicate that dwarves had a weapon restriction. Could you tell me where that's at? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just didn't see it.

> I'm not seeing anything disadvantageous about gnomes vs dwarfs. They seem to combine the best features of elfs and derfs, stealth, spellcasting, save bonuses, etc. with the drawback of dorf style immobilization.
all of that still sounds better than "humans move faster," but I we're probably going to have to agree to disagree.

File: ability_score_adjustments.png (71KB, 520x600px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 520x600px

Reading Moldvay Basic and I'm wondering what the intent of this section is. Can it be done at any time, or just at character creation? Can it be used to meet a prime requisite? e.g. if you roll high Strength but want to play a magic-user.

>>43518870
I can't find any restriction on their weapon choice in 1e and I'll admit that any such limits are circumstantial in 1e.

>humans move faster

You can't escape ANYTHING. Gray oozes, I suppose. You can't chase down ANYTHING. You can, I suppose, keep pace with zombies if you're unarmored. +3 to +4 on bonuses vs spells and poisons, +1 to hit vs orcs and +4 to AC vs giants, darkvision, etc. etc. is the absolute minimum benefit I'd be willing to pay for the inability to outrun, well, basically anything.

In an edition with a hell of a lot of monsters, some on the first level tables, that kill outright on a successful hit, and others that come in large groups, and all manner of other creatures that basically require you to a flip a coin each round or die, I don't feel confident at all being even slower than other armored types.

>>43517669
>>43517735
>>43517761
God's work, Anon. God's work.

>>43518947
>You can't escape ANYTHING
Reality check: you don't need to run faster than the [insert horrible monster]. You need to run faster than the party dwarf.

>>43519085
Yup.

Since this was about whether moving slower was a good enough penalty for derfs, I'd say it is.

>>43518924
I assume that it's only at character creation.

Honestly, we've always played it with the caveat that you could swap a score for a class requisite. So if you wanted to play a magic-user, you could swap your intelligence with one of your other scores and so on.

New to OSR here. Reading ACKS it seems very disbalanced, whats the point of fighters? Dwarves are just better. And why level caps to demi-humans? Am I missing something?

>>43519523
>what's the point of fighters?
>level caps to demi-humans
Succinctly answering your own questions there.

>>43519523
ACKS is emulating the AD&D setup, which was just being debated in the posts above. Thus, level restrictions are assumed to be part of what balances demihumans, even though in practice they aren't particularly good at it.

>>43519624
Look at the Vaultguard, he goes up to 13 level. Better Saves, more hp, same damage bonus.

>>43519678
Any tips to help balance the game?

>>43519683
>Look at the Vaultguard,
Okay.
1) Vaultguard requires 10% more XP to level-up.
2) I don't really see "more HP". Only +1 HP bonus after level 10. It ends up with 9d8+11 vs 9d8+10.

>>43519695
I feel like fighters should get extra proficiencies but maybe that's 3e's corrupting influence speaking

Has anyone here purchased the new (relatively speaking) printing of the AD&D 2e core rulebooks? If so, how is the physical quality? I am in a group that plays mostly 2e, and as you can imagine a lot of our books are old and some are beginning to fall apart. I thought it might be a nice surprise to bring in a set of the new books as a replacement.

File: 1431640519605.jpg (645KB, 1078x1368px) Image search: [Google]

645KB, 1078x1368px

>>43518547
>>43517669
>>43517735
>>43517761
As a huge fan of 2e, I agree with you that the splatbooks are largely shit, especially the Player's Option series and the DM Option (though I'm not all that butthurt about the Complete Book of Elves like many people seem to be). You're absolutely right that they were the precursor to 3e's skill system, power creep/bloat, and essentially everything I don't like about 3e.

What I don't agree with is your analysis of why they removed Half-Orcs and Assassins, and the inherent badness of changing the names of the Demons and Devils.

I honestly cannot imagine a world in which any significant number of reasonable people would not only carry an orc's rape baby to term, but also allow it to reach adulthood, on top of the incredibly low odds of the half-orc being conceived at all being due to being two completely different creatures. It is so unlikely that a player character who is a half-orc would have to be literally one of the only ~10 half-orcs to exist on that world. At least half-elves make some kind of sense. They're not common enough to play.
Half-orcs still exist in core, but they're tucked away in the orc section of the monster manual (as they should be). The Players Option has the option to play half-orcs and half-ogres if you still want to.

