Best OSR System
- Thread starter Evard's Small Tentacle
- Start date
Evard's Small Tentacle
*eyeroll*
Tangential question- what is the thinking behind scarcity of classes based on your dice rolls? Are certain classes more powerful based on such scarcity? How does this benefit game play?
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
There is (intentionally) no difference between OSRIC and AD&D --- except as clarification given 30 years of hindsight. Some names and serial-numbers have been filed off of OSRIC as a legal protection, that's all.
OSRIC is now 15 years old. Maybe it will get a face-lift someday, but the intend is to preserve AD&D for posterity--not "improve it".
I am probably the worst person to ask about this, but...
The "prestige classes" (e.g. paladin, ranger and bard) were originally suppose to be less common that the core classes. This is somewhat mitigated by AD&D allowing for alternative roll-up systems (e.g. 4d6, etc.).
A lot of house-ruling and fudging goes on because players wanna to play the candy-classes (so bad they could just cry). So the nice DM's just give up and let them. None of the AD&D classes are system-breakers---just a slight edge-up like starting at 2nd or 3rd level. "Prestige" because it was suppose to indicate lucky rolls...only EVERYONE had one. They're just my pet peeve (especially paladins).
Here's one of my favorite AD&D illustrations. It's called "A Paladin In Hell".
It's good because the paladin gets killed.
Last edited:
Yes that was my understanding as well. Interested in what the poster meant. This could lead to an interesting discussion.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
He's a little aside from my OD&D playing days.
My DM invented a prestige race "High Elf" which was more Tolkienized. (Regular elves were Grey Elves). The scores were very hard to get. Once (in 10 years) did I get lucky and roll them. Shortly after the game started, my party was approached by a lawful evil faction and bribed to betray me. Two sessions and I was back-stabbed --- D E A D.
They were really sorry (well some of them), but the offer was just too good to pass up.
Learned an important life lesson about professional jealousy and wearing a target on your (literal) back.
My DM invented a prestige race "High Elf" which was more Tolkienized. (Regular elves were Grey Elves). The scores were very hard to get. Once (in 10 years) did I get lucky and roll them. Shortly after the game started, my party was approached by a lawful evil faction and bribed to betray me. Two sessions and I was back-stabbed --- D E A D.
They were really sorry (well some of them), but the offer was just too good to pass up.
Learned an important life lesson about professional jealousy and wearing a target on your (literal) back.
Last edited:
robertsconley
*eyeroll*
We didn't know this until the History of Middle Earth series came out containing Tolkien's notes and draft. But as it turned out Tolkien don't die. Yes their physical form will perish but their spirit will go to the Hall of Mandos, regain strength, and when ready regain a new body in Valinor. That process varies from individual to individual become particularly long if it somebody who done great evil in their life like Feanor and many of his sons.
For for that character in my campaign I would have you roll 1d100x10 to see how many years the character will come back from the dead and can return.
One of my friends liked it so much he used for one his campaign. A player made an "returned" elf. He started out the same as the rest of us because while the character remembered their life. The process of being reborn weaken them so they had to relearn their character abilities and skills.
From time to time, I have run theme campaigns were everybody made characters fitting a theme. Everybody a member of the Thieves Guild was one. Everybody was a magic user and member of a magical order was another. I thought it would be a interesting twist that an all-Elven party suffered a TPK and they all were reborn decades or centuries later.
Beek Gwenders
*eyeroll*
Sorry, that probably wasn’t put clearly; I was more trying to highlight the risk-vs-reward of AD&D versus other versions, in particular B/X or OD&D, not OSRIC. It’s the tactical crunch, one example would be segments and casting times, that makes AD&D play as a very different game from B/X or OD&D and enhances the importance of decisioning making.
OSRIC is less a clarification of 1e, but rather one interpretation of 1e. Very close in most regards, but not the same. There is a lot missing from OSRIC.
