/osrg/ OSR General - Endless Labyrinth Edition

>>51318167
>>Do you think mega dungeons are good?
they're great

TO PLUNDER ROOM DESCRIPTIONS FROM

I prefer hexcrawling to just being in a single big dungeon

File: KEKleon.png (1015KB, 1184x1413px) Image search: [Google]

1015KB, 1184x1413px

>>51318167
Megas are a shit thing from 6th edition. Only 4th edition is good, and anyone who bans garchamp or salamence is a pussy.

File: 1483059004993.jpg (1MB, 600x3050px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 600x3050px

First for fold Cleric and Thief into a single class. And give the religion system a Roguelike vibe.

File: player_aid_card.png (63KB, 873x903px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 873x903px

>>51318215
where is that comic from?

>>51318245
why would you ever use a crossbow if it deals same damage as a bow, has same range, but shoots half as often?

>>51318278
only fighters and rangers are proficient with these rules, but thieves, clerics and magic-users can use crossbows.

File: google-fu.png (140KB, 403x463px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 403x463px

>>51318245
http://markerslinger.tumblr.com/archive

>>51318296
ah, now that makes sense

still better to shoot a sling or throw a dagger for 1d4 every round rather than shoot an 1d6 crossbow every other round

>>51318340
Unless you fire a crossbow and then immediately charge with a sword, or have multiple loaded crossbows with you

>>51318350
bandolier of crossbows!
just shoot one and throw it away, jonh woo style

File: STONE ROCK PEBBLE.jpg (60KB, 568x394px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 568x394px

>>51318386
But that would be way overpowered. No dm should allow that

File: Rockfall.jpg (32KB, 288x240px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 288x240px

>>51318404
>>51318350
>>51318340
>>51318386
that's it
rocks fall
everyone dies

File: OSR BINGO.png (188KB, 805x685px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 805x685px

Off to a good start.

>>51318475
Remove thieves because they aren't how gygax fucking wanted dnd to work.

Thieves make the game way to anime. Magic needs to be a powerful force, but we can't have things so extreme that an unarmered human with no magical powers can defeat a troll or survive a fireball, even if they make their saving throw. My house rules are the only way to play, if you play anything else you need to go back to pathfinder general and stop shitting up my personal board.

oh, and gay people? TOTALLY faggots. Tolkien said so.

>>51318475

This bingo thing is dumb. It's basically an excuse for funposting, and a lot of its entries aren't even very good.

>>51318563
>basically an excuse for funposting

And here to prove it is >>51318558

>>51318475
>>51318563
Hey, here's a thought:

Play bingo privately, then attach your *winning* board to an otherwise constructive post.

>>51318563
I don't even know what raggi IS.

I agree with you. The time to post the bingo is AFTER we've filled it, or come close.

I think bingo anon is just proud of his new creation. I'd be proud to.

Note to bingo anon: next thread, post that after people have mentioned things in it. Much better that way, it discourages this crap >>51318558

>>51318576
Well he's right. Gay people are faggots.

File: crt-feeling.png (568KB, 1194x896px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 1194x896px

>>51318576
>>51318581
They've TWO (2) ill-gotten (You)s now, and I bet you didn't even report them.

>>51318589
Now tell me about Elves?

>>51318580
But what if he changes the board before posting it? Its terrible game design to let people just cheat at bingo like that.

This isn't the type of bingo gygax envisioned at ALL

To get the thread back on track: Opinions on drow?

The way I play 'em they're mostly 2nd level fighters with bonus magic abilities and items.

So +3-5 to hit, super intelligent and tricky, but only 2d6 hitpoints. They go down in essentially two hits, though their +5 chain makes that hard to accomplish for low levels.

>>51318606
Elves are amazing to add flavor to a world, but I dont' let players play them. If you make them characters, you get humans-with-pointy-ears disease.

>>51318627
>drow
my opinion is

one kind of elf should be enough for everyone

>>51318640
What about normal elves that live under ground?

>>51318627 c >>51318640
3rd to 5th level Elves

>>51318627

I like Shadow Elves better than Drow.

>>51318646
that's a dwarf

File: Oppossum cute.jpg (57KB, 576x432px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 576x432px

So if I post my homebrew could I get good feedback?

File: 1484953620404.gif (1MB, 420x512px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 420x512px

>>51318722
Maybe, maybe not. But you'll get feedback.

>>51318729
aw what the fuck is that gif

>>51318722
just do it

>>51318762
a very old classic 4chan meme packed in a newer 4chan meme

File: PDVD_007.jpg (55KB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 720x576px

Guys, I have an idea. Not meming here. An OSR style Doctor Who game, mainly in the fashion of the classic show rather than the modern show.

Why? Because of a few factors:

1) Classic Doctor Who could be lethal - our heroes rarely die but the people they meet die all the time to demonstrate the threat of the monsters and villains.

OSR games are low HP games. This makes PCs quite mortal and it frequently promotes thinking around violent solutions. Very Doctor Who in my opinion.

2) The Doctor is extremely skilled and capable in ways that are hard to make work in games with skills. OSR is not based around skills but rather player skill and GM rulings.

3) Rulings > Rules allows flexibility to tell nearly any story as desired as per Doctor Who.

4) Similarly, OSR can be realistic or gonzo. This is suitable for everything from pure historicals to adventures on alien worlds.

Am I onto something here?

If Goblins are asshole children does that make Hobgoblins asshole teenagers?

>>51318627
>Opinions on drow?
Demon summoning elfs that live in the underworld?

Awesome.

>>51318949
I'm not sure that classes and levels--at least with respect to ramping hit points--really work very well. Barring something meta like Fate, it seems like a stripped down, attribute-based system without the combat focus of the D&D crunch might work pretty well though. So sort of D&D with no classes, and just the attribute scores and improvise... or something like Barbarians of Lemuria, actually. Just add on the necessary careers and go with simple 2d6 rolls.

So now that we've decided that thieves and clerics are unneeded clutter, why don't we take the next step? It's time we all started playing properly in classless systems like Gygax intended.

Any character token generator? i am thinking on using the ones from rpg maker but they dont have dwarves or halflings

>>51319252
It's very easy to houserule.

>have just one class: man
>wearing armor of any kind prevents spellcasting

There.

File: TSR 20XX - Monster Manual 3 AKA Official Dragons Bestiary Gygax Approved.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

By gracious arrangement with the author of AD&D™, these monsters of The Dragon's Bestiary are to be considered Official Rules Additions on the same level as those within the Monster Manual.

>>51319018
makes sense;

http://mushroompress.blogspot.co.nz/2016/09/goblins-as-nasty-maggotmonsters.html

>>51319018
But who are the asshole grown-ups?
Inb4 humans

>>51319591
hu-
damnit
bugbears?

File: superm_n_2x.png (58KB, 536x707px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 536x707px

>>51319591
Ogres and giants
Duh

>>51319591
>>51319591
Not sure really. There isn't a monster equivalent of taking advantage of your children to feed your vices while simultaneously teaching them that same behaviour through verbal and physical abuse. Get dad another beer or he'll beat you doesn't lend well to a monster trait.

Not Bugbears since they're not very gobliny . It needs to be like a Goblin King or Queen. Ogres maybe?

>>51319591
>>51319660
>>51319667
>>51319684
progresses through each of the Monstrous Humanoids, with it varying for individuals depending on various factors, so you might get weedy little Kobolds(that nonetheless have deadly cunning), or a titanic Hill Giant, or maybe even some Lizardmen if things get weird enough for said group of Goblins

basically most non-undead or extra-planar monsters you encounter are in fact Goblins, just warped and altered by their upbringings(sometimes intentionally so, like with Wargs)

File: 313 Stormer.jpg (183KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 900x900px

Rate my Race as Class monsters from a mysterious city in the wastes.

Stormers are horrific killing machines, created by some alchemic and spiritual means in a mysterious city in the wastes. This city is known only for its brutal decay and production of cheap goods in its slave factories. Stormers can serve as elite Operatives, journeying far beyond the wastes as part of a mission with others, or just to record their travels for a hungry home audience. Stomers is expected to name themselves, as part of its training; usually choosing an adjective which is thought by general consensus to be interesting, otherwise they are known by the three digit number tattooed on their arm. A consequence of this is there are only a thousand Stormers at any one time, with only a hundred chosen for Operative status, due to their superior intellect. Management is unhappy with the current breed as they display less health and intelligence than estimates expected and have marked them as Export-Only, if a superior breed could be grown.
However Stormers are child-like in their curiosity and eagerly obtain hobby skills from those they encounter, in an attempt to differentiate themselves. Stormer are often gluttons, and will eat anything else if offered food other than their pork rations.
They suffer a -2 penalty to reaction rolls due to their hideous skinned-horse face, it is also speculated they are part troll, as they regenerate 1 hp every 4 turns, unless exposed to acid or fire. However the process that is used to create them is a foul twisting of magic and science and so Stormers cannot use any form of magic weapons or benefit from any magic. They are so large, it costs twice as much to fit armour for them and the Halfling bonus against large creatures applies.
Saves as Elf
Level 1 ------------- 0
Level 2 -------- 2775
Level 3 -------- 5550
Level 4 ------ 11100
Level 5 ----- 22200
Level 6 ----- 44400
Level 7 ----- 88800
Level 8 ---- 138750

>>51319815
These will only be encounter as enemies in my campaign.

They have d10 HD

File: Hack.jpg (22KB, 198x171px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 198x171px

>>51319803
Under that idea, what's a good name for the class?

