Welcome to /osrg/ – a center for pre-WotC D&D and all things related.
>Troves:
pastebin.com
>Tools & Resources:
pastebin.com
>Old School Blogs:
pastebin.com
>Previous thread:
TOPIC: Without immersion you cannot experience and can barely contribute to emergent story.
> SH1: The Caves of Crap
> SH2: The Tunnels of Turd
> SH3: The Fortress of Feces
> SH4: The Mire of Methane
> SH5: The Skies of Stool
> SH6: The Plane of Poop
what is FOE GYG/GVG
False OSR Enthusiast Get Ye Gone
In 0e how the fuck does stealth work? i know 0e is basically missing information and you have to house rule shit to get it to work sometimes but did i miss something about sneaking
Don't wear armor/move slowly
There are no rules for it (thief notwithstanding).
You're assumed to be moving quietly and won't alert monsters 1 room over (unless you do something loud).
Monsters explicitly have to see you to bother with you, but "I hide behind the crate" is always to late if you can see a Wandering Monster.
Monsters have a 90 foot line of sight. Players have 20 to 80 foot line of sight.
Some people don't care about "story", emergent or not. They just want to solve puzzles, feel clever, and maybe sometimes hit the monsters reeeaaal good. You don't need the GMs failed novel or your groups junior theatre hour impression for that
That's a false dichotomy, in fact, emergent stories are the opposite of the GMs failed novel.
>thief notwithstanding
how does thief differ?
Sneak chance and Hide chance.
Anyone show an older edition of D&D to your group who only played post WotC? How'd they like it? Half my group liked it the ther half fucking hated but those where my kinda power gamer players. They nearly had a heart attack when i told them all fighters get when they level is basically more HP and hits.
The key point you have to get across to people who scoff at things like that is this: The rules tell you what you cannot do by telling you what you can do.
In 5e you get rules that let you trip, disarm, or push with an attack and players think "Wow I can do all of this stuff" without thinking about the implication that because of this, no other character can do this stuff.
In OSR you can do it as anyone and it is up to the DM to set an appropriate difficulty for it and then you play it out.
Getting through to new edition fags is really hard but once they realise that excess rules only limit them then they get better.
I summed it up beautifully. I could never explain it right to others. I'd just say the older games where about simulating being an everyday adventure in a fantasy world. While the new games are about checking rules to give you the feeling of being the main character in a cringey fantasy book you got off amazon publisher.
As an avid 3e player who got burned out on Pathfinder and still runs 5e: I love OSR. I would prefer an OSR with slightly more unified mechanics, but I love OSR ideas and style. Running for 3.PF and 4e/5e players, oh God, it's like pulling teeth sometimes. They think they can't do ANYTHING unless it's on their character sheet. I am pretty permissive with stuff characters want to do, and I let them break the strict rules with a bastard version of PbtA skill checks for most task resolution, so they're guaranteed to get most of what they want in the majority of situations...all they have to do is ASK. But they don't. They want to stand around and spam cantrips and attacks.
On another note, race-as-class: Man should be a class, just as Tolkien intended. Men, Hobbits, Elves, and Dwarves, with perhaps some minor distinction between the individuals of a race depending on their ancestry.
YOU summed it up beautifully. NOT I, fuck me i'm retarded
>Man should be a class, just as Tolkien intended.
>On another note, race-as-class: Man should be a class, just as Tolkien intended
I have been running a few Cy[her games recently and it just fucking assumes you are human. If you want a race it counts as your Descriptor. Really to fix it you just have to give humans a bonus separate from Descriptor and then the same for the other races. So you could be a Graceful Glaive who Carries a Quiver instead of a Dwarf Glaive who Carries a Quiver.
I'm trying to remember the name of a very interesting module I read several years ago and I'm hoping to find again.
It was set in a great desert, where a large pyramid like complex was slightly unburied. Inside were multiple cultlike factions of a race of fallen men which have little outside contact and have degenerated over the centuries. These cultmembers you could befriend and join, avoid, or fight. The cults had masks, tattoos, and specific dead gods they worshipped, thus you could even attempt to pass as them.
How should I give magic items to the PCs? Should they automatically know whether a newly-found item is magical? Should they automatically know what it does and how to use it? And if not, how are they supposed to know if an item is magical/how to use it?
Obviously a lot depends on the item and the situation, but some insight would be nice. Examples would also be greatly appreciated.
