|
Selachian posted:
You see, I wouldn't mind poo poo like that if it was left to the DM between sessions (or if one session ran particularly long in-game), with the players only really knowing if a) they were a Magic-User who was affected, b) really, really paid attention to the celestial bodies (i.e. a sailor, astronomer, etc), or c) it was actually part of the campaign story (like a BBEG was trying to pull one down into the planet). Even then, that's still a ton of work to keep in mind for very little actual payoff.
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 10:42 |
|
|
http://www.dlnexus.com/weather/moons.aspx
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
I'm looking for a retroclone that cleaves more closely to the wargame roots of the hobby. Something heavy on tactical combat, with grids or hexes preferably. Something between a hex and counter wargame, fourth edition dungeons and dragons, and Final Fantasy Tactics. I've already got Strike! which is great but I'm looking for something with a little more of that OSR grit on it. Do y'all know of this kind of game?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 07:55
|
|
|
Have you considered picking up a copy of Chainmail, along with the original D&D rules? The original D&D rules were intended to be used alongside Chainmail, and can still pull this off. It uses measurements in inches rather than squares or hexes though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
I recently ran a game of ODD with Chainmail +Swords and Spells for the siege of the keep, and it still held up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:I'm looking for a retroclone that cleaves more closely to the wargame roots of the hobby. Something heavy on tactical combat, with grids or hexes preferably. Something between a hex and counter wargame, fourth edition dungeons and dragons, and Final Fantasy Tactics. I've already got Strike! which is great but I'm looking for something with a little more of that OSR grit on it. Do y'all know of this kind of game? It's not D&D, but early Gurps and Steve Jackson's games running up to it might be interesting given what you've asked for - Melee/Wizard/The Fantasy Trip. Otherwise I'm drawing a blank on stuff that's not a full on board game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
I know it's unpopular around here, but Adventurer Conqueror King does a lot of domain management stuff, and has supplementary rules to do wargaming, though i don't know anyone who has used them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Have you tried The Big Brown Book? It's a 0e retroclone with an emphasis on the wargame aspects.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
hectorgrey posted:Have you considered picking up a copy of Chainmail, along with the original D&D rules? The original D&D rules were intended to be used alongside Chainmail, and can still pull this off. It uses measurements in inches rather than squares or hexes though. Huh, that sounds interesting, but I'm not sure where I'd find a copy of Chainmail? Soggy Cereal posted:Have you tried The Big Brown Book? It's a 0e retroclone with an emphasis on the wargame aspects. This sounds ideal, but it looks like all of the links to the guy's website are dead. Glorified Scrivener posted:It's not D&D, but early Gurps and Steve Jackson's games running up to it might be interesting given what you've asked for - Melee/Wizard/The Fantasy Trip. You know, that's actually a good point. I used to be a huge GURPS-head in HS. I bet that the new fantasy GURPS box probably has a good amount of what I'm looking for with the right optional rules. I'm not too enthralled with teh combat system of GURPS because it's very very far away from the elegance of Strike! but I'm sure I could tinekr withe the ruleset with various optional rules until I got something playable but also suitably groggy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:Huh, that sounds interesting, but I'm not sure where I'd find a copy of Chainmail? http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/17010/Chainmail-Rules-for-Medieval-Miniatures-0e?term=Chainmail&manufacturers_id=44&test_epoch=0&it=1 Play GURPS though
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
There is a free retroclonish version of Chainmail called Platemail (GoogleDocs link to pdf).