Boogey men?

Goblinoids?

Gublinches?

banderlogs?

Fay folk?

Long fingered dwellers in holes?

Relevant
http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/06/game-mission-statement.html

File: Ray gun workshop.jpg (152KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1920x1080px

How do you make a sci-fi OSR game?

>>51320096
The fighter has a laser sword.
The ranger has a raygun.
The wizard is psionic.
And your go murdering and looting in spaceships, moon bases and ancient alien tombs.

>>51319971
Relevant how? What in the thread is it a response to?

>>51319815
>>51319835

Combat mini-maxing, goback to pathfinder

>>51320109
Fighter specializing in rayguns and fighting sense
No ranger, but there is a pilot/tech guy who can reverse engineer and break into derelict network systems.
Wizard is psionic.
And you go murdering and looting in spaceships, moon bases and ancient alien tombs while hitting on neon colored alien babes in between.

>>51320109
>>51320251

I'd honestly rather not have psychics at all.

Maybe keep the classes like Thug, Smuggler, and Technician to round it out.

>>51320389
Magic by any other name.

Still, nanomachies are a common alternative.

File: Unnamed OSR game teaser.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I need a name and to iron out this homebrew, though the classes are starting to shape up well enough.

File: Blame Megastructure.png (293KB, 467x700px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 467x700px

>Do you think mega dungeons are good?
Hell yeah. Gonna be running a one-shot later today where the setting is loosely based on the megastructure from Blame! Here's hoping the group enjoys it, they're not usually into OSR games.

>>51320527
Your shields need a significant buff to make them worthwhile if you have 2-handers that good.

File: Buck Rodgers swag.jpg (216KB, 973x1200px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 973x1200px

How gonzo do you like your OSR?

File: 1448041685195.jpg (46KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 400x400px

>>51320748
so, are you going to incorporate the fact it all takes place in the subconsciousness of a single person?

>>51320766

How would you do it?

+2 AC? Reduce all damage taken by -2 while holding the shield (minimum of 1)?

>>51320796
It probably won't get too metaphysical unless my group wants to keep going with it.

>>51320766

I guess I fucked up my wording.

Originally I was going to have it so if you used a 2 hander you didn't get to add your Dexterity modifier to your AC, and a shield just gives a flat bonus of +1, the idea being that if you are a weak caster or thief you'd probably want to hide behind a shield anyway and not use a two hander, but I like the idea of even characters like Wizards being allowed to use 2 handers just because.

>>51321035
>I like the idea of even characters like Wizards being allowed to use 2 handers just because
Just ask Elric of Melniboné.

>>51318683
I bet you only got to D&D through the beat 'em up, you secondary.

WELCOME TO THE D&D WORLD

Thief best girl

>>51321286
Elric's one of the reasons the D&D Elf is a Fighter/Mage, though.

>>51318167
>Do you think mega dungeons are good?
I think they're neat in theory, but I've never had occasion to run one.

I feel like you'd need some Dark Souls-tier level design to make one worth playing through, 'cause a generic dungeon crawl stretched out over several floor would just be awful.

>>51321482

I wish, they didn't have D&D games that cool in 1981. I mean, there was that Intellivision game, but nobody had an Intellivision.

>>51318949
I might be biased because I hate Dr. Who, but no. God no. A system like FATE is much more suitable for what you're looking for than trying to kludge together some sort of OSR Frankengame.

>>51319944
Bogles.

>>51320096
Play Stars Without Number if you want something "realistic". Starships and Spacemen + Mutant Future if you want something wilder.

I've been putting together a setting for my OSR game. Something focused on the things I want to DM a game on. I've settled on the idea of a large empire that fell to a civil war and left behind a fuckton of feuding factions, chaos and general unplesantness. That seems like a pretty good starting point for a sandbox.

Additionally, the idea is that when the empire still ruled, it pacified its lands well and drove all kinds of monstrous things away from its lands. Outside of its borders, into deep woods, under the ground, wherever. Point is, there's no empire any more, and everyone's too busy bashing each other over the head to get their shit together and actually deal with it. So a lot of bad stuff has crept in and is settling back at its leisure, which just adds to the chaos. As people keep bashing heads and adding to the corpse piles, the world around them is getting worse and worse.

Now, I've been thinking I should probably come up with some representative type of monster for all that. I don't want it to just be generic goblins and shit. It needs to be something more evocative and punchier. Ghouls (and stuff like that) might be good, since they'd be literally gnawing on humanity at that point. Unburied battlefields full of corpse-eaters, growing bolder and greedier, preying on travellers and villagers, seems like some pretty evocative imagery.

Suggestions?

>>51319097
BoL Hack perhaps?

>>51322786
Skeletons. But not just boney mooks with rusty weapons, go full hog with the imagery of the skeleton and death. Skeleton riders on skeleton horses, blaring Aztec death-whistles. Skeleton guards mounting permanent guard over checkpoints and watchposts lost to time and history. Step out of the towns and villages that remain, and before long you hear the awful crack of broken bone under your soles. Everything looks bleached and worn, everyone looks haggard and thin - like skin straining to fully stretch over the skeleton under it.

>>51322786
Draugr maybe?

>>51320768
I like to add in gonzo details in most dungeons I do, but it has mostly only confused my players so I keep it at a minimum for the most part.

>>51318683
Mystara's shadow elves are a bit more interesting than the drow of Greyhawk/The Forgotten Realms, yeah.

>>51321814
>I feel like you'd need some Dark Souls-tier level design to make one worth playing through, 'cause a generic dungeon crawl stretched out over several floor would just be awful.
IMHO the main thing to make it tick is having it be unclearable and running multiple groups through it.

DaS1-tier level design is a good idea, though. Never have just one entrance and just one staircase to the next level.

File: 175cec44ed977ee3744eaab836f20eba.jpg (80KB, 564x817px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 564x817px

>>51322786
Undead. Assuming your basic man is 1 hd, and a trained fighter might have chainmail (ac 5) and 1-3 hd, these are plenty terrifying.

Skeleton: Undead. Damage, 1d6, ac 7, hd 1/2 (1-2: 1 hp, 3-4: 2 hp, 5-6: 3 hp)
Anything killed by a skeleton and left on its own becomes a zombie. Skeletons are just zombies whose flesh has rotted away.

Zombie. Hd 1 (1d6 hp) damage 1d6 ac 8.
Anything bitten by a zombie becomes a zombie unless cured. Villagers commonly kill their wounded to prevent the spread. Can only be killed by destroying the head, but that's not too difficult 1v1

Ghoul Hd 3, ac 5, damage 1d6. Bite as zombie, but also save or be paralyzed for 1d6 rounds. That's probably enough time for them to eat you.

Ghasts hd 5. Ac 5, Attacks like ghouls. Ghasts have an unholy stenche, so anyone within 20 feet of them must save versus spell or be overcome by uncontrollable retching and be -2 to hit for 1 day. Ghasts are difficult to distinguish from ghouls by sight

File: ownt.png (4KB, 715x150px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 715x150px

>>51320527
>Bipedal animal-people, astoundingly
fertile. Lineage of species, sometimes chimeric

Why don't you name it furry oc central

File: Promotionnigger.jpg (18KB, 320x375px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 320x375px

>>51318215
>promotions?

File: Underworld Cross-Section Map.jpg (188KB, 1095x1600px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1095x1600px

>>51320096
honestly I'd probably ripoff either Destiny or Mass Effect, because those games' setups works pretty well for Sci-Fi OSR shenanigans(heck Dead Space, Lost Planet, and The Deadly Tower of Monsters are also possibilities to take influence from)

>>51320768
it varies depending on what system and setting I'm using, but there's often at least some gonzo in the setting somewhere

>>51319944
I'm fond of the term Grendel-Kin when putting the monstrous humanoids under a blanket term(something in reference to Typhon, Echinda, Tiamat, or other mythological progenitors of monsters are also possible ones)

>>51321814
>I feel like you'd need some Dark Souls-tier level design to make one worth playing through
that's what I've thought of doing if I ever made one(well my tastes lean towards more towards Bloodborne, but same general concept)

>>51325757
Bloodborne is too

Bloody

For me

>>51318167
Mega dungeons are how the game started. So if you want to be really "Old School", then mega dungeons are the way to go.

Now that being the case, I like how ACKs has them and the reason they exist. To harvest monsters. Think of them as an interactive zoo/farm. Adventurers are just the way you harvest, or the vermin coming in to take away your crop.

Would I like to play in one? Sure. I've played all sorts of video games for this purpose, since computers tend to do it better.

Would I run one? Doubtful. I like story that is a little more deep then kill shit, take their cash, get drunk,laid and healed, rinse, repeat.

>>51326601
>I like story that is a little more deep then kill shit, take their cash, get drunk,laid and healed, rinse, repeat.
Are you unironically implying megadungeons cannot provide that?

>>51326601
They can. But they are an inferior medium for such stories. I much prefer other settings for deeper stories. They have so much more to offer.

File: NO.jpg (184KB, 794x549px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 794x549px

>>51326601
>computers tend to do it better.

You don't belong here

>>51326900
>But they are an inferior medium for such stories.

[citation needed]

Anything you can do with a city and overmap can be done with a mega-dungeon environment. Hell, that image upthread is going to require hexcrawling to explore some of those bigger levels, and at that point the only real difference between adventuring in that and the region above ground is that your sky is made of earth.

