New, and somewhat confused about...

[Robb_d20]

Okay, two things- The first I don't understand, the second I thought I read but maybe it was a house rule I read somewhere.

1) I am just so confused by the way that the Thief skills are set up. Am I trying to roll under or over? And especially a Halfling Thief hiding...

"Outdoors in their preferred forest terrain, they are able to hide very effectively; so long as they remain still there is only a 10% chance they will be detected. Even indoors... 30% chance of detection."

Then, the table for Hide for a level 1 Thief is 10. And level 2 Thief is 15, and so on. So, I would assume you want to roll under. My only question is that may clarify, do you roll for Hide and then again for being seen? Because if not, why would the number go up, or why would a halfling thief use their indoor hide ever? I'm just really confused...

2) Are the spells per day hard numbers? You don't add Wis/Int to them as bonus or anything like in D&D? And, if you don't, how the heck do Magic Users live past level 1?! And I guess as a side note, do people die a LOT more regularly in this game than others?

Thanks!

[LibraryLass]

1) You normally roll under. The halfling thing is a little different, though if you wanted it wouldn't be difficult to invert the percentages and treat it like thief skills. Whichever percentage is more favorable is the one a halfling thief uses

2) By default, that's all they get. The answer is "they hide behind the fighters".
2a) Old-school gameplay usually features more lethal combat, yes, but that's simply an incentive to try solutions other than charging in swords flashing (unless you know you can win).

[Joe the Rat]

Percentile systems in general are roll-under. You'll see that in Chaosium and Palladium systems as well. I usually write down the Halfling Hiding as 90%/70% to keep in in the same setup. Opposed checks aren't part of this system, you just roll to hide.

Yeah, Magic-Users are a bit limited - as they were originally (You hadn't commented yet on clerics not getting any spells before level 2 - but hey, unlimited turning attempts per day!).

There are house rules for bonus spells, and you can get some mileage out of the cantrip rules, but you'll find low-level MUs don't work well as blasting wizards. Save that spell until it counts, hold the torch, be smart, and take advantage of that 40' per round movement rate with no armor.

[Solomoriah]

I see a blog post coming. "Survival in the Old School." Just have to think it over some.

Robb, BFRPG is based on the model of classic RPGs of the early '80's. They depend on several things that are considered "bad" in the modern age, including GM Fiat (the GM is right, and in case of doubt, the GM is still right), potentially high mortality and "global" balance.

Generating a BFRPG character can be done in a handful of minutes (I usually say 20, but you can do it faster if you're experienced and you don't need half that time to come up with a name) so the loss of a low-level character isn't the issue it is when you spend hours "building" a character. The higher level a character is, the less mortality is an issue, but death is always possible.

Modern games insulate you from failure. Like a modern parent, who will not permit his or her child to do badly in school but doesn't seem to really care if the child actually knows anything (such that, if the child gets a bad grade, the teacher is blamed), modern games are built on the idea that, if you play, you should have a good time.

Baloney. If you play well, you should have a good time. If you play badly, you are encouraged (by the necessity of rolling up a new character) to learn to play better.

Doing things the modern way means that "game balance" is a law unto itself. Modern players will tell a GM that he's doing it wrong if they are expected to face a monster that is "too powerful."

Baloney, again. First and foremost, on the basis of verisimilitude. How can you take the game world seriously when you know that, even though there are giant, dragons, undead horrors, devils and demons, and any number of other terrible foes in the world, you will never have to face them until you are ready?

How can you take a game seriously that is structured such that, no matter how hard you fought the last opponent, nor how little rest and recuperation time you have, you'll be at or near tip-top shape when you face the next opponent?

BFRPG, and the Old School in general, rewards careful play. It's a challenge to survive at low levels, a challenge that you should not be ashamed to fail at a few times.

If you really can't fail, what's the point of playing?

Back in the day, as they say, back when the original games first came out, we also had video games (yes, really). But you got three lives, in most anyway, with bonus lives for good play. The challenge was to get a high score... how long can you play before you finally lose? Modern games give you, effectively, unlimited lives, and the reward is what? Time wasted pushing your score ever higher, building your world ever bigger, but really never arriving anywhere.

Or you could play a game like Mass Effect, where the plot is laid out in advance. There are variations (are you playing a male or female character?) but regardless of the variations, the game is directed to the final denouement with unfailing focus. Only at the very end do you get the chance to make a choice that matters, and even there, in the first release of the last chapter, your choice mattered so little that people actually got angry over it. In the Old School, we call that a railroad, and we try to never build railroads.

But railroads aren't what we're here to talk about. At the moment, you're concerned about the difficulties of being a player, especially a player of a magic-user.

