Thread 96297535

Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to TSR-era D&D, derived systems, and compatible content.

Broadly, OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons as played in the game's first decade — less emphasis on linear adventures and overarching meta-plots and a greater emphasis on player agency.

If you are new to the OSR, welcome! Ask us whatever you're curious about: we'll be happy to help you get started.

>Troves, Resources, Blogs, etc:
http://pastebin.com/9fzM6128

>Need a starter dungeon? Here's a curated collection:
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/94994969/#95006768

>Previous thread:
>>96255749

>Thread Question
What was the first dungeon you've ever played in or DM'ed?

>What's an OSR?
>Don't know how to get started?
>The friendly n00b guide can be found here: https://pastebin.com/EVvt6P0B until further notice.

Want to contribute to the thread but don't know where to start? Use this table.
>1. Make a spell
>2. Make a monster
>3. Make a dungeon special
>4. Make a wilderness location
>5. Make an urban set piece
>6. Make a magic item
>7. Make a class, race, or race-as-class
>8. Make a 4-10 room lair.
>9. Make a trap
>10. Roll 2D10 and combine

>>96297723
Add it to the list of reasons we recommend B/X over BECMI.

>>96297798
But we don't? OSR has always pushed BECMI and the RC as well as 2e over "kiddie D&D" BX

>>96297817
>fell for it again award
Memelords may be loud but they aren't the arbiter of OSR any more than the nuSR kiddies are.

again: I'm planning on doing a "loose" feudal game and Im wondering if anyone has ever written a Pendragon-esque "winter phase" checklist for their games. I'm thinking like a downtime phase. anyone got anything like htat

>>96297929
For those of us who haven't played Pendragon (probably the vast majority), can you better explain what a winter phase is? Downtime is covered all the time in OSR stuff, so presumably you want something different than just that alone.

>>96297929
Actually yes! Unfortunately I wrote it in Spanish, let me run it through Google Translate (tables will be fucked tho):

WINTER PHASE

1. Aging

Increase your knight's age by 1, as well as that of his squire and important members of his family and domain. If your knight has reached 50 years of age, reduce -1 to his Strength and -1 to his Constitution, and add +1 to his Intelligence and +1 to his Wisdom. If your knight reaches 65 years of age, reduce -2 to his Strength, -2 to his Dexterity, and -1 to his Constitution, and add +1 to his Wisdom.

2. Survival

Roll 1d20 for each member of your family or domain. The Women table applies only to married women other than the knight's wife, regardless of whether they are human, elf, or troll.

3. Stable

Roll 1d20 for each mount you own. On a roll of 1-2, it dies or is crippled; on a roll above 2, it is still alive and well. A -1 modifier is applied for each year the mount is older than 7 years.

4. Family

Roll 1d20 for each wife and/or lover with whom there has been a chance of pregnancy this year.

C'mon, when is the OSE starter set coming out already? I want it.

>>96298208
>OSE starter set
What is promised to be in that set?

>>96298208
What do you want it for?

I anticipate Norman writing bullshit in his Referee guidance section.

>>96297798
Inexperienced DM detected.

>>96297957

It was basically >>96298155

The basic idea is that in my campaign you will have very little time to "adventure" in between duties, so there will be four sessions and then the year ends

>>96298575
So basically 1:13 time. Just take the downtime procedures from the DMG and/or ACKS and apply them.

>>96297510
I've met the two plotting guys for a downtime session before we have our adventure session later this week. I've explained the situation and they still don't want to have multiple characters. They used the time to do all sorts of things such as running a brothel and starting a hemp plantation. While accepting the premise to be cooperative during adventure sessions, they want to run their underground businesses secretly. Since they also plan on using Demons to further their hidden goals, we've agreed that their alignment changes to chaotic at this point. We'll see how this course of action is turning out when the rest of the group notices something. I feel like it could escalate quickly and mess up the campaign in a bad way but it would also be kinda hilarious.

>>96298600
Oh god no. Some people actually care about their time, both in regards to their character's and their own personal time.

alright tg, I need help with some names and ideas for this map. so the coloured in section of the map is what the players will see for the first couple sessions until they decide to explore further. for future games, I'd like to have some names and ideas for the future towns and their surroundings.
going for an anglo-saxon feel for names and themes. suggestions for towns already on the map are welcome as well, not sold on Rynnport for example.
the three towns are in a loose alliance of Earldoms trying to keep themselves afloat.
the High King of the whole continent used to rule from the black city but bad shit went down and now everythings collapsed. hes still there, hes just an interdimensional horror now.

>>96297929
An anon from here made this a while ago. Its a winter season minigame add on. A bit more granular than I like but still neat. Could probably find salvageable inspiration there.

>>96297535 (OP)
>TQ
Zanzer's.

>>96302013

This is a bit different that I what I am working on. Most of what I'm working on is more "weird stuff happens you can talk about every four sessions. Maybe you died, maybe you got [redacted] by a faerie monarch. Maybe you're a changeling now. Perhaps you got a horrible injury from a joust. Anyway, the maze is there and it's still a maze."

The general idea for the campaign is at least one of you is a liege lord of a tiny fief. You'll have clearly defined villagers and staff(there will be tables for this) for your house, and that includes hirelings, who will just be your men-at-arms, so you can't just throw their lives away. You'll get to start with nice stuff but the downside is that your earnings technically belong to your liege lord. The upside is one of you doesn't really need to wonder where their next meal comes from. You'll need to make sure you have enough men and supplies for the winter, heirs for when you age out, all of that shit. It's a weird bolt-on system for Dragonslayer RPG or maybe OSRIC 3 it will depend on how OSRIC 3 looks. We'll see.

I was asked to run a 8 hour long one-shot, what do you think is the appropriate size for a dungeon/adventure? The players have only played 5e up to this point

>>96303198
>Most of what I'm working on is more "weird stuff happens you can talk about every four sessions. Maybe you died, maybe you got [redacted] by a faerie monarch. Maybe you're a changeling now. Perhaps you got a horrible injury from a joust
Yeah that sounds mostly like trash.
its just quirky lolrandom ideas that invalidate player action. The goal of seasonal off time events is to give players more to do, not to suddenly kill their character because Titania had a moody.

>>96297535 (OP)
>The roll a random osr thing table was removed
lolwut

>>96303386
Honestly Keep on the Borderlands if you want that classic experience. B4 would also work and be a bit stranger.
The list of intro pdfs isn't easy to post here but there's a few large ones on it. I liked running Curse of Cragebridge but it needed a bit of work.
I've heard good things about The Evils of Ilmire but haven't run it.
Through Ultan's Door is a solid large strange exploration area.
Tomb Raiders on the Crystal Frontier is another great intro module that they might be able to get good gameplay out of in 8 hours. Might have more of a flashy vibe for newcommers.
The Isle is osr-adjacent or whatever but if you like em more artsy and doing more of your own fiddling to make it work its neat.

>>96303472

okay, well, we'll see how the final product is considering it's meant to be an advanced carousing table.

Are there dual wielding rules in AD&D1e (NOT UA)?
I am sure there is something in BECMI but not B/X so I was wondering if there is anything in the "core" period

>>96304200
Yes, in then DMG. Main weapon attacks with -2 penalty, secondary weapon (only dagger or hand axe) attacks with -4. This is modified by DEX.

Not sure about BECMI or B/X, but I use the +1 to attack houserule when dual-wielding.

>>96304266
I find this interesting, it's more generous that what I would do.
Maybe my math is wrong, but it seems to me that this makes 2-handed weapons obsolete?

>>96304273
I give two-handed weapons a STR bonus x2 on damage. Another houserule I didn't think through all that much but it's still fun tho.

>>96300248
Little sad development but one of my players basically turned his back on adventuring due to disliking certain people in he group. He only wants to continue playing his character alone or with the people he doesn't dislike. I'm not sure if I can coherently run him parallel without entering immediate adversarial play because his influence is shaping the very town and area the party is adventuring in. In the long run of course I want to upgrade our B/X+ campaign into full scale AD&D but at the moment I'm not sure if I can do justice to the campaign as we're a newfag group with variable attendance heading to session 15

Did anyone get to look at Nebulith? Is it suitable for low level adventures?

>>96304273
>Maybe my math is wrong, but it seems to me that this makes 2-handed weapons obsolete?
Correct, your math is wrong.

>>96304796
Modified by dexterity the -2 on both sides is way better than the two-handed bonus

>>96304604
1:1 time, chaos group vs law group, now that’s TRVESR. he can be the new bbeg. dont forget to make them do a mass combat wargaming session

>>96304399
I would add something but perhaps is better to be more conservative with TWF

>>96304828
It -2/-4, not -2.

Whether it's better or worse depends on the attacker's dexterity and the target's AC, HP, size, and weapon length. As well as its base AC if you're using the weapon vs armour adjustments. Even with 18 dexterity there's a bunch of situations in which a two-handed sword is much better than longsword+dagger or longsword+battle axe.

>>96305070
>much better than longsword+dagger or longsword+battle axe.
I meant HAND axe, of course.

>>96305070
>It -2/-4, not -2.
If anyone tries this, will have a +1 or +2 dex.
When that happens, THanders are outdamaged barring against enemies which one shouldn't absolutely fight if that's the case.

Which is not the end of the world nor is balance something so important here, but it's something so know.

>>96301525
Ideas (These are just off the top of my head,):
>Hogfox, A cursed town that no one even talks about. All the inhabitants have mutated or animal-like features and are incestuous degenerates. Beneath the town is a tunnel network connecting all the houses. The curse stems from a witch that they drowned in their well a half-century ago. The witch's ghost still wanders the tunnels and laying her to rest can relieve the curse
>Fort Erregard, a fortress that contains a brutal factory where hobgoblins toil at making arms for a secret military campaign. Everything is goblin-powered! They have goblins on hamster-wheels, turning cranks, and activating levers in order to keep the place functioning. They are led by a particularly nasty hobgoblin that calls herself "The Duchess of Wounds" and she beats the shit out of any goblin that stops working.
>Lake Iddle-Mire, a swampy place where an ancient city once stood. The locals fish here, but some have made a living dredging up old baubles, items, and machinery from the lake's bed. Nobody knows that beneath the lake is actually a cave containing an air pocket where life has flourished since the times of the fallen city. It is full of frog people that live off of lichen and slugs.
>Kalwats, (pronounced "Call-Vats",) sits on Lake Iddle-Mire and has a notably large community of Hobbits. Tall-folk who visit the wrong parts of town are sometimes harassed by the hobbit gangs to pay an unofficial "Kneecap Tax" or fear having their legs broken. The town sort of symbolizes the more industrious nature of halflings and their relationship to the other races. There is a particularly well known shop here that sells top-quality adventuring gear, as many consider it the last stop before entering true wilderness.
>The Tower of The Great Sorcerer Umpkin, A great tower that is the home and laboratory of a powerful sorcerer named "Umpkin" (Who no one has seen in quite some time.) Disturbingly, the tower's security system has been reset

Does anyone have the /osrg/ handbook introducing OSR? I can't find it

>>96304604
Had a similar issue come up recently in my game. Honestly, it's kind of frustrating. I've asked /osrg/ for help on the matter in the past and they were actually really helpful.

Love it

Is he fake OSR?

>>96305241
I used to hate the guy, but his recent content has been pretty good. Recently I started going back and watching his older videos, and while I don't agree with some of the things he's said regarding the OSR, I have gotten some benefit out of his product reviews.

Also BFRPG IS OSR. :)

>>96305241
His reviews are just page-throughs and his "OSR" games are of the "rulings not rules lol cut everything, just buy a PHB, DMG, and MM to fill in the gaps and also download an understanding of the playstyle from the aether" style that has turned the modern OSR into largely slop. The most I can give them is Knave works well as something for very young children of the type that might try to eat a copy of B/X.

My interest in labelling things true or false OSR is non-existent when you can level actual critiques instead.

>>96305176
>THanders are outdamaged
Not against large creatures: 3d6 vs 1d12+1d4. Against medium creatures:

1. Hitting is better than not hitting (to-hit penalty),

2. Hitting first is better than hitting second: On the charge round / the first melee round after charging initiative is not rolled, attacks go in order of weapon length, and the 2H sword almost always goes first.

3. If you're using weapon vs AC modifiers, 2H swords get much better bonuses to hit, which compounds with (1).

4. With 2H swords and polearms, the greater reach allows to do better area control to protect casters, as well as possibly attacking from the second line.

>>96305207
Try here:
https://www.sendspace.com/file/yf2zdc

>>96305241
I used to hate the guy. I still do.

>>96305316
I can agree with most of that, albeit
>1. Hitting is better than not hitting (to-hit penalty)
That can make sense if the to-hit is slightly better. but if you use a d8 and a d4 vs a d10 (say) you will want the 2 hit attempts.

I think you just demonstrated that in AD&D there is enough granularity for TWF rules but they should never-fucking-ever be used for B/X derivatives.

At least BECMI forced reductions in Weapon Mastery usage. You can love or hate BECMI or WM but at least there was a mechanical choice to make.

>>96305344
BECMI Weapon Mastery is crap.