>>51327010
A computer doesn't give a shit about "plot." A computer is going to kill characters if they are misplayed without the slightest thought for story or balance. A computer can easily generate dungeons and monsters and run them seamlessly without flip-flopping, and can have characters running through them in a fraction of a time it would take generating them by hand for tabletop.

If all you want of OSR is plotless megadungeons, there's no reason to waste time and braincells on tabletop. There's a million roguelikes for that.

>>51327070
You don't know how OSR playstyle is like, you don't know what a megadungeon is like, and you clearly don't care enough to find out trough the millions and millions of blogs that tell you how megadungeons are played and how the OSR playstyle is like

so I'll say again, you don't belong here.

>>51327113
All what those "million blogs" you're parroting mindlessly say can be reduced to "you must play the way we imagine some nerds in the '70s did" For that matter, you have never played a megadungeon beyond a game or two that went nowhere, though you'll claim you're in a ten-year old campaign with twenty-odd players that come and go to raid the dungeon and have finely developed player skill that allows you to thrive and enjoy the megadungeons because of it.

To that, I say congratulations on your functional MMO guild.

>>51327293
why are you even here?
You clearly think the osr movement is bogus.

And you clearly haven't read a single one of the osr blogs.

>>51326601
>computers tend to do it better.
Unless you're talking about, like, NetHack? Nah, you don't have anywhere near the same freedom in CRPGs as you have in pen & paper.

Also, well, why the fuck would you play a story-based RPG campaign rather than playing a story-intensive videogame or reading a book?

Interactivity and freedom from rails. The same reason that even a hack & slash dungeoncrawl has a different feel on the tabletop than on a computer.

Also, well, if your megadungeon doesn't have factions and NPC interactions then quite frankly it's a shit megadungeon.

Honestly, it kind of surprises me that there aren't more RPGs out there that don't require you to kill enemies to progress? Is it just because that was easier to program in the old days and then later 2E also did away with nonlethal progression, or what?
Honestly, I wish more games would have morale and reaction checks. And GP=XP, I guess, but it's not as integral to the whole "all NPCs attack on sight and fight to the death" problem some games have.

>>51320527
Include some sort of intro or preface. In that paragraph sell your game. What separates it from the 100 other OSR games? Compare on contrast. What is the goal your rules can reach that no other game in the world can do as well than this one?

Drop the semicolon, make Stats a table.
Perhaps rename Rouge to Assassin.

The race options do nothing but give a peak into an intended tone or setting, which is cool if you want to lean in that direction. As currently written they it seems unnecessary, you could do something more inclusive with a line like, "describe your character's appearance".

Saving Throws should be moved to a later section it has nothing to do with character creation as presented. What does "base saving throw number?" Starting difficulty? you forgot a period at the end of this sentence. The third paragraph is a mess off commas and seems to be missing the word "add", because it doesn't tell you want to do with half your attribute.

Under combat, might want to replace "strike" with a less melee biased verb. I tend to use the word for a number when talking in amounts, and digits only when talking about math. This makes the document easier to reference later. The verbs under Combat Maneuvers change tense.

You may want to move your armor rules in front of the Attacking rules, or include a not in the attacking rules that wearing armor makes a target harder to hit. I would limit armor to left leg, left arm, torso, right leg, right arm, head, but that's not necessary I suppose.

Drop the "and so on" in Weapon Damage. This is a rule book not a conversation with your friend. Break Hidden Weapons into two sentences. Simple, quick duel wielding rules, this is a plus. rework the last sentence in Heavy weapons.

cont.

>>51320527
>>51327638
You swap between "Hit Die" and "Health Die" in the very first explanation of them, stick to one. I don't know anything about math or curves or odds so I can't give you any input on the max health advancement. You don't mentioned some assumed information like HP max and current HP. You don't mentioned what happens when you you hit 0 HP, which is very important.

The section under Saves for Fighter advancement is strangely worded. "Odd levels +1 to..." There's an implied "When you reach an..." but when you read it out loud as it it sounds pretty bad.
"Superiority" gives the fight +2 Range, what is range? It's never mentioned before this point. "Once per adventure" is too loose a measurement. Try limiting it to once a day, week, etc. Parry again uses Range, an unexplained mechanic. Sometimes you write "Fighting Style" with a capitol F and S, sometimes you do not. The second sentence describing Fighting Styles is redundant.
Tossing the Fighting Styles into a table and giving them names can be a place to inject some flavor (Savage, Quick, etc). I don't really have any idea what you're talking about in regards to Fighting Styles needing specific weapons, so you might want to elaborate on that point.

Under Rogue you give a bonus to sneak attacks, but don't explain what qualifies as a sneak attack. that should probably go in the combat section. There's another style inconsistency when you ou italicize Rogue Skills, but not Fighting Style. Making rolling Rogue Skills a more complete sentence, "When you attempt a Rouge Skill you roll 1d20, if the result is equal to or less than your Rouge Skill points you were successful." Some games make moving without being noticed and other similar roles secret and the DM rolls them. If this is the case in your game you should mention it. You offer a complete list of Rouge Skills, but before that you mention it's up to the DM I would advise doing both. Either make it a set list, or open for interpretation.

cont.

>>51327328
>You clearly think the osr movement is bogus.
Well, he's not really wrong. Reading the blogs they pretend that everyone was running Conanesque low-fantasy tales of cunning when in reality people were running high fantasy hackfests against Norse gods (that's why Gods, Demigods, and Heroes exists).

So much is either manufactured or cherry-picked that the OSR is actually pretty laughable as a historical source.

>>51320527
>>51327638
>>51327663

Magician looks WIP, but as with the other two classes I would restructuring the Saving Throw bonuses into more complete sentences. If you don't want them to be complete sentences, you could make them bullet points. even still I would reword them.

Overall I can't say this home brew is very interesting. I've seen a lot like it before. It doesn't offer any rules for how to level up (or how to get experience if that's a system in the game at all.) If it's meant for quick play going all the way to level 10 seems useless. It doesn't touch on money or equipment in other than mentioned a few items, which is fine you can write a paragraph along the lines of "You start out with proper adventure gear" if you wanted to handle it that way but it should be mentioned in some capacity.

Hope I offered some help.

>>51327664
If you think so why are you here on /osrg/?

>>51327728
To point out the fallacies of the OSR and steal those sweet random charts those Anons post.

>>51327664

Yes, people ran all sorts of stuff in the early days, but most OSR blogs aren't interested in all sorts of stuff; they're interested in the specific kind of stuff that didn't survive into the 90s, which was only a subset of what people were running back then.

Also, mixing a little truth in with your retardation is standard trolling procedure. And while that part of his post is semi-defensible, the rest of it is full-on aggressive stupidity, whether real or simulated. It's best to ignore him and his dumb shit.

>>51327760
So youre just a troll and your words can be ignored. Thanks for admiting it.

>>51320527
You don't actually say what the stats are if they go in 1e order or 3e order.

The staff and the use of Wisdom seems random. In fact, I'm wondering why you would even Wis and Cha since they don't do anything right now.

>>51327760
Do you visit and interrupt sermons to praise atheism?

>>51327664
>(that's why Gods, Demigods, and Heroes exists).
GDG&H exists as some kind of weird response to that kind of play, yes, with the introduction ridiculing the people who played that way. Or attempting to, at any rate.

The whole Sword & Sorcery aspect is more about the "intended" way to play the game, which was pretty poorly explained at the time but has been pieced together in later days to some degree. It's kind of like how the "intended" way to play D&D 3E is through dungeoncrawling with a blaster wizard, sword & board fighter, healbot cleric and skillmonkey rogue but the actual way people play it is more like Exalted.

There's a reason that the Monty Hauls were looked down upon back in the day, basically, and if you play it by-the-book then such things aren't really something that's likely to happen.
It's just that they did a piss-poor job of explaining how to play it by-the-book until, what, Moldvay Basic? And most people just bought the Basic books and then transitioned straight into AD&D and got even more confused because they're not even the same damn rules.

>>51327777
>>51327785
>>51327866
People like Finch (of S&W) and the DCC staff have stated and continue to state that "THE REAL WAY TO PLAY DEEANDEE" is all about high-lethality low-fantasy tales of cunning when that was just one of many playstyles that flourished at the time. I'm just saying that the false consensus of the OSR intelligentsia should not be take at face value.

>>51327888
>yes, with the introduction ridiculing the people who played that way.
I've noticed that Gygax does that a lot when he writes about stuff he doesn't like. I'm still not sure how much of his "X begged me to put Y rules in but I never liked them" was true and how much is damage control.

>>51328049
>"THE REAL WAY TO PLAY DEEANDEE" is all about high-lethality low-fantasy tales of cunning
But this is 100% correct though. I mean, DCC is a shit game on various means but this statement is completely correct.

What 90% of those people seem to miss is that you can run that kind of game on any edition (some may work better than others), so their constant "MODERN D&D IS NOT REAL D&D" rants are dumb.

>>51328049
I actually agree with you, it's pretty obvious that people in the 70s and 80s often played high-fantasy stuff (whether or not this was the intended way to play). I think the low-fantasy focus in the OSR comes from a reaction against 3.pf and later editions of d&d.

That being said, I'd just like to remind everyone in the thread to stay civil. This thread has actually managed to be pretty decent and peaceful for the first time in weeks, and I personally would like to keep it like that.

File: asd1314124.jpg (364KB, 728x1035px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 728x1035px

>>51328049
>low-fantasy

>DCC
>low fantasy

this doesn't look low fantasy to me

>>51328146

Dude, you can run any kind of game with any system if you're willing to put the work in. But the system as-is will fight you on it until you houserule the shit out of it, which is why you try to pick the right tool for the job in the first place.

