OSR General

File: main-qimg-4b0af8e653b1fa27ad2450cbe1d5d74a.jpg (457KB, 800x958px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 800x958px

>>47713976
I've been creating a simple post-apocalyptic OSR. So mostly been writing that, but haven't run anything yet.

Hey OSR, I'm preparing a sandbox and have been musing about DW's fronts for a while.
I'm thinking of stealing the idea to have some sort of organisational tool for developing factions and dangers on both a local and global scale.

Question is, does anyone know anything similar?
I want to see different takes on the idea that may help.

>>47714957

Fronts are general to a lot of the Powered by the Apocalypse games, so looking at others ones might help, in giving you other implementations of the same basic idea. In particular, I'd look at Apocalypse World and Sagas of the Icelanders to compare and contrast.

I definitely like the idea of using them in an OSR game. It's one of those things that really works nicely when adapted to other games.

>>47714957
An Echo Resounding for LL has domain management rules, which while not necessarily what you want for a game also include ways to integrate factional struggle into a more traditional freewheeling adventuring game.

Outside the OSR, Night's Black Agents (espionage+vampires RPG) has the Conspyramid, a way to set up conspiracy nodes so that PCs have ways to work down each layer until they get at the mastermind behind it all.

Come on fellows, we can't die just yet

File: lunar offering sm.jpg (221KB, 502x640px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 502x640px

>>47717053
I was gonna post some Mullen art but 4chan's posting is spotty.

File: S&W white box sm.jpg (215KB, 498x640px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 498x640px

>>47717522
I love the Whitebox cover art.

File: S&W small.jpg (215KB, 482x640px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 482x640px

>>47717581

File: sea cave sm.jpg (224KB, 640x493px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 640x493px

>>47717650

File: Seconded.jpg (6KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 200x200px

>>47715119


This. Fronts are a handy tool, especially good for when the players are all looking at you and you're not sure where to go next. You can glance at it and get some idea of what to do, in a heartbeat.

>>47714957

Maybe check out Reign's company system. Might not quite be what you're looking for though.

>>47714957

Beyond The Wall and Further Afield have a threats/world-building set up similar to fronts that's worth looking at. Different threats can be placed on the map, worked into character generation, and have increasingly dangerous actions/effects as time goes on. Its pretty cool.

I've heard Shadows Of The Demon Lord has something similar.

That being said, if you haven't taken a look at Apocalypse World and how it explains fronts, and the threat/world map its worth looking at.

>>47718174
Is Further Afield in the trove? I can't find it.

>>47718262
It's in the BtW folder.

>>47718408
Apparently I'm fucking blind, don't worry.

>>47717581
That cover is probably my single most favorite OSR RPG art of all time. It invokes an incredibly nostalgic feel of adventure being right around the corner that makes me want to get involved in creating my own adventures.

File: skeleton 1.png (333KB, 984x830px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 984x830px

>>47719354
I know, right? It gives me that sense of wonder more than anything else in the OSR.

Addressing OP of duplicate thread >>47717082 here:

>Wizard, here are hundreds of fun and interesting mechanics to choose from! Build your spellbook! Expect support in every supplement! Oooh, ahhh, look at these cool abilities!

>Fighter, here's +1 to hit.

>Why.

I won't disagree that wizards have more flexibility and can get a bit out of hand at higher levels (though that's more a matter of screwing up the power progression than anything else), but fighters have real world physical to draw from. You can (and should) describe your attacks and receive adjustments based on that. There should be disarming and wresting, and hacking people's fingers off, and staggering back stunned and so forth. If fighter combat in your game is just a matter of rolling your chance to-hit, and then rolling damage if you succeed, without improvisation or adjustment, then your game sucks, and fighters really do get the short end of the stick.

Now, I don't mind throwing in a little something extra for fighters--maybe points of focus / talent / valor / mettle / heroism / chi / ki / etc. that they can spend to boost an attack. But having detailed maneuvers can detract from your ability to improvise and encourage you just to choose an option off a menu, much like a video game. This hurts immersion and cinematics, which to me is a very serious problem. Also, if a particular maneuver is better than the other ones for you, why would you ever do anything else? And this can lead you to preposterous battles where, for instance, you try to trip an enemy every single round. That's both boring and ridiculous. So by all means, give fighters some way of performing a special action, but keep things broad and flexible.

>>47719751
>here are hundreds of fun and interesting mechanics to choose from!
The Vancian magic system is quite limiting to mages, and they are quite simply unable to hold their own even at higher levels in combat unless they have someone protecting them.
>Build your spellbook!
No, the GM decides what spells they find, and even after the mage finds them, they must roll to see if they actually learn the spell at all. Unless they are a specialist mage, expect the mage to have almost no choice in what spells are available to them, and being a specialist naturally cuts you off from one or more schools of magic entirely. It's also hard to qualify for a specialty if you're rolling the standard way for ability scores.
>Expect support in every supplement!
I don't know what edition you're using, but it's not OSR, or even 2nd edition. The supplements are routinely thought to be the worst aspect of earlier editions aside from perhaps campaign setting material and a few outliers.
None of the supplements change how a wizard actually acquires his spells or casts them.

Your spiel about fighters is unnecessary and would make the process of completing a combat round lengthy and complicated- exactly what people are trying to avoid in the early editions.
If you want to say your fighter does something other than just try to hit the enemy, then say so. The GM will extrapolate from the situation at hand how difficult that maneuver is and by what measure you will need to roll. If you succeed, then the thing you want to happen happens.
You're playing a roleplaying game. Your character is a person capable of doing more than a robotic attack move, and no OSR system deliberately forces a fighter in combat to do nothing but attack, flee, or withdraw.

>>47719751
>If fighter combat in your game is just a matter of rolling your chance to-hit, and then rolling damage if you succeed, without improvisation or adjustment, then your game sucks,

>if you don't run your game with my set of houserules, it sucks!

Jesus fucking Christ, what's with the entitlement mentality? Calm the fuck down. DMs are not stuck in a dichotomy of having to cater to your desires or automatically sucking, and no, stunts are not automatically desirable outside of Exalted.

Attackers are already attempting to do their best with their attacks. Adding embellishments for added bonuses should not be taken as the one true way to play. I really enjoy how in TSR D&D combat rounds are incredibly fast, and I don't need "I describe my attack extra flamboyantly for extra damage"/"I shoot him in the eye/cut off his fingers/etc/etc."

When proposing a houserule for maiming people, first stop and ask yourself whether you'd like it if someone returned the favor.

And for the record, in most cases spells are found in the form of a magic item anyway, and while you will find more scrolls than magic weapons, a good portion of spell scrolls you find will be for another class, and then another good portion will be too high level for you, and then some will be fairly irrelevant. So its not as if the fighter is behind on shiny new toys compared to the mage.

Don't be a preachy, adversarial cunt that demands all DMs bow to your whims. Come to the gametable fresh of expectations and bias, other than the expectation that it will probably be D&Dy in some form.

>>47719987
>>47719856
>>47719751
Can we keep the supremacy wars to the other thread, and just sage it to death?
>>47717082

File: House path night time.jpg (817KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

817KB, 1920x1080px

>What non-medieval fantasy stuff have you played/run in OSR systems recently?

I'm creating Night Garden. It's set in a city outside of time and space, named Night Garden, in which lost people and things end up. Some people are born here, and all who were born here have never seen the sun; because Night Garden never goes to day time, it is an eternal night. Yet the endless forest of trees around the town seem to live and even thrive in the darkness.

The city is supported by a mysterious electric power grid. Cars are frankenstien'd out of all of the junkers and lost that end up here. People eat pig, lemur, night fruits and rarely grown daylight foods grown under special lamps.

Guns are pretty common and are so named 'Chimneys'. Sweeps are the names of the gunsmiths. Psychic powers develop here in this strange place; and though of these 'savants' only has one power they can grow very strong. There are even more stranger, nameless powers and magic in this city.

Instead of the city that never sleeps, this is the city that always sleeps.

>Things to do in Night Garden
-Fight mobsters and take over their casinos!
-Earn your right and go through the endless hoops to get a car!
-Dive into the canals under the city and dig through the muck to find something very old and valuable!
-Explore the ageless forest and meet the horrible things in the dark!
-Walk endless miles of blank, featureless service tunnels underneath the city for a chance to break open some of the mysterious 'lockers' and the odd prizes within!
-Get killed by a magically empowered serial killer who infuses the blood of his victims to make himself immortal!
-Run a sweep-shop and sell guns to kids!
-Molest the pigs down at the swine district!
-Try to earn enough money to retire on Dazzle Street!

---
Anyway, long silly in-character post aside, this is my big project. It's going to take a lot of work and inspiration, so wish me luck. I just wonder how much people here enjoy the concept.

>>47720156
Very colorful! Sounds like a very interesting campaign-in-the-making.

>>47720156
so what are the classes/archetypes/etc?

>>47720156
Oh, I remember you. You were talking about firearms rules.

As far as OSR systems go the whole pseudo-modern junker aesthetic seems pretty unique. Keep at it, and remember to share once your done.

File: Garden fountain night 2.jpg (105KB, 960x539px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 960x539px

>>47720726

Thanks!

>>47720735

As of right now, I wasn't planning on using classes. The urban/gunslinger mindset doesn't 'gel' as well with classes in my honest opinion.

Instead I was using an optional random rolling or just list of bonuses you get when you level up. So one of the potential bonuses would be increased saves in one area, or improved stats, or better with guns, or even something like increased contacts within the city. The most important or 'class based' one would probably be the psychic power people, who would get a power and each time they level can choose to improve it, but each person can only have 1 psychic powers. They are meant to be flexible and interesting but limiting it to one stops people from making Wizards in this game. It's kind of like the movie Push if you need a good idea.

I was trying to work out a way to add some oomph to higher level fighters. The two systems I've seen were weapon mastery and some kind of maneuver system. The latter felt kind of clunky as a tack-on. Weapon mastery is okay, but not really all that exciting.

What are some other ways to make high-level fighters more exciting? Heroic, kind of.

>>47722533
>What are some other ways to make high-level fighters more exciting?
Magic weapons, armor, and items.

>>47722542
That feels an awful lot like "you are your toys" which sounds kinda meh to me. I want ways for the character to do cool stuff.. not.. the character acquires cool stuff.

>>47722533
> I was trying to work out a way to add some oomph to higher level fighters.
> What are some other ways to make high-level fighters more exciting? Heroic, kind of.
Don't make fighters. Make demi-gods or Wuxia-level swordmasters.

>>47722657
Sure. That's kind of the angle anyway. Beowulf comes to mind. I'm just not sure what to do mechanically. I almost want to somehow build a setup similar to the Fate system, but it feels wonky.

>>47722687
> I'm just not sure what to do mechanically.
Well, following the Fighter design concepts, mechanically they should get some sort of "at will" abilities. I.e. permanent, always useable stuff.

> Beowulf comes to mind.
What abilities did he have?

>>47713976
I've compiled all the articles from the Into the Odd blog to make an Odd Master's Guide, an Odd Menagerie and overall get a lot of useful stuff for ItO because it's awesome and I want to run it soon, but my players are very much for LotFP those days so I have to wait until they get TPK'd, which isn't likely to happen because they're pretty good and all second level now.

>>47722687
>Beowulf comes to mind.
But Beowful had Hrunting. He wouldn't have defeated Grendel without it. That feels an awful like like "you are your toys," which sounds kinda meh to me.

>>47722570

>That feels an awful lot like "you are your toys" which sounds kinda meh to me.

What's the problem? The wizard is his toys. Specifically, the wizard is his scrolls.