>>96304855
>>96305208
I'll have to study the newbguide approved adversarial play and wargaming rules. Certainly something I am intrigued by later down the road but right now I'm still trying to master B/X with gradual AD&D additions as well as keeping up the weekly schedule for the whole group.

>>96305374
There's no hurry, take it one step at a time as you're comfortable and as need arises, but don't be scared either: Specifically, the figure scaling rules for mass combat detailed in the guide are very easy to use.

>>96305371
Which was not the point of the post.
Genuine knee-jerk here anon.

>>96305421
>>96304855
The hard question for me right now is how I would let the guy who doesn't want to stay with the whole group play his chaotic adversary during a session he's not attending 8asvw

>>96305462
If you have time, sure! Perhaps I'd do some expectation and goal management, for example by making it clear that his goal should not be to ruin the fun for everybody else. But if that's clear, it could be fun, and it'll certainly be a learning experience for you.

>>96305462
>>96305480
Oh I missed the "how" in your sentence and thought you were asking WHETHER you should do it. What's unclear about the how?

>>96305480
>>96305493
I mean if it came to open combat either with their armies or man to man, I could only do it just if I like get him into a call or something.
Apologies for typing like a monkey on phone

>>96305583
Army vs army they can do on their own without you present. Just give them the rules.

Ben Milton made a new OSR introduction video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_krKx8NOhM

>>96305462
when the chaotic player has a session he advances time forward. when you play the other party you go back in time and keep notes of what the chaotic player had done
>you open the chest and its empty!

>>96305241
his "reviews" suck ass because its like does everything possible to avoid giving an actual opinion. It feels more like he's reading marketing material the whole time. The strongest take he'll ever give is stuff like "I feel like x might lead to y ins some cases"
His Gazetter is good for an overview of whats happening in the OSR world though.

>>96305241
>>96306029
>>96306272
also he had one good video where he showed what his in person games were like which were actually useful to me as an online only player but then he never ever did another one and I will forever hold a grudge over it because most other in person liveplays have either the worlds worst audio or video or players or all three.

>>96306295
The Winter's Daughter one?

>>96306469
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkZRQHdPaYc
I believe so.

>>96305177
hey great reply thanks. the goblin powered fort idea is pretty fortuitious, goblins in my setting don't breed theyre born from a ritual over pits of offal and gore. so the hobgoblins are basically killing people, creating goblins, and then enslaving those goblins to go kill more people. pretty interesting.

OSRG discord server perma-invite (feel free to share around): https://discord.gg/evhaXjw7md

>>96304273
>Maybe my math is wrong, but it seems to me that this makes 2-handed weapons obsolete?
You won't be dual-wielding Longswords+5 like it's Baldur's gate. Dagger is d4 (d3 vs. L, even), handaxe is d6 / d4 vs. L.
You won't often outdamage the other fighters, especially against large opponents where two-handers and polearms dominate. It's decent for (Fighter/)Thieves who get an extra backstab, or if you happen to find the legendary dagger+3/+6 vs. whatever your current opponent is.

t. AD&D DM

>>96305176
>When that happens, THanders are outdamaged barring against enemies which one shouldn't absolutely fight if that's the case.
Are you stuck in a 1st level-mindset or something?
One or two hits from an ogre won't kill you, whereas he is in BIG trouble if he has to eat 2d8 or 3d6 from your two-hander.
If you want to tickle enemies with daggers from a safe spot, I recommend you play a rogue, not a fighter.

>>96308613
It's full of cool people and is way more chill than this general, but please don't tell anyone, we do have a toxic image to maintain.

>>96309342
>>96308613
Are you allowed to share the noob guide there?
Or other primers?

>>96305599
Isn't this exactly what Anon's bailing player wants to avoid, though? Spending time with the players he dislikes?

Reading Blackmoor Foundations, something that's really striking is how badly written the session reports are. People give Gygax shit for being a bad writer all the time, but looking at this stuff and comparing it to something like the Black Reservoir play report it's obvious that Gygax's prose and narrative ability are in a whole other league.

Still interesting material for the insight into the origins of Blackmoor, although the guy who wrote the editorial commentary should be forced to ritually disembowel himself.

>>96310799
The funny thing about Arneson is that he's not a good writer, but he definitely understood D&D better than Gygax did, and somewhere in his nonsense you can see what Gygax was so desperate to try and get a hold of. I think the best demonstration of this is Adventures in Fantasy, Arneson's first game after D&D, which is a borderline objectively bad game, but right from its rambling, poorly-written preamble we have Arneson's take on RPGs, which is what Gygax ultimately ended up adopting towards the end of his life. Before that though, Gygax took AD&D (and his post-D&D games) in the opposite direction, with stricter rules and less room for improvisation/inspiration. The funny (and slightly sad) thing is that in his last few months of life, Gygax admitted that his favorite way to play was the earliest, most Arenesonian version of D&D.

>>96308613
This is the bigoted one where people act like complete boot licking losers.

Just google for an OSR server and you'll find a much better one.

>>96310899
Ah, so we have been getting raided.

>>96310889
>The funny thing about Arneson is that he's not a good writer, but he definitely understood D&D better than Gygax did
lmao nothing could be further from the truth. Arneson thought of the dungeon as a distraction from the wargame and most of the things you associate with D&D, like a living breathing world with NPCs, didn't exist in Blackmoor until long after Gygax introduced it. And he more or less shelved Blackmoor entirely after meeting MAR Barker and liking Tekumel more.
Gygax also "didn't adopt it towards the end of his life". He played OD&D and AD&D much the same as always, he just didn't write books about it for other people and ignored the parts of the rules added in that he never liked in the first place like psionics.
He didn't even refer to them as a separate game at all if you bothered reading what he said, calling them "OAD&D" in his posts. (which if you've actually played OD&D with the greyhawk and later supplements you'd realize is accurate that it approaches AD&D very fast)
What you're likely thinking of are some unsourced quotes claiming DMs don't need to care about the rules and only roll dice to hear the sound they make, ignoring of course that he wrote entire books on gamemastering, easily sourced, in which he goes on about the importance of rules and how to deal with them fairly. (and notably that he wrote another ruleset that was in line with his OAD&D game tastes which TSR sued to stop him from working on)

>>96311114
Arneson's roleplaying rules were light and loose and barely even fully-written down, while Gygax kept trying to make everything strict and pinned down. And, it's weird you'd try and say Gygax was the guy who innovated world-building when it's pretty clear Blackmoor was exactly that.

Gygax's philosophy was actually to build up AD&D so it could be used with tournaments in mind, ie, a strong core of universal rules that judges could use to arbitrate uniformly. Aside from this being fundamentally ridiculous, it ultimately culminated in Dangerous Journeys, a game so bad that even Gygax's biggest fans and even Gygax later himself would admit is the opposite direction that games should head in.

Gygax in his later years HATED the obsession with rules that some people had developed (with himself being somewhat responsible). He would call out "rulesplayers" as the worst kind of player, and advise people away from that philosophy.

Arneson did a poor job writing rules down, but that's likely (aside from him just not being a particularly smart guy) because of the inherent difficult of trying to translate incredibly complex concepts into simplified mechanics, and he just relied on human features like intuition, approximation, and inspiration. This makes for a messy and incomplete "system", but ultimately for better games and game masters, something even Gygax would admit.

this thread always seemed to lean way more Team Gygax

>>96311229
Broadly, yeah: Gygax is the guy who actually wrote the vast majority of what is used, and a lot of the later in life material that came out about Arneson unfortunately paints him as the quintessential ideas guy. Can't ignore his contribution, but he's not actually a big direct part of what most of the thread (which is primarily B/X and AD&D players) plays at the table.

Plus our local troll likes to cosplay as a big Arneson megafan, so lately the man has an extra layer of filth added to him.

>>96311229
Being on either "team" is being a fag.
But, the worst is the guy who keeps sucking on Gygax's corpse dick at every opportunity and trying to deify him.
The "praise st. gygax" shit is supposed to be an ironic joke, but he's actually taken it to heart because he's a retard.

But AD&D 1e is halal right and Gygax (pbuh) approved?

>>96311212
>Arneson's roleplaying rules were light and loose and barely even fully-written down
Pretty sure he didn't get why people just didn't use D&D when asked about rules at cons.
>while Gygax kept trying to make everything strict and pinned down
AKA he played the game extensively several times a week for years (Arneson in contrast played about once a year in Blackmoor post 1974 sticking to Tekumel and it was mostly a friendly get-together to catch-up with each other) and tried to introduce other people to it and found it didn't work well if you kept it too loose.
>And, it's weird you'd try and say Gygax was the guy who innovated world-building when it's pretty clear Blackmoor was exactly that.
What Arneson introduced was the first dungeon. Which is funny because if you listen to him he didn't really like dungeon play much while his players loved it.
>tournaments in mind, ie, a strong core of universal rules that judges could use to arbitrate uniformly.
Tournaments were just one facet, having a shared rules language that everyone could understand was the main impetus.
>Aside from this being fundamentally ridiculous
Worked fine for years.

>>96311212
>>96311387
>Dangerous Journeys, a game so bad
You're acting on tertiary information. DJ was good game, mostly AD&D-like and was sued out of existence by TSR. You're thinking of Lejendary Adventures which has nothing to do with a rules fetish and was just a later project while he was working with TLG.
>Gygax in his later years HATED the obsession with rules
Wrong, he answered several hundred questions about them over several years on dragonsfoot and enworld.
>He would call out "rulesplayers"
Meaning rules lawyers. He discusses them in the 1E DMG too.
>Arneson did a poor job writing rules down
Or just because he didn't have much to write down since it was mostly loosey-goosey Braunstein.
>but ultimately for better games
Having played under people who just make shit up without respect for an existing rules-set or giving players something to work with, even a simple one like OD&D, or ones that do like Gygax I will stick with the latter every single day of the week.

>>96311229
I mean anyone who actually plays the game, reads the rules or skims one of Peterson's old history books tends to do so outside of arguing about royalties and what not.
The main reason Arneson gets brought up on here hasn't really anything to do with the game. There's a resident troll who routinely tries to ruin the thread because he's still assmad, to this day, that people don't like his houserules he shared here nearly two years ago and because he gave bad advice to new players.
He thinks people called his rules ideas shit because of 'deifying Gygax' or whatever and not just because it was a mish-mash of narrativist xp for milestones crap that leads to a completely different style of game than the one this thread is about.

>>96308977
>>96309005
See >>96305344

>>96311398
>You're thinking of Lejendary Adventures
That was Gygax's "improvement" and the game he promoted the most during his time on Dragonsfoot. DJ is the rules-heavy abomination that is unplayably bad. LJ is just regular bad.

>Meaning rules lawyers.
Meaning rules obsessed people like yourself. He principally hated them because he was faced with the fact that he had spent the better part of a decade trying to convince everyone that they should follow D&D's rules and treat them as some sort of higher constitution above all other games, and then those same people showed more loyalty to the rules than they did to him.

That, and generally no one likes ruleplayers.

>Having played under people who just make shit up
Chief among the complaints of Areneson and his games were the obvious (and confusing) contradictions and inconsistencies. But, it's not a dichotomy where the only choices are play a rigid game with laborous rules or play a drug-fueled fever nonsensical fever dream. Arneson wasn't that good, neither was Gygax, and that's perfectly fine because they were both pioneers and should be expected to have made mistakes and can be forgiven for them. The kind of mistake that shouldn't be forgiven though is trying to treat either of them like some sort of infallible resource (but only selectively when they agree with you).

What are some good reasons for playing OD&D instead of AD&D after learning B/X?

>>96311526
I think the biggest OD&D advantage is that its lack of clarity forces you to make it your own. For guys who like a more freewheeling or less codified game, OD&D's thin skeleton is actually just what many of them are looking for.

Plus, its more expansion-like framework (rules added in expansion books instead of all baked in like AD&D) allows you to mix and match to again better make the game you want. You have to put the work in though.

Not my speed, but I've played in some OD&D games and they felt very unique to the GM in a way I haven't quite had with other engines.

>>96311398
>Wrong, he answered several hundred questions about them over several years on dragonsfoot and enworld.
Only with extreme reluctance and because that's the only thing anyone there actually wanted to ask him about. He made dozens of posts begging people to stop asking him D&D rules questions, and even more posts complaining about "rulesplayers", but caved in largely because the whole point of him posting at all was to generate goodwill towards himself/promote LJ and telling everyone to just fuck off would have been a bad move.

>>96311515
>DJ is the rules-heavy
It's fine. Most of the unwieldiness in it comes from non-standard nomenclature for regular things and it gave us AD&D stuff like his great Necropolis dungeon and some good class ideas backported by the way of some of the OSRIC dudes.
>LJ is just regular bad.
LJ is the one that doesn't have much good going for it because it's basically just his reaction to modern games and a way to collab with TLG.
>Meaning rules obsessed people
Nope, rules lawyers. Gygax made it clear many times throughout numerous works and on forums.
If you claim otherwise then feel free to post some direct sourced quotes by him saying as much.
>they should follow D&D's rules and treat them as some sort of higher constitution above all other games
This is just you projecting and being assmad about people in this general not caring about your ideas.
>Chief among the complaints of Areneson and his games were the obvious (and confusing) contradictions and inconsistencies.
Yes, I know. Because unlike Gygax and OD&D he didn't follow the idea of writing down the rulings he made to have a consistent experience.
>it's not a dichotomy
Obviously not, but you're making one out of whole cloth because the people of this general largely prefer the Gygaxian style over what you're selling and getting very angry about it instead of just making other threads to discuss what you're into.

