In Matt Finch's Quick Primer for Old School Gaming the first zen moment is Rulings not Rules. He describe how in the absence of mechanics or guidance the referee has to rely on his common sense and experience to come up with the mechanics to adjudicate the actions of  a character.

Since I started actively refereeing Swords & Wizardry several years ago I come up with some handy concrete guidelines that help make up a ruling without burdening the game with overly complicated mechanics.

First off I look at Swords & Wizardry and the classic editions to see what tools I can come with.

• There is the to hit roll.
• Saving Throws
• Modifiers
• Some type of roll based on a characteristic.
• A skill roll.

The To Hit Roll
This is best used when the ruling involves throwning, swinging, or hitting something. If it is just about hitting the target with no real damage I usually set the target number based off AC 10 (or 9 depending on the edition).  The same with targeting a piece of floor or a specific section of a wall. If just hitting a large building, wall, rock, etc. Then I will add +2. I will also use the range guidelines for darts and other thrown weapons as a guide to when to impose range modifiers.

Saving Throws
I use saving throw to resolve actions where player is attempting to have his character do something non-lethal to another character. A character wants to do disarm or trip an opponent. I will generally say he needs to hit the target and the target gets a save. If the save fails then the character is successful in his action.

The implication is that it harder to do certain things against higher level character or monsters. I feel this is OK as in my mind higher level or HD represent characters/monsters with more points or build in other systems.

Modifiers
The benchmark I go by here is that it is -4 to hit an invisible opponent or to fight in complete darkness. Generally this means modifiers range from +4 to -4.
There is also the issues with modifiers granted by characteristics. Some editions like ADnD have extensive modifiers while other don't. I found I was happy with this chart.

15-17 +2
12-14 +1
 9-11 +0
 6-8  -1
 3-5  -2
Some type of roll based on a characteristic.
I don't use this a lot myself but other referees do. The basic options are

• Roll under the characteristic with a d20
• Roll a d20 add the characteristic and get 20 or higher
• Multiply the characteristic by 5 and roll under the number with percentile dice.

A skill roll.
With the introduction of the Thief class skill rolls became part of DnD. The original class used percentile dice modified by race and dexterity. This is something I never really liked.  I preferred something similar to 3rd Edition version which is a d20 roll and beat a target number. I consider skill rolls valuable because they allow the creation of character class that are better at various non-combat things. Ultimately what I adopted was roll a d20 and equal or beat a 15 modified by the relevant characteristic and any bonus given to you by your class.

However the spirit of the oldest editions make for a game where characters can attempt anything. So instead of skill I added abilities. That way anybody can still try to pick a lock but burglars are better than anybody else.

By combining these various elements I can come with the mechanics needed to adjudicate just about anything a players wants to do in my campaign. With the virtue of still making the game feel like you are playing a classic edition.

Good stuff. Very reasonable and well thought out.

When it comes to things that any person could do, I favor the idea of just giving certain classes an edge and thier specialties without making the difficulty for everyone else so terrible that they felt like attempting anything was a easte of time.

The scaling difficulties of 3X were so bad that even allowing any class to learn any skill didn't help.

This usually means that if I'm contemplating giving a class a huge monster bonus at a particular skill, then I'd rather just make it a class exclusive ability instead.

This might simply mean ehnanced performance at something that everyone can do, but going beyond the ability of a mere bonus to provide. For example, Grogtar the fighter can track reasonably well under normal conditions but Lord Baltimore the ranger can track over bare rock, at night.

Nothing wrong with that approach especially for a more heroic type campaign where, as you mentioned, rangers can track over bare stone.

What I opted for is more in the spirit of the original 1974 OD&D rules where there is not a lot of difference between fighter, magic-user, and cleric (and later thief). This reflects the low fantasy and gritty aspects of the Majestic Wilderlands  better than later editions.

The nice thing about this is that a referee can set the tone of his D&D campaign by how he roleplays his rulings. By making the description of the action more or less fantastic. A good example is allowing tracking over bare stone vs adjudicating more realistically.

Two referee can have very different campaigns with the same classic edition rules. Now other RPGs can do this as well but older D&D I feel better invites the referee into putting his own stamp on it.

There is a lot of good info here, food for thought for sure. When I run OD&D I only make checks if I feel there is a reasonable chance of failure and then I typically have the player roll 3d6 trying for under the relevant ability score. Allows a quick resolution, gives me a leeway for differing measures of success or failure and it makes ability scores a bit more useful.

Quote from: estar;654434The original class used percentile dice modified by race and dexterity. This is something I never really liked.  I preferred something similar to 3rd Edition version which is a d20 roll and beat a target number.

The original did not stipulate percentile dice: just probabilities!

So it's the same damned thing, unless you mean you'd rather have 1 chance in 20 of breaking your neck when climbing than 1 in 100. For the other functions that don't give so many chances in 6, you change nothing by using d20.

What is with the fetish for pedantry over tossing dice this way or that way anyway? It seems to have swept the hobby to the point that people think the first thing to do in making up an RPG is to come up with a new variation on Yahtzee or something.

Quote from: Phillip;654506What is with the fetish for pedantry over tossing dice this way or that way anyway? It seems to have swept the hobby to the point that people think the first thing to do in making up an RPG is to come up with a new variation on Yahtzee or something.