>>47722533
Freeform stunts with freeform benefits - perhaps from a list, if you want. Make sure they're all attractive options and relatively balanced with eachother - the end result is set (if you hit the enemy, they are temporarily blinded) but the specifics are not (do you strike at their eyes, aim for a concussion, or just cover their sight some other way? Do you literally blind them with pain?)

That way you get the narrative freedom without the problem of always trying to trip the guy since that's the best mechanical move.

You do need to be careful about narrating the result after the roll, though, and overall it'll slow down combat a hell of a lot.

Also, this probably needs to be at-will infinite use shit and you REALLY need to make sure that there's no "best" option because otherwise all the others become useless. No instant-death-with-hit-penalty shit.

Also, of course, don't just go for pure damage bonuses and hit bonuses. Stuff that list full of debuffs - hobble their movement, cut down their accuracy, restrict their abilities, destroy their concentration, disarm them of their weapons.
More importantly, don't just hand this shit out to the other classes as well. Make an assumption that the reason only the Fighter can do this is because they're trained for it, much like only the thief gets the damage multiplier on backstabs.

And this bears repeating, but this is going to slow down your combats like fuck. Roll to hit->roll damage takes seconds - having to describe your actions beyond that, not to mention keeping track of various effects? Damn, son.

>>47722871
This is true. The only OSR class that really gets new stuff as they level up is the Cleric, and they're still going for the Fighter's leftovers. Hell, their spells aren't really that great either.

The only thing the Thief gets as they level up is the ability to use more magic items, for fuck's sake!

>>47722533
The way DCC does it is by giving Warriors more and better crits over time, better initiative, as well as multiple attacks and the "mighty deeds" mechanic. Mighty Deeds is basically a stunt system whereby your attack modifier is replaced by a die roll. If you roll 3 or more you get to do something special with your attack like tripping or pushing or whatever you can come up with.

All of it is front-loaded at level 1 though, with incremental bonuses to do it better. Might still seem dull in comparison to spellcasters getting new spells to play with every level.

>>47722533
>oomph
getting to run your own stronghold and army isn't enough "oomph"?

>>47722929
Cleric spells are not bad, they're just not encounter-enders... usually. One could say the cleric is his god (or his alignment or whatever).

>>47722991

Well, people don't normally salivate to become Tax Man, with the power of Collect Taxes.

File: The-Legend-Of-Conan-Feature.jpg (63KB, 1893x809px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1893x809px

>>47722991
...destined to wear the jeweled crown of Aquilonia upon a troubled brow...

>>47723011
Yeah, they're not bad but they're usually pretty reactive. It's not like the Magic-User, who has very "active" spells, or the Fighter whose very role is nothing but active (albeit in a different way).

For the Cleric to heal, someone must first be hurt; for the Wizard to hurt, they just need a target. Active vs. reactive.

The Fighter's niche, which the Cleric shares, is being active in combat in ways that the Magic-User cannot. Go out and fight, protect those behind. The Cleric is kind of split in it, though, since they cannot both fight and heal - if they're in melee, they're not getting out of it any time soon. If they're standing back and healing the front line, they're not really part of it and playing in a purely reactive manner.

The Cleric is very much about that dilemma, I feel, a character that needs to choose between the front line and the back. Kind of like the Elf, in a way!

Note also that there's some active shit still lying around in the Clerics abilities like Turn Undead, but most of the really active ones are locked behind the "Chaotic" wall. EHPs can go nuts with their Fingers of Death and Cause Wounds and Darkness, though.

>>47723052
I dunno, if you actually enforce taxes on the players during the game (as in OD&D, for instance, which has both a 1% of XP monthly tax and IIRC a 10% inheritance tax) then I could see them enjoying the idea of flipping all that around to stop paying taxes and instead becoming The Man.

Also, don't forget how it's not just Tax Man - it's "dude with a fucking army who rules from a kickass castle you designed yourself and built with your hard-earned cash". That's an especially interesting thing once you start throwing in mass combat, which you probably should anyway because it'll make the Magic-User really happy that they finally have a use for their really big shit. (Massmorph got removed from later editions for a reason, and that reason was a lack of mass combat.)

File: rogue.jpg (44KB, 429x724px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 429x724px

>>47723052
> Well, people don't normally salivate to become Tax Man, with the power of Collect Taxes.
That's the Thieves we are talking about.

>>47723482

The cleric can paralyze someone, blind them, send bugs or snakes to fuck up their day, make bears eat someone for making fun of their male pattern baldness etc.

I would generally prefer to prepare even say a Protection from Evil instead of a cure.

Unless for nostalgia (LL, S&W, OSRIC... which are almost direct copies of the original D&D rules) or sadomasochism (LotFP), why would anybody not use DCC? It seems insanely fun

>>47723826
I guess? I just generally feel like the Cleric's powers are more of a supporting role, so to speak.

Like, lemme give you a list of the combat-worthy spells of the OD&D Cleric:
>1st
Cure Light Wounds, Protection from Evil
>2nd
Hold Person
>3rd
Continual Light, maybe?
>4th
CSW, PfE 10', Turn Sticks to Snakes
>5th
Dispell Evil, Quest, Insect Plague

That's not a lot! Compare that to the M-U. Even of the "combat spells" I nitpicked out up there, the only actually offensive ones are Hold Person, Continual Light (vs. vampires and the like), Turn Sticks to Snakes, Quest and Insect Plague. And even then, nothing is quite as direct as the Magic-USer spells.

Actually, maybe that would've been a better word to use. Clerical magic is pretty damn indirect, and tends to be more of the supportive nature than the story-warping one that Magic-Users have with Pass-Wall and Charm Person. Hence, while the Cleric is the one class that actually gets new abilities as it levels up, it doesn't necessarily feel that way. It's the 3E Monk problem, where they get a shitload of abilities but none of them matter much in the grand scheme of things, except it's also intrinsically linked to the whole healbot archetype and how a Cleric who wants to use spells must stay away from the melee and thus not have much of a noticeable impact on the combat. Hell, even buffs - noticeable indeed - put the focus on the person they buff.

Note that this isn't true for Anti-Clerics, since debuffs kind of can't help but put the focus on the caster. A Fighter who hits thanks to the +1 from Bless might not take much note of it, but a Fighter who misses thanks to the -1 from whatever the reversed version is called will be pissed. A Cleric who removes a disease has the player thankful, but an Evil High Priest who Causes Disease will have the player curse their name. (As an aside, that spell is so PvP/player-targeting that it's ridiculous. Also, some day I want to run a PvP Blackmoor-esque campaign.)

File: Triggered.jpg (12KB, 320x337px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 320x337px

>>47723054
>destined to wear the jeweled crown of Aquilonia

>destined


That line always gets me a little riled up.

File: you.gif (773KB, 308x173px) Image search: [Google]

773KB, 308x173px

>>47724573
You don't look like you belong here, amigo.


>>47724987
As a rule, MU doesn't get to choose spells, but Cleric gets all the spells. This means, even one mostly combat spell per spell level is enough to make Cleric more battleworthy than MU.

As for spells, there is Command (1), Silence (2), Animate Dead (3). Not sure about the edition you are talking about, though.

But - yeah. Cleric is not as fancy.

File: Returnwhatyouhadstolen.jpg (612KB, 1042x1335px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 1042x1335px

Is the trove guy around?

>>47725204
>You don't look like you belong here, amigo.
I'm just saying DCC seems more fun

>>47725988

But you're also saying nobody should use faithful clones, and that all the folks who love LotFP, probably the most popular system around these parts, must be "masochists."
It's one thing to say you like a thing, it's something else entirely to insult others while doing so.

>>47726027
He claimed they were into SM. Not masochism in particular.
Get your facts straight.

File: fighterandogre.jpg (840KB, 1157x1600px) Image search: [Google]

840KB, 1157x1600px

>>47725982
I have for him material for the trove!
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0us8rpu1bzu1ho2/AACJHX-9rfXqihjLVxcMfw8Wa?dl=0

>>47726357

Sure, whatever. I can't tell you run-of-the-mill "deviants" apart. Either way, he's trying to incite people.

>>47722861
He defeated an even nastier monster without it, though.

File: tumblr_nq8vwtWZTC1rkdevlo1_500.png (297KB, 500x649px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 500x649px

what sort of rare, fallout-esque armors/mods/drugs would be good to have in a post-apoc OSR? their main component would be to assist in saving throws.

thusfar I have:

BODY:
Hazmat Suit [L] - +2 radiation save
Bulletproof Vest [M] - +2 ranged ac
Blast Suit* [M] - +2 explosives save


HEAD:
Welder’s Mask [L] - +2 blindness save
Gasmask [L] - +2 gas save
Firefighter Face-Helm [M] - +2 fire save
Gunrange Earmuffs [U] - +2 sonic save
Nightvision Goggles [U] - see 90' in dark


WEAPON MODS:
Bayonette - give d4/d6 melee damage to pistols/rifles
Scope - +4 attack after a round of aiming
Pistol Silencer - allows sneak attacks with pistols.


DRUGS:
Morphine - fall unconscious at -2 instead of 0.
Methamphetamine - reduce food/sleep needs a full day. -3 CHA

File: 555.jpg (66KB, 700x552px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 700x552px

>>47725988
Too many tables (DCC). Also, too rude about other systems (you).


>>47726571
> what sort of rare, fallout-esque armors/mods/drugs would be good to have in a post-apoc OSR? their main component would be to assist in saving throws.
Well, there should be some drugs that give +2/5 to resist against disease or radiation. Also, tinted glasses (+1 vs blindness?).

As for armor, I'd say tire armor is a must.

> Bayonette - give d4/d6 melee damage to pistols/rifles
> Bayonette
> pistols
Okay, I googled to be sure, but I was wrong. This is actually real. People are iditios. We are all doomed.

Btw, I still refuse to believe it is effective. And it's bayonet, I think.

P.s. I'm quite certain bulletproof vest is also stabbing semi-proof.

>>47727015
Hey. if I was in the apocalypse and could bind a blade to my gun, I'd do it.

File: Birdfolk fighter.jpg (1MB, 904x1280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 904x1280px

>>47722533

I'm surprised I didn't see this method posted but;

Basically I give fighters an 'extra attack' every level, as in they get a number of attacks over their enemy's HD or level.
Or another way to put it;
>Fighter level equal or lower then enemy HD- one attack
>Fighter level higher than enemy HD- gain bonus attacks to the difference +1

So a level 2 Fighter gets two attacks against goblins, a level 3 fighter gets three, etc.

The kicker is that you can fluff this as multiple attacks against the same tough enemy, or attacks against a swarm. Additionally; this power only works against THE HIGHEST ENEMY LEVEL in the combat. Meaning even if you are fighting a bunch of goblins but they are being led by a HD 6 troll lord, that means a level 7 fighter only gets one attack.

This method essentially adds a lot more usefulness to 'big monster' bosses as they protect their swarms.

I hope this helps or at least gives you some ideas.

>>47727156
But the grip is all wrong. You can't stab properly with a blade strapped to a gun.

>>47724573
A number of reasons.. though.. the nostalgia argument is wrong on the face of it. The majority of people in the OSR scene (much less on this board) aren't old enough to actually be nostalgic for those games. I'm 30 and it's only by pure chance that when I got into D&D as a teen it was through a used AD&D set i picked up at a yardsale, rather than 3e. I don't think there are many (if any) greybeards hanging around /osr/.

