|
I'm going to say ability scores is what I'd remove. If you look at OD&D, they have so little influence that you could do it with very little effort: * drop the XP tables by 5-15% (which also has the advantage of legally clearing you with the OGL) * put Fighters on the Fighter table of saving throws and attack rolls, ditto Clerics, ditto Magic-Users * standardize a number for the Constitution benefits, either globally or by class, or rule out the Constitution benefits of system shock completely and I think that's pretty much all of it. Give the Fighters a +1 to attack and/or damage rolls just for being a Fighter, as Gygax would sometimes do in his later years.
|
#
?
May 26, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:51 |
|
|
I really like how classes let you just get a functional character up and running very quickly, even when you don't really understand the game well yet. Multiclassing is horrible and basically loses all the strengths of classes while still not being as good at customization as point buy. Ability scores do something pretty vital (make each character of the same class feel different/gives hooks to hang personality onto even before you've started playing them), but I feel like there are much better ways of accomplishing the same thing in other ways, so I'd definitely scrap them. Point-buy ability scores, like multi-classing, pretty much destroy all the strengths that ability scores have without really giving much in return (if your ability scores aren't random you're just going to end up with at best 2 or 3 'correct' configurations that every competent player ends up with, making all warriors identical again), but random ability scores suffer kind of badly from a "well, I guess you're just like that other character but worse" issue. I think what I'd prefer would be just some randomly assigned narratively rich special abilities/traits you roll up at chargen, sort of like 2 positive and 1 negative feats that kind of define what make you memorable as a character.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
The first decision I made in writing For Gold & Glory was to remove all the "optional" stuff, specifically proficiencies, and it was a pretty controversial decision among the community. But gently caress it, I hate skills and percentiles (leave that to Chaosium) but after the thief class was introduced you can track this snowballing effect of D&D creating an exception for everything. And I agree, the thief's abilities are (or at least should be) special. Anyone can climb, but only the thief can climb a shear vertical wall etc. I can't remember if it was AD&D DMG or 2E PHB but either Gygax or Steve Winters, maybe both, warned against occupations for adventurers. Your fighter shouldn't be a blacksmith, he should have to deal with blacksmiths. That's what you're spending your gold on. 2E kind of ruined it all because proficiencies assume that if you're not trained, you are literally inept. I remember long arguments about characters being illiterate -- and by RAW you're illiterate unskilled -- and most DM's I knew hand waved it so that if your class could take the skill then you were literate even if you didn't pump points into it. Those arguments were never fun. No, my wizard isn't a skilled swimmer but he shouldn't immediately sink in static water over his head! As for me I just made every skill "roll under your stats" modified as I saw fit. I believe RAW if you didn't use proficiencies then the DMG actually said skills were tied to saving throws e.g. maintaining your balance was save vs. breath weapon or something weird like that. 5th edition made me drop the old stuff pretty hard as it was the most like 2nd edition in my eyes without me having to rewrite 2nd edition.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
OtspIII posted:I really like how classes let you just get a functional character up and running very quickly, even when you don't really understand the game well yet. Multiclassing is horrible and basically loses all the strengths of classes while still not being as good at customization as point buy. Great post. It's difficult to really 'role play' the difference between a 13 and a 14 wisdom or whatever anyway. I like your narrative hook idea, it's why I love the character gen in DCC. Your occupation and starting equipment end up being what you strongly base your character on, even though you do have attributes.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
al-azad posted:The first decision I made in writing For Gold & Glory was to remove all the "optional" stuff, specifically proficiencies, and it was a pretty controversial decision among the community. But gently caress it, I hate skills and percentiles (leave that to Chaosium) but after the thief class was introduced you can track this snowballing effect of D&D creating an exception for everything. And I agree, the thief's abilities are (or at least should be) special. Anyone can climb, but only the thief can climb a shear vertical wall etc. Oh man you wrote FG&G too?! That's really cool - it's a well-written retroclone. I've been planning to pick it up in print to round out my collection.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Oh man you wrote FG&G too?! That's really cool - it's a well-written retroclone. I've been planning to pick it up in print to round out my collection. Thanks. I want to say that whatever edition is on DriveThru and Lulu are legit but a year ago I had a falling out with some people working on it and they basically threatened to scrub my name from future releases. I've long washed my hands of it. It was fun going through like 10 years of Dragon magazine looking for all the "patches" that were published for 2E. I want to say more was written for 2E than any other single edition. If I ever get back into the RPG hobby it's going to be campaigns and adventures (compatible with the other clones) which is IMO the 2E era's greatest strength.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I want to say more was written for 2E than any other single edition. Thats interesting to hear. I have felt that way, but only read a bit of 3rd and 5th, and just skimmed the core books for 4th.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 10:38
