File: osr-canon.png (292.4 KB)

292.4 KB PNG

The mega, and your threadly reminder not, NOT to chomp bait. Thank you.

>>97617851
one criticism: call it GygACKSian, just to rile up the turd hobbit ;)

>>97617891
No, we're not doing that. Stop acknowledging him in any way, that's just feeding the troll. You're effectively on his side if you respond to him. Just report and ignore. Talk about games in this thread, please.

>>97617851
>classic D&D module
Gotta be my boy X1. So filled with possibility.
I made the island a former magi-tech city that was covered by lava/earthquake, and bits still poked out/showed up

>>97617901
>written in the OSR era
Maybe it wasn't phrased clearly, but the question is about modules written after the old-school revival started in 2006.

>>97617900
Ill do what I want, actually, and thats both.
>>97617908
I see, well in that case its gotta be ASE or Stonehell.
Both are perfect to me, in different ways.

>gay OP
Nope. Waiting on the right one.

>>97617851
Fishfag troll thread
the old thread is still on page 4
you know what to do boys, report and ignore

>>97618324
kek, nice try.
(You) are fishfag.

The longstanding OP that includes the first decade of 1974-1983 (ten years btw) is the real thread, as is plainly obvious.

Kill yourself or post another fake character sheet for us to laugh at.

File: 1742594643644565.png (326.6 KB)

326.6 KB PNG

>>97618444
Samefagging again,
Here is more clear evidence of his hijack threads that omit "first decade" and/or include "pre-third edition".

https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/subject/%2Fosrg%2F/deleted/deleted/type/op/

>>97618444
>>97618583
all deleted posts are viewable via archive.4plebs.org/tg/

https://www.zombieorpheus.com/the-gamers/
one of my favorite D&D/OSR related films. You can tell these guys love D&D.

File: liar.png (304.2 KB)

304.2 KB PNG

>>97618583
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhKMVlHz9FQ&t=60

>>97618429
also >>97619043

File: 1759610572882975.png (49.4 KB)

49.4 KB PNG

>>97619051
>>97619043
Oh, I think you're misinformed.
See picrel. "First decade" has been used for almost 800 threads, over seven years.

The adding the text of "1974-1983" was to make it clear what range that first decade looks like, as someone here became confused and thought a decade was 11 years long.

>>97619043
>the /osrg/ civil war
kekkkk
it's just one dumb nigger losing his shit

>>97619043
"first decade" has been used for seven fucking years you stupid loser retard nogames

>>97619098
You seem to be trying to deliberately mislead people.
The full text was:
>Welcome to the Old School Renaissance General, the thread dedicated to TSR-era D&D, derived systems, and compatible content.
Broadly, OSR games encourage a tonal and mechanical fidelity to Dungeons & Dragons as played in the game’s first decade – less emphasis on linear adventures and overarching meta-plots and a greater emphasis on player agency.

You are hoping to lie to this board, including changing the OP just a few months ago while claiming it was unchanged for years, and all in a strange effort just to try and deliberately exclude 2e.

But, reading the original text. even if we went ahead and instead said “Strictly” rather than merely “Broadly”, 2e would still be a TSR-era D&D, as well a derived system from 1st decade D&D, with compatible content. It would still fall in the scope of the thread, in no small part because it is very much an OSR system and always was discussed in the /osrg/.

That’s why you’ve changed the OP text, despite constant and consistent protest from posters here.

File: bonk.jpg (64.5 KB)

64.5 KB JPG

Come on, people. He doesn't need help shitting up the thread.
>>97617864
>threadly reminder not, NOT to chomp bait.

>>97619174
Fuck off, fishfag.

"First decade" has been in use for 7 years and 800 threads.

And how long is a decade? Ten years?

When did D&D first come out? 1974.

One decade is 1974-1983.

You worthless lying sack of shit nogames

>>97619187
>But, reading the original text. even if we went ahead and instead said “Strictly” rather than merely “Broadly”, 2e would still be a TSR-era D&D, as well a derived system from 1st decade D&D, with compatible content. It would still fall in the scope of the thread, in no small part because it is very much an OSR system and always was discussed in the /osrg/.

>>97619174
no one mentioned 2e, faggot.
The OP has said first decade for seven years.
So why does that bother you?

>>97619196
The new OP you're trying to force is quite different from the one from 7 years ago.

>>97619196
What are you even doing. You were already called out on trying to mislead people, and yet you're doubling down.

If you want to claim that people must accept the "first decade" part of the old OP, then you should also be forced to accept the terms "TSR-era D&D, derived systems, and compatible content," as well as recognizing that the OP only mentions the first decade under it being broadly encouraged.

>>97619174
>posters

File: 1764099539703733.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

>>97619190
Completely irrelevant. Why are you upset about the longstanding "First Decade" clause?
>>97619206
>The new OP you're trying to force
fuck off, fishfag. you dont play game.

Prove me wrong and post a char sheet.

>>97619233
>called out on trying to mislead people
Lol classic fishfag "no u!" deflection.

"First decade" has been used for 800 threads over seven years. Why does this bother you?

>>97619248
"TSR-era D&D, derived systems, and compatible content" and "first decade" was only broadly encouraged for bla bla bla, seven years.

Why does that bother you?

>>97619261
>more "no u, I am rubber you are glue!" deflection
So youre admitting you changed the longstanding OP?

Because first decade does not include 2e.

>>97619179
This. Fucking Christ. Haven't you people learned by now that he'll never care about the facts and will just keep spewing his fanfic? Don't reply, report.

>>97619261
lol, fuck off fishfag. You dont have a character sheet and youve never once played.

>>97619294
I suspect he's copy-pasting previous angry replies to himself to slide the thread. At the very least the responses are off-topic

>>97619307
So am I blind? I don't see anywhere in ACKS2 rules for how much you can sell mundane equipment for. Is it half like almost every game? Full value? Some other number?

>>97619294
A report? Is that a thin report, or a thick report?

>>97619358
I think it's a thick report

>>97619239
It's good OC. I like it as well. So good. And thank you for saying its good content, thats good commentary. I like these in-depth organic discussions. Theyre increasing my appreciation for good content.

>>97619393
Its good, isnt it? I like that theres a thread to discuss this. And I also like that you commented that you like that theres a thread to discuss this. Do you like my comment?

>>97619400
i agree its a good comment

>>97619407
Do you like good first decade comments?

>>97619435
I love good first decade comments. The first decade is so osr.

>>97617864
are there any 2e sources worth plucking stuff from in a AD&D game?

>>97619453
It's the osr! The only osr.