If your players are really into the new school and you expect a revolt, you might consider going with the bonus spells from the current Cleric Options and Magic-User Options supplements. They might even find one of the alternate spell-casting methods described there more palatable, and you'll still be able to play the standard adventures (as they aren't broken by those changes).

Another possibility: Let your players each have two characters, but require them to play a spellcaster and a non-spellcaster. This gives the player something to do all the time, which should make them happy; at higher levels, their spellcasters will become more useful, and you may want to let each player drop a character and play just one at that point. I've done it, and it works.

On the other hand, I'll say that learning to play BFRPG according to the Old School method might be very rewarding to your players. It's certainly very different. I'm sure they'll find combat way faster than they're used to... streamlining actual play is one of my design goals.

[Sir Bedivere]

I see a blog post coming. "Survival in the Old School." Just have to think it over some.

That's something we need, I think. I look forward to the post.

... modern games are built on the idea that, if you play, you should have a good time.

Baloney. If you play well, you should have a good time. If you play badly, you are encouraged (by the necessity of rolling up a new character) to learn to play better.

Here I disagree.

I'm not playing a game to learn how to play the game better, which is pretty worthless in and of itself. I'm playing to have fun, with a big fat period.

Now, "having fun" isn't the same as "my PC surviving." I've had some pretty good sessions where a PC or two died, but everyone still had a good time. And learning to play better is fun because overcoming a challenge is fun. The key is having a good time, but you might have to expand your idea of what "having a good time" means.

[Sir Bedivere]

I should say that I don't think I'm really disagreeing with Solomoriah. I'm just saying things differently.

For example:

Doing things the modern way means that "game balance" is a law unto itself. Modern players will tell a GM that he's doing it wrong if they are expected to face a monster that is "too powerful."

What does "too powerful" mean, really?

I think a GM is wrong to throw a monster that is too powerful to handle at a party. But, "handle" doesn't mean "kill." Negotiation, deception, bribery, flattery, flight, begging for mercy, these are all ways to handle a creature that is far more powerful than your character is. In general, survival is winning. Killing the monsters and getting the gold is a bonus.

Old School games should be fun, but fun means something different here than in many other games.

[Robb_d20]

Thanks you all for your comments! I got my answers questioned, and I do plan on playing it "by the book" for the first session. I normally play 3.5 with 6 players (I DM), and I'm going to try this first with only 3 of them, as some are moving away to college/jobs and I thought this would be better for online play since it's simpler.

I created 4 characters from scratch in probably about 20 minutes total (If only that was the case in 3.5) and rand them through the dungeon I made for them. I also ran a couple of test battles and saw just how lethal combat can be.

My question (and I really don't care if the answer is old school or not, I'll take whatever you give me) is do you usually just use the random tables or place monsters? I'm a fan of, in dungeons, placing monsters.

For example, I have my characters going off after a small band of kobold bandits that stole a sacred idol from a church. The random table said 4d4, or 6d10 for a lair. I wouldn't call it a lair, but I also think 4d4 is too much, so I placed every monster, rolled for it's health (and if it was a warrior) ahead of time. I did this so and ran my characters so I would make sure it would be fine if they ended up trying to fight everything (which may very well happen- but I also have prepared different reactions for the reaction table rolls, as well as a couple creatures who would rather not fight. And possibly one room that they can't fight through and would have to otherwise get around).

Yeah, the idea is a little dull, and maybe I'm not doing it old school by rolling on the random table, but I feel like 4d4 is a bit much? Like 6 kobolds at once slaughtered them (2 fighters, a cleric and a MU) and they have pretty good stats.

So, with this in mind, what suggestions do you have for me running games, creating adventures, and adjusting my players to this new style of play? (We may end up implementing the magic rules, racial rules, extra classes, etc... but I'm starting them off, like I said, by the book).

EDIT: I have another question: How do you handle skill-checks for non-thief characters? Say, a fighter (who shed his armor) wants to try and hide somewhere? Or a MU who wants to climb a wall?)

[Solomoriah]

My question (and I really don't care if the answer is old school or not, I'll take whatever you give me) is do you usually just use the random tables or place monsters? I'm a fan of, in dungeons, placing monsters.

I use the random tables when I'm throwing something together in a hurry. That's really what they are for. But when I build a dungeon, I place whatever I want within it.

Really, take a look at BF1 Morgansfort for an example of how I build adventures; most of Cave of the Unknown and Nameless Dungeon are my work, and Olde Island Fortress is my ideas with several contributors supplying stuff.