The Assassin class is just an unnecessary thief sub class. It was merged right into the Thief because you didn't need an entire class to be more focused on killing than stealing, and if you wanted to be a thief who killed more than stole, there's a kit for that in the Complete Thief's Handbook.

Planescape actually put the tanar'ri and the baatezu's name changes to good use. The terms "demon" and "devil" still exist, but they're racial slurs for fiends. I personally like it.

Basically, the core rules are great, and the non-core rules you can take or leave.

>>43520697
The 2E AD&D reprints are amazing. I bought the three of them and gifted the DM and MM books to my DM for his games. Shit is cash.

>>43519804
I kinda agree, as long as it's not anything silly.

>>43522107
> What I don't agree with is your analysis of why they removed Half-Orcs and Assassins, and the inherent badness of changing the names of the Demons and Devils.
I didn't say any of those things were inherently bad. It also wasn't my personal analysis. It was a summary of the materials from Designers & Dragons - and specifically, information that people on the design team at the time said. It wasn't conjecture - it was company policy.

You can argue about whether or not these things should be in the game for other reasons, but people who were on TSR staff at the time said that most of these changes were a direct response to the "satanic panic" of the 80s and TSR's attempts to avoid shit like BADD (Bothered About D&D).

Whether or not you or I personally agree with the idea of removing demons, half-orcs, assassins, etc. it is a common complaint raised against the edition. The only personal opinion I voiced in any of that was at the very end when I said that I tended to prefer using basic. Everything else was explaining history or summarizing other people's arguments. I even granted that there were positives to 2e and listed them.

>>43506045
troll artist anon do we have permission to use your drawings elsewhere? have a name or website to give you credit?
do you have these with a transparent background?

File: eroloelfking.jpg (89KB, 393x497px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 393x497px

I like the vibe of these games, but what's with 1st-level magic-users and elves only being able to prepare and cast one spell? Isn't that horribly boring to play? It's not like Magic Missile is even that special, it's not much better than hitting with an arrow.

File: 1446903145372.jpg (429KB, 1172x1600px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1172x1600px

>>43523434
Alright. That wasn't my only misgiving with what you said, however.
Your comment about monster killing being more important than getting treasure in terms of XP gain makes no sense when you realize story progression XP and other discretionary XP awarded by the DM for well-used class abilities is the main source of XP in all of these cases.

If you exclusively relied on monster killing or gold to get XP, and since you divide up XP evenly between party members, it would take 20 sessions to reach level 2.
Putting this much emphasis on XP gain from monsters or gold is unwarranted.

>>43486853

What is that?

>>43523638
They eventually get crazy good, so it's "balanced" that way.

File: areyouretarded.jpg (19KB, 720x299px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 720x299px

>>43523884
A thread.

>>43523638
most oldschool RPGs aren't balanced, or are balanced in roundabout bizarre ways. A low level magic user is a normal guy with a single bullet left in the chamber. A tenth level MU is two or three Gandalfs stapled together at the beards.

>>43523832
What I said was
> this shift in feel was accompanied by a change in the game's focus to a more "heroic" game. Previous editions were based on the gp = xp standard, awarding very minimal xp for monsters and such and making the main incentive to get in and out with the loot with as little conflict as possible.

Lets look at xp gains for two other editions prior, with a sample monster hit die xp.

Moldvay basic:
1gp = 1xp for nonmagical treasure and loot.
Monster hit dice
1 = 10xp
3 = 35xp
5 = 175xp.

AD&D1e
1gp=1xp for all items sold from an adventure, but with some shenanigans about gauging relative difficulty of acquiring it (1,000gp looted from a comparatively weak encounter could at DM's discretion be worth less than 1,000gp looted from a difficult one)

Monster xp
1 = 10xp
3 = 35xp
5 = 150xp

There is bonus XP for .. being brought back to life, apparently, as well. Not sure why.

I then further state:
> 2e greatly expands the amount of xp awarded for defeating monsters and other goals, which changes the emphasis and expectations some. The modules that we're coming out at this time also began a strong shift in focus to more story-oriented play.

Lets look at some of the xp advice for 2e. It takes easily 2-3x as many pages as previous editions.

cont...

