/osr/ - The Old School Renaissance

Welcome to Old School Renaissance General!

>Links:
Trove: pastebin.com/QWyBuJxd
OSR Discord: discord.gg/qaku8y9
Blogosphere: pastebin.com/ZwUBVq8L
In-Browser Tools: pastebin.com/KKeE3etp

>Old Thread:
>Thread Question:
What's your favorite OSR adventure that no one ever talks about?

Other urls found in this thread:

thealexandrian.net/wordpress/15151/roleplaying-games/game-structures-part-5-mysteries
thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1118/roleplaying-games/three-clue-rule
businessinsider.com/air-force-cadet-bullet-stopping-goo-for-body-armor-2017-5
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Continuing from the previous thread:
>Attacking Enemy Units on page 52
The only kind of damage mentioned here at all is the damage against heroes.

>look at the table on page 59
Only brings up the regular damage of a single unit.

It basically looks to me like a unit has the same number of hit points, and does the same amount of damage, regardless of how many actual creatures is in the unit: you could have ten ogres or hundred ogres and they'd do the exact same amount of damage and be able to withstand the exact same amount of punishment before all falling at the same time. Basically their actual numbers cease to matter entirely.

This can't possibly be what the truth of this is, but there's just so big walls of text here with no easy-to-read sum ups that I'm forced to ask here about it and probably make myself look like a complete moron in the process.

>What's your favorite OSR adventure that no one ever talks about?
I'm fond of Assault on the Tower of the Gibbelins, Fiend of the Spired City and The House of Rogat Demazien.

>Assault on the Tower of the Gibbelins
There's an adventure about Gibbelins? Does it go whole hog with them at the edge of the world, or does it just borrow their name or something?

Are there any good short adventures that'd fit for a two-player group of about level 4?

>two-player group
Have them run multiple characters.

It's exactly what it says on the tin. The PCs have been lured to the tower on the other side of the river that encircles the world and now they have to figure out how to burgle the Gibbelins without getting murdered. This is hard.

>two-player group
It'll be much easier for you if you just let them run two or three PCs each.

Thing is, it's an established campaign and we normally have a bunch of more players, but this time around several of them will have to skip a game day, leaving us with just two guys and their characters.

I was just wondering whether there'd be anything we could do with half a party without having them possess the rest of the PCs or writing in a bunch of one-note extras.

>or writing in a bunch of one-note extras.
If you don't even like the idea of using hirelings, I'm blank for suggestions, sorry.

Wouldn't hirelings be just zero-level NPCs? I don't really see how a small army of those, or the lack of one, would make a difference.

>It's exactly what it says on the tin. The PCs have been lured to the tower on the other side of the river that encircles the world and now they have to figure out how to burgle the Gibbelins without getting murdered. This is hard.
Sounds awesome! You got a link? The only result google gives me is this very thread.

Not a bad idea. I know a lot of people don't like splitting the party, but thieves/rogues are also pretty useful for that because of their self-sufficiency (although they do still have the problem where they are good at scouting ahead but need to use a fucking torch that all and sundry can see from miles away).

There was some OSR supplement about this I saw on RPGnow called By This Axe/By This Poleaxe (depending on the exact details of the mass combat). Looked pretty alright. One of them is free too I think.

>I really liked the idea, but in longer play I find its combat jarring on a philosophical level - if I wanted it to get lethal, I can't just declare an attack and drop a d20 vs AC. Every time I deal damage to PCs, I feel too responsible instead of delegating the hit resolution off to the game's rules and dice.

Just make some guidelines for yourself to follow instead to leaving it all up to whim. Like 6- always means you deal damage (maybe plus something else). That can really help make the unpredictable nature of GM Moves more palatable to traditional gamer types.

Just run them through a level 2 module. 2 guys at level 4 is about equal to 4 guys at level 2, or so says their hit dice. It's also fun to go beat up low level monsters as a high level guy occasionally because it shows you that the game isn't just a treadmill - you actually are getting more powerful.

Daily reminder that magic-users choose a different path. Instead of cowering away from the darkness, they revel in it. They see the forces of magic as a new frontier to explore, a new tool for the attainment of power and knowledge. If it blackens the soul to equal that of any devil, it is but a small price to pay.

Nah, you've got it.

>Units engaged in combat make attack and damage rolls just as characters do.