The1True
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Naaaah son. This Paladin absolutely rocked those devil bitches. He's standing there singing the 'Farming these bitches for the XP's' song at the top of his lungs, feeling the holy spirit while your fighter, other fighter and slightly different fighter are off doing something 'interactive'/'immersive' with each other down in the valley with those tentacles...It's good because the paladin gets killed.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
The clarification comes in, to my mind, with regards to bringing together pieces from all 3 of the AD&D book into one place (e.g. halflings get +3 with missile weapons from the MM). OSRIC is an example of good archival research and best-effort at reading original intent, IMO. I haven't found (except for some missing stuff, like WvsAC) anything significantly different. They are, to my mind, the same thing---with a nod and wink that says we left some things out because of legal concerns (which subsequently proved to be minor). Those elements seamlessly stitch back in if you get the original books (now available, but weren't at the time of OSRIC's publication).
@Malrex & T1T: Eat your vegetables every day boys so your games grow up big and strong...and then, maybe later, you can have some candy.
Last edited:
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
Yes. I'm sure he handily emerges victorious in 3e. But we are talking 1e here...so he's doomed.Naaaah son. This Paladin absolutely rocked those devil bitches. He's standing there singing the 'Farming these bitches for the XP's' song at the top of his lungs, feeling the holy spirit while your fighter, other fighter and slightly different fighter are off doing something 'interactive'/'immersive' with each other down in the valley with those tentacles...
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
Bold of you to say this to the guy who wrote Red Prophet Rises.
Except he's in plate armor, so he's a UA paladin, which means he has better stats, the cavalier "to hit" bonus, +6 gear including a Holy Avenger, and good positioning at a choke point. He could get lucky.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
That's how DCS drew knights, even in Holmes Basic.
But you make an excellent point that UA was the continuation of a trend of character power inflation (that started with the 1e paladin) and continued uncontested until the nascent OSR (briefly) kicked it in the nuts.
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
So Gygax could do something wrong?
I would agree that UA constituted power inflation within 1e, because the PCs got tougher and the monsters stayed the same. However I do not think you can assume that the same thing was happening with later editions, merely because PC stats, HP and damage went up, because monsters stats, HP and damage also went up. It is the relative balance between PCs and monsters that is the relevant consideration.
EDIT: I do think that UA was an indication that Gygax' ideas about the game were changing, a trend I think really got started with the advent of the "death at -10 HP" rule. As we have discussed here, he liked the long term campaign game, and I suspect after many games he found that players could get to that game more readily if they survived low level.
It may also have been an attempt to balance high level spellcasters, since it was mainly the "martial" classes that got new goodies. The druid got to go to high levels, but I suspect that was because he had more experience with high level play by that time and saw that some changes were in order; I think this is also why UA raised level limits for demihumans.
Last edited:
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
He already downed an ice devil and that barbed devil looks doomed. Devils are tougher in 3e. That Pit Fiend? 13 HD in 1e, 20 HD in 3e. Also, IIRC it will explode for 20d6 damage if he manages to slay it (2e+).
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
Right. He was only human.
From a technical perspective you are 100% correct. And while I know you fight it in your games, I think practically speaking you'd have to agree that was the common trend. It will probably always be the path of least resistance to give the players an edge with cool toys.
From a technical perspective you are 100% correct. And while I know you fight it in your games, I think practically speaking you'd have to agree that was the common trend. It will probably always be the path of least resistance to give the players an edge with cool toys.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
So you are saying the paladin dies? Music to my ears.
The1True
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
The barbed (or maybe the horned? Whatever the Cornugon used to be before they got wussy about the word 'devil') devil became an absolute bastard in 3e. Some of those things in that picture have 100-200 hp now bro. And plate armour is absolute garbage in 3e for anyone with half a dexterity. Devils were a frickin cakewalk in 1e. If he made it to Hell pre-Planescape, he is a high level character absolutely loaded to the tits with magic items even by your anemic 1e standards. That paladin is categorically having the time of his life. He is living the fucking dream right there.
I don't think you're playing AD&D RAW bro, I think you're playing some half-starved, DM is god, white-book D&D and you're in trouble if your players ever figure out the rules. Stop edition-baiting (as if UA counts as a frickin 'edition') you fun-loving scamp you.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
Last edited: