State of the OSR: so, what did I miss?

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
For those of you like me who think an open table has a lot of potential but BrOSR is way too much hassle I suggest you take a look at the open table as outlined by The Alexandrian. I am extremely interested in making an open table for my next campaign and would love to have a thread where we collaborate and share ideas. For me, the challenge is bookkeeping. The best way to accurately track character sheets, gold, XP, etc for a large stable of PCs is eluding me but obviously people have figured out how to manage it long before personal computers were common. Ideas?
 
Gygax notoriously had trouble explaining the game he had co-invented.

This strikes me as the best succinct explanation of D&D, written in June 1975:

“In order to play the game, it is necessary to do the following things. 1. Someone must create and stock a dungeon with monsters. … The Dungeon Master (DM) may not play as a character inside his own dungeon. 2. Create and name the fantasy characters who will explore the dungeon. 3. Arm and equip these characters so they will have some kind of chance of getting down into the dungeon and getting out alive. Instructions for the above operations, and for having combat with monsters and compiling experience (points) follow.”
 
How is OSE for higher-level play, i.e. when domains, mass combat, and such enter the picture?
It depends on what kind of mechanical support you are looking for. In general, I find classic editions work fine for high-level play involving mass combat and domains but there are nuances. I had some experience in this area.

The first campaign in the Wilderlands
 
Gygax notoriously had trouble explaining the game he had co-invented.

This strikes me as the best succinct explanation of D&D, written in June 1975:

“In order to play the game, it is necessary to do the following things. 1. Someone must create and stock a dungeon with monsters. … The Dungeon Master (DM) may not play as a character inside his own dungeon. 2. Create and name the fantasy characters who will explore the dungeon. 3. Arm and equip these characters so they will have some kind of chance of getting down into the dungeon and getting out alive. Instructions for the above operations, and for having combat with monsters and compiling experience (points) follow.”
isee.gif
 
Side-tracking a bit, but I often get the impression that what some folks mean by Domain Play is waaay more involved than what I mean by similar terms.

For me, what's in the old Expert (B/X) book does 90% of the job. The only thing really missing is actually a mass combat system (and that could be pretty easily accomplished on one's own if not for the possibility of the whole D&D menagerie of monsters showing up at once on a battlefield).
 
Side-tracking a bit, but I often get the impression that what some folks mean by Domain Play is waaay more involved than what I mean by similar terms.

For me, what's in the old Expert (B/X) book does 90% of the job. The only thing really missing is actually a mass combat system (and that could be pretty easily accomplished on one's own if not for the possibility of the whole D&D menagerie of monsters showing up at once on a battlefield).
Yea domain play to me is clearing out some wilderness and building a stronghold (or occupying and renovating an existing one) to end a campaign with a bang but people seem to want more than that. My objection is that domain play is gonna be largely boring and mundane for most people.
 
It depends on what kind of mechanical support you are looking for. In general, I find classic editions work fine for high-level play involving mass combat and domains but there are nuances. I had some experience in this area.

The first campaign in the Wilderlands

Basically (no pun intended), I'm looking for something that handles the CMI part of BECMI, and not just the BE.

There are a number of options out there that can handle the lower levels, but if I am trying to replicate the whole shebang, the options get thinner (and I'm not sure if they exist).
 
Yea domain play to me is clearing out some wilderness and building a stronghold (or occupying and renovating an existing one) to end a campaign with a bang but people seem to want more than that. My objection is that domain play is gonna be largely boring and mundane for most people.
I think domain play either needs to be a way to gracefully retire characters or it needs to be part of the game from the beginning. The players don't necessarily need to be rulers, but the domains should already exist in some mechanical context for them to interact with or take over.
 
Yea domain play to me is clearing out some wilderness and building a stronghold (or occupying and renovating an existing one) to end a campaign with a bang but people seem to want more than that. My objection is that domain play is gonna be largely boring and mundane for most people.
For me it's more about the buildup/ prelude to a wargame campaign, done in a way that the participants don't really know when or how it's going to kick off or what the starting placement and forces will be, that having developed organically from the earlier character-scope adventures (and of course, the inevitable mixing between those two levels).*

For it to work that way, you'd need to have at least a significant portion of the participants having entered play always wanting that outcome, however.

