Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 07/11/2014 in Blog Comments

  1. 5 points
    I tend to think of APP (in BRP games which use it) as "Appeal", rather than "Appearance"; it's a mixture of looks and personality.
  2. 3 points
    You can run any scenario from any RQ-like game with any other RQ-like game with varying levels of difficulty. Mythras/Legend/RQ6 - Very Similar/Easy to use RQ2/RQ3 - Very Similar/Easy to use RQ2/3 with BRP or OpenQuest - Similar/Fairly easy to use Revolution is similar to Mythras/Legend/RQ6, but treats skills quite differently, so is a bit harder to fit into Mythras/Legend/RQ6, but should be easy enough to use Mythras/Legend/RQ6 for Revolution. After all, does it matter that a troll NPC in RQ3 has Sneak rather than Move Quietly, or a troll in Legend has Stealth, or a troll in Revolution has Stealth [Move Quietly]? As a GM, not at all. What I do when using supplements written for one system in another is: Use Characteristics/Skills/Hit Points/Armour/Hit Locations as they are in the supplement, no need to convert, no need to recaulculate Use spells as they are in the rules you are using, if the spell isn't there then use the original spell description Recalculate Strike Ranks, if your systems use different types of Strike ranks, so for RQ2/3 keep them the same, Mythras/Legend/RQ6 keep them the same, but using an RQ2/3 scenario with Mythras/Legend/RQ6, recalculate them. Do all recalculations on the fly, rough and ready, they don't need to be exactly right
  3. 3 points
    Just a coincidence! She's an Elric! player:
  4. 3 points
    Sunwolfe said: Since June, I’ve been hoping for some official shout out, even a small one, from Chaosium: “We’re keeping BRP, but (understandably) it is the lowest of our priorities…don’t worry though, we remember all our loyal fans…”. At our Gencon 2015 news seminar, available as a podcast, and mentioned in several other people's podcasts, I mentioned what we basically intend to do with BRP. http://www.mu-podcast.com/whats-new-at-chaosium-panel-gencon-2015/ BRP starts getting asked about at 49:00 minutes in and again at 51:00. Up front I should clarify that you won't be hearing detailed plans for what we intend to do with BRP. What I found interesting though is that I used similar phrasing to what I quoted above. Side note: we're going to have the BRP softcover big gold book for sale again soon on the Chaosium website, probably right around the end of the month. Also, please note that the BRP BGB remains in the new forum banner.
  5. 2 points
    I was one of the Podtesters. My comments were that I don't normally listen to Podcasts, but it kept me listening to the end, amongst others. Yours are the same.
  6. 2 points
    Good video. You pronounced Glorantha correctly, at least it's how we say it. Lozenge was a bit trickier, I pronounce it Loz-Inje, but some people say Loz-enje, it's as the old fashioned cough sweets or shape. Interesting that you have spent a lot of money on Glorantha/RQ material, I hope you like them and look forward to your videos about them.
  7. 2 points
    Excellent suggestion. I never liked Appearence either, but as Mankcam says, it works much better as Appeal.
  8. 2 points
    I never liked APP replacing CHA, but your suggestion suddenly makes it work
  9. 2 points
    I always make charisma rolls against a different species a difficult roll as well as social skills if the races are opposed.
  10. 2 points
    I've always found Appearance to be a bit limited compared to Charisma. Charisma can be whatever blend of appearance and personality the player wants it to be. Appearance also runs into problems when run in a fantasy game like Runequest or Magic World where you have a number of different humanoid species running around, all with different appearances. Should my dragonnewt have multiple appearance score for how different species perceive them? It's easier to imagine Charisma cutting across those lines than Appearance. I don't get too worked up about it either way though. I save my real stat hate for EDU.
  11. 2 points
    Since the dawn of roleplaying (at least for me) my players have always used this as a dump stat. You'll see the same stories on a multitude of forums. I've ALWAYS put a value on all characteristics in my games. Now that being said my players are just as likely to slap someone as try to negotiate with them so it's not always easy to give Charisma a solid chance. If you WANT Charisma to be a used characteristic then make it more important in your games. Give the character with the highest a love interest (who is actually beneficial), or some charmed hireling who decides to help the party just to be close to the charismatic character. Let them negotiate lower prices when trying to buy/sell goods. Have people buy the character with higher charisma a meal or drink at the tavern. But it's important not to leave other players out because they dumped Charisma. Play on everyones strengths and weaknesses. Only you, the chronicler, can give value to aspects of a character.