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
WaywardWoodwose posted:I know it's unpopular around here, but Adventurer Conqueror King does a lot of domain management stuff, and has supplementary rules to do wargaming, though i don't know anyone who has used them. They are pretty good rules, very hex-and-counter wargamey.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
Alright, I've got some more design questions. These ones are about Wizard spells. What do you see as the pros and cons of the following spell casting possibilities for a class. 1. Spontaneous Casting (i.e. You choose your spell from your list at the moment you cast rather than at the beginning of the day). 2. No direct damage spells in the spell list 3. You can only memorize each spell in your list once (i.e. You can't memorize three sleep spells only one.) 4. Using power points instead of slots I'm not going to use all or maybe not even any of these options, but I would like to hear your thoughts.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 06:58
|
|
|
Spontaneous Casting There's an argument to be had in the "ease of learning" between spontaneous casting and true Vancian casting. Personally, I think it's a wash, but I would consider spontaneous casting to be easier for newbies since it's far more versatile. No direct damage spells in the spell list Can't say I'm in favor of this. Direct damage spells are some of the easiest ways to connect with the game, and most of the problems of D&D casters is when they're using not-direct-damage spells. If anything, I would consider "all direct damage spells" to be a better deal, if you could come up with enough different damage gimmicks. You can only memorize each spell in your list once If you're not using spontaneous casting, definitely I am favor of this + true Vancian casting. It forces people to get creative with their spells. When I ran a B/X oneshot about a month ago, I didn't want to stick the M-U with a single spell for the entire adventure, so I gave them the entire level 1 spell list, with the proviso that they could only use them once each. It went fairly well - the very first thing they used was Magic Missile, for fairly obvious reasons, but as the game wore on and their spell list become smaller and smaller they started doing things like using Tenser's Floating Disc to get up to a grating to sneak past some guards. Using power points instead of slots This is even more versatile than spontaneous casting in that it effectively allows you to trade spell slots across spell levels. It makes casters even more powerful in that regard. I don't know that I would ever use this, because all it does is exacerbate some of the problems of D&D casters, and any solutions to the caster problem is fairly well separate from whether I use power points or not.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
OD&D and BX have a bit of a dearth of damage spells given your advice. In fact, I think book 1 OD&D has 2 actual damage spells both of which are at 3rd level. If I were to add some would be reasonable to draw from 3rd and 4th e and retrofit them?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:OD&D and BX have a bit of a dearth of damage spells given your advice. In fact, I think book 1 OD&D has 2 actual damage spells both of which are at 3rd level. If I were to add some would be reasonable to draw from 3rd and 4th e and retrofit them? I'd add more from 2e first, which has a ton of damage spell options that'll be more usable without significant adjustment.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:This sounds ideal, but it looks like all of the links to the guy's website are dead. I wrote it so I'll see if I have a backup floating around. I honestly can't remember if it was designed specifically for tabletop wargaming style play, the actual conceit behind the design was "what if "funny dice" were never invented" so it's D&D with D6s only.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:This sounds ideal, but it looks like all of the links to the guy's website are dead. It's a free game as far as I can tell, and here's a link.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
EverettLO posted:It's a free game as far as I can tell, and here's a link. Hey thanks! I lost the PDF when I moved and have been looking for it ever since. al-azad posted:I wrote it so I'll see if I have a backup floating around. I honestly can't remember if it was designed specifically for tabletop wargaming style play, the actual conceit behind the design was "what if "funny dice" were never invented" so it's D&D with D6s only. And the creator is a goon! Incredible.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 06:41
|
|
|
Does anyone have some nice (and free) character sheets for AD&D 2e? I'm trying to look at the feasibility of a game that makes full use of the Combat & Tactics rules, and I need to familiarize myself with filling out a sheet for the opening pitch's character creation rules.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
You can find a bunch on Dragonsfoot: http://www.dragonsfoot.org/cs/#CS2E32
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
