Thread 96919290

Is it a good setting to get into?

AD&D 1E for player rules

Dolmenwood at surface world

Shadowdark at dungeons

Knave 2e, Into the Odd, DCC several other books for random encounteres

>>96919290 (OP)
>>96919340
Buy an ad

>>96919340
>>96919354
I got some basic knowledge of it, I was more hoping for some subjective opinions about the setting, I'm familiar with ose. Some of the modules seems well enough liked

Sure.

>>96919763
Buy an exit bag

Setting has been Disneyfied but is still good: https://torchless.substack.com/p/setting-boundaries-the-ruin-that

Btw: Does anyone know about "Dolmenwood Uncensored"?

>>96921586
Thanks for the read, I don't mind things like changing from Minstrel to Bard, but some of the darker stuff seems a shame to lose. It's small things like that give settings a certain edge. I got the uncensored version a while back on the trove, but I placed it on hold as I didn't have time for another setting. I have been skimming through the new updated version (25.6). Not sure what they changed though

a single-book gazetteer book for B/X D&D would have been great. i don't like any of the extra stuff i've seen.

and 'Disneyfied' is absolutely the right term for it. i remember when he was asking for ideas in his Discord like, 'what should i change "goat-men" to, to be more gender-inclusive?'
it's old-fashioned, and they're dicks anyway. there's your 'justification' mate.

>>96919290 (OP)
I've been playing in it for awhile (~7 months) and have been enjoying it. as far as the book goes, it's pretty packed full of encounters and hooks formatted for easy parsing (as opposed to walls of prose) that tie into setting with dials to let you play it as whimsical or horror as you want. it'll still require prep work from the GM side.
as far as the rules end of it goes, it's OSE with a bunch of the CC optional rules stapled to it and some setting specific systems. ymmv depending on if you like B/X or not
>96921586
>the cum jar guy is still shilling his blog

>>96919290 (OP)
where is the PDF? Let's see it.

>>96921794
>Thanks for the read, I don't mind things like changing from Minstrel to Bard
Honestly this change offends me more than the other changes. Only Americans think minstrel means "someone who does blackface", meanwhile a bard is an actual real life historical celtic thing that has very specific implications that does not align with the traditional view of a minstrel.

>>96921586
No, he has no idea what he's talking about, but I'm not going to bother dumping how dumb it is.