>>96311561
>Only with extreme reluctance
lol, more like with the caveat that it isn't his game anymore and it's just his opinion. He answered hundreds of them and happily going on about having drinks when meeting people on the forum and talking about the old days.
>He made dozens of posts begging people to stop asking him D&D rules questions
He did no such thing. He said it wasn't his property anymore and still answered questions fine.
>and even more posts complaining about "rulesplayers"
Feel free to quote them. Doing exact searches of DF, Enworld and the like neither "rules players" nor "roles players" gives any results from his account.
>but caved in largely because the whole point of him posting at all was to generate goodwill towards himself/promote LJ
They very first post by him on the very first QA thread is him saying and I quote "As I promised, this new thread is begun so I can respond to questions of all sorts, not just the the LA game, that members here might have for me.".

>>96311561
>Only with extreme reluctance
No, just the caveat that it isn't his game anymore and it's just his opinion. He created the QA thread in the first place to answer questions like that.
He answered hundreds of them and happily going on about having drinks when meeting people on the forum and talking about the old days.
>He made dozens of posts begging people to stop asking him D&D rules questions
He did no such thing. He said it wasn't his property anymore and still answered questions fine.
>and even more posts complaining about "rulesplayers"
Feel free to quote them. Doing exact searches of DF, Enworld and the like neither "rules players" nor "rulesplayers" gives any results from his account.
>but caved in largely because the whole point of him posting at all was to generate goodwill towards himself/promote LJ
They very first post by him on the very first QA thread is him saying and I quote "As I promised, this new thread is begun so I can respond to questions of all sorts, not just the the LA game, that members here might have for me.".

>>96311560
So even though AD&D is more to work through initially, you need to put in more work to run OD&D?
Are there other benefits or things you prefer in AD&D compared to OD&D?

>>96311572
>It's fine.
No no it's not.
It might be one of the worst games ever published. It essentially makes every design mistake a designer could make, and I'm actually amazed that you would crucify yourself by trying to pretend it's any good.

You might be the first person I've ever heard of who is willing to pretend it's not terrible, and I really can't take anything you say seriously at this point if that's the kind of lie you're happy to shamelessly drop

>>96311610
Did you try "ruleplayers"

>>96311610
>They very first post by him on the very first QA thread is him saying and I quote "As I promised, this new thread is begun so I can respond to questions of all sorts, not just the the LA game, that members here might have for me."
Yeah, questions of ALL sorts, not just rule questions like the ones people kept bombarding him with.

>>96311621
Not quoted but yes. OD&D with just the 3LBBs is barebones and assumes you have wargaming background so there's a lot of DIY needed to run a game long-term.
If you add in all the OD&D books you get something like a pared down AD&D where characters are simpler and spells stop at earlier levels. (but are way less restrictive and more powerful due to it)
That can be fun, I like it for some stuff, but it can also be a ton of drudgework for a DM who prefer other parts compared to expanding the rules compared to something more full-fledged and just stripping it down if you're going to be running more than one-shots in it.

>>96311631
I take it that much like your takes on Arneson you've never actually read it and just heard what people say about it, given how much vague you're being about it's issues. (which it does have, just not in any way what you're saying)
>>96311639
Yes, but you made me think of trying "rule-players" and I found exactly two posts of his mentioning them.
One of them is pic related where he says the GM has the final word over rules lawyers and laughs about it.
The other one is even funnier in the context of this discussion, give me a sec and i'll post it.
>>96311653
I wonder how you can write this stuff with a straight face when it doesn't take very long at all to actually read his posts and find out you're wrong.

>>96311639
>>96311712
This is his other one where he responds to a post complaining about 3E Rules Lawyers and says that Rules-players (clearly meaning the same thing if you didn't already know this from the DMG 1E use) where he recommends introducing better players to AD&D 1E instead.

>>96311668
Thanks for the explanation. Maybe one last question, what wargaming rules would you recommend or do you prefer for AD&D?

>>96311712
>One of them is pic related where he says the GM has the final word over rules lawyers and laughs about it.

No, he says they have the last word over "rule-players", not "rule lawyers", and ironically for you in a post explaining that his opinions don't matter in comparison to the decisions of the GM.

We've got Gygax himself saying "Gygax's opinion doesn't count as much as what a GM wants to do" and you're acting like he's supposed to be an advocate for extensive and strict rules.

>>96311750
I don't really use wargaming rules for AD&D since I play regular wargames and would rather just stat up the armies in those (I like Thud & Blunder and Fistful of Lead) and don't feel that itch but I know a subset of OD&D games like to use Chainmail specifically for mass battles and there's a surprising amount of content on youtube for original chainmail. (there's also the retro clone Old Lords of Wonder and Ruin and the autistic math take from Delta's Book of War)
I've looked at the AD&D battlesystem but didn't think it was that good and would rather use something else personally.

>>96311572
Can you please just speak for yourself instead of demanding everyone believe you speak for this general, especially when that's demonstrably false?
What is wrong with you? Who taught you to argue that way?

>>96311793
>No, he says they have the last word over "rule-players", not "rule lawyers"
Which is a synonym as is clear in context and in his use of the word in the other post.
>that his opinions don't matter in comparison to the decisions of the GM.
That much is obvious to anyone here?
Obviously the guy running a game has final say over his game. Just like any player has final say over sticking around to enjoy and/or suffer under it.
>and you're acting like he's supposed to be an advocate for extensive and strict rules.
Because he is an advocate for rulesets, do you think "no a player can't rules argue his way out of a DM's judgement" to mean "no rules don't matter at all and you shouldn't care about them".
Have you actually ever played an OSR game?
Even the autists who push the rulings over rules maxim to the point of absurdity get this stuff, so why don't you?

>>96311819
>Can you please just speak for yourself
I am anyone else is free to agree, maybe you should try understanding how 4chan works before you try and to tone police our threads.

>>96311843
>Which is a synonym as is clear in context and in his use of the word in the other post.
No, you're stretching things just for the sake of trying to put words in his mouth.
>rest of your gay post
Shut the fuck up with your strawfmanning dichotomy bullshit.

The fuck is wrong with you.

>>96311855
4chan works with everyone only speaking for themselves. You keep trying to turn it into some sort of numbers game, where you try to convince everyone that everyone agrees with you, and everyone who disagrees with you is a single person.

You don't belong on this website.

>>96310899
>muh bigots
So the one in that link is the good one, then.

>>96311858
>No, you're stretching things
No, i'm using his terminology as he used it explicitly in the other post and in the DMG.
The question in that post he's answering is about AD&D casting segments which can be arbitrated differently and he's saying that no rules-lawyer gets to overrule the DM in his own game based on opinions of people online.
It's adamantly clear in the context of that thread which you'd know if you'd actually read it and weren't just aping stuff you saw people post previously.
>Shut the fuck up with your strawfmanning
lol, assmad that you got proven wrong.

>>96311877
>4chan works with everyone only speaking for themselves.
Which every post does even if you get mad about people pointing out general opinion.
>You keep trying to turn it into some sort of numbers game
This is rich coming from the guy who've routinely been caught samefagging and replying to his own posts with some blatantly sycopanthic one-liner posts in past threads.
>You don't belong on this website.
lmao, I don't think anyone whose been here longer than a week would consider you a fit for this site nevermind anyone whose actually been on /tg/ since before it was purged.

>>96311819
>>96311858
>>96311877
If you don't like how people post here go clutch your pearls somewhere else instead of pretending to be shocked and horrified that people have no patience for your cocktail of historical revisionism and nervous clucking.

>>96297535 (OP)
I just finished my siege at sukiskyn scenarios. 40 something fucking goblins, largest encounter ive done so far, but it turned out well kind of just playing them as an amorphous blob with an estimated number of attacks and actions while the big boss tries to break in through the other side. was a fun experience! really made me feel like i was in a siege. trying to beat the boss before the goblin forces finished thier escalade

>>96311877
>4chan works with everyone only speaking for themselves.
I, too, get offended when someone on /hwg/ says something like "we like historical wargames here". Like, who does he think he is? He's not speaking for me.

>>96311900
>No, i'm using his terminology as he used it explicitly in the other post and in the DMG.
Wrong. Extra penalty for using "explicitly" incorrectly.

You're interpreting everything, and then demanding your interpretation be treated as fact. Fuck you, you dumb bitch, that's not how anything works here. Hell, it's not how anything works anywhere.

You dumb cunt. Also, I just told you to fuck off with your strawmanning. Do it again, and that's an automatic loss. You only seem to be able to comprehend things in terms of strict rules, so I'm going to lay that one down for you.

>>96305241
i remember his flipthrough of the adnd dmg being painful.

him having a really hard time grasping the intentions behind things.

Here have the actual post of Gary's so everyone can see what a humongous retard you are who have never even read a col_pladoh thread yet keeps insisting he knows what's in them.
There's no "automatic loss" here either, everyone can see what a low IQ retard you are no matter how many times you get your pals to purge the thread on-demand even as you're consistently breaking the sitewide rules.

is there a common term for quick actions outside of the main action/ movement action dynamic? shit like saying something or other things the gm doesnt think impacts your main actions like opening a door?

>>96312003
>Here have the actual post of Gary's so everyone can see what a humongous retard you are
Wrong, it shows how retarded you are.

You're still banking on trying to say that people who are obsessed with rules are somehow distinct from rules-players/rules-lawyers. And, we've got a post showing that Gygax despised rules-players and even compared them to ticks on a dog, and advocating that GM's trust their own judgement over the wording of the rules or Gygax's opinions/clarifications.

So, shut the fuck up, you dumb rules-player bitch.

>>96312021
Not sure why classifying that would help to be honest. The whole dynamic is only really a combat thing to begin with and there's plenty of specific rules there like charging outside of those i'd expect it's either no cost or the DM has a ruling. I know some add on a combat segment to get a potion stuck in their backpack for example.

>>96312048
>You're still banking on trying to say that people who are obsessed with rules are somehow distinct from rules-players/rules-lawyers
Obviously. He responded to a post about rules lawyers calling them rules-players and gave the example of AD&D 1E as something to play instead.
He didn't say "rules don't matter at all and people who want them are ticks hurfadurf i'm a giant fucking retard trolling osrg every single day please God make me the hightlight of a cartel video like I deserve" like a retard.
>showing that Gygax despised rules-players
In response to the mention of rules lawyers and advising them to play a crunchy game like AD&D lmao.
>advocating that GM's trust their own judgement over the wording of the rules
That's not what he said. What he said was that their rulings are what matter over what other people opine.
>So, shut the fuck up, you dumb rules-player bitch.
Go play in traffic and become another statistic you single-digit IQ retarded scumbag.

>>96312070
because i think there are a lot of things that are significant, but maybe not worth a full main action.

>>96312097
>That's not what he said. What he said was that their rulings are what matter over what other people opine.
Yes. Rulings over Rules. That cornerstone of OSR.

Glad you finally ended up admitting I was right, even if you're going to be a little stupid bitch about it.

>He didn't say "rules don't matter at all and people who want them are ticks hurfadurf i'm a giant fucking retard trolling osrg every single day please God make me the hightlight of a cartel video like I deserve" like a retard.

Aaaaaand, strawmanning. Automatic loss.

>>96312115
There's no real term for it and personally I wouldn't mechanize it but ymmv. Either it'd be a no cost action or the DM would add some segment cost if it's significant like getting an unprepared potion out. That's my take anyway.

>>96312122
>Rulings over Rules.
You clearly don't understand what either of those means or what the terms refer to going by all your posts ITT.
>Glad you finally ended up admitting I was right
Not even your own family would consider you right in the head, nevermind right in this thread.

>>96311273
>a lot of the later in life material that came out about Arneson unfortunately paints him as the quintessential ideas guy
Yeah, what we've seen of Arneson's rules in the FFC and elsewhere (notably his desciption of how the Wizard Gaylord's Superberries had lots of properties that had never been discovered) indicate that they were creative and elaborate but poorly systematized at best. He seems to have just thrown down very specific ideas and assigned them probabilities where required, which isn't even necessarily a bad way to make a campaign, especially when adventure games haven't been invented yet, but doesn't generalize and is very hard to use to explain to others how to play. Particularly if you don't want to show them your rules.

Gygax was able to create a set of general routines for play which (give or take OD&D's editing issues) others could pick up, use, and expand on.

>>96312140
Sorry, you've already lost. You were warned, and you still went for it.

Hell, you already had lost without your strawmanning, the strawmanning just makes it official.

>>96311515
Holy shit, this guy's mad.

>>96312122
>>96312149
The fuck kind of reddit-tier posting is this? Get the hell out of here.

