/osrg/ - Halfling Edition

File: armello___barnaby_by_flowersimh-d9tfgyb.png (220KB, 650x650px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 650x650px

>>48306879
>Should Halflings be rabbitfolk?
As a fan of Redwall, hell yeah.

>>48307186

>Redwall
>Post pic of Armello character

Get your rabbitfolk lore right, shithead.

File: Howellbasil.jpg (248KB, 553x612px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 553x612px

>>48307205
I guess I should have listed out other media with talking animals but I thought it was implied. Is this better?

what OSR games involve awesome halflings? I like the DCC halfling alot.

File: Halfling Outrider.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>48307392

Beyond the Wall's Halfling Vagabond and Halfling Outrider are great.

File: Bunny Loves Kitty.gif (2MB, 400x231px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x231px

>>48307205

Why so mad, anon? Relax.

>Should Halflings be rabbitfolk?
I don't see the point unless you're making a world where anthropomorphic animals are a thing.

I'm looking for a dungeon crawl to run, anyone have a favorite they'd like to suggest?

Also, ruleset suggestions? I was looking at Labyrinth Lord but I'm happy to consider other spins. My big gripe with Labyrinth Lord so far is the fighter seems unreasonably lame, but I don't mind doctoring it to make him a little more appealing.

In terms of what I'd like to see, I'd like something that is closer to AD&D than 3.x/5e. My group has played a lot of newer editions of dnd but I've read that 3.0 was a fairly big departure from what came before it. Also, anything freely available is preferable, I prefer not to pirate things.

What's a good really tall/big race (about 9 feet or so average height) that would fit with the 'good guy' or 'lawful' races?

Half giants are my first answer but I'm curious if anyone likes the idea for something bigger.

>>48308546
>>48308546
>anyone have a favorite they'd like to suggest?
No Stone Unturned (AD&D 2e Dungeon mag), Three Faces of Evil (D&D 3.5 Dungeon mag), The Lichway (White Dwarf mag)

>>48308041
Everybody likes to do The Short Folk different. Some want talking animals, some want goblins (sadness optional), some strange bastards actually want kender, and so on.
I almost see the inclusion of both Gnome and Halfling as a way to be like 'there. Two different approaches to your Short People. Pick whichever's closest, and reskin to your heart's content.'

>>48308816
Goliaths? Tohr-Kreen?

>>48308856
I honestly hate most Gnomes.
The underground/crafty aspect infringes on the Dwarf's niche.
The magical/friend of nature aspect infringes on the Elf's niche.
The short/jolly aspect infringes on the Halfling's niche.

The only time they're moderately interesting is either when they go full Fey (which doesn't happen) or full Tinker (which alters the whole feel of the setting)

tl;dr remove gnome

>>48306879
>dat pic
Takes me back, man.

>>48308950
Oh, I get you. They're definitely niche, there to create a specific feel. Like, Pathfinder went an interesting route by making their Elves full-on Vulcans, leaving the Faerie Folk stuff entirely to Gnomes. (Like, the only time I've ever seen them go full Fey. Granted, I prefer my Elves to be in that niche, so it don't do a lot for me.)
That's kinda why I say you only need one out of Gnomes and Halflings. Most of the time, the Short Folk you want are gonna be a Halfling reskin, but there *are* some corner cases where you'd want the Gnome instead. (Tinkers being the big one here, obviously.)

>>48308546
>I'm looking for a dungeon crawl to run, anyone have a favorite they'd like to suggest?
B4 The Lost City and B2 Keep on the Borderlands are pretty good.

>Also, ruleset suggestions?
Dark Dungeons for the free version of BECMI (i.e. Fighter Edition), perhaps?

I have a Spelljammer question for you people: How are ships that can't land on land or water supposed to get people on an off? Some of the larger ones can have a ship's boat obviously, but what about something like a Tradesman? Especially one being used for its eponymous purpose- how do you load and unload cargo? Can they only dock at spaceports like the Rock of Bral? That sound like a totally unnecessary limitation and risk and for something that's supposed to be ubiquitous and utilitarian.

File: Garden Gnomes.jpg (64KB, 512x540px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 512x540px

>>48308041
>>48308856
>>48308950
>>48309066

Is it bad to say I'm doing both?

Basically I want to have the semi-fae style animal people, all small forest critters like foxes, stouts, weasels, rabbits, badgers, squirrels, rats, otters, and so forth as one race.

THEN you have a wee-folk race that is a combination of gnomes, elves, dwarves, and halflings all in one.

You could even say they are like a lighthearted or mirror version of humans and the vile beastfolk, who are obviously much bigger and much more edgy.

Please help me decide what setting to run an OSR game with in the next few weeks when I finally get my free time back.

I'll also probably recruit a little in the /osr/ general too, so help me out!

http://www.strawpoll.me/10762838

>>48309066
In my homebrew, halflings are sort of fighter/thieves. Really, they're jacks of all trades. Thieves have thief skills. Halflings get a lesser boost to pretty much everything. They are typified by curiosity, and are kind of like Bilbo, if he wasn't reluctant and fully and enthusiastically embraced his adventure from the beginning.

Gnomes, meanwhile, are essentially wizard/thieves, and as such are a lot squishier than halflings (and obviously, a lot more magic-focused). They're a bit more contemplative than halflings are, often lost in thought about some esoteric matter with little relevance to the adventure at hand, though this is counterbalanced somewhat by a mischievous streak that prompts them to play more than their fair share of practical jokes. Halflings get in at least as many scrapes as gnomes, but that's just because they're poking their noses into everything. Often, gnomes get in trouble for gleefully poking trouble with a stick.

Dwarves also have some skills of their own, being basically fighter/engineers. They're good with traps and locks and constructions and so forth, but are warriors more than anything else. Unsurprisingly, they're a good deal more durable than halflings, and they tend to be the pragmatists of the three. Halflings fly by the seats of their pants, and gnomes walk through life with their heads in the clouds, but dwarves are much more calculated in their endeavors. Dwarves tend to be conservative by nature and only deviate from the familiar path if there is a clear and considered reason to do so. If a dwarf gets in a scrape, it's normally because there is a goal lying on the other side of that scrape, and they've chosen to go right at it, full bore.

>>48309196
Let halflings be halflings.

Gnomes are the wierd slightly fae talking to animal ones, make them into the "Critter-folk."

>>48309334
What ruleset are you going to use?

>>48309649

Homebrew.

What's wrong with
Joyful yet hardy , old English country folk who lime good mead , fine stews , rambling, stories and songs by the hearth.

Everything has to be grimdark edgy shit these days.

>>48309911
>Joyful yet hardy , old English country folk who lime good mead , fine stews , rambling, stories and songs by the hearth.
So, Peter Rabbit? Also, don't forget living underground with large families and lots of farms.

>>48309566
Naw.

>tfw you will NEVER EVER get a chance to play a Thri-Kreen in an OSR game

>>48310986

IMHO bug people don't really fit in high fantasy themes. Bug people and really weird races like that are a better fit for science fiction stuff.

>>48311227
Not all OSR games are high fantasy, anon

>>48309911

You don't seem to understand that the reason why they have grimdark edgy shit is to defend that jolly goodness from the rest of the world.

That was literally the plot of LotR. If we don't stop the bad guys then our perfect little pastoral life will be over.

>>48312000
Almost lost it anyway. Saruman was trying to start the fucking industrial revolution in the Shire before Frodo and Sam showed back up to enforce late medieval gentryism back into place

What are the best dungeon crawl modules to run for new players? The kind that don't mind a good challenge?

>>48308816
it's your world, so the fluff is what you want it to be.
Nothing's stopping you from saying 'in this world ogres are dumb but basically lawful'. Think of warhammer ogres, who are sorta civilized and work as mercenaries.

>>48308856
I run the little people as goblins. Sneaky, thieving, cunning little assholes. Physically weak and frail, but with a talent for stealth and ruthlessness.
Halflings are half-goblin-half-human crossbreeds. They even have 'half' in the name!

>>48312293
Any system or level requirements?

>>48312422

I have Delving Deeper and Labyrinth Lord, for either works, I'm interested in trying Delving Deeper, or maybe cutting thieves out of LL.

File: 1465152666841.jpg (180KB, 486x624px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 486x624px

For people who play Dungeon Crawl Classics, how does misfire and corruptions works? Do both happen when the wizard rolls a 1, or does one happen? Or is possible that none of them happen? The rules are kind of unclear.

File: poppy-wallpaper.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

I personally like the way LoL did their Midget Race.

File: Untitled.png (115KB, 665x890px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 665x890px

>>48312617
Usually from rolling a 1.

Look at this spell. If you roll a 1, you then roll a d6 modified by your LCK mod.
0 or less (from a negative LCK mod) causes both, plus a patron taint.
1-2 causes corruption.
4+ causes a misfire.

File: 1465099669624.jpg (168KB, 540x372px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 540x372px

>>48312731
Oh fuck, that was right in front of me and I missed it. Disregard all I wrote, the rules aren't unclear and I suck cocks.

Give me some spells that are pretty standard and useful for dungeon crawling without using a core rulebook.

>>48312990
Candlefist
Makes all lights in a 20 feet radius teleport into the wizard's closed fist. He can either open his fist to relight the area at any point or he can throw the light at an enemy, blinding it.

>>48313092

Where's that from? That's fucking great.

>>48312990
Floating Disk
Have it form over a ledge and have an ally bait the enemy to the disk. As they step foot on it, end it and watch said foe plummet to their doom.

