Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Any D&D/D20

Shadowrun

World of Darkness

Palladium

Other (feel free to post about it)

[My Name is Immaterial]

Another thing.  I want to convert/run the original Keep on the Borderlands in 5th Ed.  Anyone have any tips for attempting this?

You may find this helpful.

[nullBolt]

This sort of thing is never a helpful response.

But were you the one talking about OSR stuff before? Is there any you'd recommend.

It is the best advice, though. It's best to run an OSR campaign using OSR rules. Modern rules just don't hold the same feeling and weight to them.

Spoiler: General OSR Advice (click to show/hide)

- You're the DM.
- The rules aren't comprehensive, don't expect them to be.
- You are the rules. What you say is what goes.
- Characters are quick and easy to build.
- Tell players to have back up characters even if you don't think you're going to kill them. Keeps them on edge.
- Character differentiation is through roleplaying, not through builds.
- Randomly make up magical items. Don't tailor them to your players.
- Try to keep the players hungry. They should always JUST have enough.
- Don't be afraid to beat the shit out of them.

It depends on what you're going for. Keep in mind that OSR tries to be as simple as possible across the board because most designers believe that a lot of complexity should rest on the backs of the GM. Don't expect "Buy this feat to get a +1 to damage when you jump attack".

I'd recommend:
Swords & Wizardy for pure fantasy action. Very simple, very solid, very good.

ACKS for fantasy action that avoids the leveling problem. It's designed so the players start off as adventurers and then, as they start to get too powerful, it begins to change into a kingdom building and ruling game. It's pretty exceptional.

Dungeon Crawl Classics for fucked up fantasy action. It's recommended players start off with 4 randomly generated level 0 characters and whatever ones survive to get to level 1 they can choose as a character. As an example of other fucked up ness, mages are linked inherently to a patron who grants them their magic. Every magic spell has a chance of tainting the mage and causing him to take on magical corruption (which usually manifests as some sort of magical deformity). DCC magic is probably my favourite magic because it's dangerous to everyone.

Lamentations of the Flame Princess if you want to use one of their standard campaigns, one of which is set in a fantasyised 17th century Europe where the players have 14 days before the Swedish invade and it's got a bunch of different possible outcomes depending on who they side with. Also, their modules are probably the best, most depressing and creepiest. I'd find a way to integrate them into another system.

Stars Without Number as a solid final mention if you want to run a space-based OSR game. I've heard good things about Labyrinth Lord, which the developers of Stars Without Number made, but I haven't had a chance to read through it yet.

[Bohandas]

Any additional material hurts this cause

Because... why? I'm legitimately interested in why you think this. I think I understand why, but I'd like to hear your reasoning.

Because then they have a less severely limited toolset to craft their own stuff with.

He said it's a 5e game, so yeah.

Seriously, the funniest thing I've heard today.
Sounds like someone's salty.
Would you like to elaborate on that?

Pathfinder is the true successor to D&D 3e. Official D&D is little more than a crazy steward throwing live people onto funeral pyres.

To speak more seriously, new editions seem to be coming out more frequently and I think it's a cash grab. Plus the BS with 4e put me off of WoTC forever. 5e may very well be better than 4e, but then Castro was better than Stalin. It won't last anyway even if it is good; WoTC is a subsidiary of Hasboro and whenever Hasboro makes anything good they always do something later to ruin it.

This sort of thing is never a helpful response.

But were you the one talking about OSR stuff before? Is there any you'd recommend.

It is the best advice, though. It's best to run an OSR campaign using OSR rules. Modern rules just don't hold the same feeling and weight to them.

What the heck is OSR?

[Neonivek]

Blah di blah I want people to see this

My created monsters
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155678.0

[nullBolt]

What the heck is OSR?

Old School Renaissance. Pen and paper systems that try to emulate pre-3rd edition D&D.

There's a lot of them.

[MrRoboto75]

What the heck is OSR?

As far as I understand, a remake of classic D&D.


I do have the option of just running KotB with 1st ed AD&D rather than converting it to 5th

[Bohandas]

What the heck is OSR?

As far as I understand, a remake of classic D&D.


I do have the option of just running KotB with 1st ed AD&D rather than converting it to 5th

That sounds like a much more palatable option to me.

[nullBolt]

What the heck is OSR?

As far as I understand, a remake of classic D&D.

I do have the option of just running KotB with 1st ed AD&D rather than converting it to 5th

Personally I recommend ACKS for KotB. I think there's a post over on Autarch's actual play forum where they played KotB.

[Bohandas]

I'd say too much material can potentially hurt play.
Power Creeping from the countless books that used to be pushed out, and from the countless other third party publishers/homebrewers.