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Thats interesting to hear. I have felt that way, but only read a bit of 3rd and 5th, and just skimmed the core books for 4th. I should modify that with "more has officially been written for 2E." I can't account for the mountains of stuff D20/OGL produced.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
So something that just popped up in my head, Dave Arneson's original Blackmoor campaign book (not the brown book) mandated that adventurers spend a good chunk of their money to level up. This being a neat spin on OD&D's system where money = experience just like you don't get experience from fighting easy monsters, you don't level up in Arneson's world without sacrificing money. You could bank what you needed to maintain your army and stronghold, a feature Arneson carried over from his wargame days, but adventurers weren't poo poo unless they were partying or donating to their religion. And it has to be frivolous spending, it can't be an investment or gift to another player. I've only seen it in one other game (the D20 Conan game) but admittedly I haven't kept up with RPGs the past 7 years. It's something I've always tried to adopt into my games but naturally there's some push back from players. Treasure is really contentious and most players are red dragons in that they will hoard every copper to save up for that shiny wand but refuse to spend any of it even if it means getting something that would save their life. My middle ground has become the "wealth level" where I just scratch out any numbers and let them buy whatever the gently caress they want at any time unless it's super rare. "Yeah, you can buy 10 third level potions until you have to start sleeping in the lovely inn by the harbor." al-azad fucked around with this message at 00:15 on May 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Just steal Dark Souls' system, where XP and currency are the same thing.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
I've definitely seen that "spend everything in a class-related manner in order for it to count as XP" mentioned in other OSR RPGs before, also using Arneson as an inspiration, and it's a good, evocative touch that I wouldn't mind implementing, but you're also right that players are probably going to not want to "spend" all their gold without getting some kind of benefit out of it, so I feel like you'd also have to be prepared to come up with a reward for the Fighter's carousing, even if it's something like a new plot hook or whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
IIRC Barbarians of Lemuria assumes that the PCs blow all their money between adventures, giving them impetus to adventure again. I don't think it's the only such game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:IIRC Barbarians of Lemuria assumes that the PCs blow all their money between adventures, giving them impetus to adventure again. I don't think it's the only such game. That's basically the barbarian MO in fiction: make a big haul, drink and party and live it up for a few months, then get back out there again once you go broke. Pretty sure that's how Conan operated when he wasn't playing king.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I've definitely seen that "spend everything in a class-related manner in order for it to count as XP" mentioned in other OSR RPGs before, also using Arneson as an inspiration, and it's a good, evocative touch that I wouldn't mind implementing, but you're also right that players are probably going to not want to "spend" all their gold without getting some kind of benefit out of it, so I feel like you'd also have to be prepared to come up with a reward for the Fighter's carousing, even if it's something like a new plot hook or whatever. The reward is a new level 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
If anyone wants to give DCC a try, the Free RPG Day adventure has a quick start guide that is rather extensive, and there are two adventures in there too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
After chatting with players more, going with a modified ACKS that adds a bit of heroism to players (mostly optional fighter maneuvers, some boosts to mages with a sort of borrowed at-will/prepared spell thing, paladins don't fall, thief auto-successes and some better-delineated backstab rules, etc), built out my initial hex map, and started in on the bigger background seeds for "stuff that's happening while they initially murderhobo". Any recommendations for tracking this stuff? I've built a rudimentary database/program thing in Python to handle the procedural stuff for sessions (weather tables, trade stuff, tracking kingdoms and fiefs), and I'm still searching for the best way to have stuff as table references. My thought was getting some roughly 3" x 5" labels, printing them off and putting them on cards, and using a card index keyed to hex locations. I figure it's easier to keep encounter tables/basic statlines available for wherever they wander. Got most of the starting and surrounding hexes populated with hooks, but I'm wondering if I should slot in a few more random options. Building this is fun, but suggestions for adding more options are always useful, because I intend to do as much of this without planning a dumb giant plot and let them determine where to go, but also want appropriate hooks so the world doesn't feel too empty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