  12. 2 points
    Although I am one of those RQ6ers who is more or less secure that I'll have a system to keep playing in, I'm far from happy with the entire thing. I have been primarily a BGB devotee until this year, and all this is indeed sad news. I seem to prefer the MRQ D100 SRD builds at present, but I don't like how the generic BRP rules could be going the way of the dinosaur. One of the things that brought me back to BRP was that it had the BGB, a set of generic rules from which I could build my own genres from. It was not as nice looking as GURPS, yet it had much better rules with the percentile system. Perhaps the BGB could be reinvented with MRQ D100 SRD as the core perhaps (or perhaps this is blasphemy)... but either way I think it is a major step backwards if there are no generic rules in print - this is what attracts us to dabble and tinker with. Prepackaged settings are great, but there are many rules out there doing that. New consumers, the tinkerer types, will go for Savage Worlds, GURPS, Cypher and the like; not only due to their flashy covers, but also due to the fact that Chaosium appears unlikely to be publishing a generic ruleset as part of its strategic plan. Very sad indeed. And even sadder is that for CoC and RQ to live, it seems that MW and BGB may have to die. Your analogies do strike a chord. You captured an intangible feeling that I suspect many of us are experiencing, and minimising with the real world around us ( of which all this will seem trivial). I suspect many of us are quietly feeling the pain Of course all these games can live on at our gaming tables, but even that may feel hollow at times if the system has no current incarnation on the shelves. We'll just have to keep hoping for the best, and see how all this pans out. Thanks for the honesty in your blog Sunwolfe
  13. 1 point
    Yes, why not? I am not a YouTube person, but I was considering writing scenarios for the Miskatonic Repository. Even tough CoC is almost 40 years old, I see there is still a huge gap of unexplored ideas on the market. But I could start doing anything earliest after the summer.
  14. 1 point
    Dear Deathstrok9, I do not claim that you stole my idea, I am happy that it was used by you, and more people can learn from it. I just like when the sources are provided (especially when I am the source 😄). Either solution (reference in the description/ pinned comment) works, I do not have any preference. I would argue on that, I think the resemblance is still striking. If you took a poem and added your commentary after each line, because "it seemed vague" it would still require a citation. But I do not want to make more fuss about that than required, so let me stop here. I hope your channel will grow. Thank you for understanding, and have a good day.
  15. 1 point
    I am with you on that! Though, personally, I don't fudge rolls, I fudge stats! But this made me wonder if CoC Luck points (where you get like 50 of them to trade point for point to affect skill roll) build better dramatic tension (as they go down) that an other rule where you got like 3 or 4 of them to make a reroll....
  16. 1 point
    Wow, thanks a lot! The project is nowhere near ready, but once it is, I will be sure to let you know. Thanks again!
  17. 1 point
    For Call of Cthulhu, I have to publish through Miskatonic Repository. And after my next project, I will be stopping using it. I really don't like the contract they make you agree to.
  18. 1 point
    Good video! I knew that CoC spells were more cosmic in nature than the standard D&D type spells, but I could never find any resources for them on the internet for me to use. After reading a lot, I came to the conclusion that they were more tailor made for the individual scenarios that being a standard list of spells. I found it very interesting that the spells are made to be more like scenes than utilities, it would make everything much more cinematic. Also, you said that you published a scenario on DrivethroughRPG, was it very difficult? Do you think promoting from a website would be better?
  19. 1 point
    My students from the Fall 2019 Tabletop Game Writing Lab have updated their Call of Cthulhu scenario, Refractions of Glasston, responding to the great feedback they received. They even created a hyperlinked PDF along with a Black and White Printer Friendly edition. The revised edition and printer friendly edition are posted and ready for download. https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/297601/Refractions-of-Glasston
  20. 1 point
    Not really, so much as it is one of the most (in)famous stories from the table top gaming world. You can read about it here: https://m.1d4chan.org/wiki/Old_Man_Henderson It is quite a hilarious story all and all, and it is where I got my name tag. Because of this story, there is even a scale named after Henderson to show how derailed a campaign can be.
  21. 1 point
    Read the tale of Old Man Henderson, that will give you all you need to survive, thrive, and maybe even kill an actual god!
  22. 1 point
    Also, on a side note the Legion has grown to over 200 members. Thank you guys for all the support, We are All Us!