So here's where I am so far on character creation:quote:AD&D 2e Feedback would be appreciated How would you handle Wizard spell selection? They're supposed to start with six spells. Would you let them have their pick, or would you do it yourself, or some other middle-ground? Would you houserule anything for the Rogue? I was particularly thinking about their skills and maybe importing the AD&D 1e Thief tables instead of the point-by-point allocation. Might that be better or worse?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
I'd let the wizard pick three of six spells, and have the other three "assigned by the wizarding master." If you're ditching thaco, I'd ditch thief skill percentiles, and make it a standard d20 roll; I'd also do something like if a rogue fails a thief skill roll, they then roll a regular skill check like anyone else would.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
My personal thoughts on point buy and percentile strength is that each tier should be worth a point, ignoring the actual number. The 10% jump makes for a lot of points that feel kind of wasted. Edit: Basically, don't make peak performance cost fighters 10 points more than it costs any other class. remusclaw fucked around with this message at 03:54 on May 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 03:18
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:I'm looking for a retroclone that cleaves more closely to the wargame roots of the hobby. Something heavy on tactical combat, with grids or hexes preferably. Something between a hex and counter wargame, fourth edition dungeons and dragons, and Final Fantasy Tactics. I've already got Strike! which is great but I'm looking for something with a little more of that OSR grit on it. Do y'all know of this kind of game? retrophaze is inspired by a mashup of D&D and old final fantasy it's intended more for hexcrawls but it might suit you well. it's also free http://www.lulu.com/shop/john-higgins/retro-phaze/ebook/product-23151238.html
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:My personal thoughts on point buy and percentile strength is that each tier should be worth a point, ignoring the actual number. The 10% jump makes for a lot of points that feel kind of wasted. To bring a little randomness in you could let fighters roll the d100 for free at the end of the process if they end with an 18 str. Or let them choose: "you can buy your way up, or roll".
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:How would you handle Wizard spell selection? They're supposed to start with six spells. Would you let them have their pick, or would you do it yourself, or some other middle-ground? gradenko_2000 posted:Would you houserule anything for the Rogue? I was particularly thinking about their skills and maybe importing the AD&D 1e Thief tables instead of the point-by-point allocation. Might that be better or worse? Unless yo are playing the dungeons-and-traps game, I would consider making "rogues" more fight-ey. Some ideas: - Let them attack on the fighter table (still no specialization or exceptional strength, so they wont play out the same). - Allow them to specialize in some sneaky weapon, the bonus will wash out over time but make the low levels less painful Or go all in: - Put them on the fighter xp table, give them fighter to-hit, fighter HP. They keep thieves abilities and armor restrictions. This seems pretty balanced to me in that the gains (abilities, sneak attack) are semi-comparable to the loss (extra str, specialization).
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 06:41
|
|
|
Where does the idea of 18/XX strength even come from? It's just so...weird.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 07:20
|
|
|
Zurui posted:Where does the idea of 18/XX strength even come from? It's just so...weird. During the lifetime 0e D&D - Gygax had realised that the fighter was significantly underpowered compared to the other two classes, and so introduced to hit bonuses for strength - but only for the fighter. As time went on, he realised that that wasn't enough to close the gap, but he also wanted to keep 19+ as superhuman, so he put a scale of "not quite superhuman, but still better than anybody else" above 18 - the percentile rating.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
Thanks for the feedback, all. I think I will make it a 1-point-per-Exceptional-Strength-tier, and the middle-ground approach to spell-selection seems okay. I still have to take a closer look at Thief skills, but I'll keep your points in mind. Zurui posted:Where does the idea of 18/XX strength even come from? It's just so...weird. https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11262/where-did-exceptional-percentile-strength-come-from It was a mechanic first introduced in OD&D's Greyhawk supplement. Gygax wanted to buff Fighters, but didn't want to break the "conceit" that 3 to 18 was the "terrestrial human" numerical range of stats, so he invented a new scale of 18-but-better-but-also-still-less-than-19 just for Fighters.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
Honestly I'd just make a lot of the level one spells 4e style at-will cantrips, as many of them are otherwise incredibly underwhelming(especially Read Magic and Detect Magic), especially when a level 1 MU can normally only cast a single spell per day