>>97619462
So true. Thank you anon!

>>97619471
What do you like most about the first decade?

>>97619484
How Gygaxian it is

>>97619515
Yes! So gygaxian. Very true. Praise gygax. I love this discussion.

File: whish i could turn back time.png (884.6 KB)

884.6 KB PNG

>>97619098
>>97619139
and yet you are on the fence if suggested to simply return to old OP wording from just 3 years ago

>>97619484
How perfect all first decade d&d is.

>>97619590
I feel I didn't properly lead to an argument which is so you obviously are not protecting the old OP of 7 years, you are protecting the new OP that you started pushing just 6 months ago which lead to the civil war retardation

>>97619043
>You changed it to make it clearer because I was being a retard on purpose
>That's unfair because now I can't ruin every thread with my bitching ;_;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEnJbjBuxnw

>>97619174
By the power vested in me as speaker for the /osrg/: Fuck off retard.

>>97619612
I'm not who you think I am so get your head out of your ass for once
but yes, I don't know what's your damage, but your crusade to exclude 2e specifically is retarded

frankly I've said before and I'll say it again, it seems like you retards are just really fucking stupid, hold a lot of dogmatic beliefs close to heart, and acting out on emotions with no capacity to act based on reason, which is the entire cause for this long lasting argument
And you know what? maybe the so called 2e fag really did get to you after all these years but you have no one else to blame but you. Anon, internet bullying isn't real, just ignore him.

>>97619597
I love the first decade! I love the first decade! Praise gygax!

>>97619643
Yes, gygax crested the perfrct fkrdt decade game.

>>97619607
Wait.

So you're saying that the guy in this thread demanding we uphold the "real OP", the one with 800 threads, and 7 years, and all those other things, is trying to erase that actual real OP and replace it with his new one while trying to convince everyone they're the same because they both said "first decade"?

That might be the shittiest thing I've heard someone try in quite some time.

>>97619637
2e isn't *specifically* excluded, it's excluded along with all other non-OSR games. We just have to put up with a lot fewer faggots trying to force Cyberpunk 2020 into this general is all.

>>97619714
>2e isn't *specifically* excluded,
> (2e and newer)
>the first thing mentioned is 2e

>>97619714
2e is OSR though.
The OSR began after 3rd edition dropped in 2000 and WotC stopped all support for 2e, and seemed to indicate that no pre-3rd edition material would be reprinted (since it would be competition for 3e). That's why the earliest "Old School Revival" discussions began roughly around 2002, with people doing things like trying to start petitions to show WotC there was an interest in older editions, and just generally trying their best to figure out how to preserve the older games from slowly disappearing. That's essentially what the "Revival" business was about.
If the OSR was instead a reaction to 2e, then it's quite strange to imagine that the OSR was acting like a secret cabal since 1989 only to emerge in 2002, and even then not voicing any strong exclusionary attitudes towards 2e besides a small minority within the OSR community.

>>97619347
Since ACKS II is meant to allow characters to be able to turn a profit through commerce, the base price for selling and buying items is the same. So full price.

I would still apply a price reduction in specific circumstances, e.g. a non-merchant PC doing a one-off sale of random bits of salvaged equipment to a professional NPC (whether merchant or guildsman).

File: stop-it-get-some-help.gif (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB GIF

>>97619758
>Repeats the same bullshit for the thousandth time.
We're not a support group for autistic fixation, fishfag. Seek psychiatric help.

>>97619758
2e is not OSR

>>97619714
2e is OSR. Even if we agreed it wasn't, it's still compatible and directly derrived from other OSR games.
And don't try to pull slippery slope bullshit of "people will be talking about cyberpunk here".

>>97619817
2e is not OSR, eat shit

Hey I am planning for an adnd 1e esc game with a weird race/class list to match a setting. I am trying to find the last few races/classes that I need. Does anyone have any adnd 1e or adnd 1e retroclone examples of any of the following;
>something like a magical null (race)
>grey aliens (race)
>evil cleric (class) (I can probably just use a regular cleric here tweaked a bit)
>human raised by Halflings (race or class) (quarterling or whatever a half-halfling is would probably also work)
I am homebrewing a bit but I do like to have something close to build off of.

>>97619714
first of all calling older editions OSR games is retarded
they aren't OSR games, they are the original oldschool games
second of all it literally is there mentioned specifically, to exclude it specifically
and finally, 2e most definitely an oldschool game, it is 1e compatible, moreover even more so than 1e and B/X are

I'll say it again, it seems like you retards are just really fucking stupid, hold a lot of dogmatic beliefs close to heart, and acting out on emotions with no capacity to act based on reason, which is the entire cause for this long lasting argument

>>97619911
>2e most definitely an oldschool game
Incorrect, very incorrect. Totally wrong. This shows that you've never understood what the old school even is.

>>97619455
There are a lot. Settings alone are a treasure trove. As for mechanics, that's a different matter. Some people here are likely to react poorly to any question that involves 2e especially mechanics, but OSR involves house ruling so I'll say that 2e PHB saving throw priority is an improvement over 1e.

While a group playing 1e could adopt their own convention like "in order listed, starting from the left" which is what we did and what 2e did it's also conceivable that a group would have chosen a convention like "best applicable" or "worst applicable".

1e did have a couple of notes like polymorph wands didn't use the polymorph save and the spell save wasn't used when the spell was of a type that would be covered by PPDM or PP.

They obviously had a vague idea about priority but not enough sense to state a concrete rule. You have to wonder why a polymorph wand was singled out to have its effect saved vs RSW but there's nothing about a wand of paralyzation which could be either PPDM or RSW.

Even without a great like for bards I still prefer 2e bard to 1e. 1e bard is a mess, not helped by Gary's usual writing style.
>[the character must] begin clerical studies as druids; but at this time they are actually bards and under druidical tutelage.
If they're bards not druids now Gary then say they are bards, don't waste time saying anything about them beginning as druids then immediately contradicting this.

They're around 10x less likely to roll than a paladin, even by a favourable method such as Method I or II, so it's not like anyone was going to be playing them anyway without a lot of fudging.

They attack as the level they reached as fighter. That means THACO 16 or maybe 14. Once they reach bard level 10 their THACO doesn't become 14 if it wasn't already and it certainly doesn't become 12 at level 13.

So many problems, run out of space here.

1e bards are a bungled frankenstein hack job and are rightly forgotten.

File: night-below-cover-detail.jpg (215.2 KB)

215.2 KB JPG

>>97620022
>This shows that you've never understood what the old school even is.
Nice self admission there.
Despite your coping, 2e will always be OSR. Now you can either keep coping and derailing, preventing discussion, or you can leave, because i'm not.