>>96312149
This kind of thing might work with your fellow redditors and whatever discord you run but not on here little retard.
Anyone can go up and read you being wrong at any point and even if removed they can see it with 4chanx to boot. Not that you being wrong and getting angry over it is anything new considering how often you do these trolling spiels based on tertiary opinions of games you have no actual experience or knowledge of and claim stuff about forum posts, even in this thread, that can be disproven with a single google search. Guess you're not used to being around people who'd actually fact-check you and just take your retarded hot-takes at your word.

>he's trying to recover
lol

>>96311621
OD&D requires more creative work. AD&D requires more study.

>>96312192
I like that way of putting it.

>>96312192
OD&D kinda requires study too if it's going to be good, but yes also way more rulings you'll have to write down overall.

>>96311819
Anon speaks for this general. Go fuck yourself.

>>96312130
thats fair. i remember worlds without number giving it a name in “instant action” basicly whatever the gm feels is fair other actions, and I was currious why i dont see it named in other things.

>>96311964
God, now you made me remember that. Why did I watch that entire video? What a hopeless plonk.

>>96312221
>OD&D kinda requires study too
That's why the word "more" is in the sentence. Of course you always have to study any ruleset (and yes, there's a bit more work to do in that regard with OD&D than e.g. Moldvay Basic as well since it's so unclear).

>>96311818
Alright, I will take a look at some of the skirmish and wargaming rules. But you actually gave me an idea, I can imagine how some older Warhammer 40k rules could actually help running larger scaled combat.

>>96312192
Yeah I see, it probably makes much more sense for me to move from B/X to AD&D first.

>>96312289
Yeah, just throwing it out there. I consider the 3LBBs and AD&D to be the best D&D there is in actual play but in my experience the former is actually more work on average, particularly if you come from a place of knowing little about wargames.

>>96312302
Sorry but I need to expand on that with a newb question, what is a good system for really large scale battles with 1,000 to 10,000 combatants (or even more?) on each side?

>>96312310
Fair, fair. I really think which seems to be more work depends on which type you like better/are more comfortable with. I certainly wouldn't have made my own OD&D variant if I hadn't enjoyed the process.

>>96312389
I'm not a huge wargamer so I might be off base here, but I think there are very few wargames handling battles on that scale. I think that's mostly the domain of kriegspiel-style map-and-block games. You're probably better off asking this question in /hwg/ or /awg/.

>>96312389
Whichever combat system you like, but each unit represents 100-1000 people.
Mass combat is an abstraction of an aggregation to begin with, so you shouldn't over-complicate it.

>>96312434
>>96312441
Good points, thanks

>>96312389
Just general wargames?
You want "Epic scale" so usually between 6m-15mm units where you can plonk down a lot of small figures on a single base so you're moving entire regiments or what have you.
Warmaster Ancients, Fantasy and the fan-made Revolutions is well-beloved for that kind of thing.

>>96312474
Yes, that actually sounds cool, I'll take a look at those. Might even get something out of the 2mm Napoleonic scale, which I really enjoyed.

>>96298223
https://necroticgnome.com/products/old-school-essentials-starter-set-dungeons-of-the-undermoon
>a book explaining how to play TTRPGs for new players
>a book for DMs (new to DM'ing and/or new to the style) as well as a starting settlement
>a full length starter adventure to tie in with it
nothing ground breaking of course but still the kind of information you'd expect would have already been included

How many of you play actually old school verses OSR games?

>>96313053
What's the difference? I kinda use them synonymously.

>>96313053
I'm happy to play in old-school D&D games, but for my own I run my own homebrew, so OSR most of the time.

>>96305421
What are "figure scaling rules"? I've been playing D&D for years and never heard that combination of words before. What book are they from?

>>96304641
I ended up looking at it, the settings is cool but it's weird the titular mega dungeon isn't really fleshed out and left to the DM to fill out. Also the dungeons that actually are there don't feel particularly usable, I'll try running them in a oneshot and report back

>>96313103
They're in the noob guide. They're a quick and dirty rule to do mass combat rather than something formal and fleshed out (but often weaker), like War Machine for BECMI, BattleSystem for AD&D, etc.

>>96313415
The n00b guide really is a fucking mess. Probably would be better if it was organized and designed around helping guide n00bs, rather than trying to indoctrinate them into some insane bullshit not upheld by this general.

>>96313519
Don't call it "the" n00b guide. It's just "his" guide. Even calling it a guide is only a half-truth.

>>96313546
It'd be nice to make an actual guide for n00bs.

One that offers a more... balanced set of opinions, or rather just wasn't so opinionated at all. Problem is, it'd need to be made out of genuine consideration/concern for n00bs, and I don't think there's enough of that to go around.

>>96313519
>>96313546
Samefag and shut up. The noob guide is great, instructs noobs correctly, and is upheld by this general.

>>96313718
That is some awful advice, and leading with Chainmail is psychotic.

>>96313733
>if i repeat lies enough, people will have to believe them!
lol

>>96313519
>some insane bullshit not upheld by this general.
The guide was written over the course of about one year with input from many different Anons in this general. It went through multiple iterations, and you can literally see the process of it being written, expanded, and corrected based on feedback or whole sections written by different Anons if you go through the archives.

>>96313415
>>96313718
Wow, is it really that simple, just treat a group of units as if they were a single one? Why isn't it talked about more? I have to try it.

So why is this one troll hoesmad about the noob guide specifically, anyway? Is it becuase it's too clear about the limits and framework of the OSR? Too good at helping new referees understand the style of play? Not asshurt enough about Gygax? What?

>Captcha: WHYX2
Why×2 indeed.

>>96313833
There's no point actually arguing in good faith with this guy, since he's a troll. Then again, it occurs to me just now that you might be saying this for the benefit of the actual new guy ITT, so that *he'll* know that he can just look up the receipts if he wants to know who's a screeching sperg and who's in the right. Never mind, carry on.

>>96314698
It trashes 2e is why. He never gets specific any longer, since that would reveal his agenda, but that's the reason.

>>96314777
Ohhhhhhhh right yeah okay I'm retarded, selective amnesia apparently.

>>96314698
For a constructive critique:
1. Put away your ego. All of it. Especially the part where you think you can speak for all of /osrg/ but you then only give your very personal opinions.
2. Most of the opinions in this guide are wild and unhelpful. A guide should strive to be neutral, and should try to stick to facts, not super-opinionated opinions. You might need to actually try listening to more people before writing a guide, because then you'd realize that there's a lot more opinions on these topics than what you are portraying.
3. Focus on actually helping people start OSR games. You spend way too much time telling people what you think OSR should be and almost no time actually helping anyone new begin playing. There's many different ways for a person to start getting into OSR games, and it's not a bad idea to provide more options that can help ease in groups who are not all unified in their unabashed love for old school gaming, ie. gateway games with more modern approaches. People are going to be approaching OSR from many different backgrounds and with many different tastes, so a welcome guide should try to actually accomodate them.
More starting options and explanations of those starting options are what a n00b guide is actually for.
4. Make OSR actually sound appealing. I don't think anyone could read your guide and actually want to play an OSR. Even your one-sided gushing about what you think are staples is incredibly off-putting (particularly because it being all one-sided seems innately dishonest), especially because it comes after you started the whole guide just by complaining how people who don't play your way are simply confused and lazy.
5. I don't think your FAQs are actually FAQs. They are not the frequent questions new people ask here, and none are particularly helpful. Most real questions I've seen are stuff like "what's a good adventure" or "how do i get my group to play this" and not "tell me how I should feel about post-1983 books."

>>96315058
I didn't write that noob guide. I'm just aware that it's a good and helpful document that Anons assembled collectively (and that apparently helped an OSR newbie in this very thread). Thus, all your abderitic blabbering misses its mark.

>>96315075
>saying it helped someone who doesn't understand what's wrong with it
>pretending you and your discord speak for this general

What do we even call your little clique? You can't call yourselves the /osrg/, because that doesn't really belong to you, and you keep getting banned from here anyway.

Fags? Retards? Trolls? Trying to think of what most people here call your discord.

>>96315095
My Discord? I've never been on Discord, that shit's cancer. Just the next stage of instacollapsing chat app. You might as well accuse me of using Skype, lmao

>You can't call yourselves the /osrg/, because that doesn't really belong to you
Sure we can, the /osrg/ does belong to those of us who are its regulars, and all of us agree on this. You are the only seether.

>and you keep getting banned
Nah fampai.

>>96315095
They're little shits. Like trolls but more annoying. Keep coming back no matter what's done to get rid of them.

...Goblins. The /osrg/ is plagued by little goblins.

>>96315160
NTA, and I'm tired of your tantrums. Everyone is. You can't talk like normal people.

>>96315161
I like it.

>96315170
>"Everyone"

>>96315191
I'm betting even you are tired of being such a little shit. You just can't help it though.

>>96315095
They're trying to call themselves OSRG. >>96308613

>>96315170
>NTA
Suuuuuuuuure, Jan.

>>96313197
>Zac wrote something unplayable that expects you to make the adventure yourself
I'm shocked. SHOCKED I say! I though that after doing that in every single thing he's ever published he'd have gotten bored doing that exact thing.
The cover art looks less dogshit than his other stuff but that probably only happened because it was co author and the other guy has eyes.

>>96311515
Rules are important in a game with high lethality and consequences.
Rulings should be consistent, ergo, growing new rules.

>>96315678
A well constructed game does not need "more" rules, since any rulings will already adhere to the ones present.
Your "growing new rules" business is how you end up with a bloated game that loses sight of itself.

>>96315692
A consisten ruling is a rule.
If you say
"Every time you fart in the face of an orc rol a d100 below 30"
that's a ruling
if you want a fair game it should be consistent the next time somebody wants to fart in the face of an orc
so it becomes a rule
it doesn't matter how you call it
and if you are not consistent... well depend the kind of game that you want, but if the game have stakes inconsistent rulings is equivalent to shit on your players

>>96315766
>"Every time you fart in the face of an orc rol a d100 below 30"
You've lost sight of the game.

>>96315773
I will say that reducing arguments to mysticism and sophistry is losing sight of reality

>>96315779
You've lost sight of reality too then.

>there's a single autist who's spent 6-8 YEARS malding so hard about 2e not being an old-school game that he still pitches fits at each individual tangential allusion to the fact
I know he's a periodic scourge of this thread but there's just something so pathetically funny about it that I'm almost warming up to him, he's like a retarded mascot of sorts.

What's the best OSR videogame? The Wizardry series gets pretty close but no gold-for-exp.

Anyone here use miniatures for osr games?

>>96316054
Do dry beans, coins, and bottle caps count as minis?

>>96315058
NTA. By and large, that would make the guide worse.

>>96315058
Toddle off with your pasta

>>96313519
>>96313546
>>96313658
>>96313783
Be sure to take a course on comprehensive reading before returning. Tout tout now!

>>96315058
a well articulated post in my /osrg/?
no wonder we have retarded anons seething already

>>96305261
>Also BFRPG IS OSR. :)
>>96311819
Jesus fucking Christ you do this every time somebody post something you don't like, you just cry about how they don't speak for everyone, while cowering in the corner

>>96312149
Stop impersonating a janitor

>>96313519
Feel free to write something yourself

>>96315058
Give one single example of what you would actually change about the guide instead of just making vague complaints

>>96315692
That's crazy because my table keeps an ever growing list of new rules that we have been adding in over time

>>96316826
I strongly suspect you're replying to a certain Deep One.
Please don't, he's going to start posting about how much he hates ACKS and shit up the entire thread again.

Still reading through Nebulith, isn't a 2-in-6 chance of a random encounter a lot? I guess they really want most encounters to be non-combat

>>96315058
>>95958745
Quit spamming.

>>96317620
1/3rd of the exploration turns having an encounter is pretty high. Generally Zak books aren't great to use as is, they're idea mines to take a few things from. Don't pay for that shit.

>>96317620
It is if you roll the encounter die every turn. If it's every hour it's a bit low if anything.

>>96317793
It says every ten minutes, doesn't say if it means a single turn or irl time. The hex crawling section says to roll every hour, so I'm assuming it does mean roll each turn

>>96305435
Reminder that BECMI is not OSR

whose cornflakes did greg piss in seriously, every post i find on this is either complete sycophantic or its seething rage over non game related shit

>>96318067
It's the usual case of "designer has political opinions, and so defenders of those opinions must treat the game as delivered by god and haters must treat it as the devil incarnate".

I'm not sure there's anything to actually recommend it, though it might work just fine for what it is. Like 99% of OSR games out there, he failed to make a case for why anyone would play this over any other old-school/OSR edition. If you're going to make a new game at this stage, that's by far the most important thing you have to hammer home in all your marketing.

>>96316826
That's kind of concerning. I can't even remember the last time my groups had to come up with a rule that wasn't just an intuitive application of per-existing rules that ultimately did not need to be written down, in any of the games I'm playing/running.
What system are you playing?