>>51328163
you've never seen a crackhead before?

>>51328218
>crackhead

see this is why I don't do drugs
I don't want to become a chaos mutant

>>51328049
>I've noticed that Gygax does that a lot when he writes about stuff he doesn't like.
It's Tim Kask this time, TSR's editor at the time. GDG&H doesn't even have Gygax' name in the list of contributors - it's just Robert Kuntz and James Ward. If I'd have to guess, he was probably busy working on the Monster Manual and other projects?

But anyway, condescending attitudes weren't exactly exclusive to Gygax, although his Dragon articles and DMG put his in the spotlight.

>>51328163
Wow, I guess Conan is high fantasy because of The People of The Black Circle.

Really activated my almonds.

>>51328182
>But the system as-is will fight you on it until you houserule the shit out of it, which is why you try to pick the right tool for the job in the first place.

And that tool is GURPS
1e only though, this an oldschool thread after all.

>>51328319
conan is sword and sorcery
low fantasy is another genre

>>51328319
>GURPS
>Not The Fantasy Trip
Get out of here, new-schooler.

>>51326517
no such thing as too bloody

File: 1394237507814.jpg (66KB, 470x352px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 470x352px

>>51328319
>GURPS
>1e

>>51328354
Wizard was a mistake. Melee-only is is the One True TFT.

>>51328411
Now you're making wonder how hard it is to convert Orcslayer to D&D rulesets.

>>51328404
sure
now let me get some blood bullets
and I just noticed I'm out of bloodsouls to buy bloodsalves and now I'm gonna have to farm some bloodbeasts in the bloody cathedhral's blood-altar

>>51328469
Now you got me curious, anywhere I can get old GURPS books and Steve Jackson's games'

/osrg/ give me ideas for secret doors that aren't just "false wall on a hinge".

I'd like to put together a table.

File: 1465096475742.jpg (63KB, 362x334px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 362x334px

In OD&D, characters get additional languages based on every intelligence point over 10. So as it says in the book, a character with 15 intelligence knows 7 languages.

Why did this change so drastically in later editions?

>>51328705
>so drastically
It's only a two-language drop if you play AD&D.

>>51328654
False sliding wall.
False illusory wall.
As above but a bookshelf or other large feature.
False rotating wall (Bonus points if it rotates something else into the room, more bonus points if it can rotate into multiple rooms on repeated tries.)
Part of the cavern wall is a boulder blocking a hole - it can be pushed open with force.
A painting with a hole behind it.
Loose bricks in the wall can be removed to reveal and passage, and replaced to hide it.

Basically, just read through mystery comics and whatnot and find all the ways they make secret doors. Tweak the ear of the statue and the chandelier lowers down to become an elevator, shit like that.

>>51328705
That's quite a lot of languages, I suppose. Seems a bit too high.

>>51328705
Numbers got shuffled around in general.

One fun one: in OD&D, Holmes, AD&D, B/X? Scrolls can have up to seven spells on them. In the Rules Cyclopedia? Three spells maximum.

>>51328591
They sell most of their stuff via their company webstore, warehouse23. I don't think they have all of the 1e-2e material though.

The guys at GURPSgen (>>51243645) might be able to help you find other material but they really aren't interested in anything beside the current edition.

>>51328654
Canvas over a doorway painted with such realistic detail that only magic can discern something odd about it.

>>51328705
Does OD&D even have 7 languages?

>>51328654

I always liked when one of the many wall hangings has an archway behind it.

>>51328786
When every single monster has its own language, and the only way to communicate with them is being their alignment or counting on the 20% chance they know Common? Remember, this is pre-Monster Manual - you can't just take Orc and count on being able to talk with most of the humanoids.

I dunno, you quickly start to run out of slots for all the useful languages you'd want to know.

>>51328754
Didn't AD&D make it so that you actively need to learn the language in-game, with that just being the cap for how many you could know?

>>51328654
Alright, some classics.
>Bookcase with a book you pull out causing the case to swing away
>Rotating fireplace like in Indy 3
>illusory wall, with or without illusory floor on the other side
>trap door covered with a rug
>painting with a door in it, the doorknob is real and lets you open the door which is cut into the canvas
>statue on a pedestal, pull an arm or some shit and the base opens (you can also use a suit of armor in place of a statue)
>magically placed film of water over the surface of a "pool" concealing a pit/tunnel underneath
>basic concealments, like a rock rolled in front of a passage, loose flagstone in floor or wall, or a regular door concealed behind part of a tapestry covering a wall
>real wall in the sense of stone and mortar but it's framed in iron on the back and hooked to a chain which when pulled makes the wall rise, like a portcullis

>>51328792
>Does OD&D even have 7 languages?
Kobold, goblin, orc, hobgoblin, ogre, troll, hill giant, and oh shit I ran out.

Also, the two base ones that'd get them to 7 languages at 15 INT are Common and the alignment language.

>>51328754
I see, I don't know the AD&D rules well so I assumed that it changed similarly to Basic D&D.

>>51328786
But aren't there many languages and many uses for them? It kind of seems more appropriate that PCs have the chance to know a whole bunch of them since they're supposed to be important tools.

>>51328788
What's the reasoning for that? Did they think players had it too easy or something?

>>51328792
>Does OD&D even have 7 languages?
I guess it includes human, demihuman, monster and alignment languages, if not more.

>>51328856
Elf and Dwarf too, Anon. (On the other hand, IIRC it's not clear that "the language of goblins and hobgoblins" means two languages instead of one, especially given that a hobgoblin is just a fat goblin)

>>51328869
True, that. Kobolds as well, I suppose.

>>51328861
>Did they think players had it too easy or something?
Who knows. The Rules Cyclopedia is firmly in the 2E era with story-based XP and loosy-goosy treasure allocation (Black Puddings "may have gems nearby").

>>51328654
>>51328841
Mordor:
>barrel or chest without a bottom, or with a removable one
>a fountain with a round basin, when the secret door is triggered the water stops flowing, drains away, and the basin sinks into a spiral staircase
>a permanent passwall or dimension door keyed to tapping a particular stone in the wall in a specific sequence
>a chair which spins around either horisontally with part of the wall or vertically like a trap door, or folds into the start of a chute which opens at the user's feet
>a dumbwaiter hidden inside an armoire (or just a doorway disguised as one) -- can also be a cupboard halfway up the wall, or anything of the same sort
>loose step in a stairway, either trigger-operated or just lift it off, then slip through the hole
>"mirror" which is actually a doorway to an identical room with deliberately inverted shape and furnishings; only the mirror images of people are illusory
>apparent mouse-hole which is actually the handle for pulling out a removable piece of wall which can be crawled through

>>51328944
>The Rules Cyclopedia is firmly in the 2E era
That's a damn dirty lie and you know it! Although admittedly the optional story XP are shit, shiiiiiit

>>51328567
you act like it's a bad thing that Bloodborne has a unified aesthetic

>>51329106
>That's a damn dirty lie and you know it! Although admittedly the optional story XP are shit, shiiiiiit
It was released in '91, anon. 2E was two years old at that point, and the Basic adventures were getting heavy on the metaplot. Hey, remember how the RC is just the BECM bits and the I got turned into Wrath of the Immortals? That sure was an adventure that had no setting-changing metaplot elements in it at all, no sirree.

I could see arguing about BECMI, but the Rules Cyclopedia and The New Easy-to-Master Dungeons & Dragons Game? Yeah, no.

>>51329169
It's a lighthearted dig at it but they do go way over the top with the blood[anything] stuff

>>51329194
I was never really the same game as BECM in the first place, t b h.

And sure, the RC came out after 2E, but it's much more like BECM than it's like 2E. I agree about some of the adventures, though. I have that B1-9 one-book compilation, and that strings them all together into one plot (IIRC a branching one, at least).

>>51329169
you mean a bloodified bloodthetic
I agree w/you tho, it's blood, or even bleat

>>51328834
2e has it as 'ask your DM', unless you're using NWPs, in which case you can blow all your INT-given NWP slots on languages.

Langauges in 1e are weird, complex, and depend on your character race as well as INT.

>>51329561
Yeah, I meant 1E. I think I remember seeing that rule hiding somewhere in the DMG last time I was skimming through - probably in the early bit with the random language table?

File: 01 - Ruinations.png (3MB, 1167x1654px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1167x1654px

Update to Ruinations, the Post-Apocalyptic LotFP based hack.

>https://www.docdroid.net/FrxCKOl/ruinations.pdf.html

>>51330305
>"Race-as-class argument" should be race-and-class argument since race-as-class is the default
Should really be "race/class separation argument". That way it's not coming down one way or the other. Remove Moldvay.

File: mfw.gif (103KB, 267x200px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 267x200px

Great, now we're getting arguments over the details of the stupid bingo card.

You know what was a mistake? Bingo cards.

>>51330305
>"Race-as-class argument" should be race-and-class argument since race-as-class is the default
Race-as-class is only the default in B/X and BECMI - in OD&D, Holmes, and AD&D it's all race-and-class.

Most of the race-as-class OSR systems out there are the ones that stick harder to the B/X formula specifically, although there's a few clones/reworks that change things up a bit in that area - ACKS being the obvious one, with the whole race-as-classes thing it's got going.

>>51330355
Make posting bingo cards a square, that'll show them.

>>51330355
I said as much when they first started. "It's lighthearted fun, anon" they said. GEE.

