Thread 96815749

Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to first-decade Gygaxian D&D, its various modern clones, and content created specifically for use with this. Later editions (2e and newer) should be discussed elsewhere.

Broadly, OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons as played in the game's first decade (74-83) — 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. We also have two excellent beginner guides created by Anons with feedback from the thread, feel free to check them out for answers:

>n00b DM's Guide
https://pastebin.com/EVvt6P0B
>n00b Player's Handbook
https://pastebin.com/XALkXkV0

>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:
>>96799302

Continuing from the last thread. Gaze attacks: how do you resolve them?

there is already a thread >>96815556

>What's an OSR?
>Don't know how to get started?
The friendly n00b guides can be found here:

>n00b DM's Guide
https://pastebin.com/EVvt6P0B
>n00b Player's Handbook
https://pastebin.com/XALkXkV0

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

I'll just say for the record that I preferred the
>Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to first decade, Gygaxian D&D, its more faithful modern clones, and content created specifically for use with them. Later editions (2e and newer) should be discussed elsewhere.

>Broadly, OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons played as intended and taught by its creators from 1974 to 1983 — less emphasis on linear adventures and overarching metaplots and a greater emphasis on player agency.
phrasing from >>96801529 although I don't set myself up for an authority. Also, given the circumstances I get why you had to make this one quickly and might not have felt like fucking around for exact phrasings in the last thread.

TL:DR death to faggotry whether fish- or Hodgson-based, glory to /osrg/.

>>96815802
Yeah, that was exactly it: tried to make some quick additions based on discussion but was in a hurry because of the hijacker. We can continue to tweak over the next few threads.

>>96815785
dogshit troll attempt

>>96815816
For sure.

>>96815749 (OP)
>Continuing from the last thread. Gaze attacks: how do you resolve them?
I already posted my take on gaze attacks here: >>96814887, although I will say that the MMII guidelines on handling gaze attacks are pretty good *as long as* you don't take them as clarifications of existing rules, at which point you'll notice that they conflict with almost every petrifying monster in the original Monster Manual.

>>96815917
Why is everyone here so autistically aggressive / aggressively autistic?

>>96814966
>It's not magic, it's just a thing that happens, then again I've never had such things interact with anti-magic so hard call, I'd probably rule they're non-magic for the most part, an inherent part of the creature.
I'm not really seeing this, you figure a beholder's gaze attacks aren't magic? I can kind of see making a specific exception for a creature which just looks supernaturally horrid (classically the medusa) but paralyzing and killing ray attacks, surely not?

>>96815989
100%, otherwise the next question is 'Is the Beholder floating in midair magic'
From there you end up at '...man this things biology makes zero sense without magic/is made of magic, does it die in the field?'

I'd rather just go 'Nah mate, it's a biology thing' and knock off for a pint.

>>96816003
Seems obvious to me that it's levitating using magic, not least because the creature description says so (I could've sworn I had a screencap of its MM entry, but now I can't find one so you'll have to do without, sorry). I admit that creates comical consequences if it wanders into an anti-magic field or something, but to me that's just part of the set of viable anti-beholder strategies.

>>96816076
(Note: This does mean a Magic-User can just dispel the beholder and make it fall down. It's not even that hard, the base chance of Dispel Magic working is 50% and a beholder counts as a level 10 creature, so if you're level 8 you have a 40% chance of hilarious hijinks)

>>96816120
NTA, but Dispel Magic affects items and spells, but I don't think negates anything that could broadly be defined as "magic".

>>96816152
Good point actually. I'd have to think about that and reread Dispel Magic before I could argue with it at all.

>>96816003
>>96816076
Found the screencap! Pic related. I also misremembered the beholder's effective HD, have a link to an extensive discussion of this matter from last year:
>https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/93798979/#93815219
TL;DR the average beholder has an effective HD of 13 or 14.

>>96816152
>Dispel Magic affects items and spells
ACKCHUALLY it explicitly does not affect items aside from potions, which it destroys. At least in AD&D. Maybe it's different in Basic? Anyway, Dispel Magic (AD&D version) affects all magic it comes into contact with in its area of effect except enchanted items, including "spells cast upon persons or objects". I suppose you could argue that the beholder isn't technically casting a spell of levitation on itself, and if that's how you want to roll at your table I'm not going to break your basement door down and upend your sand table, but for my part I don't think that kind of quibble was intended.

>>96816268
No, you're right: no item effects besides potions. Although that makes it even less of a generalist "anti-magic effect".

I agree that if you wanted to roll with the spell that way on the table that it's no biggie, but I'd find it annoying to try to arbitrate what effects of X or Y creature are magical vs not to figure out user cases (though the results could get pretty creative).

>>96816345
>I'd find it annoying to try to arbitrate what effects of X or Y creature are magical vs not to figure out user cases (though the results could get pretty creative).
Yeah, again, fair enough. I get it. Are the beholder's eyestalks magical, or does it just cast spells *through* the eyestalks, etc. etc.

>>96816268
Beholder's levitation is inherently magical but not a spell. Same as an enchanted item being inherently magical rather than something that can be dispelled.
Magical abilities aren't spells even if they have spell like effects or even use spell mechanics.
Seems straight forward enough to arbitrate and implement although there must be edge cases.
>that really upends my sand table you know?

The idea that regular henchman use is considered essentially a given in OSR games seems grossly overstated to me based on my experience with AD&D.

The AD&D guidelines for recruiting henchmen are incredibly strict, requiring PCs to sink large amounts of time and money into recruitment alone. The DMG states about 1 in 1000 residents of a settlement are suitable for employment as a henchman. In a city with a population of 10000, only 10 people per month are interested in becoming hirelings, and even fewer will respond to PCs posting notices in public, hiring criers, etc. as it's impossible to get a recruiting effectiveness of 100%.

That's not even mentioning the odds that a potential henchman would turn down a PCs offer or secretly conspire to stab them in the back.

