/osrg/ OSR General

Elemental planes, negative/positive energy plane, and the abyss/nine hells. I don't like Ysgard being more "epic" than the material plane, I don't like all the good-aligned planes existing. I am fine with Carceri, Pandemonium, even Acheron in some respects. The biggest issue I have with the planes is that some of them just invalidate the players' existence. If a genie is chaotic good aligned, why would he not raise a powerful adventurer with a wish? Why would an angel not help the players, or just do their job for them? Seriously. In 3.PF a solar angel was like CR 23. Immune to so many different effects the only way to kill it was straight damage. Pretty sure it could do holy word at will. Now, I'm not saying such a creature has time to go around the world wiping out all the orc tribes and bandits. But any BBEG who threatened the security of the material plane, would be BTFO by one if they knew about it. What else do they have to do? Fight demonic incursions into Arborea? Surely they could spare a single solar for a few days a year to solve literally all the problems of the material plane and teleport back. Unless it's some argument similar to why omnipotent God doesn't just solve everyone's problems, but it doesn't make sense to me. I suppose also that there could be some Maiar-esque restriction.

I had a player in 3.5 basically call a genie, defeat him, then get the 3 wishes. He then decided he wanted to repeat this plan to "farm" wishes ad nauseum. And, according to the rules-text, I saw nothing really wrong with his plan. The fact that this kind of stuff exists just decentralizes the importance of the material planes, in my mind. That said, extraplanar travel is just too big a part of D&D to drop entirely. I will have to carefully consider what planes I include in my next setting.

It's some sort of terrifying stand-off where if you send a guy, they'll send a guy. Pretty soon everybody's there.

Do you have a printer and a stapler?

Should I allow first level clerics and wizards start out with a scroll of 1-2 extra spells? In a dungeon crawl wizards just sorta lose interest in the game when they lose their one spell, and clerics are just a shittier fighter with a kinda useless turn undead ability

They literally just have one less hit point and one less damage, and Turn Undead is one of the most powerful abilities in the game.

Just make sure that they understand the meaning of "resource conservation" and maybe make sure to actually include some skeletons and zombies in your dungeons.

What the minimum amount of preparation needed for a GOOD first session? Not just improv haphazard shit.

Read the rules.
Read a module.

oh yes

>In a dungeon crawl wizards just sorta lose interest in the game when they lose their one spell,
Sounds like a player problem. If you give them crossbows they are just as good as fighters at low levels.

How do I get my 5e shitter friends to understand why I love OSR so much? I tried to get them to play once and they just complained and gave up. They didn't like that they couldn't play as any race and class combo, or that only thieves had skills, or that they didn't get more spells, etc.

It was a wreck

Some kind of map, and some kind of description for what's going on in the map. If you made the map yourself, it can be mental. Both of them. Just make sure that you have an idea of what's out there.

The minimum amount, though, is probably just to grab a good introductory module (i.e. Keep on the Borderlands), read through the entirety of it, and then make sure that you're relatively familiar with first-level rules. Then you'll want to make sure that you have a bunch of handy references - a homemade DM screen or a bundle of sheets, whatever makes you not have to flip through the books.

And that's probably enough from the gaming side of things. For the actual session, though, you'll also want to make sure that you have a good place to play, a sufficient amount of snacks and food and whatnot (if everyone brings their own, make sure you have enough for yourself), book everything some time in advance, and tell the players that since it's their first session you'd prefer it if they didn't completely flip the module the bird and ride off into the unmapped sunset.

>start out with a scroll
This seems like a lazy band-aid that doesn't really address the problem.

If you earnestly think that wizards and/or clerics need to be able to do more, then rework them so they CAN do more. I let spellcasters in my game cast a theoretically infinite number of spells in one day, and it hasn't ruined anything—in fact, it fits the feel of my campaign way better. Don't bother trying to make existing rules work in a way they weren't intended; mod the rules to serve the game you want to run.

Read the rules.
Read a module.
Make decent shorthand notes on the module.

lastgaspgrimoire.com/do-not-take-me-for-some-turner-of-cheap-tricks/

Try to emphasize the strengths of it. Quick character generation+high lethality, reaction+morale, strict time records (that must be kept), the entire procedural nature of it all. Spells that generally do what they say they do and don't have a bunch of variables to compute. Fighters that can actually fight.

Although that's mostly just stuff that make me love it, I guess. I dunno what makes you hot and bothered.