>>51330355
Bingo cards are a good idea in theory at least. Makes people realize that the thing they want to argue about has been discussed to death already.

File: osrg-bingo.png (185KB, 676x750px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 676x750px

>>51318475
>Unsolicited opinions about SJWs and/or identity politics
Where did this come from? It barely comes up in threads. Ironically, this reeks of an attempt to inject your own politics into the bingo card.

"Race-as-class argument" should be race-and-class argument since race-as-class is the default. Similarly, "Remove thieves!" doesn't make sense in the way that it does for clerics, as thieves are not the default; it should be Thieves were a mistake like the original.

"Gonzo" should be free space as previously suggested. And it's just generally missing all the wit and relevance of the original. Fuck it I'll just fix it myself.

>>51330439
Clearly we need a "arguing about the bingo card" square.

File: 409.jpg (60KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x620px

>>51330364
Holmes let a few subhumans choose to be thieves, but OD&D had de facto race-as-class (subhumans each had only one option for class).

Why don't you guys make a good bingo card about positive elements in the threads?

>>51330439
>It barely comes up in threads

It shows up every now and then, but generally nobody takes the bait, so it doesn't snowball.

>implying one side is correct about thieves, right in the bingo card

That's what the other dude was talking about when he said bingo cards were passive aggressive bullshit, anon.

File: why would anything nice ever happen.jpg (30KB, 500x566px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x566px

>>51330500
I can't think of a single good thing about anything ever

>>51330493
Using only the LBBs that's true, but as soon as the first supplement gets released that ceases to be so.

And if you call the Greyhawk method race-as-class, you should really do the same for AD&D - it barely expanded the options, if at all.

So anyway, is there an OSRIC vs 1E comparison chart?

>>51318167
So, is OSR strictly for fantasy, or are other genres allowed too? I ask because I'm thinking of using OD&D or one of its clones as a base for a wuxia style game.

>>51330439

Weirdly too I don't see as much hate for storygames here as often as on the rest of /tg/. Seems /osrg/ accepts it's just a different legitimate style of RPG. Even Dungeon World and Torchbearer are in the trove as "OSR-adjacent" games last I checked.

This thread is just a chill place compared to the board in general

>>51330535
I can think of a few (those random lists, for instance), but not really 25 of them.

A mixed bingo would be best, really, with things spaced around so that you couldn't get a bingo through purely positive/negative results.

>>51330500
>Encounters charts
>Neat little mechanics to make a situation more fun
>Sweet drawings of dungeons

>>51330563

There are definitely other genres of OSR stuff. Stars Without Number is a big sci-fi example, as well as Other Dust for a post-apoclyptic one by the same author. Along those lines there's Ruinations of the Dust Princess and Machinations of the Space Princess respectively. Spelljammer was originally for AD&D too, IIRC. Probably a lot more examples that aren't coming to mind.

>>51330500
I'll whip one up. Give me some ideas meanwhile.

bingo cards aside, has anyone tried doing mecha with OSR rulesets? how did it turn out?

My group wants to run a not-gundam campaign, but most of the dedicated rulesets seem over-bloated and rules-heavy for my taste. As-is, I'm tempted to just use two systems for it, SWN for the on-foot sections and something like godbound for the mecha stuff, carrying over Wis/Int/Cha and skills from SWN and using the various Gifts for the mech's abilities.

>>51330608
Homebrew

File: 1484025518741.jpg (49KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x480px

>>51330342
>>51330364
Sorry for reposting, realized I missed 'thieves were a mistake'.

Only Moldvay and 3LBB were explicitly race-as-class, but for all intents and purposes (player chargen has a clear choice between both race and class), AD&D 1e was the first to have race-and-classs. And race-as-class is distinctly in line with minimizing player facing mechanics, chargen time and the 'build' style of play which is why it's so strongly favored by OSR. I'm not arguing for or against it, but it is, imo, the clear default position that is primarily argued against.

>>51330530
>implying one side is correct about thieves, right in the bingo card
All it's implying is that "Thieves were a mistake" is a commonly repeated mantra, unless you mean the assumption that Clerics are a default that can only be removed, while Thieves are an addition that might be a mistake.

>>51330355
I think the bingo cards are decently relevant and valuable as they codify tropes that crop up frequently which is something of an attempt to define the culture and attitudes of the general at the moment while also hopefully playing a part in leading discourse in a more original direction by lightly mocking stale discussions. It plays a similar role as that 'x' starter pack meme. I considered putting in 'posting bingo cards' as a joke, but I didn't want to remove anything and it could also lead to a paradoxical situation where you could declare bingo only after you declare bingo (eg it's the winning square)

File: 1483166682520.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51330563
We were talking about wuxia some threads ago. Here.

>>51330567

I think we have a larger population of older gamers than average for the board, which seems to help with not flipping out, and not taking bait. Unless the bait involves thieves.

File: Thor recieves the largest twizzler in Valhalla.gif (2MB, 336x199px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 336x199px

>>51330578

Huh. Encouraging people to make neat stuff to get a bingo would actually be kinda cool.

>>51330626
I know at least one guy made a Black Hack clone but with robots.

File: hot opinions.png (10KB, 482x509px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 482x509px

Brand new bingo sheet here that accurately reflects the threads.

File: 1485051463042.png (66KB, 676x750px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 676x750px

Work so far. Need eleven more things.

>>51330956
BINGO!

>>51330599
>Spelljammer was originally for AD&D too, IIRC.
Spelljammer is distinctly a fantasy Age of Sail setting.

The only Sci-Fi in it that comes to mind are Guyvers and Mechas made by the Elven Imperial Navy.

>>51330956
>calling me quarrelsome
You just made an enemy for life!

>>51330988
the fuck is gonzo, and what is the old school mindset?

>>51331037
>the fuck is gonzo
google it

>>51331037
A bad anime studio, and the idea that only Tomino Gundam is worth anything.

>>51330254
>A 12-in-12 Skill fails on a roll of Double-1's or Double-12's.
What's this about doubles?? Do your roll a second d12 if you have a 12-in-12 chance?

>>51331013

Yes, you're clearly vindictive, not quarrelsome.

>>51330988
I used this site, very convenient

http://osric.com/bingo-card-generator/

>Hexmaps shared
>Cool traps
>Mechanics for scifi setting

>>51330821
3LBB were not explicitly race-as-class.

>>51330988
Lets nix "New stuff in the trove"
That never, ever happens and it's nearly complete

>Need [...] more things.
"Readily adapted lists," can't find a good way to phrase that
But you know what I mean

>>51328163
low fantasy's """""proper"""" meaning is Harry Potter, while Game of Thrones without magic and 2000% more tetanus and syphilis would be """""proper""""""" high fantasy

IN PRACTICE most fans use low fantasy to mean "the world itself shits on you no matter what you do," and DCC is designed for antagonistically shitting on the players as much as possible. Conversely, one may consider 4e and 5e to tend towards high fantasy in this regard, on account of that although they are still lethal, PCs are prone to bouncing back after trauma.

>>51328182
The main distinction between early and late deeandee is:

early deeandee: you have to stick sword or blast fire only a few times to do and you have to nap for a week to recover

late deeandee: you have to stick sword or blast fire a BUNCH of times to kill and it takes a brief nap to recover

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

1B, 486x500px

>>51331037
>and what is the old school mindset?
• description + adjudication as the central resolution mechanic
• PCs are hobos desperate enough to resort to tomb robbing
• low narrative dungeon/hex crawling
• actively avoiding combat

...well, a lot of that is just "emulating Swords and Sorcery"
The most important bit is the central resolution mechanic

>>51331304
"Easily adaptable lists and tables", perhaps?
And can you come up with another reference to the trove for the bingo? I kind of want it in there since it's one of the prides and joys of this general.

>>51331395
People starting discussions about obscure modules that are in the Trove?

>>51331333
>low fantasy(...) is Harry Potter, while Game of Thrones is (...) high fantasy

did you switch those up?

>IN PRACTICE most fans use low fantasy to mean "the world itself shits on you no matter what you do,"

they should use "dark fantasy" for that

>>51331421
>did you switch those up?

No, the 'official' descriptions used by literary critics and lit teachers is:

High fantasy: its on a different world
Low fantasy: its in the past, future, or a compartmentalization of our own

So Harry Potter is low fantasy, while adventures in fake europe that is by Word of God on a planet unrelated to ours but where everyone's teeth are falling out and you die of wound infection at the slightest of scratch and everyone lives in houses made of wood covered in shit and magic gives you cancer and all protagonists rape every helpless civilian they encounter would be high fantasy.

>>51331504
So the conclusion we can take from this discussion is that DCC is high fantasy and therefore shit, right?

>>51331419
Let me start.

N2 The Forest Oracle is the best module TSR ever released, and if you think otherwise you are objectively wrong.

>>51331571
give me a synopsis
I'm lazy

>>51331547
correct

>>51331504
That definition is stupid because if it's fantasy it by definition did not take place in our world because otherwise it would be non-fiction.

>>51331504
That's wrong dummy.

>>51331649
>it by definition

Well, you mean "it by MY personal definition." Your personal definition sucks, though, because by that definition every banal crime drama show on the planet would be fantasy.

the way I see it, Low/High fantasy relates more to how people treat elements like magic, non human races, gods intervening directly, etc.

Settings where these are mostly commonplace and no one really bats an eye at the local eccentric juggling fireballs or at the magic robots doing menial tasks would be high fantasy.