It's basically scaling one creature up to a whole unit of creatures. If 1 Ogre can do 1d10 to a 1 HD militiaman, then 12 Ogres can do 1d10 to 100 1 HD militiamen. It's better than having hundreds of Hit Dice and damage dice.

As for their actual numbers, it's not really a problem. You get down to the last man or the last ogre and they can still do the same damage as if they were an individual creature. You can see half hit points as half the unit being wiped down, so morale checks.

After all, a high-level fighter down to 1 hp still does the same amount of damage. It's just an abstraction.

Anyone willing to give some insight on a custom class I'm making in ACKs?

Don't ask, just post it

>OSR
>Not using hirelings

They could be allies of any level, paid or not.

Give them a couple new characters to control, more or less justified by the context of the adventure.

It'd be a fun way to try out a new character, and there could be various rewards based on whether the new PC's survive.
>If the mysterious wizard dies, you get his spellbook and a wand with a few charges
>if he survives, you may ally with his coven and have a resource for magical research or a place to lay low.

If you don't want to introduce new characters, run a mystery scenario or something that doesn't particularly rely on combat. Perhaps there's an enemy that's easy to kill, but difficult to catch.

Drop it like it's hot.

I like reading custom stuff, especially when it's thought out.

I posted some of it last thread but didn't get any feedback. Here's what I got so far. Any changes or critiques would be desired

Class Category - Eremi Mercenary
Hit Dice: [d4]
Fighting: 2 BP [1000 XP]
Attack Throws: +2 per 3 Levels
Weapon Selection: Narrow [+ 2 CusP] [+300 XP]
Armor Selection: Narrow [+3 CusP] [+450 XP]
Fighting
Styles: Two-Handed Melee & Two Weapons [+1 CusP] [+150 XP]
Damage Bonus: +1 per 3 Levels
Cleaves: 1 per Level

Thievery: 1 BP [+200 XP]
Divine: 1 BP [+250 XP]
Arcane:
Prime Requisites: CON & DEX
Saving Throw Progression: Fighter

XP Requirements for each level:
2nd - 2500 XP
3rd - 5000 XP
4th - 10000 XP
5th - 20000 XP
6th - 40000 XP
7th - 80000 XP
8th - 160000 XP
9th - 280000 XP
10th - 400000 XP
etc.

Total CusP: 6
CusP:
-Acrobatics
-Darkvision 60r
-Fighting Fury
-Alertness

Skills:
-Move Silently
-Hide In Shadows
-Backstab

Eremi Spell List:
1st:
Raze (Blast) - 1d10 per Level, Maximum 4d Damage, Elemental (Fire), Targets 1 creature, 5" diameter sphere, attack throw required to hit target, Range 150', Instantaneous, Saving throw avoids spell, Source divine [Cost 8.6]

Warmth (Healing) - Cures 1d6 + 1, Targets 1 creature, Attack throw required, Target self, Instantaneous, Beneficial effect, Source divine [Cost 7.5]

Scorching Fists (Blast) - 1d12 per Level, Maximum 5d Damage, Elemental (Fire), Targets 1 creature, 5" diameter sphere, Attack throw required, Range 0", Instantaneous, Saving throw reduces spell effect by half, Source divine [Cost 8.6]

2nd:
Smokestep (Transmogrification) - Current form becomes gaseous, Target self, Duration 1 turn, source divine [Cost 13]

Hearth (Healing) - Cures 2d6, Targets 1 creature, Attack throw required, Range 0", Instantaneous, Beneficial effect, Source divine [Cost 20]

Solar Flare (Harming) - Inflicts Blindness, Targets 1 creature, Attack throw required, Range 60", Instantaneous, Saving throw avoids spell, Source divine [Cost 19]

3rd:
Tongue of Surt (Blast) - 1d10 per Level, Maximum 4d damage, Elemental (Fire), Target by Area 60" long x 10" wide cone, Attack thow required, Range 0", Instantaneous, Saving throw reduces spell effect by half, Source divine [Cost 23.3]

Starting Equipment:
Crimson Gargoyle Leather Suit, Smoke Scented Sable Robes, Charcoal Desert Shemagh, Khyber Sword with Bone Handle, Red Steel Sabre, Traveller Boots, Waterskin, 1 weeks Iron Rations

>Gargoyle Leather
wat

Fluff piece from the setting. Got the inspiration from Dark Souls with the Gargoyle drop items.