>>97620084
is that a book you own? because I own multiple IRL 2e books and I know they arent OSR

>>97620084
>2e will always be OSR.
No, it's never been OSR, and it never will be. Your insistence on repeating this claim only demonstrates your profound ignorance. Here are some blog posts for you to read, so you can learn better:
>http://osrsimulacrum.blogspot.com/2021/12/a-historical-look-at-osr-part-v.html
>https://beyondfomalhaut.blogspot.com/2022/10/blog-osr-module-o5-2e-is-still-not-old.html

You don't have to leave, but you do have to accept that 2e isn't OSR, and doesn't belong in this general. You can post about it in its own dedicated thread, >>97568805.

>>97620096
Keep coping. You have no argument for why 2e isn't OSR, you just releat yourself and hope people believe you. So keep coping, every time you do it brings us closer to a real thread.

It would be cool if there was anywhere left on this garbage site that I could still post without having to regularly scroll past shrieking moneys flinging their own shit at shadows on the wall while accusing each other of being THE poopybutthole schizo.

>>97620115
>, it's never been OSR, and it never will be.
Cope harder
I'm not reading an OSRIC propaganda blog. Your source is illegitimate.

>>97619832
>magical null
What do you even mean? Are you copying 40k speak and magical null is the magic equivalent to a psychic null?

First search result leads to reddit...Not a great start.

>>97620124
>muh bothsidesism
One side wants to turn the thread into a private echochamber
The other wants what you posted to be true again.

File: Bildtgarv.png (571.3 KB)

571.3 KB PNG

>>97620132
>if I just declare that extensively researched posts with tons of pictorial evidence are illegitimate, they are!!!
This is very hapless, a pathetic attempt. And may I also say that this flaccid attempt at spamming the thread is a lot of seething for just having your shitty troll OPs consistently deleted, Fishfag. Just accept that they're never going to go away.

>>97619832
Sorry, you're confused. This is the shitflinging monkeys thread. Can I interest you in a discussion about subtraction instead?

>>97620150
Cope and seethe
Nothing you say or do will change reality that 2e is OSR.

File: reply to thread.png (8.8 KB)

8.8 KB PNG

>>97620124
>post without having to regularly scroll
Wish granted, pic related. There's a "reply to thread" button at the top of every thread. No scrolling needed.

Won't help if you're interested in reading without having to scroll past the noise but you did get what you asked for.

>>97620143
I literally do not care why you feel the vapid garbage I have to scroll past no matter where I go across the entire site is actually righteous and good.

File: Only up to early 2019.png (2.4 MB)

2.4 MB PNG

>>97620166
2e is not OSR, sorry. You can't discuss 2e in this thread. Why don't you try restarting /tsrdnd/ or /todd/ again instead, you salty little faggot?

>>97620181
>2e is not OSR
Cope, nothing you or your list of cherrypicked replies says is going to change that and i am never going to change my mind. You and they are not an authority.

>>97619714
>We just have to put up with a lot fewer faggots trying to force Cyberpunk 2020 into this general is all.
Well, now that you mention it, Cyberpunk 2013 did come out in 1988...

>>97620208
The funny part is that he had to dig over a span of several years to get those, and it's all just butthurt reactions to people discussing 2e in the /osrg/, meaning for every one of those posts there's several of people talking about 2e (and probably ignoring his shitposts).

>>97620220
Cyberpunk and Shadowrun also prominently involve raids on complex buildings full of dangerous armed foes in search of (admittedly abstract) treasure. They're more old-school in spirit than 2e is. Still not enough to belong here, but it would make more sense than this ridiculous autist's attempts to force his ebin storyquest game into the general.

>>97620208
>i am never going to change my mind
We all already know you're retarded, Fishfag. You don't need to explain that, you just need to accept that you can't post about 2e in here and either stick to the thread topic or leave.

>You and they are not an authority.
Yes they are, actually. Melan, Simulacrum and that anon are all authorities on this topic, while you're an ignorant, raging speg.

>>97620223
Good point! Im just wondering how long this will continue. I want to have genuine discussions but these people refuse to do anything but derail because they cannot stomach the notion of a game being discussed here.

>>97620257
>Im just wondering how long this will continue.
It's going to continue forever, Fishfag. The new OP is in place by common agreement of all thread posters except you and will remain in place.

>>97620276
>2e is OSR, this is the general for all things OSR.
Incorrect. Not only is 2e not in any way OSR, but the OP also specifies that 2e does not belong in this general. So you're doubly wrong.

>>97620277
>by common agreement of all thread posters
Youre one person, not everyone, nor are you speaking on behalf of everyone.
>>97620282
Cope harder. Your obstinancy does not trump reality. This is the OSR thread, 2e is OSR, we WILL talk about 2e here.

>>97620142
Ya in the 40k way. A race focused on counter magic.

>>97620096
please answer, do you even own a single 2e book? ill post mine if you post yours

>>97620208
if thats cherry picked, then it should be easy to find plenty of pro-2e replies

>>97620277
That's a hard lie. If that's what you're hoping to use as your foundation, you might as well give up now because it has no chance of working out for you.

Just look at how badly your "seven year" lie fell apart above. Lies might be easy to spit out, but it's not that hard for the truth to smash them apart here thanks to the archive.

IMO 2e with just the core rule books (1989) was OSR but by 2000 2e (with all the supplements) was not. IDK were in that spectrum I would draw the line, maybe 1995 with the revised edition of 2e is a good place to draw the line.

>>97620349
Theres no bargaining here.
2e is OSR. everything prior to 3rd editions release is OSR. that is the reality of things, that is ehat will be posted. Dragonlance and ravenloft are ontopic regardless of my opinions of them. So is morkborg.

>>97620302
>nor are you speaking on behalf of everyone
Yes he is. He's speaking for everyone in the thread but you, including the pastebin maintainer.

What mechanical changes make 2e not osr?

>>97620302
>Cope harder. Your obstinancy does not trump reality.
Take your own advice, Fishfag.

>we WILL talk about 2e here
No you won't. You don't know anything about 2e. Everyone who actually wants to talk about it is in /2eg/.

>>97620388
Cope harder. all you can do is repeat your persecution fantasy and hope people believe it if you say it enough times. 2e has, is and always will be OSR, regardless of what you say.

>>97620349
No, that's not correct. The old-school style had already fallen by the wayside in late 1e and the 2e corebooks are solidly non-OSR.

>>97620398
Ask about this in the 2e general. 2e is off topic here, so it shouldn't be discussed ITT.