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
Examining Thief skills across AD&D Under AD&D 1e, a level 1 (Human) Thief is going to have 30% Pick Pocket 25% Open Locks 20% Find/Remove Traps 15% Move Silently 10% Hide in Shadows 10% Hear Noise 85% Climb Walls - Read Languages If the Thief has 18 Dex, this would increase to: 40% Pick Pocket 40% Open Locks 25% Find/Remove Traps 25% Move Silently 20% Hide in Shadows 10% Hear Noise 85% Climb Walls - Read Languages In AD&D 2e, a level 1 (Human) Thief is going to have: 15% Pick Pocket 10% Open Locks 5% Find/Remove Traps 10% Move Silently 5% Hide in Shadows 15% Hear Noise 60% Climb Walls - Read Languages If the Thief has 18 Dex, this would increase to: 25% Pick Pocket 25% Open Locks 10% Find/Remove Traps 20% Move Silently 10% Hide in Shadows 15% Hear Noise 60% Climb Walls - Read Languages but the 2e Thief also has 60 points to sink into any of these categories, and they cannot add more than 30 points to a single skill. If the 2e Thief does something like: 15 points in Pick Pocket to make it 40% 15 points in Open Locks to make it 40% 15 points in Find/Remove Traps to make it 25% 5 points in Move Silently to make it 25% 10 points in Hide in Shadows to make 20% then that matches the 1e Thief in all respects, except in Climb Walls, but the 2e Thief could also instead sink 30 points right away into Move Silently to make it 50% Okay, that's got me convinced, I'll leave the Thief skills as-is. *** For weapon proficiency/specialization, I'd like a double-check if I'm grasping this correctly: * Warriors start with 4 proficiency slots, Wizards start with 1, Priests start with 2, Rogues start with 2. (and then they gain more as they level at varying rates) * You need to be Proficient in a weapon just to remove a penalty. * Fighters (and no other Warriors) can spend a second proficiency slot on a weapon to get Weapon Specialization with it. * If a Fighter is Specialized in a melee weapon, they get a +1 bonus to attack rolls, and a +2 to damage rolls. * If a Fighter is Specialized in a ranged weapon, they get a +2 bonus to attack rolls within "point-blank" range. * Specialization also gives you extra attacks earlier. * Normally, a Warrior has 1 attack-per-round up to level 6, then 3/2 attacks-per-round starting level 7, then 2 attacks-per-round starting level 13. * With Specialization, a Fighter (and not all Warriors) can have 3/2 attacks-per-round at level 1 right away, then 2 attacks-per-round at level 7, then 5/2 attacks-per-round at level 13. (and light crossbows, heavy crossbows, thrown daggers, thrown darts, and all other non-bow missile weapons get more attacks at different rates according to a table)
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 09:26
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:
I am with FRINGE on thieves here. I would actually go a little bit further on making them full skirmisher's by allowing them sneak attacks on anything that would grant them advantage in 3rd edition up, as I like that mechanic and it takes sneak attacks away from GM jurisdiction and places on character positioning. The Thief at this level is still not overpowered, but at least can take a little bit of punishment, which may actually be more important for their interactions with traps than it is in combat.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
What's the rationale behind thieves being so bad at the things they're supposed to do at low levels? And conversely, why is climbing walls so easy?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:What's the rationale behind thieves being so bad at the things they're supposed to do at low levels? And conversely, why is climbing walls so easy? Everyone in D&D is garbage at the thing they're supposed to do at level 1.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Except the walking sleep spell class. But point taken.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:Except the walking sleep spell class. But point taken. Nah, wizards sucked in 2e too. 1-4 hp, one spell at first level (two if you specialize), and a couple darts? Good luck.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:What's the rationale behind thieves being so bad at the things they're supposed to do at low levels? And conversely, why is climbing walls so easy? My theory has always been that the thief is a joke class designed to generate amusing anecdotes.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
I'm a big fan of giving wizards non seeking magic missiles as an at will. 1d4+1 with an attack roll modified by dex like a ranged attack.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 10:42 |
|
|
remusclaw posted:I'm a big fan of giving wizards non seeking magic missiles as an at will. 1d4+1 with an attack roll modified by dex like a ranged attack. Isn't that just a sling with +1 damage? The larger point is that classic D&D was not supposed to be a heroic game. It was a grungy deathfest where getting out with the treasure alive was the only accomplishment you dreamed of and level 2 was a distant goal.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:49
|
|