admanb posted:

Why would you run 1e if you don't think mediocrity is fun?

Hypnobeard posted:

I'm working on a 1e game, with the intent of running TAGDQ, but I'm not particularly interested in running bare 1e. I've come up with some house rules, and I'd like some other eyes to look them over and point out unexpected things that I'm missing.

My intent is to allow some kick-rear end characters, as I don't think mediocrity is very fun. Also I'm only expecting 4-5 players, and many of the older adventures assume a much larger party (5-8).

Link is here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g1AT-0L9U_iOx7WFWjQfu8orWQwzeC1I2NwUG4OSLOY/edit?usp=drivesdk

Xotl posted:

I'm writing my own retroclone with the same basic idea (mediocrity is annoying), and looking at this I don't think you've really touched on what makes characters mediocre at low levels. The real culprits are ultra-low HP (a cat is a genuine threat; though max HP helps here it doesn't mitigate it entirely) and the difficulty to hit anything (an 18/00 Str fighter with double weapon specialization--the creme de la 1st-level creme--is hitting a lowly AC 7 kobold opponent only 65% of the time, or an AC 6 Goblin 60%; most other characters, including all non-rangers/fighters, are never getting it that good).

A single 5% bonus to XP is going to be effectively meaningless and just result in more math for you to perform at the end of every session. At the same time, a single-class human with a high Prime Req stat (which is the next thing to automatic thanks to your ability score method) getting +20% XP might encourage a certain one-dimensionality to your party.

admanb posted:

A Strange Aeon posted:

You're supposed to roll the HP for monsters in older editions, right? Like, not every orc has 16 HP--if they have 2 HD, wouldn't the HP on individual orcs range from 2 to 16?

OtspIII posted:

I always thought rolling monster hp was the dumbest thing back when I played 3e, but once I started playing older editions I realized I actually really like it. For each monster I can just use one die to track the number of HD a creature has left and another for the current HD and avoid needing to write down anything on paper. It's an elegant mechanic that just becomes weird nonsense the moment you introduce CON bonuses.

Megazver posted:

PRINCIPIA APOCRYPHA: Apocalypse Engine-style Rules And Principles For Running OSR Games

Jenny Angel posted:

I've been looking into running a 4E campaign but the general sense that I'm getting is that D&D Insider is no longer a functional option unless I'm already actively subscribing to it. Is that accurate? I have 6 books of it including all 3 core books so I'm definitely not out of options if that's the case, but the campaign be over Skype with some remote players so I'm hoping there are some options available that let players access the rules without being in the same physical room as me and reading the same physical books as me

dwarf74 posted:

Heya! FYI, there's a dedicated 4e thread here

You actually can still subscribe to Insider; rumors of its demise have been greatly exaggerated. But if all you want is the character builder, there are other options.

dwarf74 posted:

Heya! FYI, there's a dedicated 4e thread here

You actually can still subscribe to Insider; rumors of its demise have been greatly exaggerated. But if all you want is the character builder, there are other options.

Megazver posted:

PRINCIPIA APOCRYPHA: Apocalypse Engine-style Rules And Principles For Running OSR Games

Megazver posted:

It's probably Zak S or maybe James Raggi drama again, I dunno. I recommend just ignoring it.

OtspIII posted:

I always thought rolling monster hp was the dumbest thing back when I played 3e, but once I started playing older editions I realized I actually really like it. For each monster I can just use one die to track the number of HD a creature has left and another for the current HD and avoid needing to write down anything on paper. It's an elegant mechanic that just becomes weird nonsense the moment you introduce CON bonuses.

Megazver posted:

It's probably Zak S or maybe James Raggi drama again, I dunno. I recommend just ignoring it.

admanb posted:

Zak had a post recently that was blunt and acerbic about narrative games in the way that Zak posts always are, but I don't think it generated a particularly high amount of drama. Probably just making a big deal out of nothing tbh.

Babylon Astronaut posted:

Seriously, can't that guy just gently caress off already?

FIGHTING-MAN posted:

Oh, Zak S you say?
http://falsemachine.blogspot.com/2017/09/gently caress-all-of-you.html?m=1

I watched this thing slowly blow up since Monday: Someone cool leaves G+ because of Zak, Zak gets defensive and goes full Zak, and then Patrick drops that. Good times in the OSR y'all!

Halloween Jack posted:

He runs a blog called "D&D with Pornstars" and he's part of the segment of the OSR that sells bad sex RPGs to nerds who buy bad sex RPGs instead of just leaving their house and talking to girls. So a certain sub-sub-subset of geeks will always be willing to huff his rear end like a cigarette on the Internet. Like alg said, this isn't even a OSR thing, it's a weird fraction of D&D/D20 fandom that still lives in a time warp where reading Heavy Metal is apparently their only sexual outlet.

FIGHTING-MAN posted:

Patrick drops that. Good times in the OSR y'all!