There's a number of reasons you wouldn't use DCC.
> Requires you to buy extra dice most people don't have handy
> Magic system is fairly different and requires looking up tables
> Also, a ton of other shit requires looking up tables
> More fucking tables
> Maybe you don't like the deviation from the GP standard of XP.
> Maybe you don't like some of the different core mechanics.
Literally any point of divergence from the "standard" B/x or AD&D style model could be a reason someone didn't like DCC, while someone else might see that exact reason as why they want to play DCC. Anything "different" is going to attract people who like it, and repel people who hate it.

>>47725982
speak the devil's name and he shall appear.

>>47726383
I'll download and sort when I'm home.

>>47725204
>As for spells, there is Command (1), Silence (2), Animate Dead (3). Not sure about the edition you are talking about, though.
I went for the LBBs for lack of a better option. I was never too fond of the post-Greyhawk treatment of things, to be honest.

Also, it's kind of funny to see magic-users without Magic Missile.

Then again, that's the edition where Magic-Users also get all the spells and Clerics (unintentionally?) get spellbooks.

>>47727436
Ah, the OD&D approach to things. Kind of. I guess OD&D technically only gives you tons of attacks against non-fantastic opponents and gives jack shit in the way of advice for what is and isn't fantastic, but yeah. (I think Arneson said to look at the numbers appearing, which makes a helluva lot of sense.)

>>47727620
Pistolnettes aren't supposed to be used as stabbing weapons like with rifles though

>>47726394
>you
How dare you insinuate such a thing. Sir, I challenge you to a duel.

File: 347193_orig.jpg (204KB, 1066x800px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1066x800px

>>47724573
DCC *is* insanely fun. It's just different, so people's assholes tighten and they lose their minds over new dice and tables (of which you commonly only use 3 throughout actual gameplay: Magic, Crits/Fumbles and Deeds)

>>47728630
I agree with it being fun but even those "three" tables are actually split into a lot of sub-tables

>trying to make the classes have metal names
>wanting to call fighters "Warriors"
>wanting to call magic-users "Warlocks"
>tfw One needs to get scrapped so they both don't start with the same letter

>>47728630
DCC seems like a fun game and I'm looking forward to the fourth printing so I can get the damn book but I'm also not sure how much I'll play it since I've gotten tired of flipping through big books during play.

>>47728795
http://peoplethemwithmonsters.blogspot.com/2014/08/dcc-rpg-reference-booklet-revised-and.html

>>47728795
You know, I ran a campaign with it once.
It's not too bad, but I do prefer something lighter myself.
It's a very atmospheric game and I adore it for its style and ideas, and it's definitively worth a read.
I just ended up at a place where I want its style and systems in a simpler package, which is exactly what I'm writing atm

What's the opinion here on DCC? Seems like a lot of charts.

>>47728771

Call Fighters 'Barbarians' or 'Champions' instead.

>>47728846
Well that's helpful. Thanks for the link!

>>47728912
I'll definitely try it once I get it. If me and my group can dig it then I'll probably stick with it.

>>47724573

Wow you sound like an absolute elitist cunt. No offense.

>Hurr the only reason someone would play an old school title where your own spells and ordinary attacks don't cripple you is nostalgia

Also how in the high holy fuck do you consider LotFP more sadomasochistic than DCC? We're talking about the rules since most of these modules are cross compatible afterall.

>>47727774
Yep. The edition I grew up on was 2e and have played far more of it than any other edition, but I don't feel nostalgia for it because I feel I have ran and played absolutely everything there is to do in 2e.

>>47728630
>it's just different

The insanely arrogant and elitist attitude of DCC fanboys like yourself is also very offputting.

>>47729187
Champions is my second choice, but it weirdly enough gives me these paladiny vibes

>>47728771
No it doesn't.
What you do is call the game Warlocks&Warriors.

>>47728771
Call the fighters "Slayers"

>>47728630
>so people's assholes tighten and they lose their minds over new dice

So much this.

All the asspain over FFGs specialty dice lol

>>47729590
Or the wizards "Sorcerers". Or both.

>>47724573
I've been reading through the DCC book. I really like the ideas, but there are so many charts. I'm also not sure I can get my players behind the idea of characters dieing and not being in control of character creation and the results of spell casting. I ran a couple of games of Basic Fantasy RPG in The Keep on the Borderlands and some of them would get pissy or morose when their characters were near death.

>>47729455
I just don't want the statblocks to have War5 meaning 2things
Warlocks&Warriors is pretty cool though

>>47729912
WAR/WLK

>>47729942
You are a god

>>47727832
>I think Arneson said to look at the numbers appearing, which makes a helluva lot of sense.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is the key. If it appears and fights in formation in Chainmail, it's normal-type; if it has an entry on the Fantastic Combat Table it's a "monster" for attacks purposes. (And, arguably you're meant to fight it using the Fantastic Combat Table, which is hair-raisingly lethal)

>>47728846
This is also useful, level 0 charts: http://purplesorcerer.com/0_charts.pdf

>>47729590
>Slayers
I like this one mane
Call Thieves "Reavers" to top it off

Is Flame Princess as edgy/weird!/gross as people claim?

I'm going to run an OSR game soon and I'm reading over Flame Princess and it looks pretty nifty. What's your favorite module?

>>47730437
>Is Flame Princess as edgy/weird!/gross as people claim?

Yup.

I tend to agree with the folks saying DCC is fun but after running it for a little while, it can get tedious.

It has a lot of really great ideas and fun mechanics that can generate interesting results at the table.

But it almost goes too far. Stuff like patrons and deities can wrestle too much away from the DM. Mighty Deeds are a great idea, that they should have left without any tables. Players lean on them like a crutch. Any table lookup really does slow the game down and loses its novelty after the first half a dozen sessions. Too much magical bullshit (taint, corruption, spell duels, patrons, etc, etc). Funky dice are a pain if you don't buy the actual dice or use a dice roller app.

The character funnel is great. The luck mechanic is great. There are lots of little ideas that I think would improve another system like LL or LotFP.

It is a truly wonderful system, but only for short periods. Not something I think I or any of my players could run for an extended campaign. For that, it is easier to settle in to a simpler system where rulebook lookup is minimal.

>>47730437
The system in itself, no. The art is a bit... eh, and some of the modules border on the /d/, however.

>>47730437
the published modules are.
The mechanics themselves are neutral oldschool D&D and do not enforce any of the themes that the modules and fluff do.

>>47730437
Having not played LotFP at all, my favorite adventure I've read is Death Frost Doom v2, second only to the God That Crawls.

Unfortunately both of them are sort of a crapshoot; DFD will most likely end in the party being mostly dead or helping an undead king start taking over the world, and GTC will most likely end in the party being mostly dead or on the run and wanted for all sorts of crimes.

It's hard to imagine running either of them and then continuing into a long-running campaign afterwards.
Which sucks, because I kinda wanna try running/playing through DFD, Death Love Doom, and Fuck For Satan, all in one campaign, because they all involve the Duvan'Ku to some degree or another.

>>47730437
Sort of, some modules are more gross and edgy than others. The rules themself contain no real edge but some of the illustrations in the rulebook does. I guess the least edgy LotFP stuff is the Zak S modules, and the most edgy is definitely stuff like Carcosa and Death Love Doom. The thing about the modules though is that while they can have gory and edgy stuff they are actually more about subverting or (attempting to) better mechanics/situations/ways of playing.

>>47730498
>>47730551
>>47730560
>>47730578

Quite a healthy amount of replies, where I was expecting no answer. Since it would be my own and the group's first time playing it should I stick to a published module? Would taking a module from Basic or AD&D be a bad decision? If I do should I look out for anything in particular?

>>47730649
A lot of people in these threads seems to agree that the rules are really solid and you can use them for basically any old school or OSR modules.

Tower of the Stargazer is an LotFP module that a lot of people recommend. It's kind of different from the other modules though since it's a bit easier on the players, but it still has deadly traps and some pretty fun encounters.

>>47730649
Uh, I can't answer that question because its basically irreconcilable. But it depends on whether you want weird /d/ + /b/ fantasy or D&D with slim rule system. If the former, go with the LFP modules, if the latter, go with the D&D modules, but mixing the two may result in tonal dissonance where the PCs fight orcs and stuff one week and in the next week you fall into the nose of a colossal sleeping giant or get hit by a curse that makes you squirm around in blind agony forever as your body constantly oscillates between fetal and geriatric states.

>>47730712
Seconding Stargazer.
The one in the grindhouse DMG is also a good little intro scenario. A Stranger Storm I think it was called?

You can use DFD as an intro to kick off a campaign. If there is a TPK then no big deal. It was a prologue! Roll up the REAL heroes now!
DFD is best used early, before players get too attached to their characters.

>>47730564
>It's hard to imagine running either of them and then continuing into a long-running campaign afterwards.
Both Zak S.' Vornheim campaign and Maliszewski(?)'s Dwimmermount game started with DFD...

>>47730804
Idk, my idea(>>47730564) was to have DFD cap off a campaign/prequel that ends with the group at level 3 or 4, that way they see a bit of the Death Sign around before they run into the Duvan'Ku, and it isn't just some random throwaway symbol in their minds.

>>47730534

Thanks for this. It's nice to see some more insightful replies than just "I like x". I'm guilty of that myself.

>>47730318
>(And, arguably you're meant to fight it using the Fantastic Combat Table, which is hair-raisingly lethal)
Eh, later prints (4+, I think?) made sure to point out that "drive back or kill" meant 1d6 points of damage.

As opposed to the first print, for instance, which I'm pretty sure doesn't say jack shit about damage and needs to be inferred from shit like elves with magic weapons doing 2-7 damage and giants doing double damage (two dice) and whatnot.

It's kind of baffling that something like that could just slip through, to be honest, but I guess 1974 was a different time.

>>47730318
>>47731126
Also, yes, this means that fantastic combat takes way longer than normal combat. Don't ask me why, although I'm pretty sure it's intentional.

>>47727620
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_revolver

People will mount guns/pointy bits into literally anything.

I just got three copies of Basic Fantasy for $15, and I'm really impressed. I have yet to playtest, but this could someday be my go-to for OSR gaming.

How does it scale compared to other d20 D&D, though? Like is 5e cross-compatibility viable or should I just homebrew?
I don't have my books side-by-side to compare right now, and d20 is a little easier to convert than, say, stuff from the AD&D monster manuals.

>>47731126
>Eh, later prints (4+, I think?) made sure to point out that "drive back or kill" meant 1d6 points of damage.
I'm not sure that's so much "point out" as "oh fug, this is lethal as fuck and nobody likes to play this way, let's errata it". I'm almost certain that Arneson originally instituted Chops (proto-HP) because his players didn't like the lethality.

Honestly I think there's good reason to run it either way.

Are there any good examples of OSR race and class separation?
As fun and nostalgic as race-as-class is, I do think it is nice to give players a little more freedom to mix shit up a bit.
The problem is making humans a compelling choice.
I've stuck with race-as-class so far, because the races perform distinct functions from the human classes.

Since you guys are talking about LotFP, I really like weird/unusual fantasy, other than LotFP, do you recommend any other books? I think DCC has some weird stuff and there is Yoon Suin, other than that do you know anything else?

>>47732134
Check out Maze of the Blue Medusa, it just came out. There's a link to it in the previous thread I think.

>>47732092
>I do think it is nice to give players a little more freedom to mix shit up a bit.

Thats something I agree entirely, BUT what I find really annoying is that people usually play demi-humans as "Short Humans the drink a lot" (Dwarves) or "Humans with pointed ears" (Elfs). I like race-as-class to make the demi-humans feel different. Dont know if you looked at ACKS, it has more than one class for each race, giving a lot of option. Thats my suggestion.

