/osrg/ OSR General - Jungle Gym Edition

>>52793408
>How many players is TOO many players?
depends on the size of the table

>How many players is TOO many players?
I've found that the difficulty of running games increases drastically once you reach the five player mark.

File: Amano_FF1_Anaconda.gif (48KB, 1000x848px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1000x848px

>>52793408
I'll just reiterate my Chainmail OD&D questions from last thread quicklike:

>Is there an 'intended' way to cross-pollinate bonuses from one combat system (STR damage bonus in M2M) to another (20:1 HD-per-man)? I have some solutions but they're not elegant
>Why do halbards [sic] get a +1 Man in 20:1, but nothing reflective in M2M?
>Is WIS a dump stat? Even supplements don't seem to do anything with it

I'm also humming and hawing on whether to use Facing. It seems more intended for large units, not individuals, but it could be of interest for Thieves.

>>52793408
>How many players is TOO many players?

My limit comes at six or seven. I prefer three or four with two or three guys each.

So i'm putting together a not-Spelljammer sort of campaign. I'm procedurally generating the star map, but I want to know should I generate it like a massive dungeon or as a hexmap? Which makes more sense?

File: spine.png (338KB, 1295x961px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 1295x961px

Each hex is three miles across.

Is this too much stuff to an area of this size?

>>52793560
Nice Balkans

>>52793635
I used Renegade Crowns for it. It's to be expected.

So one of my players has written up a background that involves freeing slaves so I suppose it's time to flesh out slavery in my world. I'm writing up some magical drugs for my campaign setting, which are used by slavers to better control their slaves. Besides the various lotus from Conan, what are some interesting drugs for a fantasy setting?

>>52793560
If that's both snow and desert in the span of 40 miles, then yes, probably too much stuff.

As for the spread of hamlets, villages, fortifiations, farms/ranches/villas, bandit camps, and smaller fortifications it's perfectly fine. On a map of that scale, I would only have a single proper town in the entire area.

>>52793464
I prefer 4 both as a player and as a GM, it seems to work best for me. I'm fine with 3 as well, assuming everyone is reliable in terms of schedule and pretty active in terms of roleplaying.

5 is my limit and is the number of players I'm currently running a game for. It's slightly unwieldy due to the occasional party split.

6 and 7 have caused me tons of stress in both planning sessions, giving players time to shine, making combats challenging without dragging out, and scheduling everyone. I will never run for 6 or 7 again. I suspect anyone who runs these sorts of games to either be a masochist, or worse, someone incapable of saying no.

>>52793907
>If that's both snow and desert in the span of 40 miles, then yes, probably too much stuff.

Stuff on the south is just hills. Hexographer makes them look a bit like desert, but it's actually fairly rocky and stuff.

>On a map of that scale, I would only have a single proper town in the entire area.

It has two towns with about 2000 people on each. The rest of the villages have like 200 guys at most.

>>52793907
apparently they used to chew coca leaves in the spanish colonies to increase labour output and decrease the pain of starvation

So is this just for OD&D?
Does advanced ed 1 count?

>>52794062
Even the 2nd edition does.

>>52794062
OD&D, Basic D&D, AD&D 1e, and AD&D 2e. Also retroclones.

>>52794199
Aren't OD&D and Basic D&D the same?

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

229KB, 911x1470px

>>52794208

Nope. Behold!

Are there any good OSR-themed YouTube channels? Genuinely informative, funny, or otherwise worth watching?

>>52794062
It's the B/X cult center, although other D&D games and "old" games sometimes get discussed.

>>52794208
After OD&D, TSR decided to split up D&D into AD&D and BD&D. BD&D used simpler rules and kind of faded out in the beginning of the 90s. A lot of OSR people really like it, so it's pretty often discussed here.
There are three versions of Basic D&D: Moldvay/Cook B/X, BECMI, and Rules Cyclopedia. B/X is the version that is discussed most around here.

>>52794246
Counter Monkey.

Anyone got a copy of Veins of the Earth?

>>52793821
>Renegade Crowns
I like you.

>>52794422
I think it's in the trove, or at least available somewhere. There was a post about it a couple threads back.

>>52794336
*that upload new material more than once a decade.

>>52794496
Can't find it in the trove. I'll go search for a mention of it in the past threads.

>>52794583
Turns out it was shared in the pdf thread.
https://mega.nz/#!EIcTEZIK!Z1CZUOfXwQ-ZKtaRqm34A9l2uQvqvG24WCnKW8o1bWU

File: 1486863125937.jpg (659KB, 785x1079px) Image search: [Google]

659KB, 785x1079px

Still hopin' for a copy of this. Anyone?

>>52792429
In LBB Intelligence gave bonus languages and Wisdom did jack shit.
It gave every class bonus xp, but so did Intelligence.
Unless you were a Cleric, it gave xp at a /worse/ rate than Intelligence.

>>52793408
>How many players is TOO many players?
Fifty one.

File: tumblr_nf1girWcBH1ro2bqto1_500.jpg (60KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 500x600px

Okay guys... so on page 82 of the DMG for AD&D 1e they talk about dying at -10 hp, bleeding out, etc.... yet in the PHB they say a character at 0 hp dies? How does it work? Did a bunch of characters die in our last session for nothing? I was the guy who posted >>52734578 by the way. I am curious if some of our characters might be saveable, we left off right after a battle with nine bandits from Hommlet adventure with a lot of the characters reduced to 0 hp. Which we had assumed meant they were dead.

File: editions of D&D graphic.jpg (1MB, 6000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 6000x3000px

>>52794208
Some people lump them together, I think primarily because they were both just called Dungeons & Dragons, while AD&D was nomenclaturally set apart by the "Advanced" in front of its name. So it kind of looks like there's a continuous D&D line running from OD&D through Basic, with a separate AD&D line being more of an off-shoot. And to be fair, the first edition of Basic (Holmes Basic) was as much an OD&D starter set as anything else.

If you want to trace Basic's lineage back through Holmes to OD&D, that's easy enough to do. Basic is essentially a cleaned up, tweaked, repackaged version of the core OD&D (the so-called "little brown books") plus the Greyhawk supplement. But you can do a similar thing with AD&D, which is a continued development of OD&D with all the supplements.

>>52794749
Did any of you even check, IC, or did you just leave them there to die? If it's the latter, then I'd say they were killed regardless of any rulings.

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

185KB, 676x750px

>>52792769
>Is WIS a dump stat? The base rulebooks and supplements don't seem to give it much to do.
Unless you use Greyhawk, all the Prime Requisites are dump stats.
But Wisdom is extra dumpy, its description is even "this influences player actions in the same Intelligence does."
It wasn't even in the game for most of development, they tacked it and Clerics on at the last minute.

>>52794779
>they tacked it and Clerics on at the last minute.

Does this mean the true OD&D experience would only have two classes - fighting-man and magic-user?

>>52794803
Magic-Users were also a mistake.
t. Gygax

https://youtu.be/7UjXi1HKjms

>>52794749
>Okay guys... so on page 82 of the DMG for AD&D 1e they talk about dying at -10 hp, bleeding out, etc.... yet in the PHB they say a character at 0 hp dies? How does it work?
I've forgotten exactly what 1e says about it. I was thinking it was an optional rule, but it might be that it's simply something that changed in between the time the books were written, like how the Monster Manual is based on an "AC 9 is unarmored" scheme while the PHB moves to AC 10. Regardless, almost everybody uses the -10 hit point rule when playing AD&D. Really though, it all comes down to what the DM decides.

In ACK can Thrassian 4 dive attack? Is dive attack exclusive to talons as the rules seem to state excluding clawed creatures?

>>52793548
Flowchart.

>>52794208
No, but OD&D and AD&D are essentially the same.

>>52794767
Well the campaign ended immediately after the last bandit ran away. Maybe 3 or 4 rounds have elapsed since then. So we could heal some of them and save their lives (at least those who are still interested in playing, which might be our halfling rogue).

File: 1492648050975.jpg (1MB, 6000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 6000x3000px

>>52794754
Fixed.

File: 1492648050975.jpg (1MB, 6000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 6000x3000px

*missed two arrows, sorry

>>52795002
>>52795038
Was it autism?

>>52795002
>>52795038
The arrow colors are arbitrary and necessarily subjective anyway. The thing you should've changed is the date on Moldvay Basic, which should be '81 instead of '79.

>>52794824
Is this the video of the guy who says Magic Missile was somehow "the one concession for the little guy" while overlooking fucking Sleep and Charm Person?

>>52794862
In 1e its not presented as optional rule in the DMG, but what is optional is how much you can be reduced to and not die (in one hit). From 0 to -3 is the default.

>>52795038
hum... I like it.

As D&D Minis had a HUGE impact on 4e it may be worth slipping in there somewhere.

>>52793821
How did you manage the conversion from a grid based map to a hex based one?

File: 1457188416916.jpg (53KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 540x720px

Yooooo, what's the best module to run based around a Thieves Guild?

>>52795445
>Sleep
LBB sleep doesn't have rules for waking up, but I was under the impression it was mostly used for sneaking in that version.
>Charm Person
LBB charm person hires a bipedal monster, as a hireling, in a hireling slot. You have to pay them a salary and everything.
It's a lot like knock, insofar as it's a flashy but guaranteed way to perform an action that you're free to do without it.

>>52795711
Yeah you're right, Charm Person is RADICALLY stronger in 3LBB than in later editions. Like crazy-go-nuts more powerful.

>an action that you're free to do without it

In LBB its totally up to the discretion of the DM whether you so overwhelmingly and visibly outclass the enemy that you can get a chance to do a reaction roll at all. So yeah, Charm Person is more of a big deal in LBB than in any subsequent edition, depending on time frame and coincidences (a campaign with no downtime and a 3 int high level fighter is of course going to be a golden opportunity for Charm Person I suppose).

>>52795445
>In 1e its not presented as optional rule in the DMG, but what is optional is how much you can be reduced to and not die (in one hit). From 0 to -3 is the default.

Are you referring to this section? Because I'm not at all clear on what he's saying. Like many of the bullshit complexities of AD&D, this is something that seems to always be ignored in actual play.

>Zero Hit Points:
>When any creature is brought to 0 hit points (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until -10 is reached and the creature dies. Such loss and death are caused from bleeding, shock, convulsions, non-respiration, and similar causes. It ceases immediately on any round a friendly creature administers aid to the unconscious one. Aid consists of binding wounds, starting respiration, administering a draught (spirits, healing potion, etc.), or otherwise doing whatever is necessary to restore life.

>Any character brought to 0 (or fewer) hit points and then revived will remain in a coma far 1-6 turns. Thereafter, he or she must rest for a full week, minimum. He or she will be incapable of any activity other than that necessary to move slowly to a place of rest and eat and sleep when there. The character cannot attack, defend, cast spells, use magic devices, carry burdens, run, study, research, or do anything else. This is true even if cure spells and/or healing potions are given to him or her, although if a heal spell i s bestowed the prohibition no longer applies.

>If any creature reaches a state of -6 or greater negative points before being revived, this could indicate scarring or the loss of some member, if you so choose. For example, a character struck by a fireball and then treated when at -9 might have horrible scar tissue on exposed areas of flesh - hands, arms, neck, face.

File: hirelings.png (51KB, 571x614px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 571x614px

>>52795767
You're free to hire like-aligned monsters at any time, reaction rolls or combat be damned.