I'm not contesting that, and neither is WOTC. There’s a “World of Warcraft” model Wizards is using: they want to release a mammoth, not a bunch of mice, and would rather wait for a year or two for each big release.

So now even their business model is stolen from World of Warcraft?

[My Name is Immaterial]

Any additional material hurts this cause

Because... why? I'm legitimately interested in why you think this. I think I understand why, but I'd like to hear your reasoning.

Because then they have a less severely limited toolset to craft their own stuff with.

I'm not really seeing a legitimate point here. All I'm seeing is "People are making things for a thing I don't like, and I don't like that."

Pathfinder is the true successor to D&D 3e. Official D&D is little more than a crazy steward throwing live people onto funeral pyres.

Pathfinder is like the western Roman Empire during its fall, bloated, and falling into decadence. The problems of power creep and complexity that 3e had are only magnified by Pathfinder's bloat.

To speak more seriously, new editions seem to be coming out more frequently and I think it's a cash grab. Plus the BS with 4e put me off of WoTC forever. 5e may very well be better than 4e, but then Castro was better than Stalin. It won't last anyway even if it is good; WoTC is a subsidiary of Hasboro and whenever Hasboro makes anything good they always do something later to ruin it.

I respect where you're coming from, but it's important to remember the context of 5e in its relationship to 4e. 4e was panned. Across the board. This, we can all agree on. It was a Hasbro cash grab. Then, they realized that people weren't interested in a tactical boardgame labeled D&D. So, 5e was the apology game. They reached out to players, and said, 'hey, what do you want D&D to be like?' If 5e was a cash grab, then we would be seeing far more splat books for it. We wouldn't be seeing an SRD or the Basic Rules packets. We'd be seeing splatbooks every month or two.

It won't last anyway even if it is good; WoTC is a subsidiary of Hasboro and whenever Hasboro makes anything good they always do something later to ruin it.

Hmm? Oh, yeah, I totally remember how 3.5 was a cash grab by Hasbro. I mean, have you seen how many source books there are for that game? Have you ever used half of the ones they wanted you to buy?
Don't be all high and mighty about 3.5 and Pathfinder, they've got no cleaner hands than 5e.

So now even their business model is stolen from World of Warcraft?

A. It's an example. B. It works. C. I could make a joke about how Paizo stole their business model from mobile games' microtransactions, but I won't, despite the fact that I just did.

[Bohandas]

1) You meet a goblin, who offers to show you a secret passage in exchange for a bit of gold.
2) Troll stampede! (Or whatever kind of monster DM prefers.)
3) You come across a supply shop. Don't try anything funny.
4) You find an underground lake, which may or may not contain a giant squid.
5) You discover some sort of dungeon town or city, with houses made of scavenged bits and monster parts.

46.) ceiling collapse

As for the number of magic items the biggest limitation that turns it from "a lot" to "deceptively little" is the fact that there are a thousand magic weapons for swords but none for say... A throwing dagger or Pikes beyond just "Magic weapon".

That could be our next list then

[Neonivek]

Also boo you guys! I wanted comments

Anyhow I am thinking of changing the way I create the Living spells. Lowering their Dex but leaving it relevant, stabilizing their Charisma, Wisdom is fine... As well for the stronger ones I am thinking of giving them a Discharge basically a recharged attack that increases the damage of ANY of their attacks.

[Jimmy]

Personally, I'd say Living Spells are fine as written. I'd treat their placement more like a trap than a monster though. It's essentially a high damage effect that's pretty easy to bypass if you're prepared. Use them as support for other monsters. A wizard looking to defend himself would probably pair a Living Fireball with an Iron Golem, for example, or a Living Lightning Bolt with a Flesh Golem.

[Neonivek]

Personally, I'd say Living Spells are fine as written. I'd treat their placement more like a trap than a monster though. It's essentially a high damage effect that's pretty easy to bypass if you're prepared. Use them as support for other monsters. A wizard looking to defend himself would probably pair a Living Fireball with an Iron Golem, for example, or a Living Lightning Bolt with a Flesh Golem.

Thanks a ton for the comment.

[NullForceOmega]

Okay guys, warning time, the OP clearly states that comparing various editions is outside of this thread's scope.  While it has quieted down now, the last page of discussion came very close to violating that rule, so it is being restated here:

From the outset I want a few things clear, DO NOT engage in 'version X is better than version Y' discussion/argument, I will lock down the thread and report the parties responsible. (Even if it's me.)

Please refrain from further discussion of versions except to respond to rules questions.