B4.
That's what happens when a DM lets a player look at his campaign notes.
Thanks. I really appreciate it.
Magic items don't necessarily need to be obvious though extremely powerful ones should be fairly distinct. In an Arthurian setting for example a +1 longsword might just look like your average longsword but any Briton can recognise Excalibur on sight
I very much like the 2e identify spell for figuring out item properties.
Does anyone have Powers of the Mind for ACKS?
I started in 3.5
Found Basic Fantasy after browsing some d20 books on amazon. It was like my eyes were opened up. I think it made me a better DM, a bigger fan of gaming, and a better player
never played 3.0f but from what i hear its the beginning of the end.
I liked 4e kinda and i have the core books. Anyone think that if it wasn't called Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition but something stupid like Dungeon Slasher 5000 then it would have been better well better?
>any Briton can recognise Excalibur on sight
Wasn't that and blinding people the only two things Excalibur was good for?
Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures Game 2nd Edition?
Biggest thing I hated was character creation. I didn't like how much work was in it. I love the build up over time to be a hero.
The OSR gave me that feeling of being unique through play and not skills and feats.
I switched my group from 5e early on, because I became enamored with OSR, plus they couldn't be bothered to learn the rules anyway.
It was interesting, but clearly, some people liked our mostly improvisational pulpy hijinks with more or less clear story spiced by le natural d20s better. Also lack of customization did bother some people. But mostly they loved it, even though now that I look back at it, the split in preferences was so amazingly clear that it would be a good idea to split groups at the time. Problem was, we didn't have any DMs beside me and when we did, well, none of them managed to actually entice the same amount of players. Not that I'm good, but we've got some head-scratching stories out of those first DM attempts.
Anyway, good DMing beats the system any day. Especially in our group, where people liked the IDEA of 5e butt not so much in practice.
Well Excalibur could blind people but the better part was the scabbard because it gave immunity to dying from blood loss
I knew the standard was the great part. But we're talking about the sword.
>Anyway, good DMing beats the system any day
^ this is the only truth there is in this hobby.
I agree the zero to hero through play is where it's at. 4e was like a video game. a really fun version of Fire Emblem or Gladius.
I really like how OSR was so deadly and resource management was more important than stats that it felt like a horror game sometimes.
I knew the scabard was the great part. But we're talking about the sword.
was the scabbard also stuck in the stone? or did you get, like, a voucher for it, once you pulled excaliber out?
The sword in the stone (actually, in an anvil and a stone) was a different, unnamed sword. It was also a metaphor for gaining control of England "by the sword."
The Sword in the Stone and Excalibur are different swords.
I believe I've read several different variants of the carousing rules. Care to elaborate what I've missed?
ACKS has some great simple rules on how to create new classes, and new racial classes... but does it have anything for how to create new -races-?
Is there a way to bring my weird snowflake races to ACKS? All the frogs and slug people and slimes that OSR often likes? Or are we stuck with elves, dwarves, halflings, those Numenorean-knockoffs, and the weird lizards?
Thieves were originally capable of disappearing into the shadows, literally being undetectable until they chose to expose themselves.
Unless you have infravision.
>FOE GYG
What does this even mean?
Basically, "Your opinions, game style, and favorite system/edition are unpalatable to me, and therefore you are objectively cancer and the entire /osrg/ thread stands with me in throwing you out into the wilds. My way is the only way. You are not one of us."
When are you going to stop being upset people don't care to discuss RQ in theses threads?
Is FOE a reference to Etrian Odyssey?
>Care to elaborate what I've missed?
Jeff Rients' carousing rules are an addition to the standard XP=GP mechanic, where you can optionally choose to spend downtime carousing. It costs 1d6x100 gp and you get that many XP, but if you fail a save (vs. poison, I think) you also have to roll on a mishap table.
This is a totally voluntary rule and one thing you can buy for the money you scored; you don't have to use it, and the potential consequences are laid out in advance. Thus there is no loss whatever of player agency, unless you think shit like "I bought platemail but now my movement speed went down!" infringes on player agency as well.
jrients.blogspot.co.nz/2008/12/party-like-its-999.html
I play 5e with a group of newbies and you can absolutely show them the way with that system as opposed to 3.x or 4e. After sessions, my players are asking me to penalize or simply exclude spells & abilities that break the need for resource management.