>>96318067

i dunno its literally just LL with modifications so he didnt have to deal with the LL retard anymore. it's fine as a game and I liked some of the changes here and there. it lacks the fresh feeling of something like shadowdark and the creator literally cant stop seething about the radical left, nonstop. Also he lists Ty Beard as a special thanks. Like the lawyer that was involved in that voice actor's legal case(they lost lol)

>>96318134

ADnD1e, which reigns over all as one of the least complete systems of a TTRPG.

>>96318067
I wanted do like Dragonslayer, like I wanted to like Archaia, Highfell, and Dwarrowdeep. Unfortunately, see below.

>>96318138
>its literally just LL with modifications
I wish it were. I wish I could just say "you can just play Dragonslayer if you like it", but unfortunately that's not the case.

It has a bunch of glaring omissions, for example no wilderness evasion rules, no dungeon pursuit rules, no rules to determine encounter distance, no wilderness movement cost by terrain, no rule that tells you that room traps that are not found have a 2-in-6 chances of being triggered, no reaction roll table

More importantly, it has several mechanics that range between FOE and retarded, for instance wilderness encounters being stronger or weaker not based on locale but based on the level of the PCs in the party, and 1:1 time while dungeon exploring.

Last but not least, there's some rules are so puzzlingly stupid it makes me suspect Gillespie doesn't actually DM anything. For example, if a group gets lost in the Wilderness, something that according to the rules could happen EVEN THOUGH NO PROBABILITY IS GIVEN for it, you roll the actual direction that the party travels in using 1d8... on a fucking hex map.

All in all, I'm not sure if the issue is that Gillespie DMs like shit, or if the problem is that he's okay at DMing, but after the success of Barrowmaze his products have become more and more sloppy and half-baked and he doesn't actually mean it. Either way, it's just another poorly thought out, bad quality shitbrew that sells because of its beautiful art (which it is) to consumers who don't know any better.

Too bad, because it has Picrel on the front page, which is based. Makes me sad.

>>96318144
>ADnD1e
Fellow 1e fag here. May I ask for an excerpt from your table's list of added rules, please?

>>96316054
just for party marching order
>>96316037
if you're drawing the line up to and including gold for XP then there isn't a single game that qualifies and you will be disappointed if you are looking for anything that 1:1 copies the style or mechanics
there are games that evoke elements that fall short for various reasons but are still fun: Wizardry The Five Ordeals, Kings Field II, Barony, Lunacid, Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup (ver 0.23), Elin, Arx Fatalis

>>96318574
That's really interesting: thanks for the comments.

I've actually gamed with Gillespie and, at least in the one game I played in, he's a very methodical 10 ft by 10 ft kind of guy. Nothing was taken for granted. So this sort of slapdash treatment seems really weird to me. I assume he rushed it to meet some sort of deadline, because a lot of what you list is baffling.

>>96313053
I play both. I'm currently running a game in my own OSR system (same procedures as classic D&D but streamlined mechanics) and I'm a big fan of Dank Dungeons' 5B as a party game or introduction to OSR principles, even though it's kind of gimmicky. But I also ran an OD&D campaign last year that went great and I'm going to be playing in a Basic one-shot next week.

>Have pic related and print copy of ADND1E DMG
>Really want to run some DND
>All anyone wants me to do is Call of Cthulhu because they are in 5e games.

Life is pain.

>>96319223
Where did you get that book

>>96319223
Hang in there, anon. If I can eventually find a group to play with, I believe that anyone can. (Mind you, it took me a decade to find a good group for oldschool games, but it was worth the wait.)

>>96319124
>he's a very methodical 10 ft by 10 ft kind of guy. Nothing was taken for granted. So this sort of slapdash treatment seems really weird to me. I assume he rushed it to meet some sort of deadline
Could well be.

Could also be that he's known to force his students to buy his books and give them positive reviews on DTRPG, which disincentivises quality. Very disappointing. But hey, if you like the classes and monsters and want to use them on an AD&D or B/X chassis, I guess you can do that.

>>96319262
There are like, 30 different covers you can get for printing your omnibus. I just had a printer make it. Was like 20 something bucks.

>>96313050
literally just make a book that has 50 pages of examples of play. AKA the shit that should have been in the main book.

>>96313053
I play the "without numbers" games which I think are considered nu-sr.

Any experience with mass combat?
Is ACKS mass combat any different from the Companion book one?
Any other?

>>96321322
Yes, ACKS mass combat is very different from the Companion one, since it's based on scaling the standard combat rules up instead of making shit up without playtesting it à la Mentzer.

There's a few more possible examples listed in this screenshot from the guide:
>>96313718
Brutal figure scaling and Delta's Book of War are probably the easiest ones to use, but the ACKS rules are not bad if you want extra spreadsheety crunch.

>>96318574
>More importantly, it has several mechanics that range between FOE and retarded, for instance wilderness encounters being stronger or weaker not based on locale but based on the level of the PCs in the party, and 1:1 time while dungeon exploring.
OOF this is bad for the type of game.
I have seen other things like that like barbarians buffing each other I am not sure I like these things.

I appreciate stuff I use myself tho like some bump in HD (Fighter) and higher % rolls base for Thieves.

>>96321449
>Yes, ACKS mass combat is very different from the Companion one, since it's based on scaling the standard combat rules up instead of making shit up without playtesting it à la Mentzer.
Anon, I am a fucking retard. I meant
>Is B/X mass combat any different from the Companion book one?
You answered about ACKS in your first post about this, you have been in fact patient now not telling me to go fuck myself because it sounded I ignored you, I am just a tad bit tired - sorry

>>96321560
Ignore this post, tired anon
see you tomm guys

>>96321560
No worries, I just thought you were a new Anon who happened to have the same question. There's no rules for mass combat in B/X.

>>96321579
>There's no rules for mass combat in B/X.
Do you even Player's Companion?

>>96321605
The Companion is part of BECMI. A Companion for B/X was planned but never released.

>>96318957
>there are games that evoke elements that fall short for various reasons but are still fun: Wizardry The Five Ordeals, Kings Field II, Barony, Lunacid, Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup (ver 0.23), Elin, Arx Fatalis
Don't forget Legend of Grimrock 1+2, Soulash II, and Daggerfall. Also Personally I would recommend Kings field IV over any other.
Its interesting how there a lot of games which evoke oldschool by capturing certain elements, but no game that captures all.

>>96321614
Hence why such numbers, TRVE or no, come through this general looking for what's in the noob guide and what is to be found in ACKS II; B/X and AD&D offer incomplete or even missing, unsatisfying or inelegant solutions.

>>96323928
>unsatisfying or inelegant solutions.
That's basically ACKS, minus anything actually being a solution.

>>96323937
Extra emphasis on the "inelegant" part.

Anything that should be one roll is always going to be three or more; anything that should be simple is going to be a headache.

>>96323946
>three or more
That's if you're lucky. I don't think the game is even playable RAW. Just a round of combat takes ages. I remember a friend of a friend trying to run the game by the book as closely as he could. We traveled three hexes, had two fights against I forget what, no treasure from either one, and we gave up for the night because even the guy running the game didn't want to bother with the swamp we had just reached.

>>96323937
>>96323946
>>96324066
I'll take "things that didn't happen" for a barrel of garum, Alex.
>Just a round of combat takes ages.
What exactly in an ACKS round of combat "takes ages" with respect to B/X? Be explicit.

>>96323937
>>96323946
>>96324066
Samefag report on your game and contribute to the thread or GYG

Does LOTFP have tracking for their orders? I purchased Nebulith and I want to bring the book on a vacation soon.

>>96324240
Kek
It's true that there's something fishy about those posts.

In a 40-rooms dungeon for level 1 players, how many rooms should have an encounter, combat or otherwise? How much treasure? System is lotfp

>>96324340
Reach out to Raggi et al instead of this general.
>>96324717
Read some rulebooks instead of reaching out to this general. Happy gaming.

>>96324717
This is unfortunately a bug in LOTFP: There are no dungeon design procedures in the rules and magic book.

Below links the OSE SRD which provides you with tables to roll on for what could be in the room. Obviously this is not set down in stone so use your imagination to change things up.
https://oldschoolessentials.necroticgnome.com/srd/index.php/Designing_a_Dungeon

Holy shit I joined the discord and I'm getting pings from some loser tagging everyone in the server he's streaming fucking Minecraft at 2AM.

Also a bunch of losers throwing around the N word and trying to act tough about pen and paper game.

>>96325228
What were you expecting. This general has been suffering from that little group of losers for a while now.
They're the kind of guys who can't stand on their own, so they try to get one or two guys to chime in on their behalf so that they don't feel so alone.

>>96325228
>>96325473
If it's cavegreg's old "/osrg/" server, yeah, it's probably where the trolls come from lol. The guy currently in charge is some italian who used to brag about his prison time and that should tell you enough.
They really hate AD&D (the real one) over there and insist on playing 2e and "rules-light arnesonian 3LBB", whatever the fuck that means. And comfy cushy Minecraft games, apparently.
May Gygax (pbuh) have mercy on their souls and games, assuming they have either.

>>96325593
Wait, are you trying to tell me this general is being attacked by TWO discords?
Fucking hell.

>>96324340
>I purchased Nebulith
lol

>>96324717
Depends on if you're using lotfp as a generic osr or specifically the splatter horror drunk history thing they're going for.
The room stocking ratio in the AD&D dmg has worked out pretty well for me.
We can't post pdfs because they have too many gems but
https://files.catbox.moe/gopccv.pdf
has some well put together analysis of dungeon generation.

>>96325631
>https://files.catbox.moe/gopccv.pdf
I come here for this stuff, thanks anon

>>96325228
>a bunch of losers throwing around the N word
Non-weapon proficiencies? NuSR? Narrativism? Negotiated boundaries? Nordic LARP?

>>96325593
Jesus fucking Christ, that explains a lot.

>>96325687
I'm actually gonna use the nebulith for monsters and magic items and general setting, I wanted to use the dungeons in the book but they don't seem suitable for first level so I'm making my own dungeon using their table. Btw I know Zak is a meme here, idgaf it just looks cool

>>96325602
>>96325718
Only two? There's cavegreg's old dindunuffin "osrg" server, cavegreg's new MAP "osr" server, a reddit "osrg" server, the server of a guy who would steal thread OC for his blog and then shill it back here as his own (also friend of the creepy clown guy that got laughed out of the thread, his server has a secret "family section" too, he banned me after I called him out on letting his wife circumcise his sons and raise them "in the faith"), and the mongrel banquet club. There was also another "osr" server but we succesfully bullied him away. There's probably more but they also all hate each other because differently from us they can't agree on a real definition on what OSR is.

>>96325725
Don't forget the residential psychotic. But he's currently over here >>96298364 proclaiming that no-no, it's everyone except him that's the problem and everything everyone has pointed him out doing is actually done by everyone else and he's the one suddenly noticing it.

>>96325881
>Someone calls him out and gives archive posts
>He immediately starts samefagging the entire thread into oblivion and insisting that it's everyone else that's samefagging
Jesus.

>>96325228
>the N word
>>96325718
I think in the above case its
>newfriend
on account of being unable to type nigger.

Please tell me if this is FOE or not: my players are currently searching for an old abandoned fortress and when they encounter it there's going to be an active battle between two humanoid groups taking place there. I'm planning to solo play a quick mass combat in advance of the session to determine what happens, and then during for the actual session adapt the events of the mass combat into a schedule of events the players can respond and adapt to. Something like "Round 3: hobgoblin cannon destroys north tower. Round 5: orcs advance, combat spills out into the courtyard. Round 7: hobgoblin hang glider grenadiers shot down by orc archers, crash land into central keep. (etc.)"
Of course, the schedule of events are fully subject to change based on the decisions made by the players, but I am unsure if this is too "scripted" by OSR standards.

>>96326469
>Please tell me if this is FOE or not:
It's gay. Whatever you're about to say it's already pretty gay.

>>96326469
1: Doesn't sound FOE to me
2: Who cares
3: Sounds more like dungeon prep, you wouldn't be worrying about it being FOE if you were talking about a pack of cave lobsters going about their business, would you?

>>96326469
>I'm going to script in advance what happens through solo play
>but I'm not actually going to do it
>is it too scripted?

>>96326469
Is rolling out wandering monsters in advance FOE? Egads!

I've been using Chainmail for my campaign (TOLoWaR). What a great system for resolving large battles. All this time looking for something that I wouldnt need to buy hundreds of minis for and it was right there.

I feel like the son that has returned home.

>>96326782
Gary is waiting with open arms and ready to slaughter his fatted calf for you.

>>96326782
Play be upon you my brother in Gygax

My players have too many options for content they can pursue... I ask them each session what they would like to do next session and they discussed it for over 30 minutes and still came to no conclusion. I said, "Well just discuss it and message me when you've decided."

It's been a week, they're still discussing, but still haven't decided because they're fairly certain death is in any direction.

What do I do if they can't decide by game time without me just making the decision for them?

>>96326469
Go full rrtard and use clocks.

>>96327094
>What do I do if they can't decide by game time without me just making the decision for them?
Improvise based on what they decide at the table. Have Appendices A, B, and C ready just in case. Also Wilderness Hexplore.

>>96327094
1:1 time. have events plotted out on the calendar that will force their hand

>>96327326
>1:1 time.
This.