Settings where magic is generally looked upon with wonder/horror, or where magic and the like are pushed to the fringes of society would be low fantasy

>>51331392
>unironically posting Finch's grognard masturbation material

lol?

>>51330500
>>51330608
>>51330988
>A guy shares his hexmap
>Anon asks for help thinking of types of stuff, and Anons pitch in (like the secret doors ITT)
>"I can't find X in the Trove" "It's in this folder"
>Anon asks about obtuse Chainmail shit and two different anons reply with elaborate answers within five minutes
>Discussion about or referencing PatW

>>51331714
Would 40K be low science fantasy then?

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

1B, 486x500px

>>51331751
Make a better primer. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The next best thing I could think to show to new people is Philotomy's Musings.
But Philotomy's Musings is almost 50 pages, and two-thirds of it is house rules.

>>51331770
Those definitions don't really work too well for SF, given that pretty much all SF has Earth existing in the universe, whether or not it's in any way relevant to the story.

That's why we have hard and soft SF instead.

File: 1485051463042.png (88KB, 676x750px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 676x750px

Four more.

>>51331703
>Well, you mean "it by MY personal definition."
>Well, you mean "it by MY personal definition."
No.
If it it fantasy it LITERALLY could not have taken place in our world. Which means your definition of "low fantasy" is an oxymoron.
>because by that definition every banal crime drama show on the planet would be fantasy.
But they are? It's just extremely-low fantasy.

>>51331751
>>51331814
I don't understand the complaints about Finch's Primer. It's good, both in that it's an accurate description of the style and in conveying it to people so they get it. Okay, so it's a bit smug, but what grog doesn't go full Bert about his own preferred playing style?

>>51331868
Actually, I have a huge headache so I'm abandoning this project for now and going to sleep. If anyone else wants to finish or change anything at all, feel free. The font I've used is Duvall.

>>51331868
Typo in E2. should be 'with[in] minutes'

File: 1466736543987.png (2MB, 1214x1109px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1214x1109px

>>51331923
>I don't understand the complaints about Finch's Primer.
He partially strawmans new school to make his point. Also,
>it's a bit smug
It's not "a bit" smug.

Lossless Planescape map of the planes, from the box set. 20.4 MB = too big to post. Highest quality.

https://www.sendspace.com/file/t5e8v2

File: smug.png (24KB, 186x292px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 186x292px

>>51332038
S&S stands for Smug & Strawmen. Since when were they ever a problem on 4chan?

>>51332060
not OSR

I had enough of 4chan for a while
my parting words for /osrg/ are

OD&D IS NOT AS GOOD AS B/X
LOFTP IS SHIT
ACKS IS THE BEST
CLERICS RULE, THIEVES WERE A MISTAKE
GONZO A SHIT TRADITIONAL FANTASY RULES
DCC IS NOT OSR

>>51332256
>OD&D IS NOT AS GOOD AS B/X
>LOFTP IS SHIT
>ACKS IS THE BEST
>CLERICS RULE
I agree with this.

>>51332256
>LOFTP IS SHIT
Well, you're definitely right about that.

File: 1484456397673.png (159KB, 540x405px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 540x405px

>>51332256
>implying you're not right on every point

File: 1475623928426.jpg (10KB, 228x300px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 228x300px

>>51332256
Fare thee well, Anon.

Your opinions were too good for /osrg/.

File: Wrong Trump gif.gif (704KB, 480x287px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 480x287px

>>51332256
>THIEVES WERE A MISTAKE
>GONZO A SHIT

>>51330439
What's true AD&D?
t. newfag

File: True AD&D.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51332651
>If you aren't playing AD&D® by the book then you aren't playing AD&D®
Also, pic related.

>>51332178
Diagrams the Planes as they were initially described by Roger E. Moore in 1981/1982 etc. so you're wrong. Also you're stupid.

File: 1st.12.pages.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51332723
Are you pretending to be me?

Sell me on ACKS. Why should I use it instead of Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy?

>>51332738
>as they were initially described
Provide evidence.

>>51332822
>Sell me on ACKS.
I don't know what that is.
>Why should I use it instead of Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy?
Because you're actively seeking approval to considering trying it.

>>51332723
True AD&D™ is playing using all the books, all the magazine articles, all materials published for the game until summer of 2000. It's a Platonic Form representing an ideal form of AD&D in practice but can never be achieved in this universe—only approached asymptotically.

>>51330563
other genres are fine

>>51332793
>1st. 12.pages
What happened to the next 12 pages?

>>51332853
That's like telling someone to prove that the sky is blue: Look up yourself and see. Not spoonfeeding you Dragon articles that became Manual of the Planes.

>>51332822

>Sell me on ACKS

Haven't you ever dreamed of tracking how many peasants can be supported by a hectare? Now you can! With ACKS you get all the number crunching you were missing from the OSR, but without funny dice like DCC!
This post not 100% serious. Poster assumes no liability for nerd rage as a result of reading this.

File: 1485051463042.png (193KB, 676x750px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 676x750px

>>51332256
>>51328146
>>51332793
BINGO!

>>51332884
They don't exist yet

>>51332822
It has everything

>Domain rules
>race-as-multiple classes
>crafting rules
>rules for creating new classes
>mass combat rules
>detailed economics
>rules for creating magic items (including golems!)
>Leveling stops at level 14 for human classes

And MORE!

File: 1466737766220.jpg (106KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1280x720px

>>51332913
>he doesn't have the next twelve pages!

File: neither.do.you.png (8KB, 1653x44px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 1653x44px

>>51332948

File: 1469479531524.png (1011KB, 3160x3254px) Image search: [Google]

1011KB, 3160x3254px

>>51332983
>he doesn't have the next twelve pages!

>>51331089
Yes. Any maxed out skill rolls 2d12 to still provide a chance for failure, similar to LotFP.

>>51332865
Following the rules and protecting the regulations is binding oneself without rope.
Neglecting the written records with unrestrained ideas is falling into a deep pit.
If you meet Gygax on the road, kill him.

>>51332917
But are the rules good? Do they work well in practice?
And
>Leveling stops at level 14 for human classes
How specifically is this a benefit? It just seems like a balance thing.

Speaking of ACKS, does anyone have Lairs & Encounters and Guns of War? They aren't in the trove

>>51333024
>But are the rules good? Do they work well in practice?
yes and yes

>How specifically is this a benefit? It just seems like a balance thing.
I don't know you, but I dont like the 36 levels in the RC, it's too much form, ACKS goes only to 14 just like B/X. At level 9 you build a stronghold and become a ruler. demi-humans classes goes up to 8~13 depending on the class

>>51333032
>They aren't in the trove
How about you go fucking buy them, you beggar.

>>51333258
I don't have Lairs and Encounters, but consider looking into the bundle of holding going on at the moment. Gets you everything for ACKS for $20.

>>51333258
thank you

>>51333081
BUT
Does it have ascending AC?

>>51333298
>Does it have ascending AC?
YES!

>>51330893
Thieves aren't the problem. Skills are the problem.

Thieves just brought skills to the forefront of our minds

>>51330988
>>51331766

This is more like it. Focus entirely on the positive.

What's gonzo?

>>51332822
-Race-as-class that actually feels different from basic human classes.

-Excellent support for homebrewing your own relatively balanced classes.

-Extensive domain management rules if you're into that kind of thing.

-More character building options than other OSR games, if you're into that kind of thing.

Basically, if you're wanting to run a GoT heart-breaker campaign, then give it a shot. If you don't give a fuck about nation building and just want to stab goblins, don't bother.

File: gonzo.png (24KB, 638x412px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 638x412px

>>51333350
"silly"

>>51331571
>N2 The Forest Oracle

This guy gets it. He's neither hurrying or tarrying. He's not carrying axes.

The only "problem" with ACKS™ is the fact that thieves are still shit but thieves were a mistake anyway

File: 1475382688463.gif (210KB, 496x526px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 496x526px

So I get the impression that opinions regarding LotFP are pretty polarized around here.
I've read over the rules and a few of the published modules and am actually considering trying to run it. Any particular reason why I should use something else?

>inb4 "Raggi is a creep/weirdo", I've already figured that out

>>51333562
The rules themselves are fine, solid, and unspectacular. The settings and modules are what make it interesting. There's no compelling reason not to use the game, but there's also no real reason why it has to have its own rule set as opposed to just publishing a bunch of system-agnostic modules.

>>51333330

Blame weapon proficiencies and their bastard offspring, non-weapon proficiencies. Nobody tried to turn the thief's class features into a skill system. (Well, LotFP does, but it only goes to the Specialist)

>>51333780
>there's also no real reason why it has to have its own rule set as opposed to just publishing a bunch of system-agnostic modules.

Part branding, part the rules supporting the play style, what with the reworked spell list and the 17th century retainer rules and etc.

>>51333562
>inb4 "Raggi is a creep/weirdo", I've already figured that out

I'll also add that Raggi wants to show how cool and transgressive he is with his guro fanservice but he's too big of a cuck to include black slaves and exploited colonials in the rules.

>>51333330
>>51333970

Thief's having skills in stealth and lockpicking is good though. It gives them a unique niche. It doesn't have to be a skill system.

>>51333286
>I don't have Lairs and Encounters, but consider looking into the bundle of holding going on at the moment. Gets you everything for ACKS for $20.

Gonna take this opportunity to shill my current favourite system a bit more. Lairs & Encounters is fucking stunning work, taking the usual "Monster Manual" thing way further than I've ever seen before by building a complete lair encounter for every single monster, complete with maps for the more extensive ones.