>>52795803
Right.

Default: Brought to 0, you can get Death's Door rules.
Option: Brought as low as -3 in one hit, you can get Death's Door rules.
If an ally spends an action, you can be saved and become weakly mobile (think "disabled" condition in 3e) after 1-6 turns.
Heal immediately counters it.

At -6 or worse you'll come back retarded.

That's how I'd interpret it, seems straightforward.

File: 1492648050975.jpg (1MB, 6000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 6000x3000px

>>52795098
>>52795593

>>52795689
Plundering Poppof from Dungeon if you're starting out.

>>52795038

The arrow between Holmes and Moldvay should be green.

The D&D Adventure game from '99 is just an AD&D 2nd ed. starter set, not a revision of Basic.

>>52795952
I'm running out of MS Paint.
You'll have to buy me some more or get someone else to do it.
Speaking of which, MSPaint_LotFP_Class_Guy, I leave to you this request: Revisionist Historian.

>>52795897
Two things combine to make it unclear to me.

First, it doesn't specifically specify what the alternative is. If you're reduced to 0 (or optionally as low as -3) then you're unconscious. Does the optional rule A) expand the range (if you land anywhere in the 0 to -3 range, you're unconscious, which probably means you're dead if you land anywhere lower), or B) simply lower the point at which you're deemed to be unconscious (so if a single blow lands you at -2, you're still up).

The first way seems to make a bit more sense to me, except that it means that if you don't use the optional expansion of the unconscious range to -3, the only way that the death's door rules come into play is if you somehow manage to land *exactly* on 0 HP, and it's all kinds of retarded to go into that much detail over something that's hardly ever going to happen.

>>52796094
>First, it doesn't specifically specify what the alternative is.
ded

>the optional rule

The default is, only if you are cleanly reduced to 0, you are at Death's Door. The option is if you are reduced to as low as -3 in one blow.

If you are dying for 6 minutes straight with no help in the default, you come back retarded in some way. In the optional rule it can be 3-6 minutes, since you can have been reduced to up to -3 and still dead.

And exactly 0, or exactly 0 to -3, doesn't strike me as bad. You know why? Measure orc damage to death's door ranges in 1e vs 3e. Its pretty much always a slim window of opportunity, thing, pre 4e.

>>52796236
>And exactly 0, or exactly 0 to -3, doesn't strike me as bad. You know why? Measure orc damage to death's door ranges in 1e vs 3e. Its pretty much always a slim window of opportunity, thing, pre 4e.
An orc does d8 damage, which means they only have a 12.5% chance to hit 0 on the nose. It's really not worth cramming in all the extra rules for something that only happens 12.5% of the time.

>>52796303
Optionally, it can be 0 to -3.

>>52796325
>Optionally, it can be 0 to -3.
And that's fine. But it's optional, so he obviously thought that 0 could stand fine on its own.

>>52796351
A lot of optional rules are for corner cases. Its imo more like a 1 in 6 probability, which is the same frequency of weapon speed factor coming into play.

>>52795987
>Revisionist Historian
HD as Priest
THAC0 as Wizard
Proficiencies as Wizard
Spells as Wizard of (HD-3, minimum 0) level

Once per session may attempt to Correct The Record:
Level 1: may force a player or the DM to re-do one dice roll just made and abide by the results
Level 3: may force a player or the DM to re-do one dice roll made within the current session and abide by the results
Level 5: may force a player or the DM to re-do one dice roll made within the last two sessions and abide by the results
Level 7: may force a player or the DM to re-do one dice roll made within the last five sessions and abide by the results
Level 10: may force a player or the DM to re-do one dice roll made within the campaign and abide by the results

If the re-roll would result in a living character dying or a dead character living then he dies/comes back to life as the case may be but has no recollection of how that happened.

>>52796405
REEEEE

Rolled 5, 3 = 8 (2d6)

I'm forcing >>52796422 to re-roll his reaction check

>>52796444
Uncertain. What is the offer again, and do we share a common alignment?

>>52796487
The offer is this class write-up >>52796405 for FREE. I assume we are both True Neutral.

File: reaction roll.jpg (20KB, 558x168px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 558x168px

>>52796487
Those *are* relevant, but Hiring Reaction =/= Reaction Roll

>>52796361
>Its imo more like a 1 in 6 probability, which is the same frequency of weapon speed factor coming into play.
But even if it's the same percentage chance, you're gonna be figuring out who goes first a lot more often than you're gonna see people dropping to 0 hit points or below.

>>52796506
Sounds great, I'll take it.

>I assume we are both True Neutral

I will assume so as well.

>>52796576
Probably about the same, actually. In many, probably most, cases in 1e, determining who goes first rarely requires a roll. Especially when the PCs are at mid levels.

>>52793515
>Is there an 'intended' way to cross-pollinate bonuses from one combat system (STR damage bonus in M2M) to another (20:1 HD-per-man)? I have some solutions but they're not elegant
AFAIK you're meant to apply the same bonuses to both MTM and 20:1 (and Fantastic Combat, where that applies). Sure, they don't give the same exact outcomes in each case, but close enough; the only real trouble's transferring them straight over to the OD&D Alternative Combat System (e.g. the d20-based one we all know as "D&D combat"), because on a straight d20 scale they're all far too low. (For example, the goblin -1 penalty to fighting in daylight is a huge deal in Chainmail and a shrug in the ACS.)

>Why do halbards [sic] get a +1 Man in 20:1, but nothing reflective in M2M?
They do; the equivalent they get is that halberds hit like a motherfucking mule in Man-To-Man, like all polearms. If you compare it to the efficacy of a sword or mace with some test fights, you'll see that it's a clear superiority.

>Is WIS a dump stat? Even supplements don't seem to do anything with it
Wis is like the other Prime Requisite stats in LBB OD&D: it's only directly mechanically useful to the class it's tied to. The rest is up to the individual referee's house rules on adjudicating various types of actions (that is, although the rules give no explicit mechanic for it, the referee might give a character with high strength a higher chance to bend an iron bar, for instance, or lift a heavy barrel). So no, it's not a dump stat more than Int or Str are.

Broadly, the way the abilities work in unmodified OD&D is that each class has a main one which gives them the bonus XP, and then the three other abilities grant game-relevant bonuses to all characters if their roll was high enough. Of course, this symmetry was broken immediately, with the Thief in Supplement I keying off Dexterity.

>>52793907
How is the lotus stuff from the Conan setting?

>>52793560
>Is this too much stuff to an area of this size?
No, that's fine. The upper bound is really just how populated you want the region to be. (If you can, find a map of some area of medieval France and see how many things are a league(≈3 miles) apart. It'll be a lot.) This map gives me the impression of an icy wasteland above a mountain chain, all sparsely populated, so your amount of stuff looks good.

>>52794135
>>52794199
>2e counts
NEIN

>>52794754
Aside from the Moldvay date thing which Anon pointed out, I'm almost 100% that the Classic D&D Game box predates the black box and not the other way around.

>>52795833
>like-aligned
This is the crucial bit. If you want to hire an ogre, you either have to play a faggot chaos sucks or a Magic-User who picked the best spell.

>>52797147
>I'm almost 100% that the Classic D&D Game box predates the black box and not the other way around.
Not if Wikipedia is to be believed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons_Game_(1991_boxed_set)

>>52794795
That card's missing discussion of d20 roll under ability checks.

>>52797439
We blew up that hissy fit after we swore off Bingo.

File: lololol.png (87KB, 555x284px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 555x284px

>>52797213
>you either have to play a faggot or a Magic-User
Umm. https://youtu.be/2z29Rk8814w

File: Evolution chart.png (37KB, 2548x832px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 2548x832px

Work in progress. I was inspired by all the shitty charts ITT

>>52795938
What issue?

>>52798117
Dungeon #72

>>52798039
Master Set was more Gygax than Mentzer.

>>52797670
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtvIYRrgZ04

File: Evolution chart.png (68KB, 3712x956px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 3712x956px

>>52798039
Did a few tweaks.

>>52798898
You might consider denoting which node inspired the other. without existing knowledge of the material going into it, someone might not know if Rune Quest inspired 2E, or if 2E inspired RuneQuest.

(well you just edited the post to make a little easier to read. arrows could still help anyway.)

How good is Adventurer, Conquerer, King? I've been thinking of reading up on it to have a different system to run with.
Also is it balanced (particularly magic)? I've had a less-than-stellar experience with games like 3.5, and even 5e has a tendency to grind my gears every once in a while.
If I sound like I'm asking the wrong questions, I'm basically completely new to OSR.

has anyone ever played an immortals game from becmi?

>>52798919
aight

I feel like I might be screwing up the 2e divergences a little. Like, it's pretty easy to see when LBB OD&D becomes proto-1e or when 1e becomes proto-2e but 2e has big shifts like kits and planescape that change the game as a whole which then kinda peter out.

File: db62c41f8a19c5d4cbc98a58499867a8.jpg (63KB, 736x670px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 736x670px

>>52796965
Thanks for the info. I've been bending myself over backwards trying to avoid using the Alternative system, so anything to inspire some confidence in Chainmail is appreciated.

>Halberds hit like a mule
But that's the thing--in the M2M tables they're largely comparable to polearms (worse against AC9/8, better against AC3/2). But on the 20:1 scale they're arbitrarily stronger.

My problems are obviously stemming from trying to use Chainmail while being inclusive of the supplement classes and attribute bonuses (which don't use it). I'm tempted to just go vanilla, save perhaps the exception of Thieves.

>>52799021
Not anyone I know, but goddamn do I want to! I want to do a max level one and have it fight it out with another, just to see who comes out on top!

>>52799058
man these images youre posting are fucking sick, where did you get them from?

>>52798919
>>52799025
I would say the left-to-right timeline makes relationships clear.

>>52793408
Honestly seven is too many players. When I was young I could DM to larger groups but I can't assure you that it was fun. It was for them but that was more a byproduct of us all just having fun, having no responsibilities etc.

I have friends who try to pull off big groups and they just can't do it. The last big group I died dmed to was seventeen. I was 32 at the time and it was a hot mess. Luckily almost every player I had knew the rules nearly inside and out so they basically entertained themselves with the ridiculous amount of crap I had to throw at them.

I'm going to assume that 1e and up aren't very welcome here, it seems?? I've lurked a bit but never the osr threads. I sorely regret that now as I've been addicted to reading it for weeks now.

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

238KB, 650x528px

>>52799076
c >>52777063

>>52794749
They bleed out. They're not dead until they hit -10. 0 should read as dying, not dead.

>>52799058
Hey its MANCAT! or CATMAN

File: Rakshasa.jpg (112KB, 626x667px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 626x667px

>>52799222
The tiger pattern leads me to believe it's a CATMAN (Weataigā) and not a MANCAT (Rakushāsa).
Not to say that Rakshasa shouldn't look like Tigers, just that they don't seem to in Final Fantasy.

>>52799310
>they dont seem to fit final fantasy

final fantasy 1 literally took all of its monsters from the monster manual

>>52797075
Genuinely curious about this. Can some anon tell me how does 2e differ from general OSR? I really wanted to try something more old school and 2e seemed cool enough. Am I misguided?

>>52799375
no he meant rakshasas don't seem to be tigers in final fantasy. I don't know much about most FFs.