I don't really like carousing tables. My players get into enough trouble and "plot-hooks" as it is. I also use XP=GP "thrown away" mechanic as well and I usually just give the players a plot hook afterward.
...okay? Good for you.
The context of that reply thread was an user criticizing Rients' carousing rules for "removing player agency" with the mishaps when he clearly hadn't understood the rules in question.
People are ridiculously afraid of railroading here.
It's fiddly and even though it could be argued that "Yeah, you're getting really drunk and you won't know what you'll do" your player loses agency over the *context* of their situation.
It reminds me of those stupid green text natural 20 stories where things "just happen" because someone rolled a 20.
At one point does "player skill" become "metagaming"?
20s should always succeed because the DM should just say you failed if there's no chance of success.
bois, how to urbancrawl?
Bruh, what? That's your threshold for fiddly? Have you seen the Ready Ref Sheets?
>your player loses agency over the *context* of their situation
No because they *choose* to get into the situation when they opt to carouse, they don't *have* to do this. It's no different from the fact that engaging in combat may leave your character dead if you roll poorly, or a failed save may leave you petrified. The only real distinction is that carousing carries less risk for a more guaranteed reward. How is this not obvious to you?
A referee with really finicky players might show them the mishap table; then they'd know exactly what they were getting into and would have no excuses at all.
>in a previous thread, a link to a post by some guy whining about adjudicating Wishes
>read Wilderlands
>there is literally a table for adjudicating Wishes right there
It's like Bob Bledsaw gamed for our sins or some shit. Fuckin' uncanny. Actually I guess it's more like the same questions come up pretty predictably, but damn if he didn't do his best to solve them all long before people even started kvetching about it.
RuneQuest subthread anchor
The story comes after play
youtube.com
Didn't you use this image months ago to try to start an actual RQ thread and it lasted like 17 posts?
>No because they *choose* to get into the situation when they opt to carouse
Like I said before, it can be argued that since the players are getting drunk, they are choosing to relinquish that agency, however the context or resolutions of your table are divorced from specific player action.
>It's no different from the fact that engaging in combat may leave your character dead if you roll poorly, or a failed save may leave you petrified.
I disagree with this analogy, considering that player agency doesn't magically stop in combat but is rather suspension of agency is the consequence to poor tactics, planning and sometimes yes bad luck but the point is the scenario can play out differently and is largely dictated by player agency. It would be closer to something like a hexcrawl procedure where a relative degree of abstraction is needed so you can reduce large chunks of time into game-able content. But even then, players are choosing the CONTEXT of the situations.
>The only real distinction is that carousing carries less risk for a more guaranteed reward. How is this not obvious to you?
I respectfully disagree.
I remember it getting 0 posts. But people keep talking about RuneQuest in this thread so wat do.
>wat do
Report and hide RQposters
How do you convert Runequest to AD&D?
Going via 13th Age is not an option.
Looking it up online, read White Dwarf when they duo-stated characters or look at All The World's Monsters Volume 2.
>Metal OSR
>Class level caps at 11
Wrym Footnotes has Ardiun stats for White Bear & Red Moon.
Level 10 is about as high as normal people get, and Demigods hover around 15-18 mark.
>it can be argued that since the players are getting drunk, they are choosing to relinquish that agency
No, that's not what I'm saying. Carousing is an optional rule. If the players opt to engage in carousing, they are *using their agency to choose to run the risks presented under the conditions provided*. Although it's true that part of the charm of the table is the way that it simulates, simulatory concerns are no part of the *justification* of the rules as regards player agency.
Again, if you're worried about this you can simply show the players the full table; if they then opt to avail themselves of the carousing option, they're tacitly agreeing to any of those possible outcomes. (And frankly, they are anyway; in practice I've never heard anybody be anything but entertained by these rules, which are among the most common house rules in the OSR for that exact reason.)
Do you think the table is meant to be used every time a character has a drink or something? Is that the issue here? Carousing is meant to be a fully voluntary, specified action where the player says "Cork the Eagle engages in carousing", not just "oops haha you bought too many drinks, save vs. ass tattoo".
> Many monsters should not be played as characters immediately. Players should accustom themselves to the play of human characters before branching out into the exotics. Many of the races described have clear advantages over the human. Referees desiring a certain reality in their campaign should realize that these are mostly very reclusive or rare races who stick to their own and rarely venture out amongst humanity, unless it is to fight it. Thus, the adventuresome dragonewt, ogre, or morokanth is a rarity and a campaign in which every player chose to be an exotic would be very strange indeed.