>>48312990
Frastidar's Tap
The walls, floor and ceiling of a single room (or 10' square per level if you're the guy who has to be anal about it) are rapidly tapped all over as though by sharp blows from the end of a pole. Any hollow places (e.g. trap doors, roof hatches, secret doors) are detected and located at once, but the loud noise provokes a random monster check.

Effectively, this one just saves you torchlight/spell duration time, since the roll goes in as normal -- if it's a large room I guess you might spare yourself a wandering monster roll or two as well, though.

>>48312990
Hand of Glory
Five lights spring from its fingertips and cast a pale blue light which lights like a torch, but seems less bright. Valuable or magical objects within the radius of this light glow softly when its rays fall on them; the glow shows through drawers, chests and the like.

Optionally, this requires the mummified hand of a hanged murderer or thief, as a material component that isn't consumed.

>>48312617
I love the look on that elf's face. 'Oh, dear, not this nonsense again'.

>>48312990
Emblem of Lightness
A rune scribed in cockatrice blood on a backpack lightens the wearer's burden. Things carried in it cause two points less of encumbrance (or equivalent if not playing LotFP). Lasts an hour per level, say.

File: BoneKey.png (80KB, 2400x874px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 2400x874px

>>48312823
Skeleton Key:
Cast on self or another. Melts flesh from a single finger and sculpts the visible bone into one door's proper key, permanently.

>>48312990
Timed Flash
A flash of blinding light goes off, either right away or at any point within [level] turns. Can be used either to blind in combat (but will affect friends and foes alike) or as a distraction by creeping away from the area of effect and hoping to draw a monster out to investigate.

>>48313603
Oh, that's a good one. In a similar vein, how about:

>>48312990
Arcane Lens
The caster can remove one eye, without injury to himself, and still see out of it. He can handle it more or less with impunity, but it's still an eye, so anything that would normally be painful remains so. The spell has no set duration, but ends when the eye is replaced or destroyed. While the spell is in effect, the caster isn't disoriented, but does get -2 to hit with ranged weapons due to his lack of functional depth vision.

>>48312990
Paste
Target (one creature or object) becomes immensely sticky and clings to anything touched, strongly enough to e.g. cling to a ceiling without falling. A Strength check is necessary to detach the target from any given object it's stuck to (or vice versa).

>>48311227
Good point, Anon, good point indeed.

HOWEVER

Thri-kreen canonically exist in Toril and Oerth.

>>48313687
reminds me of the scouting orbs in Thief II. I like it.

>>48312990
Invisibridge
A bridge of 10' area per level materializes between two points (spell fails if two suitable anchoring points with a gap between them are not available). It's perfectly invisible and lasts for one turn, plus 2d6 rounds.

>>48312990
Delver's Skein
A 3" wide glowing line appears, leading from the caster's location to where he entered the dungeon, cave or building he's in. The spell fails if outdoors or if there is no unbroken floor path to the specific entrance used (referee's adjudication necessary for slopes and such, of course). It lasts for 3 turns per level, is visible to everyone, and thus conveniently points right at the caster, in the other direction.

>>48312990
Sense Proprietor
Makes the caster aware of any being that consider the target object its property, and how they will probably react should they lose it. Doesn't give any clue as to the actual power of the owner, but an educated guess may be possible.

>>48312990
What Has It Got In Its Pocketses?
The caster pulls one ordinary nonmagical and nonvaluable object, like a sandwich, fishing rod, hammer or line of rope from his pocket. The caster must be wearing something with a pocket for this to work, but can draw forth something that wouldn't fit in the pocket, as long as it can be pulled through the pocket's opening.

somebody ought to put all these spells together into a PDF.

>>48312990
Panic Button
This spell materializes whatever is best suited to distract a creature presently in pursuit of the caster (use the OD&D monster distraction rules if you don't have any), which must be thrown behind the caster at once lest it vanish again. This spell can be cast while running hell for leather.

>>48313305
I came up with it on the spot.

>>48312990
Create Crate
A hollow wooden crate with no lid appears, 4' on a side. It persists for one hour (or indefinitely if the referee prefers).

>>48312990
Bungle
Everything the target attempts for the next [caster's level] rounds fails. Not disastrously as in a crit fumble or similar, it merely doesn't succeed, whatever (and however simple) it is. Saving throws are not affected, only things the character actively attempts.

>>48312990
Soak
One object becomes saturated with water.

>>48312990
Nightingale
One wooden door, floor or lidded box creaks loudly every time it's opened/stepped on (as appropriate) for 1 hour/level. The spell can be cast reversed as "Muffle", which prevents a target of the same types from creaking.

>>48312990
Summon Dog
A tame Labrador retriever appears to serve the caster; it totally wants to help. If it dies, this will strike the caster and all his allies as unbearably tragic, as he was a good dog. This may or may not be part of the magical effect.

OSR-ish question here:

I know Microlite 20 is built on the 3.5 but how hard is it to convert AD&D stuff for it? Is it just a matter of THAC0 to AC? Does damage scale well?

File: tumblr_mhwyjp2Jk91reohnuo1_500.jpg (127KB, 440x550px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 440x550px

>>48312990
Common Fucking Sense:
Cast upon your murderhobo ally, it makes them realize the decision to senselessly attack that NPC is, in fact, stupid and unnecessary. Their mind is changed for 1d4 Turns.

>>48314207
If they actively attempt to miss a blow, do they hit instead?

>>48314679
No. No trying to weasel out with verbal trickery. Magic isn't susceptible to that shit. Also, the Inevitables track such malfeasance, and repeat offenders are cursed with receiving a wish from an angry Efreet.

>>48314666
This sounds like the reversed version of Not The Droids You're Looking For.

File: osrp.png (486KB, 1167x1654px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 1167x1654px

>>48313975

>>48314875
awesome :D

>>48314875
Neat!

>>48314875
Kinda makes me wish Troll Gods was still happening.

>>48309566
I play ACKS and am quite content without halflings. Everything in their niche can be done with gnomes while the gnomes still fill their own niche.

>>48312213
>late medieval
You mean early modern.

>>48314875
Looking a gift horse in the mouth here, I know, but would it be possible to get the spell names set in another font or bolded or something, so they're set off a bit from the text? Nice work, either way!

File: eryeryyrey.png (518KB, 1167x1654px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 1167x1654px

>>48315053

>>48315136
Fuckin' great looking, Anon. Thanks!

File: Neil.jpg (33KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 320x240px

>>48313497

He reminds me of Neil from the Young Ones.

Rolled 1 (1d20)

I cast Raise Thread.

File: Rappan Athuk.jpg (42KB, 500x650px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x650px

>>48316737

kek

>>48312552

I just realized DD has no modules, shame.

How hard would it be to convert DCC adventures or something? would I be ruining the module without playing it with DCC?

separate question, has anyone ever tried this? is it any good?

>>48316774

DCC modules are mostly doable in other systems, but you're going to have some trouble with the fact that they have arbitrary DC checks for stuff, all over the place, like a 3e+ D&D.
I'd say just skip most of those and let the players succeed at whatever, and give the players a saving throw on any that seem really important.

File: tumblr_o4ei5c4Mjo1t2t2gmo1_1280.jpg (337KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 1280x960px

I'd like to run a setting focusing around the more uncommon races, where gnomes basically fill the roles of both elves, as the magically inclined race, and dwarves, as the short, earth-dwelling craftsmen race. The problem is finding other races to fill the gaps.

>>48316884
I think the DC checks could basically convert to tell the DM whether something is simply Doable, is Skill-Use-Doable, or Roll-Under-Ability-Doable.

I just started playing the PC game Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen

Shit's old-school as fuck.

>>48317162

it really really is, most people don't realize this, the resource management, not just being able to stay out in the wilderness for as long as you want, the enemies, omg, that game is the best

it's right up there with Dark Souls as one of the most old school DnD games

>>48316994
Sneaky little evil men could be ratfolk. Maybe Minotaurs for the brutish semi-human tribesman.

>>48316994

Have you been reading the thread? Because your gnome race there is eerily similar to mine.
>>48309196

I'm not sure if this will help you- but in my campaign setting I'm working on I'm using-
>Weefolk- Combination of dwarves, elves, halflings with the asthetic of gnomes. Have magic powers tied to their hat- take away their hat and they can't use racial powers. I'm thinking of some kind of nature bending power for them.
>Vanara- sneaky/agility race. Smaller then humans but bigger then wee folk. Age with experience but not age- some of them are immortal idiots running around. Add Wisdom mod to AC.
>Humans, middle size. Interesting cultures.
>Herpetons- Lizard folk with honorabu theme. Poison bite, cold blooded. Worship dragons, usually. Bigger then humans.
>Big guys-

The last category is unfilled for now. I can't think of a good one besides trolls.

>>48317571
What about Golems?

>>48317888

Nice trips. But the reason I don't like playable golems is the same I don't like playable undead; they eliminate too many of the human weaknesses. Players should be worried about freezing to death, having to breath underwater, needing to eat and sleep. These construct and undead creatures do not fear these things. It's the same reason why giving races that can fly are usually overpowered; it elements too many challenges.

>>48307248
Why is that rabbit hung

>>48318016
You sound boring.

>>48318128

I mean I'm all for making werido alien races, beastfolk, or make things like hobgoblins and trolls and orcs and shit playable, I just want something biological and ALIVE so the player can avoid and actually care about BEING DEAD.