>>52799310
So what's your theory on what Dark Fighters etc. were supposed to be? Dark elf clerics? Cambions?

File: Rakshasa-ff1-psp.png (2KB, 59x64px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 59x64px

>>52799375
Don't put words in my mouth. They don't seem to look like tigers in Final Fantasy.

>>52799381
Kits aren't the most old schoolish thing around, and 2e psionics, although cool, are very charbuildy and not very old schoolish. Some of the campaign settings are not that old schoolish either.

>>52799381
2e is just a neutered 1e in a ton of ways. Mechanically it's about the same as 1e. It takes very little to convert 1e content to 2e. With enough practice you could do it on the fly, honestly.

>>52799375
What about the Warmech/Death Machine?

>>52799381
Gold=XP is an optional rule, the DM advice is more new-school, and you have a lot more mechanical options in the supplements. It's still 99.99% compatible with the rest of the OSR, so it's more people playing No True OSR.

Alright, I just picked up some more ink for my printer. I'm gonna stock my DM binder with some useful reference material.

Any suggestions on pages to print out that are good to have on hand?

>>52799443
Mechanical, setting, or what?

Appendix A, if you want a random dungeon generator.

File: Behorudā.gif (15KB, 500x446px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 500x446px

>>52799397
MAGE -> Drow Mage (Male Drow)
FIGHTER -> Drow Priest (Female Drow)

>Cambions?
Did MMII Cambion use support spells?

>>52799406
>Kits aren't the most old schoolish thing around

Kits are completely optional.

>>52799164
>I'm going to assume that 1e and up aren't very welcome here, it seems?
1e is. 2e isn't. BECMI is a literal who.

>>52799381
It groups classes into roles (Warrior, Priest, Mage, Rogue)
It has a skill system.
No more half-orcs or assassins.
Less moral ambiguity (although that was already going out the window with dragonlance)
Name changes to outsiders to avoid negative press (which as 3.5babby I must say are better than 1e's)
Kits (which are optional) are proto-Feats in a way; most are okay, some are useless, and a few are OP (cf. Complete Elves Handbook).

>>52799443
Calimport - The City at Large
The Horde - Caravan Generator
Dragon 209 - 1001 Faces of Death

>>52799576
>It has a skill system.
So does 1e. The only difference is that 2e has it in core and 1e has it in OA.

How relevant is Rythlondar - 1975 Campaign Log? (it's in the trove)
It's just some loser's notes, or worth reading?

>>52799415
>What about the Warmech/Death Machine?

That's just about the only thing, along with Chaos, that doesn't have a clear analog.

>>52799471

>Did MMII Cambion use support spells?

They could wind up being fairly high level in cleric, assassin, fighter, or magic user.

>FIGHTER -> Drow Priest (Female Drow)

Interesting, thought so.

>>52799611
It's mildly interesting only because it's a window into a specific group's reactions to OD&D releases. Like when Greyhawk lands they re-roll almost every character.

>>52799576
Hm, I still have some of my b/e stuff so I'll just be sticking around then! This is one of the best threads on tg.

>>52799576
>2e isn't.
Yes it is.

>>52798984
Bumping this.

>about half of our usual gaming group won't be able to make the game
>youngest member wants to run AD&D2e

It's been nearly half a lifetime since I played and I haven't felt this stoked in a while. Which supplementals should I snag? Making a dwarf fighter/cleric and it's been so long I have forgotten so much.

>>52798984
It's a cool modern take on the OSR style, with a bigger focus on domain management (which is usually alluded to in B/X and AD&D as a possibility, but more as an excuse to retire your character and start a new one).

But it might be more useful to know why 3.x and 5e grind your gears? What are you looking for that made you turn to OSR D&D?

>>52798898
Not sure if this is outside the scope of your chart, but maybe show Braunstein/wargames and fiction like Jack Vance and Tolkien as part of the roots for Chainmail.

>>52799164
>I'm going to assume that 1e and up aren't very welcome here, it seems?
Sure, 1e is cool. These threads get a very heavy B/X bias (with a good chunk of LotFP and DCC too) but 1E and OD&D do get mentioned from time to time. Sometimes Chainmail comes up too.
The hard cut off no one will argue is 3rd Edition and up. People might not count AD&D 2E, but you're more likely to get discussion on it here than in another thread.

>>52799850
>But it might be more useful to know why 3.x and 5e grind your gears?
3.x grinds my gears first because it's the system I started with and my first group was 100% spergs/edgelords/assholes (myself included) and second because there's just too much munchkining and splatbook hunting encouraged by the system.
Whatever his intentions may be, reading that quote by Monte
>"Darn, I got another Cleave, I'm still looking for the ultra-rare Great Cleave."
boils my blood even if it is a joke.

5e is decent enough, but it still has several 'what the fuck were they thinking' spells and the system seems to rebuke attempts to make rulings rather than reference rules. I like playing 5e fast and loose, so I figured a dedicated OSR game would be better for my tastes.
Plus Unearthed Arcana, while having pockets of deliciousness, still tends towards the horribly unbalanced or bland. It feels like they stopped halfway through when they first designed the system, then started copying over stuff from 3.5.
And it's just my grognard flare-ups, but I still feel like at-will combat cantrips that scale are a mistake (except for Eldritch Blast, which might as well be a Warlock class feature).

>>52799471
After my recent, PSP playthrough (solo red mage), inspired solely by being educated here on the piscodaemon/mind flayer thingy, I am more convinced than ever that FF1 would be a great basis for an AD&D campaign.

The monsters lists in the Swamp Cave, Ice Cave, and Volcano in particular would be great encounter tables for mid and up PCs.

Its too bad that if you level up enough to not be curb stomped by Piscodaemons, the rest of the game becomes too easy in short order. It'd be nice to see something like FF1, but with zones scaling all the way to level 99.

>>52799844
CBoDwarves, Complete Fighter, Complete Cleric, Priest's Spell Compendium (though if you're going to break out that three-volume beast, make sure the GM remembers that since clerics petition their god for spells, their god can tell them they aren't getting spell X).

>>52799969
Scaling combat cantrips are not really a big deal. In old school editions, you have the fact that magic is insanely more powerful than in 5e combined with the fact that if you get a wand (and know how to recharge it -- in OD&D you can just make one no problem), you're going to have something a hell of a lot better than EB garbage.

File: osrg demographics.png (187KB, 1876x611px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1876x611px

>>52799164
Adding to >>52799884 with this post by some anon, which goes into a bit more detail on the different groups of anons in these generals.

>>52799994
More than anything else, I don't want the rest of the group sitting back while Wizard/Cleric Mc Solvesit does everything better than everyone else all the time.
That's mostly my paranoia speaking, but it's still a non-negotiable for me.
Ideally I want characters to be of generally equal contribution to the party.

>>52800067
>More than anything else, I don't want the rest of the group sitting back while Wizard/Cleric Mc Solvesit does everything better than everyone else all the time.

Fair, but its not a concern in 5e and has nothing to do with damage cantrips. Generally direct damage spells get better the farther back you go, with them being strongest in LBB.

>Ideally I want characters to be of generally equal contribution to the party.

ok

>>52800002
How would you describe the small group of anons who think that 2e can/should be discussed here? They're not included in the AD&D guys, because the third paragraph counts them as hating 2e.

>>52800081
That wasn't intended to be a comment on direct damage spells, it was more of expressing my mindset as to what sort of game I want to play (I was sort of continuing my earlier thought). Maybe I should just give into the memes and play 4E.

>>52800101
I have never gotten a hostile response from talking 2e, so its pretty much just a meme.

I do find 2e core to be strictly a shittier version of 1e core, and the 2e DMG has an unbelievably bad attitude as well as shitting on dungeons in general, and being the worst intro to D&D possible in a DMG. Still, I am about to run a 2e game and its got a lot of good stuff (the edition not the core).

>>52800101
Honestly, I feel like I see more "Is 2e allowed to be discussed here?" posts than actual posts about 2e, so I can't really place what that group is all about.

>>52795627
I just filled a bunch of hexes instead of grids and ignored the possibility of any trouble coming out of that.

>>52800101
>>52800130
>>52800153
Personally I prefer 2e on the grounds of it having the most options out of all the editions, due to essentially combining them all into a singe hugeass katamari and then adding about an equal pile of its own shit into it, allowing you to stretch the whole OSR thing as far as it can go. Plus, it's the best system out there to do both OSR -and- high fantasy, sometimes switching between sessions, and I like that compromise.

Any poor advice in DMG, removing half-orcs or assassins, or other neutering, is easy to counter purely by bringing up stuff from 1e to fill the blanks. Just about the only thing I can't deal with that way is the subtly raised power levels and reduced lethality: PCs aren't as powerful as in later editions, but they sure as hell are more formidable than in B/X or even 1e.

>>52800214
2e's got a lot of great options. Only problem for me is that, for whatever reason, TSR didn't want people mixing different campaigns too much.

>Just about the only thing I can't deal with that way is the subtly raised power levels and reduced lethality

How so? There's a lot of instant death monsters and a lot of brutally hard ones. The Greater Medusa is my favorite 2eism.

>>52800241
Sorry, I mean generic setting 2eism... generic 2e is a setting of its own in some regards.

File: MASS EFFECT.pdf (26KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 1x1px

I was looking at the Machinations of the Space Princess and decided to take a crack at making a Mass Effect race guide using the race traits they have listed. What do you all think?

>>52800241
>TSR didn't want people mixing different campaigns too much
Do you even Spacejammer, anon?

>>52800241
Most of the really difficult monsters have been around since 1e or even earlier, and all the new ones aren't especially common or otherwise won't make much of a dent in that group.

On the opposite side, 1e was the one to buff up the hit dice of most characters, while not doing much to increase the lethality of the monsters to compensate. Unearthed Arcana added in weapon specialization and allowed fighters to hit more often and do more damage, even on first level. 2e finally brought up specialist wizards, allowing even the first level mage to cast -two- spells, which was a huge buff at the time; specialist priests, which could essentially have any power you and your DM can come up with, starting from first level; thief skills could be allocated by yourself, so if you put all your points on hiding and moving silently and took an appropriate kit, your thief would have pretty good odds at backstabbing in every fight; and fighters got more stuff from the Complete Fighter's Handbook and Player's Option, especially shield proficiency and weapon style specialization. And since we opened the can that was Player's Option, we might as well add in heroic frays, which allowed you to literally mow down goblins and bandits even on level 1.

Sure, you could still be killed in one hit by a rusty goblin blade, but then, that could happen even in 4e.

>>52800294
Spelljammer was entirely made out of spite, to troll with Lorraine Williams. It doesn't exactly match with TSR's dominant philosophies at the time.

When generating dungeons how do you know when it's a good time for a room to go back and connect to a previous room beyond adjacent rooms?

>>52800294
The campaign settings besides SJ I like best have Rule 1: Fugg Spelldamer :DDD

Some elements of SJ fit perfectly with DS though; elves in zombie bugs and living ceramic ships and lifejammer and deathjammer helms.

The weirdest thing, though, is that that Athas is the zik-chil homeworld (afaik) and they somehow got into space.

>>52800294
Spelljammer is fucking great.

>>52800322
>they somehow got into space.
Athasian clerics can take people to the Inner Planes, and from there you can get back out to a more normal Sphere. The Planewalker's Handbook specifically mentions Athasiasn sometimes showing up in Sigil.