>>96327326
>1:1 time.
Okay, yeah... That makes a lot of sense. I've mostly been doing that, but maybe adding in more time sensative stuff will push their hand a bit.

>have events plotted out on the calendar
How do I do this without railroading them or taking out the spirit of OSR and procedural generation?

>>96327326
Damn... I told my wife about the situation, and she doesn't even play D&D or know anything about it. But she actually just gave me the exact same advice...

She said, "Well, in this game can't you just make things move along like they would in real life? Can't you pressure them into taking action by saying stuff will happen if they don't hurry up?"

>>96325228
>on a 4chan-advertised discord
>shocked to see slurs
>can't even repeat the slurs
I'm not saying you need to be an edgelord to use the Malaysian Woodcarving forum, but I am gonna ask exactly what the fuck you're expecting.

But yes the minecraft ping was cringe and I'm not sure I'll stay in the discord. Not sure what this is about raids; the people in that discord were complaining about all the new people and were acting like we were raiding them lol. Far too much drama for something so gay and innocuous.

>>96326477
True but sometimes you have to ask a question in a gay way to get any responses
>>96326485
>Sounds more like dungeon prep
Good point desu
>>96326735
How would you do it?
>>96326767
It's not but I feel this is rather different, don't you think?
>>96327142
Lmao not the worst idea in this circumstance but seems like a bigger hassle than what the adventure would merit

Is this the right thread to ask some questions concerning Dungeon Crawl Classics?

Because I don’t have the core book with me and I wanted some clarification about early game mechanics, at least as intended.

I remember reading that at the start of a DCC campaign, each player actually rolls up about half-a-dozen characters that are functionally Lvl 0 villagers, and as they go through various adventures they gradually get weeded down to just one or maybe two high level PCs per player. I just don’t remember if at those early levels the Players run each PC one at a time, pulling up a fresh PC as each one get killed in turn? Or if they are all ran simultaneously similar to frostgrave, or like an MMORPG and each player is controlling a party and the whole player group is functionally a raid until the chaff get killed off?

>>96328283
Generally the thread isn't keen on DCC, since even its creator doesn't really see it as OSR: it's doing its own gonzo kind of thing with callbacks to the feel of old D&D but at the table playing quite differently.

Whether or not you care about anything in the way of classification like that, there's not much of a playerbase for the game here. You might get lucky, but don't be surprised if there's not much help.

B/X newfag update after sessions 15:
I've lost my shit a little over the player who has quit. I'm reconsidering letting him run his solo downtime jerk campaign and become some sort of antagonist to the group perhaps. The MU (his buddy in crime) ditched yesterday's session on a short notice. I was both concerned player wise as well as for the session with the only arcane caster, multi tool and artillery class being absent. The players managed well, nevertheless. They've headed South to finally map the lake which was thrown as a hook since session 1. First they've encountered some Neanderthals hunting dinosaurs and getting cornered. They've helped their distance relatives who were suspicious of the two goblins in the party but warmed up towards the dwarf. Despite communication barriers they've found a way to communicate through a mixture of alignment language (once the Cleric arrived late to the session) and before that the dwarf could talk to the village's shaman who understand a bit of Dwarvish. My invested power gaming player became impatient when he felt the session would end with no treasure and thus no xp. Eagerly he pleaded his concerns so the group continued walking the lake's shore until they were ambushed by a brigand patrol. After repelling that attack and pursuing the brigands, they've occupied the brigand's camp as a result of a short siege, which involved a lot of oil flask induced fires. Luckily they could recover the whole treasure before mounted brigands could flee with parts of it. In the end it was another cool session and implementing strict 1:1 downtime last session also worked well. They've already started planning shit today. After my initial headache with the buddy who quit and the MU who didn't show up yesterday, it all felt well again and I calmed down a little, appreciating the way my fellow newb homies adapted to B/X+ and considering as mentioned before to let my quitting buddy still participate in his downtime potential bbeg adventure.

>>96325631
Very cool, thanks for sharing!

>>96326469
I like the idea to some extent. What I fared well with so far was while expanding the stuff in the area around my players' party as well as simulating world events during downtime, I've always stressed that my players can go wherever they want and do whatever they want, even if that meant I had a session where I've ended up using Appendix A to let them crawl through a dungeon that wasn't there before. For the blank parts just use common sense, connect some ends to your campaign and respond a little to what your table enjoys eventually.

>>96326469
>>96329531
Maybe to extend the part I like: For all sorts of settlements that are more than just randomly generated through hexcrawling (and sometimes even then) I use ExNovo to generate them. When rolling for the development phase events, I also let players arrive in between of them so I have a vivid history as well as future developments already at hand and ofc let the players influence them.

>>96297535 (OP)
Thoughts on delving deeper?
It seems like it tries to stick to original pretty closely, while also providing citations for its reasonings and explanations
>>96312021
Not in a game sense, but I think what you're looking for is inductive reasoning, and common sense.
Basically holding your players to a certain standard of accommodation when it comes to understanding that not everything needs to be explicitly stated, while also remaining true to that standard for yourself.
For example, if a player tells you that he is opening a door, and you are uninterrupted, you can assume that he walks up to the door and opens it bystanding in front of it grabbing the knob and opening.
If there is a hidden needle trap that's fine, but you shouldn't then say "well I was about to tell you that there is an open pit in front of the door, so you just step into it and die!
There has to be a certain level of giving your players the benefit of the doubt, while also assuming that characters are actively doing their best to survive at all times.

Something that reminds me of this, when players tell you that they want to "sneak". Well dungeon exploration movement already assumes that you are doing your best to sneak as well as possible at all times. If you tell me you're trying extra hard to sneak, I will say that's great, but you're already sneaking as well as you can, in the future if you want you can tell me when you would like to speed up if you don't want to be stralthy

>>96324717
Try using the dungeon stocking procedures from the game of your choice, if the game of your choice does not include these procedures, pick a much better game

>>96325723
zak is only a meme here because people keep trying to shill for him
and his anti-fan retards occasionally anti-shill for him. His work is fine, good even. His obsessive retardation in needing to win every argument is awful.

One way or anther, AFAIK, him getting his life destroyed hasnt changed his position that this kind of life-ruining shutting out of the artistic side of the hobby is only unjust in that it happened to him. No bad tactics, only bad targets.

>>96330105
Calling his work good is over stating it. Some of it's mineable and it's doubtlessly evocative but so too is any good piece of fantastical literature. You'd be better off (re)reading the Chronicles of Narnia or anything from Appendix N.

>>96327432
Procedually generate the calendar duh.

>>96328427
Well shoot!

Worth a shot anyway…

good idea oh nahh?? i have four lvl 2 players on the regular and the random two or three extra. should i be trying to get more players?

we just finished hole in the oak but my players said it felt too random and aimless for them. they quite enjoyed skeples tomb of the serpent king. they seem to want a big narrative motivation, a sort of "goal" besides loot. they loot along the way, loving that, but they need to feel like theyre 'looking' for something.

left is B5 Horror on the Hill right is B2 Keep on the Borderlands. theyre currently holed up outside a cave in area 8 on HotH. havent actually indocated the caves of chaos to the east yet so i could nix this idea wothout much effort.

i will be honest with you guys here. im wildly insecure about this shit for some reason.

>>96327432
>without railroading them
Have NPCs, usually the primary drivers of action besides the PCs, take and plan their actions independent of the PCs.
>unfriendly NPC guard captain decides to patrol west area this month (maybe he even has a schedule)
>PCs go to east area instead this month
>nothing
vs.
>NPC goes west
>PCs go west
>NPC: "it's you! You're lucky you are not wanted yet. Although crime is severely underreported here in these empty borderlands."
>PC: "Is that so? I'll show you crime..." *draws weapon*

>>96330105
Hi buzz. This isn't the transformers thread

>>96329496
1. Cavemen and dinosaurs are an OSR must. Good.
2. Love how the power gamer forced the rest to go back to looking for treasure.

I've read about your problems with the player who quit but really you're doing great, maybe than trying to run games solo for the guy have the MU join him and run a living campaign with the two groups of adventurers, one game with the regular group and another game (online) for the two jerks.

>>96331023
Please stop overthinking and get to playing, classic modules were meant to be used that way.

>>96331023
B2 doesn't give any specific aim for the players beyond clearing it and taking the gold. I had the cult on the top floor collecting the bodies of the slain and raise them as undead. As winter began (about 4 in game months of play including downtime and recovery from wounds) the undead hoard attacked the keep. Without that I suggest filling out the area in the wood including the cavern of the unknown and beyond. Rumours both true and false are key to a world that feels full and connected. All these things can be implemented slowly between sessions.
I don't know B5 and Skerps is an idiot.

>>96331023
Did you even read B5? It's crap.

>>96331372
>its crap
elaborate

Why do gender stat differences upset people so much, are they really that bad?

they are stupid
and if you focus on something like that it tells me you are focusing on the wrong things
ergo you don't know what are the important things

>>96331372
Ooooooooh!

>>96331480
The only thing that bothers me about it is the hypocrisy. Gary specifically said he wouldn't have limits on female strength in the preface to AD&D where he sets out what he's trying to accomplish with it, then does anyway. Which is kind of funny, but shows the lack of editing and consistency.

>>96331408
Life's too short to talk about that crap module. Run one of the good ones instead: B1, B2, B3 (or even better the B3.5 tweak), or B4.

Advanced options: Combine B2 with any of the gazillion fan-made expansions for it. My favourite ones are Mike's World, Stonehell (place Stonehell in the ravine and scatter the caves around the map), and The Dungeon Under the Keep.

>>96331647
>Gary specifically said he wouldn't have limits on female strength in the preface to AD&D
False. He never said no limits tout court, he said no BASELESS ARBITRARY limits. Picrel.

>then does anyway
Limits on female strength are not baseless, so there's no contradiction there.

>>96331647
There are no male / female human differences in dungeons & dragons when Gary made it, you're a lying sack of shit

>>96332601
Also false. Don't talk about things you know nothing about.

>>96331023
>map
Profoundly estúpido, if you want an expanded B2 map use the ones made by Geoff McKinney.

>>96331372
That's overstating things. It's a pretty good intro for brand-new players, it's like D&D: The Theme Park Ride. Sure, nobody thinks much of it as a location in campaign play, and they shouldn't, but as a B-series module it has its place.

>>96331480
(A certain type of) Women seethe intensely about being weaker than men in real life and feel that reproducing this aspect of reality in games (where you "don't have to") is misogynous. Due to nerds being spineless pussies, this attitude has seeped into nerd male culture and become associated with chuddism.

There are no *actual* problems with them, though, so no, they're not bad. Just... try not to go full Paul Jaquays with that shit. If your ability score rules for women mention the risk of being raped out of access to your unicorn, that's too far, you fucked up and it's bad now.

>>96330727
The final battle of Chronicles of Narnia where the forces of evil are just a random mishmash of various evil coded monsters with no cohesion is basically a perfect chainmail fantasy battle to be honest.

>>96331074
I'm just chronische.

>>96330105
>>96332960
>pretending to be Caveman
Cringe. If you actually are Caveman, even more cringe.

>>96331849
In the context of that paragraph, it comes across much more like "baseless" is being used to disparage the concept rather than identify the particular kind he doesn't like. He didn't go on to place non-arbitrary limits on male charisma, and the point is in a list of things he obviously considers needlessly complex for the game.

>>96331480
They are bad because at the end of they day they are a waste of space. With the str cap thing 99.9% of the time either no one plays a woman fighter or the rule is just ignored. When that is how people react to a rule you have ask yourself why are you bothering with it.

>>96332925
If you had a brain it would dawn on you that going durr durr realism derp is not good reason to have a rule that most people don't bother with.

>>96333601
Hahaha it's you again!
I'm still so fascinated with how one particular poster could have such a low quality idiosyncratic style of typing that he is immediately recognizable upon opening the thread.
:)

>>96332960
You will never be a woman

>>96333719
Good job showing that thinking is too hard for you by bitching about a boogeyman while missing the point of the post. There no point for a rule to exist if no one bothers to use it.

>>96333765
Lol do another one, mention me being brainless this time though

>>96331315
Thanks anon, I appreciate the reassurance. I'll look at the options and offer the MU to participate in the endeavors of the quitting player but I will stress the strict time keeping so the MU player has to decide where to spend his character's time and maybe consider making another character so he can technically play on both sides. One step after another, though. I'll keep running things as they are right now but I'll keep an open mind about introducing a rival adventure party to the campaign if I find enough people and time in our schedule.

On another note, I am wondering as my players start hoarding large amounts of gold or invest them into assets of all sorts, what is an elegant way to combat the growing imbalance between prices written in the rules and players having "too much" money to spend. This might sound like a stupid question and even though I'd encourage all kinds of investments, my players seem specifically keen on spending all their money on mercenaries, oil flasks or magical research.