>>47732296
It's also in the 'OSR Misc' folder of the Trove.

>>47732296
>>47732344
Thanks! I dig Zak works, so I'm certain I'll like this one

Anyone has the slumbering ursine dunes pdf?

>>47732092
>Are there any good examples of OSR race and class separation?
OD&D and both varieties of AD&D had race-and-class as separate things. Anything that clones either of those is going to have them separate.

I like Race-as-class for the reasons you mentioned. It lets you tweak the races and their functions more directly, and makes them a bit more iconic. I've yet to see a really good race-and-class setup in an OSR style game where there was a good reason to play a human. At best, you tend to get level caps and class restrictions, but those are the first things that get house-ruled away by most groups as onerous and unnecessary.

So yeah. I'm right there with you. This guy >>47732337 has the best advice though. Look at the way ACKS makes multiple race-as-class setups for each race and roll with some form of that.

Question about BFRPG Stirge's:

>If a stirge hits a creature, it attaches and drains blood equal to 1d4 damage per round (on its Initiative). The creature can only be removed by killing it; any attack on the creature receives an attack bonus of +2, but any attack that misses hits the victim instead.

Does this mean you can only remove a stirge by killing it, that any attack on the stirge gets a bonus of +2, and that any attack that misses hits the creature the stirge is attached to?

Rolled 5 + 1 (1d20 + 1)

>>47728393

Okay, I roll to to hit, as a 0th level Fighter, befitting my commoner status. Does this hit your AC?

>>47733289
Yes. That's pretty plain English dude.

>>47732134
>weird fantasy
Slumbering Ursine Dunes, Fever-Dreaming Marlinko, Misty Isles of the Eld.

>>47727814
>speak the devil's name and he shall appear.
https://youtu.be/0OEeYyrmr7w?t=7m19s

>>47727774
>I don't think there are many (if any) greybeards hanging around /osr/
I started playing somewhere around '83, so while you might be right about the "not many", there's little question about the "if any". Though my beard is streaked with white more than it's actually grey, so you might have me on a technicality.

Also, I do think there's something like vicarious nostalgia. There are periods of time that I look fondly back upon that I never actually experienced firsthand, or movements I get wistful about that I never did more than touch the trailing end of. Black Sabbath seems to me to be the quintessential OSR music and it puts me right in the mood, even though I never listened to it back in the day. And I do feel like I'm always questing for a spirit of OSR that reaches further back than my own personal experience. Of course, I'm also a fickle bitch, and I can't resist tweaking and improving things, at least according to my own standards, so perhaps my nostalgia-by-proxy is little more than cosmetic.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I've gotta put myself geared up for a game -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ4IRzwi_Gg

>>47732735
Yess-s. It should be in the trove, though (Labyrinth Lord, IIRC).

>>47734965
> Misty Isles of the Eld
Is this out? As in 4/7chan out.

File: 1461723337719.png (988KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

988KB, 600x900px

>>47713976
So many of the things people design for OSR games seem absurdly top heavy. They'll make a trap or a monster or whatever that does 2D6 damage and has some special effect, like poison or acid or immobilizing you or whatever, but what's the point? The expected value of 2D6 is 7, enough to oneshot a low level character, or even a higher one if you roll badly for HP or just play a class with small HD or shitty constitution. It seems like the lethality really hamstrings what the GM can throw at the players. If you can't really hit anyone with anything without killing them, what's the point to giving enemies flavor abilities and attacks?

I also think the model of magic users as starting weak but growing more powerful (eventually outstripping fighters and the like) is a bit shit, since it means 'balance' depends entirely on whether you run a long campaign vs a oneshot, how much treasure (or however else you handle XP) you give out, etc. I'm glad to see games moving away from it.

File: Lady_of_Pain_Que.jpg (23KB, 220x326px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 220x326px

>>47736546
> balance
What is this "balance" you speak of?

File: 517.jpg (9KB, 248x233px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 248x233px

>>47736655
Why don't you ask your mom? She did a pretty good job balancing over my dick, although not for very long.

Nice dubs

Can I get a rec for a good dungeon crawl? Something akin to Tower of the Stargazer.

>>47736705
>a good dungeon crawl
>Something akin to Tower of the Stargazer

Pick one

>>47736826

>a good post
>your post

Pick one.

>>47736705
Stygian Garden of Abelia Prem is pretty fun, should last you a good 2-3 sessions. Nature themed haunted house type deal.

>>47736858
>my dick
>your mouth

Pick two :^)

>>47730931

I started my 5e campaign with a modified DFD, and they are currently reaping the pain of what they sowed. If your players survive it, its a great hook to really get the players yo think about what they're doing.

>>47736546
I don't really think casters start off weak and wind up strong. To put it another way, the nature of save scaling means that high level spells will generally be saved against more often than low level spells (ironically), and high level disabling spells tend to be not very different from low level disabling spells.

The case can be made that the power level of a mage is maxed out at level 1: with the humble Sleep spell, you can get 2d4 or so monsters incapacitated with no save, just an inits+1 action. Taking out 2-4 level 10 fighters at level 10 without a save, or 2-4 level 20 fighters at level 20 without a save, now that would be a feat.

>>47737899
Sleep is powerful, if you have it, but you're a one-trick pony. You only have one tool in your box. Actually, no. You can reuse tools. It's more like you have one bullet in your gun. Only the bullet is a tool that only works on certain things. So it's like a gun that shoots screwdrivers. Only you only have one screwdriver-bullet. And that's great the first time you run into a screw, but thereafter, you're kind of fucked. Meanwhile the higher level wizard has all manner of different sorts of tool guns. He has saw-guns, hammer-guns, torque wrench-guns and screwdriver guns. And sure, the screws he's running into are countersunk, reducing the effectiveness of his screwdriver-gun, but he's got plenty of other shit he can do, so it's no big deal.

>>47728630
Dude, a retroclone of D&D that has over 300 page rulebook? Way, way, way to miss the entire point.

File: 009.jpg (87KB, 400x694px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 400x694px

Does any OSR (or OSR homebrew) have a good necromancer class/rules?

>>47736546
Generally I agree, although the fighter vs magic user balance is generally quite good.

>>47738479
> fighter vs magic user balance is generally quite good.
How would bad balance look like?

>>47738023
I don't get your point. Exactly how much mileage are you going to get out of a 4-6 hp fighter by comparison to the magic user's sleep? The fighter is LUCKY if he can take out 1 HD of foes in a day without dying in the process.

>Meanwhile the higher level wizard has all manner of different sorts of tool guns.

Sure, but the point is that he doesn't start off as shit and become OP (except in OD&D which has legit caster imbalance unless you use Chainmail or something -- a lightning bolt can hit a target twice and does 1d6/level, which is faster than a fighter's hp scales -- and by RAW you generally only deal 1d6 a hit), he starts off being able to do more in 1 round than most people can do in 1 day.

>>47738473
2e has a lot of decent necromancy stuff, but that may not fit your definition of OSR.

>>47738504

Well you could remove the fighter's advantage in having the best scaling saving throws. And after you cut out the fighter's scaling advantage, you could make monsters and mages have saving throws that DO scale, so a level 1 fighter and a level 20 fighter are exactly equally fucked over in the save department. Or you could even have it be so that the scaling is so bad that the level 20 fighter is more fucked up than he was at the start of his career.

You could make it so that the wizard's spell advancement wasn't mostly tied to magic items, and then you could make it so that the fighter finding the best magic items was no longer part of his thing, but rather assume all PCs have equal use for gear, so instead of wizards being underprivileged by magic items and fighters being overprivileged by magic items, they're about equal.

You could take the fighter's advantage in some edition with high stats in str and con and instead have monsters have even higher str and con than the fighter does.

I suppose you could also give monsters free attacks, with their higher-than-thou strength scores, whenever the fighter tries to fight them. You could alternatively make some of the most dangerous monsters in the game simply ignore the defense method fighters have against them, armor.

So yeah, make math progressively fuck the fighter worse in all ways, and make magic item distribution cease to favor the fighter.

>>47738545
> 2e has a lot of decent necromancy stuff, but that may not fit your definition of OSR.
Would that be the Tome of Necromancy where GM is literally told to screw with players?

>>47738598
No, the Complete Book of Necromancers and core rules on specialist priests.
I don't see a 'tome of necromancy' on any list of official 2e splats.

>>47738473
Deathmaster from Dragon Magazine is supposed to not be for PCs, but its good.

The 2e Wizard Spell Compendium introduces a pretty elaborate system for necromancer only spells, and has an extremely badass system for wizard spells being arranged by rarity -- so a unique spell is the equivalent of an artifact, a very rare spell is the equivalent of a magic item, a rare spell is the equivalent of a nonmagical treasure, scroll, or potion, a common spell can be researched or obtained by a generalist on levelup, and an uncommon spell can be researched or obtained by a specialist on levelup. Something like that.

>>47738595

Did you intentionally make the math of 3.PF, or was it convergent thinking?

>>47738598
>>47738615
> The Complete Book of Necromancers
I forgot the exact name, yes.

>>47738627
Quote, please, then.

>>47738622
I was trying to lay out the deeper and more specific reasons why fighters are utterly fucked in 3.PF while avoiding the more superficial ways they're fucked; ie wizards having nice things.

Its true, wizards have nice things, but far more relevant I think is the way the game rules are custom tailored to fuck them over forever.

>>47738637
>>47738598
The "literally told to screw with players" thing is that the Complete Book of Necromancers has a lot of ways to make necromancy more than just another school; the DM can, if desired, use its various subsystems to liven it up for better or worse. For example, it has a system akin to the Dark Powers' powers checks from Ravenloft. But you can also choose to visit insanity or plagues on PCs for using the harsher forms of necromancy (mostly death and torture spells; grey necromancy, ie animation of the dead and control thereof, is optionally more likely to be safe, depending on how its used).

Basically you can increase the power level of necromancy, disincentivize its use (though NOTHING compared to DCC's magical drawbacks), or both.

>>47738664
That's not limited to rules
> These rules must be kept strictly hidden from the players, even if they are adamant about portraying a necromancer.
> As the DM, you should make certain that a necromancer PC will confront as many difficult obstacles as possible during his or her own career

>>47738683
> Feel free to impose any of the penalties in Chapter Three to keep a necromancer PC from
monopolizing every gaming session.
> Despite this quasi-romantic allure, however, the necromancer deals in cold death, pure and simple The DM should delight in reminding the player of this rather unglamorous fact whenever necessary.

That was the introduction.

>>47738703
>>47738683
That doesn't translate to fucking them over. As challenging the PCs is part of the role of the DM, and as animate dead (for starters) is a phenomenally powerful spell, to say nothing of the new stuff necromancers get, presenting the magic itself as a threat and risk itself helps preserve the mystique rather than letting the PCs have a free lunch.

>>47738729
> As challenging the PCs is part of the role of the DM, and as animate dead (for starters) is a phenomenally powerful spell
Animate Dead is a (core) spell clerics get at 5th level. Necromancers get it at 9th level. And the one that needs to have "as many difficult obstacles as possible" and constantly kept in check is the necromancer.

Did I miss anything?

>>47738777
To the surprise of no one, Animate Dead is:

1. Necromancy
2. By the terms in the book, Grey Necromancy, as opposed to White Necromancy, that which is helpful and benign and unlikely to incur the risks in the book
3. Subject to the oversight of your god, who is almost certainly an extremely creepy person if he's granting you these spells

The book makes it clear that not all necromantic sphere spells are appropriate for all priests, not even all death priests.