>>52800310
>It doesn't exactly match with TSR's dominant philosophies at the time.
But Planescape.

File: 1451320419_Vasari_Corridor_and_Uffizi_Gallery_Tour.jpg (117KB, 1132x768px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1132x768px

>>52800315
I'd say the general rule is "about one loop or shortcut for every 4 rooms". You can make cloverleafs, or weird cross-sections, or other odd paths that way.

>>52800310

2e has some great beasties though, you gotta admit: greater medusae, dracoliches (1e had not as great ones), witchlight marauders, dark sun monsters whose name ends in "beast," etc. Many Mystara monsters also are great.

Heroic Frays are stronger at level 1, but are generally weaker than the 1e rule of 1 attack/level against 1-1 and down HD.

Some elements of 2e were more subdued. For example, elven fighter mages are significantly weaker in 2e, at least until level limit comparisons show up.

>>52800354
>The Planewalker's Handbook specifically mentions Athasiasn sometimes showing up in Sigil.

That's true, but it makes xixchil (sp) in Wildspace and not Sigil even weirder.

Does Planescape ever imply each material plane has its own inner plane, or was the idea of Athas having its own inner planes a unique idea?

>>52800362
>2e has some great beasties though, you gotta admit: greater medusae, dracoliches (1e had not as great ones), witchlight marauders, dark sun monsters whose name ends in "beast," etc. Many Mystara monsters also are great.

Sure does, but again, you don't generally meet them often enough to match the increased power level of your own characters.

>Heroic Frays are stronger at level 1, but are generally weaker than the 1e rule of 1 attack/level against 1-1 and down HD.

Yeah, but by the time you reach the point where it changes - level 4 - anything with just 1-1 HD has completely ceased to matter, and on very high levels heroic fray once again becomes stronger by allowing you to extend this to more powerful opponents.

>elven fighter mages are significantly weaker in 2e

This one's entirely true. Best case scenario, they'd need to memorize Armor every morning, and that's one spell out of their lists. I don't know whether it'd matter much on a bit higher levels, though, once they find some Bracers of Defense or something.

>>52800387
1-1 HD foes are completely viable threats for level 2 people (don't remember when the level = attacks vs level 0 rule shows up).

"completely ceased to matter?" Level 0s, can definitely fuck up much higher level PCs and I have seen it. If stoneskin is relevant they are relevant, they can screw up casters fairly well and nothing particularly stops them from screwing up melee dudes, albeit not that well.

>though, once they find some Bracers of Defense or something.

Assuming a VERY generous DM, expect fighter-mages to be about 4-8 points of AC behind the entire campagin. Assuming a stingy DM... expect AC to hover at around Mage Armor/Shield level forever, no improvements.

Theoretically heroic fray could be relevant at high levels. I do like that element, especially since the Chainmail Cuisinart rule could potentially apply to more than the most garbagey dudes in the universe (probably up to bugbears), but even though I've ran multiple 2e games that got to level 20, its rare that I've seen that rule.

I don't know what to say about
>Sure does, but again, you don't generally meet them often enough to match the increased power level of your own characters.

since there's no real objective standard for what is common or normal in 2e, but when I DM I tend to emphasize fairly inflated antagonists.

>>52800381
>and not Sigil
You can find pretty much everything in Sigil, man. That's part of its identity as a city.

Planescape specifically denies that Athas has its own lot of Inner Planes.

>ATHAS
>A secluded, hard-to-reach world called Athas is notable for a couple reasons. First, "hard-to-reach" isn't just hyperbole; portals leading here are rare in the extreme, and spells that allow interplanar travel fail more than half the time. Recently, the githyanki attempted to reopen one of the few permanent portals to this world from the Astral, but their efforts were thwarted by the natives - which says a good deal for the inhabitants' might. Also, while the priests here have interesting connections with the Inner Planes, they refer to a number of the Paraelemental Planes by different names - so don't be confused if the sods talk about places called the plane of Sun or Rain.

Also, a number of Dark Sun critters made it into the Planescape Monstrous Compendium Appendices (mostly PSMCA3, I think).

>>52799406
In what way are they not old schoolish? Why don't they feel that way to you? Also is crunch contrary to OSR paradigms?

>>52799413
This kinda surprises me, as there seems to be much more content for 2e (judging only for what I'm able to find, forgive me if I'm wrong), I'd really love to hear some examples. It's good to hear it's easily compatible with other systems though, because I've seen OSR systems I've liked parts of, but not clicked with entirely. Labyrinth Lord comes to mind.

>>52799415
I should read 1e DMG for advice, right? I keep hearing it's damn great. Also, considering what the first anon said, are the mechanical options somehow a bad thing? Does it become way too bloated, a la Pathfinder? I personally would like a middle-ground, where that's not the case but Fighters only going "I attack" isn't the case either.

>>52799576
This is great, helps me understand a few differences on the system. Is there anything you'd say 1e does better than 2e, particularly?

>>52800466
>don't remember when the level = attacks vs level 0 rule shows up
When the monster's HD is less than 1. Not that they ever bothered telling you how those multiple attacks work with mixed-HD groups.

>>52800466
>1-1 HD foes are completely viable threats for level 2 people (don't remember when the level = attacks vs level 0 rule shows up).

As I said, though, the transition point comes at level 4: until that point heroic fray is more viable, and it continues to have a bit of a bump every time the fighters gain enough levels to have more attacks.

> If stoneskin is relevant they are relevant, they can screw up casters fairly well and nothing particularly stops them from screwing up melee dudes, albeit not that well.

The best way 1-1 HD foes can remain a credible threat for a long time is by going down the Tucker's Kobolds route, with dungeons full of traps and murderholes and shit. They will know better than to just charge mindlessly against the fighters. This will make the advantage of multiple attacks completely null.

>Assuming a VERY generous DM, expect fighter-mages to be about 4-8 points of AC behind the entire campagin. Assuming a stingy DM... expect AC to hover at around Mage Armor/Shield level forever, no improvements.

Theoretically speaking the best Bracers of Defense are equivalent to a full plate, so if they manage to find one of these they could only stay a point or two behind, assuming the fighters get some magic armor instead.

In the cases of more stingy DMs, wizards still get a bunch of other ways to protect themselves, such as the one you brought forth - Stoneskin.

>since there's no real objective standard for what is common or normal in 2e, but when I DM I tend to emphasize fairly inflated antagonists.

While I on my part tend to forget about the 2e-specific guys more often than not, but other than that I suppose this is a fair point. I still don't think they'd show up all the damn time even in your games, though.

>>52800503
>there seems to be much more content for 2e
There is. Not all of it is good, because Lorraine Williams (2e-era TSR CEO) instituted a policy that translated to 'no playtesting'. That there are relatively few completely garbage rules expansions speaks to the quality of the writers TSR had managed to accumulate by that time.

>>52800503
> Also, considering what the first anon said, are the mechanical options somehow a bad thing? Does it become way too bloated, a la Pathfinder?

Even at its most bloated, 2e never gets remotely as bad as Pathfinder does. It doesn't have whole books of feats and character traits to meticulously go through, and far more to the point, it doesn't carry the mindset of absolutely needing to powergame and pick all the mechanically best options. You can just sort of pick up stuff from here and there and it likely won't hurt your chances.

>Is there anything you'd say 1e does better than 2e, particularly?

Modules, DMG prose, some of the art, a bunch of random tables, and much of the planes. Nothing that couldn't be easily transplanted to 2e, in my mind.

>>52800539
Player's Option, brought up earlier, is probably the worst offender of the time. Combat & Tactics is all right, some of the spells in Spells & Magic can be brought in without breaking everything, High-Level Campaigns has some good advice for late-game as well as the occasional fun proficiency, but never, -ever- open Skills & Powers.

>>52800544
>It doesn't have whole books of feats and character traits to meticulously go through,
Only spells and magic items. 11 books of spells and magic items.

>>52800555
Yeah, but that's a burden more for the DM than the player. Just the way it should be.

Besides, those magic items are the shit.

>>52800495
>Planescape specifically denies that Athas has its own lot of Inner Planes.

If Athas does have the same Inner Planes as everyone else, then the fact that the elemental planes are warring upon each other over it and some (water especially) are in danger of *dying out* over the conditions on Athas is probably a pretty big deal. This may have something to do with the fact that the gods seem nonexistent with regards to Athas.

If there are just the Inner Planes and not each Prime Material Plane having its own, then the way that the denizens in Planescape seem overwhelmingly biased against Primes and Prime Materials may very well bite them in the ass; they don't seem equipped to even comprehend the idea that the calamity in Athas could destroy the plane of Water for everyone. Likewise, they don't seem to know of the powerful psionic, cleric elementals that hail from Athas.

>>52800569
Athas is 'Literally What' to pretty much everywhere that isn't Athas. The Outer Planar people give more of a shit about the Blood War.

>>52800569
>some (water especially) are in danger of *dying out* over the conditions on Athas
The question is, is that the plane itself ceasing to exist or just the vortices leading to Athas?

>>52800586
>just the vortices leading to Athas?
Rather, the potential of having vortices that lead to Athas. Athas is already largely cut off from the Outer Planes, what if it were to become cut off from the Inner Planes as well?

>>52800539
Ah yes, the "No playing during work" thing, I had forgotten about that. It's great to hear it's decent, but anything I should specifically avo-

>>52800553
Well beat me to it. Thank you, anon! Now you are making me curious though, what's so bad about Skills & Powers?

>>52800544
Okay that's damn great. If there's anything I hate with a passion about PF is the mentality (and fact) that if you don't carefully pick your feats and skills, you are gimped and basically can't do shit. Might as well play Magic at that point.

Thank you a lot guys, thus far you've been damn helpful. I've got a last, less specific question, though. Something that drives me away from newer editions is, mostly, combat. In the sense that, I absolutely hate the lack of options of most classes, sans spellcasters, perhaps. It's enormously dull for me playing a fighter, and only being able to full attack for a few rounds until an HP sponge dies, and that goes double as I play online, by text, so people tend to take forever to do their turns (myself included). 5e somewhat helps me with that, at least as a Battlemaster, but otherwise is still not ideal.

Does 2e / OSR in general fix this issue? Either by combat being shorter, tactics mattering more, or whatever? The big draw for me has been that, for what I've heard, you 'really' want to pick your fights and avoid unnecessary combat, which is great because I really like the adventuring / roleplaying aspects of any edition, but the whole "kill every enemy as if this was an MMO raid" gets on my nerves.

>>52800518

>Theoretically speaking the best Bracers of Defense are equivalent to a full plate, so if they manage to find one of these they could only stay a point or two behind,

The best Bracers of Defense get are AC 0. If you're gonna compare that with the best magic armor and shield, or with the best dragon armor, they're gonna get -8 easy. Hence, 8 points behind.

>I still don't think they'd show up all the damn time even in your games, though.
Hmm.

My last couple of 2e campaigns largely pit orcs, orogs, and red and black neo orogs early on (1 through 5 HD);
Minotaurs, greater medusas, & evil/undead treant land;
Van Richten Guide style clay golem conspiracy, the Tzadikim (lots of high stat intelligent clay golems, but without blunt-only damage);
A few bionids who were included for no good reason;
LOTS of drider casters & vampire drow (the latter having excellent stats);
LOTS of red dragons;
Mystaran nightshade pileup;
Vampire hordes;
High level drow;
And a defiler dragon (specifically not a Sorcerer King, just a drow who unlocked the same power) who was a natural finishing point.

