|
Post by jakdethe on May 14, 2018 17:39:03 GMT -6
I use a combination of S&W Whitebox with the original rules. I have my DIY repros of them for collecting, but I mainly use a spiral bound copy of all 3 booklets in one. It's also printed at full letter size, so it's extra large print. I mostly use S&W for players who might not completely grok the original rules, and I use the original for myself as Referee, though some players have found it interesting and useful.
I'm not sure if it counts as a retroclone, but I use a lot of Arduin, Palladium, and early Chaosium stuff with it. I only mention them because they were early forks of D&D, that are very much still OD&D-like in rules and theme.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on May 13, 2018 11:17:43 GMT -6
I couldn't find the old Introductions/Greetings threads, but I just wanted to say something.
Thank you to everyone on this board. It's been a long time since I've been on here, but it's such a welcoming and friendly community. Everywhere else in the gaming/nerd community can be pretty aggressive at times, but this board has always been open, and focused on the fun. Thank you guys for making a haven for people who actually want to play games with their friends. Not to mention all the wonderful ideas, and solid advice I've found over here.
Also thank you to Fin who made these awesome boards, and also compiled my introduction to OD&D. After reading his game I actually understood what tabletop role playing games where about: creativity, having fun with your friends, and thinking outside of the box.
Thanks guys.
**Edit: As soon as I posted this, I saw the introduction thread right above, haha. Feel free to delete this if it's in the wrong place.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Oct 11, 2015 10:14:17 GMT -6
Agreeing here. OD&D is well suited to the "sub-class" specialist idea, which allows an endless amount of tailoring of the three main classes, and the 2e spell spheres are ready made for that. Personally I think TSR was mistaken to introduce new classes, but that's another story. One thing to think about though is how much magic variety you really want in the game. What I mean is, too much of a good thing can take away the special feel of magic. Agreed on all three points. I always felt the Greyhawk Paladin was a better example of an extra class, than the Thief. The subclass system always made more sense in context of the original game. I agree too much magic may make it feel less than special, which is kind of why I like this approach. I think the option for a larger spell list, is better than endless magic-using classes, with specific spell lists, such as the Illusionist, or Druid. Especially when, as you just said, one can tailor the already existing classes.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Oct 5, 2015 19:27:50 GMT -6
I've converted a few spells over from 1st so second should be just as easy. Although I did retain some of the non d6 damage. (Mostly for ones that do d4. 2E spells should work just fine. Heck, I've even run 3E spells (using my C&C rulebooks) in my OD&D games. The secret, as others have noted, is to simplify and reduce. I actually used the C&C spells in my first OD&D campaign, not realizing the difference, or the fact that C&C spells were similar to 3E spells. It's just awesome to think that even now, OD&D is compatible with some of the latest gaming systems, just like it always was easy to take material from any game and add it to your OD&D campaign.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Oct 2, 2015 22:29:29 GMT -6
Thanks for the advice guys, definitely what I expected, so I'm going to go ahead and try this next game. Sorry about the delay in response, I tried posting the other night, but it wouldn't let me for some reason. Same if range/duration is randomised (white box spells usually have either a fixed R/D either something like 1d6+level of caster) This is definitely the biggest draw for me. All around great advice to keep mind, thank you. The only way it could be a bad thing is if it reduced everyone's fun. So have some fun with it! Definitely the best metric for if it's work. Something I have to constantly remind myself of, haha.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Sept 30, 2015 20:54:48 GMT -6
Hey guys, long time no see, like kind of got in the way of D&D, as it is wont to do. Hope everyone is doing well.
Anyway, after a lot of playing around and reading lately, I've come to appreciate the sublimity of "White Box D&D" or LBB D&D. I definitely love some "kitchen sink" OD&D, and all of the cool classes you can find. However, lately, it's become kind of a head ache. Having all the different classes and races can get kind of confusing, and really weird (not in the cool gonzo way either). So I've come back to playing straight White Box.
The main point of my post, though is, how well would the AD&D 2E spells go with just the LBBs? I have a couple other ideas floating around in my head, like adding kits for the core three classes (as this would give that kitchen sink feel, but still allow simplicity). Mainly this strikes me as rather suitable though.