>>96331480
There was a guy a couple threads ago who was having an absolute meltdown because of the easily verifiable statistically proven and inherently biological fact that women tend to be less strong than men by a fairly wide margin.
Even admitted that he doesn't know what the real life strength differences between men and women are, but that he assumes it is very small, and then we proved how even the world's strongest women have only about 80% the strength of the world's strongest men

>>96334079
Nothing was proved and posting "realism"retardation has nothing to do with the rule being good or bad.

>>96334133
What are you talking about? It's an easily verifiable fact that generally women are much weaker than men.
The fact that you get all bent out of shape over it really says a lot lmao

>>96334133
That's fine if you don't like it, but you could cry about realism in regards to literally any rule that is trying to simulate something.
But you would be denying reality if you said that women aren't provably weaker than men.
would you like me to post the statistics again?

>>96333581
>With the str cap thing 99.9% of the time either no one plays a woman fighter
In AD&D, a fighter with 18 dex is competitive if not even better than one with 18 str in a bunch of situations. The main reason is that you have to allocate your 18 to strength first, and then roll for percentile strength that, unless you roll very high, is nowhere near as good as the guaranteed bonuses that you get from 18 dexterity.

Also Gauntlets of Ogre Power and Girdles of Giant Strength are relatively easy to get.

So as long as you're using an arrange-to-taste system for ability scores, a cap on strength is not really an issue if you want to play a fighter Even more so if you want to play a ranger, since high dexterity synergises well with the bonuses a ranger gets for going around in leather armour.

It's an extremely easy fact to look up, and the information was even spoon-fed to you in the previous thread.
Reality really seems to get you worked up

>>96334274
Meant for >>96334133

>>96333581
>When that is how people react to a rule you have ask yourself why are you bothering with it.
For verisimilitude in my milieu, of course!

>>96334287
That reason is pointless when people don't use the rule.

>>96334272
That looks like another reason to not bother having the rule existing.

>>96334300
I bet there's a lot of rules you don't use, and I bet there's ones that you do use that I don't.
Strange to be upset about it though

>>96334312
Sure but when most people don't use a rule you need to ask yourself does it really need to exist. If it is just taking up space then you probably could just replace it with something else

>>96333851
>On another note, I am wondering as my players start hoarding large amounts of gold or invest them into assets of all sorts, what is an elegant way to combat the growing imbalance between prices written in the rules and players having "too much" money to spend.
Honestly, this is fine, and I think you'll find it sorts itself out over time. Once the PCs can afford all the basic gear they need, the game simply transitions out of money for these things being a concern – which isn't to say the items themselves stop mattering, necessarily. If you can buy arbitrary amounts of lamp oil the encumbrance even stops mattering since you don't mind dumping excess flasks to stock up on gold and silver when you find it.

Nor do you need to force the players to invest their money. They should eventually reach a point where, for example, the tradeoff between monthly upkeep and their use in overland adventuring (mercenaries will not enter the dungeon) renders further mercenaries moot, or else they decide to use these hired companies to start conquering things, which is fine – basically domain play from another angle. Or, if they just keep adventuring with the biggest army they can in train, eventually they're liable to start running out of money. And of course, it would be perfectly sensible for you to adjudicate that established army-havers of the region start getting very leery of this private army sprung up out of nowhere and constantly on the march, and decide to get involved. And so on, and so forth.

You get the idea: there's actually not much of a way for PC money management to go *wrong*, in the sense of impacting the game negatively. You can relax and allow your players their rein.

>>96334343
I will make sure to let Gary know

>>96334343
Most people don't use 1:1 time, figure scaling rules for mass combat, and grappling and overbearing. Do those rules need to exist? Yeah, they fucking do. Most people are morons.

>>96334300
Anon, what I'm saying is I do use the rule. For verisimilitude. In my milieu!

>some guy getting insanely bent out of shape at the mere prospect of someone else having fun in a non-preapproved way
Almost indescribably Reddit behavior.

>>96334488
It's exactly opposite: Plebbit is the home of the Tyranny of Fun, where a game is OSR if it identifies as such. We have standards here.

>>96334488
>>96334499
>double sequential triple dubs
Ch-ch-ch-checked!

>>96334499
You're talking about playstyle standards, and I've never seen those enforced more strongly than "that's not the way we roll, try another thread on this board" here. I'm talking about ideological standards. This guy malding over Strength caps and mods clearly doesn't think they're incompatible with XP for gold.

>>96334559
Okay then, carry on.

>>96334471
Those rule probably get way more use than this str cap one.

>>96334488
>>96334559
>if you don't like a retarded rule that adds nothing to the game then you hate fun.

>>96334733
Nta, but it seems like you are pretty ass blasted about this

>>96334733
>>96334726
I only use the strength cap rule whenever women try to join my game, just so that I can demonstrate to them that not only are they weaker in real life, but that even in their fantasies they will be easily dominated and have their unicorns taken away

>>96334777
Even as trolling your post is nogames retardation.

>>96334755
I think you meant to reply one of the faggot trying to justly a stupid rule that most people don't use. \

I don't cap woman PC strength because I like strong Amazonians in my fantasy

>>96334370
Alright, that makes sense, thanks for clearing that up for me!

>>96334370
Nta but how would you recommend implementing upkeep costs in BX? It offers no baseline for lodging and other expenses but I feel there ought to be some sort of cost associated with crashing in town

Are you guys ready to admit that hirelings are boring as fuck? Why should PCs be middle managers?

>>96335481
t. that B/X newfag anon, in OSE classic it's mental that the mercenaries upkeep covers those things (unlike retainers). However, if the party extensively travels the wilderness or doesn't find a place that has the supplies to restock a band of mercenary, I let the players know and would simulate the consequences.

>>96335570
*mentioned not mental sorry

>>96335561
Not as boring as having a party of PCs larping as cape wearing faggots

>>96335481
You can abstract it monthly using the DMG rule (100 gp per level per month), but I think ACKS is better when it comes to abstract living expenses, and it also has table for concrete, specific expenses. Picrel

>>96335561
FOEGYG

>>96335614
>FOEGYG
Explain yourself.

>>96335953
Lurk more newfag

>>96335953
"False OSR Enthusiast, Get Ye Gone." It's a phrase used for gatekeeping/purity testing. Doesn't seem to work all that well.

>>96334272
>as long as you're using an arrange-to-taste system for ability scores
kwab

>>96335561
>not leading from the front
Can't even middle manage rite lol.

>>96335481
I'm an OD&Dfag but I think the AD&D rule for this is better, the LBB rule of 1% of actual XP for upkeep is insanely punishing, at least if you interpret it as being per month (in a classic LBB Moment, it actually doesn't say).

>>96331480
Was I running Advanced I wouldn't enforce it but it only applies to str it's perfectly reasonable to include.
>>96332925
+1
>>96334300
Wouldn't call it pointless. It reflects a fact about human biology in a game that often, but not always, reflects reality.
>>96335561
>doesn't like having troops in his fantasy wargame
Why are you playing osr?
>>96336438
Can you effectively offset your upkeep with peasant taxes?

>>96332643
How embarrassing.

>>96336594
It's pointless because most people don't use it and it add nothing to the game.

>>96336729
>this part of a rules toolkit isn't a thing I like so it should be removed
They aren't sending their best this time.
But don't worry, I'm sure TSR will take your complaints about streamlining to heart and modify the next print run.

>>96337042
It was removed later on and never came back so clearly TSR and late WotC could not find a good reason to keep it.

>>96337118
>XP for gold was removed later on and never came back so clearly TSR and late WotC could not find a good reason to keep it.

>>96337118
Oh good, go play one of those editions.

>>96337164
That existed for reasons other than "realism"faggotry.
>>96337165
Go play a edition, faggot.

>>96337196
nou

>>96326469
Thats just a modified order of battle which is entirely bueno.

>>96327094
make a poll. If they can not come to a clear consensus then majority rules.

>>96335953
Fuckin retard.
>>96336232
Cope, FOE

>>96336729
Just because you are autistic and can only repeat the same things over and over again, doesn't mean other people are the same way.

>>96337118
Oh yeah, specifically which editions? And are they on topic for this thread?>>96337196
It really is genuinely impressive how you're posting style is so characteristic that I can immediately tell who it is at a glance.

>>96336389
The DMG is required reading, Anon.

>>96336438
Is it? OD&D charges less than ACKS all the way, and less than the DMG until 7th fighter level. Maths follows

The ACKS rule linked above is equivalent to a bit more than 1% per month. E.g. 25 gp for a first-level fighter (average XP = 1,000) is 2.50%, and 100 gp for a third-level fighter (average XP = 6,000) is 1.67%. At low levels they're both much less than what the DMG charges, 100 gp and 300 gp per month respectively.

ACKS overtakes the DMG at 6th fighter level (800 gp vs 600 gp), when OD&D is still charging on average 480 gp/month.

Only at 7th fighter level does OD&D charge more than the DMG, 900 gp/month vs 700.

So OD&D is the lowest of the three actually. It's not a bad rule at all except for the fact that it gives you 0 gp for starting characters, but that's easily fixed by setting a minimum of, say, 10gp/month for starting characters.

>>96337793
You're FOE.

>>96336143
>>96336232

I've been running OSE for four years straight now. "False enthusiast" indeed. Other people on /tg/ always make fun of this general and say it's full of autists. I see why.

>>96338309
People in and out of this thread have an unfortunate habit of claiming the be osr while playing totally unrelated nonsense games that have no overlap with proper Fantasy Adventure Gaming in the old style. As a result some of our number have developed a somewhat justified aversion to the uninitiated. Hope your game is going well Anon.

>>96316037
Fear and Hunger is basically a LotFP roguelike made in rpgmaker

>>96338428
Proper FAG bro

I'm drunk and feeling stupid, which is normal because I know I'm not smart.
What would happen if I took all of the stringent dungeon procedures from bx/1e, but used races classes and combat actions of a different edition?
For example, ACKS begs the question of using 3.x as part of a BX structure.

>>96338463
To clarify, what I mean is can I let players have the fun of 5e, while also enforcing the structure and mileu of osr?
I'm sorry if this sounds really dumb, and probably foegyg. I just miss having people to play with

>>96337849
>Is it? OD&D charges less than ACKS all the way, and less than the DMG until 7th fighter level.
Sorry, yeah, the words "at high level" got left in my brain and didn't make it into text. Since XP requirements effectively double per level but 100/level is linear, ultimately the PCs end up screwed over. But you're right that it's more forgiving on low levels.

I guess the thing is that to me getting 100 gp isn't that hard for a starting character, and at that level needing the money is also a good push into adventure when the PC hasn't developed many organic hooks into the setting yet.

>>96338466
>I just miss having people to play with
To be totally honest, if that's the case you should just run whatever people will play.

But to answer your actual question, no, it's very difficult to do that without heavily nerfing certain PC abilities, the way rests work, and so on because otherwise the PCs can just break the resource management out the gate (the entire purpose of these abilities is to trivialize it). It's been tried many times, and the result is always one of two outcomes:

• A 5ebabby gleefully squealing "I'm playing reel OSR! Look, Ma!" while just running 5e
• A more realistic, disappointed DM, admitting that it's a ton of work to combine the systems correctly and the only outcome is disappointed *players*

Basically, you have to remember that the reason players flock to 5e is that it represents the style they *want*, or think they want. Sometimes they really want OSR gameplay, then you're in business. Most of the time they know what they want and by OSR-izing your game you're basically just trying to trick them into playing something they don't like, that's a bad time.

>>96338504
>>96338466
Interesting discussion. In my experience, your statement here is a little incorrect:
>Basically, you have to remember that the reason players flock to 5e is that it represents the style they *want*, or think they want
A lot of people play D&D 5e not because they want to delve into dungeons and fight dragons, they want D&D 5e™ so that they can participate in the memes, buy a colorful set of dice, share reels of wacky NAT 20!!! moments and so on. They really mostly have no fucking idea what style they want as they're not familiar with any styles at all.

That being said, it can be overwhelmingly difficult to get people away from it. And you are right, there is a significant portion of them who legitimately enjoy the 5e playstyle: high-flying, easy, colorful, character-focused, with "interesting" build options. It's incredibly unlikely that these players will enjoy OSR even if Gygax himself ran the damn game.

>can I let players have the fun of 5e, while also enforcing the structure and mileu of osr?
Probably not in a way that's fun for you. Combat is the biggest problem and 5e combat is probably specifically what the players enjoy. You simply cannot run a satisfying OSR-style game when 5e has spells that break resource management, in addition to rules like death saving throws, short rests, abundant healing, etc.

Honestly, have you considered Shadowdark for them? It's not a bad gateway drug.

>>96338579

People reccommending Shadowdark in an OSR thread. Fucking tragic. Soon we'll have the DCC people in droves here.

>>96338463
>>96338466
>can I let players have the fun of 5e, while also enforcing the structure and mileu of osr?
TL;DR no

It's been tried by several games in the "O5R" genre. It doesn't really work for a plethora of reasons. A few off the top of my head.

Many of the race/class rules militate against the core OSR procedures, for example spells and infinite cantrips that take resource management out of the equation.

Combat is slow, doesn't scale well to large numbers of combatants, and focused on pushing the right buttons on the character sheet.

The very way skill systems and character classes are built encourages the players to do the same (spam the actions that their characters are best at).