Temporarily promote favored hirelings to characters.
Or start up a character tree/stable/whatever.

Frankly, they should have one of those already.

>without having them possess the rest of the PCs
Never, ever allow characters to die while their players are absent.
That's the epitome of begging for a hissing fit.

What classes do you have in your game?

Do you think more or less classes make players more creative?

Do you make a new class if a player wants to be something very specific?

Do you use ability score requirements?

How important and distinct are classes in your game?

>Leather

I keep classes as few and as distinct as possible. The less there are, the more space players have to make whatever sort of a weird thing out of them: the fighter can be a barbarian or a ranger or a swashbuckler, or it could end up being something even weirder they might not even have thought of had they been constrained by more classes.

>run a mystery scenario or something
thealexandrian.net/wordpress/15151/roleplaying-games/game-structures-part-5-mysteries
thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1118/roleplaying-games/three-clue-rule

>sneaky arsonists
Just call them ninja.

Do you let them pick certain bonuses, for example their favored weapon, in order to distinguish various "roles", or is a ranger and a barbarian effectively the same mechanically in your game?

>What classes do you have in your game?
depends on the system really
>Do you think more or less classes make players more creative?
eh I'd say that's too dependent on the players in question to answered with any reliability
>Do you make a new class if a player wants to be something very specific?
depends on the system, if it's something like ACKS than probably cause it's easy to do
>Do you use ability score requirements?
I'm not necessarily against ability score requirements, but the ones that OSR systems often use are too much
>How important and distinct are classes in your game?
again too reliant on the system I'd be using to answer reliably

>What classes do you have in your game?
I've a a rest progression tree thing, but it's basically just Fighter, Magic-User, and Demihuman.
>Do you make a new class if a player wants to be something very specific?
Absolutely all the time.

>depends on the system really
I'm mostly interested in the osr system you are currently running, or planning on running.

>I'm mostly interested in the osr system you are currently running, or planning on running.
honestly I'm kinda suffering from choice paralysis in that regard, even limiting my choices to just the ones I own in physical format I've got about 14 different OSR systems I could possibly run

>even limiting my choices to just the ones I own in physical format
How many have you actually run before?

>How many have you actually run before?
honestly none, I've had ridiculously bad luck actually DMing anything in the past, and due to a move back in 2013 I have no one to play with anyways

I'm using a d12 spell list for starting spells in my game. And I have fucking 11.

>Transport loot and gear and shit
>Magic Missile stand in
>Slow everyone down curse
>Enemies make a morale check curse
>Curse that lowers enemy HD by one (goes to zero they get knocked out like Sleep)
>Spell that lets you avoid a saving throw
>Spell that blocks a passage or door or whatever so you can escape
>Guidance spell that helps you navigate
>Message spell so you can be clever and transmit information far away
>Slowfall/levitation stand in
>Mage hand stand in

And I need exactly one more. It's really tough to think of because all the 'cool' spells, like making dead bodies speak and tell you everything the body knew before it died, or making men made out of clay as minions, or teleportation, or transformation and all that stuff are weird spells I want to make more specific and hard to find. I want the original list of spells to be as tight, dungeon focused, and useful/"balanced" as possible with each other.

I don't want to give Wizards automatic light spells or conjuring spells to make planning and resource management obsolete. I don't want to give Wizards anything that lets them bypass locked doors or avoid random encounters because that's the Rogue's thing. I don't want to give the Wizard anything that's useful to spam because my game as unlimited daily casts, just needing time in between casts to prepare the spells again and I don't really want to encourage that playstyle.

Any ideas?

Spells are more interesting if they combine unrelated things.
Double up spells 1&10, 2&4, 3&9, and 6&8.
Add some very limited divination to 7.
Add speak with dead to 11?

You now have a d8 spell list. ...and need one more spell.

fireball fire ball
lightning bolt lightningbolt

Does anyone know how to introduce WW1 era gun types, artillery, and items like breech-loading guns, lever action guns, bolt action guns, and cartridges in Domains of War?

Oh hey it's me.

>having friends
>having friends with free time
>having friends with free time who are into RPGs
>having friends with free time who are into RPGs and want to play OSR

Let's just keep buying books, brother. At least they're fun to flick through and imagine what could be.

>Spells are more interesting if they combine unrelated things.
Oh, and make sure every spell has one glaring limitation.