When your undead hordes are the actual gift of a being that is at best a coldly detached god indifferent to good and evil, and at worst a ravenous dark god, not only do all issues pertaining to necromancy literally apply regardless of whether its priest or magic user unless otherwise stated, but there is a being granting you those undead minions only inasmuch as it fits his agenda.

>>47738814
And yes, I'm aware that in some settings, its legitimate for the DM to permit following a philosophy or force rather than a god. The ramifications of this are up to the DM as with all things.

>>47726571
Some post-apoc equipment.

http://iceandruin.blogspot.com/2016/05/junkland-blues-gear.html

>>47733375
I use roll-under, so it hits me square in the face. Roll your damage, sir! I got 3 HP so you better pray you defeat me right here and now, for there will be no second chances.

>>47736863
Is it in the trove? Sounds really atmospheric, but I wanna check it out first

>>47732092
>>47732337
>>47733219
Been thinking about this.
To make humans appealing: an xx% increase to experience gain (or -xx% xp required to level).
Humans being the most short lived (in the typical milieu) are driven to achieve more within their short life spans.

What magic % would make this balanced so that you don't out-level the demi-humans too quickly? Depending on the ruleset, the level disparity could be negligible, making it worthless. Depending on the class, it may make certain characters overpowered.

I dunno. Good idea or red herring?

Rolled 1 (1d6)

No strength mod due to aging effects. Have at thee!

>>47740552
Yeah, LotFP > Modules > 3rd Party.

>>47741079
Basic Fantasy RPG does this. Humans are the only race that gets a 10% experience bonus to all experience points earned, can be any of the four classes, and do not get limitations (such as the HP limitation on elves and halflings or the large weapon limitation on dwarves and halflings). The extra experience lets them level up slightly earlier than demi-humans but they won't start eclipsing them in levels until you get near level 20.

File: product_thumbnail.php.jpg (28KB, 247x320px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 247x320px

Does anyone have any of the Crawling Under a Broken Moon zines?

Or W,M,&L?

Reccomended hex crawls/mega dungeons? Any system will do.

File: gat1865.jpg (50KB, 419x295px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 419x295px

>>47713976
Anybody have any Vacant Ritual Assembley? The first two were great.

>>47739773

>>47741323

Oops, somehow I deleted the link or something. Anyway, a piddly 1 damage, you are bloodied but not down. Uh, have at you?

>>47741418
>>47741079
If one has a demihuman doubleclass (like the traditional elven gish) it may be reasonable to give humans +100% xp, as they will only be one level ahead typically.

File: GMG5070WCoverLarge.jpg (162KB, 300x407px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 300x407px

>>47729361
lol wut? All I said was DCC is fun and people are almost cainophobic towards it. You're trying to make me sound like a douche.

>>47738043
DCC isn't a retroclone. Retro in style and shit, yes, and obviously inspired by D&D, but it is it's own game. A vast majority of that books density is for the Spells. Goodman put out quality shit.

>>47741703
I'm currently uploading CuaBM to my Mega. Will post links soon.

More IRC stuff from overnight:

60 Second Dungeon Design.pdf
Deluxe Tunnels & Trolls - Solo Adventure #9 - Deluxe City of Terrors.pdf
Dungeon World & Labyrinth Lord - (RK1) Knives in the Dark.zip
Dungeon World - Perilous Wilds [oef 2015].pdf
Dungeon World - Playbooks - Forsaken Magic.zip
Dungeon World - Playbooks - Undead Conspiracy.zip
Infinite Trinkets.pdf
Labyrinth Lord - Bestiarum Vocabulum - Nagas & Magics.pdf
Monster Alphabet.pdf
White Star - Assimilant Menace.pdf
White Star - Hyperspace Messenger 01 - Stunners.pdf
White Star - Hyperspace Messenger 02 - Robots.pdf
White Star - Hyperspace Messenger 03 - Aliens.pdf
White Star - Hyperspace Messenger 04 - Skills.pdf
White Star - Hyperspace Messenger 05 - Vehicles.pdf
White Star - Hyperspace Messenger 06 - Cyberware.pdf
White Star - Outer Space Raiders, Vol 1 - Classes.pdf
White Star - Outer Space Raiders, Vol 2 - Aliens, Creatures & Foes.pdf
White Star - Space Cede.pdf
White Star - (W2) Twelve Easy Parsecs.pdf

anonfiles com /file/56f3cb3b25451e5fbba2116011310d1e


>>47741703
>Crawling Under a Broken Moon zines?

I think I saw those on IRC the other day, but I didn't grab 'em because I'm not into DCC. I'll go back and get 'em for you, though. Give me a bit.

>>47742200
>All I said was DCC is fun

And "it's different, and that makes people's assholes tighten and makes them lose their minds." It's pretty condescending to go around telling people "you just can't handle it, man!"
Especially in a thread full of people who clearly DO like lots of different things.

>>47742229
thanks amigo. I currently have 1-6. I think there are 14 all in all.

>>47742200
>I'm currently uploading CuaBM to my Mega. Will post links soon.

How many issues have you got? I just got one through six off IRC I was going to post.

>>47742275

Ah, then you've got those already. Nevermind then!

>>47717581
seriously, if they just did a proper poster version of that, I would have it on my nerdroom wall.

I love the PCs down there.

File: GMG6200CoverLarge.jpg (75KB, 300x389px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 300x389px

>>47742266
Hey, one look at any DCC thread around here shows what I said is true. People absolutely can't get past the dice and tables.

It's not a matter of "not being able to handle it bro, lol." It's that they wave their hands dismissively because it strays from what they're used to. I just think it's a shame because it's probably the most fun I've had at a gaming table since I took up the hobby.

So now that we're talking about DCC, if one would want to convert a classic D&D module to DCC, like, say Keep on the Borderlands, how would you do it? what would one have to look our for?

>>47742346
>they wave their hands dismissively because it strays from what they're used to

You're doing a fair bit of >implying there. How do you know they're not used to it? Lots of folks here have played games with plenty of tables and odd dice mechanics, and decided they don't like them. That's all there is to it.
I know that I don't care to go back to that sort of thing, and no amount of you being snotty about it is going to help matters.

>>47742500
You'd have to account for DCC only having 3 saves: Fortitude, Reflex, & Willpower so figure out which type of save would go where. They are d20+Mod over a DC.

DCCs skills are also d20+Ability Mod over a DC. So plenty of things would have to be modified for that.

>>47742229
>firefox thinks anonfiles is unsafe
Oh come on. Has this been put in the trove yet?

>>47743327
how does one convert the saves? I can do the type, but the target number? especially since in ye olden times the DC was static and base on character level...

>>47742346
It's not that people are waving their hands dismissively, it's that either
a) People tried it and didn't like it, for some reason (probably the dice and charts, honestly), or
b) They tried it and liked it well enough but they simply prefer something else and recommend that instead

I think that DCC is designed such that if you like it, you'll love it. I personally think it's got a number of fairly good ideas that are outweighed by bad ideas, and those good ideas are too cumbersome to transplant into pretty much anything. So I don't play it.

File: st.png (77KB, 638x734px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 638x734px

>>47743736
as the DM, you have to decide on it's difficulty and set a DC.

5 - easy
10 - challenging
15 - difficult
20+ - nigh impossible

was that poison set by a master assassin? prolly a DC 15.
was that magic attack from a low level wizard apprentice? do a DC 10.
is there an prolonged rumble as a landslide comes? DC 12.
was that explosive rune invisible? DC 22.

>>47743736
Check out the new Keep on the Borderlands put out for D&D 5e, it's called The Caves of Chaos: http://zaffudo.com/012813%20DnD%20Next%20Playtest%20Packet/100812%20Adventure%20-%20The%20Caves%20of%20Chaos.pdf

It's the same caves but it'll be easier to convert.

>>47743611

You can tell firefox to show it anyway. I don't know if they're still running the funky ad banners or not, I've been adblocking/noscripting the site since that happened, but you should be able to just turn off javascript and it'll work fine.

If you have suggestions for a good file host that doesn't require me to register or jump through hoops, I'm open to it. I'd have used uploadmb, but the files are too big and splitting's a hassle.

(I'm mostly posting for TroveGuy, though. He seems to be able to get 'em fine from anonfiles, my last post went up to the Trove a day or so back.)

>>47744319
I can get them from anonfiles. I'll get this and the last load of stuff I grabbed yesterday sorted when I'm home this evening. Keep up the good work.

File: wizardfin2-780x1024.jpg (339KB, 780x1024px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 780x1024px

https://mega.nz/#F!MBtWTJBJ!3QHos5Lhj8VP0EWFziRpMg

Link to my own mega. Some OSR, some not.
Pretty well organized; lots of DCC goodies.

File: 1412688329367.webm (3MB, 382x912px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 382x912px

>>47742229
I just wanna say, you're the man.

Best OSR system /tg/?

>>47745862

Depends on who you ask, and what you want it for. I'm fond of Labyrinth Lord for all the old modules, and LotFP for its new ones. Beyond the Wall for more narrative adventuring heroes games.

>>47745955
I'd just like a simple but brutal, setting agnostic system.

Still, what's Beyond the Wall like?

File: fc,550x550,black.jpg (39KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 550x550px

>>47745862
there isn't one.

LotFP is great for beginners and eerie shit.
DCC is great for 1 shots or short campaigns.
LL is great as a B/X reboot and longer campaigns.
MF is great as a post-apoc gonzo mutant adventure.

>>47745981
there aren't really setting-agnostic OSRs out there.
I mean, you could use an Ultralight like 1974 Style.
But most have a theme: fantasy, post-apoc, horror, etc.
With enough homebrewing, you can turn any system into the one you want.

>>47745981

LotFP is probably more simple and more brutal than Labyrinth Lord. It's probably the most popular system in OSR right now.

Beyond the Wall has a more modern approach to OSR stuff, where players and GM build a map together, and there are a few nods to modern narrative mechanics bolted on to an otherwise OSR framework.
I really like its execution of race-as-class, as the classes are all really flavorful and well done. A Dwarven Adventurer feels different from a Warrior, and a Dwarven Runecaster differs from a Mage. While the Halfling Vagabond does a Bilbo Baggins pretty well, the Halfling Outrider has a whole other vibe.

>>47746057
>there aren't really setting-agnostic OSRs out there.

On the contrary, I'd say most of them are setting agnostic. Labyrinth Lord will run just about any TSR setting you throw at it, and plenty of other settings besides. LotFP has all its setting stuff in the modules, and the rules don't have much setting color apart from "magic is fairly dangerous."

>I mean, you could use an Ultralight like 1974 Style.

1974 Style is poorly designed though. I read far enough to notice that there is never a situation where you'd want to use a Heavy weapon over a Medium one, much less an Elite one. Then there's how Artillery weapons are reliant on GM to decide their damage, and they only do half damage when an enemy saves, which are passed 50+% of the time at level one and only get more trivial from there on out. If the GM declares your Artillery weapon to be 2d6, then since enemies will easily be passing more than half their saves, you'll be doing only slightly better damage than with the 1d6 of a medium weapon. But why not? Unlike Heavy weapons, whose drawbacks make them worthless, Artillery and Elite weapons apparently have no drawbacks at all.

That was just half a page in, and already glaring problems stood out.

Do you guys think using 1d6 for HD and weapon damage (like in OD&D and its clones) is viable for dungeon crawling, or is it too extreme to work?

>>47746333

OD&D does dungeon crawling pretty well, so yeah.

>>47746188
I'm just saying, they're clearly fantasy based for the most part.