>>43523832
>>43524309
AD&D2e
"The best approach is to vary the awards given from game to game, based on the actions of the characters. Players should be rewarded according to how hard they try and how well they accomplish various goals."
"To give out experience points for fun, the DM should consider the following:
1. Did the player actively get involved in the game?
2. Did the player make the game fun for others, or make fun at their expense?
3. Was the player disrupting or interfering with the fun of the game?
4. Was the player argumentative or a "rules lawyer?"

Points are additionally rewarded for
> Character Survival
> "Improvement" - playing more intelligently
> Story goals

Monster xp
1 = 15
3 = 35
5 = 270

Base monster xp is listed as higher than it was in previous editions, in addition to being the only class-based bonus source of individual xp for warriors. Rogues also get bonus xp for defeating enemies.

Xp for treasure is now listed as an optional rule with the caveat "overuse of this option can increase the tendency to give out too much treasure in the campaign."

Individual xp awards begin to be added for
Player has a clever idea 50-100
Saves the party - 100-500
Role-playing 100-200
Encourages others to partcipate 100-200
Defeats a character in single combat xp value/creature

This is objectively both "more xp for defeating monsters" and an emphasis on other goals - such as story goals, RP stuff, etc. I have never said that was a bad thing, but when you go from gp=xp as the primary source of xp to being an optional source of xp the DM is adviced not to overuse, it is a shift in focus away from the incentives of previous editions.

>>43524024
Fair enough. I don't mind that idea, but isn't it disappointing if you only have D&D Basic? You love fantasy wizards in fiction, you rolled perfectly and get to play one, but then one Magic Missile and that's it? Even at 3rd level, it's not a whole lot better.

>>43524193
That's true but the bullets kind of suck. I guess it makes more sense if you use variable weapon damage in Moldvay rather than "everything does d6"? But then fighters can use stronger weapons once every round, rather than what might be a d6+1 once every session.

(Also Gandalf was a fifth-level magic-user.)

>>43524330
>>43523832
>Your comment about monster killing being more important than getting treasure in terms of XP gain makes no sense when
In previous editions Gold was the primary source of xp, with monster killing being a significantly less important source.

When 2e makes xp from gold an optional rule, but xp from monsters is NOT an optional rule, then 2e has objectively made killing monsters more important than gaining treasure from gold, because treasure from gold is no longer even a core rule.

This is before you actually finish my original sentence and add "and other goals" which by your own argument becomes the primary source of xp.

>>43523638
Magic Missile isn't, but Sleep insta-wins one fight, and Charm Person is a force multiplier, especially if you manage to charm an ogre.

>>43523638
>>43524024
>>43524193
>>43524393
>>43524425

This is why you give Wizards unlimited or nearly unlimited minor cantrips a day. Cantrips are where Wizards really shine, the big spells are just there for insurance.

File: burning_chainsaws.gif (2MB, 320x204px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x204px

>>43523638
>horribly boring
Consider evolution of Charm Person, for example.

Original: you got henchman until spell got dispelled.
Basic/Advanced: you got henchman (best friend) with time limit (generally - saving throw once per week).

By the 3rd edition it went from best friend to "trusted ally" (you had to win Charisma checks) and duration was only 1 hour/lvl.

5th edition has 1 hour flat, target knows it was charmed (!) and considers you simply "friendly acquaintance".

>>43524425
>ogre
And - yes. You could charm an ogre. But by AD&D2 you could not.

>>43524554
What's wrong with giving Wizards a sling and sling stones so they can attack at a range every round instead of giving them 'unlimited magic'? Doesn't that fly in the face of the core philosophy of Vancian casting?

>>43524679
>And - yes. You could charm an ogre. But by AD&D2 you could not.
Yes, you can. It's a 4th level spell called "Charm Monster".

>>43524554
This is something I like about newer games, and I don't see why magic-users couldn't have an unlimited "magic blast" spell that requires a "to hit" roll and does similar damage to a weapon.

I'm just wondering what the OSR response to this is. Sure, the party is made up of beginner adventurers and magic is special, but as a GAME it just seems boring and unfair. Was the idea simply that you'd stick with it in the hopes of making it to higher levels?

>>43524722
I'm talking about "horribly boring" 1st level spellcaster.

>>43524722
>It's a 4th level spell called "Charm Monster".
Charm monster was in Basic iirc? They just tweaked what a monster was.