Megazver posted:

PRINCIPIA APOCRYPHA: Apocalypse Engine-style Rules And Principles For Running OSR Games

alg posted:

To even know this stuff goes on I usually have to read it here

quote:

Even if someone is technically beaten in an argument, they feel so demeaned and diminished by the process that, if they are weak, they can't let it go and look for any opportunity for revenge.

The difference here is not between people who are hurt or unhurt by you, but between those who are hurt and let it go, those who are hurt and disconnect, and those who are hurt and paradoxically attracted, obsessed and drawn in. Paolo is of this third type, as are many of your most obsessive opponents.

Sniping & Stalking

The stalking of peoples accounts and feeds is, if not ideal, then at least understandable. If you are being conspired against, and I do believe that there are a number of people entirely willing to bend and ignore the truth in order to hurt you, then seeing what they may be saying about you is perhaps necessary.

Its still creepy as gently caress though. David Hill might be a loving nutter but going through David Hills twitter feed for AGES in order to collect the evidence that he is a loving nutter only puts you one slim step above him on the sanity scales.

The sniping and crowing is less forgiveable and unecessary and damages you in meaningful ways.

You never let anything go.

Even after a victory or temporary calm, or a pause in hostilites, you consistantly and repeatedly introduce the names and works of your enemies into your own posts, texts and statements in a variety of subtle and not-subtle ways.

You poke, prod, provoke and antagonise, even when things are quiet.

Its possible you do this to deal with your alienation and anger at the way you have been treated and demeaned but it is still pathetic.

Most essentially, it undercuts any possiblity of peace or truce and ultimately makes you unsafe.

Its impossible to state to anyone offended or angry with you;

"If you leave him alone, he will leave you alone."

You won't. Even if someone steps away, refuses to mention you and confines their criticism to only the most emotionally distant and technical statements, you will still bring them up, ad-nauseam, even years after the initial event.

And again you will not extend the same behaviour to others that you demand for yourself. Your sniping is honourable and decent and dedicated to reminding everyone just how terrible these liars and harassers are. Their sniping and stalking *is* harassment.

...

Conclusion

Even *just* including the qualities you would admit to, because you think they are good, the aggression and the binary mercilesness, those alone would be enough to reasonably call someone a dick.

If we include the recursive arguments, the shaming, the sniping and stalking, then it becomes completely reasonable for someone to say 'Zak Smith is a Dick' - if you take that to a lawyer as a libel case then they wouldn't accept it.

...

.....................................................

TO PAOLO

You are a neurotic bag of soup.

You persistently and publicly withdraw from conversations while simultaneously vaguebooking, sniping and wailing about those conversations.

You talked poo poo about Zak on G+ for years .

You talked poo poo about Zak on G+ while simultaneously saying that you didn't have a problem with him? Expecting people to hear which part of that statement exactly?

When Zak states, in the thread about Ben Miltons interviews, that "Paolo hates me for obscure reasons". - he is telling the truth, you did call him a dick, and you did vaguebook about him while also withdrawing from contact and refusing to answer questions.

...

.....................................................


Zak - you can launch eternal war against everyone you think is a liar or monster, but it is a war you will never win. And in terms of morality - regardless of how you may see it, almost no-one else thinks you have a leg to stand on as you have visibly engaged in many of the behaviours you condemn.

And you should stop sniping in your work and your statements against people who have already left you the gently caress alone for a long period of time. Again, this will be seen as provocation and harassment and will re-ignite the cycle.

The stalking is unpleasant, but bearable, providing it only ever comes up as a response to a false claim.

...

Paolo - and anyone else pissed off with or angry at Zak, should AVOID loving VAGEUBOOKING about him. Burn a clear line between; "I don't like this guys personality" and "He systemically harrasses people."

Most importantly, make no VAGUE, GENERAL or INDISTINCT statements about him. If he did a particular thing, then talk about the thing, if you don't like his personality, then talk about the distinct element or behaviour you don't like. If you want to break contact, then break contact.

There is a certain kind of neurotic personality who is intensely vulnerable, bleeds anxiety and harm signals mixed with semi-aggression and is incapable of letting stuff go and walking away. And we see, time and time and time again, this exact kind of person come into contact with Zak, and they do their harm-signal-mixed-with-anxiety-mixed-with-slight-aggression thing, and Zak responds; "What's this? Aggression?" and its like watching someone being fed into a threshing machine every time.

DalaranJ posted:

What modern ready ref sheets exist? It occurred to me due to discussion in the general chat that the only ones I can think of are GreyHawk and City State of the Invincible Overlord and those are both 30 years old.

DalaranJ posted:

On another interesting note, this list also led me to "Searchers of the Unknown" which is the realized version of my theorized no ability score heartbreaker.

DalaranJ posted:

What modern ready ref sheets exist? It occurred to me due to discussion in the general chat that the only ones I can think of are GreyHawk and City State of the Invincible Overlord and those are both 30 years old.

gradenko_2000 posted:

3e's DMG fall under the same idea.