* That part being pretty radically different from...well almost any other sort of wargame, really.

To work well though, it really does imply a fairly larger number of players and, I suspect, a certain attitude towards war gaming that is both relaxed (only moderately competitive) but also takes a fair bit of commitment. That's a tricky combo of things to put together.
 
Basically (no pun intended), I'm looking for something that handles the CMI part of BECMI, and not just the BE.

There are a number of options out there that can handle the lower levels, but if I am trying to replicate the whole shebang, the options get thinner (and I'm not sure if they exist).
I guess you could just go ahead and use the rules from the Rules Cyclopedia to fill-in whatever gaps you have. Or there's Dark Dungeons, a BECMI clone. ACKS has some fairly robust domain-level play (but nothing covering the "M" or the "I" that you might want).
 
The players don't necessarily need to be rulers, but the domains should already exist in some mechanical context for them to interact with or take over.
Theoretically, I suspect that could be accomplished by having "nobles" as NPCs of intermediate levels, higher that starting PCs but perhaps not generally Name Level ( that's' more for self-made warlords- the PCs, IOW), who may claim but don't actually control large areas of the setting (to allow PCs to move into and take claim of that space).

But, as you say, that outcome needs to be a part of the understanding from step one, and a significant number of players have to actually try for that goal (hopefully in various competing combinations over the course of the campaign) to actually make it work. That way, if some players choose to not pursue that goal, the overall play still works out. (And those who choose not to pursue that end-goal can still make colorful, interesting, tough, heroic/villainous, eccentric characters anyway, in their own way becoming the equivalent of important NPCs in a more traditional set up)

Which gets us back to then need/desire for a fairly large pool of players.
 
Domain play was hardly one of D&D’s most sparkling 6E916A54-79C0-4F5B-AD6F-9ADCDDDFE487.jpeginnovations. There was already much better thought out advice available than anything Gygax could provide. Probably the most knowledgeable campaign runner at TSR was the 2e designer Steve Winter. He had a parallel identity as “The Colonial Angle”.
 
Which gets us back to then need/desire for a fairly large pool of players.
Thanks to online gaming, a large pool of players shouldn't be too hard so long as it is made clear that minimal commitment is fine and you recruit from a solid community like the Pub or FLGS. I imagine there'd be a large pool of players who'd play once in a while around a small core of regulars who rarely miss a session.
 
As a reminder, in Blackmoor the wargame/domain-level stuff came first: each of the players was initially assigned a faction with a base and a budget which they would use to raise and maintain their army, invest in improvements to their holding, establish trade and diplomacy with the other players, and engage in battles (about half the players were “bad guy” factions). The personal-scale dungeon crawling stuff came along a year or so later and was initially seen as something of a sideshow but was popular enough with the players that it started overshadowing the wargame stuff (to Arneson’s apparent annoyance) and that was exacerbated once he demonstrated that dungeon-crawling game to the Lake Geneva crowd and they fell in love with it and made it the central focus of D&D-as-published.

Greyhawk AFAIK didn’t really include much wargame stuff - high level characters would build castles and acquire armies of followers, but they seemingly were still mostly focused on personal-scale “adventuring” rather than budget balancing and domain management and high level diplomacy. The castles and armies were effectively background color and “trophy” symbols. I suspect that the (fairly minimal) coverage of that stuff in D&D is mostly vestigial - it’s there because it was part of early play in Blackmoor and Gygax maybe thought it would make the game seem more appealing and comprehensible to fans who knew about wargame campaigns.

But the idea that you spend a year or two going on personal-scale adventures and then switch over to what is, effectively, a completely different game that the players may or may not actually want to play is, AFAICT, mostly a myth, a sort of hand waved wishful thinking when Gygax and Arneson were compiling the rules for publication.

(And yes, I know that Frank Mentzer’s D&D Companion set in 1984 added a bunch more crunch and detail to this aspect of the game and filled out the vague suggestions in OD&D and AD&D, but as with everything in the CMI sets that stuff was largely (totally?) unplaytested and was written to order to fill a theoretical gap in the game architecture (and boost Frank’s ego), not because it was either reflecting actual pre-existing play practice or addressing a commercial demand from the player-base.)
 