>>43524682
>What's wrong with giving Wizards a sling and sling stones so they can attack at a range every round
Pretty much, a wizard can do everything other characters can do (if not as well as a specialist in that area), and has one (or more at higher levels) tricks they can pull out in an emergency.

>>43524425
>Magic Missile isn't
Magic Missile always hits and doesn't allow a save. Point at the enemy, they take some damage. It's not as bad as you might think, particularly if you're dealing with stuff like ghosts and displacer beasts with ways of avoiding attacks.

>>43524726
>what the OSR response to this is
Incorporate whatever works.

Beyond the Wall got both cantrips and rituals, for example.

>seems boring and unfair
Is this bait? People already told you - it is not that boring.

>>43524785
If you think a spellcaster is "horribly boring" at 1st level, you need to get better at roleplaying and not rollplaying.

>>43524726
I think one thing to keep in mind was that a lot of the early play was based specifically around dungeon-exploration, and this was generally done with spoken-word role playing. You weren't rolling to disarm the trap, you tried to RP through it. Thieves got a roll, but it was generally a failsafe because they had otherwised messed up or couldnt figure it out.

And that's sort of the thing - class abilities weren't the end-all be-all of play, particularly not at low-level. Fighters could fight, but you generally avoided any fight you could. Magic users had their spell per day, but again - if you were using it, something has probably gone horribly wrong. The thief? all of their percentile abilities were pretty terrible, but again - failsafes. And the poor cleric didn't even get spells at level 1 in some editions..

"Unfair" was not the issue. If "boring" is, then you're either not playing it right or the style of game just isn't for you, which itself is perfectly fine.

>>43524785
if the only interesting thing you can think of about your character is their Cool Powers, that's your problem as an unimaginative roleplayer, not the system's problem.
There's no reason why you can't play a MU or cleric (particularly clerics) as a competent mundane character and save your spell for an emergency; in fact that's how the game was intended.

>>43524824
>Charm monster was in Basic iirc?
In Original too. It got anyone except undead. Pet dragon FTW!

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

1B, 486x500px

>>43486853
Working on a submission

File: lol.png (125KB, 268x265px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 268x265px

>>43524874
>>43524919
> baiting this hard
You are cute.

>>43524844
>Is this bait? People already told you - it is not that boring.

Sorry, my post sent a bit too late. >>43524425 does make a good point and I hadn't seen >>43524679 and >>43524682

>>43524918
That's interesting. So would finding and removing traps go down? I mean, the thief has that specific ability. Anyone can do it through prodding and poking, but the thief can specifically say, "I roll to find traps," and roll some dice for it?

>>43524874
>>43524919
>>43525005
I think they're quoting me (>>43523638) hence the quotation marks.

>>43524682
>>43524726

Sorry, I didn't mean THOSE kind of cantrips.

Personally having the powers of Prestidigitation or similar is far more interesting to me then any acid bolt or magic missile. The Wizard only helps fights with ranged attacks or maybe a few clumsily flung rocks with magic. I was more referring to being able to start a small fire at will, move objects around, make throw your voice or levitate an inch off the ground, all minor magic like this is incredibly cool and what Wizards should be throwing around all the time, not mini fireballs.

>>43525052
We're digging back into the vaults here, but if you look at the interviews by arneson and gygax and crew.. a lot of it was just role-played out. Your fighter could disarm traps of his own accord - remember, the thief wasn't an original class anyway. I'd say you find a drawer. You'd examine the drawer for panels or whatever bullshit, and we'd go back and forth with you trying to puzzle solve, basically. Traps were designed with mechanisms that the players could interact with.

From what I understand, stuff like the thief roll was a backup - if the player fucked up, the thief could still roll to see if the character was better at it than the player was, basically. That's why the thief having low percentiles is not as bad as it looks - because that wasn't necessarily their primary way of doing things. Same with the stealth systems for a thief. Anyone can sneak around or hide in the bushes. "Hide in shadows" is more of a quasi-magical ability.

If you wanted to find a secret door, the players all got a roll for it if they spent a turn or two searching - but when I announce there's a bookshelf in the room, or torches in wall sconces, a smart player is going to go cautiously poking around to see if you can trigger a catch or something.

Somewhere, there's a fairly famous story about arneson playing D&D with gygax back in the day. People asked him about low level magic users sucking, and he would tell them how as a level 1 magic-user, he solo'd castle greyhawk with a series of iron spikes and some lamp oil. He made it out with enough treasure to be an xp shy of hitting level 3.