The idea of the PCs in an adventuring party commanding numerous henchmen on their adventures seems like a fabrication based on grossly exaggerated assumptions retainer recruitment. Playing the game RAW, henchmen are rare, useful assets that require significant investment.

>>96817347
>The DMG states about 1 in 1000 residents of a settlement are suitable for employment as a henchman.
Did you read the next sentence?

>>96817347
>The AD&D guidelines for recruiting henchmen are incredibly strict, requiring PCs to sink large amounts of time and money into recruitment alone.
This is precisely because it's so powerful. It's like a lot of the other deranged money sink rules of AD&D, like training costs: it was added to either bleed surplus funds off PCs or make abusing the thing/behavior harder or both. In this case I'd guess that Gygax wanted PCs to typically have 1-2 hirelings, not like eight. (By comparison OD&D permits a highly charismatic person to have 12 and the norm is 4; nothing really regulates numbers besides the Charisma score. Whether this is to be seen as an Arnesonism or just something Gygax himself decided over time didn't work, who can say?)

>The idea of the PCs in an adventuring party commanding numerous henchmen on their adventures seems like a fabrication based on grossly exaggerated assumptions
Not to be a contrarian shit, but I don't think I've ever actually seen a notion like this expressed. I'd say the big distinction I've seen people make WRT henchmen and the OSR is that old-school PCs typically have them at all, which isn't the norm in 3e or 5e.

>>96816712
Posting here just in case

>>96817497
You've got Conquering the Barbarian Altanis here:
>https://attronarch.com/wilderlands

Ben Mazirian's Dreamlands stuff started as a spinoff of a game he was running in the Wilderlands:
>https://maziriansgarden.blogspot.com/2013/11/my-ghinor-highlands.html
(click the Ruined Ghinor tag for the rest of his posts about it)

I'm trying to think of others; I'd swear I've read at least half a dozen accounts of using the CSIO, for example. If I come up wth any I'll post again. Melan has definitely written at various times about playing in the Wilderlands but I don't have any of his posts on it available offhand, sorry.

>>96817347
holy fuck lmao
retard nogames

>>96817426
Yes
>>96817482
>In this case I'd guess that Gygax wanted PCs to typically have 1-2 hirelings
If that. IME and based on the numbers about half the PCs in a campaign at a given time have no retainers, and the other have 1-2, maybe 3 if the player is a fiend.
>>96817570
Call me "nogames" all you want, doesn't change the fact that 1. I'm correct 2. I run AD&D games every week and have for years 3. you have nothing worthwhile to contribute.

>>96818036
You shouldn't even respond to posts like that nogames fag honestly, I'm like 98% certain that's the local sperg trying to make this thread look like it's full of le evil abrasive posters so that he can then accuse it of being unpleasant even though it's his own fault.

>>96818036
>uhm ACKSHUALLY HENCHMEN ARE RARE AN UNUSED
mhm, ye okay
>>96818082
no I just dont like nogames turistas

>>96815749 (OP)
I already know how to play B/X. What's the most popular game that will guarantee me the greastest amount of players?

>>96818082
You're right, but sometimes I can't help myself
>>96818109
Well then why don't you tell me why I'm wrong instead of being a massive faggot (actually I know why; it's because I'm right + you are a massive faggot)

>>96818339
Probably B/X. If your sole criteria is widest appeal /potential playerbase while still being OSR, B/X and OSE games are the most popular, as far as I know.

>>96818355
Nta, but he's kinda right, if a bit rude. Playing the game btb necessitates hireling use pretty quickly if you track any amount of encumbrance with coins, wilderness encounter numbers or have gaps in party composition. You could get by with just hirelings and mercenaries but henchmen will be needed for more firepower/utility pretty quickly.

>>96818339
D&D 5e with homebrew rules :^)

>>96818339
It's almost certainly B/X, yeah. It might, *might* get a bit more attention if you call it OSE instead depending on where you're at, but they're the same game, so.

>>96818401
>>96818830

Is OSE the same system? What if I want to play a game with sword & sorcery themes (Primeval Thule, On Mighty Thews, Barbarians of Lemuria, Planets of Peril, etc.) I'm looking for a fairly generic system that will allow me to play freely. B/X kind of constrains you to play with the established classes and I'm looking for something with low magic, weird, pulpy fiction.

>>96818893
It is yeah: rewritten for clarity and conciseness (and in the process removing all the gameplay advice), but the same system. So if B/X doesn't work for you, neither will OSE.

>>96818893
Yeah, OSE is just B/X rewritten and stripped of most of the explanatory text in favor of a "modern" reference-style layout. Honestly it's probably better at the table, but flavorlessly written compared to B/X and not nearly as good at teaching the game.

>What if I want to play a game with sword & sorcery themes
Then you have a few options. Hyperborea (formerly Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperborea, but the name was too much of a mouthful) is a heavier game, based on AD&D, but has a bunch of classes and this spiffing map for a setting.

Or, if you want a lighter and more loosey-goosey system you could try an LBB OD&D derivative. For your purposes the best would probably be Seven Voyages of Zylarthen; the aesthetic in the books isn't exactly Conan, because all the art was lifted from the same Edwardian(?) public-domain illustrator, but the rules work admirably well for sword & sorcery. There are a couple other OD&D clones you could try, like the relatively straight imitation Swords & Wizardry.

Be warned though, effectively any D&D derivative pretty much constrains you to play with the established classes. That's just a core element of how D&D works. So you may be disappointed either way, depending on exactly what it is you're after.

>>96815786
n00b PHB anon here. I updated the doc with a recommended reading list cribbed from Appendix N.
Also fixed the broken second link.
https://pastebin.com/XALkXkV0

>>96819237
Nice one, Anon! I'll try to remember this, if I make the next thread. Otherwise hopefully whoever does make it will remember.

Is there an O.S.R. version of the World of Darkness?

>>96819395
Fortunately not. Is there some specific WoD trait you're after?