>>48318150
I agree with you, I think it's important that the players retains a sense of humanity so they fear what they meet. I mostly suggested golem just because, but I suppose you could make them into some sort of frankenstein-like golem race to retain the human aspect.

>>48317571
>I can't think of a good one besides trolls.
Well, you've already used lizardmen, but that still leaves you with ogres, minotaurs, modest-size giants (goliaths or whatnot), and maybe some sort of neanderthal-esque cave dweller.

File: Porcelin coin.jpg (88KB, 628x505px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 628x505px

So I've been really feeling the idea of making the basic currency in a dungeon Porcelain coins. Partially to keep players more interested in non-money treasures more and to make players think more carefully about fighting with their treasure so they don't shatter and break it.

How stupid is this idea?

>>48318786
I guess I should start by saying that IIRC that's how Dark Sun did it.

But yeah, that would probably work alright - as long as you have very strict and obvious-to-the-players rules about when exactly they're vulnerable to breaking.

Kind of like how OD&D has fire and lightning destroy treasure. Ain't nothing quite like a Lightning Bolt destroying tens of thousands without even allowing a spell.
(Coins aren't destroyed, but they're melted together - hope you weren't planning on replacing those copper coins with higher-value treasure!)

>>48309191
Land them on the ground. Land them on a stardock. Why must all planetary bodies have water? Seafaring spelljamming ships are just so you can land 10 miles out to sea and then cruise in like you're normal.

>>48312213
He was trying to start communism in the Shire.

So, rebounding lightning bolts and fireballs expanding to a volume. Good ideas or not?

>>48320614
If they are a high level spell, yes.

File: 1528356500_01156450c0_o.jpg (1MB, 936x1262px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 936x1262px

has anyone grabbed a copy of the Rad-Hack yet? or did ASE #2 ever pop-up?

>>48318867
But most of them can't land on the ground, at least without sustaining damage

File: 0a8dc058bd27b54ec889f77483124e1c.jpg (70KB, 713x1000px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 713x1000px

My heartbreaker (largely derivative of Here's Some Fucking D&D and BoL, with a little LotFP mixed in), is about to go into it's second rendition.
As part of this momentous occasion new Races are going to be made for the game (as opposed to the stock four). While the current setup is solid, works well in-setting, and conveys a consistent tone, 3/4 are basically a flavor of human. In generic terms (to avoid extensive elaboration), there are planescape-style Tieflings, Half-Elves (with their own kingdom), Hill-Dwarves (which is a human-given nickname), and humans. Part of me, knowing that there's plenty of non-human humanoids/sapient life in setting wants to provide more options to the players, but as the lore is being provided via implications and context I'm worried about what sort of tonal shifts each could bring if made official. I'm open to suggestions for fairly grounded races (it's not low-magic, but it's certainly not planescape or ebberon), as well as general feedback. Current candidates include:
Draclings/Dracons (maybe with a c, or a k).
> D&D kobolds, but slightly larger (4~4.5' at most) Swear up n' down that they're descendant from dragons, which haven't been seen on record for centuries, but they have no evidence to support the claim. Live in hillsides and swamps, good at alchemy and subterfuge. May want a better name for them.
Golems
> sapient constructs which wander the new world in search of a cause, or to follow-through on an assumed purpose. Some just keep doing what they were originally meant to do, but this is a non-option for just as many. The magic to make such a being has not been seen since the dark age (which has passed btw)
Sun Elves
> brown elves that live on islands and shorelines. Pretty sure my dick is the only reason I'm still hanging onto this concept. Technically higher-magic than the aforementioned golems (which conceptually are incapable of higher magic use because their existence is basically one continuous spell).
[cont]

>>48323306
> [cont]
Additionally the use of core-abilities has been a wish-washy point too. The game works okay without them, but via' their inclusion a WORLD of options opens up. The recurring array is some variant of:
Brawn (STR+CON)
Agility (one half of DEX)
Cunning (the other half of DEX+INT)
Wisdom (the other half of INT+WIS)
Charisma (Charisma, but also willpower-based stuff)

One thing is I want them all to have a different first letter, but changing Charisma to Willpower just clashes with Wisdom.

The other is that, while I don't *need* to include the core abilities, I'm beginning to be worried that the options of character advancement are too limited. One way I could extrapolate would be to ad even just those five core abilities. I've also been considering including a set of talents/feats/perks that you can buy. Then, when you level up, you chose to advance an ability or take a talent. No abilities and just Talents is also an option, but I'm not sure what I'd call them. Feats defaults people back to D&D mentalities, and I'm trying to avoid that as much as I can, Talents implies that they're special abilities, and Skills insinuates they're all mundane.

>>48323306
Sounds cool
I'd just calling the kobold wannabes kobolds for ease
Also, unless there are multiple elf subraces, drop the Sun Elves

If you took LotFP and added Scarlet Heroes, would you get badasses fighting nightmarish monsters a la Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser?

>>48323365
>One thing is I want them all to have a different first letter, but changing Charisma to Willpower just clashes with Wisdom.
Spirit? Elan? Resolve? Drive? Presence? Gravitas? Mettle?

>>48323746

Yeah, I think that would work. Two SH characters are a walking meatgrinder.

>>48323772
I'm using Spirit for my version of Wisdom personally. It works.

>>48323365
"Talents" works fine. "Feats" has always been an awkward usage. A feat is an accomplishment--something you do. Lifting a small boulder is, for instance, a feat of strength. And that works okay for some D&D feats, but many are far too passive or indirect for it to make much sense. But you get used to the term being used that way and subconsciously redefine it's RPG-related meaning in your head.

Unlike "feats", "talents" doesn't have any major issues. Yes, it does somewhat imply that whatever it is is more innate than learned, but it can also mix the two--you have a talent for pulling off the new trick you've been taught. Short of going with something overly long and bureaucratic-sounding, like "expertise" or "technique" (the latter of which shares the same active problem as "feat"), I'm not sure you're going to do much better than "talent". "Knack" works too, I suppose, but in pretty much the exact same way as "talent".

>>48325061
In my stat system, Spirit is the presence/authority part of Charisma combined with the Willpower part of Wisdom.

>>48325205
The stats I'm using are Agility, Brawn, Fortitude, Personality, Spirit, Wits and Luck (Elves and Dwarves start with 3 Luck, Humans 4 and Halflings 5, but it can only be regained through either spells, divine intervention or taking on a threat or challenge out of your normal capabilities and succeeding.

>>48307186
Good cookbook, especially the rabbit stew

>>48325308
MR. FAIRS -- Might, Reflexes, Finesse, Awareness, Intellect, Rapport, and Spirit.

>>48325461
I really like that acronym! Catchy!

>>48325308
>>48325461

I like smaller number of stats, so for me I used BASIC
>Body
>Agility
>Sense (Wisdom)
>Intellect
>Charisma

I usually only combine Strength + Con together on modern or sci-fi games where it is less important.

>>48312656
I'll see you on /shortstack/ then bro

>>48325734
>I really like that acronym! Catchy!
Thanks. Believe it or not, it was completely happenstance--all I did was to notice the acronym that was already there. I didn't even rearrange the order of the attributes (they're positioned so that each attribute is placed next to the ones it has the closest relationship with, at least as much as is possible going in a straight line).

>>48325791
It's pretty hard to beat BASIC.

So, for the game I'm designing I'm thinking of having weapon expertise sorta like Basic D&D. Thoughts on this?

>>48327515
Don't know enough about your combat core to tell you if this is a good idea or not.

File: Museum at the End of Time.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

has anyone ran the Mutant Crawl Classics preview & funnel?

>>48328921
One of my buds has it but out of our group of 6-8 regular players I'm the only one interested besides him in DCC/MCC.

Don't you die on me, OSR.

I'm having my group wind up in an underground mushroom forest. They have no preconceptions of D&D so I can bend the lore a bit. I was thinking of having the following elements:
>Main races here are Ettercaps, Driders, and Myconids
>Driders used to be Drow who were charged with guarding some cursed artifact
>Most Drow abandoned the Elven gods and turned to Lolth who corrupted them into Driders
>Some Drow instead worship the Elder Elemental God or something suitable odd
>Ettercaps and Driders are engaged in an on-off war that's lasted for centuries; both worship Lolth
>Myconids caught in the middle
>Maybe have Batfolk as another neutral faction

Thoughts?

Hey guys, what are some of your favorite house rules for ACKS.

>>48330815
Not playing ACKS.

(Sorry guys. I know osrg loves it, but I find the player options to be more restrictive and un-fun like 3e. The economy and domain stuff is tight though)

>>48330807
Well, its still pretty much the Underdark, except with Ettercaps wearing the hat of the Duergar... so I really can't naysay it. Could be fun.

>>48330877
You've kind of lost me, which B/X clone has more player options than ACKS, because I have no problem with going and stealing stuff from it. But, if your answer is "not playing B/X" then I really don't like you.

>>48330877
This is a very weird answer to "favorite ACKS house rules".

>>48330918
He's saying the opposite: that the mass of options in ACKS has a restrictive effect and that he prefers fewer mechanized options. I feel the same way myself, actually.

>>48331155
Thank you for translating him, in a way he did answer correctly.

His favorite house rule is to cut back on the mass of options. Which is not bad advice.