In my youth I was known for lots of direguards, "super cheater necromancers" and "beholder infested goodness."

The most I saw of heroic fray was, surprisingly... a disgruntled, deranged, charisma 1 defiler-necromancer who sent like 300+ level 0s (with terrible morale) and skellingtons at the other characters.

I actually do plan on using more dungeon ecology creatures next campaign around, but things like black puddings and ascomoids are just as deadly as most of the above.

>>52800586
>The question is, is that the plane itself ceasing to exist or just the vortices leading to Athas?

Seems pretty clear that the Plane itself is dying out. "The champions of the dying Plane of Water are few." I don't think its just their imagination, otherwise the mistake would be corrected the moment they show up to their home realms.

Plus, Athasian characters don't ever make the mistake that the Outer Planes are dying out, and its actually probably the most fiend/celestial summoning-y setting around (Cacofiend is a thing, but in 2e its stated to be for "NPC villains").

If indeed there is no basis to think Inner Planes are different per material plane, then I would clear up any discrepancies by simply deciding that Athasians are better informed about the elemental planes than the Barmy Berk Squad. Afterall, I know of no Barmy Berks who have evolved to become elementals, and as you say, the Blood War is generally more significant to them, with good reason.

>>52800689
Skills and Powers is a (mostly) point-buy character creation system (buy special racial traits, class abilities, etc.). It has all the inherent balance issues that point-buy systems have, plus those that come from not actually having time to check the costing on things.

It's a cheese factory, is what I'm trying to say. Should also note that the kits from the Complete Book of Elves are overpowered compared to those from the other Complete X books (some of them have rather restrictive RP limitations, but they're still really good).

OSR combat is about player creativity, not mechanical options (unless you bring Combat and Tactics or maybe Battlesystem Skirmishes into the mix).

>>52800689
>what's so bad about Skills & Powers?

The ability score split was unnecessary and bloody stupid, the psionics were literally unplayable, and you could may characters capable of casting Wish at first level.

>Does 2e / OSR in general fix this issue? Either by combat being shorter, tactics mattering more, or whatever? The big draw for me has been that, for what I've heard, you 'really' want to pick your fights and avoid unnecessary combat, which is great because I really like the adventuring / roleplaying aspects of any edition, but the whole "kill every enemy as if this was an MMO raid" gets on my nerves.

Yeah, that's really not a problem in 2e. The whole "I hit it with my sword" thing is rather exaggerated and mostly stems from taking things too literally and straight from the book - by doing that you get other ridiculous problems like thieves being literally the only ones that can ever hide or move silently, period.

In truth it's quite the opposite. There's the mindset that you can try out basically anything, and then you and the DM will have to figure out how that shit works out in practice. Later editions brought in feats to give you more options, but in truth they gimped you, by giving you the mindset that if you don't have the feat for something, you can't do it.

In just the few recent games, I've had the thief try to kick the feet off the skeletal guardian, the wizard snatching an ogre's wand away from him (imagine doing that in later editions, with no sleight of hand as your class skill!), and then of course all the stuff you too bring up, like throwing food at the wolves to turn them from an enemy into an ally.

And yeah, you also sneak around a lot more, so fighters having less options wouldn't really matter at that regard so much anyway. In 3.PF you will fight everything you come across.

File: PS Inner Planes Elemental Evolution.png (842KB, 789x921px) Image search: [Google]

842KB, 789x921px

>>52800719
>Athasians are better informed about the elemental planes than the Barmy Berk Squad.
Found this theory about the Inner Planes in the PS Inner Planes sourcebook.

>>52800724
Of the most eye grabbing Elf kits; Archer is probably OP, but the Collector isn't bad (for magic item IDing, you give up wand, potion, and scroll use), and the most infamous one, the Bladesinger, is actually pretty restrained: its about blocking-while-casting.

>>52800724
>Battlesystem Skirmishes

I've ran Battlesystem 1e and 2e, but what's the big deal about Skirmishes?

>>52800829
Skirmishes is the scaled-down version of 2e for party-size battles. Like, six PCs vs 10 skeletons or some shit.

File: memery.jpg (13KB, 425x275px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 425x275px

>>52796405
What is this new memery?

>>52800783
But what was the mechanical option thing though?

>>52800895
What mechanical option thing?

>>52800733
>>52800724

This really does sound great, thank you a lot!

>In just the few recent games, I've had the thief try to kick the feet off the skeletal guardian, the wizard snatching an ogre's wand away from him (imagine doing that in later editions, with no sleight of hand as your class skill!), and then of course all the stuff you too bring up, like throwing food at the wolves to turn them from an enemy into an ally.

To be fair, my DM has tried to push for this for quite a while with newer editions, but it's damn hard for most players to break the mold of "you can only do what your character sheet says you can do". It's great to hear the system actually encourages it.

I want to implement the "power attack" mechanic from 3.5/PF. Just need some creative ideas to make better other than - take 1 point from your attack roll and add it to your damage and shazam.

>>52801070
Take a point from AC -and- attack roll, bump the damage die up by one, so 1d8 longsword would deal 1d10 damage instead.

I don't know about creativity, but it'd probably fit the mechanics of earlier editions better. I might also allow the opposite: to increase your AC by reducing your damage die.

>>52800284
needs Vorcha and maybe Yahg

>>52801094
Sounds good enough for me! Thanks.

>>52799058
>But that's the thing--in the M2M tables they're largely comparable to polearms (worse against AC9/8, better against AC3/2). But on the 20:1 scale they're arbitrarily stronger.
I'd have to reread the relevant sections of Chainmail to be sure, but if this is how it works, presumably Gygax though halberds confer an advantage on formations that other polearms don't.

You have to remember that the combat systems are meant for different purposes. The 1:20 rules are for tactical formation fighting, the M2M rules for single combat. The whole reason the M2M rules were included at all is that that sort of fight works differently, so you shouldn't be surprised that they don't give identical outcomes. When playing D&D with Chainmail rules, the 1:20 rules are just not relevant; you're not meant to use those for the dungeoncrawling. The only time 1:20 combat should come up is when you're fighting large wilderness forces; you might say "playing Chainmail with D&D characters".

In all other cases, stick to M2M and the fantastic combat tables, and disregard any discrepancies.

>>52799164
>I'm going to assume that 1e and up aren't very welcome here, it seems??
1e definitely belongs here, it's a great game and arguably the core OSR game. Just don't mention Dragonlance.

>>52801107
I don't really see how one could fit the Vorcha in since they are the ones who rapidly adjust to any environment they live in super fast. And aren't the Yahg only in space because some asshole are trying to 'uplift' them? I know it was a huge surprise that the Shadow Broker was one for that reason.

>>52794246
There's Rollplay Swan Song, if you like Stars Without Number.

>>52801182
well for Vorcha I'd just model them after how the playable ones in ME3's MP behave and play like(so ones raised for combat and engineering purposes), and I'll admit I was mostly suggesting the Yahg for completionist reasons

actually this is reminding me of one of those things I still want to make(and I've talked about in the past here in /osrg/), a Sci-Fi OSR game that has it's class system modeled after the one the Mass Effect franchise uses

>>52801241
I'd play it.

>>52800101
>How would you describe the small group of anons who think that 2e can/should be discussed here?
They're either OSR guys who think 2e is perfectly fine as long as you go into it knowing what changes in it will shit on functional play, or they're just guys who fell between the chairs of the OSR and 3.pf generals. (I get that it's a weird situation for them. /2egen/ seems like a ridiculous proposal when there's what looks from outside like a running "literally all the other old D&D" general.)

>>52801392
>knowing what changes in it will shit on functional play

Outside of bad advice in DMG, what changes in 2e will shit on functional play?

>>52795627
>>52800165
For the record, hexes tile as squares with every other column offset half a square's height vertically. This means converting square-grid maps to hexgrid maps directly causes some distortion, but there should literally not be any problems at all if you're using a random stocking method of some kind and just reapplying it.

>>52801413
Seconded, I want to know as well.

>>52801413
Notably making gold=XP an optional rule completely trashes the exploration/incentive loop, so if you don't know to use that rule (and WHY to use it) and disregard the shit advice in the DMG, the system breaks in a bunch of ways.

The game also deemphasizes the rigorous time- and light tracking, shits on dungeons in general like the other Anon said, and adds a pile of optional rules like NWPs which LOOK like added content but really just make the game more rigid. (IIRC the Riding proficiency makes PCs without it stone cold retarded about falling off horses, for instance, whereas in previous editions it's just assumed that an adventurer can ride a horse, come on, what the fuck.)

Heroic fray was brought up earlier, but I actually think it could be improved.

In 2e, it doubles your attacks against anything with 1-1 HD or less. Once you reach level 10, you can do the same against full 1 HD, then 2 HD on level 11, and so forth. But isn't this a pretty high level to gain this ability in? Wouldn't it be better to spread it out a little, get it earlier on but slower?

Say, the old version of getting to attack as often as you have levels starts to become better on level 4, so that could be a good point where heroic fray kicks in against full 1 HD foes, then add in another HD every 2 levels or so? The end result would be being able to use it on 9-HD guys on level 20, as opposed to 10 HD as in rules as written, but I think it'd scale better.

File: gongfarmer.png (329KB, 624x970px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 624x970px

>>52801566
>Notably making gold=XP an optional rule completely trashes the exploration/incentive loop, so if you don't know to use that rule (and WHY to use it) and disregard the shit advice in the DMG, the system breaks in a bunch of ways.

I never even found the whole gold=XP rule in 2e books at all, outside from thieves optionally gaining -2- XP per coin where other classes gain fuck-all, which is just all sorts of stupid.

>optional rules like NWPs which LOOK like added content but really just make the game more rigid

I still don't know how else you'd know what each party member knows to do and does not. Secondary skills, or previous professions like how DCC does it? Maybe a bit of pic related added to it.

>>52801566
>>52801602
>no gold=XP
Hold on - then how did people even gain levels? Afaik the xp requirements stay the same...

>>52801680
Grinding.

>>52801680
Arbitrary 'Quest' rewards.

>>52794824
This was nice to hear.
And now I'm 100% sure all the houseruled boosts I'm giving to casters are all well and good.

>>52801680
Monsters gave a bit more experience, most of it was of good roleplaying and quests and other such arbitrary shit.

My games keep dragging on low levels because I always forget to give those.

>>52801680
>then how did people even gain levels?
Very slowly.

>>52801602
>I still don't know how else you'd know what each party member knows to do and does not.
This is a strictly new-school attitude. I realize that refereeing can be intimidating, but just make it up, for Christ's sakes. Use your judgment.

Should an adventurer know a given thing? Well, would the protagonist not knowing it make a lot of sword & sorcery stories completely idiotic (example: riding, climbing a rope without losing one's grip like a tard)? Then yes, all the PCs know it. *Could* a character know a thing? Ask the player, and if he says yes, then he does, except he can't just do that over and over: that's his background now (example: blacksmithing). Again, use your judgment and common sense. Is a (ex-)scholar Fighting-Man reasonable? I think so, at least if he has a high INT. A scholar-tracker-armorer Fighting-Man? No, fuck off, Gros Bill.