WotC rules are VERY aimed at buildfagging because they realised that what actually sells is character options: There's a bunch of people buying splatbooks and theorycrafting builds and not playing. (This business model actually started with 2e). This puts the focus on the characters and the desire to complete the buildfagging instead of on the world.

Many of the spells have been fucked up in many different ways. For example, errors in Teleport take you a few miles off of your destination instead of killing you.

>>96339261
>spam the actions that their characters are best at
And bitch and moan if the DM doesn't present them with the situations that allows them to spam those powers.

Another chainmail battle tonight. Players were adventuring normally, decided that instead of talking to the orcs, they were going to come back with an army of mercs. Returned with 300 mercs (30 models) and marched through the dungeon. Kicked down the door of the Orc Lord and combat began. The Orc lord had 6HD, two henchmen with 2HD, and a shitload of orcs and goblins that could be combined into units of troops. While outnumbered, the Orcs had both a terrain advantage (hidden passageways) and an advantage that Gary's mercs are cunts.

The Orc Lord sent his henchies in so the party fought them normally while the troops attacked from all around them doing the vietcong tactics. Didn't work out great for the orcs, but it was touch and go, especially then 100 troops of mercs defected. The magic user managed to grease the floor making it difficult to reach them, fighter #1 defended them in a choke point and the party managed to chase the orc leader through various holes until he got cornered and stabbed to death by Fighter #2, Cleric, Magic User and Thief.

Immense props to a level 3 fighter #1, who held that line for most of the battle. The chokepoint meant only two attacks could be rolled against him, but I was nice enough to let him roll three attacks in response because it was still pretty touch and go. By the time the party found him he was dying with 2hp and the orcs were mostly slain or fleeing. The hold was looted and the party returned to their stronghold. It was the biggest faction on the second floor of the dungeon so it was major horde and everyone leveled up, even after paying the mercs. They made it clear their plans to use this wand of animate dead they found to raise up a fucking small legion of skeletons and burn the merc camp to the ground because the betrayal, while ultimately not that bad, nearly got them all killed, and as one player put it "fuck mercenaries, seriously" so I guess we're doing that next session.

Incredible session.

>>96338579
>even if Gygax himself ran the damn game.
yeah, they wouldn't enjoy Gygax's style
But all the things you listed are not something that didn't exist in D&D before the 10's. Except build options, but 5e just pretends to have them and that's enough, you don't see people flocking to 3.5 to get that. Everything else
>High Flying
>Simplified
>Colorful
>Character focused
Gygax wasn't into but people did and it was a thing in D&D since forever.

>>96339271
Posting from page zero, I happened to read this post and had vietnam flashbacks. Like, an adult dude red in the face screaming because he couldn't press his buttons.
Horrible stuff. Carry on.

>>96339214
>Soon we'll have the DCC people in droves here.
DCC is a fun game. What's it like being a no-fun-allowed faggot? You sound like a miserable piece of shit.

>>96337800
>>96337805
>I can't justly this rule being used so I post nonsense.

>>96339309

sounds fun anon but typically leaders of enemy forces lead from the front in DnD. I know it makes sense not to but

What are some useful and quick to implement rules for sieges?
Specifically asking after the party took over a brigand camp and received an ultimatum from the Robber Baron during the downtime.

>>96325631
>https://files.catbox.moe/gopccv.pdf
AD&D and B/X stocking methods lead to dramatically different % holy shit
Is AD&D expecting way more rooms and larger places?

>>96339945
AD&D has more empty rooms, but once you take away those, the stocking "rules" are fairly similar. It's not a huge difference in practice, particularly when you take into account that those are not rules but guidelines. (The DMG is, in fact, not even that, just what you use with Appendix A.)

A kind Anon shared the statistics here:
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/96186918/#96205115

>>96327094
I tend to ask what they're thinking of trying next session, make note and then summarize it into 2-3 options I ask mid week as a reminder. There's usually enough discussion towards one or the other I can run with it.

>>96337849
>An optional rule that's widely regarded as trash is required reading
Sure. Reading =/= using.
Go make your TODD thread for that shit.

>>96338579
>Honestly, have you considered Shadowdark for them? It's not a bad gateway drug.
This entire song and dance about having to trick your friends into having fun with you via bait games is fucked and sad. Evidence of a deceitful cultural norm where patronizing your fellows into doing what you want is a constant, contempt for each other's capacities is everpresent and denied simultaneously.
If you can't discus what sort of game you want to play like an adult with clear expectations you're not going to get an osr style game out of whatever bullshit you're shilling. Not everyone has to like whatever niche hip thing. Not everything has to be a secret marketing push for recreational bandwidth.

>>96340008
>AD&D has more empty rooms, but once you take away those, the stocking "rules" are fairly similar.
Did that come out weird? The empty rooms are part of the stocking procedure.

>>96340008
Oh thanks calculations already done, convenitent.
Thank you!

>>96339945
>>96340008
>>96340419
>>96340441
Isn't weird that AD&D has no Trap + Treasure combinations?
It feels wrong

>>96340361
>hurr introducing new games to people is bad
Retard

>>96340509
So this one. >>96340008
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/96186918/#96205115
Is not accurate? Every treasure is trapped?

>>96339309
That's cool and I'm glad you had a great session, but you do know that mercenaries will not under normal circumstances enter the dungeon and that there are good gameplay reasons for that, right?

I'm saying this not to dunk on your refereeing but to warn you that if the players start to do this systematically there are well-known problems which will crop up.

>>96339748
Chainmail has siege rules. There's also the Siege Machine in BECMI which is a sort of adjunct to the War Machine, but it's very abstract and many posters here seem to dislike the War Machine intensely.

>>96339945
>Is AD&D expecting way more rooms and larger places?
Pretty much. The expected percentage of empty rooms decreased continuously over the old-school era; Gygax's original level 1 of Castle Greyhawk probably has over 100 rooms and 18 of those are keyed.

This decrease reached its apex in the retard wing of the OSR which keeps publishing funbox monster hotels with no empty rooms at all.

>>96340290
>>96340488
Obvious false flag troll is obvious.

>>96340509
NTA. Those are treasure traps. The stocking procedures deal with room traps.

>>96339309
>Returned with 300 mercs (30 models) and marched through the dungeon.
your players will remember this and you will pay the price.

>>96340419
>Did that come out weird?
Nope.

>The empty rooms are part of the stocking procedure.
Sure, but counting empty rooms is like counting corridors. Both are important and need to be present in a reasonable amount and in the right places, but ultimately what matters more is the ratio of treasures to monsters and treasures to tricks and traps.

In other words, if you have a dungeon that is stocked well you can add or remove corridors and empty rooms at your leisure within reason: That doesn't affect the part of stocking that actually matters. The B/X table describes a dungeon that has fewer empty rooms than the AD&D one, but the risk/reward ratios are not that far off from one another.

In other other words, I regard the art of placing empty rooms to be closer to the art of Jelqing the dungeon than to the art of stocking it well, although technically it's neither, it's its own thing.

This does NOT contradict:
>>96340764
The DMG percentage of empty rooms is better than the B/X one, but the B/X one is not game breaking in and of itself, just a bit suboptimal.

>>96340460
>Isn't weird that AD&D has no Trap + Treasure combinations?
*Room* traps + treasure? Yes, it's weird. I've added them back in at a rate of 1-in-20.

>>96340764
I see what you mean here anon. It doesn't feel like a lived space without emptiness. It's as if I visit my friend and in each room including the garage and attic there is an uncle, cousin and so on.

>>96340740
Thanks, that will do!
Do you think chainmail is generally a good supplement for B/X and AD&D? Maybe I need to make room at our adventure table for a playmat you can draw on and use some miniatures in addition to that in order to run bigger battles.

>>96340785
Treasure traps are part of the stocking procedure you fuckwit. It says so, in the stocking procedure.

>>96340688
Read the whole page anon. I know its hard but read an entire page of a book before making decisions. Maybe the entire section even.

>>96340862
>but ultimately what matters more is the ratio of treasures to monsters and treasures to tricks and traps.
Nope.
Can't have one without the other. Empty rooms and corridors are an essential part of stocking. If you don't take that into account all the other shit you cram in there won't work.

>>96341102
Did you hit reply before reading the whole comment? I never said not to take it into account.

I agree empty rooms are important in and of themselves, I'm just saying that I regard it as an important but *distinct* practice from stocking proper, since they don't affect the risk:reward part of the dungeon.

In this regard, it's like having the right number and location of corridors, as well as jelqing the dungeon well: Super important, but not part of stocking proper.

>>96341095
>>96341102
>>96341184
It's also a matter of immersion.
If fights happen, but non-empty rooms are isolated, it a bit easier to imagine most other guys didn't hear your party and rolled to be surprised.
Good conversation.

>>96339675
Please start taking mental health medication instead of making posts like this

>>96339459
Well it's off topic for this thread, so consider that before you start acting like a petulant retard

>>96337931
What an astounding retort. Maybe dedicate some of that brain power to learning how to play your games?

>>96341184
I did. You just don't know how to write without hyperbolic description you then have to backpedal on.
>ultimately what matters more
>but uih no never mind I mean uh what you said but how I say it
lol

>>96341305
I'm not backpedalling. Let's put it like this. Imagine you've written a good dungeon, you're satisfied with it, and it's more or less in line with the Appendix A ratio. Now you have four choices:
1. Remove half the treasure rooms.
2. Remove half the monster rooms.
3. Remove half the room traps.
4. Remove half the empty rooms.
These will all make the dungeon worse if it was good to begin with, but in very different ways: (1-3) affect the risk-reward dynamics of it, while (4) affects something quite different from it, the dynamics of "space" in the dungeon. It's like unjelqing sections of it, or removing corridors.

>>96341305
>>96341352
In fact, some (perhaps even many) of the functions of empty rooms can be replicated with additional corridors, branching, jelqing, three-dimensionality, and other space-managing techniques providing unstocked explorable zones that also creates space and breathing room separating monster factions from one another and allow for tactical manoeuvring for both monsters and PCs.

The same cannot be said of rooms with monsters, treasures, tricks, traps, and "specials". There's no substitute for any of those.

>>96341352
>>96341403
>he can't stop doubling down
Go ahead and make your dungeon with substitutes for empty rooms. I'm sure it'll work out great. Very osr. Much ad&d.

>>96341403
This is all very reasonable. I'm not sure what the other Anon's problem is, and at this point I don't think he does either. Ignore him.

>>96339675
>>96338579
>have you considered Shadowdark
I'm that anon. I might have been drunk but even I'm not that fucking stupid

>>96340290
>/todd/ler actually having a melty because he was told to read his DMG
Hate to see it!

>>96341095
>Read the whole page anon.
I have access to B/X but not to AD&D for the moment and clones don't do it. Say OSRIC changed this and many other things.

>>96341703
You're on the internet right fucking now you moron

>>96340929
I think OD&D is the best fit for Chainmail, unsurprising since it was written with Chainmail in mind and many of the monsters have Chainmail troop stats and so on. It probably works well with B/X as well, but for AD&D specifically I think Chainmail might be a bit too low on detail to be a good fit. You'd probably have to do a lot of chopping and changing to accomodate new monsters, spells and magic items.

>>96341713
Doesn't matter, other anons gave useful answers, you can have your autistic meltdown anon, enjoy your miserable existence I guess.

>>96341830
>I don't have access to ad&d!
>is currently posting online
Seriously, are you actually this stupid, or are you just trolling?

>>96341304
I alraedy know how to play my games, unlike you.

>>96341985
Hey it's you! You're that one poster who has an extremely characteristic style that is easy to recognize immediately!
What are your thoughts on the 2nd edition of advanced dungeons & dragons?

>>96341990
You're the one with the recognizable style. What are your thoughts on ACKS?

>>96335614
Source of that picture?

>>96342571
ACKS II RR

NEW THREAD

>>96342662
>>96342662
>>96342662

Consistently for almost a year now /osrg/ has had the most deleted posts per thread of any thread on /tg/.
Shit's bananas. More than /40kg/, more than any of the mtg stuff, more than trench crusade even.

>>96342879
It's pretty crazy as someone who just lurks and doesn't post too much. 80% of the time I don't even know why they get deleted, it's like there's one offending message and everyone who replied just gets zapped all the way down the chain.

>>96341255
No u
>>96341604
What does Shadowdark have do with this reply chain?

>>96342879
It's because it has the most useless slapfights. Wait, actually, there's no way that's true

>>96343069
It's just a sad attempt to topic shift the general by someone who disagrees with its premise.

>>96343177
>>96343422
It does seem specifically targeted given the level of dickbuttery in various other threads that gets a free pass.

>>96343652
It absolutely is. Essentially, anything that

- names 2efag
- tells 2efag to fuck off
- says 2e is off-topic
- mentions the newbie guide (which says 2e is a bad game)
- mentions the moderation campaign to enforce the above

is deleted.

224 posts deleted last thread, 85 this thread btw.

>>96342879
>>96343069
>>96343422
>>96343652
>>96343857

224 posts deleted last thread. 91 posts deleted this thread.