I was for a long time very against the way 2E did spells, viewing it in a 1E light, of having Illusionists, and Druids, and felt the system complicated things too much. However, if you just have Magic-User and Cleric, that is just Wizard and Priest spells. This would allow you to make kits for the magic classes (Illusionist is a specialist wizard, Druid a specialist Priest, etc.), or run the game as is, just with a ton of spells.
I mostly ask because I know 2E had a ton of spells, and would be the easiest route to getting a plethora of spells into my game, without having to scour a million sources.
How different are they from OD&D spells? Would using the 1E or 2E spell progression charts be appropriate, or would that make it too powerful? Does anyone have any experience with this?
Personally, I used to use the 1E and Castles & Crusades spells in my White Box game the first time I ran it. I never seemed to have a problem with them. Another strong point of OD&D I must say.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Dec 18, 2014 11:58:29 GMT -6
I run most of my OD&D games with a horror atmosphere blended into the fantasy. First level characters plundering unknown underworlds full of unnatural monsters that can deliver grisly death without warning. Doesn't require special rules or adventures, just proper descriptive tone. After the first time players watch a screaming hireling dragging himself across the floor on fire after getting his legs bit off by a giant lizard, the atmosphere will be established. ;-) I would kill to play in that campaign!
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Dec 15, 2014 10:00:09 GMT -6
Talysman you summed it up much better than I did.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Dec 12, 2014 15:05:48 GMT -6
To give a few better examples:
1) I keep bonuses to a +1 at most for first level characters. And generally it matches to classes. For example the Fighter gets a +1 "to hit", damage, and hit point per level. I feel that's in keeping with OD&D, and not too high.
2) The above mentioned fighter is a good example of my classes. He's a fighter just like in OD&D, and he gets a few bonuses relevant to his profession. Another example is a Ranger one of my players is running: dual wield (two attacks) at no penalty, a +1 with ranged weapons, and a 3-in-6 chance for surprise ("sneaking"). My thief functions similarly, getting a "back stab" bonus whenever attacking from surprise (whether it's an occupied opponent, or he was sneaking the round before), a 3-in-6 chance to "sneak", and a couple other standard thief skills (like pick locks, find/remove traps, etc).
I'm glad my style of play generally meets the approval of you all, as you guys (and the discussions here) are a huge influence on my DMing style. Even those of you who disagree are making valid points, and I love the discussion it's fostering. Definitely my favorite place to discuss D&D.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Dec 9, 2014 12:15:45 GMT -6
Mastery of the rules is how one survives a dungeon crawl. To me what makes old school D&D, and OD&D in particular is the philosophy that one survives a dungeon crawl through common sense, logic, cooperation, and critical thinking. None of which requires rules, or rules mastery. That's just my style of play though. To me rules are there when the rest of those tools fall short. For example combat, a situation where cannot simply "talk through" the conflict. Though this is just the style of play I've extrapolated from reading a bunch of old school blogs and what not.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Dec 8, 2014 12:48:34 GMT -6
I'd say that makes complete sense, personally. I firmly believe that you can play D&D using few if any of the actual "rules." The rules, in fact, support this, particularly in ODD. Thanks Kesher, you're definitely one of the guys on here that has influenced my style and philosophy of play lately.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Dec 8, 2014 9:37:42 GMT -6
Yes very much like Searchers of the Unknown.
To clarify, I don't think anything is wrong with OD&D, and I'm more or less commenting on D&D rpg's in general, having played so many later editions lately. However I will say that with newer players (the guys I get to play with), they still hold on to a lot of their perception of roleplaying games that they got from playing later games (3E, 2E, GURPS, etc.). So even using OD&D with those guys, they see "attributes" and class statistics and try to make the game very character focused, and they try to figure out ways to maximize bonuses and what not. In fact this leads to a lot of frustration on both ends I've noticed, because they try to force their paradigm onto OD&D. Once again, not a criticism leveled at OD&D, simply an observation on playing with newer players.