In most cases, "profession" shit like that will never matter, or will only matter once. There's no reason to be too particular about it. And in contrast, with shit that matters *all the time* you should just take it for granted that the players can do it. You don't want to be one of those "roll to evacuate bowels" referees, right?

File: funny-drawing-LOTR-Legolas-riding-back-sign1.jpg (79KB, 540x776px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 540x776px

>>52802425
Riding is easy enough (gives big enough bonuses) that really anyone can ride just fine even without the NWP, just unable to do all the really weird trick riding bullshit. Unless you're a dwarf, which will just end up being funny and therefore worth it. To my knowledge there's no rope use NWP at all.

So I think you're rather overexaggerating the issue. Most of the common adventuring stuff is not counted as NWPs at all, so everyone can be reasonably assumed to be able to do them. It's just bonus stuff that'll give you ideas in background and roleplaying, instead of having to go in completely blind.

It's not a perfect system but I still think game's better with than without.

>>52802425
>>52802525
Also, most of the time we don't roll NWPs anyway: if you know the thing, you can usually do the thing just fine even without any rolls.

File: emwormy.jpg (651KB, 695x931px) Image search: [Google]

651KB, 695x931px

Why is it called "non-weapon proficiency" anyway? It implies both that there are weapon proficiencies and that they are more important that other proficiencies. Why not call them mundane or standard proficiencies instead?

>>52802673
Probably purely because weapon proficiencies came first and were mechanically more important. So they just lumped all the remaining random shit together and called it a day. It's not a perfect fix.

>>52800322
A Gith raiding party also got stranded and naturalized.

I like the ACKS proficiencies better. Each of them have some mechanical implications rather than being just flavor, and you get them more regularly and split into classes and generics much better.

When do you say "No?" I like to allow my players to be creative and such, but I feel the game too quickly devolves into "repeat this strategy that worked" over and over. It's easy to implement things that counter said strategy but then I find it turns into a cold war between the players and me the GM.

>>52803374
>but then I find it turns into a cold war between the players and me the GM.
It's one your bound to win. When their routines get too big, their travel time decreases. More wandering monsters, etc.

>>52803374
Examples?

>>52803437

Generally plans that get so big as to circumvent or trivialize entire dungeons, Causing huge cave-ins, smoking out the entire dungeon, One player hiring so many soldiers that I have to have ridiculous monsters or tons of them just to be a challenge. I don't pigeonhole them down one path or another, but if what I do create (For all our entertainment) gets essentially nuked, I don't see the point in even creating. And if I snip the obvious gamebreaking, certain players get whiny.

I'm still new to dming OSR-esque games.

>>52803535
>Causing huge cave-ins

Sturdy construction work, possibly magically altered. Can't be all caved in. Maybe some parts of it, but not all. Also then you'll need to dig all the treasure back up.

>smoking out the entire dungeon

Undead.

>One player hiring so many soldiers that I have to have ridiculous monsters or tons of them just to be a challenge

Most hirelings wouldn't be stupid enough to go down into dungeons. There's really weird magical bullshit in there. Only a man already mad - i.e. adventurers - would even think of descending to those depths.

You could convince maybe half a dozen morons to come along with the party, but surely no more than that.

>I'm still new to dming OSR-esque games.

That's all right: it takes a while to get these things down, especially if you're familiar with the new school. I hope I was a bit of help.

File: stargazer.png (51KB, 1185x320px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1185x320px

So why the switch to the silver standard in LotFP? Doesn't that break compatibility with other OSR games?

>>52803614
I think it's because the silver standard is regarded as a "better" approximation of real life medieval wealth, so it would add to the verisimilitude of the setting.

As for breaking compatibility..., simply converting gp to sp 1:1, with all that it implies for other conversions, is easy enough imo.

>>52801602
Spelljammer references it, and GP for magic items (like, more direct GP magic item values than usual), leading me to think it started during 1e.

To this day I know of no actual XP for GP blanket rule. Sure does not seem to be in the 2e DMG, under Experience anyway.

>>52803535
Oh boy.
>huge cave-ins
How? Even if they have gunpowder that should be difficult.
If that kills enemies, you aren't giving them any of that XP, right? Monster XP is only for encounters.
How do they rescue the treasure then?
What's stopping cave-monsters from seeking revenge?
What's stopping intelligent-monsters from doing the same on PCs?
>smoking out the entire dungeon
How? Also, most dungeons are supposed to have ventilation inside, natural or otherwise.
>One player hiring so many soldiers
What lever are they? I think that's supposed to be part of the normal game once you reach 10th level.
If not, where are they hiring all those?
Are you rolling morale for them? Remember that a single death can cause the whole lot to disband or stop fighting.
Why are they following orders instead of murdering the PC?
Also, mercenary-types don't go INTO dungeons. They wait outside. They will fight orc lairs and the like, but they ain't that crazy.

Talk about this with your players, you might want to say "we've been playing wrong, we should reset this campaign"

>if I snip the obvious gamebreaking, certain players get whiny
That sounds like a problematic player.

Also, there's gods, armies, *demographics* and laws. And druid counter-terrorist forces too. And Liches. But don't turn it into a power competition, that won't end up good, just make sure players understand there's an ecology there and that they start at the bottom of the pyramid.

>>52803535
In several editions, encounters are rated per character. So multiply encounters by number of soldiers brought along, resulting in absolutely unbelievable carnage, and give warnings several times that such numbers are creating a huge racket. Also, may want to make aoe foes a common threat.

Assume dungeon is too well ventilated to smoke out.

Assume dungeon is too well crafted to cave in without huge effort. If they insist on trying, have the entire population wake up and obliterate everyone.

>>52803778
>Also, mercenary-types don't go INTO dungeons. They wait outside.

I'd say let the PCs promote as many as they want to generic fighter henchmen, but they get 100 gp/mo and a full share of the treasure and experience, as with any henchmen.

>>52803535
>You could convince maybe half a dozen morons to come along with the party, but surely no more than that.
This is even a mechanical facet of the game. Check the table for the Charisma attribute.

>>52803868
Usually, henchmen and hirelings are classified differently.

>>52803765
>Sure does not seem to be in the 2e DMG, under Experience anyway.
I forget the page number, but it's a small square in the bottom left corner of the left page.
The opposite page has a picture of a draw bridge.

>>52803882
I don't want to get into the (inconsistent) name scheme for employees, but the distinction is "you can hire as many people as you'd like (mostly for going to war or running an estate), but you can only bring so many with you into the dungeon."

>>52803882
Exactly. The ones crazy enough to come down to the dungeon with you are the ones called "henchmen". The rest are just hirelings.

File: xp.png (283KB, 338x554px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 338x554px

>>52803765
>Sure does not seem to be in the 2e DMG, under Experience anyway.

Relevant part circled.

>>52803608
>>52803778
>>52803811

First, I appreciate the advice. You all have definitely given me some ideas and, more importantly, the right frame of mind to view such problems.

We were playing using Rules Cyclopedia, and I know I read that mercs don't enter dungeons, but but I felt like that a character who took the skills of leadership and had great charisma should be able to convince them to enter. However, the numbers got absurd once they actually got their hands on treasure.

I also feel like the moment I introduce magical protections against absurd amounts of explosives or enemies that negate their "next-big-plan," is the moment that it turns into as I described above, a war between dm and player.

>>52804037
>absurd amounts of explosives

Where'd they get all those explosives from anyway?

>>52804052

Usually through a combination of tons of burning oils or by bringing in player knowledge about history of explosives to gather up all the ingredients.

>>52804206
Burning oil doesn't blow up, and player knowledge can only go so far.

>>52803968
BLANKET rule, anon. As in, covering all the classes and not just rogue

>>52803535
Like others have said, a normal group of soldiers won't go down in a dungeon with you, and if they do then they want as big of a reward as you get. A guy hiring 20 soldiers to go down a cave with him would only get 1/21 of the loot.

>>52804037
RC is funky, lots of untested stuff- but use whatever makes you happy.
Do you allow move+attack the same round? If you don't how does it play?

>>52804206
Oils aren't explosive, they are actually kinda lame in action. They are thrown (or smeared) first, then lit by hurling a torch before it drips off (2 rounds, iirc). They are more a battlefield control thing, not grenades.

>player knowledge
That's out of the question. If your setting doesn't have sandals, the PCs can't make them even if they tie a piece of leather to their feet - it'll look more like very very low boots. It's your game, and if they accept dragons exist in it, they'll have to accept sandals don't.

>>52799381

2e is sort of OSR, but it's starting to inch away into railroad storyville. It has lots of small changes and "fixes," often of things that were intentional. Like we noticed dragon breath a couple of threads back -- originally it was a unique thing that made dragons stand out from all other monsters; dragons didn't roll dice for their breath. They just spat their current HP total at you, so if it had 80 HP, you could either eat 80 points damage or save and take 40, so you needed to bring its HP down fast if you wanted to be safe.

2e changed that so dragons roll a number of dice, just like every other creature with an area attack. Why? Because somebody apparently decided it didn't "make sense" for dragons to have their own thing.
That change doesn't make it stop being OSR, but it is kinda lame.

>>52804260
Well, as I said before, it only applies to rogues. I also said it was dumber than anything else they could've done.

File: 1455412778405.jpg (159KB, 729x1000px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 729x1000px

Does anyone know where I can find the Sorcerer class for 2e?

File: 220px-TSR2126_Arabian_Adventures.jpg (24KB, 220x279px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 220x279px

>>52804373
Al-Qadim.

>>52804037
Have the PCs encounter horrible scorch marks and melted flesh.

Have the PCs encounter zombies that look to be made from dead bodies burned horribly.

At that point it should be pretty obvious that enemy Fireballer types are there, so if they still bring explosives or mooks, start to unleash enemy casters with Fireball with no hesitation or mercy. Remember, they don't need line of sight to hit you with Fireball, and they can decloak from invisibility to do so.

So the PCs should get to savor not only all their hard earned explosives going up in smoke, but while their mercs are carrying them, quite possibly obliterating them as well.

>>52804260
c >>52803901
Might be in the PH, but I'm pretty sure its in the DMG.

>>52804358
>Why? Because somebody apparently decided it didn't "make sense" for dragons to have their own thing.

Nah, because Ed Greenwood (I think) and everyone got sick and tired of how weak the game's titular monsters were and decided to buff em. Seriously, 1e dragons are SAD.

Its honestly pretty bad design that even if a dragon manages to survive til his turn, his one attack before he dies is probably going to be nerfed.

>>52804458
Yeah, but fire breath wasn't by far the only way the dragons were buffed. They got more hit points, too, so if their breath was still tied to HP it would've gotten a good mighty boost just as well while still being unique.

>>52804479
I'm okay with dragons not being sad little chumps. Its in the name of the game.

A dragon is PROBABLY only going to get a chance to do one thing in combat -- ever. May as well make it count.

>>52804458
>>52804479
An adult red dragon's breath weapon does 12d10+6 damage, on average 72. He's got 17d8 hit points, which would average on 76,5! Almost the exact same, funny that.

It could've worked: not only would it be a bit of a unique spin on things, but it would've given the player characters some much-needed breathing room (pun not intended) when the dragon's breath grows weaker as they hurt it.

>>52804358
>They just spat their current HP total at you,
I thought they spat their full hp?