Hedningen posted:After chatting with players more, going with a modified ACKS that adds a bit of heroism to players (mostly optional fighter maneuvers, some boosts to mages with a sort of borrowed at-will/prepared spell thing, paladins don't fall, thief auto-successes and some better-delineated backstab rules, etc), built out my initial hex map, and started in on the bigger background seeds for "stuff that's happening while they initially murderhobo". I tend to go wide but shallow with my initial prep for these things. Lots of hooks that are pretty much just a one-sentence or less concept and maybe an idea for how they relate to at least one other nearby hex. Then I just ad-lib things using that seed the first time players run into them and start doing some limited prep on things the players have actively put into motion between sessions. I don't like completely making things up since it feels arbitrary, but you don't need much to get past that issue--just if the encounter is dangerous or helpful/potentially profitable or not/what its general deal is. I also gotta say that I have pulled way back on stuff like anything fancy like trade. The way ACKS handles that is pretty onerous--I'd almost just suggest a system like saying "hey, here are things we've already established in the world that might influence the price--if any of you can think of/argue additional things I'll factor them in" and then just roll a d10 and use the guidelines you established to establish the reasonable range for what a 1 vs a 10 means. I think actively making it into a system is kind of self-defeating and super annoying--I'd just assume by default that the characters at least break even on a trade if they roll a 4 or better, but other relevant info could change that (if they heard previously from a reliable source that X city was hot for selling weapons I'd make them break even on a 2, and if the city was previously noted to be a holy site for the Pacifist Cult I'd probably make it more like a 6). Stuff like that is actively fun to fiddle with, since it's the type of into the players are already engaging with, while doing stuff like thinking about population densities or climates or bookkeeping actively takes players out of the regular pacing of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
OtspIII posted:I tend to go wide but shallow with my initial prep for these things. Lots of hooks that are pretty much just a one-sentence or less concept and maybe an idea for how they relate to at least one other nearby hex. Then I just ad-lib things using that seed the first time players run into them and start doing some limited prep on things the players have actively put into motion between sessions. I don't like completely making things up since it feels arbitrary, but you don't need much to get past that issue--just if the encounter is dangerous or helpful/potentially profitable or not/what its general deal is. Yeah, I absolutely get that. Admittedly, my players have requested a bit more crunch in a few areas, so I'm working on balancing modifications and rules with the amount of table prep. As far as larger-scale stuff like weather and general trade, I'm mostly building a suite of utilities to automate stuff like that so I can generate my numbers for a given session, print them out, and have a general view of stuff like weather, big developments, etc. Hex campaign stuff really seems to be about balancing the macro/micro scales of things, especially when the goal I'm looking at is allowing for rotating GMs in different map corners, as a few players have expressed interest in running sections of the world. Worst case, I get utilities that can be used for other stuff or tossed online to help people run things. The weather generator is turning out to be a little crunchier than I anticipated, in part because I'd like vaguely sensible patterns, but it works well enough. Plus, I can set it to generate a year's worth of stuff, dress it up as an in-game almanac, and call it done for that load of prepwork. Basically, built a seasonal table for a region, then had it run through the year, with edge values for dates getting a weighted probability to pull from earlier/later seasons to test. Results are stored to a table that references hexes, and an incredibly pointless and complicated solution to something no one cares about in-game is modeled. I've fallen into a dark, dark hole with this crap, and I suspect it's only going to get dumber as I try more bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
I'm a DCC fanboy at this point but the quick start from Free RPG Day is a super good value for anyone wanting to try the system. It includes rules to level two and a funnel and level 1 adventure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
This isn't really huge news, but a PDF version of the 5th Edition of Tunnels & Trolls was added to DTRPG just last month. Apparently that was the longest-running (and most popular?) version of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
What are the pros/cons of T&T vs. D&D?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
It's a fork of D&D that's got a focus on a simpler roll-under resolution system, spell-point magic and a really strange approach to combat where it's a push-pull team-based thing I can't explain super good (at least in the one I've played, which was the recent kickstarted one) plus a lot of options for solo-play. Someone familiar with this particular edition and osr stuff could explain it better than me. it'd be an interesting thing to look at from a historical perspective as well, it's cool to see the strange parallel evolution to D&D Wrestlepig fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
T&T is far, far simpler, if memory serves (I played some of the solo adventures years ago). Beyond that, in the edition I played, class determines whether you focus your training on weapons, magic or both. Damage comes directly from your constitution rather than a number of hit points, so characters remain vulnerable to regular weapons. Monsters only have one stat: a monster rating. It determines how good the monster is at fighting, and damage is taken out of this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Liz Danforth's drawings are a strong pro imho. (Probably this is a nostalgia-tinged opinion.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