>>97620405
>No you won't.
You cannot stop me or anyone from doing so. you can only innefectually derail and cope. 2e is still OSR, and people will keep talking about it regardless of you trying to nonconsenually repost in your bad faith troll 2eg

>>97620424
But its not 2eg thats making the distinction

>>97620383
I do think it is a spectrum, there is room for OSRalike as a label even if there isnt room for OSRalikes here. Morkborg as an example is definitely an OSRalike, it is 5e with a "What would a lame Zak S do" coat of paint.

>>97620121
please answer, do you even own a single 2e book? ill post mine if you post yours

File: 1759654756136170.png (220.6 KB)

220.6 KB PNG

i found fishfag

Hi guys, Johnny OSR here.

First all, wow. Really happy so many people love my OSR thing after all these years. You guys are the best. Makes me really glad I made it in the first place.

I'm back because I heard there was some confusion over what was or wasn't OSR. Even heard people were fighting over that. That's not cool. That's also not us. We're old skool, so we should be old skool cool.

So, I want to lay it down for everyone. Forever. These are the words of Johnny OSR, the father of the OSR, so pay attention.

_________________________________________Relax, sheesh. You're supposed to be adults._______________________________________________[/spoilers]

No questions? Great. So, I'll just leave you all with reminding you that spelling skool with a "k" is way cooler.

>>97620507
i have nothing to prove to you so i'm not going to. it's clearly bait.

>>97620520
same reason you wont post a character sheet, huh? LOL
you have no books and no sheet because youve never played

>>97620067
holy shit thank you anon, this is golden

>>97620534
golden copypasta troll material lmao

>>97620580
Your point?

>>97620121
>every time you do it brings us closer to a real thread
This thread will simply be replaced bt another thread witht he same OP, and your troll OP threads will be removed. Haven't you realized that by now?

>>97620534
You're welcome, though I'm puzzled at the lauds when all I did was say
>Yes there is stuff in 2e that is good
then gave three examples one of which was "settings good" without explanation

>>97620534
>copypasta
Show me the original.
protip: I wrote it in this thread.
You're the one trolling. Great job!

>>97620534
No, that's offtopic spam. It's also incorrect.

>>97620518
Still too kool to close spoiler tags properly eh Johnny OSR? Never change Johnny, never change.

>>97620617
Point out the factual errors or fuck off with your baseless allegations.

>>97620617
cope, 2e is OSR, 1e bards suck, and it was a great post.

>>97620617
>offtopic
Someone asked
>What can I use to improve my OSR game?
and I answered. You're welcome to say that in your opinion none of those things are improvements but you saying my reply of
>(at least some) 2e settings good
>1e bards bad
>saving throw priority is very good idea
is off topic is silly. To further say that it's incorrect just proves you have no interest in actual dialogue but only want to troll.

>>97620779
>Someone asked
If someone asks you a question which is not within the thread's topic, you should reply by telling them so at most.

>>97620779
>just proves you have no interest in actual dialogue but only want to troll.
He's been doing this since October.
Reminder that 2e is OSR, and this will keep being said until board quality improves.

>>97620786
What you're doing is offtopic funnily enough.
You're supposed to just ignore it and report it, and then the jannies would delete it if it was. you screaming offtopic is the only thing doing that here.
also, 2e is OSR.

>>97620550
the "why" is you have nothing to post. no sheets, no books, nevergames

>>97620879
i dont need to prove anything. 2e is OSR.

>>97620786
>giant strawtroll
It wasn't someone asking an off topic question, it was someone asking an on topic question. It was an effort to improve their game. Asking in an OSR thread
>How can I improve my game?
is implicitly asking
>How can I improve my OSR game?
even if the person asks
>How can I improve my OSR game using non-OSR material?

>>97620383
nta I like 2e but I say it checks out of old school at the release of the Player's Option aka 2.5, not that I'm saying old school is synonymous with being OSR, it's more nuanced than that. 2e is highly compatible with 1e, sometimes identical, at others nearly identical. I can't easily come up with any 1e module that wouldn't run easily using 2e DMG and PHB. We freely swapped between 1e and 2e books whenever we wanted though I have a special hatred for cavaliers.

PO added weird complications like splitting abilities into subabilities. 15 Strength became 15 Muscle/15 Stamina, or 14/16 or 13/17, some combination that added to double the base value. Muscle gave attack and damage bonuses, bend bars, maximum press etc., stamina was for weight allowance. The other five abilities did the same. NWP started being based on the subabilities.

Everyone gained the ability to specialise in fighting styles and gain weapon specialisation through the mastery process though it cost non-fighters a lot more, they had to be higher level, and they couldn't choose as many styles.

At creation characters could spend points to choose special abilities at creation like fighters could choose base move 15, 2% MR per level. Paladins either spent their points to recreate the PHB paladin or they sacrificed some of those for alternates like getting priest spells early or weapon specialisation.

Then the Combat Options book looked at things like shield walls and pike hedges which is really going towards skirmish game or miniatures wargame, a regression to before Chainmail, complicated critical hit tables worthy of WFRP.

The movement that became known as OSR started in large part by rejecting several aspects of 3e. I don't see that those complications and more introduced in the PO books were at all embraced by the spirit of the OSR. I'm fine with about the first half of 2e but the second half imo takes things a step to far.

>>97620922
Macris says otherwise. He's a better authority on OSR than you

>>97619187
A decade is ten years. 1983-1974= 9 not 10.
How are you this bad at math while masquerading as an RPG Player?

>>97620922
>Im not gonna show my books ot my sheets because youre so mean!
lol kill yourself fishfag

>>97619179
You can't shit up a thread that's already pigshit. We will call you a moron for the next 300 posts and then post an OP that doesn't yell at me for asking about Rules Cyclopedia.

>>97621167
BAHAHAHAHAH HOLY SHIT YOU FUCKING RETARD

1974
75
76
77
78
77
80
81
82
83

ten (10) years

>>97620988
>>97621180
>>97621167
stop shitting up the thread pls

File: Screenshot_20260216-193500.png (272 KB)

272 KB PNG

>>97620518
John, the man literally copypasted our posts from the OSR and reposted them in a 2e thread. But added images. We are dealing with an honest to god psychopath.

>>97621167
THIS RETARDED FISHFAG LITERALLY CANNOT COUNT TO 10 OH MY FUCK

>>97621191
>77
>78
>77
This that New Math they're teaching the kids these days?

>>97621242
youre right, a decade is 9 years because I made a slight typo!