Maybe that door spell can only tell you who's passed through it. Or permenantly mars the door. Or puts the answer on the side you're barring.
Maybe that speak with dead only works once per corpse, then damns the ghost. Or maybe it only works if the ghost hates you? Etc.

>Telling me to combine spell effects together when I already made effects as general as possible
>Telling me to do these things when I am the only person who ever combined Slowfall and Levitation into one spell
>Telling me to create more flavorful spells when I specifically did not want to create flavorful spells
>Telling me to make a d8 spell list but add another one to it, in which case it would be useless as a start spells list

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

>flavor is bad
I don't think you're asking for what you want.

If someone's deliberately makign a list of generic spells, the best advice is not 'make them less generic lol'

The best advice I can give is, "Make spells do two things and have a limitation."

You can consider it next to why you decided to make the list.

Maybe you'll refocus on an existing part of your motives/thoughts that had been receiving less attention.
Maybe you'll get a thread of inspiration from what i said that wasn't wholly related to what I meant.

You won't necessarily come away siding with me, but you will come away with something.
Or you can ignore what I've said and come away with nothing.

But that would be antisocial.
Which is odd, people go to forums to be social.

>Links to the definition of the word 'Dialogue' as if to say "hur dur you're retarded u don't know what this word means"
>Gives unwanted advice on how to design spells
>"Make spells do two things and have a limitation" as if that is a reigning principle on spell design
>deliberately ignores the guidelines about why I want to make spells and acts smug going outside the box
>If you ignore me then you're antisocial, so why would you come on here lol?

for real, what a smug prick

Yes. You're absolutely perfect and have nothing to learn.
Which is how were able to invent the exact number of spells you wanted.
You've also conveyed the expression of smiling and having a nose.

why are you still posting?

Actually, belay that question, I found some Pathfinder rules from Rasputin Must Die thing. In conjunction with the advent of guns, I want to make a response to this from the Fighter's Guild who still use melee weapons like swords, spears, and the like. I want to write up prices for alchemically treating materials like steel, cloth, and leather that change their properties into something stronger, lighter, and more flexible. How expensive would you consider the process of treating pieces of armour and the like to become shot resistant?

Can't say what's good for game balance but in real life it was hella expensive. Also even proof armor would be practically worthless against any WW1 era firearm above a pistol.

If they feel like going a tad anachronistic
>alchemically treating materials
businessinsider.com/air-force-cadet-bullet-stopping-goo-for-body-armor-2017-5

Steal one from here, maybe?

Building off a conversation we were having in last thread, how would you value disarming an opponent as compared to inflicting damage?

I realize this question has a number of facets -- How many hits does it take to kill the enemy? Does the enemy have a backup weapon? Does drawing a new weapon take up his turn, or can he draw and strike on the same turn? Can he just pick up the weapon he was disarmed off? -- so feel free to expound on each of the bits.

Ultimately, though, I'm looking to get some kind of guideline on something that's always been a random ass-pull for me. So how powerful is disarming? What about knocking somebody over? I'm not looking for a mechanic here, but rather a valuation (though obviously you can extrapolate valuation from a mechanic, if there's one you think yields the results you're looking for).

No game I've ever ran has used hirelings.

I think it's probably worth an attack, and it becomes more valuable at higher levels because things don't die in 1 hit anymore (so missing your sword can accumulate over multiple rounds).

Could always take a cue from Dungeon World and let people deal damage + do some kind of fictional effect at the same time. People are always complaining martial types are too skimpy anyway so the buff probably wouldn't hurt.

That was a good thread day.

c

Having two different kinds of straight damage spells makes sense. Magic Missile is long range, auto-hit, so maybe splash damage at close range that people can save to avoid?

Alternately, some kind of illusion / trickery / change appearance spell.

Some kind of snare / entangle / web / flying ropes spell, that tangles people up.

Some kind of defense spell that makes you harder to hit or absorbs damage (shield, armor, blur, displaced image, protection from missiles, etc.).

Something that obscures vision (fog, darkness, etc.).

Some kind of anti-magic spell?

Thanks for posting these quotes. They are most of the ones I'm including in my Estates post, oddly enough.

>Filthy mainlanders actually believe that generic high fantasy medieval tokenism is based off the psychopathic evil french elite instead of the far more noble, good humored, and egalitarian society of the Britons

I... don't think we're taking about generic high fantasy medieval tokenism? I don't think D&D is that at all, even if it says it is. And yeah, the Britons were arguably slightly better at not being insane, but it's not really a contest. It's like watching two people play "bite the earlobe" while mud wrestling. You don't really care that one of them has a degree from Harvard.