File: wizard stock image sparkles.jpg (50KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 800x533px

>>48330619

If you don't want the thread to die either then I'd like to start the following discussion;

Bascially I'm trying to finish up the rough draft of my system so I can get some players in about 2-3 weeks time here; but I need material for my magic system. A bunch of good spell suggestions above in the thread- but I'd need something a bit more unspecific. Maybe a sort of DW style 'bend the natural world' move kind of thing for spell crafters instead of specific spells? Maybe rough spell categories tied to the dice? Maybe the result of the magic dice roll is the effect of the spell?

I also need ideas for Arcana, which is what extra thing I'm giving magic users. Each Arcana is essentially a special power or ability magic users get, once per level, along with their spell casting abilities (since spells are only on a 'per adventure' basis)

Examples of Arcana would include being able to speak to a specific animal (rabbits, bats, lizards, etc), carve your face on a wall and make it speak a few words when somebody passes, bottle up a campfire in a glass bottle and throw it like a grenade, you get extremely long hair and can use it like rope, or grow out your fingers nails as d4 claw weapons, and so on.

So in short;
>Need to finalize magic system and get spells/effects
>Need a big list of Arcana for magic users to randomly gain

While my request here is a bit complicated, I feel once it is complete it will be perfect for my game/setting.

File: The Witch A new class for Basic era games.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>48331363
I'm a big fan of this spell list for an OSR 'Witch' class.

>>48331363
You could look at Ars Magica's spell system, and then boil it down into something that doesn't consume the entire game.

>>48331310
In case you need fill-ins on why someone might feel that way, the main reasons are 1: that mechanical option choices often lock you into playing in a way you might not want to keep up in future (or you might; but you can't know that at the moment of choice), and 2: it's alost impossible to make mechanics of that kind that don't entail others being less good at common dungeoneering tasks, which screws up the balance of the game.

ACKS is definitely far better at #2 than 3e is, but so is a diseased weasel. In 3e the skills make it so some "options" are must-picks that in practice just rob you of option points if you want to be good at the shit your class is meant to do, which also means others can't even try. It's just grinding unfun.

>>48331514
kek

>>48331363
This is sort of my standard advice for people wanting a weirder/more random wizard class, but have you checked out Zak's alternate Wizard? That has a lot of good shit in the vein of your arcana that you could probably use.

>>48331155
This, basically.

Facetiousness aside; I find that because of those proficiencies and such, the game wants to penalise you for not having them.
Want to do something not listed on your sheet? Fuck you -4 to do it. Or you just can't.

Frustrating. Gets in the way of an otherwise great system.

>>48331478

Those spells are quite good, though I dislike the religious/assumed baggage of the 'witch' class in that document. I do love Witches in general though, thanks.

>>48331514

I like Ars Magica if you're gonna for really well codified and autistic spell systems, but I'm looking for something else.

>>48331593
Thanks.

==
To reiterate; I'd like help deciding on which magic system to use for my game. I want something simple and fun, but perhaps brings interesting choices.

The idea is that maybe when the magic user casts the spell, he either;
>Rolls magic dice to succeed the spell's DC; lose magic dice whenever it rolls a 6
>Rolls magic dice to see the effect of a spell, lost automatically.

Now since I kind of want to start magic users off at level 1 with 1 magic dice, the second idea is a bit less powerful here. Like being able to deal 1d6 instant damage to a group of enemies is a cool power, but with only one magic die it makes it kind of weak. Maybe I should increase it to 2 magic dice per level?

The first category (roll magic die to beat a spell DC) is cool, but the problem with that stems from the need to create a list of spells and effects, which has always been one of the big necessary evils of roleplaying games. I wish there was a way to combine the two.

>>48328921
Probably a stupid question, is this supposed to start at page 11?

>>48331598
Right, so as I said here...
>>48331310
>cut back on the mass of options
A possible houserule is the removal of proficiencies or otherwise altering them so as to not screw people over.

File: MCC-Preview-GC15PG.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>48331888
there's something funky with the PDF where the page numbers aren't right. Im assuming they just split what was the whole PDF that included a Lankhmar module from the Free RPG Day book.

>>48323746
Dunno if the rules of LotFP themselves actually reflect the grindhouse aesthetic of the art and adventures, oddly enough. I *think* the rules tend to support adventures in actual early modern earth (which would give you Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser in the English Civil War), but that might also just be the preferred aesthetics, and not the rules.

>>48331844
>>48331363

GURPS Thaumatology: Ritual Path Magic?

https://endchan.xyz/.media/d4a27e9343ef35aebb1e1468e55e3f55-applicationpdf

>Aranea were 17-HD monsters in AD&D 2e

wut the fugg

>>48332060
>I *think* the rules tend to support adventures in actual early modern earth (which would give you Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser in the English Civil War), but that might also just be the preferred aesthetics, and not the rules.
It depends on the edition. It's just aesthetics in the box editions, but in the hardcover there's some rules support. Also I'd play the shit out of Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser in the English Civil War. Thirty Years' War even moreso, though.

>>48325085
That's always been my nitpicking hang-up with Feats. Glad someone else feels the same.

That said, the nice thing about Feats, especially Fighter bonus feats, is that they can serve as good inspiration for things to try doing as an OSR fighter.

>>48332087
>Aranea just means Spider in Latin
There's a lot of odd shit going on around there, Anon.

>>48332084

That's not really what I was going for. I was looking for feedback on my homebrew system, not a system from an entirely different game.

File: Gamma World 1e - Rules.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

All this MCC talk has me wanting to check out Gamma World more. It always seemed overtly complex so I avoided it, even tho I love the aesthetic and themes and post-apoc gonzo of it all (I've know of Mutant Future and MYZ also).

What edition is best?

File: GMG5070minicover.jpg (67KB, 200x259px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 200x259px

If I may ask, what is DCC like? It looks like it's popular in the OSR community, so what does it being to the table? How does it compare to straight retroclones like S&W or LL?

File: 6899374639_c740a8aefe_o.jpg (185KB, 725x1023px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 725x1023px

Intelligent shapeshifting spiders are no laughing matter anon. I have a reoccurring NPC who's the player's contact with all sorts of arcane and underworld contacts. She's intelligent, helpful, and can always point them in the right direction or come up with the right tool for the job.

And she's playing them for fools, ruthlessly exploiting the upheaval they inadvertently cause to tighten her stranglehold as the realm's top information broker, while cornering the black market.

They don't suspect a thing.

>>48332271
Depends on which TSR system you like the most.

1e is Metamorphois Alpha 1e, I think
2e is TSR's d100 thing that powers shit like Top Secret and Gangbusters
3e is Marvel Super Heroes
4e is AD&D 2e with Skills and Powers/Dark Sun Revised psionics rules
5e is Alternity
6e is d20
7e is D&D 4e.

>>48332287
>>48332287
>what does it being to the table?
Funnels, casting checks, corruption, and patron taint.

>>48332271
Wasn't 1e Gamma World kinda grimdark gonzo? Gonzodark?

>>48332107
Yeah, I should have said Thirty Years War; dropped the ball on that one. But 17th century seems like a good time for lovable assholes with swords to get in all kinds of trouble.

File: 16 - 1.jpg (123KB, 506x555px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 506x555px

>>48332287
DCC is prolly my favorite OSR system to use, after LotFP (which I like for its "simplicity-without-being-light"). Style and fun just drip out of it.

It starts with a 0-level funnel where you're farmers, peasants and shit and you all get put through the meat-grinder until you have a survivor. Then you chose your class (unless yer an elf, halfling or dwarf already)

It's table heavy, but only for specific things: Most notably magic (which takes up most of the book), which can have any sort of negative or positive repercussions. Warriors and Dwarfs also get an extra die to roll during attacks that can give them sweet action movie moves. It honestly makes being a fighter more fun, imho.

There are no skills; just DC checks (that your beginning occupation may be of use for) or Ability roll-unders.

It ditches the whole "one spell at level 1" shit, thank fuck.

You can 'burn' luck to modify dice rolls. Wizards can 'spellburn' abilities to affect Spellcasting.

There are some negatives. The funky dice aren't easy to find cheap. Clerical healing is more convoluted than it should be. All the dice rolling for tables can throw some people off (there's a great app that expedites this.) And as a Judge, the sheer amount of DC checks in the adventures can get a little repetitive. It's also not the most ideal system for running a lengthy campaign, but oh well.

Other than that, it rules. My players have never laughed or enjoyed themselves more, I think. Especially the Wizards/Clerics.
I'm honestly considering taking LotFP and integrating DCCs magic system with it because it rules THAT MUCH.

>>48332379
>17th century seems like a good time for lovable assholes with swords to get in all kinds of trouble.
Precisely. Raggi's not wrong to observe this; less grimdark metalgore writers - like Dumas - already noticed it long ago.

File: 1465144073585.jpg (3MB, 1341x2118px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1341x2118px

>>48332466
>>48332287

>there's a great app that expedites this

http://purplesorcerer.com

The aforementioned link.


If you like games that feel like something out of Moorcock, Fritz Leiber, or Clark Ashton Smith, give DCC a shot.

File: action table.jpg (133KB, 1200x1566px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 1200x1566px

>>48332271
I'm (mostly) reposting what I said in an earlier thread, because I'm lazy.

2e is pretty much the definitive edition. It's basically a tweaked, expanded 1e. However, it's old school TSR, so it may seem a bit dated to modern eyes (though that's less of a concern here in /osr/, where folks are probably at peace with that).