As a reminder, in Blackmoor the wargame/domain-level stuff came first: each of the players was initially assigned a faction with a base and a budget which they would use to raise and maintain their army, invest in improvements to their holding, establish trade and diplomacy with the other players, and engage in battles (about half the players were “bad guy” factions). The personal-scale dungeon crawling stuff came along a year or so later and was initially seen as something of a sideshow but was popular enough with the players that it started overshadowing the wargame stuff (to Arneson’s apparent annoyance) and that was exacerbated once he demonstrated that dungeon-crawling game to the Lake Geneva crowd and they fell in love with it and made it the central focus of D&D-as-published.
I guess there's a sort of poetic justice in Dave Arneson's side-show getting out of hand and taking on a life of its own, since isn't that pretty much what happened with Braunstein as well? :grin:
 
In a moment of clarity I realise that by having this discussion we are performing something akin to a sacred ritual, taking a path many have trodden before and others will tread in the future.

In a desperate attempt to pay my Joesky Tax, here’s a Howardian monster for Bloody Basic.





NNameSHDACFort.Ref.WillAttacksSpecial
4Yahlgan CyborgM314121217Bite (1d8)Berserker
 
I grew up as a wargamer first, but most of my players over the past 45 years did not. So the army game/domain game that I wind up leading them to is a tonal shit that usually leads to player casualties and the game winding done sometime after.

Which is reasonable, as not everyone wants to play a wargame, and few people want to play a tax collector sim.
 
The trick with the domain game is the same trick with RPG combat versus wargaming man to man combat. The focus on not just emulating the activity but bringing the fact is happening as part of the life of a PC. In short it about the context the elevates it above being a wargame scenario.

The virtues of the various elements I use

Harnmanor
The key to this that it has about the same complexity and focus as Traveller's Starship Economic. There is a small amount of spreadsheet work but the rest of the materials is about fleshing out living out a life of a holder of a fief. The heart of this isn't the economics but rather the random events that happens to tenants of the manor. And those led to complications which are fodder for adventure. And elevates product above being just SimManor.

Harnmaster's Pilot Almanac
The Pilot Almanac is basically Traveller's Starship rules for medieval/early renaissance sailing ships. They even have ship construction rules. Its only flaw is that doesn't bring the life of being a ship owner to life as much Harnmanor does for being a feudal lord.

Harnworld
The Harn setting has details, it is not to the level that Chivalry & Sorcery, but it is well presented and it makes sense. Surprisingly what it doesn't have are castle-building rules. Probably because like in life building castles are basically a unique one of the kind event and takes decades to complete. But for everything else you get not only how kingdoms work based on tables on how much land is held and by who. How feudal governments are organized. How military forces are levied. But also a sense of how the feudal lords interact with each other on a personal level.

Adventurer Conqueror King
The domain-level stuff along with things like merchant trade rules are well designed, well-thought-out and consistent. In various Axioms articles the author lay out the assumptions of the system and how they build it up from those assumptions.

Merchant Adventures for the Majestic Fantasy RPG
Where I take what I learned from ACKS, the Pilot's Almanac and other sources. Bake in my own assumptions and recast a slightly lower level of detail that I found is more suitable for my players. This includes overland and sea trade rules. As well as a way of handling sailing ships.

AD&D Battlesystem 1e
The virtue of this set of miniature rules is that the core mechanic answers the question of if I had a 100 orc with 1 HD swing their weapons how much damage they would do. And does it in a way that would reflect if you actually made those 100 rolls. The secret is the clever use of a statistical technique called a binominal distribution to turn this into a easy to use chart.

The result is a game that allows you to take any character or monster from any edition and translate it exactly to work with the game. It does this by focusing on how many hit dice creatures have as opposed to how many hit points they have. And converting AC and what they need to hit into modifiers for the chart above.

I blog about it in a series of posts and used it in actual play with Swords & Wizardry which has ascending AC and a different set of stats for stuff compared to AD&D 1e.

Note Battlesystem 2e is not the same game as this. The authors wimped out and made the same mistakes that happen a bunch of D&D miniature wargames. Treating units as a bigger monster with more hit points.

GURPS Mass Combat
The problem with Battlesystem and other miniature wargame is that you have to setup all the figures (or cardboard tokens) and manipulate them during the session.