>No game I've ever ran has used hirelings
Same here. It's not like I don't see the use, but it makes for a less interesting, less immersive game in my opinion.

>I think it's probably worth an attack, and it becomes more valuable at higher levels
Under what conditions? Is it a matter of the disarmed guy taking a turn to draw an inferior weapon? (Loses a turn, and probably does -1 on -2 damage per strike on average?).

If he can draw a new weapon and strike on the same turn, then it seems like disarming is considerably worse than dealing damage, unless the target is really high level and you can expect a long fight.

Out of curiosity, have you ever seen the movie "Flesh and Blood?"

Nope. Fill me in.

This sort of proofing would essentially be considered magic, so there's not much of a real world comparison other than the hight tech stuff like the other user posted.

See, they made a 2h8min summary of it that you can download and watch. It even has special effects.

Or if that doesn't work, I hear looking it up on any of the different internets might work.

You're a cool guy, user.

lol i came into this thread to say that you're retarded

That's what I was going for, yeah. Anything else you recommend I add or subtract?

Replace backstab with causing disease.
Also give them some sort of "distant distraction" or ventriloquist spell.

You came to this thread to samefag.

How well do your Necromancers get on with the church?
What sort of deals do they cut for their Doom?

In many cases it's tantamount to defeating your opponent, so it would have to be calibrated against those cases. (It's also very hard IRL compared to e.g. just killing somebody with a sword.) Knocking someone prone should be easier, for instance.

Personally, I don't even like to run disarms as a technique; I see them as more of the end result of subdual. Once you've gotten to the point of completely shutting someone down, THEN you can take his weapon away. (As also mentioned last thread, if someone has an image or PDF of the Strategic Review article about OD&D grappling, now would be a good time to post that. I thought I had it myself, but I can't find it)

tl;dr
>Roll to hit as normal and then each side rolls their hit dice.
>Whoever wins has control, whether that means pinning them, shoving them, etc.

Hmm. I wonder if there's some workable system whereby people get easier to disarm as they get more wounded. It makes sense from a balance perspective (the more wounded somebody is, the less of a point there is in disarming them seeing as they don't have that many hit points left) and a logic perspective (somebody who's hurt and worn down is going to be easier to outmaneuver). If nothing else, you could just give a bonus if the target is at half-life. If you were doing something like this d6 system , maybe you could let the person have the better of 2 rolls if the target was at half or less life.

>tfw just realized that in Chainmail combat, armor is completely irrelevant in melee between Heroes and higher aside from any magic bonus it has
I think I like it better, tb h.

Thanks, bruh. For some reason I keep imagining the rule Gygax outlined as much more complicated than it actually is. Some sort of brain damage from literally every other edition of D&D having terrible grappling rules, no doubt.

I'd blame the "inarticulate high school dropout with a thesaurus" prose.

Gygax wasn't responsible for the shitty grapple rules, kek.

Probably. Freakin' Gygaxian prose. The thing is, it's not even really that bad in this case; the main flaw is that he put a bunch of the actual rule text in the combat example.

The SR grappling rules are not shit, and definitely Gygax's work; all of the early SR content was. (Notice how the one thing that isn't has Blume's byline.) is issue #2, ever; it's way before they hired Kask on to do that job.

Pick any level 4 adventure and use Scarlet Heroes.

I, personally, absolutely suck at running hirelings, we all forget about them and it's not fulfilling so it's either a big group or SH for me.

Are there any recorded sessions of typical OSR around? I'm thinking about running some Moldvay or DGC for my group and could really use some examples from GM's point of view.

>recorded
I'm not aware of any good ones, not much of a podcast guy myself, but if you search RPG.net of all fucking places for "Fellowship of the Bling", it's a pretty good chronicle of Moldvay Basic, written by the referee, with fairly good notes on how it was run.

Does anyone know of a way to backup the trove or make a new link for it? Some jackass on another chan posted the full link in a busy request thread.

I've always really enjoyed how HD works with most things in OSR games. I like how bigger monsters with more HD are stronger not just from health but other forms of stat inflation, and I like it can be manipulated in some way; spells that lower HD for instance can do more then just lower max health.