3e tried to make Gamma World more sophisticated than earlier editions. It used an action resolution table (see pic) whereby you achieve different levels of success on a percentile dice roll (instead of using a d20, like earlier and later editions). For weapon damage for instance, blue did one damage multiple (7 for instance), green did two (14), yellow did three (21) and so forth. It's a neat system, and is a decent bit more detailed than 2e, but it's rather disorganized and had a ton of errata to contend with. It, perhaps, provides the basis to be the best edition with streamlining and organizing (so long as you're okay with the action table), but as-is it's a bit of a mess. So it's a fixer-upper.

4e took GW in the direction of AD&D, with classes and honest-to-god levels and shit, something I think was a mistake. GW already shared a common heritage with D&D, and the differences between them were largely a matter of them being better adapted to their respective settings.

I've never even seen 5th edition or played the Alternity system it uses, so I can't help there. Alternity apparently folded right after 5th edition came out, though, so I don't think 5th edition ever got much circulation.

6th edition looks terrible to me, but then it's based on d20 Modern, and I'm really not a fan of d20 modern.

I've not played 7th edition, but it's been billed as a short-term, pickup game of zany fun (albeit one with a high death rate). That seems like it could be cool, but I prefer to take my Gamma World seriously (even when it's ridiculous), and to run longer term campaigns.

>>48332893
I should add that there's a Savage World port in the third party folder under Gamma World that I've heard good things about, if you wanted to go that route. I've not looked it over, but it seems like Savage Worlds could do Gamma World justice.

And then there's also Mutant Future, for a Labyrinth Lord rules-based take on Gamma World. I've no experience with that either, but I'm sure somebody around here does.

>>48332271
personally I like 7th the best, even if it ain't OSR at all

>>48332310
Your 2e and 3e are the same thing (3e). 2e is d20-based and relatively similar to 1e from what I recall.

>>48332960
So weird how these post-apoc OSRs have little to no modules written for them.

>>48333037
>Your 2e and 3e are the same thing
Top Secret/Gangbusters and MSH aren't similar at all. MSH and GW3e are the only things that use that sort of action table.

>>48333100
Gamma World has something like 19 different modules over its 7 editions.

>>48333111
Maybe so, but 3e Gamma World is the only one based on percentile dice.

>>48308950
the whole illusionist thing makes gnomes relatively distinct unto themselves.

>>48311227
D&D's as sci fi as it is high fantasy though. The dungeon half of the equation, for example.

File: RPG_hackmaster_cover.jpg (25KB, 224x288px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 224x288px

I remember this game coming out a decade and a half ago. Does it count?

Which setting, /osr/?

http://www.strawpoll.me/10762838

>>48333591
It counts as a TL2 wooden club.
>>/T5gen/

>>48333641
man this is actually tough to choose, cause on the one hand I love properly gonzo D&D Medieval Fantasy, but Pulp/Noir Urban Fantasy D&D is also a wonderful thing(still want to do a game that's basically that mixed with Bloodborne)

by the way what is this question for, you asking which setting to run, or write about, or something else entirely?

>>48333695

Which one to run, yeah. I might also be recruiting from people from /osr/, at least those interested in the homebrews.

Has anyone like, converted old ADnD modules to DCC? It seems like that would be fine. I wanted to run Isle of Dread with DCC instead of ADnD.

do any of you play any modern systems and enjoy them?

5e, SotDL and Savage Worlds all look appealing to me, but I've been pretty stubborn about sticking to OSR games.

>>48334053

Yeah, I like some of those storygame things. Probably because, like Basic D&D, they really know what they're about, and push that at the table. (I had a great time running Dungeon World, which sits right smack inbetween those two things.)

>>48311227

Just one more reason why High Fantasy is shit. Swords and Sorcery is the way to go motherfuckers!

Except dwarves, they're alright.

Anyone see Fire on the Velvet Horizon in any of the treasure troves?

>>48334608
as far as I know a PDF edition for that book literally doesn't exist, so someone would need to scan it(much like how Whitehack didn't have a PDF until someone scanned it)

Do you prefer classes that are highly flavored to the setting (like a shaman for a prehistoric style game instead of a cleric/mu), or do you prefer more general classes that can be fluffed as needed?

I ask because I see a lot of OSR stuff that makes really fluff-related mechanics for some classes, but I question is if its necessary since those can be put into play from abstraction and random stuff beyond class abilities.

>>48333591
I would not readily count HackMaster as an OSR game. It's a solid game and I do like some of it's mechanics but it is way, way too crunchy for my tastes.

>>48335136
Depends. If the game is specific for a type of game, then fluff overrides generic, but if the game is designed for being able to be played across many different settings then keep the classes generic as well.

File: 3D-printed-smart-doll-danny-choo02-960x600.jpg (325KB, 960x600px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 960x600px

>>48306879
In my setting the halflings are 1/3 scale humans. so like 2 feet tall with proper proportions.

the halfling in our party is a cliche thief/rogue type. During one of the tavern brawls she became trapped in upturned beer mug.

>>48335319

I dislike this.

The size would make them too vulnerable to any kind of damage, unrealistic they could even fight anything at all without just getting squashed.

Even 3-4 foot tall races have a hard time justifying it, but 2 foot or less? Not happening.

>>48334053
I'm actually a massive fan of the old World of Darkness games, and play vamp, changeling and wraith pretty regularly. The rules are a fractal dicepool nightmare, but I love the setting to bits.
Other than that, fuck 'em.

Whats new? any interesting game?

>>48336024
>old World of Darkness
>modern
20A, maybe, but the rest stop at 2004.

>>48334053
I currently run a 5e game and I absolutely adore using Risus for one-shots, but I would like to find games that support different styles of play without going into storygame territory.
I'd love to run GURPS but I'm way too lazy to do all the prep needed to actually run GURPS. Mini Six is what I usually use in lieu of it.

>>48337260
Fun fact: RISUS is somewhere between 23 and 27 years old depending on how you count.

It had its ten-year anniversary the same year that D&D 3.5 got released.

Would putting wisdom and charisma together as one attribute, giving bonuses to retainers, non-magic saves and possible cleric magic, be too powerful?

>>48337309
Well shoot, I thought it was a lot younger than that. Still a fun little system, especially with the evens-up houserule.

>>48337312
Charisma is already the best stat, so maybe? Be prepared for the Cleric to suddenly get a secondary role as "the really charismatic dude with a bunch of followers".

File: moses-parting-red-sea-barrett-301889-print.jpg (2MB, 1200x1118px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1200x1118px

>>48337325
>Be prepared for the Cleric to suddenly get a secondary role as "the really charismatic dude with a bunch of followers".
Seems pretty fitting, I think.

>>48337369
As in, "more charismatic than King Arthur" charismatic.

Charisma would literally be the source of the Cleric's power, whereas it would be a secondary stat for the Fighting-Man - if you get really good Charisma and high Strength, you'd probably not be a Fighter when the Cleric could be better!

>>48337437
If that happens I'd probably just call that a paladin.

>>48337312
semi-related. I'm working on my homebrew and have overhauled ability modifiers. I've tried to separate ability scores from class choice. So people don't go "I have high STR I'll be a Fighter".

One of the things I did was remove WIS (and replace it with Luck). Before I decided to overhaul the modifiers I made Cleric stuff key off CHA. But yes, it did make CHA over-desirable.

(In case anyone cares:
STR: Mods encumbrance only.
CON: Mods hit dice type only.
DEX: Mods Initiative dice.
INT: Mods Languages and ability to learn new ones.
CHA: Mods hireling morale only.
LUCK: Gives Luck Points which can be spent on re-rolls and such.
Modifiers still count for skill checks, but no longer tie in to any class abilities, spells, attacks, damage, etc. All that is either handled by class now, or not modified at all)

Hey cuties

I'm a newbie GM with a group of new players interested in OSR. We wanted to go way back, so we looked at the S&W White box. It all looks awesome, but theres one thing I'm wondering if anyone wants to lend a hand on. I know that generally in OSR skill rolls are blasphemy, but as a new GM I think it helps me out alot. For S&W skill rolls, I was thinking 3d6 to an approptiate skill + modifiers (bonuses to stats, +1 for class). Has anyone here done stuff like this before? Should I forego skill checks, or use a more efficent method?

>>48337792
The most efficient method is to choose an ability score most appropriate to the task in question and ask the player to roll under that score on 1d20 (with modifiers).

LotFP uses a simple skill system with around a dozen adventuring skills. Every character starts off at a 1-in-6 chance on any skill (Roll 1d6. If it comes up 1, then you succeed), modified by the appropriate ability score (if any). Specialists (Thieves) gain skill points every level that they can allot to any of these skills.

>>48334053
Plenty of them.

>>48334053
GURPS

>>48335136
Generally, a specific class always woos me rather than a generic one. There are literally thousands of generic classes now, therefore something specific seems almost unique.

>>48334053
I don't play but I would want to play/run GURPS and All Flesh Must Be Eaten/Terra Primate.

I kinda want to try 4e and 5e too.

Anybody knows where I could find Philotomy's campaign play report? Not his Musings, which are readily available, but the other RPG stuff he had on his website.

File: Tiamat vs Takhisis.jpg (259KB, 1160x768px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1160x768px

Today I will remind them.

File: No Kender Please.png (133KB, 620x520px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 620x520px

>>48338763

Dragonlance a shit
You're waifu a shit

>>48339414
I was never a fan of the Dragonlance setting, it was too weird for my (albeit bland) tastes.

File: Bretonia.jpg (1MB, 1299x1391px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1299x1391px

Is Basic Fantasy Role Play based on D&D 3.5/Pathfinder mechanics wise? Are D&D 3.5 supplements compatible with Basic Fantasy Role Play?