Sometimes you just want something that can be played out on a regional map and is mostly verbal with a few dice rolls. GURPS Mass Combat is a system to handle mass combat that is tailored and made for what RPGs focus on. It is somewhat abstract and boils stuff down to Troop Strengths. When you play it, the decision you make, makes sense in terms of what you will be doing as a commander. Just abstracted. And SJ Game games did a good job making sure the math feel right.

Wrapping it up
Hope this help folks with the aspect of a campaign.
 
Basically (no pun intended), I'm looking for something that handles the CMI part of BECMI, and not just the BE.

There are a number of options out there that can handle the lower levels, but if I am trying to replicate the whole shebang, the options get thinner (and I'm not sure if they exist).
I think B/X Companion does a pretty good job of this in a manner that's consistent with B/X D&D. https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/103412/B-X-Companion
 
The reason the OSR doesn't pay much attention to CMI part of BECMI is that D&D is already creaking with strain at 20th level, and it gets worse as you go higher. Keep in mind, OD&D only had 10 levels.

Still, kudos to Mentzer for selling 36th level to a bunch of kids who hadn't realized they were never going to get there.
 
The reason the OSR doesn't pay much attention to CMI part of BECMI is that D&D is already creaking with strain at 20th level, and it gets worse as you go higher. Keep in mind, OD&D only had 10 levels.
Though I totally agree, B/X Companion contains quite a bit that is usable at levels 1 to 14, such as Mass Combat. I find it more of a rules extension to B/X than adding a new tier of play which was definitely an issue with CMI.
 
Unpopular opinion, I think BECMI is a terrible book. I bought it expecting a treasure trove of good expanded rules and was severely disappointed. A lot of the rules are half-ass and feel like they were just pulled out of the author's ass.
 
Though I totally agree, B/X Companion contains quite a bit that is usable at levels 1 to 14, such as Mass Combat. I find it more of a rules extension to B/X than adding a new tier of play which was definitely an issue with CMI.
Yes, even though my comment came right after yours, it wasn't meant as a direct response. It's been a long time since I looked at the B/X Companion, but I recall it being pretty good.
 
The reason the OSR doesn't pay much attention to CMI part of BECMI is that D&D is already creaking with strain at 20th level, and it gets worse as you go higher. Keep in mind, OD&D only had 10 levels.

Still, kudos to Mentzer for selling 36th level to a bunch of kids who hadn't realized they were never going to get there.
Dude, one of the first guys I played with had a 50th level Thief/Mage, so I don't know what bizarro land you're living in.
 
Unpopular opinion, I think BECMI is a terrible book. I bought it expecting a treasure trove of good expanded rules and was severely disappointed. A lot of the rules are half-ass and feel like they were just pulled out of the author's ass.
I actually found that same realization liberating with 5e. Meant I didn't have to worry about accidentally breaking anything.
 
I get not everyone liking 3d6 in order. My problem is that most people swap in 4d6 and drop the lowest. While I understand people wanting to have a high stat in their prime requisite, I hate a system that is designed to make people above average in every stat. It takes away from being the strongest one in the group when even wizards have an average Strength of 13.
Ha, you should have seen me use that to generate a character. My DM told me to reroll the set of 6 die rolls once - he couldn't believe that a 6 x '4d6 drop low' system could generate a maximum score of 14!
 
According to anydice.com, 4d6k3 will generate 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9 on average. Not bad, but not amazing given how many dead spots (i.e. scores with +/- 0) there are on the AD&D 1E tables. I prefer the newer (x-10)/2 for the bonus/penalty modifiers.
 
According to anydice.com, 4d6k3 will generate 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9 on average. Not bad, but not amazing given how many dead spots (i.e. scores with +/- 0) there are on the AD&D 1E tables. I prefer the newer (x-10)/2 for the bonus/penalty modifiers.
That's in line with Gygax's "A PC should have two scores of 15 or higher" from the AD&D PHB, which is why he recommended 4d6k3 as the default.

3d6 combined with AD&D tables (as opposed to the minimal stat influences of OD&D and the smoothed-out tables of BD&D) is something unique to 2nd Edition, which suffers a lot from mixing OD&D philosophies and approaches with AD&D rules, IMO.
 
The reason the OSR doesn't pay much attention to CMI part of BECMI is that D&D is already creaking with strain at 20th level, and it gets worse as you go higher. Keep in mind, OD&D only had 10 levels.