>>96819374
Note the link to the pastebin works fine; the problem was the upload to the anon file site. It redirects now.

>>96819406
Oh, duh. My bad.

>>96818036
>did you read the next sentence
>yes
>still goes with 1:1000 ratio
Can't help the retarded. Adjust the ratio between 1:200 to 1:1000 as needed. Shit's not complicated.

>>96819395
Esoteric Enterprises and Deep Morphean Transmissions. Probably get more traction discussing them and WoD style stuff in the nusr thread.
>>96803352

>>96819403
Modern paranormal adventures.

>>96820128
Oh, alright, cool. I'm not sure OSR games are really a good fit for that, though, because the two classic pillars of OSR gameplay are dungeon delving and wilderness adventures. I guess you could have sewers and such stand in for the dungeons, but it seems like it would get monotonous to go down there and find chuds and Ron Perlman every time. Esoteric Enterprises might be your best bet, as Anon suggested. I haven't read it myself though, so it might suck for all I know.

>>96820282
>and Ron Perlman
Ha, I understood that reference. Damn I'm old

>>96820282
>dungeon delving and wilderness adventures
nta but I could see it being translated now that you've said it aloud. Just make it delving abandoned places and urban exploration.
While it's not entirely thread relevant I've actually done something kind of similar in the past in a solo game, in an urban fantasy "Magic is real and underground" type setting.
Dungeons? Ruins of various places wizards have hung out in the past, monster-haunted derelict places ala the Tunnels and pocked dimensions.
Exploration? Depth rather than distance, set it all in one big ass city (I used London) and have players peeling back layers of history/finding strange places in among the ordinary. You can pass the same little side alley a dozen times but it's only once you know the weird, fucky little shop that sells cursed antiques is down there that you'll note it as worth looking into.
Hope that helps a bit at least.

>>96820896
Not the anon who asked for OSR WoD, but your post does illustrate the problem. The campaign you describe could definitely work, but it's a highly specific campaign. Basing an entire game around it wouldn't have nearly the versatility of the typical fantasy OSR game. That's what it seems like to me anyway.

>>96821341
Oh it's 100% highly specific, but it's one of those "If that's what you want here's how to do it." type deals.
Besides, you can still hit the OSR fundamentals by keeping it open/let them figure out their own path to glory/power/bitches beyond measure.
As for versatility, you can keep things fairly open by remembering one benefit that the modern world has; with about $2k you can go anywhere.

But yeah, it's definitely a niche setting, more so than sci-fi or fantasy and you need a hook for it beyond "Play Dave from Accounting going about his normal life", something to be a mythical underworld below & beyond.

>>96821404
I pretty much agree with all of that, I just mean it's hard to imagine someone producing a whole game representing one niche concept like this, especially since OSR games are typically big on openness and player agency.

Come to think of it, though, Free League's whole business model is to publish campaigns and call them games, so maybe I'm just off-base here.

>>96819395
Shadow city by chubbyfunster.
It has random encounter tables, d100 rumors and a 1 mile hex city generator.

It's Shadow dark but Vampire isn't TSR published either.

It was uploaded to /NV/

>>96822210
Kek, this looks like it would be cyberpunk. I mean, I'm sure you're right, but that's... not great cover art for a game about vampires without robot arms.

>>96824286
I agree 100%

Session 2 of Stonehell on the Borderlands last night.
The party explored the south wall of the canyon on their way to the dungeon entrance. In the evil rooms where the skeletons & cenotaph are they decided to provoke the skeletons, setting a rope up as a tripwire across a bottleneck. This did work well, and prevented the skeletons from landing a hit in the first round, but then the skeletons won initiative and one killed the 2hp magic user.
After regrouping, the party decided to stop mucking about on the surface & actually enter the dungeon. I was looking forward to this, as reading the inscription over the entrance was intended to be a sort of "title-card" moment, it was only now that a player might realize exactly what I was running. I was rewarded with expressions of recognition from a couple of the players.
We didn't have much time left in the session to explore much of the first level. The fighter died to the dry fountain poison gas trap & then the party ran away home at the sound of approaching critters. Another session with a paltry ~30xp per player awarded.
I wish I had thought quicker around the poison gas trap and given it a bit more description. The player who died wasn't especially put out by it, but it did feel a little unfair. I'm pretty sure I ran it correctly: only one PC investigated it - they tried to pour water on it, I rolled 2/6 so asked for a saving throw against poison, the character failed & died.
I don't know what I could have said that might have made the player tread more carefully; we agreed it was a good tone-setter & warning as to what they might expect. A shame they turned North instead of South at that intersection as I was hoping they would discover the wheel of fortune instead.

>>96825763
Nothing you said sounds like you did wrong. Unwillingly sacrificing a couple of level 1 pcs to the rpg gods to set the tone of the dungeon and the expected level of deadliness is one of the best ways to get into it a new campaign honestly.

>>96825763
The opening levels of Stonehell do feel a bit lacklustre and short of reward. The text gives a perfectly plausible reason for this, but it's always what has made me shy away from running it myself: I worry players would think it's an empty shithole before making it to the vastly more rewarding lower levels.

Good luck in your campaign, and keep us posted.

>>96825763
I don't think you screwed anything up. I also second-guess myself a lot about the appropriate amount of description, but ultimately, if nobody ever died from save-or-die poison traps there would be no point in including them. Plus, consider that between a 2:6 chance of you proccing the trap and a level 1 Fighter's 45% chance of passing the save, he actually had a significantly better than even chance of surviving that trap. In terms of chance this is really no different than an unlikely hit and a high damage roll killing off a level 1 character. (1/3 chance to trigger the trap corresponds most closely to 35% chance to hit, which assuming a level 1 attacker equates to AC 5, chainmail, in OD&D; not unreasonable armor for a staring Fighter.)

>>96826063
I feel like it's been suggested before ITT that Stonehell I benefits from increased treasure allocation (whereas II is adequate). Cavens of Thracia is well known to have the same issue.