  23. 1 point
    Nicely done, should help some folk The Open License seemed petty clear to me but based on the new thread and the tons of questions, your walkthru should be of help to a large group of people. Cheers
  24. 1 point
    It is inevitable that their power has drawn me deeper... I will say it will take awhile for me to truly appreciate the game as I started dual enrollment and will be rather occupied for the next 8 weeks of intense schooling. I will keep trying to upload at least twice a week, but it will likeybe more gm advice and reviews until I can focus on a new game. If you haven't already, go listen to their podcast, it's awesome!
  25. 1 point
    Well. it is people like you that make people like me want to give up sleep and do things like this! Thank you for the kind words and very entertaining review... It is better, really, watch it, you will see! You won’t be sorry!
  26. 1 point
    Thank you, it was fun to make! Also, it most assuredly is not better than your podcast, with that 'cast, you single handedly made Chaosium a couple hundred dollars from me alone!
  27. 1 point
    Yep, don't bothers going to our cast... this is far more entertaining! Cheers!
  28. 1 point
    I will say that I'm not familiar with all the games you mentioned, but the concept sounds awesome, and I'm thrilled you took the time to do that. Great work man, we owe you now!
  29. 1 point
    I'm going to post my homebrew rules in a few weeks, when my Master of Orion setting is developped well enough... But there is one thing I don't like with BRP it's the elemental spells.... But I think I found a compromise I like! Will text when I GM again (now I have a break when we take turn, the other player is GMing D&d5e of course....) Can explain later if you like (typing on a phone now.... My internet is broken )
  30. 1 point
    What about BRP? Same rule set as CoC but not specifically horror or contemporary...
  31. 1 point
    A good video, interesting and useful.
  32. 1 point
    Eyh, cheers, man. You inspired me to create my own gallery and upload some memes.
  33. 1 point
    But.. what if the Ghosts have the wrong political opinion?! 😮 Mwahahaha
  34. 1 point
    I am not too much into horror so I just passed on that... But just now I just read a glowing critic on no less than new scientist! 😮 https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24532690-600-color-out-of-space-another-nicolas-cage-film-thats-so-bad-its-good/ Might watch it after all! 😅
  35. 1 point
    I assume you mean the tables I used, and not the five individual results. The new tables are published here (pay what you want): https://www.drivethrurpg.com/m/product/297538
  36. 1 point
    It's a campaign management system. I would recommend you register and try it out yourself (https://kanka.io/en/about) to see what it's about. There's a few tutorials for some aspects of the site on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwb3pl0LOlxd3GvMPAXIEog/videos I don't use it at the moment, as none of my players are interested in it. If they were interested, they could read up on world lore, write personal notes etc between sessions. Personally, I work better with online spreadsheets, text files, printed books, and printouts.
  37. 1 point
    The protagonists, or their rivals? Or is your GMing style and/or the troupe's playing style so contrary that you name the player characters the antagonists?
  38. 1 point
    Ummm, that's not a cow! 🙂
  39. 1 point
    Shadowcats are doglike in their trainability. I'd allow a well-trained dog to do a scout-and-report, within limits. As Soltakss says, limit it to INT "tricks," if they're complex, dangerous, or otherwise difficult-to-train. I'd let it do a "Trick" on any relevant roll -- Beast Rune, animal-handling, animal-lore, etc. In-game, you've established that "scout-and-report" is not one of the Tricks it knows; if Nathem is a Player's character, I'd allow him to work on training his shadowcat to do this (I'd expect it to take months of dedicated effort; at least 10 training sessions every week for at least 2ish hours/session (normally I'd do 1h sessions, but not for outdoor/exploration tasks).). Use communication via Beast Rune (or spell) for other things. On the ordinary success achieved in-game, I'd probably have been a bit more generous, but I'm gonna call that a simple difference of opinion, not that your choice was "wrong." I'd have had the Alynx understand Nathem wanted it to go "look around out thata-way," and rolled 3d6ish for 10-meter range-increment it went (30m-180m(ish)) & a bit of randomizing for precise direction and for straight-line vs meandering. Without a trained Trick, I'd default to the cat only having 2 reports available: "Found some prey - lets go hunt!" (n.b. cattle are not valid "prey") or "oh HELL no -- that's dangerous. don't go hunting THAT way!" === About those "limits" (within which a critter's scout-and-report are limited): the most-limited bit is the "report" of course. How well do you read the animal's body-language? How sophisticated is its mind, how much can it grasp, to even attempt to convey? I would call for a separate roll to UNDERSTAND the report. I'd disallow any "count" info beyond one/some/lots... and any particularly-scary-to-the-animal threat might register as "lots" of threat, regardless of count! It can't really convey species, etc. That said, wild animal groups have been documented with different threat-signals for "hawk" (animals take cover vs threat from above; large-enough ones only "take caution" and don't take cover) & "poison snake" (animals look at the ground, avoid dense undergrowth) & "Big Cat" (animals look for trees to climb, avoid big-cat-cover), etc. I'd allow them to also specifically be able to signal "human" and maybe 1-2 other specific creatures (hounds can be trained to hunt specific species). Complex situations are beyond their ability to convey. A mixed party of humans & trolls, mounted on bison, bolo-lizards & beetles, with packs of hounds & trollkin? Your report will translate roughly as: "It's a booshgobbldyfrake. Big one. Let's run away." === IIRC, Nathem's shadowcat does NOT house any allied-spirit / etc. So it's an ordinary beast. As others have noted, a spirit will give it a mind, make it effectively an NPC like any other.