>>52804388
Eh how do I implement it to my Greyhawk campaign?

>>52804609
Rules-as-written lifted wholesale?

>>52804593

Nope, if you damaged a dragon, it weakened the breath weapon.

(I use dice, I like the dragon's breath weapon to be more of a desperation tactic than something that's only effective at the start of the battle or if the dragon gets surprise.)

File: dragon eater.jpg (358KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1000x1000px

>>52804515
>unique

Unique isn't a synonym for good. When its nerfing the titular creature of the game to grant an additional advantage to the player characters who need it the least, it strikes me as particularly bad.

There are so many ways they can reduce the damage. They can encircle it. Many have line breaths, which are often only going to hit one person. They get a breath save. A saving throw almost reserved for them seems unique enough, ignoring the fact that dragons are loaded with other features, and presumably non-magic resistable AoE damage is pretty unusual as well. Then there's possibly cover, scrolls of protection from dragon's breath, and don't forget, spells like Resist Fire and Fire Shield, which not only makes it so their breath weapon is further reduced, but the dragon can barely do anything to harm you without dying in the process.

Not to mention that in every way, these are the PCs that least deserve sympathy or mercy. The game already disproportionately favors high level PCs as far as foes go; poisoners, for example, tend to be rarer and rarer (and what poisoners exist tend to be weaker), vampires as opposed to wights can be cockblocked by a a cross, and I'm not even remotely sure how fiends are supposed to work -- do they use their plentiful Symbol of X 100 times underneath a rug (or worse, on a bouncy ball) to obliterate the PCs, or do they just discharge it as a one time attack? There's pretty much just that and psionic attacks. 1e MM2 is when shit actually gets real as far as most mid and late game foes.

At low levels, player death just plain happens. At high levels, actually killing PCs that didn't bother with prep time with, say, a maxed, breath = HP red dragon is actually fucking difficult without resorting to stupid shit like it hiding behind an illusionary wall or having been hit with Invis. However the hell its going to work, the PCs are probably going to somewhat go first and its gonna lose too many HP to be viable.

>>52804620
Yeah but it has some wind/sand crap from Al-whatever you call it was wondering if there was a Dragon magazine out there with the class fully laid out.

>>52804865
Just change the spell list, ya dingus.

>>52800284
Interesting. Might look into Machinations now, see how it works out and such.

>>52804865
>not wanting wind/sand magic inn your game
Next you'll tell me you don't use psionics either.

>>52805330
>muh psychic cacti
>muh water oligarchy
>muh gypsy elves
>muh dying multiverse
>>>/out/

>>52803748
>As for breaking compatibility..., simply converting gp to sp 1:1, with all that it implies for other conversions, is easy enough imo.

Then it has broken compatibility (not that D&D has a consistent or sensible economy, but still).

In the same adventure, the wizard has gone from offering the party a 100 gp reward (for leaving) to 100 sp. That factor of ten makes all the difference, since you could find that much gold on some goblins.

I'm guessing LotFP equipment is sold in sp and is considerably cheaper, but I don't understnad why Raggi couldn't bite the bullet and stick with gp. Maybe gold is just worth less in fantasy worlds and that's why it's the standard? It seems really arbitrary to divide everything by ten for your modules/system.

>>52805661
>That factor of ten makes all the difference, since you could find that much gold on some goblins.

But then the goblins too offer the same amount of silver instead. Right?

>>52805680
This is where it gets confusing because it isn't 1:1. Some 10 gp china becomes 50 sp (5 gp) china, some 50 gp wine becomes 100 sp (10 gp) wine, and a 100 gp reward becomes a 100 sp reward (10 gp).

Maybe Raggi rejiggered the whole economy around the silver piece standard, but it screws over the rough compatibility of OSR. If LotFP swords are 10 sp instead of 10 gp, then all you have to do is play one non-LotFP module and suddenly a gemstone is worth a hundred swords instead of ten.

I guess the solution is to convert LotFP values to non-LotFP values and vice versa depending on the module, but then I don't get why he didn't just stick with the decades-old standard. And are we going to see two separate values for treasure like how some modules handle armor class? "This necklace is worth 100 gp (100 sp or 1000 sp if you're playing LotFP, at the whim of the GM)."

>>52805793
>This is where it gets confusing because it isn't 1:1.
Treasure is fairly arbitrary. Pretend he adjusted treasure distribution separately *then* converted to the silver standard.

I do silver standard by just ditching the gold pieces or converting them to silver - i.e. multiplying by ten. So I keep the usual value silver has, instead of making it the new gold, and keep actual gold coins around but very rare.

It usually just means the party needs to carry a lot more coins around, but given that all treasure should be a little hard to get back home so it's worth all its experience, I don't see this as a bad thing.

>>52805834
The problem is that it works either within LotFP or within classic systems, but now they're no longer compatible. As arbitrary as treasure might be, you switch between two systems and now it's either worth 1/10th as much or 10x as much. All he had to do was keep things as they were, maybe say a gold ring is "worth 500 sp" instead of "worth 50 gp".

My guess is that this was part of Raggi's effort to make LotFP its own role-playing system rather than another retroclone (like how he plans to remove dwarfs and elves and make it more historical). Which is a shame because it's a good system and the modules are great.

>>52806168

You're making a mountain out of a molehill. If a TSR module says the treasure is worth 100gp, it's 100sp. All you have to do for compatibility is mentally replace gp with sp whenever you encounter it in a non-LotFP module.

>>52803374
>I find it turns into a cold war between the players and me the GM.
That's where ear seekers and the Tomb of Horrors came from!

>It is common for player
characters to attack first, parley afterwards. It is recommended that you devise
encounters which penalize such action so as to encourage parleying attempts
— which will usually be fruitless, of course!
-DMG

wut

>>52806793
A great example of Gygaxian prose, anon!

>>52806835
I'm honetly clueless about wtf he meant.
This comes right after a perfectly fine and balanced reaction table (unlike black box/RC's, that is weighted towards hostility).

How do limited torches and light matter anything when almost literally every race, barring humans, gets to have infravision?

>>52806793
Translation: Murderhobos will find a way.
Which is funny, because one of my groups is so damned careful it's almost scary. It's been like four months since they tried to resolve something with combat.

>>52807064
Because it's hard to see those cold, damp dungeon walls with just infravision.

>>52807064
Infravision only lets you see things that are warm. Not very useful if you're fighting undead, for instance.

Gimme some Dark-Soulsy gods in a D&D format - spell lists are optional but that would be AMAZING.

>>52807020
>Parley rarely works, but almost never works as a follow-up to attacking out of the blue.
>>52807064
Because the people at TSR though infrared light was cool, but didn't know how radiation actually works.
Despite anything intuitive, the folks at TSR expected players would assume infravsiion was useless in dungeons.

>>52807240
>though infrared light was cool,
*thought infrared light *sounded cool

>>52807240
>Parley rarely works, but almost never works as a follow-up to attacking out of the blue.
Ahh makes sense. I thought it was one of those passive-aggressive things. Make PCs parley first, but then make enemies ignore said parley attempts, punish this then punish that, etc etc

>>52805508
No idea why that's bad, although Dark Sun is admittedly not that well fleshed out aside from the wasteland elements. I like to marry the campy sci fi psychic wasteland of Dark Sun to the campy sci fi of dungeon flora and fauna.

>>52805661
do you really have a hard time understanding that if a Dark Sun adventure gives ceramic pieces, and a Dragonlance adventure gives steel pieces, and a Gurofag adventure gives silver pieces, these all translate to gold? do you go crazy and lose your mind if someone says "crown pieces" or "gil" or whatever?

>>52803778
>huge cave-ins
>How?
This. Without explosives (especially safe for mining use) it takes a team of professional miners about a year to dig three feet through granite or any other hard rock. Granted, that almost certainly means the dungeons themselves are cut in limestone or some other soft rock, but nevertheless the timescales are definitely long as shit and take massive manpower. Where are they getting the workers? Where's the food? How are their supply lines? What about bandits raiding the provision trains? Are the dungeon people just going to sit there and let some assholes cave their homes in on them?

It's some name-level shit to pull that off, not something a bunch of first-level dips who can barely buy decent armor can do on their own.

>>52806793
>>52807020
I think he meant that you will often want to have monsters attack out of hand, but if 1 in 10 encounters allow the random encounter table, then PCs will be hesitant to kill em all from surprise.

>>52807495
Has anyone done the maths to see how dungeon much a typical wizard of mid-high level can make for basically free?

>>52801602
>>52803765
>>52804450
It's in there. In the original version (TSR2100) it's got its own blue box, but the revised version (2160) just put it as a normal paragraph at the end of a page.

>>52804206
>tons of burning oils
Lamp oil is shit like *olive oil*, Anon, not gasoline. Try to set some olive oil on fire and see how hard it explodes.

Lamp oils were actually chosen on the basis of slow burning and low smoke grade, and the reason that stone oil (= petroleum) wasn't used in ancient times despite being known is that it burned too quickly and with a horrid, voluminous black smoke. It was considered effectively worthless.

>>52807545
>Lamp oil is shit like *olive oil*, Anon

In our world, medieval lamp oil was generally olive oil, but this is clearly not the case in the D&D universe, as that stuff is very flammable. Unless the high magic field makes olive oil burn readily without a wick, perhaps?

>>52807531
Can you give me a snippet of the phrase so I can search for it?

>>52806405
I'm really not because it varies even within those modules, look at the examples I posted.

The new version of Death Frost Doom doesn't seem to use the silver standard whereas the new version of Tower of the Stargazer does. Or who knows, maybe they both do. A mention in the introduction would be nice.

I'm not mad, I just want them to say, "Look, this is is going by LotFP standards," in the same way that -1 AC might be 20 AC in another system.

>>52806793
>You should create some encounters such that if PCs just attack it will be a shit plan and they'll regret it afterward and be inclined to parley instead, but of course not all parleying will succeed, far from it

I assume the encounters which penalize attacking would be stuff like "oh, these guys were actually fleeing the real villain and now we killed them for him" and "shit, those guys could've traded with us but now we've made enemies of their whole clan instead".

Which AD&D DMG method for stat generation do you like the most?

>>52807851
4d6k3
Mostly since ability scores provide somewhat-significant benefits in 1e. In BX I'd probably be fine with 3d6.

>>52807851
3d6 in order

>>52807580
That only happens in AD&D, Basic and friends have proper oil.

>>52807851
3d6 in order. Higher stats do provide tangible benefits in AD&D, but not so much that you couldn't absolutely go without.

>>52807945
>That only happens in AD&D, Basic and friends have proper oil.

Nope, Moldvay Basic says otherwise. A flask of oil costs 2gp (B12) and can either fuel a lantern for 24 turns (B21), or be thrown as a missile weapon and lit, doing 1d8 damage for 2 rounds if thrown on a creature before dripping off, or will burn in a pool on the floor for 1 turn. (B26)

File: Amano_FF1_Sabertooth.gif (31KB, 603x395px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 603x395px

>>52801143
I'll admit, another problem I was having was that I thought the 1:20 system seemed like a load of fun as the "normal" combat system. But I've been warming up to M2M, so whatever.

My current plan is to just cut loose and use whatever system makes sense at the time--if I have access to like four different combat systems, why NOT use them all (Monks, Assassins, and to a lesser extent Thieves make Alternative mandatory, etc.)?