To further clarify, I'm definitely still playing D&D. All I've modified is the character rules. I very much still use everything in M&T and U&WA. Dungeon and wilderness exploration rules are all still in place, surprise is handled as usual, checks for traps and secret doors, wandering monsters, etc. All rules are just on my (DM) side, and all those rules are from my OD&D booklets. In fact I would say I'm very much playing D&D, I'm just using it like a tool kit, using it as a guideline as the foreword tells you too. At worst I'd say I'm doing something similar to Arduin or the Perrin Conventions. So maybe not "Dungeons & Dragons" but very much "D&D", if that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Dec 7, 2014 21:27:22 GMT -6
This isn't by the book OD&D in any stretch of the imagination. I'm not actually sure it belongs here in Men & Magic, but it has to do with player characters, so I think it's appropriate.
Anyway, I've been running a campaign for a few weeks at my FLGS. I've been using my heavily modified house rules for OD&D. The major changes I've made are thus: 1) Removed attribute scores entirely; any relevant bonus is simply worked into the class statistics if appropriate. 2) Classes are extremely bare bones; almost all of them have a few class abilities that don't improve and remain static (the main exception being spell-casters). 3) Simplified and paired down most statistics, for example; all classes have a 15 saving throw, with bonuses to relevant saves (like Swords & Wizardry). Another most of you guys will hate, base attack bonus is simply 1/2 level, with Fighters getting a +1.
I'm sure there are more changes, but those are the biggest. I've essentially just tossed out the rules. In fact I started this campaign this way, partially because I don't have access to any of my books right now (except S&W Whitebox).
The first thing I've noticed with this is something you guys pointed out. Really I made this post to kind of say "hey you guys were totally right!". The game has completely shifted from character focus to adventure focus. No one really cares about class abilities, or spends anytime trying to optimize or micro-manage (there's nothing to optimize). The entire game is all about adventure, exploration, and overcoming challenges.
This goes without saying, but obviously the game is simplified. Character creation takes a few seconds if the player knows what they want to play. Furthermore, there is just complete freedom. A player can come to me with a concept, and we just make it. They determine what's important to them, and what they want their character to be able to do, and I simply work with them to make it playable. It's been such a liberating experience, and it's reminded me of why I started playing OD&D in the first place.
I'm sure there's more to be said, and there's definitely a lot of minutia and rules discussions I could get into, about the benefits of the changes I've made, however the real point here is we're having a lot of fun. Was it necessary to do all of this? Not at all. Has it been a playable, and extremely enjoyable game? In fact, I'd be willing to say this is the most fun I've had running D&D ever.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Nov 27, 2014 11:41:23 GMT -6
Happy Thanksgiving guys!
I'm definitely thankful for our little haven here, and all the friendly people here.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Nov 16, 2014 21:53:29 GMT -6
Haven't been on in a while (real-life drama), so sorry for jumping in the middle of the discussion. Just wanted to put my two cents in.
Just started up a new OD&D campaign at the LGS, with some work buddies. I wanted to try running with no attributes again (that's how I started playing actually). I have to see, it's been great. Much more freedom, the game is faster, character creation is literally seconds, and the players are having a blast. I suppose it helps that my players are very open-minded and easy going, but for whatever reason, we've been having fun. In fact I'd say it's the most fun we've had in ages.