My table my rules. The rules I choose make it easy for me to adjudicate the action in the way I think is most fun for the players. Obviously you prefer the original mechanics for thieves, I don't and never have either today or back in the day.

I see all the methods I outlined used by one referee or another in a classic edition game.  The "best" way is the one that the referee and his players like the best.

Quote from: estar;654551Obviously you prefer the original mechanics for thieves

That's nonsense, because I'm simply pointing out that you are misrepresenting as "the original mechanics" something that's just your own arbitrary choice, not any requirement of the rules.

Why must every pointing out of a matter of fact get treated as an opinion on what non-factual alternative one prefers?

As I wrote, I wonder why navel-gazing over minutia that make no difference at all in the results is seen as of such importance as to warrant pontification generally -- and particularly when the supposed actual subject is "rulings not rules?"

All you're doing in fact is promoting your own set of rules, and rules about which dice to toss are irrelevant to the really important aspect of making rulings: deciding what the probabilities should be, regardless of what random-number generator one happens to pick up!

Anyone can play D&D 3E or GURPS or Champions or whatever with dreidels instead of dice, or cards or a spinner or a dart board. Choosing one or another has squat to do with the difference between looking up something in a book (which is actually for the most part just what you recommend) and assessing it on the spot.

Quote from: Phillip;654562That's nonsense, because I'm simply pointing out that you are misrepresenting as "the original mechanics" something that's just your own arbitrary choice, not any requirement of the rules.

Why must every pointing out of a matter of fact get treated as an opinion on what non-factual alternative one prefers?

As I wrote, I wonder why navel-gazing over minutia that make no difference at all in the results is seen as of such importance as to warrant pontification generally -- and particularly when the supposed actual subject is "rulings not rules?"

Why so angry?  You act like you were abused by a d20 or something.  As he mentioned in a part that you didn't quote, that's just the method that he prefers, he didn't make any kind of "d% sucks so I do it this way" statement, just stated that he likes rolling d20 for skill better.  Which becomes his ruling for his table, and hence a 'house rule', since maintaining flexible consistency is one of the basic ideas.

Quote from: Phillip;654506The original did not stipulate percentile dice: just probabilities!

So it's the same damned thing, unless you mean you'd rather have 1 chance in 20 of breaking your neck when climbing than 1 in 100. For the other functions that don't give so many chances in 6, you change nothing by using d20.

What is with the fetish for pedantry over tossing dice this way or that way anyway? It seems to have swept the hobby to the point that people think the first thing to do in making up an RPG is to come up with a new variation on Yahtzee or something.

Is SLUG then the highest development of roleplaying games?

Quote from:  SlugChapter 2: Action Resolution

When the GM asks a player to roll some dice, the player should roll some dice. The GM can specify the number, size, and shape of the dice, or just let the player choose. The GM will assess the result based on how far above or below the average the result is - the higher, the better (unless the GM says otherwise). The GM rolls in secret on occasion, mostly for information rolls.

If the GM is just going to invent a probability and roll whatever dice, that makes it very difficult to write any other rules that mesh with that, specifying how skills or stats or anything else adjusts the chances. The rules themselves then can't define any levels of achievement, only the bare probability.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;654598Is SLUG then the highest development of roleplaying games?

Well, its no TWERPS but its close.

Quote from: estar;654434By combining these various elements I can come with the mechanics needed to adjudicate just about anything a players wants to do in my campaign. With the virtue of still making the game feel like you are playing a classic edition.

Okay. But here's the question; what's the dividing line between a "ruling" and a "rule"? Because it looks to me like you've created "Set of rules for playing a fantasy adventure game at Estar's table". You've added some structure to a set of core mechanics that you were given.

Now, I don't have a problem with that, I'd certainly be happy to play under those rules because they seem pretty reasonable in concept and scope.

Quote from: estar;654434First off I look at Swords & Wizardry and the classic editions to see what tools I can come with.

• There is the to hit roll.
• Saving Throws
• Modifiers
• Some type of roll based on a characteristic.
• A skill roll.

Is there a special reason why you left the x-in-6 chance out?

Quote from: Ladybird;654698Okay. But here's the question; what's the dividing line between a "ruling" and a "rule"?

There isn't if the referee remains consistent and applies the same ruling to the same circumstances. In which case the ruling has become a rule.

Pretty much that what has happened in my campaign over the past four years that I been running Swords & Wizardry. Enough so I am in the middle of writing some followup supplements to my original Majestic Wilderlands supplement.

Quote from: Ladybird;654698Because it looks to me like you've created "Set of rules for playing a fantasy adventure game at Estar's table". You've added some structure to a set of core mechanics that you were given.

Aside from some examples and explanations of options. I don't see much in the way of rules in my post. Mainly I am pointing out how to use existing rules in classic edition or making note of what I seen folks do in the past like the differing ways of rolling versus a characteristic.

I know its a pretty novel concept for some, but I've been using the notion of Rulings not Rules for a very long time now...

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;655589I know its a pretty novel concept for some, but I've been using the notion of Rulings not Rules for a very long time now...

RPGPundit

Since i play Homebrew all the time where none of the rules apart from a char gen process and the mechanical skill and combat mechanisms are even close to written down I would concur.
I mean can you imagine playing Amber without rullings.....