And yeah, 1974 style is flawed. But it isn't geared towards a specific genre, like GURPs or Savage Worlds which is why I suggested it.

>>47746361
>But it isn't geared towards a specific genre, like GURPs or Savage Worlds which is why I suggested it.

Ah, I see. He asked for setting-agnostic, though, which is different than genre-agnostic.
There are OSRs for scads of different genres, though. Horror, Supers, Sci-fi, Westerns, Post-apoc, and more besides.

>>47746439
>Westerns
Yo, hit me up. What is there for the Old West?

>>47746473
Check out Boot Hill (TSR), Owl Hoot Trail (western mixed with fantasy) and Black Powder, Black Magic (DCC)

>>47746473

There's Blood and Bullets, based on Swords & Wizardry, and Shotguns & Saddles, based on OD&D itself.
Revolvers & Wizardry is an OSRIC/1e based western system.

There's a Boot Hill retroclone called Tombstone, by Corey Walden, which has a free PDF.

I've also heard of an OSR game called High Noon that's being developed, for weird west stuff.

>>47746439
my bad. on topic: what genre-neutral OSR systems do you know of?

>>47746576

I don't know of any off the top of my head. Most OSR systems that are even remotely successful have all had a particular genre or feel that they're going for.
The good thing is that converting stuff between OSR systems is pretty simple.

>>47746576
I don't think there's an OSR system without an implied genre to be honest. What genre are you looking for? Because if you want some unusual genre then maybe it's better to look at all kinds of systems that have that setting and try to add them to some kind of OSR skeleton?

>>47746659

I don't see much in the way of genre-neutral systems on Taxidermic Owlbear, but I do see Ability Score, which is an ultralite based around using the six character stats for everything. I don't know if it's any good though.

>>47746862

Er, that should be a reply to >>47746576

Is there anyone here who's well-acquainted with maptools?
I'm trying to make a macro that is supposed to be an editable LotFP inventory system. But I have no clue how to make it refresh

I'm trying to implement a system that gets rid of rounds and monster rolls and instead has melee attacks end up in either hitting the enemy, getting hit, or a mutual strike.
Is this a bad idea?

>>47747104

Nope, that's how Dungeon World does it, and it gives you a dramatic, free-flowing combat. It's up to you to make sure the quiet folks at the table get stuff to do though.
You might also want to bump up player HP, too, as players get less control without a turn order.

>>47747104
opposed attack rolls? higher wins? draws both hit?

>>47746562
> OSR westerns
...I need all of these things.

>>47747733

Yeah, come to think of it, so do I. Let me see what I can come up with.

>>47747524
The way it works so far is that checks are roll-under, but with higher being better.
Enemies have a "Threat" rating that signifies their ability to taint your success.
So if someone has a Threat of 4, then rolling a 4 or lower is a mutual hit.

It can also be easily converted from HD in most cases

File: Blood & Bullets.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>47747763

Here's Blood and Bullets, which is freely available.

>>47747733
beyondbeliefgames webs com/freestuff htm

Blood and Bullets is here, along with Sabres and Witchery (18th century monster hunting, already in the trove) and Ancient Mysteries and Lost Treasures (modern Tomb Raider-style adventure, interesting experiment in a single-class game) B&B is neat, if kind of simplistic. The author also had another Western game, Go Fer Yer Gun, that is Castles and Crusades based but finding it has been a hassle as its DrivethruRPG/RPGNow entry has been deleted.

>>47747991

Here's the Tombstone alpha. It's also pay-what-you-want on DTRPG.
anonfiles com file/385d2e4edfce728f6194c211290b88ee


High Noon is in development, with some early stuff up on the creator's blog:
https://wrathofzombie.wordpress.com/category/role-playing/high-noon/

I haven't found a source for Shotguns & Saddles or Revolvers & Wizardry yet. If I wasn't broke I'd buy 'em, but c'est la vie.


>>47748010

I didn't know about that Go Fer Yer Gun, but I'm downloading it right now. Will post in a moment.

>>47745981

Beyond The Wall is made for being able to play a short notice game that has plot, motivations and player connections built into character generation. It barrows some really good ideas from *world playbook style world building, and playing at cons or on short notice where there isn't time to meander. Works really well for long term play too, and encouraging players to be involved in coming up with parts of the world that some people end up intuitively doing in osr sort of things, but having some help built in helps. Especially for newer players. I'd recommend taking a look at Beyond The Wall and the expansion/campaign book Further Afield to pretty much anyone, even if they're going to use a different system its got some good stuff.

Go Fer Yer Gun:
anonfiles com /file/6bab5705ab9d143d3d83ff1db58f1ee7

>>47745981

Beyond the wall does a more young adult style fantasy. It's a smaller scale, the focus in the beginning is around the village, with PCs and NPCs closely tied together.

It has fortune points, so I wouldn't call it brutal by OSR standards.

>setting agnostic

This is kind of a weird one. I'd say it's more setting implied than a setting in the way that Forgotten Realms or something is fully fleshed out.

Really I think the charm is the character creation and lightness of the system overall.

I think B/X might be worth looking at and The Black Hack has been getting some mention as pretty rules lite, but I haven't actually looked at it myself.

>>47748154
Neat, thanks.

Anyone know of a good setting to read through for inspiration that'd fit the style and mood of DCC?

>>47746057

I'm not really familiar with the various OSR systems in-depth.

>LotFP is great for beginners and eerie shit.

Is LotFP actually good for "eerie shit" itself, or is all of that in the published modules? Because I've heard it claims to be "weird fantasy" but only shows that with prewritten adventures.

>DCC is great for 1 shots or short campaigns.

Why is it good for short campaigns specifically? Does it break down or have no options for higher-level play, or something?

>>47745862
Basic Fantasy RPG, I see no reason to use any other. Maybe mix in some of the DCC elements like player funnels and the magic system.

File: DCC 67 Sailors on the Starless Sea.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>47748549
The modules are 90% the eerie vibe. There's a few little bits in the rulebook like magic and race descriptions that add a bit to that, but its definitely in the modules. Otherwise, it's essentially just B/X.

DCC absolutely has high-level play, and I don't want to deter you from trying to run a campaign with it. But its so unforgiving that the odds of naturally progressing there are slim, especially if you're only using a single character.

>>47748664

Ah, I see. I've seen the funnel thing from DCC and really like the idea, but I figured the deadliness had a drop-off after you get past that initial setup. Maybe not as much as a guessed, it sounds.

>The modules are 90% the eerie vibe. There's a few little bits in the rulebook like magic and race descriptions that add a bit to that, but its definitely in the modules. Otherwise, it's essentially just B/X.

I'm glad it wasn't just me missing something in the book then at least.

File: The Wizardarium of Calabraxis.compressed.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>47748708
well, there's certainly a plateau that hits after the funnel. you stand more of a chance. but with HPs that are as little as 1 at 0-level, fumbles that can fuck you over, magic that can defile you, DC checks that are just plain evil, you're up against a lot. it's practically suggested you run 2 or more characters, even after the funnel.

and I LOOOOOOOOOVE it.

>>47748708
>the funnel thing from DCC

Actually invented by TSR with module N4, Treasure Hunt. The More You Know!

>>47748925

Oh, really? That's interesting

>>47748549
I think it's subtle, but the tone is the main thing, as the referee book tells you. The rules aren't "weird", they're mainly a modernized BX, even nicer (for HP and Saves) in some points. Also Charm Person is the OD&D way which is no stated duration and that's awesome.
Plus it takes all the great things about magic-users making up shit from Holmes that B/X didn't have, so yeah, it's like the perfect Basic Mashup if you know where to look in the old books but like new stuff too.

Session #5 today, where the leader had his character die in a very unfair way. I think he was a bit shocked, which surprised me because he had it coming, despite usually surviving by being pretty clever and genre-savy, especially for a casual gamer.

I discovered that there's a pattern growing here :

-there's a session of slow grind with few risks taken and few rewards.
-then there's a session with some more confidence and efficience, with some good loot and no casualties
-then they get cocky and one or many PCs get killed
-so they revert to the super cautious or easier ventures way for a while.

Some high points :

Scruffy the Laborer (retainer) was spirited away by a wyvern named Erynies, which was waiting for the party at the exit of the dungeon like the evil flying bitch it is.

The group defeated a 10HD Hell Knight from Doom by throwing gnomes at it.

The fighter's player is a sneaky, sneaky gal. She knows where to be cautious and where to have her friends' back in a way that makes her seem like a great companion when she's basically a rogue with the labels marked off. I noticed when I realised half of her stuff comes from the dead bodies of the companions that died when she knew to stay back.

A Philosopher Dwarf that doesn't speak the common tongue is a great way to distract NPCs.

Mostly grabbing Traveller stuff tonight, but I did realize that we don't have the White Star core rules, so here's all the White Star stuff I haven't posted before:
anonfiles com file/d36db823fa9e8e14b505708acc20c4ae

How difficult would it be to run a 2e setting like Planescape using a B/X-style retroclone? Would there be anything that would need to be converted?

>>47749322
On a scale from Easy Peasy to Impossible, I would say Frankly Easy.

Step 1 : identify the actual BX-style retroclone more clearly, because I swear to god every single of those retroclones and heartbreakers are different, and the small differences are that, but if you worry about translation, then be specific.

Step 2 : usually, you'll want to tone down the AC and number of attacks, more rarely, the damage dice. Compare a few monsters from both editions and everything will probably be easy to wing though, no need to be super-duper-faithful.

Step 3 : be prepared to either make up cool races-as-classes for the various Planescape stuff, or switch to race + class without giving too much details on the races. If you do that, remember that either way, BX has 7 classes, not 4, to draw upon.

>>47714957
>>47715259
ACKS provides a more "crunchy", stats-based approach to handling rival kingdoms in the domain phase of play; while this doesn't intentionally generate plot hooks, being able to stat up your kingdoms in some meaningful way on a hex map may help you generate ideas.

>>47749378
Alright, cool. I was thinking of using BFRPG so the race/class split is already done for me. My biggest worry would be the monsters, I wouldn't want to completely shred player characters with something that wasn't meant to be much of a challenge. I know fighters get multiple attacks and all the classes get bumped up a hit die so I may do something similar for them. Guess I'll be eyeballing as I go along, thanks.

>>47720906
One thing you may want to do is let players build their own class from scratch using some sort of point-buy or initial set of rolls (buying a Fighter attack progression costs X points, etc. ACKS Player's Companion has an example system and there are a bunch of homebrew examples for rolling level-up increases around).

This makes each PC immediately very different, rather than making everyone the same blank tabula rasa.

>>47722533
-Extra attacks, as per AD&D 2e

-Cleave mechanic - allow fighters to make an additional attack for each foe they drop - either unlimited or limited by their HD. Generally tends to make them more impressive against swarms of basic monsters, or in conjunction with methods to increase damage or wound foes to low HP, and tends to reinforce the "master warrior" archetype, cutting down mooks who jump him.

-Combat maneuvers system. This can be stat/character sheet based (ala 3.x, where specific feats or powers give you narrowly defined abilities) or narrative based (ala DCSS, with points/dice that can be allocated to maneuvers that the GM permits)

>>47749164
>The group defeated a 10HD Hell Knight from Doom by throwing gnomes at it.
Do tell. Also poaching stuff from old FPS is a thing I want to do - I'm thinking of an early 20th Century splatterpunk game using Blood monsters and cultists.

Kind of off topic, but since I only play OSR games, I might as well ask like-minded people:

Anyone run with the metric system?
I live in a metric country. I use them in my job and day to day life. But I've been playing elfgames with American standards my whole life, just because that is what all the books and supplements use.