Back in the day and currently I considered level to be a mark of experience and that every character has levels. One alternative is that those with character classes are special and those with levels are special heroes.

Partially inspired by the level titles of AD&D. I considered overall experience in groups of three levels in order to figure out whether a character was an apprentice, journeyman, master, or grandmaster. Over time it evolved into the below.

Levels 1 to 2 are considered to be trained apprentices. Characters are nominally capable of doing the job of their class or profession, but still have more to learn before being considered a veteran or fully trained.

Level 3 is where characters are considered professionals within their class or profession. In a guild, this is the point where a character becomes a journeyman and is allowed to take employment with any master willing to hire them. Burglars will now be respected enough to run their own heists. Clerics become full priests of their religion, allowed to officiate at services and ceremonies. Fighters receive their first minor command. Finally, Magic-Users are considered fully trained and ready to make their own way in the world.

Level 6 is where characters are considered to have mastered their profession and ready to assume various leadership roles. In guilds, the character would be considered a master of their profession. Burglars gain control over the jobs and heists done in a neighborhood. A Cleric becomes eligible to be a bishop, responsible for the flock of a small region or city. Fighters start to independently command troops as a captain. Finally, Magic-Users start to take on apprentices to train and to assist them in their expanding array of research.

Level 9 is where the character reaches the pinnacle of their profession and occupies the highest leadership positions. In guilds, the character becomes a grandmaster, either leading the guild or with a place on the council, setting policy for the guild. Clerics become High Priests or Archbishops in charge of their religion’s hierarchy for a region or realm. A Fighter would be promoted to general or granted lands to rule as the lord or lady of the land. Finally, a Magic-User would be known as a full wizard and widely respected for their knowledge and skill. They would attract many apprentices and fellow Magic-Users to learn and assist the wizard in their research.

At level 12, the character is considered a paragon of their profession, somebody whose skill and exploits are worthy of being used as an example for others to follow. In modern times, these characters would win the Nobel Prize or be Olympic-caliber athletes.

At level 16, the character becomes more than a paragon and moves into legendary status. Their deeds are famous through the continent or even the world. Consider these on par with our own world’s Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Sun Tzu, Plato, or Aristotle.

This also reflects that for the most part when my campaigns end. Usually around 12th level or so.
 
The reason the OSR doesn't pay much attention to CMI part of BECMI is that D&D is already creaking with strain at 20th level, and it gets worse as you go higher. Keep in mind, OD&D only had 10 levels.

Still, kudos to Mentzer for selling 36th level to a bunch of kids who hadn't realized they were never going to get there.
Before ACKS came out I defaulted to LL because I liked their 20-level spread, and supplemented it with the D&D RC subsystems for domains, item creation etc.
According to anydice.com, 4d6k3 will generate 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9 on average. Not bad, but not amazing given how many dead spots (i.e. scores with +/- 0) there are on the AD&D 1E tables. I prefer the newer (x-10)/2 for the bonus/penalty modifiers.
Excuse me sir, do you have a moment to listen to the word of our lord and savior the bell curve?
Back in the day and currently I considered level to be a mark of experience and that every character has levels. One alternative is that those with character classes are special and those with levels are special heroes.

Partially inspired by the level titles of AD&D. I considered overall experience in groups of three levels in order to figure out whether a character was an apprentice, journeyman, master, or grandmaster. Over time it evolved into the below.

Levels 1 to 2 are considered to be trained apprentices. Characters are nominally capable of doing the job of their class or profession, but still have more to learn before being considered a veteran or fully trained.

Level 3 is where characters are considered professionals within their class or profession. In a guild, this is the point where a character becomes a journeyman and is allowed to take employment with any master willing to hire them. Burglars will now be respected enough to run their own heists. Clerics become full priests of their religion, allowed to officiate at services and ceremonies. Fighters receive their first minor command. Finally, Magic-Users are considered fully trained and ready to make their own way in the world.

Level 6 is where characters are considered to have mastered their profession and ready to assume various leadership roles. In guilds, the character would be considered a master of their profession. Burglars gain control over the jobs and heists done in a neighborhood. A Cleric becomes eligible to be a bishop, responsible for the flock of a small region or city. Fighters start to independently command troops as a captain. Finally, Magic-Users start to take on apprentices to train and to assist them in their expanding array of research.