>How do you convert Runequest to AD&D?
• Don't publish the game.
• Curb your autism.
• Keep playing D&D.
If you're not Steve Perrin a similar procedure is indicated whereby you just don't buy or use Runequest.
>the way that it simulates
Doy, sentence fragment. "The way that it simulates the bad decisions and terribly impaired judgment of being totally wasted".
> convert RuneQuest to AD&D
RuneQuest has the same 3d6 attributes, except that Wisdom was renamed to power and a 7th attribute for SIZE was added. RuneQuest even uses the same all cap abbreviations (calling the new names POW and SIZ). The attribute names and the use of hit points are evidence RuneQuest is *related* to D&D.
>The attribute names and the use of hit points are evidence RuneQuest is *related* to D&D.
Is this a joke or did you just not read your RPG history as autismally as some of us? Runequest is literally Steve Perrin's D&D house rules mixed with Greg Stafford's hippie setting.
Fighter goes to some noble for a favor. The noble turns out to be lady, pulls him to the bedroom. Fade to black and all that usual stuff.
But the better he performs, the more in-game favors she can get to him. The more quality land, or bigger army for his endeavors, or whatever else he was here for. There's therefore a genuine reason to figuring out how well he did in the sack.
How do you roll for sexual performance in OSR?
Roll-under Constitution, grant a level bonus. Differential is how well it went. Or if you want something more complicated I'm sure there would be a JG routine for this stuff.
Add together d20+CON and d20+CHA
40 is average
It just shows how little we've truly grown, to be honest. Thirty years and we're still arguing the same shit, even though it was all solved ages ago.
Are there any blogs that talk about urban sandboxes? Or do you guys know anything about this shit? hexcrawls and dungeoncrawls are easy enough, but what about adventures in settlements?
I've been thinking of making an urban dungeon crawl set in some really shitty part of town, with townsfolk and pickpocketing orphans and thugs as random encounters. Basically as deadly and unknowable as any dungeon, only humans and shit actually have to live in it.
But I'm lazy and also don't know how to make maps.
City-State of the Invincible Overlord and Vornheim are the classic suggestions ITT.
You too should have a look at the CSIO, especially the maps.
Bryce thinks The Lost Mine of Phandelver is a great adventure. Gus thinks it's terrible.
Who's right?
> Steve Perrin's D&D house rules
You are probably thinking of the Perrin Conventions. These are not RuneQuest, though they were used with OD&D and later with RuneQuest.
It hits a lot of Bryce points. There's a wilderness, wandering monsters and random encounters, interesting magic items, non-standard twists on regular monsters, rivalling factions, monsters you really shouldn't fight, etc.
If it was a straight-up hex crawl with four dungeons and a few other points of interest, it would be pretty damn good. Sadly it's let down by the hand-holding, linear nature of the whole thing.
> The coinage of Glorantha is based on silver. While both gold and copper are used as coins, silver is by far the most common monetary metal. The generic term for silver coins used over the continent is the Lunar, in honor of the Lunar Empire. Gold was the first coinage of the world, brought to the people by the enigmatic Sun-Wheel Dancers. In their honor, gold coins are still called Wheels. Copper coins were invented by the dwarves. The copper coin is called a Clack, or often just a Copper.
>
> 1 Wheel=20 Lunars
> 1 Lunar=10 Clakcs
>hand-holding, linear nature of the whole thing
That's because it's meant to be a new DM's first adventure.
But for all its talk about making stuff up and keeping things open, it definitely guides the GM and players toward certain courses of action.
Compare it with something like B4 where there's just a dungeon and it's entirely open. You can rebuild a civilization, murder everyone, or do anything in between.
Oh also LMoP is far too long. The first two dungeons could be one page dungeons and lose nothing. X1 accomplished far more with half the page count.
I was never able to get excited about the Glorantha setting, but Apple Lane and Snake Pipe Hollow are cornerstones of old school imo.
Is there a better borderland generator in existence than Renegade Crowns?
>this new school game from 1987 is totally the cornerstone of old school gaming guise!
I'm personally a fan of the setting but I'm also a sucker for anything that incorporates/apes the weirder parts of myth, especially Hindu stuff