(and if there's another book that takes the same approach, plz link, I want moar)

>>51334239
There were a number of AD&D books kind of like that, called the "X Book of Lairs" (except for Space Lairs).

>>51332917

With everything in the Bundle of Holding higher tier, the list becomes:

>>Domain rules
>>race-as-multiple classes
>>crafting rules
>>rules for creating new classes
>>mass combat rules
>Including detailed rules for what troops you can raise from your domain, costs, vassal levies, and so on, and a complete supply system, meaning it works on a strategy level as well as tactical
>Full siege rules, again on strategic and tactical levels
>>detailed economics
>A class that actually uses said detailed economics
>>rules for creating magic items (including golems!)
>>Leveling stops at level 14 for human classes
>Full lair encounters for every monster in the book
>Detailed rules for clearing out a hex (while riding a pegasus if you like)
>Firearms rules covering a broad portion of the early blackpowder era, including cannons etc
>Two dungeon adventures incl one small comfy KotB style and one utterly ludicrous megadungeon
>A half-assed joke of a setting book

>>51334317
Oh, I forgot

>Full spell creation rules

Although in all honesty if I wanted spell creation in a game I'd be running Ars Magica.

>>51334317
>utterly ludicrous megadungeon


Ludicrous in a good way, or a bad way.

>>51334432
1000 rooms with 3d6 rats and 1d12x100 copper pieces.

>>51334529

That's the alternate plane of existence; rats and coppers.

>>51334432
It's nearly 400 pages of mad Gnostic alchemy and techno-elves and mummified gods and a whole history involving elven invaders from another planet setting up portals in the dungeon.

It's ludicrous in the sense of completely mad. It's probably useless unless you're actually running an entire campaign set in Telluria, but it's also 400 pages of material to be stolen with impunity.

File: doctor who 2nd doctor umbrella.jpg (229KB, 684x530px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 684x530px

>>51322024
>not liking classic Who

>>51330626
well I'm actually going to be working on a mecha related OSR concept for an RPG contest that's being held over on Something Awful, so hopefully that'll go well

although I'm going for a very specific concept so it's probably not quite what you're looking for

File: Garden Game Draft.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Since other people are doing it, might as well post my modern gonzo game draft.

File: the bad times.jpg (53KB, 479x623px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 479x623px

>>51334801
Well, not liking Classic Who when it was good, anyway. Towards the end, it got pretty horrible.

>>51322887
I'm wondering what careers you'd go with... and which ones you drop. You'd probably want to ditch or refluff the overtly magical classes. Alchemist could maybe be retooled as some kind of scientist, and magicians as psychics (of course, outright magic does fit in some Doctor Who stories, but overall, you're better going with something that's a bit more pseudo-scientific). In the end though, you're going to encounter the Time Lord problem, like any RPG based on Doctor Who, where one person ends up being better than everybody else (or things are too contrived). At least if you went for an early Who vibe--2nd and especially 1st Doctors--things would be a bit more balanced.

Bus-ride thoughts:
>A weapon is an instrument of death, and only in the hands of a Fighter can it be fully utilized. Starting at 3rd Level for B/X-based systems, any weapon a Fighter picks up and wields is considered to be Magical, and has an additional +1 to-hit and damage. Every 3 levels thereafter (6th, 9th, etc), this bonus increases by +1. This is not a magical effect, but the sheer skill and strength of a Fighter's training.
>This bonus does NOT stack with any magical enhancement the weapon might otherwise have. For example, a Sword +1, +2 vs. Orcs in the hand of a 3rd Level Fighter would be functionally identical, whereas the same sword in the hands of a 9th Level Fighter would be treated in all ways as a Sword +3.
>Possible tweaks: could be used for armor (but not shields) instead, for tankier fightans? Could also change the levels of the increasing bonus, either slowing the progression in BECMI/RC games, or speeding it up for lower-level-cap games.

Real talk, why hasn't someone else come up with something like this? This concept:
- allows the treasure table to not be like 60% swords (so other non-Fighters might get thrown a bone every now and again);
- does away with the whole concept of the equipment treadmill, where you could start with a sword from your grandparents only to throw it away for something shinier;
- doesn't penalize the fighter for using weird weapons (like whips or polearms) any more than the system used would do;
- has the Fighter get better at fighting shit naturally, rather than having to rely on dubious methods of forging weapons via either Magic-Users and/or non-Fighter blacksmiths;
- helps to differentiate Fighters from demi-humans a bit more, rather than Dwarves and Halflings just being "Fighters with racial abilities".

This leans more towards the heroic fantasy end of things, but it's open enough to tweak for the gritty sword & sorcery stuff (within reason). Critique away.

>>51335060
>60% swords
Just give people non-swords.
>equipment treadmill
Rust monsters notwithstanding, people replace weapons maybe twice before dying.
>penalize the fighter for using weird
Don't see how it does or doesn't do this more than anything else.
Unless you've weapon specialization bullocks going on.
>get better at fighting shit naturally
What if we let them increased THAC0 and attacks per round!!
>Dwarves and Halflings just being "Fighters with racial abilities"
Fighting-Man is the class of Men, Dwarf is the class of Dwarves, yadda yadda yadda.

>Critique away.
The closest I'd go to this is letting name level Fighting-Men attacks count as +1 weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage resistance.
Which isn't close to this at all, come to think of it.

>>51335060
You could also tailor things so that maybe half of the bonus comes from sword and half from the fighter. That would mean that a sword +1, +2 vs. Orcs wouldn't be rendered obsolete. You could either reduce magic weapon bonuses (sword +1, +2 vs. Orcs just becomes a sword +1 vs. Orcs), or maybe split them along damage and to-hit lines (though at the point where a fighter is getting a bonus to-hit, he just has a better THAC0 progression, with magical weapons being depowered a bit for other folks).

>>51335189
>Dwarf is the class of Dwarves
>any system with Fighting-Men as a class

File: disproportionate hand and head.jpg (57KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1280x720px

>>>51335200 starting a semantics arguement

>>51335214
>not valuing proper semantics

>>51335224
In all other forms of argument, even a flame war, there is at least a slim possibility that you persuade your opponent.
There are no winners in semantics arguments. Semantics are too deeply rooted in opinion and personal experience.

>>51335191
Might be reading it wrong, but I think they intend for it to work that way. That passage is kind of ambiguous.

File: osrs_world_map_jan05_2017.png (5MB, 5785x4937px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 5785x4937px

>>51333298
ew

No seriously guys. Hear me out.

I know that many people feel as though ascending ac is easier to work with, and that thac0 is a needless complication, but I have a counterpoint.

Unfortunately, someone else said it better, so you can go read his opinion on it if you want.

http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-is-best-combat-algorithm.html

>>51335191
>>51335189
>>51335060
I've always liked the idea that fighters get more dangerous at high levels, but I'm not sure your system does anything more than complicate things a bit.

That said, I'd play in your game.

But don't fighters already get +1 to hit each level? So your fighter table would look something like this

THACO
1: 20
2:19
3:17
4: 16
5:15
6:13

Which is confusing to remember.

I've always had more of a problem with fighter not doing enough DAMAGE at high levels. This is solved by multiple attacks, but I don't like those. Multiple rolls per round is a pain, and it has awkward interaction with increasing fumbles.

What I'm considering doing is using this >>51318245 pictured strength table, then having fighters simply add their level to their strength. I'll continue giving +1 to damage for every 3 strength levels, with the max now 30.

>>51335288
>Semantics are too deeply rooted in opinion and personal experience.
This isn't any of that, though. There are no systems in which both Dwarf and Fighting-Man are classes.

File: we_should_do_it_again_tonight.png (79KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 800x500px

>>51335311
except for my homebrew

>>51335331
Not even that.

>>51335307
>This is solved by multiple attacks, but I don't like those.
Here's a thought:

At "two attacks" hit for 2d6, at "three attacks" hit for 3d6, at "four attacks" hit for 4d6...
You play with d6 HD, CHAINMAIL 3d6 man-to-man to hit rolls, and d6 weapons right?

>>51335356
Well, I use d30 to hit, but basically yes.

I'm thinking of toning down hitpoints, though. At the higher levels, even 10d6 hp gets silly. Why would a man be able to 60 arrows, while another man can only take 1?

I'm a big proponent of not dying until you reach negative hitpoints equal to your level.

>>51335189
>Rust monsters notwithstanding, people replace weapons maybe twice before dying.
Eh, it depends on how stingy your DM is. I've had games like that, and I've had games where just about every 4 sessions or so (if not sooner), there's another viable weapon (or even multiple) in the loot. Besides, it gives more weight to holding on to that ancestral weapon, even if it has been around a little too long.

>Don't see how it does or doesn't do this more than anything else. Unless you've weapon specialization bullocks going on.
Like I said, no more or less restrictions than whatever system you decide to use would put on to the character.

>What if we let them increased THAC0 and attacks per round!!
Ha.

Seriously, though, B/X doesn't really do the whole multiple attack thing until 20th level, and the Fighter THAC0 table also counts the Demi-human classes, whereas this is just for Fighters.

>Fighting-Man is the class of Men, Dwarf is the class of Dwarves, yadda yadda yadda.
>WELL ACKSHUALLY
You know what I mean, no need to be a pretentious prick about it.