Level 9 is where the character reaches the pinnacle of their profession and occupies the highest leadership positions. In guilds, the character becomes a grandmaster, either leading the guild or with a place on the council, setting policy for the guild. Clerics become High Priests or Archbishops in charge of their religion’s hierarchy for a region or realm. A Fighter would be promoted to general or granted lands to rule as the lord or lady of the land. Finally, a Magic-User would be known as a full wizard and widely respected for their knowledge and skill. They would attract many apprentices and fellow Magic-Users to learn and assist the wizard in their research.

At level 12, the character is considered a paragon of their profession, somebody whose skill and exploits are worthy of being used as an example for others to follow. In modern times, these characters would win the Nobel Prize or be Olympic-caliber athletes.

At level 16, the character becomes more than a paragon and moves into legendary status. Their deeds are famous through the continent or even the world. Consider these on par with our own world’s Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Sun Tzu, Plato, or Aristotle.

This also reflects that for the most part when my campaigns end. Usually around 12th level or so.
Alexander Macris has a great ACKS design blog entry that touches of similar ground: Demographics of Heroism
 
According to anydice.com, 4d6k3 will generate 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9 on average. Not bad, but not amazing given how many dead spots (i.e. scores with +/- 0) there are on the AD&D 1E tables. I prefer the newer (x-10)/2 for the bonus/penalty modifiers.
I really like the Basic stat mod ranges of
3=-3
4-5=-2
6-8=-1
9-12=0
13-15=+1
16-17=+2
18=+3

Keeps everything nice and similar across the various attributes instead of the weirdness of AD&D, keeps even small modifiers meaningful as there aren't too many levels and makes 18s very special.
 
Alexander Macris has a great ACKS design blog entry that touches of similar ground: Demographics of Heroism
It is good for the assumptions he makes and it is a good implementation of the idea that "levels are for heroes"

My view that levels are a mark of experience means for the distribution is a bottom heavy diamond with the peak being at 3rd to 4th level. Most folks progress to a professional levels (3rd) but afterwards the distribution narrows until it reaches the apex of legendary caliber individuals as capable as newton, julius caesar, aristole, einstein, etc. Below that are the olympic/nobel caliber individuals far more numerous but not compared to the bulk of the population.
 
I really like the Basic stat mod ranges of
3=-3
4-5=-2
6-8=-1
9-12=0
13-15=+1
16-17=+2
18=+3

Keeps everything nice and similar across the various attributes instead of the weirdness of AD&D, keeps even small modifiers meaningful as there aren't too many levels and makes 18s very special.
I dislike the uneven progression so I went with. But agree the top modifier should be capped at +3 not +4. Works out better in the long run I found in various campaigns.



ScoreModifier
3, 4, 5​
-2​
6, 7, 8​
-1​
9, 10, 11​
+0​
12, 13, 14​
+1​
15, 16, 17​
+2​
18, 19, 20​
+3​
21, 22, 23​
+4​
 
That's in line with Gygax's "A PC should have two scores of 15 or higher" from the AD&D PHB, which is why he recommended 4d6k3 as the default.

3d6 combined with AD&D tables (as opposed to the minimal stat influences of OD&D and the smoothed-out tables of BD&D) is something unique to 2nd Edition, which suffers a lot from mixing OD&D philosophies and approaches with AD&D rules, IMO.
AD&D2, has a bunch of different rolling methods given in the PHB and discussed DMG (as I recall in 1e these were all in the DMG, away from the prying eyes of players). If people didn't use them in 2e and did in 1e that's not on the system, but on the groups.
 
Last edited:
AD&D2, like AD&D1, has a bunch of different rolling methods given in the DMG. If people didn't use them in 2e and did in 1e that's not on the system, but on the groups.
Yes, but it is the only time it's been applied as an official model for AD&D, and is called out as "Method I," implying that it's the default. In practice, "Method V" (4d6k3) became the baseline.
 
AD&D2, like AD&D1, has a bunch of different rolling methods given in the DMG. If people didn't use them in 2e and did in 1e that's not on the system, but on the groups.

And there is those first couple of months when you saw a stunning number of players who 'honestly rolled' the following:

18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 17
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top