And I'm gonna incorporate the Polearm supplement to Chainmail from The Strategic Review. Because I hate myself.

>>52808068
It's likely whale oil.

>>52807629
The phrase is
>As an option, the DM can award XP for the cash value of non-magical treasures. One XP can be given per gold piece found. However, overuse of this option can increase the tendency to give out too much treasure in the campaign.
Bottom of the left column on p69 in the revised black-cover version. Just above the skeleton in the cage.

I'm working on a setting that's largely ignorant of its deities. The gods are there, they just prefer to keep to themselves.
One of my PCs wants to play a cleric, how should I proceed with this? It seems like a super cool concept to play as Moses with a mace. Should I just let him "make up" a god? How should I handle cleric spells?

>>52808791
The setting's ignorant of its gods, but that doesn't mean they couldn't have the occasional prophet.

Tell him of some of the gods and let him choose. Or if you've never actually made any of them up yourself, you might as well let him make something up then.

>>52807218
Based on D&D power levels or Dark Souls power levels?

Because Gwynn would be almost omnipotent (greater god) as a D&D god but in DaS he's either barely divine (demi-god) or just a high-HD monster.

>>52808838
You could just decide Dark Souls is a pretty low-divine setting and all gods in it, even the major ones, are demipowers at best.

>>52808838
>implying he wasn't both in DaS

The Gwynn you fight is a decrepit shadow of his former self

That sort of decay is kinda the entire point of the setting

If I have the 2000 gp required to level up, what then do I spend it on?

>>52808904
Ale, whores, and training or research.

>>52793464
It depends on desired pacing (approximately how many sessions you want to spend on an adventure). I've done solo side games with one or two players and massive games with as many as 14 players.The easiest group size to work with and still keep a good pace is 3-6 players. this allows or a variety of character types and is still manageable.

>>52808838
It's not D&D/DS if you can't kill them.

So if I want to play an OSR game where I can go from "okay mortal" to "god fightin guy" what game/s would be good for that? I have only minor knowledge of the majority of OSR games but i'm kind of getting into the idea of them after giving AD&D a read. Though i'm not sure how I feel about AD&D itself. THAC0 is pretty disgusting looking to try and utilize.

>>52809290
AD&D probably has the best power level for it. You start out as pretty all right, not too powerful but capable of handling yourself, and only grow stronger from there.

I guess THAC0 is a bit unintuitive, but it's still better than the attack matrices that just about all other OSR systems have.

File: CqEsGXmWEAEASb9.jpg (60KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 604x453px

>be a raging weeaboo
>have to resist drafting up (more) player races for AD&D inspired by Monster Girl Encyclopedia
Put me down already

>>52809332
Huh. Well okay then, I guess i'll look into giving it a shot. I guess its totally possible that it isn't too bad after some practice. I just know it reads really confusing.

If I want to look into AD&D more should I do 1e or 2e? whats the difference (generally speaking i suppose) and what are the "must read" books?

Magic Resistance has always irked me as it worked in AD&D. Why is there no chance of accidentally resisting a healing spell or a buff, when you so aptly resisted a fireball a moment earlier? Turning it on and off always seemed like a lame excuse to me.

>>52809400
2e is more refined and makes better sense, with the occasional mechanical improvement, but 1e has much better mindset and philosophy to it. 2e's Dungeon Master's Guide is pretty worthless. It also ditched assassins and half-orcs from 1e, which you might miss, but they're easy enough to add back.

Go with 2e's rules, 1e's DMG.

>>52809400
2e is more clearly written, but the 1e DMG is gold.

>>52803535
>One player hiring so many soldiers that I have to have ridiculous monsters or tons of them just to be a challenge.
The more hirelings you bring, the more you have to divide the loot at the end of the dungeon.
It could very well not be worth it after a certain number arrive. Also? Hirelings will NOT walk in front of the party and just tank all the instant-death traps. A hireling would tell you to fuck off if you tell him to walk in front of the party's fighter.
Henchmen would, but not hirelings.

>>52809474
>>52809564

Thanks for the heads up anons. Get ready for a ton of noob questions as I just kind of skin my way through the books initially. First: what are the deals with kits? are they like a "special" type of a class you can play?

>>52808904
Armor, weapons, a horse, armor for your horse, or buy gems for easy transport of wealth.

>>52804206
Greek fire is not the same as lantern oil.

>>52809637
>First: what are the deals with kits? are they like a "special" type of a class you can play?

If you've played Pathfinder, you'll know about character archetypes. Kits are like that.

If you haven't played Pathfinder, then I guess kits just change bits of the basic class to something slightly different. For instance, you've got the myrmidon kit for fighter, that gets an extra weapon specialization but has to swear fealty to some lord; or the assassin kit for thief that knows his shit around poisons and herbs but gets less thief skills.

>>52809687

The rules are the rules. It may not be realistic, but it definitely adds a nice tactical wrinkle, allowing for some measure of battlefield control and a way to cover your flight.

Okay, I really hope this isn't off topic... does anyone here remember Mystara? I'm trying to add an article on Phanatons, a race of gliding sapient racoon-monkeys native to that setting, on 1d4chan, and I need some help from a real Mystaran expert.

I know that Phanatons first appeared as a neutral monster race in the Mystara module X1: Isle of Dread. But, did they ever appear as a playable race in 1st or 2nd edition?

If yes, where did they show up? I know their 3.5 stats are in Dragon Magazine #351, but I can't find any references to them outside of that book when I google for them.

>>52809637
>>52809710
There are two points to add.

First, even 2e publications advise that you go with an all-or-nothing approach with kits - either all your PCs have one or none do. This is for balance reasons.

Second, kits can be as minor as giving your PC a funny hat (cf Amazon), as radical as giving you an ability that you'd never have (cf. the Blindfigher[?] from Complete Gladiator's Handbook), or change play and progression patterns (cf. Wokani).

>>52809916
>First, even 2e publications advise that you go with an all-or-nothing approach with kits - either all your PCs have one or none do. This is for balance reasons.

Can you expand on this? Like you yourself say, plenty of kits are extremely minor - and I myself have never seen any kind of trouble with some players picking kits and others not. I've got an academician wizard, pathfinder ranger, and brute barbarian in the same game with a perfectly normal fighter, cleric, and fighter/thief, and they get along fine.

If some kits are bad enough to break the balance, why not just forbid those kits?

>>52809916
Plus you have ones that radically change social status and wealth such as Noble Warrior and Patrician

>>52809845

You're in the right thread, this is kinda Basic D&D central, and Mystara was the main setting for Basic. We've got some Mystara fans who come through here pretty regularly, somebody ought to know more about them.

In the meantime, this site purports to have a complete list of Basic D&D classes:
http://pandius.com/becmicls.html

It looks like there's a Phanaton class for Basic, in Dragon Magazine, though it doesn't list the issue number.

>>52809845
>But, did they ever appear as a playable race in 1st or 2nd edition?

If they were statted for AD&D they'd be in one of the AD&D 2e splats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystara#Advanced_Dungeons_.26_Dragons_Mystara

>>52809962
You could do that, sure.

>>52810011
That too.

What's a good amount of treasure to give for an encounter or a quest? Are there any good guidelines anywhere out there, or should I just throw all caution to the wind and use full treasure tables regardless of the power or challenge of the encounter itself?

File: stepan-alekseev-01 (2).jpg (165KB, 1024x812px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1024x812px

>>52810342
>What's a good amount of treasure to give for an encounter or a quest?

You need to be more specific. The answer is "an amount that makes sense", but what that amount is varies a lot based on system, setting, game tone, design goals, and encounter design. There are no general solutions.

Alternatively d10^d6 / d4 gold pieces.

>>52810395
>system

AD&D 2e.

>setting

Wilderlands of High Fantasy.

>game tone

Sword & Sorcery, generally on the more cheerful bent.

>design goals, and encounter design

Not a clue, really. I just throw at them the sort of probably (barring good diplomacy) antagonistic forces that exist around the place and that they could possibly deal with on their level.

File: 15726947_1314669258582052_1424288459270327588_n.jpg (21KB, 720x374px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 720x374px

>>52810683
>Not a clue, really.

Ok, do you want to think about those?

Given the choice, would you prefer to roll on a table to generate a dungeon or encounter, or would you prefer to design it yourself?

Do you see yourself as a referee or as a storytelling assistant?

>>52810730
I'd rather design it myself.

More a referee. If this were about storytelling, I'd run something less OSR.

File: 26_outoftheabyss-final-lowquality.jpg (3MB, 5070x6240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5070x6240px

>>52810753
Ah, but see, those are slightly incompatible goals. If you're the referee, but you're also setting the difficulty and nature of the encounters, you're going to be biased in some way. Just the nature of the rules.

Anyway, if you want to be the refree, and avoid "unfairness", go by the full treasure table, with a modifier based on the average HD of the monsters encountered. Your goals in this scenario are limited. Your only goal is to ensure that the distribution of loot is "fair" and "balanced". As a referee, the players have an equal say in what that means, with reference to the rules.

But if you want to be a designer, there are other effects to consider. What does the treasure allow the party to do? How does it fit into the overall structure of the game? Does it unbalance the party, or emphasize an unimportant element of the game? Essentially, "Why is this treasure here, what is it going to do to the party, and why is any of this important?"

>>52808605
Don't do it Anon, you have so much to live for!

>>52808838
>almost omnipotent (greater god) as a D&D god
He'd be level 15, tops. Maybe even 9HD.

File: purcellWormRoom.jpg (32KB, 450x319px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 450x319px

>>52808904
W U N D E R
U
N
D
E
R

K A M M E R
A
M
M
E
R

>>52809394

You should look up Engines & Empires. It's basically OSR "Weebs & Waifus".

>>52809394
Switch to B/X.
Monster Girls work better under race-as-class.

>>52810683
>Not a clue, really. I just throw at them the sort of probably (barring good diplomacy) antagonistic forces that exist around the place and that they could possibly deal with on their level.
In that case just use the treasure tables as written. That shit's what they're there for.

File: 1487993215560.png (11KB, 536x207px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 536x207px

>>52809394
Gotta channel your kinks productively, anon. Nobody's going to read your blatant fetish nonsense, but some people might use your secret or subtle or just really well written slightly fetishy nonsense.

So... got at it. But if you post an anime reaction image, god help you.

File: 1462850720996.png (371KB, 565x600px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 565x600px

>>52810967
It's less of a fetish thing, it's more that I like the concept of snake-people or spider-people PCs. I feel like contrary to most OSR players I like having the options of lots of weird races. But of course I'm gonna leave all the weird fetish stuff out, I'm not really into that kind of game.

is beyond the wall and other adventures good?

File: Magic ignorant skeleton.png (69KB, 794x527px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 794x527px

>>52811032
Son, if you're familiar enough with whatever a Monstergirl Encyclopedia is to casually bring it up, then I've got news for you regarding your motivations.

There's no chaste handholding here.

>>52809441
>Why is there no chance of accidentally resisting a healing spell or a buff,
There is.
>Turning it on and off always seemed like a lame excuse to me.
Yes, and B/X thieves can wear any armor as long as they don't use thief abilities. /s
Find one mention in the rules of players turning off their magic resistance.

File: cuttlefinch.jpg (66KB, 800x902px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 800x902px

>>52810967