One thing I've immediately noticed as a huge benefit to this: no attributes as an excuse. No "Well I'm going to attack because I have a Wisdom of 3, and my character wouldn't know any better". Furthermore, there was no complaining about rolling bad attributes, or one character being better than another. I've simply built in the appropriate bonuses to the corresponding classes. IE the Fighter starts with a +1 to hit, because that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 15, 2014 17:07:28 GMT -6
I'm glad I was able to clarify a little better for everyone. My DM recently picked up an FFG rpg (Star Wars), and man it was so disappointing. What did you find disappointing about the FFG Star Wars game? It does look great and the game can work if you ignore most of the bad GMing advice. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of RPGs are bought and never played. So, in some respects, the art is more important than the game. That's not FFG's fault. My entire group hates the dice pool mechanic they use, mostly because it's not very intuitive. Our GM, having gone through the core rulebook already, still doesn't get how to determine the amount of dice used for difficulty. My experience with previous Fantasy Flight offerings is that the rules don't tend to be written well in the literary sense. They don't explain themselves well. Is part of your concern the level of knowledge needed to access the less expensive options? Not at all, as most all of us here tend to be good at digging up treasures. The problem I have is the continual shift of hobbies to the mainstream, if you will. It seems as soon as something becomes popular, it gets buried in unnecessary extravagance. As many have pointed out, there is nothing stopping me from playing previous offerings. However, there are two main drawbacks. When new comers to the hobby are introduced via new material, it becomes harder and harder to find people willing to play old games. I've met many a gamer who outright refuse to play older games. Furthermore, if I actually wanted to play, and not just DM old school D&D, I'm definitely out of luck. Second is discontinued support. When the trends keep shifting to newer games, people stop writing material for the older games. This goes for anything, though, and not just games. Luckily, the OSR seems to be doing well, especially thanks to games like Blood & Treasure, and the fine folks working on Delving Deeper. Other hobbies (the reason that I made this post initially), are not so lucky. Old computer games get no support, and if you don't want to play the latest greatest games (and have the fast gaming computers) you're stuck playing the same games over and over. With Airsoft you have to buy the $300 metal electric guns now, because almost no one makes cheap alternatives.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 15, 2014 8:41:42 GMT -6
Agreed completely coffee. Let me clarify my original point. It's disheartening when a hobby shifts from a large variety of options, and cheap alternatives, to a focus on a collector's market and special editions. OD&D started with little booklets and cheap supplements like Booty and Beasts, and Arduin. Now it's almost entirely composed of hardcover, full color, 300+ page books; the OSR being now joining this trend (Swords & Wizardry as a prime example).
I'm in no way averse to spending money, and when it's appropriate I love to (I recently purchased both Blood & Treasure as well as Adventures Dark & Deep).
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 15, 2014 4:08:10 GMT -6
I honestly don't care what other people think. I started this thread to vent, because I asked some people for advice and was mocked for my style of participation. I came here to vent, and then had more people spouting off insulting and ignorant comments. Not the majority thankfully. My only recourse is response and explanation, or withdrawal from discussion (my previous choice for some time).
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 14, 2014 7:16:12 GMT -6
Don't get me started on S&W's montrosity book, or whatever it's called. Worst 50 bucks I've spent in a long time. Half of all the pages are white space, it's like if they had condensed the thing down, it would only have been maybe a hundred and fifty pages at most. I weep for those poor trees... I really wanted to grab that and Tome of Horrors. I'm so glad I didn't grab the print editions.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 14, 2014 6:54:16 GMT -6
I look at companies like WOTC, FFG, and GW with scorn because they seem to be more interested in catering to the collector by putting way too much thought into the materials their products are presented on because the content is bland. You hit the nail on the head man. My DM recently picked up an FFG rpg (Star Wars), and man it was so disappointing. The same with D&D NEXT from WOTC. The darn PDF is so image heavy from the stupid imposed background I can barely read through it without adobe freezing every page turn. I had the same problem with Castles & Crusades 5E and Swords & Wizardry's new monster books.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 14, 2014 4:30:22 GMT -6
It seems no one read the entirety of my first post, or at least failed to comprehend my point. In fact many are proving it. I extolled the virtues of old school gaming, stating that is why I fell in love with the hobby. My concern was that publishers in the OSR are heading towards the "Premium, Limited Run, Leather Bound, Ultimate Collectors Editions", and that in my other hobbies you are considered a detriment for not wanting to spend tons of money. Now here I am being chided for being "cheap" and unreasonable. Point proven, I'd say.