74 1
75 2
76 3
77 4
78 5
79 6
80 7
81 8
82 9
83 10

oh wait, its still ten years (First Decade), fucknut

File: Screenshot_20260225-214646.png (107 KB)

107 KB PNG

>>97621257
Mhm.

>>97621257
>74 1
Oh. There's the issue. You're retarded.

>>97621263
>>97621270

you never learned how to count calender years in primary school. Must be hard not being able to figure out how long a decade is.

Jan 1 1974 - Jan 1 75 (1 year)
75 (2 years)
76 (3 years)
77 (4 years)
78 (5 years)
79 (6 years)
80 (7 years)
81 (8 years)
82 (9 years)
83 (10 years)


Must be really hard not being able to figure out how long a decade is.

File: Screenshot_20260225-220123~2.jpg (19.8 KB)

19.8 KB JPG

>>97621283

>>97621270
>>97621293

all of 74
all of 75
all of 76
all of 77
all of 78
all of 79
all of 80
all of 81
all of 82
all of 83

thats ten years. youre genuinely too stupid to understand calender years.

>>97621298
Yell at math all you like, it's still right and you're still a moron.

File: 1749940254629511.png (207.5 KB)

207.5 KB PNG

>>97621293
>>97621303
>third world retard needs a calculator to count to 10
>still cant cant to 10
hoo boy, this "first decade" thing really fucked you up

>>97621305
cant count*
fuck me

>>97621305
>1/1/74 to /12/31/83
Your chicanery grows tiresome.

>>97621324
>a year stops on Jan 1st
you literally cant fucking count lmao

all of 74 (1)
all of 75
all of 76
all of 77
all of 78 (5)
all of 79
all of 80
all of 81
all of 82
all of 83 (10)

kill yourself

fuck off, fishfag.

you have no books, no character sheets, and you cant count to 10

File: 1765816551546033.png (19.3 KB)

19.3 KB PNG

nested reactions are supreme

>>97621370
83 - 74 doesn't equal 10, dude. I look forward to the new dating in your next OP.

File: 1749552959845004.png (168.6 KB)

168.6 KB PNG

>>97621382
I look forward to you being able to count to ten you fucking retard

Found this table to be an invaluable resource for adnd (the real one)

>>97621388
74 0
75 1
76 2
77 3
78 4
79 5
80 6
81 7
82 8
83 9
84 10

File: 1769785165537785.png (8.2 KB)

8.2 KB PNG

>>97621411
>74 0
how in the world does 1974 to 1975 not count as a completed calender year?

>>97621381
I like to pair this motivation table with my reaction rolls.

>>97621427
>how in the world does 1974 to 1975 not count as a completed calender year?
Because that year, D&D existed for less than a year. Hence it's counted as zero, not one.

>If you build a straight fence 30 feet long with posts spaced 3 feet apart, how many posts do you need?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-by-one_error

>>97621492
>the totality of the first year
Is not the same thing as the age of the IP, which is what we're discussing here.

>>97621510
No, were talking about the "first decade" starting with the year of release.

all of 74 (1)
all of 75
all of 76
all of 77
all of 78 (5)
all of 79
all of 80
all of 81
all of 82
all of 83 (10)

Youre mistaking "birthdays" with calender years. Please never take a job in finance or admin.

see: >>97621498

>>97621513
>74 (1)
It had not yet existed for a year.

File: 1771795798610642.png (415.9 KB)

415.9 KB PNG

>>97621510
>>97621517

do think that 1974-1983 means that the year of 1983 isnt counted, or...? Because im having a hard time believing that youre not a troll.

>It had not yet existed for a year.
Bro. All twelve months of 1974 count as one year. How are you this fucking stupid lmao

>>97621492
Here's a helpful table for coming up with terrain types using the normal types as templates

>>97621525
>All twelve months of 1974 count as one year.
And in 1974, D&D had existed for less tha twelve damn months. Pay attention.

File: 1762034815267960.png (89.8 KB)

89.8 KB PNG

This retarded nogames troll is just going to keep playing dumb all night.

>>97621525
Heres an occupations table for random NPCs

>>97621525
9 years trollcow.

>>97621572
bro you dont own a single book, have a single character sheet, and have never played once lmao

>>97619758
>>97619785
The OSR was born on Dragonsfoot (all things pre-WotC) and adnd.com (2E and 3E content) as a rebuttal to WotC gearing up to announce 4E and the creation of Gleemax. The term itself was born on Dragonsfoot, and quickly got adopted on the satellite forums before /tg/ even had a single post about it.
Individuals, especially obsessed faggots who cry fishfag over everything, or retarded niggers who want to make 2e on topic for /osrg/, do not get to define a term. History does and it calls both of you shitjacks wrong.
This general is for OD&D, BX, AD&D1E, and retroclones meant to intersect with them.
2e is OSR
2e is not /osrg/
Learn the difference, it may make your father stop hating you.

>>97621596
>The OSR is a response to 4e now
This shit gets more retarded all the time. Next you'll be telling us it's about 5e, and 4e is an OSR system.

>>97621602
>is 13th age an OSR?

>>97621594
>he uses character sheets instead of writing down his character's stats on a piece of note paper
not OSR

>>97621602
OGL-based retroclones and the retro-D&D fanbase are far older than the OSR, but are not themselves the OSR. It's like how the Pixies aren't punk rtock music, but are an integral precursor to it.
Please develop some critical thinking skills. It will help you when you grow up.

>>97621596
>2e is OSR
>2e is not /osrg/
That is an absurd contradiction and I am exasperated by your expectation that I or anyone else will entertain it. If 2e is OSR, it's on topic for /osrg/.

>>97621594
I don't need to show you my books to prove i play OSR (like 2e)

>>97621616
>It's like how the Pixies aren't punk rtock music, but are an integral precursor to it.

I have no idea why anyone is arguing with fishfag instead of just reporting his retard posts and hoping the wandering mod table comes up "can be bothered to do work today".

Unrelated, I have to know what band you actually meant, because there's no way in hell you meant the Pixies.

>>97621596
Nice strawman trying to claim that 3e is OSR (When it was what sparked the movement to begin with)

>>97621610
index cards count as a sheet, dum dum, now post one
>>97621659
post yours with timestamp and ill post my 2e books

>>97621596
>OSR is a response to 4e now
>decade is 9 years now
HOLY FUCKING SHIT FISHFAG

>>97621658
shadowdark is considered OSR. Does SD belong in /osrg/?

I think its thin pickle time.

>>97621677
Shadowdark is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Lost the highest lvl party member last night lads. He had his face eaten by a hyrda like thing with 7 attacks.