>>48339970
Besides ascending AC, I don't think it deviates that much from Basic/Expert. So no, 3.5 supplements are not compatible.

>>48340005
Why does it say it is d20 SRD v3.5?

>>48340069
Legal ass-covering just like a ton of other retro-clones.

>>48340132
But does that not mean its D&D 3.5 compatible?

>>48340069
'Cause there's no AD&D/Basic OGL and using the d20 SRD means that you can use all the terms and spells and mechanics and such that often are the same ones that've been around since OD&D. d20 to hit Armor Class, for instance.

>>48340192
There's a helluva lot of d20 products that aren't compatible with D&D 3E.

>>48340192
Not necessarily. The DCC RPG and Mutants & Masterminds are also built off the 3.5 SRD but DCC is barely compatible with parts of 3.5 and M&M is so different that it's practically a different game.

>>48336002
they don't fight generally. the whole point of a race isnt to be effective fighters.

>>48339970
BFRPG and pretty much every game designed via the d20 OGL are not directly compatible with 3.5 D&D. The creators of many OSR and other games use the OGL with a mere handful of mechanics at best to avoid lawsuits for property and intellectual rights infringements.

>>48334053

I play 5e, but don't run it. I'm running a 3e game, but I've sawed the WBL system off because it offends me. I've restricted the number of books in play, but even then I wouldn't recommend it.

I really enjoy the old WoD like >>48336024 and I've used the system to run all kinds of crazy stuff (such as a Wheel of Time homebrew). I've both run and played it, but not lately.

I have Alternity and Pendragon waiting the wings. Pendragon is absolutely great, and I can't wait to run it. Alternity I've never run, but I really want to because the Star*Drive setting appeals to me.

There's others, but those are the big ones at the moment.

File: skill system, d12.png (58KB, 1030x1016px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1030x1016px

>>48337792
The standard go to is an attribute check, like >>48337834 was saying. It's quick and easy and doesn't require any new scores on your character sheet. However, it gives an enormous advantage to somebody with high attribute scores, which you may consider a problem, particularly if you are randomly generating your attributes (I personally dislike the standard OSR dice method for generating attributes, but it's they way things are usually done).

Another way is to set a target number on a d20 and modify the roll or target number (depending on whether you're doing a roll-over or roll-under system) with the appropriate attribute modifier. For roll-under, I like 12 or 13 as a target number, because it lets you succeed more times than you fail, but even with the maximum attribute modifier of +3, you won't come close automatically succeed on a roll (75% or 80%, depending on whether you use 12 or 13). However, you may fail that this system actually gives too little deference to attributes, with a score of 18 only giving you a bonus of 15 percentage points over a score of 9.

You could also do something a bit off-kilter, like using a d12 modified by your attribute modifier. Here, there's a bit less leeway with target numbers if you don't want to hit your head on the ceiling, and 7 recommends itself for a roll-under system. That gives a person with an 18 attribute a 10 out of 12 chance (83,33%) to succeed, and values the importance of attributes somewhere between the two systems (an 18 gives you +40% in the straight d20 check, +15% in a d20 roll using attribute modifiers, and +25% on the d12 roll).

>>48337586

I like it. Decoupling the ability scores from combat IS a good idea. One of the flaws of later systems was that ability scores became the be all and end all of the game.

>>48339970

You would need to convert 3.pf monsters to Basic Fantasy. There is a conversion document in their downloads section (and it useful for pretty much all OSR clones).

There are no prestige classes in BFRPG. There are five saves, not three. Multiclassing is done more like gestalt was (and more like previous editions of D&D). There's very little to "build" as ability scores don't have a huge impact (-3 to +3) and they cap at 18.

Despite having ascending AC and attack bonus, it's very old school, and doesn't have skills as a default rule (I use LotFP for that if I need to).

>>48340069

Legal reasons. It uses a d20 to resolve combat, and is very similar to older editions of D&D, and thus, could get into legal trouble if they didn't use the OGL. As I said above, it's not really compatible with 3.pf without doing a lot of conversion (and you'd best ditch garbage like the CR system, WBL, the entire settlement section of the 3.5 DMG, etc. Also, magic items in 3.pf are too powerful for a BFRPG game, where +1 to +3 are likely to be the range of bonuses).

>>48341194
>I'm running a 3e game, but I've sawed the WBL system off because it offends me.
You know that WBL is literally just them taking the average value of the random treasure rolls and subtracting an eighth or so for consumables, right?

Also, 3E is arguably at its worth with just the core books. The game is vastly improved by selectively replacing core classes with splatbook ones.
I'd argue that the only core classes that actually work as intended are, I dunno, the Bard and the Barbarian. The rest have pretty big issues in one way or another.

Still wouldn't actually recommend it, though. It's not even the best d20 game - that probably goes to Mutants & Masterminds, which come to think of it would probably make for a better D&D 3E.


None of those are really "modern", though - the newest is 3E, and that's from fuckin' 2003.

>>48341251
Logically speaking, ability scores *should* affect combat. The primary reason people don't want them too is the advantage they can give to somebody who rolled high during stat generation, but to me, this is clearly an issue with they system of stat generation and not with applying attributes to combat. So I say: fix the part that's broken rather than compromising the rest of the system trying to compensate for it.

>>48337586
Doesn't that make Constitution awfully important? Constitution isn't a weak stat under normal circumstances, and the bonus it gives to hit points is its primary advantage. Meanwhile, Strength loses its bonus to both your chance to hit it melee and your damage.

File: Thief Skills, Alt (specialty + weakness) 2.png (64KB, 1567x803px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1567x803px

>>48341234

>>48341251
>Decoupling the ability scores from combat

>CON: Mods hit dice type only.
>DEX: Mods Initiative dice.
>CHA: Mods hireling morale only.
>LUCK: Gives Luck Points which can be spent on re-rolls and such.

Yeah, I don't see it.

>>48341554

WBL is an assumption based on the 13 equal CR encounters level up treadmill WotC designed for 3.5 and its both stupid, and used as a an excuse to say "the GM is bad because he's not adhering to RAW!".

It is also a feature that ties into the community wealth system in the DMG, where settlements have a certain amount of GP worth of items that can be purchased (a metropolis by the way, can have magic items worth up to 100,000 gp for SALE).

Worse, the WBL system is assuming that magic items will be readily available because the CR system assumes it. The monsters themselves range from "easily beaten with a stick and some planning" to "unkillable without magic".

These are assumptions I don't care for in my own games, hence why I sawed it (the WBL system) and its attendant systems off. I just make sure I don't put things with damage reduction in unless the PCs have a reasonable chance of hurting it.

While I know what it was originally intended for (new players joining an existing group, or for starting at a higher level), it was quickly co-opted by optimizers and builders who (in my experience) DEMAND that they be allowed to take whatever they want because otherwise the GM is "unfun" and "breaking the rules".

>Class balance

I'm aware. I don't need to be educated on its flaws. I'm keeping it exclusively low-level, and I'm taking cues from OSR. One of the players is a Fighter (which is awful, I know), but he's a nobleman, so he's eventually going to acquire lands, titles, retainers, domains, income and other things that aren't accounted for by 3.5's rules.

My long experience with the system is that it's garbage, but my group asked to play, so I obliged them. House rules were made available and everyone agreed to them.

>>48341560

That kind of logic leads to needing to build characters, using set ability score arrays or point buy. I find none of that fun. Removing ability scores affecting combat doesn't compromise the system at all.

>>48341586

I meant decoupling from straight bonuses. Those bonuses to attack and damage favor high rolls over average rolls. Which is one of the reasons most OSR games cap the ability score bonuses at +3 anyway.

Ultimately, I would probably do away with LUCK, DEX, and CON bonuses if I was going to remove STR from attack and damage in the first place. I wouldn't allow CHA to affect hireling morale, just the number of hirelings, and reaction rolls as normal.

Considering how well OSR discourages combat in general, I really don't think it's a humongous issue. HP is low enough that even at higher levels it is possible to die to 0 level men.

>>48341960
>I'm keeping it exclusively low-level, and I'm taking cues from OSR.
Have you taken a look at the E6 houserule? That seems like it'd be somewhat close to what you're after.

>>48341560
Logically speaking, people who are too bad in their attributes to fight effectively wouldn't become adventurers in the first place.

>>48342051
Why not just scrap the strength adjustment to encumbrance and just go completely statless?

>>48342100

I have. I like it. I presented it as an option, but they wanted to keep stuff like prestige classes and whatnot even though I told them we likely won't go beyond 10th level.

>>48342100

I'd be fine with it. I'm not however, actually advocating doing this. I occasionally like to roll stats and get a 16 with a juicy +2 bonus.

Ultimately, I think OSR is deadly enough that high ability scores won't make a huge impact, and most of the OSR games I use have the "if the total of your ability score modifiers is less than 0, discard and re-roll".

/osr/, any suggestions for monsters and creatures and anything I should take into consideration for an Arabian Nights themed campaign?

Was there ever an actually good supplement I could steal ideas from?

>>48342440
>he hasn't read the Al-Qadim Monstrous Compendium

Shiet man. I mean, the Genies are all great and the Living Idol is good in any setting.

>>48338763
>That art
>is not a slut
Are you SURE about this?

>>48342440

Al-Qadim, Arabian Adventures is 2e, but may be helpful, as would >>48342482. There are several other Al-Qadim supplements. The Land of Fate box set details the world introduced in Al-Qadim (I wouldn't use it, but some of the info may be inspirational). There's another box set whose named escapes me. Details a city if I remember right. There is also the Complete Sha'ir, which might be helpful for detailing wizards who use genies to get their spells (though basic rules for them are included in Arabian Adventures).