However, I'm not a fan of how higher levels monsters rarely miss and rarely get hit by characters without good to-hit progression. Obviously Wizards and Thieves shouldn't be the best at fighting but making them unable to hit anything is kind of lame. Secondly making them too good at hitting things makes AC scaling a problem since you can't just scale AC as easily as health. Additionally, big huge monsters even with this can't kill players very easily if they don't get a shit ton of multiple attacks or how obnoxious save or die venom or petrifcation rays or whatever.

So in my game I considered the follow change. Instead of getting bonus AC, they don't get any bonus defenses. Having all that bonus health is good enough. But what monsters do get is a bonus to their basic damage equal to HD-1. This means that big high level monsters still have similar chances to hit, and are based on the individual MONSTER instead of just being a flat bonus. Also this means that even high level creatures can still be hit reasonably by characters that aren't that good at fighting.


Technically this makes them dangerous because a big ass HD 8 giant sword demon thing will be doing 1d6+7 damage every time it swings, but I think it makes the creature really dangerous without being obnoxious. If anything this means that big creatures just make armor MORE important since their chance to hit. Maybe you'll actually consider getting some armor on your Thief or Wizard character if the DM lets you, and makes shields more useful.

Any thoughts on this? This obviously doesn't apply to every game but I really dig the concept, at least for my own.

Is An Echo, Resounding in the trove? I can't seem to find it.

"Candlefist" is still one of my favorite things to come out of /osrg/.

If you have a Mega account, there's an option to mirror it.
Otherwise, you'll have to wait to download the whole thing.

Speaking on downloading the whole thing, do you can download whole directories as archive files IIRC.

I might do the distant distraction spell, but why the suggestion of replacing backstab with disease?

How do we fix the Charm spell?

It was fine in Men & Magic.

Necromancers are Outlaws. They are banned by the Church and will be burned if found.

Common people have a slightly different view. Necromancers raised several kingdoms in the past, and while they are connected with slaughter and oppression of the living, they are also remembered as wise kings. It's commonly believed that only those who died "in their sins", that is, without extreme unction, can be raised. They might be correct.

Necromancers can travel to Hell to cut all kinds of deals. There are many souls that should be in Hell that remain in among the living. Ghost Rider them into the ground. There are cities that need to be warned. There are dead that have been forgotten, or dead that are pained by their memory among the living. Emperors, tormented by their sins, might beg you to cast down their monuments and burn their history books.

You're going to need to give a little more information. Your questions is as vague as possible right now. Are there specific systems, contexts, or rules you want to examine?

Is there any custom made Fiting-styles like the 5e D&d to OSR ?

Preferably that isn't just a stat boost like +1 dmg with 1-hand weapons ect.

That type of thing is an ongoing item of interest here. user made a LotFP Monk class recently which I thought was good, a good mixture of static bonus stuff like "armor-breaking fist" and more active techniques.

So I'm working on my own houserules. Maybe you guys have some answers to some difficulties I'm having.

One of the big problems I have with D&D is that the abilities scores don't mean anything beyond fluff. A guy with 13 strength isn't actually any less strong than a guy with 15 strength if they both receive the same bonuses. They can both do the same sort of feats in the world.
Into the Odd's solution for this appeals to me, making all saves based on the three consolidated ability scores: Strength, Dexterity, Willpower (essentially 3.5/4e's Fortitude, Reflexes, Will) So that when you roll a save or try to do something skill-like, you just try to roll under your ability score.

But then this turns into another problem I have with D&D: binary pass/fail outcomes.
I prefer the Reaction chart, where there are five degrees of failure or success rolled on 2d6: 1. Complete castrophic failure. 2. Normal failure 3. Success with Complication 4. Success 5. Overwhelming success

So my problem is, how do I create a system in which each unit of any given ability score matters, and isn't a binary pass/fail check?

R e f e r e e s J u d i c a t e A c t i o n s
s n o i t c A e t a c i d u J s e e r e f e R

>They can both do the same sort of feats in the world.
No, they can't.

Does anyone know if there's a way to get the Barrowmaze Complete ZIP file? I understand there's one with illustrations and even handouts the book mentions.

I'm planning to buy it, but since in Latin America things are 3x more expensive, i'd like to give it a few sessions first.

Yes, the PDF is also expensive as hell, supposedly he author thinks it is a GEM of the OSR and so he won't ever consider making it a bit cheaper...

I hate being from a poor country