>>96826162
Is there a good writeup on this? I'm sure I could calculate it out, but if there's a blogger or whatnot that's already done the work, I'd prefer to use that.

>>96826904
I honestly don't know, in the first instance I would just search for Stonehell in the archives, or Stonehell + treasure.

>>96825763
Thanks for the update! As the Anon who shared the map that inspired you, I'm delighted.

>>96818555
I'm speaking to my experience playing AD&D RAW, which I've done for several years. I have enough adjustments and house rules now that I can't say it's RAW but if you actually use the rules set in the AD&D DMG it is incredibly cumbersome to
>>96820106
This is a midwit comment for a number of reasons, not least of which is that the ratios Gygax proposes go as low as 1:5000. Don't come at me with this retard shit if you yourself haven't even read the fucking manual. The baseline he proposes is 1:1000; I adjust much higher in my home games because 1:1000 is ridiculously sparse, which you'd know if you'd actually try playing the game for once.

>>96827629
>is incredibly cumbersome to
...recruit and manage hirelings. Not impossible, just cumbersome (my sperg rage has overtaken my proofreading ability)

>>96827641
>my sperg rage has overtaken my proofreading ability)
kek, we've all been there, brother

>>96827641
>my sperg rage has overtaken my proofreading ability
friendly kek

>>96827629
>>96827641
I have to push back on this again, the recruitment of hirelings BtB doesn't have any of the restrictions henchmen do. It's your call as DM to make it as abstracted or cumbersome as you want at that point.
For managing, aside from initially buying equipment, the monthly costs are only done once every few sessions and is just subtracting a multiple from your gp. You already have to take the time to subtract your monthly living costs, it's not that much more of an operation.
For management inside of the dungeon, you can give control to the players for all actions that don't require a loyalty check.

In the case of henchmen, the procurement is more of a challenge like you said but the low ratios also act as a nice player motivation for travel to different towns which you should want anyway. If the DM isn't a bastard, the money sink is just part of the carrot and stick of AD&D's levelling mechanics, the PCs should be looting exorbitant amounts of loot that they wouldn't know what to do with otherwise.
The loyalty factors, like morale or evasion chance are there for the novice DM who doesn't have the confidence to estimate it yet but can also quick if not autistically adhered to. Having the minute procedures also adds colour to an otherwise plainly mechanical transaction. To me it would be like complaining about how cumbersome getting loot from a dungeon can be.

Lastly, old school modules usually have a recommendation of at least 6-8 PCs. The AD&D rules are based on the assumption that you would already have a bigger player base than modern day gamers and sought to limit any abuse from having even more characters on top of that. A lot of modern OSR gamers do not consistently have that big of groups like in the 70s/80s, hence why it's a given that it's a necessity if you're not houseruling. If you have a lower powered game/houserules and match the encounters to the group that's fine but it's wrong to assume your deviation is the understated norm.

>>96815749 (OP)
Does any anon here have good tips or tools for dungeon generation? I've tried using appendix A a couple of times but i always end up with ugly messes of dungeons, with 40 side passages all 45 degrees that clash against each other while the actual rooms end up small and bland.

>>96828769
Roll some 6 sided dice on a piece of paper. Say you want to make 10 rooms, roll 10 dice.
Add 1 to the result and multiply by 10. That is your length of the room from one wall to another. Adjust size to make sure all rooms are not just perfect squares.

Any dice near to each other are connected rooms and at most have 10-30 feet of corridor between them. Dice far off from others are secluded and need a path to them. Dice touching become one big room.

And then just draw the shit on squared paper.

>>96822210
Oh, this seems to be exactly what I want! Thank you!

>>96828993
You're welcome Anon,
enjoy!

>>96818339
Original lbb D&D is designed for like 50 players per dungeon master.

>>96826063
This exact thing happened with my group. They bumbled around the first area setting off nearly every trap and encounter, blundering past all the treasure, then swore it off after two sessions lol.
The only way I'll get to enjoy Stonehell now is to solo play it.

>>96829360
>>96826162
I think I'll either multiply what treasure it has in the book by 5, or maybe step it up one currency level i.e, sp->gp

>>96826904
I remember reading something about how there's only like a few thousand gp in the first two levels, can't find the post now.

>>96829494
I've never read Stonehell but I'm guessing the early levels have been pre-looted?
If so, indications in the local area might be a way to go and offer the players some opportunities outside the dungeon.
'Yeah, my great-grandfather went into those ruins and came back with the sword that's over the mantlepiece, look at it, ain't it beautiful' type set dressing to show that though the upper levels have been stripped, they did have a hell of a harvest in them.

>>96829030
Correct, but in the same sense that AD&D is. And AD&D gives much more information on how to do it in practice. But I don't think that's what OP meant to ask. I think he's concerned about finding players in the first place.

>>96829494
>I think I'll either multiply what treasure it has in the book by 5, or maybe step it up one currency level i.e, sp->gp
Increasing the treasure is fine, but stepping it up by a factor of 5-20 is probably a bit too much.

>>96818339
The most? B/X.
Keep in mind that it also attracts some of the worst kinds of players, imo.
With AD&D all you have to worry about is a player who wants their favorite splatbook included. Most of the time it's Unearthed Arcana which imbalances multiclasses. You can fix this by limiting yourself to PHB+DMG and saying "no".

>>96829494
>I think I'll either multiply what treasure it has in the book by 5
I think this is fine. You want there to be a lot of treasure on each level so PCs don't have to explore the whole thing before leveling up and being able to progress to the next level, and erring in the direction of too much treasure on early levels is better IMO than too little. Not only to draw the players in but also because the low levels are less interesting than mid. I'm pretty sure this is why a bunch of Melan's stuff just assumes you start on level 3.

Of course, others will tell you that the grind of zero-resilience-character fantasy Vietnam with capricious deaths is the REAL game, and more power to them if they like to play that way. The question you have to ask yourself here is which one YOU prefer.