If I remember correctly, there was a T and T adventure where the players needed to hide a jewel somewhere and the GM had soldiers looking for it. But it meant the GM didn't know beforehand where the jewel was hidden, which I thought was neat, since the GM is usually omniscient.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Sax Solo posted:Liz Danforth's drawings are a strong pro imho. (Probably this is a nostalgia-tinged opinion.) The best thing from it is the obese unicorn on the 1st edition T&T cover.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
What adjective do you think best connotes the type of abilities that D&D Thieves have, such as 'hide in shadow'? Extraordinary Preternatural Singular Transcendent or something else?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
I would use "preternatural", or even "supernatural". I feel like "extraordinary" is the difference between a layman and, say, Harry Houdini, but "really goddamn good at being a thief" means you're still shackled to the laws of reality. Preternatural implies that the thief simply isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 05:49
|
|
|
obviously you start with extraordinary abilities and move to supernatural abilities at level 1 you can "hide in shadows" at level 10 you can "hide in shadows"
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 10:51
|
|
|
I like preternatural over supernatural because it has a stronger connotation of being self sourced, but I'm worried preternatural isn't a commonly known word. If anyone besides me cares about Into The Odd there's a play test packet for Bastionland up on the blog, it looks like it's the Unearthed Arcana of ITO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:That's basically the barbarian MO in fiction: make a big haul, drink and party and live it up for a few months, then get back out there again once you go broke. Pretty sure that's how Conan operated when he wasn't playing king. Nope. Conan doesn't offer much in the way of continuity, the first two published stories he was already king and then the author shifted to a younger time when Conan was a young buck having adventures. He never did super great for himself in terms of lootz. I mean, that's basically what he did in the movie from 1982, but in the stories he's much more pulp hero, one story starts with him being run out of town for murdering people instead of following laws.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 10:16
|
|
|
WiiFitForWindows8 posted:Nope. Conan definitely had his ups and downs throughout Howard's original stories although much of the character people associate with today came from the other authors much like Lovecraft's work. The important thing is he almost always starts every story poor, on the run, or in a fight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 10:30
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:I like preternatural over supernatural because it has a stronger connotation of being self sourced, but I'm worried preternatural isn't a commonly known word. Oh neat. Link?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 11:13
|
|
|
Angrymog posted:Oh neat. Link? Oh, yeah, here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6MR1KWIUR9US29wd0p0bVdXUmc/view
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
al-azad posted:Conan definitely had his ups and downs throughout Howard's original stories although much of the character people associate with today came from the other authors much like Lovecraft's work. The important thing is he almost always starts every story poor, on the run, or in a fight. Well, I think it's more important that many of his stories don't actually end up with him getting tons of loot. Most of his poo poo involves him simply surviving and getting sex.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
New question. What would the consequences of replacing the standard random encounter rule with this new one? Old rule: Every turn, roll 1d6 and if the result is 1 than a random encounter occurs immediately. New rule: When entering a dungeon, or after a random encounter ends, roll 1d6 to determine the number of turns until the next random encounter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:New question. Not much, really. It would just do the following: 1) increase the frequency of random encounters, 2) reduce rolling, 3) potentially wear resources quicker due to the guarantee of a random encounter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Covok posted:Not much, really. It would just do the following: 1) increase the frequency of random encounters, 2) reduce rolling, 3) potentially wear resources quicker due to the guarantee of a random encounter. To solve (1), use 1d10 or 1d12 for the number of turns. The average number of no-encounter turns before an encounter is (5/6) / (1/6) = 5, meaning every 6th turn. Assuming that, on your system, a 1 would mean back-to-back encounters, using 1d10 gives you an encounter every 5.5 turns on average (vs every 6), and 1d12 would be every 6.5 turns. If you always have a gap of at least 1 turn between encounters, use 1d8 or 1d10. Compared to your system, the traditional system has a greater chance of very closely spaced encounters, and also a non-zero chance of very very long gaps between encounters. I don't know whether that's good, or whether it's something players would even be able to notice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Right, the goal here was to reduce the incidence of back to back encounters while ensuring that they occur over the long term. 1d6 obviously doesn't work for this. I was considering 2+1d6, but looking at the math I may go with 1+1d10.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:51 |
|
|
If you have a timer-until-encounter going on, that also gives you a nice clear mechanic to mess with to represent the PCs playing it safe or being noisy. Banging down a door could tick off more points towards a random encounter than quietly picking the lock, arranging a distraction on the other side of the dungeon could reduce the timer, that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 02:23
|
|