Player skill and creativity were the primary tools you have, even if you have terrible stats or abilities. Everything else is kind of a catch for when things go south.

>>43525182
>Anyone can sneak around or hide in the bushes. "Hide in shadows" is more of a quasi-magical ability.

Then out of interest, how do you adjudicate that for other characters?

In AD&D, a Wizard can fail to learn a spell.

Is this able to be attempted again?

If I fail to learn Magic Missile when attempted, does that mean I can never learn Magic Missile?

>>43525409
He can make another attempt when he gains a level.

>>43525386
I'm honestly not sure how they did it originally. I haven't found a specific reference to say, though i've read enough mentions of stuff to know it wasn't uncommon for a magic user to be sneaking around.

I can tell you how I personally run it though. The first thing to realize is that "hiding" and "moving" are two different things. You can't really hide unless there is something obstructing the view of the thing you're hiding from. Darkness, barrels, tall grass, whatever. I'm firmly of the "let players do stuff" camp, so if you can conjure a plausible "this is why they don't see me" out of the environment, I'm going to roll with it. If I really feel the need to adjudicate it with dice, I have the thing looking for you make a wisdom check. If there is anything for the thief to hide behind -at all- I tend to let them remain hiding automatically, barring supernatural intervention. Worst case scenario, thieves always get their roll.

Sneaking is a more tricky thing. If you're in metal armor, you aren't going to be able to move unheard. If you're in leather or robes, I'll let you make a dex check. If you're a thief, you get your dex check and if that fails, a percentile roll.

This isn't the way everyone does it, nor do I know it's the most common way. I've heard people who only do it via surprise roll - modified or otherwise. I know people who make it a function of the "Search" roll that's like.. 1-in-6 or whatever to find doors. But I go with the above.
> Can I let you just get away with it? If so, then I do. Is it a good chance of failure? Someone's rolling an attribute. Thieves always get their percentiles on top of any other chance.

File: Permissions.png (248KB, 1166x1164px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1166x1164px

>>43523634

>>43525994
> all hail lorraine williams
... That was low, even for trolls.

File: TrollGodsTrio_Transparent.png (411KB, 1181x923px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 1181x923px

>>43523634
Transparent Trio

File: TrollGods_ScreamerTransparent.png (100KB, 407x655px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 407x655px

>>43525994

File: TrollGods_GrinnerTransparent.png (106KB, 658x585px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 658x585px

>>43526101

File: TrollGods_BigEarTransparent.png (153KB, 577x680px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 577x680px

>>43526129

File: TrollGods_EarringsTransparent.png (173KB, 532x739px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 532x739px

>>43526150

we're about at thread limit. Should we start another?

Rolled 4 (1d20)

>>43526367
Rolling saving throw against having no thread.

Rolled 3, 6, 2 = 11 (3d6)

>>43526513

Using a d20 in an OSR thread? Let me show you how a real grognard rolls.

>>43525994
Your the best anon, thanks for all the transparent images!

>>43523638
>It's not like Magic Missile is even that special, it's not much better than hitting with an arrow.
You're not supposed to pick Magic Missile for your first spell. It's shit on low levels, it's meant to be used as a filler spell for high level wizards who can't find much use for their level 1 slots. Magic Missile lets them blast force from their hands in classic style.

The starting spells are basically Sleep and Charm Person, as other have said. Those are amazing.

>>43525182
>Somewhere, there's a fairly famous story about arneson playing D&D with gygax back in the day.
In case you're searching and not finding it, that's because it was Mornard who was the player, not Arneson. "Lessnard the Magician" in his first expedition did that. He also came out with a pet ogre. I think he had 1 HP.

>>43525625
>I'm honestly not sure how they did it originally.
Hiding was adjudicated by common sense. Oh, you hide in the barrel? Okay, makes sense. Thieves could literally hide in a mere shadow against the wall, if they succeeded on their roll. That's why the level 1 chance is low.

>This isn't the way everyone does it, nor do I know it's the most common way. I've heard people who only do it via surprise roll - modified or otherwise.
Part of the idea of the exploration move rate and why it's so slow is that sneaking is assumed to be something everyone's doing the whole time because what retard clomps around like an elephant in a hostile dungeon? As you say, surprise handles the outcome of this. Again, thieves have the quasi-supernatural ability to move *literally soundlessly* if they succeed on their roll.