>>96830423
I can't imagine running AD&D with more than the PHB+DMG that's plenty of rules and systems.

>>96830423
>Most of the time it's Unearthed Arcana
Which other splatbooks even exist for AD&D? Oriental Adventures, I guess.

>>96830423
>>96830444
>it's now more common for faggot players to want access to Cavaliers than Samurai
Thank God, the weeb era has ended at last. I never thought I'd see this day.

>>96830444
Wilderness and dungeon survival?
I'm not entirely certain I don't read beyond Deities

>>96831430
Merely imagining a player demanding the inclusion of the Wilderness Survival Guide cracks me up.
>Travel isn't cursed enough! I need you to fuck my shit up fampai

>>96830444
The non-splat books of AD&D are the MM, PHB, DMG, and the first seven pages of Deities & Demigods. Everything else (FF, MM2, UA, OA, WSG, DSG, and MotP) is splat. Doesn't mean it's all bad, although much of it is.

How do you handle lanthorns as opposed to torches?

>>96831726
...Using the rules (B21/PHB 102)? I'm sorry, I don't really get the context of this question, what edition are you playing and where are you seeing a gap in the printed rules?

>>96829494
I'd recommend being more forthcoming with rumors and hints fot treasure locations than messing with the intentional balance of gp. Aside from the surface and section 1a, the other sections even on level 1 have a decent amount of loot, especially the crypts area.

>>96833671
Treasure maps(real and false) sold by someone at the inn would help too.

I have to say, I wish there were more non-standard dungeons ala Barrowmaze.

Having the dungeon just be an entire graveyard of barrow mounds if an elegant idea and gives plenty of options for micro-dungeons mixed in with the major ones.

>>96833680
Man, I had this idea already - was advised against it by some anon in this general. I'm noticing a pattern of getting conflicting advice, just like I'm getting on what to do with treasure. That sort of reassures me that I should make whatever changes I want because who cares I can always pull back later.
I do have an NPC that is going to laugh & scold the party for not hiring him again, maybe he can have procured a map.

>>96834350
Sometimes there's a right way, but not everyone knows it. And sometimes there's just preference. I agree that you should just do what you want: worst that happens is that you discover Anon 1 was right or whatever, and can take in feedback and adjust in future games based on actually having experience.

>>96833693
I think every review of Barrowmaze I've ever seen – and I agree with this – says the barrows are the best part of the module. I agree that, at this point in the OSR, some more unorthodox material of that type would be nice. It's understandable, though, that in like 2010 people focused on recapturing the lost megadungeon art. (Also Khosura is super good so I'm not complaining about current megadungeon releases either, exactly.)

Something you could check out if you want more of that general type of content is Mad Monks of Kwantoom, by Kabuki Kaiser – it's a random dungeon generator for an island which is covered in smallish shrines, so each run though the generator outputs a fairly tight, restrained-size dungeon, meant to be one of hundreds clustered closely together. Not dissimilar to the barrows in concept.

>>96834350
>I'm noticing a pattern of getting conflicting advice, just like I'm getting on what to do with treasure.
As Anon says, this is part preference (or variation in player traits), part experience vs. ignorance. For example, people saying that you shouldn't adjust treasure amounts pretty clearly just haven't ever run a dungeon where the risk escalates too quickly for the PCs to keep up via scoring loot, which is an increasingly miserable experience for everyone. >>96833671 also seems to assume the balance must be deliberate rather than a fuckup on Curtis' part, even though we know that even as great a luminary as Paul Jaquays bungled it at times.

Conversely, the treasure map thing IMO is a matter of preference. For my part, I'd worry that purchasable treasure maps to the dungeon would accustom the players to having someone else give them railroady directions to where the loot is and basically passivize them, so that new players learn wrong from the very start; I prefer treasure maps to be loot only and point *outside* the dungeon, so that they become chances for bonus scores which require the players to engage with the wider setting. But, if your players have a different temper (say they're just hopelessly passive already, for example) then selling them maps might be a workable fix.

>>96831590
>the first seven pages of Deities & Demigods
Explain this.

>>96835554
It has expanded MM-style intro notes with extra info for higher stats plus clerics. There's also appendices at the back for outer plane stuff and a DMG-style table for temple trappings.

>>96835769
>>96835554
There's a nice section in the back for stocking temples

Jesus this thread is fucking quiet.
I know the other thread is 2-3 autists whacking each other off about 2e to keep it going, but it's quiet in here as well.

>>96836275
Yeah, it's nice IMO.

>>96836275
Tell us about your game anon

>>96836434
NTA, the jovial priest in the keep has racked up an 8 man kill count so far.
Adding "The Dungeon under the Keep on the Borderlands" by Armchair General gave him an option to funnel them into the sewers and caves.

>>96836275
The meta-discussions in the threads make them pretty much useless at this point.

>>96835554
It's the only place that tells you what ability scores above 18 do. And they're needed because some PC races can have 19s already at creation. So it's literally required to play the core game.

>>96836477
I'm actually so keen to hear everything about how you're running the jovial priest!
I'm very unsure how to navigate the whole situation.

>>96836477
>The Dungeon under the Keep on the Borderlands
Isn't that one incomplete?

>>96836275
There just isn't remotely the same level of interest in quality OSR discussion as there is in shitposting. Back when the thread was at its comfiest we'd have to bump each one 1d4 times to keep it from dying. It's just how it is.

>>96822210
Bought this and the PDF, been utterly itching to run a game of it. i really click with it.
>Pic related, 1 mile hexmap i generated to run in. flat grey area is open plains/wilderness. What do anons think? good city for a campaign?

>>96836581
The description of the jovial priest says that he will join them to the caves of chaos if he is approached by them, once there he will betray them at a critical moment. Until they ask him directly to come along he's better off listening to them and changing the topic to theology.
It takes a very disciplined player to "forget" that the jovial priest betrayed his previous character and to play along.
I'd rather let him play out his arc, then add him to the caves of chaos or send him on errands in nearby hexes for his faction.