File: 1349198543737.png (58KB, 975x462px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 975x462px

>>48341960
>That kind of logic leads to needing to build characters, using set ability score arrays or point buy.
Or just drawing cards.

>>48342100
>Logically speaking, people who are too bad in their attributes to fight effectively wouldn't become adventurers in the first place.
Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that their attributes would be identical. Strong guy is going to have different advantages from small, quick guy.

>>48344383
That's too generous. Have 2 aces and 3 of the rest.

File: 1454872458986.jpg (2MB, 2458x773px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2458x773px

Question:
System that is devoid of setting or tied in with one?

>VR's Guide to Ghosts lets you make 1 HD Ghosts

Neat

>>48346157
Tied to setting.

>>48346157
Tied to setting. At the very least, heavily tied to theme. Generics can suck a dick.

>>48345250
The first one? The first one is designed to give you the same average as 4d6 drop low, not that I'm necessarily endorsing that, but it's a method a lot of people use. Going with 2 aces, 4 sixes and 3 of everything else is a pretty decent compromise between straight 3d6 and 4d6 drop low though. That gives you an average of 11 1/3, which is less than a tenth of a point from being at the midpoint between 10.5 and 12.24.

>>48346541
Why the hate on generic games? Aren't those best if you don't want to play in an established setting?

>>48346157
Are any OSR games actually explicitly tied to a setting? Most of them have themes, sure, but even though ACKS and LotFP have default settings, they aren't even close to "tied to" them.

Are there any articles, supplements or guides to design a good wilderness campaign?

I want to do something similar to the Souls' games, setting wise: Adventurers exploring an apocalyptic medieval landscape, completely overtaken by evil, with maybe a central hub or very few, sparse safe havens dotted around the map, a place where the brave and the lost come to seek riches, glory or redemption. Think something akin to a medieval S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

Are there any settings out there that fit the bill?

>>48347224
None come directly to mind, though I'm sure there are some out there. One sec...

Okay, there are a handful (Humanspace Empires, Balrogs and Bagginses, Arrows of Indra, etc.) but they are in the minority.

>>48347134
>Why the hate on generic games?

Because if someone wanted generic material then they have a 40+ year backlog of assorted fantasy splats to through.

Give me something new, something that inspires me. An example of that is In The Shadow of Mount Rotten. That shit oozes flavor. Will it necessarily be canon to the setting I use? No, but it gives me ideas on how to tweak Humanoids, how to throw some hooks out, etc.

>>48347398
>Are there any settings out there that fit the bill?

Gygax-era Greyhawk or Points of Light

Is the 2e Draconomicon any good?

I finally looked through the DCC core book. Holy shit I need to run this game.

>>48347591
>Gygax-era Greyhawk

Which supplements should I look for to read about it?

>>48318016
What about homunculus, instead of being small, they are big fighting machines made of flesh, so they still need to eat or die of those reasons.

>>48348336
>>48348336
OD&D Supplement I: Greyhawk
World of Greyhawk (1980 version?)
Gord the Rogue novels

Do you prefer magic more hermetic and mystical, or more general and fluffy?

Or in other words, do you prefer spells with more specific powers and uses or more general and moddable?

>>48348536

Could someone post the World of Greyhawk Folio (TSR 9025) pdf here in the thread? I haven't been able to download anything from Mega for the past few weeks.

File: 1432077001473.jpg (281KB, 778x1100px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 778x1100px

>>48349176
I prefer more mystic style spells, as I think magic ought to be a bit esoteric an nuanced so that it makes sense that only a few intelligent oddballs would have access to it. Not mention it kind of loses its charm if you make to where players can sort of "jailbreak" spells. That being said, I encourage my players to research their own spells, and let them make just about anything they want so long as it isn't game breaking. Most turn out pretty specific, but they often find new and interesting ways to use them, and the vanilla spells.

>>48349604
Why do you want it? It's basically the same shit as the box set, just with less detail.

>>48350071

Completionism, I guess. I'd like to check it out, since I've never read it, and I can't find it anywhere else.

>>48350150
http://www21.zippyshare.com/v/BtdcpWsO/file.html

>>48350309

Thanks a ton, anon!

>>48334053
Yes, though I'm getting a bit bored with 5e.

Savage Worlds is probably my favorite engine. It hits a nice balance of rules and ease of running for me.

>>48334053
I've played a fair number of systems (DCC, AD&D 2E, 3.P, 4E, 5E, CoC, WFRPG 3E, White Wolf, BESM (albeit once), Pokemon Tabletop United (albeit once), One Ring (albeit once), several homebrews, and some more I'm sure I'm forgetting since it is like 1:30 am where I am.

Can't speak for SotDL and Savage Worlds, but 5E is solid and if you want you can drop pretty much whatever the fuck you want and it plays just the same. Don't want feats? Don't include them. Don't like magic weapons or armor of X type? Don't add them. Skills piss you off? Completely optional (with rules somewhere on how to rule things out if you do drop them if I remember right). Of all the modern systems, it's personally my favorite.

File: S&W - Whitebox Advanced Player's Handbook.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I just finished a book I've been slaving over for months. It's for Swords & Wizardry whitebox. Thought I'd share it.

File: S&W - Book of the Ancients.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>48351056
Here's the spellbook for it

>>48351056

I really like what you did making every class's special ability into a single d6 roll under skill roll. Really cool there, and great diversity on classes and race-as-classes.

>>48349176
So, I like my magic to feel very 'tapping into things humans weren't meant to interfere with'.
The way I run spells is like this:
A spell is a magical trick that the wizard's used to do /safely/. It's predictable, reliable and does one specific thing.
You can try and do other stuff with magic, but then that's not safe, that's just pointing raw magic at the problem and hoping it works out. It might fix your problem, but the chances are the side-effects are gonna fuck you up.

>>48351272
Thanks, I actually got the idea from Barrel-Riders Games
If you look at the intro, I state that I copied a few races and classes/ideas. That d6 for skills comes straight from Whitebox Omnibus

>>48351056
cool as fuck, and getting saved. Troveguy oughta stick this up on the trove if he sees it.
Have you considered poshing up the graphic design a bit (and making sure you've got your ass covered legally with copyright on art) and sticking it up for sale somewhere?

>>48351362
Thank you very much.
I have ripped inspiration/classes/spells/races from so many different books, blogs, video games, and podcasts that I wouldn't feel right selling it. I posted it here because I think Swords and Wizardry fans would really appreciate it.
In terms of graphics, I did my best. I'm not the best graphic designer in the world, but I think it gets the job done.
Don't forget to save the Book of the Ancients as well!

>>48348287
Do it, but download the app "The Crawler" first. It will speed things up, trust me!

>>48339414

Kender are fine, played properly.

>>48342631

She's a whore.

File: Thief smudge art.jpg (352KB, 1554x1713px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1554x1713px

So for any of you oldschool gurus out there, I have a concern about something regarding the thieves role in the game.

So first off you have Fighters. They have high HP, attack, and can use the best weapons. They also sometimes get utility with strength related stuff, but mostly they are there for combat.

Then there are clerics. Clerics have pretty good health and armor, healing abilities and spells for before and after combat, and also turning abilities to avoid combat.

Then you have the magic user. While obviously good at utility with spells, also a potent combat character with the right spells prepared.

For the other classes; Elves, Dwarves and Halflings all have some form of fighting skill.

But then there's the poor thief. The thief gets very little to no combat abilities that I know of, not even sneak attacks if I remember it, and has semi-shitty HP to boot.

So basically if every other character and class can participate in combat and help out, what is the thief supposed to do in combat? Is the thief just supposed to be non combative entirely compared to every other class?

>>48351863
I've always looked at them as F/M, given the shit they can do with their skills.

>>48351863

OSR isn't very concerned with "combat roles", as much as its concerned with "dungeon delving" roles. You're mostly trying to avoid direct combat altogether. Thieves' role is to disarm traps, scout ahead, bypass enemies undetected, etc.

>>48339945
>Admits taste is bland
>Finds Dragonlance too weird
Either you've got hate for Mormons (not that I'd judge you for that), or I cannot imagine the depths of your blandness.

>>48351920

If that was the case, then why give the Wizard combat spells instead of pure mobility/utility spells?

Seems somewhat unfair.

File: parn-vs-deelit-heavy-flow-day.jpg (132KB, 614x799px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 614x799px

Sup /osrg/

Recently picked up a hardback copy of LotFP Rules & Magic Book. Should I print off the copy of the Ref Book from the PDFs for at-table use?

I saw the indiegogo for a Hardback Ref Book, but thats years out (2019) currently.

>>48351930

Well, the Wizard can't do anything aside from using spells. Like he literally can't use weapons bigger than a dagger at all, so I guess it balances out.

>>48351938

It might be worth printing. I haven't done it myself yet.

>>48351863
Thieves backstab for double damage, and depending on the old school edition, this damage may scale. In Basic, a thief can use any weapon a fighter can, while in AD&D they can use longswords but not bastard or two-handed swords. In Basic, they do use the same d4 hit dice as magic-users, but they gain levels faster and are a full level ahead of magic-users by the time they reach levels 6 and 5, respectively. This also means their saving throws and scores to-hit are a bit more competitive with fighters' than it may seem.