>>51335191
>>51335288
The idea was that there eventually gets to be a point where the ability of the Fighter is better than the magic of the sword, so while the sword might still be a Sword +1, +2 vs Orcs, said 9th Level Fighter would treat all weapons as +3. in doing so, his bonus is bigger than what the sword would offer, and so the larger bonus would be used. I personally think it's fair enough, because it's a 9th level Fighter at that point; you've put some serious time and effort into the game, and should be rewarded for it.

That being said, I feel you could definitely fuck around with numbers enough to make it work for your game. To keep with the example, a tweak would be having any weapon's bonus lower than the Fighter's be overwritten, such that the Sword +1, +2 vs. Orcs would now be a Sword +3, +4 vs Orcs ONLY in his hands.

con't.

>>51335399
>Why would a man be able to 60 arrows
You aren't thinking abstractly enough. Hit points aren't meat, they're "how close am I to being unable to fight."

You aren't "taking" 60 arrows. You're dodging most of them, and getting glancing hits from the rest.
But that's exhausting work, especially on top of the rest of combat. Especially for high level Fighters, hit points are stamina.
Some of that arrow "damage" might even be taking shallow hits from other combatants as a result of dodging the arrows.
Or loss of concentration from over exerting yourself. Or loss of moral because holy shit, 60 people just shot at you.

File: tips_for_players.png (98KB, 914x494px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 914x494px

>>51335468
But I thought ac was whether I'm getting hit by arrows and hp was how many arrows can hit me before I die.

I've never liked hp as abstract combat stamina.

I much prefer Hp as meat-points plus raw determination (which can get you farthur, but not 1000 times further)

>>51335437
>>51335307
Something to consider is I had originally conceived of the Fighter buffs as a bolt-on to B/X, where human classes basically top out at 14 (I mean yeah, you COULD go past that, but stopping at 14 Just Works™), so it doesn't get too ridiculous. Not only that, but Fighters and Demi-Humans THAC0 table is
1-3: 19
4-6: 17
7-9: 14
10-12: 12
13-15: 10

So yeah, it does look a little weird as written in >>51335060, but admittedly I was on the bus home after work, and I'd given my copies of B/X to a co-worker to help him get his own game started. If you want to make it flow a little better (and I would), I'd have the Fighter get the bonus at each new breakpoint on the table (so Levels 4, 7, 10, 13).

And yeah, I'm OK with a 13th Level Fighter essentially having +5 magic weapons all the time, because he's just a step shy of hitting the soft level cap and being a fucking demi-god. He SHOULD be hitting like a fuckin' freight train.

"Oops! You accidentally stab your buddy in the face because 5% chance! Even though your whole shit you've literally spent YEARS OF YOUR LIFE getting to know the pointy end of stuff and where to aim it, apparently you just forgot all those years of training and whoopsydoodle now your mage is bleeding out on the floor!"
Critical fumbles are the cancer that is killing D&D. I don't use them, so I don't have any issues with how my math might affect them.

File: 1480144242631.jpg (137KB, 791x694px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 791x694px

>>51335494
AC is whether or not the arrows are doing anything.
Maybe they bounce off, maybe they get stuck in the armor, maybe you even get hit but are hurt slightly less by other things throughout the round.

Hit points are quite literally your ability to keep fighting.

So here's the run down:
• Hit points: Ability to keep fighting.
• Damage: Becoming closer to unable to fight.
• Armor Class: Chance to become closer to being unable to fight.
• THAC0: Chance to bring someone closer to unable to fight.
• Saves: https://youtu.be/Kh0Y2hVe_bw

>>51335494
HP as meat points basically DEMANDS PCs start off way tougher. Vitality + wound points seems way more spot on, since a good hit can catastrophically fuck you up, is very very painful and disabling, but you can also take way more punishment in certain circumstances.

>>51335060
Sounds amazingly gay, senpai. I mean, a huge portion of the OSR fighter's archetype is that he's the guy who can make use of magic swords.

>>51334095
>but he's too big of a cuck to include black slaves and exploited colonials in the rules.

Not gonna lie, it strikes me as far more cucky to include racial slavery (of any sort that people are sensitive about) and exploited colonials in an RPG.

>>51333330
Thieves are the problem in the sense that they are Air Breathing Mermaid: The Class.

They are not a problem in that they open the gate for equally important, meaningful and iconic classes, such as Jester and Mountebank.

>>51331911
Okay? Any definition of "fantasy" that equates to "fucking everything RPG wise" is pretty pointless.

>>51331504

That's a shit definition and you know it. Stop using it.

>>51335704
Maybe you should follow the reply chain next time.

>>51335307
d20 + level + AC(10 to -10) + mods ≥ 20
is worse than
d20 + AC(20 to 0) + level + mods ≥ 30

File: Fantasy moon.jpg (313KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 1920x1080px

>>51335730

The reply chain had nothing to do with the definition, it was just fags arguing over it.

Technically that *is* the definition, and there is even some merit to it in that a lot of 'low fantasy' stories that take place in our world ARE lower magic or fantasy then 'high fantasy' that take place on other worlds. But its not a catch all and it's dumb because the majority of roleplaying games would fall under high fantasy even when the creator is going for a 'low fantasy' vibe.

As such I'd recommend doing something like creating a high magic/low magic definition for use in Tabletop games, or use the old 'gonzo' descriptor for anything weird and not European inspired.

>>51318589
I mean, technically, if you're a British dude from the early 20th century, than bunches of logs are totally faggots. I'm not sure what gay people are - not sure when that even becomes the word for them.

>>51335307
that map is interesting, mind talking about it a little?

>>51335792

I guess you're retarded. Do you enjoy replying to posts about how clerics or thieves are bad by accusing them of thinking they are good?

>>51331377
The main distinctions are:

You don't level up from killing monsters in old school D&D whereas that's the focus in later editions.

Also new school D&D deliberately caters to the character building crowd. Old school D&D does not have character building at all. Character building in old school D&D is what you do with the character, not where you put your points.

Old school D&D does not have minmaxing. New school D&D has extensive support for minmaxing.

Old school D&D is most often played as a dungeon crawl and has specific rules for operating in a dungeon. New school D&D does not have rules for dungeon crawling.

Characters are supposed to die in old school D&D and it's fine. It's significantly harder to lose characters in new school D&D because the game assumes you to have a core party of 4-6 adventurers that takes part in a story written by the DM or taken from a ready-made scenario.

I guess those are some of the most crucial differences and the reason why they make for so different gaming experiences.

>>51320520
Well, that's the thing, innit?
I mean, prior to DnD, how likely a protagonist is going to have access to magic is a question that swings wildly around.
In scifi, due to not really having a DnD equivalent, there's not that sense that not-magic is essential, so you get two schools of thought:
1)A scifi game like dnd needs not-magic, because there's necessarily magic in dnd.
2)A scifi game like dnd doesn't need not-magic, because there's not necessarily not-magic in scifi.
It a sticky wicket.

>>51335833
Well, you see, I played runescape as a kid.

ITS runescape. Its the map of runescape.

>>51331751
How is Finch's primer bad again? Does it hurt your feelings somehow?

>>51335838
>You don't level up from killing monsters in old school D&D
You can, it just takes ages.

>>51328305
If there's one thing I've learned, it's that condescending attitudes are ubiquitous amongst not just game designers, but gamers in general.
See: This very thread.

>>51332822
If you like fantasy fiefdom simulators you might like ACKS because that's what it is.

>>51335843
oh, never played that game, so I had no idea, thought it was something original

>>51335838
>Old school D&D does not have character building at all. Character building in old school D&D is what you do with the character, not where you put your points.
not completely true, but it is true that except for 2E when you include a bunch of supplements, that the TSR editions had relatively minimal character building(at least if you're making a level 1 character, some shows up if you're building a character of higher level), although a lot of Retroclones introduce some into the mix(which I'm more than fine with as characters otherwise end up a bit samey)

>Characters are supposed to die in old school D&D and it's fine
I'd say it's less that characters are supposed to die, and more that if you play stupidly you're going to die(well that or if you have bad luck, but that's present to at least some extent even in WOTC editions), main difference really is that modern editions tend to add more guardrails, and tend to dial down on some of the more ridiculously lethal content at lower levels

>>51332038
This long after the battle for acceptance has been won, the fact that a battle for acceptance actually happened may be hard to believe.
Trust me - at the time, that smugness was deserved.

>>51334537
You know, I'm apparently the only person who saw the original blog post with the dude sperging out about rats and coppers, and rather than think 'wow, what a valid point this dude makes', thought 'wow, I would never want to play with these assholes.'

>>51335311
D&D B/X for example? Those are two separate class choices there. You can't choose a race as it's encompassed in a class already.

>>51335478
>>Why would a man be able to 60 arrows
>You aren't thinking abstractly enough. Hit points aren't meat, they're "how close am I to being unable to fight.
This is what most people in these threads and RPG players in general need to understand. Of course some games have non-abstracted fighting capability / health, but none of the D&D editions do.

>>51335838
yeah I forgot charbuilding

You can die in new D&D, its just something you can see from farther off (while not necessarily being unable to do anything about it unless you're faster than the enemy or have other escape condition) -- fights are a lot less swingy and you can't wipe away the encounter in one spell like in old school.

>>51335835

You need to fuck off.

>>51336072
Sorry that you're a cunt who can't read or follow reply chains.

>>51328163
Oh my fucking god
I just noticed
The final version of wizard has a little figurine of his younger self on his staff

>>51335882
UMMmmmm??! Sweetie, I know you think there are condescending people in this thread, but that just isn't true... k?

Does anyone have pictures of a stereotypical Dungeon master? Sneering and scheming included