For example, I have my characters going off after a small band of kobold bandits that stole a sacred idol from a church. The random table said 4d4, or 6d10 for a lair. I wouldn't call it a lair, but I also think 4d4 is too much, so I placed every monster, rolled for it's health (and if it was a warrior) ahead of time. I did this so and ran my characters so I would make sure it would be fine if they ended up trying to fight everything (which may very well happen- but I also have prepared different reactions for the reaction table rolls, as well as a couple creatures who would rather not fight. And possibly one room that they can't fight through and would have to otherwise get around).

Yeah, the idea is a little dull, and maybe I'm not doing it old school by rolling on the random table, but I feel like 4d4 is a bit much? Like 6 kobolds at once slaughtered them (2 fighters, a cleric and a MU) and they have pretty good stats.

Part of surviving is good maneuvering and use of the terrain; an equal party of monsters should have a 50% chance to kill you, and naturally, being killed is not what you want to happen. So, if you the player have any option, you arrange things so that most of your party can attack, while only one or two of theirs can at a time.

Smart monsters will do the same things. Suckering the party into running headlong into a room where they can be surrounded, for example. We call that education...

And your approach to dungeon design seems good. I don't generally plan in that much detail... years of doing this have led me to have a fairly good grasp of what I can put in and be "fair." At least, insofar as I want to be fair.

EDIT: I have another question: How do you handle skill-checks for non-thief characters? Say, a fighter (who shed his armor) wants to try and hide somewhere? Or a MU who wants to climb a wall?)

Ah. We have a thread somewhere around here where we discussed that. Maybe someone else remembers where it went.

[Robb_d20]

Alright, so I ran my friends through my first dungeon! Attached is a screenshot of the dungeon before they went in (Well, after- I reset everything except the Fog of War). Also, all the text (except the sleeping dogs one) and the squares with [T] & [S] weren't visible to them, so they wouldn't know where the traps were.

There was 3 of them and I threw in an NPC, just because I had tested it with 4 characters myself. They all got very... average rolls, some even rolled with a total modifier in the negatives and I let them reroll until it at least evened out.

We had a Dwarf Fighter, Elf Cleric, Halfling Magic-User/Thief (completely blew over my head they couldn't be Magic-Users), and I NPC'd a Human Thief.

So, I'll take you through what happened briefly. I want advice on what I did, could do better, and overall dungeon design, and I want it to be critical, not sugar-coated. I'm used to 3.5 handing me many conventions to make adventures (Diplomatic skills, Athletic Skills, Information Skills, etc...) so this was just a dry dungeon crawl I felt. But, it was meant to teach mechanics, so I guess I hit that objective.

So, first, story: The party was got in a rockslide, taken in by local church, healed by clerics of the deity Taj, and asked the retrieve the stolen idol of Taj from the kobolds.

Room 1: So, starting at the top, they went down into the room with the two kobolds. They rolled favorable on the reaction, so I had the kobolds nicely threaten them and told them if they left now they would live. Dwarf didn't like that, and they killed the kobolds without causality. After they killed one the other ran into 3h and they shot him down before he could get away.

Room 2: They went to the left, where the Blood Rose was. All except the NPC saved versus the fragrance, and he wandered right into it, taking 2 damage and being left with 1hp. The others ran in and tried to help, but he died the next turn. A couple lucky misses from the bush and they were able to vanquish it with nothing more than the NPC dead. They looted him, and didn't bother to search the bush (there was a religious item that belonged to the kobolds in there that had been missing).

Room 3: They first went down from Room 1 to 3h and saw room 3 had two more doors. Deciding they wanted to explore all the singular option first, they went back and into 4h. The elf stopped right before the trap and decided to give it a look. He also took out his mirror and held it up around the corner to see if there was anything to be afraid of before searching for the trap. Well, he failed, and the halfling decided to just run ahead, fell in the pit trap, and managed to take 1 damage from the fall. Rope that they had bought proved useful in getting him out and they continued into room 4.

Room 4: A favorable reaction roll (after loudly knocking and announcing their arrival...) found the kobold priest in the corner, asking what they wanted. He regaled them with the tale of the goblin priest convincing his way into the kobolds and taking the priests spot by the kobold leader's side. This left a sour taste in the kobold priest's mouth, and he asked them to go kill the goblin, as well as any other kobolds that got into their way (he cared little for heretics now following the goblin and his deity). He also told them, if they promised to leave them alone he'd give them the magic ite prized by his leader. They agreed, and he opened up 4s for the with the chest. I rolled on the table and they got a +1 longsword, which no one used (the dwarf insisted on using his axe). So they put it away and continued back into room 3, tried to enter room 6 and then 5h. In front of room 6 is a trap that locked the door. Failed pick lock check, and they went back to 4 to get a key from the priest. But first...