This is how I run him:
I think of him as Father Chains from "The Lies of Locke Lamora".

Whenever a player has a bad idea inside the Keep, he shows up to enable them(within reason).
They were trying to get into the sewer outside his private apartments during the daytime.
He stops them, tells them to do it at night and that him and the acolytes will keep the guards away while they enter.
That caused a TPK in the sewer.

Character limit:
2 characters ransomed by Castellan, players never said thank you to him.
Jovial priest says the castellan is furious, he is going to sell them as slaves.
Take this sack with: Club, dagger, 6 torches, rations.
"You have one chance tomorrow, return with the gold or he has ordered these two men-at-arms to shoot you"

The players didn't stop to ask any questions and in a panic ran straight into cave K.
One died to zombies the other was shot by the men-at-arms that escorted them there.


>>96836648
Maybe? I'm running AD&D 1e so it's easy enough to fill in holes on the fly if I run into them. Checking for you

The sewer has keys and wandering monsters.
Caverns level 1 has rooms 1-16 rooms with keys and wandering monsters.
Caverns level 2 has 17-34 rooms with keys (one is the tunnel to caves of the unknown), and wandering monsters.
There is even a post-script.

I can't find anything missing when I

>>96836930
sorry, left some loose ends in this long post.

>>96836930
Lmao, before finishing the post Anon got abducted by the Jovial Pri

I'm curious about jumping into OSR stuff. I still have some of my Ad&D books laying around and I hear there are rules cyclopedias and streamlined versions of the rules.

I've read the primers itt but I'm curious about why? Not trying to be a little shit, just curious about what draws folks to those, by timescale at least, antiquated ideas?

>>96836979
The game design and system found in these books have not been improved upon in the last 45 years.
Read the AD&D 1e PHB pages 2-9.

>>96836970
I escaped!

>>96836979
>what draws folks to those, by timescale at least, antiquated ideas?
Basically it's a coherent form of gameplay. A ot of RPGs are cargo cult games written by people who don't even know that their games are incomplete; they'll say shit like "in my game you can create any type of character you want!" as if that's a positive, when in reality that just means they forgot to add a premise to the game. The rules are just a set of procedures for resolving various tasks and situations; then they expect the individual DM to not just prepare sandboxes or scenarios, but do all the heavy lifting of figuring out what the campaign will be about.

By contrast, old-school D&D is rules for running fantastic medieval wargames campaigns. Your characters are mercenary, even piratical adventurers, in a sword & sorcery mold. They desire gold and treasure, which can only be acquired through looting perilous labyrinths, and if they succeed in obtaining it their skills will increase. Eventually they will be able to command armies and do battle on a larger scale, battles which will be more enjoyable for having stakes in the fictional world established through previous play, and/or to go on strange journeys to otherworldly realms – and loot them for magical artifacts and beer money. The rules are all bent toward this end and point in the same direction. The referee need only prepare the actual setting and dungeons (and increasingly, you can buy great examples of those and just run them right out of the book); the players can follow the rules to create characters and will end up with one that makes sense and can participate meaningfully with the others, unlike many games where freedom will lead to a band of PCs with absolutely nothing in common, or worse, 3e where you can actually *fail* at making a character because you picked trap options and your penalty is that you can't meaningfully contribute to the game.

>>96837061
>3e where you can actually *fail* at making a character because you picked trap options and your penalty is that you can't meaningfully contribute to the game.
Preach. Honestly, the freedom that comes with not having to Buildfag is the single greatest appeal OSR has for me.
The freedom that comes with there being no bad options that fuck you over, just different options that lean into different kinds of play is delightful.

>>96836872
Unlikely to get much discussion of it in this general. Shadowbobado isn't on topic, you were misled by a troll raid.
It would be well suited for the nusr general but that got shit posted to death as well.
Might work to make one of those or a separate thread about it.

>>96836275
Content posting has gone down by a remarkable ratio of you consider even 5 years ago how many PDFs were being posted per thread.
Less people actually play or make things.
This doesn't combine well with PDFs now being verboten post sharty.
I suspect some of it is oversaturation with ideas such that they've become very repetitive to some, via constant use of them as 'talking points' to foster discussion such that even if someone is ernestly learning it's less likely someone who actually knows will care.

>>96834350
>Get conflicting advice
>Decides to do whatever
Like this, hard to tell if they are actually new or just being a shithead. Either way at this point they're a loss for effort in.

>>96837016
>The game design and system found in these books have not been improved upon in the last 45 years.

When it comes to dungeoneering? I'd argue that you are correct. When it comes to other aspects I'd argue that you are wrong.

>>96837061
Okay. That's a coherent and informative answer, thank you anon. Seems like they are very much not for me. But glad you guys are having a good time.

>>96837405
>When it comes to dungeoneering? I'd argue that you are correct. When it comes to other aspects I'd argue that you are wrong.

You can say that I am wrong but if you haven't tried running the system using the rules your opinion isn't worth anything to me.

Judges guild made the best tools for city adventures in the 70s.

I'd concur that some monster manuals are improvements, UNE NPC emulator is slight improvement over the one in the DMG. Random d100 tables have gotten excellent.
Also the Dungeons got really great after the megadungeon craze so that's probably better now too.

>>96837061
>A ot of RPGs are cargo cult games written by people who don't even know that their games are incomplete
Someone pointed this out in /nsrg/ recently:
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/96803352/#96805019
Very interesting read on the difference between design vs replication.

>>96836930
>I can't find anything missing
Ah, yes, no, gotcha. Dungeon Under the Keep is complete. It's BlackWyvern's Cellar Below the Guide House that is missing information on its third level.

I mix them up because I've combined those two, as well as Dyson's Screams from Jedder's Hole, into a huge ten-level dungeon under the Keep.

>>96837061
>A lot of RPGs are cargo cult games written by people who don't even know that their games are incomplete
Wise words. Would go well in the n00b guides.

>>96815749 (OP)
Has anyone here tried running any skirmish matches with any OSR? I don't mean like mass combat. I mean small scale like party vs party. It sounds like something me and my friend would enjoy but I can't really envision a costing method to use. I'd probably be happy rolling 5 guys against 5 and a dungeon to battle in. But a little balance and stretching my noggin' wouldn't hurt either.
>>96815985
Whitehack has cool rules for player deaths and ghosts that I wish to use one day. That cover art however, is atrocious.

>>96836275
I can't tell if I'm supposed to be posting here or not.
Every time I come back here it gets worse. The first time I came here I got a very helpful signpost to Ben Milton's stuff and then when I came back here again everything that wasn't some specific printing of B/X was being slammed while a flamewar raged on about said specific B/X printings.
This applies to /tg/ on a whole too.

>>96837593
>Has anyone here tried running any skirmish matches with any OSR?

Inspired by Dave Arneson I ran player party versus player controlled Dungeon monsters with fog of war.
The guy running the dungeon will just swarm the party.

I also had 5 attack a house and 5 defend it, rainbow six siege style.
It works fine.
I used B/X rules then but I would have used AD&D 1E for surprise, segments and weapon speed now.
Characters split up to cover more space so the side based initiative isn't a detriment.

>>96837405
>That's a coherent and informative answer, thank you anon. Seems like they are very much not for me. But glad you guys are having a good time.
Hey, no problem Anon. I like other games too, I'm not an OSR-only diehard (and I don't think many if even anyone here are actually), so all I can say is, that's the way, pick your poison. Hope you're enjoying your games too!

>>96837281
>The freedom that comes with there being no bad options that fuck you over, just different options that lean into different kinds of play is delightful.
Yeah, once you're used to it the alternative is honestly absurd. Why would you make it bad on purpose?! 3e is deranged.

>>96837061
Well said.

>>96837647
Well, there's different folks who post here, including friendly people, real assholes, and people who cosplay as assholes to try and kill the thread to suit their agendas. And unfortunately the long-standing troll has made every regular a bit more on-edge, because his favourite tactic is pretending to be just asking questions or otherwise pretending to not understand what he's doing, so good faith is harder to come by. I prefer it comfy, but it's not always a state you're going to achieve, especially in a generally antisocial and unmoderated environment like 4chan.

The rewards can be worth it, though.

>>96837480
I've played AD&D back in the day, fairly strict by the rules. I'd agree that it is very coherent system. But never improved upon? We'd have to agree to disagree on that.

>>96837806
All's fair. Still gonna keep an eye out on the general, seems pretty cosy outside of some trolls (which seems to be just part and parcel nowadays). I'm really glad that the older ideas allow new folks to have a good time.

>>96838288
>fairly strict by the rules.
If you say so I respect that.
I don't think anything has surpassed it.

>>96838393
Again, matter of taste. Glad you found a system you enjoy, anon. I would concede as well that the quality of written material, at least for the early "core" books for lack of the better term, of AD&D is second to none. Good ol' EGG knew his shit through and through.

>>96838583
Yeah it's all good, I will be porting AD&D 1E features over into ACKS 2E as I think those books have benefited from 45 years of graphical design evolution.

The thing that makes AD&D 1E unparalleled in my eyes is the player grading and ease with which you turn it into a miniatures wargame. ACKS made a huge error when they picked hex and chit for the domains at war.

>>96837484
I always think of this whenever I see a retroclone's overland travel system. You can almost always tell that they don't actually use the rules, which are inevitably clumsy as all hell, but felt they had to include it because that's what all the other clones and OG games do.

>>96839092
Extremely relevant: https://rancourt.substack.com/p/a-survey-of-overland-travel

>>96839198
That's the perfect summation, yes, though I had the realisation quite a while before that. Not that I was special in that regard: I think anyone who actually sat down and was interested in wilderness travel would come to the same conclusion if they tried to use most any of these rules at the table. Delta was talking about the annoyances with AD&D overland movement back in 2012.

I wrote my own rules for that reason, though it's doubly hard because something that works at a certain scale can fall apart at another, so you have to make sure you have not just the right rules but the communicated intent behind them and a group happy to play in that way.

>>96839265
Yeah – I think it's pretty striking that he concludes that the OD&D rules are the most elegant and playable ones (based on the suggestion of an Anon, no less – you?). No coincidence that those are the rules with the strongest evidence of being used as-written.

>>96828295
Appreciate your thoughtful response. To be clear, I'm not complaining about the rules being cumbersome, rather I'm making the claim--based on experience following the rules as laid out in the DMG--that the (a?) common perception in the OSR of how henchmen are used does not align with the game as written.

Personally, I like players using henchmen, and I've found that relaxing the rules specifically around procurement and the ratio of available henchmen makes my players more likely to recruit them.

I know ball. I'm well aware of how money sinks are part of the natural cycle of play in AD&D. I like the minute procedures. I'm just saying I've observed the game, as I've played it RAW to the best of my ability, function in a way that cuts against common OSR dogma.

>>96837401
I'm a new shithead, although I've been lurking for over a year. Planning on posting a bit more. I'd appreciate any effort anons would like to make to discuss/advise on how to run the game.

I beefed up the treasure on level 1 somewhat by feel; changing the copper loot to silver & increasing some quantities of gold by 20-40%
I haven't calculated it but I still don't think there's a level up's worth of xp unless they find absolutely everything, but at least it feels a bit more exciting.
I'm anxious to navigate the encumbrance rules when they find thousands of coins though - anticipate it will be slightly awkward when I ask how they plan to carry it out.

Most fun thing I've discovered you can do with ACKS is make actual prestige classes
>Player wants to join a discerning order of knights who are legendarily hardy
>Create a new class by taking the fighter, dropping fighting 1 step, narrowing his options, then increase HD by a step
>Use custom powers trade out to give him a few in-line abilities that fit with their theme
>He has to spend time retraining off screen but returns with the same stat line and his character class replaced, because of the XP difference between the two classes he's now one level lower, which fits with being someone still learning the ropes of his new obligations
Simple, elegant, mechanically unique. It's a great time.

>>96838728
>>96840053
>ACKS
You won't get actual advice in this thread.
head right for the real thread for discussing NuSR systems >>96829321

Still the greatest OSR system. OSE can suck my dick.

>>96840083
NuSR is for OSR adjacent games that don't have full convertibility. ACKS does and therefore belongs here.
More importantly let's not go provoking you-know-who and bringing him back into this thread to start more bullshit.

>>96840163
You're talking to you-know-who
>Step 1: go in /osrg/ and direct ACKS posts to /nsrg/
>Step 2: go in /nsrg/ and complain about all these ACKS posters before they even get there, because mental illness
>Step 3: ???
>Step 4: 2e is OSR now

>>96840207
Good catch. He's also in his containment thread proclaiming that when AD&D 2e came out everyone immediately filled their trousers with hot cum and converted to it instantly.
I didn't realize he was back, more fool me I suppose.

>>96840048
I'm going to tell you this right now: you can't actually destroy your game by giving the players too much loot on level 1. I mean, even if you fuck it completely and give them like a gemstone worth a million gp, there's a rule that you can't level up more than once per expedition for a reason. And your players are never going to get mad at you for handing out loot, so feel free to err in the direction of too much.

Mind you, you don't want to keep it up, you don't want to make a habit of it. But screwing up once is absolutely indistinguishable from rolling a whammy of a treasure hoard on the random tables once. Thread regulars are just skewed (for obvious reasons) toward discussing what the theoretical ideal is and sometimes, I think, forget that the D&D system is actually really robust.

TL;DR don't sweat it too much, you can feel safe being generous.

>>96840207
>>96840250
It's actually funny how when Fishfag had to go to his psychological evaluation or whatever and left the board, all three threads including his own troll attempt were much more peaceful.

>>96840317
>I'm going to tell you this right now: you can't actually destroy your game by giving the players too much loot on level 1. I mean, even if you fuck it completely and give them like a gemstone worth a million gp, there's a rule that you can't level up more than once per expedition for a reason. And your players are never going to get mad at you for handing out loot, so feel free to err in the direction of too much.
Agreed. At worst they have a bit more money to throw around for a while on consumables.

This isn't later editions where WBL bullshit means if you give a character too much money too soon they can snape the entire campaign over their knee.
Which is admittedly very entertaining when you're the one doing it, but not so much for the DM

>>96839198
This is just an autist going crazy.
>rules are not holistic
no shit

>>96840439
Sort of true? But it's still a pretty good and useful article. Autism is like that sometimes.

>>96840439
Yeah, but it's autism harnessed for good purposes. Looking at how Cairn 2e falls apart as soon as you spend any time whatsoever actually trying to use it is hilarious.

>>96840465
>>96840469
This. The dude has harnessed his autism toward good ends, he knows how to use it for the betterment (and entertainment) of mankind.

Plus, I defy anyone to say that he's actually wrong about any of his judgments on game systems.

>>96839198
Best thing about that post is getting to the end and it essentially proving 0e is the best for actually running games.
Every clone is just a cash grab. Refer to the original texts if you want to play the original game, simple as.
>>96840439
This is an autist doing the lord's work.

>>96840083
>You won't get actual advice in this thread.
I don't want advice from this thread on ACKS, it's a very clear system.
Not every /osrg/ poster is trying to pick between OSE and B/X for the first time.

>>96841971
That's the local I-hate-ACKS troll, ignore him.
He wants to get ACKS posters to leave this thread in order to kill it, and get them into /nsrg/ so he can say "oh look, these bad old ACKS posters are invading your thread!"

Is there an OSR system that is geared more towards Lovecraft? Like an OSR Delta Green?

>>96841990
There's Silent Legions, which is a Kevin Crawford game built off of B/X. I've not heard much about it good or bad, so I suppose it's about as fair-to-middling as his other games. Crawford's a genius at GM tools, but fairly average at making games IMO

>>96841990
>>96822210
You can use Shadow City as the OSR framework for Delta Green, just use the DG books for lore and agencies. The Cthuloid bestiary is a free monster manual on Lulu.

>>96842004
Silent Legions is a neat coffee table book but offers little practical value sadly.

>>96836872
Looking great Anon, I'd like to see the points of interest you rolled in the districts.

>>96837383
Shadowbobado isn't OSR but playing vampire the masquerade as OSR is. It's completely within the spirit of the thread to discuss how to achieve that.

>>96842211
>Shadowbobado isn't OSR
>>96842211
>You can use Shadow City as the OSR framework
...
>Shadow City
>Which is a modified Shadowdark

>>96842264
You're right, I apologize for being unclear.

Shadowbobado is at best an OSR adjacent system which isn't relevant to the OSR discussed in this thread on its own.

Shadow City is based on this OSR adjacent system which makes it compatible with monster books such as the cthuloid bestiary and others.
Because there are no other viable alternatives I recommend Shadow City.
Further discussion on how to use the rules and systems found in the TSR era D&D books can then be applied to Shadow City to help Anon have a better OSR game.
Once the Vampire game system and Shadowdark is ignored it's all just hexes, factions and such.

>>96842323
>Because there are no other viable alternatives
Silent Legions is an actual OSR system meant for exactly what anon asked for. You're not being unclear, you're being very weird.

>>96842365
>Silent Legions is an actual OSR system meant for exactly what anon asked for.
I know from experience that Silent Legions doesn't function as a Delta Green replacement.

>>96842387
And you know from experience that Shadow City will?

I'm always suspicious when some new game comes out (particularly NuSR ones) and people suddenly pop up on 4chan trying to convince everyone how great it is and that they totally need to use it. Feels like somebody is trying to sell his friend's game.