Fortunately, they were down the hall from a pool that almost always resurrects a corpse put into it. Unfortunately, the poor bastard rolled a 1 on the d6 check(not that I told him what he was rolling for) so he's coming back as undead next session. Rippity rip.

In the future I hope they learn not to send in the guy with a d4 hd and negative con mod.

>>97621722
Please dont make him immediately attack. Describe that he comes back cold and emotionally distant. (he becomes a ghoul and come nightfall his hunger sets in and attacks the PCs while they sleep)

>>97621676
>OSR is a response to 4e now
Nobody said that but you, trollcow. nice false flag.

>>97621596
>>97621774
>as a rebuttal to WotC gearing up to announce 4E
eat shit and kill yourself, nogames.

post a character sheet or books and Ill post mine

>>97621760
Hmmm, could be interesting. Feel like that may be rubbing salt in the wound though. The undead he comes back as are passive unless bothered though so I think him just shambling out of the water and staring absent mindedly (in the literal sense) will be the way I go about it.

>>97621839
could do a "wont attack party until desperate" angle, and see how long they let him exist as a monster before putting him down

>>97621684
its thick pickle time.

>>97621677
Of course it is, why would it not be?

File: 1746117985244732.png (13.9 KB)

13.9 KB PNG

>>97621860
>shadowdark is /osrg/
kek
>>97621858
I only have thin ones (I shred my cabbage and onion thin for pickling)

im doing a remake of the tiered reaction roll table for cleanliness btw, any feedback for formatting so far?

>>97621860
It is basically 5e

>>97621888
why is it not OSR? it's an osr system.

>>97621917
lol, do you have either a char sheet or books to post? im considering selling my 2e books

is intelligent armor (a la swords) a dumb idea?

>fighters and thieves are bad classes!
>people forget that (intelligent) magic swords are the best weapons with the most power

>>97621931
WDYM? As in as NPC's or a magic item?

>>97621923
Go ahead and sell them then. i don't need to prove anything to you.

>>97621955
either or. drunk idea of an intelligent armor with powers, like a sword.

>>97621956
>i don't need to prove anything to you
you have no books and no sheets

File: 1765347583521093.png (30.7 KB)

30.7 KB PNG

skeleton is done, formatting now.

File: Screenshot_20260226_040818_Gallery.jpg (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB JPG

IDK I definitely think a high level party should have at most half as many intelligent magic items with the ability to speak or communicate telepathically as it has players. I also think that the bigger the plus the higher the chance an item could be intelligent and the clearer it should be able to communicate when it does. If a magic item is intelligent it should have an obsessive goal that it tries for even at the detriment of the wielder. All that leads me to keep Intelligence to just swords

>>97621963
>Youre not a true scotsman.

>>97621851
The reanimated man will just stand there. Similar tonwhat you are imagining I think.
>>97621931
Seems fun. Anything specific in mind or just +1 and occasional mind controls you?

>>97621957
>sentient sword magic item
Of course thats a good idea. Stormbringer is iconic for a reason.

>>97621967
I already messed up the first column, im druk lmao trying again

>>97621993
just post a char bro

>>97621998
my initial dumb though was like """jarvis"""
lawful intelligent +3 plate with high ego,
fly, magic missile, fireball/lightning bolt, infravision.
Special purpose: ?
Maybe more powers later on

File: 1743266158004733.png (24.9 KB)

24.9 KB PNG

okay, should be fixed. this isnt final, but regarding formatting for a personal screen, what what you change here?

>>97622007
I probably wouldn't. If you did do that make each power a seperate piece and it becomes a higher armour bonus the more pieces you have.
Infra on the helm, fireball on the gauntlets, fly on the boots or cloak.
Special purpose: find more of itself till it's ego is high enough to use you as a vessel. Recover the forge where it was built and make an unstoppable army of steelmen. Probably also killing any any Chaos it comes across.

>>97622030
The fuck are you making reaction rolls more complicated for blud? I want to resolve things in one roll of the dice not in 1d3 die rolls.

File: 1765260122905160.png (223.6 KB)

223.6 KB PNG

>>97622036
hey, thats a good idea. my party already has 2 pieces of the rod of seven, it should be like that.
>>97622038
? lil bro, thats the exact same table as from red box basic, im just cleaning it up in an excel vs an old scan

>>97622038
>blud
CRIP GAME HOMIE

File: 1767289860491282.png (49.3 KB)

49.3 KB PNG

so per OSE a flaming sword is +1 genrally
against certain types it "grants an attack bonus"
is this instead of, or on top of, the normal bonus?
i think on top since its a valuable sword?

>>97622038
N O G A M E S

File: 1761128332246389.png (20.4 KB)

20.4 KB PNG

okay, heres the final skeleton, I want to make this as usable as possible, formatting wise

>>97622081
HOW DO I COLOR AN EXCEL IN ALTERNATING STRIPES
AHHH HELP ME GARYMAN

>>97622048
>table as from red box basic
Becmi continues to be the red headed step child of Fantasy Adventure Gaming. Just play bx and don't bother with cmi till you hit tenth at the earliest.
>>97622075
Sorry for wanting my resolution mechanic to resolve in a timely manner so I can actually play the game faggot.
>>97622063
It's instead of.

>>97622098
trust me, im a longtime FAG, I use this table already, im just making a cleaner-to-look-at version.
>in a timely manner
if neither side attacks immediately, the next roll takes less time than than them saying what they do
>instead of
noted

>>97622048
>thats the exact same table as from red box basic
Mentzer got a few things right and many others wrong in his basic set. This is one of the things he got wrong. Ditch it.

Even better, just use B/X.

>>97622063
>>97622098
NTA but does command take an action

>>97622110
I already play OSE and im no newfag here, this table isnt a "is this a good idea?"
Its a "how readable is this?"
>>97622116
to turn the sword on/off?
technically an action, but no imo, its like "drawing" it

>>97622103
>trust me, im a longtime FAG
We know, Your actions in the thread make that abundantly clear.

>>97621889
>It is basically 5e
you don't have a slightest clue of what you are trying to talk about, don't you?

I've said before and I'll say it again, it seems like you retards are just really fucking stupid, hold a lot of dogmatic beliefs close to heart, and acting out on emotions with no capacity to act based on reason, which is the entire cause for this long lasting argument

>>97621381
That whole table reduces to be very close to a single d6 roll
1-3 attack
4 leave
5-6 friendly

If you really need the roll play throw in a d4 roll
1 they were likely to attack
2-3 could have gone any way
4 they were probably going to be friendly

File: 1744451758198400.png (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB PNG

>>97622123
talk about games, please.
Im planning on using picrel as "thieve's cant"

>>97622128
so you say Shadowdark is OSR, or do i misunderstand?

>join onto mercenary dungeon squad (30+ members)
>spend a few days in the mountains doing nothing
>a few guys come back consistently from the hole
>makes friends with one
>asks me what i think of gnomes
>"er?"
>displays a ring of the local chaotic cult
>flashes me a smile
>walks away
WHAT DO

>>97622129
i dont see this tracking at all. are you AI?

File: conditional formating.png (22.3 KB)

22.3 KB PNG

>>97622093
I haven't used Excel for ages now
but I'm pretty sure the general idea is the same
Use conditional format -> custom condition -> use whatever Excel alternatives there are for picrel functions, naturally go for row number returning function instead of column if you need alternating rows

uh, HEY, /osrg/!

why are livestock chosen over slaves?
why are slaves chosen over livestock?

livestock:
guaranteed physical stats
no resisting will worth note
mature fast
predictable

slaves:
mercurial stats (maybe strong/smart etc)
requires eugenics for longterm
resists training
mature slowly
unpredictable

CATTLEGANG RISEUP

>>97622132
so you are so stupid you can't even read?
I've said anyone who says "SD is basically 5e" doesn't have a slightest clue of what he is talking about
also SD is an OSR game or at the very least OSR-adjacent game

>>97622163
>SD is an OSR game
LOL

File: 1767783690125570.png (841.7 KB)

841.7 KB PNG

GUYS I FOUND THE SUN'VA'BITCH

>>97622163
>OSR-adjacent
That's what the "NuSR" actually is, Something OSR-adjacent would be Shadowcity:Blood & Neon (Go play that btw, it's amazing)
Shadowdark is OSR.

>>97622123
Shut up idiot.
>>97622138
>Gnomes could be here, even on this site, right now.
>>97622194
>>97622194
Kekw.

>>97622196
>Shadowdark is OSR
uh, NO

>>97622199
No lol.

>>97622142
No, not an AI but thanks.

I didn't bother saving my calculations and I'm not going to recreate them but since it was just a few minutes ago I remember that all the attack results summed to about 0.506, leave results to about 0.168 and friendly results to about 0.32, I've forgotten the 3rd figure for that but it's going to 6 based on my other two values.

Those are about 50%, 16.7% and 33.3% which lead to their approximations by rolls of 1-3, 4, and 5-6.

The first roll column broadly indicates possible attack, uncertain, or possibly friendly with 9/36, 16/36 and 9/36 chances respectively, and 1/36 for each of the top and bottom. 9/36 is of course exactly 1/4 and while the 16/36 is 44% but that's close enough to 2/4 that I didn't care to use any higher resolution than a d4.

I didn't care enough to find out the particulars about "possible attack, it's uncertain, they attack/leave/are friendly" from the third roll because it's completely arbitrary as a table. All the results are lumped into groups with outcomes branching off 1/36, 9/36, and 16/36 or simple sums thereof. That led to me omitting the negotiation part but as it's completely arbitrary branching with completely arbitrary and only very broad descriptors and the table is only a tool to use when I don't have a good idea of a monster's reaction I don't care that negotiation was omitted.

I made an idle comment arising from my initial observation that those values, given their repetition of similar groups of values rolled on 2d6, looked like they'd resolve to something much simpler, and my second observation that my first observation was substantially correct.

Either that or it is, like this whole post, a subtle dig at overly complex solutions when simpler ones exist.

>>97622323
insanely bizarre chatgpt fakefaggery

>>97622142
>>97622333
Insane how many people here have a crippling phobia of doing more than a single line of arithmatic.

>>97622384
Ok, then explain

>>97622480
yes.

>>97622129
I done fucked like the inbred up son of my mother's daughter that I am (figure that one out) and put a couple of numbers in the wrong columns before adding which is why it wasn't symmetric but as an idle comment I didn't double check even though I thought it looked off.

Having actually done rudimentary checking now it should be 42.5%, 15.0%, 42.5%, and that's close to a single d12 roll
1-5 attack
6-7 leave
8-12 friendly

You could also use a 2d8 roll partitioning as 2-8, 9, and 10-16 but that's not much better in some ways nd if you're going to do that you might as well roll d100. You could replace the whole thing as a single layer roll with d1000 to very good approximation of all results, or d100 though sometimes you'd be rounding down from 0.49 which isn't much loss, but that wasn't the point of a throwaway comment.

>>97622664
Goddamn, some absolutely demented fishfaggotry ITT overnight, he must've been hopping mad that his hijack thread got quashed.

Why aren't the jannies doing anything?

>>97622664
You may have miscalculated some details before but either way, fundamentally you're not wrong. I don't have anything against Mentzer, but that nested reaction table is mathematically illiterate shit.

File: improved_reactions.png (47.8 KB)

47.8 KB PNG

>>97621381
I've been using this one for a while and like it.
>>97622038
Generally if there are various subtables I just roll those at the same time. Its not hard to read more than one dice result at a time.

>>97622030
Formatting wise having the number results indenting from the left is one of the more visually fucked things I've seen in a while.

How does this guy manage to consistently generate the most boring posts.

>>97622194
Someone inform the RCMP.

>>97623393
Phylacteries are a post-old-school invention, the AD&D lich has no such mechanic. They also objectively suck.

>>97622480
>>97623042
kill yourself, fishfag
>>97622674
>that nested reaction table is mathematically illiterate shit
care to explain how?

>>97623232
Diet mostly.
I'm guessing he does nothing all day but guzzle plain yogurt while wishing it was semen.

>>97623437
So you define old school as anything before the birth of Christ, got it.
Matthew 23:5
>But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
>>97623393
I do a d3 for intelligence, a d2 for corporeal vs incorporeal. If corporeal a d4 for zombie, mummy, ghoul, or skeleton. If incorporeal first I roll a d3 to see what of visibility, possession, or moving physical objects it definitely will not have then I roll a d2 for each of the remaining 2 to see it it has that power or not.

>>97623459
>care to explain how?
Anon already explained it with clear math, it simply doesn't make sense to roll multiple times because you're just simulating a different single die roll but taking more time about it.

>>97623889
"i dont like it" isnt the same as "mathematically illiterate""

>>97623918
That's correct, and this is an instance of mathematical illiteracy, not just preference. What's your point?

>>97620388
Nope, he speaking out his ass and no one who is not a faggot wants anything to do with that.

>>97623927
So explains how its illiterate?

First you dont even know that its from BE, and now youre just claiming its broken without showing why.

And no, "three rolls is too many" doesnt count, thats a preference.

>>97624335
>you dont even know that its from BE
NAYRT but what do you base this on? Anon mentioned Mentzer.

>>97624426
See: >>97622038
>The fuck are you making reaction rolls more complicated for blud

If you dont like nested results, thats fine but it doesnt make them "mathematically illiterate."

Care to talk about games now instead of complaining?
Im creating a slew of pregens for an ASE game and I cant decide if I want them to each have a small bit of flair (gear wise).

>George RR Martin invented Githyanki in 1977 and Gary (pbuh) stole them for the FF
fucking WHAT

>>97624516
More like Gith-yoinked

>>97624516
>it's true
how did I never know this? forbidden lore?

>>97624516
I thought the brits wrote the FF.

>>97624658
Obviously Gygax stole the stuff they wrote, right after he paid them for it. Or maybe just before he paid them, the timeline's not clear.

>>97624516
Gurm kind of invented them but it was Charles Stross who stole them for the Fiend Folio.

>>97624824
All the great works are divinely inspired and guided by gary's (pbuh) holy light

>>97624549
>>It's true

Novel: named githyanki
D&D: same
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: were slaves of a more powerful race
D&D: same
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: very powerful psionicists
D&D: same
Conclusion: D&D copied

You're right! That's concrete proof D&D githyanki were copied from the novel. Let's look at more.

Novel: single defining characteristic is a sort of mind control
D&D: diverse range of characteristics, mind control might be possible through magic charm or psionic domination but isn't a defining characteristic
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: no physical appearance described
D&D: humanoid
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: barely intelligent
D&D: exceptional or genius
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: society and way of life not described
D&D: society and way of life described
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: are not spellcasters
D&D: are spellcasters
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: no religion described
D&D: described as worshipping a lich-queen
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: dwelt in the normal world
D&D: dwelt mostly on an alternate plane of existence
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: not noted for being formidable fighters
D&D: noted for being formidable fighters
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: no special quest for lost artefacts
D&D: quest to find silver swords
Conclusion: D&D copied

Novel: extinct race from ancient past
D&D: thriving race in current time
Conclusion: D&D copied

It's sad that I have to note irony here because some of you guys won't get that I put D&D copied every time to criticise the attitude of the guy who said it's true. The only way to reach that conclusion is to ignore all the evidence to the contrary.

>>97625189
stross admitted it in an interview tho. why are you upset?

>>97625189
Tl;dr

>>97625189
youre retarded as fuck

>>97623889
khm-khm looking at you ____Macris___

>>97625227
Stross copying a name and two details then inventing a whole lot more details is not the same as Martin inventing D&D's githyanki.

>why are you upset?
Why are you trying to force your own emotional narrative on me?

>>97625470
Forcing a fish? Forcing a thin ration of fish?

>>97625470
"Githyanki" is not some common term, and that plus copying other details is extremely clearly a rip-off.
Even stross himself admitted it you fucking retard, fishfag

I'm coming to ask you all because you are far more experienced with the math and mechanics of OSR games than I am. But I hope that I can ask this in a way that makes sense.
I'm playing Scarlet Heroes, but I don't like the way that treasure and item costs work in that game. Is the game still going to function properly through play and character progression if I just steal the items, costs, and loot generation from B/X or OSE?

>>97625614
NTA, why would fishfag be defending Gygax? If anyone smells fishy here, it's the guy pretending there's something shameful about Gygax lifting a monster from a fantasy book he read. Like, what about the elves and orcs and hobbits and balrogs and displacer beasts and other shit? Are we mad that he "stole" those, too?

The displacer beast's pretty relevant here, I'd say -- like the githyanki it bears only partial resemblance to the original. It's a new monster that keeps the likeness but invents a bunch of new stuff about it. And there's literally nothing wrong with that.

>>97625690
It should be fine, I'd say. I never used the rules for that from Scarlet Heroes anyway. I didn't play a lot of it, but it didn't cause any problems that I ran into.

>>97625695
>shameful about Gygax (pbuh) lifting a monster from a fantasy book
not at all. did you get that impression?
try to relax a little bit. its clearly a ripoff -- and thats okay

>>97625702
I like scarlet heroes a lot, and I like how it handles most of the rules/rulings regarding solo play. But I'm not a huge fan of the setting, and then I have all of these little nitpicky things that I dislike that can be fixed just by referencing a different book.

So, cool. If I can just use the original game's rules for loot/dungeon generation, then that solves part of the problem.

>>97625709
Just the tone of "Gygax stole this!" feels dismissive and fishy. Like sidelong-insinuating that Gygax is a hack and therefore 2e is OSR or some dumb shit. It doesn't make sense, but then it never does.

>>97625749
lmao fuck off then, you sensitive fag.
not everything has to be a culture war, sometimes people can just enjoy posting in a thread.

>>97625805
You're the one who started accusing people of being fishfag, nerd. And based on the thinnest of evidence

>>97625690
It's been a long time since I looked at Scarlet Heroes but IIRC yes. I don't remember the prices having anything to do with the heroic/solo mechanics, that was just some shit related to the setting, wasn't it?

>>97625830
ill post my pickles for ya, biatch

>>97625841
Yeah, mostly. I just didn't know if there was something about the oriental setting that was ingrained into the mechanics in such a way that it might cause problems later.
There is some stuff about wastrel heroes that's an optional rule that prevents you from becoming too powerful too quickly. Oh, and there's some rules regarding the generation of magic items that I'm also going to ignore.

>>97625943
>I just didn't know if there was something about the oriental setting that was ingrained into the mechanics in such a way that it might cause problems later.
Well in that case no, I don't think there is. And if against all reason there is something like that, you're bound to notice sooner or later and you can fix it then. Good luck, Anon!

>>97625962
>Good luck, Anon!
Fortune is already on my side. I made a mage and he's already the most successful Magic-User I've ever had in SH before. (They normally get killed after just a couple battles or obstacles.)

>>97625749
>fishy
This is bordering on gangstalking. Are you really convinced of all this becaude you cannot tolerate 2e?

>>97625690
Never played scarlet heroes.

>>97623548
>they make broad their phylacteries, a
Even in antiquity we had niggas trying to make the fucking Moon their Phylectery.

>>97624923
Where do Cook, Arneson and Kaye figure into this?

>>97626650
w h o ?

>>97626650
It's all Kaye's fault

>>97626650
Angels in St Gyagx's choir.
>>97625749
Flase positive friend. It wasn't the fishfag this time but ignoring him is the wiser choice.