Room 5: Upon getting to room 5, they saw a sign in 5h that said "Let Sleeping Dogs Lie". Well, this meant there were sleeping dogs in room 5, and that the thief needed to move silently to the chest if they wanted it. The thief failed, fled, and the elf also fled to room 3. The fighter stayed here, fighting the dogs one by one in the hallway, slowly being taken down hit point by hit point (he got some VERY lucky damage rolls against him). Meanwhile...

Room 6: The elf and halfling tried to enter room 6. They used the key, and the halfling snuck in and hid successfully. The elf was seen and tried to battle the kobolds at the choke point of the doorway. He eventually ran out (backed out) and closed the door and tried to hold it shut. The halfling snuck around the commotion into room 7.

Room 7: At this point, the halfling opens the door to room 7 and sees the Goblin and a bunch of dead kobolds. The elf is trying to barricade himself against the door, and the fighter has only downed one of the dogs. Things aren't looking good. The fighter downs another dog, one left. The elf runs into 5h and closes the door, the kobolds after him spread out to find him. The goblin and halfling start to talk. The goblin SELLS the Idol of Taj to the halfling for 50gp and says he was only using the kobolds for his entertainment. One kobold stayed in 6, another went to 1, one opened 5h and one stood in 3. BAM! As soon as the kobold opened the door to 5h, the elf smashed him in the head and killed him. Argh! The dog bit and held onto the fighter, who now only had 2hp left. The fighter risked it, and went for a hit instead of a save to get away. Well, he missed, but then went again immediately because of his initiative and killed the last dog. BAM! The elf killed ANOTHER kobold! At this point, the halfling is hiding in 6 again, the goblin walks out, sees a kobold still alive, and attacks. Kobold kills the goblin, elf thinking it's safe comes in and sees the kobold. Then kills him. So, only kobolds left are the priest and the last one from room 6. The fighter loots the chest, gets some sweet potions and some gems, as well as a map to treasure. They leave, hear a kobold scream in pain, and see the priest killed the other one. They thank the priest, give him back the +1 longsword as a memento of their friendship, and leave with the idol.

So, that was that. I know it's a big post, but that is almost exactly how it happened. I WILL admit, I fudged a couple rolls early on to keep it going, but I won't say where since it doesn't matter at this point. I talked to one player since and he had this to say about it (Keep in mind, he has only ever played 3.5 before this):

I thought it was a good idea at first, I like the whole 4 person system- I like it but I don't like it. I like the thought of the thief and stuff, and fighter and cleric, but I don't think it goes deep enough, like I'd like to have sub-classes so I can get that aspect that I want. When (another player) got his Bugbear Crusader he got to be unique. Maybe I want to be a jester and do that, be a freaky thing. I think the simple way is a just a little too broad in general. That's why I like 3.5 because it has nice detail and you can create your guy anyway you want. Other than that it went fine. I liked that I could sneak around, but then I was hiding from the kobold and the goblin and I got spotted that they just kept fighting.

So yeah, give me advice on how to appease my players, make my stuff better, and handle certain things. By the way, some things that came up:
-The fighter wanting to try to sneak past the dogs in armor.
What I did: I told him he couldn't, especially not in armor. I actually afterwards read the post that was put up 2 days ago and I think I came to understand better after the session the power of the 1-n on a 1d6. However, and tell me if you agree, I would think that sometimes maybe a 1-n on a 1d8,10,12,20, etc, would also work. I mean, simple doesn't mean not switching it up, right? Maybe I think he has a 1 in 20 chance of sneaking. This isn't too out there, is it?
-A "sense motive" check.
What I did: I told them to try and discern my voice. I did a voice (shaky, somewhat scared) and asked him if he actually believed it. This is a problem in my 3.5 game where people would rather roll a die instead of actually having faith or fear in what others tell them
-"5 foot step" or leaving combat.
What I did: He wanted to move 5 feet backwards, and I know the rule of running away (Attack at a +2 with their back turned when they leave) but I also thought I read about you backing away at half speed, but the other person can still follow and attack? I let him back up and close the door, but gave the kobold one free attack. Let me know if I did this wrong or could handle it better!

Last note: I know I'm looking for a lot of mechanical rules in a system where the GM should be the one making judgement calls with the "metarules" of the game. I just want to get a good leg up from those with experience. Thanks!

[Hywaywolf]

I don't know if you have looked at the downloads page, but there are a lot of supplements available to allow for customization of PCs. I am of the opinion that you should start with the basics and add in more complicated things after you have been playing a while. Old school gaming is much different than new school. For one, at lower levels the death rate might be much higher than your players are used to, but since it doesn't take long to roll up a new PC that isn't as bad as it sounds.