All of this is not to say that thieves aren't underpowered--particularly given their poor rates of success with their thief skills--but rather that they aren't quite as shitty as they may at first appear.

Hey, guys. Are there any OSR supplements that provide the DM with more cleric/magic-user spells?

>>48351938
I've never had to use the referee book during game, I'd instead print certain lists like equipment and stuff from the rulebook.

>>48353001
You mean beyond what's in the Wizard's and Priest's Spell Compendia (being, as they are, almost complete archives of all spells appearing in all TSR products, including Dragon and Dungeon, up to their publication dates)?

>>48353375
Well, I'm looking for something which is focused in the pre-AD&D period, but, thanks, these Compendia series seem promising. Just for the record, I'm using B/X and RC spells, at the moment.

>>48353512
>the pre-AD&D period
1974-1978?

There's also the Encyclopedia Magica, which is the same thing for magic items, and the Magic Encyclopedia, which is purely an index with no descriptions.

File: 13697011_10153778714035886_6705294611321891825_n.jpg (42KB, 531x450px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 531x450px

>>48351938
aaaaand i just found out that the playtest for the new edition in circulating fml thats what i get for picking up deadtree

>>48353653
>the Magic Encyclopedia, which is purely an index
For magic items, that is. Not spells. It postdates Encyc. Magica, so has more in it.

>>48353653
I roughly checked Encyclopedia Magica and, even though it's not what I was looking for, it sure is amazing. Back then, designers were fucking serious, no doubt.
Thanks again, for mentioning the Compendia series. Now, I have a long read to do.

>>48353695
If you're talking about the alpha playtest, then don't worry. It will be years and years away.

>>48353695
Other than being many years away, it will also be very different from the B/X clone that it is now.

>>48353992
>>48354013
Just found the thread on the main forums, yeah thats good to know its a few years out. From what I've read a few pages in, its not as bad, as he's posted that he's keeping it backwards compatible with the majority of whats been published module wise.

I'll probably just keep the pdf on the tablet and not bother printing it off

>>48354034
Could you post the playtest pdf please?

File: 116758.jpg (483KB, 900x1165px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 900x1165px

https://www.sendspace.com/file/1nfzb9
Can anyone add this to the trove maybe?

>>48353512
A quick note: Basic didn't really come before Advanced, as such - it was more like having two separate brands going on at the same time.

They're also mostly compatible with eachother, although there's some details that can trip you up. And AD&D spells are almost universally more complicated than their Basic counterparts, with multiple variables involved for range and damage and duration and casting speed and material components and drawbacks and so on and so forth.

The Rules Cyclopedia was supported well into 2E, before they decided to unify the brand a bit.

The "pre-AD&D period" would, like >>48353653 said, be OD&D and Holmes Basic. I can almost guarantee you that OD&D and Holmes Basic aren't what you're looking for.

>>48354595
>The Rules Cyclopedia was supported well into 2E, before they decided to unify the brand a bit.
What? Did they release more modules for it or something?

>>48351583

They're really not. Even if they really are only "borrowing" unimportant things and will happily return them at a moment's notice, that doesn't make it okay, nor does their total fearlessness stop being a huge threat to the party and somehow become cute like the fluff seems to think it is.
The only way to roleplay a Kender decently is to intentionally ignore the fluff and play them like a regular halfling, instead of the halfling's retarded klepto cousing with no self-preservation instinct.
I loved old Tasslehoff Burrfoot, but I wouldn't want him in my adventuring party without some guarantee that we're all plot-armored to fuck and back. Scratch that, I hate railroads, I would give Tasslehoff a friendly handshake and send him packing.

Hey, my players want to try out an OSR-type game. I'm looking for a one-session adventure that ends in a dragon fight. Suggestions?

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

619KB, 241x182px

>>48354595
>The Rules Cyclopedia was supported well into 2E, before they decided to unify the brand a bit.

They didn't unify the brand so much as drop Basic off the face of the earth, and rename Advanced to pretend Basic had never existed.

>>48356023
>I'm looking for a one-session adventure that ends in a dragon fight. Suggestions?

Early Dragon Magazine had a few adventures with Inferno (?), a red dragon, as the "boss" of the dungeon.

>>48356023
It's kind of like asking what flavor of ice cream you should get. It depends on what you're looking for. Moldvay Basic (B/X) / Labyrinth Lord or Swords & Wizardry Core are your middle-of-the-road safe bets. Swords & Wizardry White Box is nice if you want dirt-simple. Castles & Crusades works if you want a modernized approach to old school gaming, with a uniform d20 mechanic. Lamentations of the Flame Princess gives a grittier, later period game (with primitive guns) that's focused on horror and introduces some interesting mechanics (for skills, encumbrance and so forth), but very much strays from the typical approach to fantasy in RPGs.

>>48356171
Oh, I see. You're more looking for an adventure than a specific system. Well, never mind all that then. Not sure if I have anything to recommend.

>>48356195
For reference, we're going to be using Swords & Wizardry, since I own the hardcopy, because I love FGG.

The only adventures I own, though, are the big ones...

>>48355972
The Rules Cyclopedia was released in '91, two years after 2E was - Wrath of the Immortals and the last two Hollow World sets were released in '92. Champion's of Mystara, the last psuedo-Gazetteer, got released in '93.

And then, like >>48356041 said, it quietly got a suffocated in its sleep and they moved Mystara over to AD&D.

>>48356041
Renaming Advanced didn't happen until 3E, really, and that's way later in 2000. I think it's more a consequence of dropping the Basic brand and no longer needing an "Advanced" line to distinguish itself - not that Basic was ever the brand name, for that matter, since it was just Dungeons & Dragons without a prefix.

>>48356226
Probably because short adventures don't really sell - you get way more bang for your buck with the long ones.

Unless you're talking about a tournament module, in which case they're perfectly beatable within a day but also really difficult 'cause they're fucking tournament modules.

>>48356294
Maybe I'll just start them on Lost City of Bakarus and let them continue on in future sessions if they want...

>>48356023
Just make something up, anon

>>48356023

The dragon hole.

A dragon fell out of the sky and crested a crater that broke into a cave. The cave is filled with a few kobolds and orcs, some rocks in the cave may explode if touched. At the end of the straight tunnel is the injuries dragon, so it can't just fly around and wreck the players super hard.

>>48356023
Why specifically a dragon?
I suppose you could chop and change The God That Crawls and swap the titular god for some kind of creepy blind drake (Maybe with horrible soft cartilige bones so it can fold itself through small doorways and kind of lurches around). The module is in the trove under Lamentations of the Flame Princess.

>>48357845
That's a pretty solid idea

>>48356023
>I'm looking for a one-session adventure that ends in a dragon fight. Suggestions?
Kinda not the advice you were asking for, but I'd recommend never introducing OSR to new players with that kind of pat quasi-plotted arrangement. If I were in your place (and I have been) I'd want to play up all the characteristic traits of OSR, not least the freedom of action. I introduce people by plonking them down at the entrance to my megadungeon, and that's what I'd advise you to do. As long as the dungeon's compelling, people typically have a pretty strong appetite of their own to go in and keep looking around. Do you have a good megadungeon lying around?

File: 1466909373843.gif (3MB, 380x136px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 380x136px

Are there any bloggers or anyone else who have converted classic spells to the DCC system?

>>48332287
I got a DCC question. I remember when Goodman Games published Dungeon Crawl Classics as 3.5 adventure modules before they made their own game (it's pretty much the same as Paizo with Pathfinder come to think of it).

Are those modules compatible with DCC? If not, is conversion feasible?

>>48360362
I don't have anything to support this, but from what I understand there is a distinction between "old" DCC and "new" DCC, so I'd imagine it's not completely compatible. It seems however like some parts of the DCC system are taken from 3.5, such as the save system, so I guess it might work?

>>48360362
Those old modules are specifically written for 3.5 and 4e. With enough tinkering, you could convert them, but honestly the newer modules made *for* DCC are miles better.

>>48360549
>from what I understand there is a distinction between "old" DCC and "new" DCC
Yeah, the "old" Dungeon Crawl Classics were just exactly what that sounds like, classic dungeon crawls, written for 3e. That's why they call it "DCC RPG" -- to imply continuity with the old module style -- and the module numbering for the game itself starts with some ridiculous high number (is it #122 that's the first DCC RPG module?).

>>48354595
Yeah, I know that B/X and RC actually didn't exist before AD&D, but either simultaneously or after it.
I had that in mind, when I was talking about the "pre-AD&D period", but I just can't express myself in different words.
TSR kinda fucked up D&D's continuity, with all this crazy back-and-forth releases of theirs.
Unfortunately, they shitted on B/X and RC, for reasons I can't comprehend... these were their best products, in my humble opinion.

Samefag from >>48361536
I forgot to add that, after a search I made on the B/X product line, I found no supplement that gives you more spell options.
That's why I got here; to ask if there's any official (or unofficial) book that could give me what I wanted, as TSR failed to deliver.
In the end, these Compendia series (the other anon spoke about) are undoubtely good, but, unfortunately, they fall into the AD&D line, which, as another anon said, changes spells' content altogether. Alas, for there is no other (visible) option.
I suppose people, with similar needs as mine, depend on retroclone releases. (LL and LotFP have released some nice stuff.)

New thread when?

File: GMG5066E_500.jpg (146KB, 500x649px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 500x649px

>>48360803
#67. Although there is a #66.5 made later.

File: mynigga.jpg (26KB, 446x336px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 446x336px

>>48341194
> Alternity

>>48362792