Selling it as 5E Basic But Even More Basic may or may not work. Probably not.

Thank you, user!

Hey Veeky Forums, is Beyond The Wall a good game to start playing tabletop rpgs with?
What's your opinion on it in general? What do you like/dislike about it?

>Good
It tackles relationships in a suitably crunchy manner

>Bad
Very storygame-y
Chargen takes longer than other OSR games
Discourages lethality
Hard to drop in new PCs

Not that user and haven't read it. How easy/hard would it be to slap its relationship rules on a more "purely" OSR game?

IIRC it's tied into chargen, so three of the four negatives necessarily come with it. It interweaves the backstories, but this takes time and since it takes time it discourages lethality and since everyone's got pre-established relationships new PCs are very much outsiders.

>first level cleric
>spells
Pick one.

>Cleric
>a class

Pick one

A little hard since they're idiosyncratic to the whole "you guys are all friends who grew up together"

You could give wizards a decent number of weak, but still useful cantrips. That could make a big difference, but I'm not against the idea of starting wizards out with an extra 1st level spell or two, provided they're weak spells, and not something like sleep.

I pick Clerics. You dont even need the other classes.

I'm thinking of making an OSR-style zombie apocalypse game. Because my group (at least, 2 members of them) have wanted me to run a zombie apocalypse game for a long time. The systems we usually play (Savage Worlds and Pathfinder) aren't really that great for zombies. Savage Worlds is close, but I have so many issues with the guns rules, the health rules, and so on, that I'd rather not play it. The only advantage it has is the Toughness system for managing lots of mooks, but honestly a high damage multiplier for headshots will take care of that. I considered GURPS, but I don't like
large parts of how GURPS works, even though I really like the system overall. I also don't like the idea that players choose their starting skills. "Yeah, man, I'm an ex-cop with 20 in Pistols and Rifles and Brawling, let's go" is not going to be conducive to the whole "let's train with weapons" and such like that.

Every aspect of OSR feels zombie-ish to me:
>high lethality
>resource management
>random character generation
So I feel that that is the best way to go.
My questions are:
>how to handle skills? what should and should not be a skill? I feel like anything that could NOT rely on player skill, should be a skill. I know skills normally aren't OSR but I feel like they will be important here.
>how to do advancement? I like the idea of "leveling up", but obviously I don't like the idea of characters gaining much HP. Should they never gain HP, or should I have it be +1 hp per level given that they'll start with 5-10 hp anyway.
>how to do random chargen? I'm considering a random roll for profession, maybe several rolls and you choose which one you like most. Then same for hobbies, side-skills, etc.
>any other things you would definitely add / definitely avoid in such a system?

Why not just use All Flesh Must Be Eaten? Honestly, just because you can do an OSR game of X Genre doesn't mean you should.

The post above me is a good post.

If I were you, I'd probably manage skills as essentially professions or non-weapon proficiencies. You randomly roll one or more at character creation from a list that includes both useful things (like medicine and construction and electrical engineering) and not particularly useful things (academics, art, secretarial, etc.). Pretty much anything that's a job in the modern day. I'd probably give characters somewhere between 1 and 3 plus their Intelligence bonus, no minimum, but you can tweak that number if you want. Your main profession might include something that you bring with you when you get out of dodge. If you have the skill, you can do the thing. If you don't, either you can't or you can but it's really shoddy.

No classes, obviously. Unless you have magic, I guess, in which case you could I suppose.

Advancement, well, if you include levelling up I'd allow players to learn an additional skill for each level up if they have some way to learn it? At best 1hp/level, but you don't have to even have that. I'd start characters off with 1d6 or 1d4 hp, modified by Con.

Make sure that resources are managed. Include colony life things once they have a semi-stable base, like people who aren't useful for survival but are being protected as well (like children, for example, or elderly, or the wounded or sick, or whatever --- maybe one of the starting professions is "stay-at-home parent" and things like that and they brought their child along). And social issues in the colony.

Obviously you probably should read the literature on zombie infestation like the Zombie Survival Guide if you haven't already. Decide on how exactly your zombieism functions --- vectors of infection, likelihood of infection, incubation period, how zombies act, etc.

Dead of Winter is a good (board) game to look at if you can. It manages the social issues as well as people getting bitten but not immediately killed.

Now I want to run a zombie apocalypse OSR game.

How do I tell my players that there is nothing in 5 Editions Xanathar's Guide to Everything that can't already be done in our OSR system?

I understand that (kinda), but it's harder to communicate to my players. They're first time OSR players and I'm a first time GM period, so it's tougher to get that across.

How do I translate that wizards can still do stuff after casting a spell, or that turning undead is useful (Yes I have tons of undead in dungeons, they've just gotten really bad turn undead roles and shunned it because of that)

Two options, really.
(a) Autistically cover every case, then show it to them.
(2) Just tell them. Make rulings when they ask how to do X.

Be aware that they don't actually care about the fact it's possible but they want a new book full of toys and goodies.

Tell them to imagine a world where every time they wanted to play a new race or class they didn't have to wait 80 years for a new book to buy.

Why is Turn Undead even a separate game mechanic from morale? It does the same thing.

Zombies don't have morale.

Cause I like absolutely none of AFMBE. The confusing exploding dice, overly-granular health, underly-granular stats, and glut of rules comes to mind. I tried running it once and it felt like pulling teeth.

How is a successful turn undead roll meaningfully different from a failed morale roll?

It kinda is, but morale checks are tipping points in combat and rolled at the DM's discretion while Turning the Undead can be seen as a morale check forced by a cleric with several possible outcomes: the undead are not impressed, they flee in terror, or they are instantly defeated.

Any tips for running a hexcrawl, lads?

I didn't think wizards could use crossbows.

>they flee in terror, or they are instantly defeated.
Either way, they're out of the fight. Does *every* spooked goblin in your campaigns come back to get even?

Do you think I should have random professions (like if you roll 00 on d% you get cop, get 1d8+1 points in Guns and 1d4 points in Law and 1d6 points in Driving), or should I just have random skill generation by skill?

The only thing in Xanthar's guide that an OSR game wouldn't have, is if there are extra feats. 5e is just a bloated OSR game with skills to encourage roll-for-everything nat20 stupidity.

They can't. You can have them throw darts, though.

It gets betters as a cleric levels.
If it really bothers you that much change it, I don't care.

Don't tell your players that you're running a hexcrawl.

That's why I said "if you give them".

Not necessarily, but be aware: they might bring friends the next time...

Brb, deleting crossbows from list of weapons magic-users can use in my OSR homebrew.
I like the idea that they throw darts or daggers, instead of using crossbow. It always felt kind of weird to me that a wizard in robes and pointy hat (or just in robes) would have a big heavy crossbow strapped on his back.

It's not just about zombies though. It's also about vampires, ghouls, and ghosts.

It fits pretty well that Clerics can turn away the more supernatural and ghostly enemies, similar to an exorcism.

Of course you should go with what feels right, but 'traditionally' Magic Users are very limited in their weapons (just daggers) and armor (none, actually). I usually allow them to have a staff or rod or something, gotta have to let your wizard carry one of those.

>instead of having a 'blaster wizard' as a class that deals long range magic damage, use a marksman class instead
>Uses mostly regular arrows but can find and use special powerful magical/elemental arrows to deal magic damage at long range

How is this idea?

>It's not just about zombies though. It's also about vampires, ghouls, and ghosts.
You aren't wrong, but you are apropos of nothing.

How does it differ from a fighter with a bow?

Vaguely reminds me of Dragons at Dawn, outside if the at-will lighting-bolt fire-ball night-vision thing.

I'm fine with staves, darts, daggers, and clubs. Anyone can use a club, and I feel like wizard school would have dart / dagger throwing as a "side" thing, something the students practice when bored. Or if the wizard had a mentor, the mentor would obviously teach him to use other weapons so that he had something for if he ran out of spells.

What kind of feats would be acceptable for OSR, if you got one every four or five levels, and no bonus feats or anything like that? inb4 none, my question is predicated on adding them. My group are Mathfinder addicts and I am sick of Mathfinder but I can't pull them off cold-turkey so I need a bone to throw them. Plus I kinda like the idea. No skills, but feats, if rare and controlled, might be okay.

Good Feats (IMO):
>weapon proficiency: pick three weapons to be proficient in. Lets people stretch class boundaries a bit, and is mostly harmless.
>Power Attack: you can take a -2 to hit for +1 damage. Or maybe a -4 to hit for +2 damage. Keeps damage relatively bounded but is still useful. May or may not require using 2 handed weapon.
>Two-Weapon Fighting: reduces -4/-4 penalty for dual-wielding to -1/-1.
>Precise Shot: Same as power attack, but for ranged weapons.
>Combat Expertise: A stance you can enter for -2 on attacks for +2 AC.
>Weapon Finesse: Dex to attack with daggers, rapiers, and shortswords.

Not sure if feats should be required to craft magic items, or if that's something all magic users should be able to do. Like, a Craft Golem or Brew Potion feat. That just feels like feat tax shit, but maybe it's good for balance.

Bad Feats (IMO):
>Toughness: either complete shit (+3 hp) or too powerful (+1 hp per level). Also contributes to hp bloat.
>Weapon Focus: needless math, never really felt that fun.
>Weapon Specialization: Adds to damage bloat.
>Skill Focus: No skills so pointless
>Natural Spell: broken in 3.5, would be just as broken in an OSR game, but I don't know much about OSR druids beyond AD&D 1e where I didn't even play one, just saw them as a subclass of cleric.

That's the thing. I don't really like fighters with a bow.

Fighters have the best armor, highest health, and good/magic weapons. They often have bonus attacks and high to hit. Why should they also be the best at long range combat? Let another class do that.

>Uses mostly regular arrows but can find and use special powerful magical/elemental arrows to deal magic damage at long range
Why couldn't another class do this?
Why can't fighter do this?

Good feats in my opinion should be special moves and abilites that are simply not available to anyone else. Things like power attack and precise shot are things anyone should be able to do.

Good feats would be things like smashing your hammer against the ground and making a shockwave, or performing an extra attack on the first round of combat when you charge into the fray.

But then you get into the problem of "Why can't I use a bow?".
Clerics can't use edged weapons for religious reasons and MU spend all their time learning magic so they don't have any time for weapon training, but what's stopping a fighter from using them or the magic arrows?

Fighters are more close ranged I feel.

They can use the bows and special arrows, it's just the Marksmen are the best at it.

>Toughness: either complete shit (+3 hp)
It was meant for low level wizards in short campaigns.

>would be just as broken in an OSR game,
Pretty sure Druids can cast while wildshaped in AD&D? Not 100% sure on that.
>but I don't know much about OSR druids
Wildshape at 7th level, so 'normal animals' are pretty much all worse than staying human.
They can change to a bird, a mammal, and a reptile each once per day.
The only important thing is that it heals an average of 35% of their hp each change.

/old/, could you help me with something, please?

OK, so the premise of the adventure is that a warlock has summoned something he didn't expect. Kind of an eldritch horror, that keeps growing and could overtake the entire planet if left unchecked. The portal is open and, while the characters don't have the mission of getting it closed, they might get into it.

Thing is, I don't want them to solve this by killing the warlock. I'd like them to find some way to convince him, trick him or fuck up with the summoning circle themselves.

In my notes it basically says, "if the characters attempt or even mention killing Kar-Hak, he, laughing, will brag that this won't close the portal"; but at the same time, I don't want to railroad them and just say "it doesn't work because fuck you". Can you help me come up with a good reason why it wouldn't work? Or am I being That GM and should let them solve the problem by brute force?

>lomion.de/cmm/egarus.php
'Evil High Priest' warlock or '8th level Magic-User' warlock?

>could overtake the entire planet
Reminds me of lomion.de/cmm/egarus.php

If it was out of the warlock's expectations, why isn't he trying to close it?
Maybe he hired the party after running afoul with Johnny Law?

And why would they think killing him would close the portal?

Forget about what you want. Forget that the warlock is a "challenge" in a game and that there should be a "solution". Think about the fiction: An evil warlock has gone in over his head. What seems reasonable? What does the story tell you? It doesn't make sense that the portal would close if the warlock was killed. Why would it? Does it make sense that the warlock brags about this like a video game boss? No! The warlock is probably trying as hard as he can to close the damn thing before it eats him. Or escaping to another plane. What would you do in this situation?

The warlock is actually keeping the portal from opening further. If he is killed the portal will expand without end.
He hasn't closed the portal yet because he is still waiting for whatever demon he was supposed to summon.

I'm honestly becoming partial to wizards with swords, because of Gandalf and Elric as well as swords being present in RL occult traditions as divination tools and such.

If you already tried playing with them and they just shittered, the only realistically possible options are to either just keep playing 5e, or find new players. It's really hard to cure players of shittery they don't want to be rid of, and you'll probably just end up being That Guy to them if you try.

Elric is already in the game as written.
He is an elf.
I don't have a problem with wizards getting swords but why not just let any class use any weapon?

I guess I think of Gandalf and Elric being more like Elves than Magic Users.

So I keep hearing Veins of the Earth's setting is brilliant and original and so on. Can anyone give me some more concrete details on what it is like and why it's so brilliant, rather than just showering it with superlatives?

Any interesting posts on demons and devils on the blogosphere?

It's a decent take on an Underdark setting where light-sources are used as currency and everybody is a cannibal.

Why do you do this?

Why not? If you're bothered by wizards and thieves increasing their melee damage output then do something like limiting the max damage dice they can get to (so a magic user with enough muscles can lift a two-handed broadsword, but can get 1d6 at most from it due to general lack of training compared to a proper fighter)
Well, Gandalf did have an elf identity...

I suppose "Evil High Priest" is closer.

>lomion.de/cmm/egarus.php
OK, I'll read this and we'll keep talking.

>If it was out of the warlock's expectations, why isn't he trying to close it?
Because he's a megalomaniac and he thinks he can control it. He's absolutey wrong, the creature is way more than he can handle. It's a calamity, but the warlock thinks that, given time and the right tools, he could turn it into a weapon of conquest.

>And why would they think killing him would close the portal?
Well, he's the one who opened it. I would assume that killing him would close it.

Don't post it.

VeoT has a high conceptual density: There's a lot of unique and interesting ideas per page. At least half are gameable. And it slots well into any other dungeon: a VotE monster can be added to any other dungeon with the justification "it crawled up from below" and it will immediately spice things up.

It's biggest strength is that it really captures a feeling of dungeoncrawling. It's not a walk down straight 10 ft corridors: It's tight and claustrophobic. There's squeezes, climbs and caves in weird shapes. And the darkness is total. Everything is starved for energy. And all of these threads about dungeons and caves are spun to many different ideas and together they make a whole.

>I would assume that killing him would close it.

>Well, he's the one who opened it. I would assume that killing him would close it.
If I punch a hole through the bottom of our boat, does killing me fix it?

What? I'm only asking because I want ideas of what to do with my own. I asked last thread, but it closed before I could get an answer.

There's a specific guy. Who's going to post a specific link.

Ah ok. I'm not a regular to these threads so I don't know who or what has notoriety

One of the madness effects you can roll is that you have to name your ropes and they take up a hireling spot, and they can talk to and betray you. Ancient trilobite knights that challenge you to single combat. A hero-hunting anglerfish that uses an illusory villain as its lure. A giant fungal crocodile that acts as an embassy ("diplomatic immunity" is being safely ensconced inside its belly). Lamps powered by the spermaceti of nightmare-manifesting whales. Rules for cannibalizing your party members.

How anime are your games, /osrg/?

youtube.com/watch?v=kOTHNoODYmY

>If I punch a hole through the bottom of our boat, does killing me fix it?

No, but if you're holding open a door then killing you might allow the door to swing closed.

>Forget about what you want. Forget that the warlock is a "challenge" in a game and that there should be a "solution".
You're right, I'm looking at this all wrong.

>It doesn't make sense that the portal would close if the warlock was killed. Why would it?
Really? It seems intuitive to me that, since he's the one who opened the portal, he's the one maintaining the connection between that plane and this one and killing him would sever it.

>Does it make sense that the warlock brags about this like a video game boss? No! The warlock is probably trying as hard as he can to close the damn thing before it eats him. Or escaping to another plane.
That would be the reasonable thing to do, yes. I imagined the warlock as a megalomaniac who's seeing the summoning as his hour of triumph instead of the shitstorm it's bound to become if he doesn't come to his senses.

>What would you do in this situation?
I guess this is rhetorical, but I'd try to
- steal his grimoire and hopefully the way to close the portal will be written there
- prove to the warlock that he can't control the creature and closing the portal it the only way either of us will survive this shit
- fuck off and hope someone more powerful will solve things, because I'm way out of my league on this one
And try to kill him, if I didn't know beforehand that it wouldn't help.

>The warlock is actually keeping the portal from opening further.
Hmmmm. I like that one.

OK, I read about the Egarus and holy fuck. Mine's nothing compared to it.

I'd just give them a weak attack at-will cantrip, like say only 1d4 or maybe 1d3+1 or something in terms of damage

>the free cantrip argument
It begins.

He was asking for a good reason why it wouldn't work.
If you think of it like tearing the fabric of reality rather then a common door then it makes sense.