I've had a couple of new players complain about it. They only know metric and have trouble visualising feet and inches and miles and pounds and flimflams and bootytoots.

It is a shame the civilised world has been made to conform to barbaric American units in these games. I've never seen an effort by non-US countries to enforce metric. Why is that?

Does anyone play metric? Was it worth the effort?

>>47751675
I can't imagine it'd be too hard.
Most games I've seen measure distance in units of 5 or 10 feet. As a general rule, anything like that can be converted to multiples of 1.5 or 3 meters without too much trouble; larger distances within the same area might get a bit iffy, but it should be fine.
Moving to larger area maps, you can probably just convert miles to kilometers without too much of an issue(as in, literally, just change the unit, don't bother with the math).
As far as weight, multiply anything in pounds by 2 and change it to kilograms. Again, larger amounts might get iffy, but it should be fine.

>>47751675
Well, if your players are up to this, simply start using meters in modern/future settings or paces (equal to 1 meter) in historical/fantasy settings.

> I've never seen an effort by non-US countries to enforce metric. Why is that?
Inertia? Also, metric looks out of place in fantasy games.

> Does anyone play metric?
In DnD/OSR? No idea. I've only used "sazhen" for my Rus campaign (it was basically 5 feet).

>>47749317
> Traveller stuff
Anything recent? I've been missing Mercenary 2nd Edition, IIRC.

>>47751675
>Does anyone play metric? Was it worth the effort?
Yes, among other systems. I like elfunits for my elfgames, as long as they're intuitive. I had an iron age-like setting that used paces and 'men' as units, which proved to be a lot more understandable to a combined metric-barbarian audience than either imperial or metric.

File: imperial to metric (approximate) bw.png (37KB, 1012x520px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1012x520px

>>47751675
Eh, conversion shouldn't be too hard once you realize that D&D measurements are precise and accurate to within two decimal spaces or anything. A meter is close enough to a yard (which is 3 feet), and a kilogram to 2 pounds, that it wouldn't be any big deal to use that as your standard. And if you're relying on spaces on a dungeon grid to measure movement, use 2 meters in place of one 5-foot space, and either 3 or 4 meters for one 10-foot space (depending on whether you need to be compatible with 5-spaces or want a conversion that's closer to accurate).

>>47752499
>metric looks out of place in European fantasy games
Truly, I remember the dark ages measuring everything in feet

I saw people wishing for CuaBM
I got all the issues, but am not sure if they are watermarked and if yes how to remove it

>>47753244
> remember
We have an old timer here. But it was pied, not feet.

>>47750841
Spoilers for Gnomes of Levnec and The Tower (Green Devil Face #3 or 4, or 5).

So basically they wanted to do tourism, and picked a random direction, so I couldn't prepare in advance and eventually found out about this short dungeon called The Tower. Or a Tower, I don't remember. At the entrance of which there is an "amorphous horrible beast that has a lot of hit points", basically. So I turned it into some kind of Hell Knight except capable of speech and very bored with its job. It should be noted that this isn't weird, most things can be talked to in my game, as in, most animals have a language that any PC may know, and most intelligent monsters do speak common because they're not evil rabble (like you can find goblins in a dungeon, and in the big city).

Anyway they discuss with it from a safe distance after noticing throwing a flask of oil at it (the main solution to most of their problems so far) didn't work, as he literally laughed while being on fire.

And I'm really bad at telling the story, lack of sleep probably, but I should have mentioned it earlier : they found a bunch of mushrooom-like gnomes that want to be eaten (eating them gives magic powers, but eat too many and you just explode into a thousand little gnomes and that's how they reproduce). The party dwarf had already encountered those monstrosities, so they decided to talk them into swarming the demon to ask him if he would be so nice as to eat them. Of course, being a badass demon, he knew about the gnomes and started laughing while trampling them heartily.
That's when the philosopher dwarf decided to take a gnome and throw it in the demon's mouth. See, the gnomes are nice, so they won't *force* you to eat them, so he found an easy solution.
It made him more powerful, and with luck, the only spell he gained was Enlarge, so he became larger and laughed even more. Which let them try another, cockier shot at his mouth. Both shots were natural twenties, so *poof* did the demon.

>>47753971
(also, before anybody cries out in rage, the gnomes do make you pop if you eat more than one whole gnome, no winning through the dices only with me)

>>47751675
I convert everything on the fly.
I assume 10' is 3m so I just multiply shit.
50' rope is 15m, and shitty ranges can get tricky sometimes, but otherwise I'm fine with feet.
I hate inches and yards though, those fuck with my already maths-fearing brain.

>>47754003
Also a few games did use the metric system. Over the Edge for exemple (and it also joked about it)

>>47753262
You'll know they're watermarked if you see your name at the bottom of every page.

>>47754003
I remember that a yard is a meter except no, but yeah, fuck inches. Converting height in my head is the worst, because I don't really have a mental reference for "sure, that guy is five feet and seven inches tall"

>>47755719
Six feet is 180cm, an inch is ~2,5cm, there are twelve inches in a foot, so 5'7"=~167,5cm.

But yeah, it's annoying as fuck to convert and there's probably a better way to go about it. Maybe just memorize the 10cm intervals or something, that sounds easy enough - a foot is 30cm, four inches is 10cm. 5ft is 150cm, 5'4" is 160, 5'8" is 170, 6' is 180cm. Something like that.

Now, pounds and ounces and gallons and whatnot, on the other hand...

File: English_length_units_graph.png (35KB, 673x983px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 673x983px

Seriously, though, I don't play roleplaying games to use old units I honestly can't wrap my head around. And this goes for more than just distance - I don't want to use guineas and sovereigns in coinage or have five varieties of pounds in weight or use the old English volume system (a "jigger" is a real unit? Really?) or use whatever the fuck the standard time system was for the period. (Apparently seconds are a post-medieval invention, but fuck if I know about minutes.)

The Imperial system isn't even that bad, in comparison, but we didn't use anything like it in my home country during the medieval era so fuck that. At least six-mile hexes are directly convertible to mil, so that's one good thing to come from that.

For the people talking about ACKS in these threads, how would you pitch it? From what I've heard it seems to have some neat ideas but I have no idea where it stands in terms of OSR. Is it a B/X clone or more of a fantasy heartbreaker? Is it easy to convert characters from say LL or LotFP to it?

>>47756034
IIRC it's a BECMI clone that tries to make the domain system more involved. It's probably most famous for its bottom-up attitude to the economy and such, to be honest. (In contrast to, say, An Echo Resounding's top-down abstract approach.)

Converting characters should probably be easy enough given how uncomplicated OSR characters are, but you'll need to have them select skills for their characters and, in the case of demihumans, which class they're going to be. There's a couple for each race.

It's fast enough to generate a character that I'd perhaps just reccomend making a new one so that the players aren't thrown into the deep end, though.

>>47754498
Not him, but can't there be hidden watermarks as well?

File: La-Mulana - Mulbruk Just buy it.jpg (9KB, 184x216px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 184x216px

>go through my rpg stuff to sell something in order to pay for the new Lankhmar box
>have very early LOTFP stuff worth like 350bux which I paid for with less than a third of that.
>tfw random purchases of early OSR stuff justifying themselves

>>47756034
This >>47756076 is more or less right. It's more or less a BECMI clone, but it is interesting to note that it's got a healthy dash of AD&D thrown in. The proficiency system is really interesting and adds a bit for people who might think the normal Basic D&D style of character options is a bit lacking. They use proficiencies in a way that simulates skills or even 3e feats to some extent without creating character builds or being an undue burden on the system. Similarly, every race they feature has multiple race-as-class options, and a system to make more. It's a good compromise between people who like race-as-class for balance reasons and people who want them to be separate for variety.

A lot of the cool stuff in ACKS strikes me as that, really. A good compromise to bring in features of AD&D without the clutter of AD&D.

>>47756093

Yeah, I've heard of such things.

>>47756093
>>47756704
FFS, people. It's not paizo product, it's a cheap e-zine. They can't afford a dedicated security specialist, nor do they have a lawyer guy ready to choke the life out of anyone who copied their pdfs. They'll use generic staff, if they'll use any.

If you don't see watermarks - there are no watermarks.

And - yes. There are hidden watermarks. But they go hand-in-hand with visible watermarks.

>>47756605
>but it is interesting to note that it's got a healthy dash of AD&D thrown in.
It's probably worth noting here that BECMI itself has a lot of AD&D-esque stuff in it. The skill skills from the Gazetteers/Rules Cyclopedia and Weapon Mastery cover proficiencies, for instance, and the skills sometimes include more obscure stuff in the various supplements. (Treewalking for elves in Alfheim, for instance.)

Hell, someday I should probably try going through BECMI and seeing what they DIDN'T convert from OD&D in some fashion. The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is Psionics, and even then the Immortals have point-based deterministic power combat and abilities in a manner that's reminiscent of Gods, Demi-gods & Heroes' psionic capabilities for gods.

Also I guess it's lacking the distinct figure-pushing mass combat, but I reckon that they thought that BATTLESYSTEM(TM) covered that and just went for the more abstract War Machine instead.

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

1B, 486x500px

>>47752614

Here's what I've acquired recently. I'll keep an eye out for MGT2 Mercenary.

>>47756840
Wait, how does ACKS mass combat work?

>>47757200
I honestly don't know. I think it might go for a more abstract War Machine-esque approach to things, maybe? That scales better for the really big battles that you'd presumably get with end-game domain play, I'd imagine.

Then again, Battlesystem-esque stuff is more fiddly and mathematically similar to normal play which seems like something that ACKS would go for. So who knows (not me).

Can anyone recommend me torchbearer?
Just some pros and cons and what sets it apart, really.

>>47738473

As others have mentioned, 2e may not quite be OSR, BUT it does have one of the best Necromancy books ever made: The Complete Necromancer.

It wasn't originally intended for PCs, but it's chock full of good stuff you can use.

>>47742200

>Retro in style, but not actually a retroclone

Then it doesn't really have a place here, does it?

Take your huge tome and weird dice and get thee gone!

I'm kidding. Take it easy. Breathe. Your game is fine. I'm sure it's a great one. It doesn't appeal to all of us.

>>47758070
Torchbearer is a weird kind of fit. It's not remotely compatible mechanically with anything in the normal OSR world. A lot of people will argue that it isn't OSR at all. What most people will agree on is that it explores the same territory. It's aiming for the same kind of goals, but coming from a totally different direction.

In a lot of ways, it 's the distant child of Burning Wheel. A lot of the systems are iterative products of that original game, though in most places it's very streamlined by comparison.

Torchbearer is a game you want to play if you like a more focused, narrative approach to dungeon crawling. It's all built around the experience of characters somewhere dark and removed from the world where the very environment is an oppressive enemy. To help build into this, it has status effects of a sort representing your character being tired, hungry, injured, and so on.

It isn't what most people are looking for as an "OSR" game, but it does provide an interesting experience in its own right.

>>47758070
Well, the most obvious thing to say about it is that it's very much not based on the D&D system. It's loosely based on it (and inspired by OSR in general, no doubt), but it's more like Dungeon World than Legend of the Flame Princess.

In that it's hacking a different system into playing D&D-esque games, that is. In this case, that's the Burning system (Burning Wheel, Mouse Guard).

>>47758379
Personally I like to consider it "OSR-adjacent", but I'm a weird kind of guy who also puts Dungeon World in that category.

>>47758379
>>47758434
This does sound intriguing, I must admit. Especially considering those are some of the things I do appreciate about OSR games in particular.