Has anyone taken the time to rebalance/recreate some of the more OP material from the 2e splatbooks?

>>43528045
You mean the kits? The DM is encouraged to use discretion on whether to allow certain kits anyway, so there isn't much point.

>>43522107
>and the inherent badness of changing the names of the Demons and Devils.

Changes for the sake of political correctness alone are always inherently bad. It shows cowardice and a lack of integrity on the part of the person being coerced, and its not as if anyone ever stopped thinking D&D was Satan's Game because of it -- capitulating to the PC brigade always just adds fuel to the fire.

>as they should be

What the heck do you mean, "as they should be?" They're as classic a race as elfs and derfs.

>The Assassin class is just an unnecessary thief sub class.

It was as necessary or unnecessary as any other subclass, and had a lot of nifty subsystems. The kit also didn't restore the functionality of the assassin.

I don't get why people defend Lorraine Williams' changes. She absolutely hated gamers.

>>43524955
This looks great anon, keep it up. I would try to condense it though. Specifically I would try to have a more diverse presentation. Tables, generators, etc instead of just text. Just so it looks better.

>>43523638

That one spell a day is what keeps your party alive. Seriously. Check out what Sleep or Color Spray does -- wipes out a whole enemy encounter. It can be the only thing that saves you from death by centipedes.

Also an elf ftr-mu is still able to fight plenty well without that spell, and in 1e at any rate a magic user's weaponry is plenty good -- he can choose between Darts (3 frikkin attacks at range), Daggers (2 attacks at range? I'm not sure, and almost always going first with double attack rate on round 2 of melee), and the Quarterstaff (always strike first on the first round unless your enemy has a polearm or such). That isn't bad at all.

>It's not like Magic Missile is even that special, it's not much better than hitting with an arrow.

Magic Missile isn't for level 1 wizards, its for level 9 wizards (5d4+5 damage for a level 1 spell slot at casting time 1 IS good).

>>43528992
I'm not defending her motives. What I'm saying is that her changes aren't nearly as bad as people make them out to be. They're certainly not as bad as what Paizo eventually did to Golarion in terms of politically correct fuckery.
Half-orcs make no sense as a player race since they're so undeniably rare, and due to assassins being required Evil aligned, they made a poor choice for any group that was otherwise Good- Lawful Good being essentially defined back in those days as the average person. These days, Neutral is defined as the average person, and I don't think that's a good thing either.

>>43528045
The two most OP kits are Cavalier (which has its own suite of disadvantages) and Bladesinger, which is basically a tankier wizard. I played a Bladesinger in a 20 level campaign and ultimately found it more trouble than its worth.

>>43509077 here

I ended up getting all 7 parts of The Queen of Spiders.

>>43529292
Not that anon, but im still calling bullshit. I'm going to remain against the removal of content for political sensitivities. If you dont want half-orcs and assassins in your game, that's cool. You don't get to decide that removing them is best for the majority of other people's games.

File: Chaotic Evil explained.png (65KB, 610x112px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 610x112px

>>43529292
>They're certainly not as bad as what Paizo eventually did to Golarion in terms of politically correct fuckery.

What changes did Paizo make to Golarion for PC? I hear this often, but they just snipped a bit from a few good gods as far as I know, and I combed the alignment section for any hint that you have to hold certain political views to be good aligned.

>Half-orcs make no sense as a player race since they're so undeniably rare, and due to assassins being required Evil aligned, they made a poor choice for any group that was otherwise Good

I don't think half orcs are rare. In, say, Middle Earth there were, what, 3 half elves and thousands of half orcs?

Evil may be an issue, but its not as if evil alignments (under the 1e DMG interpretation) are inherently disruptive. I would guess the original intent of assassins guilds are superspy agencies deployed by Team Evil, and I would guess the way most people interpret them are dickish freelance mercenary groups, but the most constructive use is probably to just have any assassins in the party be working for their kingdom's equivalent of the CIA.

>>43529447
>thousands of half orcs?
Unless you plan on having an evil empire in your game which uses magic to promote a concerted effort in breeding orcs with humans, sure. But by that logic, you could make half-dragons a player race too if your setting happens to have such a society that actively promotes a specific program to breed them.

>>43529605
How many D&D settings have the horrible always evil always rapey orcs though?

Dragonlance?