Edit: This was obviously not directed towards those of you with a sympathetic ear, or helpful suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 8, 2014 12:53:41 GMT -6
Awesome, thanks guys! I love Dragon Magazine. I'm amazed lately, how much more informative it often is.
oakesspalding: I'll definitely check out LOTFP, that sounds like exactly what I'm looking for. Interestingly enough, it's actually at my LGS with a couple other off-beat games like Torchbearer.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 7, 2014 4:54:49 GMT -6
redbaron, that is pretty much exactly what I was thinking. I'm thinking of starting D&D from scratch soon, maybe making a "Generic Fantasy RPG", and then converting the D&D monsters to that kind of system.
oakesspalding, I'm aware of the S&W stuff, as well as the same tables found in AD&D. I've never thought about using them in reverse to make monsters, only to assign XP values to monsters I've already made. Interesting thought.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jul 6, 2014 10:58:25 GMT -6
Does anyone know of creation guidelines/rules for OD&D? The general mantra seems to be "eyeball it", but I'm certain there must be a way of determining some general guidelines. For example "no 5th level spell should do more than 5d6", or "Hide is roughly AC 7, Scales are AC 5", etc.
Is there a book or magazine article with such information? Some 3rd party supplement from back in the day? Is it in TUWA, and I just missed it?
If it's not anywhere to be found, would anyone be interested on working on such a project? I think I might endeavor to, as I would find such information very useful; whether it's for conversion or internal consistency. I don't think it could be too hard, at least not for monsters. Just compile a list of various key monsters, and they're relevant statistics (AC, Hit Dice, Damage, etc.), and work out some form of correlation.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jun 19, 2014 15:50:44 GMT -6
A big portion of the character's treasure XP will be coming from magic items (how big depends on how you value them), so a portion of their treasure either won't be spendable or will be in one use items like potions and scrolls that will get used and, thus, go away. This is one place where 3e is superior since that game's magic items cost increased exponentially rather than linearly. So high power magic items were closer in value to their rarity/usefullness. Have you used 3e treasure costs with OD&D or AD&D before? I found the same thing (the exponential increase), and came to the same conclusion as you.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jun 12, 2014 17:24:20 GMT -6
I wasn't exactly sure where to put this, so I figured the players' section is appropriate, since its the players spending the gold. In OD&D it's assumed (at least how I've understood it, and Referee) that most of the players experience comes from gold. If that's the case the players will end up with a ton of gold (literally). Other than building a castle, what are players supposed to spend this money on, especially if they can't buy magic items. What if players don't want to build castles, or baronies? I've realized in most of my games the players just end up hoarding the gold. If they're happy with it, I have no problem, but I can't but feeling there should be something to do with all of that money, other than build a stronghold (especially in AD&D where certain classes can't even build strongholds).
Am I just missing something really simple here?
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jun 8, 2014 11:39:16 GMT -6
Lots of good replies, I'm glad I did ask the question. I'm definitely thinking you guys are right, I've had a similar thought process for a while. More or less I'm thinking of removing the more "realistic" aspects of the rules, in favor of simplicity. Basically I want a game where you can role play, but you're not forced to. I feel like that's one of the worst problems of moderns games, is they try to force you to role play, and include lots of rules, that actually get in the way.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jun 6, 2014 17:56:43 GMT -6
I've always wanted to try the various "Quest" games, they all looked really cool. I might just have to make a point of collecting them when I can.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jun 4, 2014 16:44:37 GMT -6
I love Searchers of the Unknown, and that's actually one of the things that inspired this train of thought.
I completely agree, as well, with the second paragraph of your post. My wife also hates D&D's built in magic system. I'm actually planning on running a fighter only game soon, with a more Arthurian theme.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Jun 3, 2014 17:55:58 GMT -6
Dig out Strategic Review #1 and use their Random Dungeon Generator and you can both play. I love that issue actually, and I have done that quite a bit. Have you ever tried a programmed adventure game? Dark City Games Legend of the Ancient World takes its lead from Metagamings Melee/Wizard microgames that later became TFT. They also have a rule set for Space adventures and the Wild West. These games are very minimalist and combine elements of tactics, roleplay, and miniatures (counters). Best part, you can try them out for free. Just download the rules and their sample modules and give it a spin. There are also free maps and counters on their site. The other programmed adventures they sell are larger then the samples and I think you get a pretty good bang for the buck. This might just fit what you're looking for. www.darkcitygames.com/This looks very promising, I'm going there right now in fact. Also TFT was actually part of my inspiration for thinking about this. You could easily do it. Hero Quest by Milton Bradley was basically D&D the board game. Heroquest was another inspiration for this thought process as well. I'd love to get a copy actually.
|
|