>>47758434
>Personally I like to consider it "OSR-adjacent", but I'm a weird kind of guy who also puts Dungeon World in that category.

That sounds about right to me. Not OSR, but it's moved into the surrounding neighborhood.

>>47751675
Like the other guys said, 10' is 3 meters, nothing in the world is important enough to be more precise about than that, it all works out. I can't remember a single inch, yard or pint in the entire game, and D&D weights are fucked anyway so you have to redo those if you give a fuck no matter what units you use.

>>47758269
>2e may not quite be OSR
To me 2E is the cut-off point for OSR, but maybe it's just because it's the first D&D I was exposed to.

>>47758551
Amen to that.

>>47758572
I think the reason people don't put it under the "OSR" umbrella is because of all the supplements and sorta-modern design philosophy and stuff? Like, roleplaying XP and ditching GP=XP and the general focus on tons of pre-made settings and adventures and whatnot.

Hell, it went so far that when 3E came out it had the marketing slogan of "back to the dungeon".

I can definitely see why some people call it OSR, though, since it's so compatible with the rest of TSR D&D.


Also some people don't consider it OSR 'cause they only consider the actual new stuff OSR (and thus also exclude stuff like B/X, 1E and OD&D), but, yeah.

My personal favorites are OD&D and BECMI, and the latter got hella 2E towards the end. The later Mystara stuff had metaplot out the whazoo.

>>47758661
>ditching GP=XP
To be absolutely fair, that's an optional rule in the DMG, so it's not like it's completely gone.

File: UltimateDoomPoster.jpg (2MB, 2711x4093px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2711x4093px

Been thinking of making an OSR hack of DooM. It lends itself will to the old school gaming experience since DooM is basically a series of dungeon crawls where every level involves exploration, monster, subterfuge, puzzles, traps, etc.

>>47757200
ACKS mass combat has its own supplement, I believe -- Domains At War.

>>47758700
Do you reckon there's anything worth nabbing from that DOOM roguelike?

>>47758695
I don't remember, isn't that rule called out as being "not recommended" or something along those lines?

I also remember something about them keeping the XP values the same while removing GP=XP and thus something like 75% of the XP gain, but I don't remember if they added enough other sources to counteract that.

>>47758901
Nah, it says overuse of GP=XP may increase the risk of giving your players too much treasure.

Return to the Keep on the Borderlands heavily recommends you use it but I'm not sure if any other modules do.

>>47758901
> DooM Roguelike
Hm?

>>47758901

Looking through my AD&D 2e DMG... There's a single reference to it, under the Rogue class's individual XP rewards. 1 gp = 2 xp.

Maybe I'm not seeing any other references to treasure as xp, but it seems as though only the Rogue gains XP from treasure.

>>47756845
Thanks.


>>47758269
Yes. Unfortunately it doesn't have anything ready-to-use.

>>47759184
The rule was in original D&D if I recall, but was kept for the rogue in 2e

>>47759139
http://doom.chaosforge.org/downloads

>>47758269
Everything before 3e used the same core rules, which I clearly delineates 2e as old school. Hell, 2e was little more than a tidied up and tweaked 1e, making it a clear continuation of what came before. Sure, there was some drift in campaign philosophy, but that had started under 1e and wasn't universal or dramatic enough to disqualify 2e from being old school. With skills and powers, they got a bit tweaky with the rules, but I don't think you can typify a system by a few supplements, especially not one with as much material put out for it as 2e. And besides, even they didn't rewrite the system so much as they tried to tweak what was already there (in rather fiddly ways, but still...). And I don't think that 1e is overwhelming judged on the basis of unearthed arcana, which is its closest equivalent.

If you want to parse things and talk about a truly old school philosophy, then sure, we can subdivide pre-3e D&D, and clearly 2e is a latter part of an evolutionary process from OD&D to 3e, but if there's a boundary to be drawn, it clearly belongs between 2e and 3e, and not 1e and 2e.

>>47759442
If you don't think that people have some really heated opinions about Unearthed Arcana then I don't know what to tell you.

Beyond hoping that your books don't fall apart, that is.

>>47756076
>>47756605
So I guess you could say that while B/X is more about adventurers adventuring, ACKS is that but also about becoming a ruler and having massive battles at some point?

>>47759474
Oh, I think Unearth Arcana is a cluttered, fiddly mess, but I don't think it's fair to judge 1e as a whole by it. Granted I think 1e is a bit too cluttered and fiddly as well, but not on nearly the same magnitude.

>Beyond hoping that your books don't fall apart, that is.
Yeah, mine is disintegrating after relatively little use.

>>47759506
That's true, in part. Though B/x does specifically talk about building castles and attracting followers in the Expert book. It's always been a part of OSR, in pretty well every edition. You start as a nobody, become a hero, and then stick your dick in politics once you become ridiculously famous and powerful.

It's moe of a difference in focus, maybe. Or the attention paid to the subject. Most editions in play wind up being more about the early game, with few campaigns getting to the end game stuff. ACKS has a bunch of interesting systems tacked onto the late game so it gets more attention to its late game than B/x does.

>>47760442
Eh, it's worth noting that in the OD&D/AD&D model of domain play you don't really get much in the way of "getting your dick stuck in politics". It's more like going out and settling a piece of unclaimed land in the wilderness and then just using that as a point to adventure from, possibly with a small army.

The whole nobility thing only really became a thing later, I think, with Oriental Adventures and Birthright and Companion. Before that it's much less political and more, I dunno, wild west? You aren't really becoming a king somewhere down the line.

Also, it's worth noting that B/X is relatively late-ish as far as OSR products go. You've got OD&D, Holmes, AD&D, B/X, 2E, BECMI, in that order.

>>47760923
A slight correction in your order: BECMI is well before 2e. It's RC that's after it. So...

OD&D
Holmes Basic and AD&D*
Moldvay Basic (B/X)
Mentzer Basic (BECMI)
2nd Edition AD&D
Rules Cyclopedia

*The 1st AD&D book, The Monster Manual, was released the same year as Holmes Basic.

>B/X is relatively late-ish as far as OSR products go.
It's more like it's in the middle in terms of products. In terms of time, it was released 9 years into old school D&D's 26 year reign, so it's a decent bit closer to the beginning than the end.

>>47760923
The B/x expert book does specifically talk about interacting with the local ruler, and name level for a fighter is literally Lord (i.e. nobility).. and in practice, the whole point of having an army was to deal with other armies and such. It's not Game of Thrones, but it is still politics of a sort. How much or how little the focus is on "what you do with those politics" is up to the DM and campaign.

All this talk of Beyond the Wall made me re-read my .pdfs, and goddamn am I liking what I'm seeing.

I see a lot of stuff that's kind of like slightly-better Dungeon World here, and with wayyyy better art. I love the idea of player helping to create the world, and the fact that chargen is based on archetypes. It's comfy in a way I really, really like.

What are some good lesser-known OSR games?

>>47763939
gray matter, homes other games,Exemplars & Eidolons, Renegade, Spears of the Dawn, Myth & Magic, Blood & Treasuer, Dark Dungeons.

What books, ORS and DnD classic stuff, cover psionics? Where did that first show up? What favourite things do people have? I'm more interested in having it as monsterous abilities, with minor psi for everyone similar to Dark Suns or Red Steel.

I'm looking through PX1 and its neat, and I'm familiar with the Dark Suns stuff from childhood, but what else is there?

File: CBM Char Sheet.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

that did with the CuaBS issues should deeeeeeeeeefinetly post that shit.

>>47742200
>>47742276
>>47764745
What is CuaBS/CuaBM?

File: Crawling under a broken Moon _3.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>47765307
>CuaBS
typo on my part.

Crawling Under a Broken Moon. It's a fanzine for DCC for this awesome, gonzo post-apocalyptic world. Like Thundarr the Barbarian meets Fallout meets Gamma World.

>>47765339
Oh neat. If someone gets them uploaded somewhere, we can toss them in the trove. I don't think we have those.

>>47759442
>this shit again
No dude, the cutoff is pretty universally agreed. 90% of the OSR movement outside of this board will tell you the break is when they begin publishing Dragonlance during 1E; that's when the play style shifts away from the old-school. 2E is NOT OSR.

>>47765630
#1-6 are here:
>>47745188

>>47765650
Not that anon, but I'm going to have to disagree with you. It's not really as cut and dried as all that. Most people will agree that 2e is when the playstyle started to change, but 2e is still OSR and can be played as an OSR game. Per any of the objective standards that you could apply (there is literally a site called osrcompatible.org) it still fits the criteria for falling under the umbrella.

>>47765750

Seconded. 2e is compatible with all OSR material, and you can definitely run it in an OSR style. Its default playstyle isn't OSR, so it's kind of an edge case, but it still counts in my mind. Call it OSR*, with an asterisk.

File: expeditionplanning4.jpg (840KB, 900x756px) Image search: [Google]

840KB, 900x756px

Does anyone here have any experiences with using hex maps for dungeons and tactical combats?

I know it's pretty common to use them for overworld maps and hexcrawls, but a lot of old school resources plot their dungeons on a square grid when it seems that sticking to hexes would be both more consistent and avoid a lot of the issues squares have with diagonals.

Sure, right angles are a little tougher but you can easily draw straight lines that run through hexes in such a way that it's pretty clear how many full hexes a square room takes up. Are there any pitfalls that I'm missing?

>>47767028

Consistency was not a goal of old D&D design. Dungeons are easier to map if they're on a grid, while hexes provide a more natural feel for wilderness.

>>47767060
Part of the reason I'm asking is because I'm doing a little dungeon design and I'm thinking that hexes might actually make my life easier if I want to do more naturalistic "dungeons" (like half-open ruins in a really dense forest that create a natural maze, or a natural rock cave).

File: expeditionplanning8.jpg (268KB, 1261x875px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1261x875px

>>47767112
That is to say, I understand "why" square maps are used, but I'm curious if there's any pitfalls to just converting wholesale to hex maps for everything. Dealing with diagonals seems a lot easier too.

>>47767028
>>47767112
>>47767122
The biggest issue I've come across is that, while diagonals are easier, horizontals(left-right, specifically) take the hit instead. You can't move directly to your left, but have to choose up-left or down-left, unless you're wanting to move an even number of hexes to the left.

File: Dungeon_From_A_Distant_Star_(7775008).pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>47767112

Sure, if you're doing a cavern or something hexes might be a great idea.

Just for fun, here's a one page dungeon that uses both.

>>47759184
Blue box at the bottom of page 47 in the original version, last paragraph in the left column of page 69 in the revised version.

>>47730649

I'm late to the thread, but my impression is that everything you need to know about Lamentations of the Flame Princess's reputation and whether it's deserved, you can learn by comparing and contrasting two modules: Tower of the Stargazer, and Fuck for Satan.

>>47767978
LotFP is a system. You can play any modules with it.

Aaand we need a new thread....

Here it is: >>47768147

>>47764218
>OD&D Supplement III: Eldritch Wizardry
>AD&D Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide & Dragon Magazine #78
>2E Complete Psionics Handbook, Player's Option: Skills & Powers, (revised) Dark Sun Campaign Setting

That's the "real" old-school stuff, plus a few more supplements here and there. (IIRC there's a Dark Sun book expanding on psionics as well?)

The BECMI Immortal set also has some Psionics elements, but isn't "real" psionics.

PX1 is the only OSR product I can think of, but there's probably more hiding somewhere.


Personally my favorite is probably Eldritch Wizardry as far as powers go, since it's split by class and whatnot, but for psionic combat I'm more interested in Immortal's approach to it. Both have problems in implementation, though.