  40. 1 point
    Most weapons (with the exception of swords) have quite a lot of non-business parts that can be "attacked" in order to deflect a bow. Spear and axe shafts, or the arm of a knife fighter are within reach of the parrying party. Cats of all sizes and bears will use their paws to strike attacking limbs, and may well be able to go for the flat of a blade, too. Only dogs are predominantly head attackers, and even they will use their forepaws to hold down thrashing prey (parrying hoofed kicks).
  41. 1 point
    Excellent! Having fun and wanted to play again are really the most important aspects. Sounds like it all played out well. I think you found, like most GM's of RQG do, not to worry too much about the movement. Narrative/story flow is more important than simulation. Seems reasonable. Unless the shadowcat had an awakened/allied spirit (effectively a familiar), then it's a normal animal, trained to some degree. Use of the Beast Rune to communicate the command works fine. With a regular success, I probably would have sent the shadowcat off, and then had it come hightailing back. But given the unusual situation (and likely Sakkar scent), not having the shadowcat go off at command also works. Earth elemental's damage is physical (basically it's a crushing attack). Armor should have the opportunity to protect, but it certainly can immobilize the target too. Correct. That's the easiest approach and works fine. You could check against cultural/occupation modifiers to ensure it seems reasonable, but I wouldn't go out of the way to do so.
  42. 1 point
    D&D went through a similar quandary when it added, and later removed, the Comeliness Attribute. The problem, of course, is that both physical appearance and personality attractiveness tend to overlap each other in subtle ways that are difficult to draw boxes around. If we try to say, for instance, that a physically attractive female who has a horrible and irascible personality has no charismatic influence over people, we are confounded by the fact that somehow she still does indeed have a charismatic affect on others - and even might have people seemingly irrationally bending obsequiously to her every whim, whether they actually enjoy doing so or not (perhaps such followers would feel less abused - or not abused at all - if she also had a high charisma: food for thought). One example of such a character might be the role that Meryl Streep played in The Devil Wears Prada (and here we can get into trouble again with those blurred lines, because Streep is older in that film, and although she has an element of being physically attractive, I would say that the efficacy of her physical appearance has more to do with the way in which she carries herself than with raw physical appeal; and yet she severely struggles with truly connecting with others throughout the entire film - is that what we would expect from someone whose influence comes from their "charisma?"). On the other hand, it may be a little easier for us to understand the effect that someone has through their personal charm or animal magnetism even though they may not appear to be very physically attractive - yet, it does seem that there must be some rudimentary physical attractiveness for their charm to "leverage" - otherwise, they effect can be quite the opposite! Further complications arise when once considers physical attractiveness as it relates to mate selection. Now, physical attractiveness is not simply a simple attribute to be considered as an effect that can be objectively measured when checking for someone's reaction. Instead, it becomes a game in itself that involves the self-perception of the person who would be affected by the attractiveness of someone else. For example, a woman sees a man who has a certain level of attractiveness, but, she is also attractive, and based other interactions she has had before with other men, she might consider herself to be able to do better, even though he has a certain level of attractiveness. So, in such a case as this, we might model a check for reaction on the man's score for attractiveness (is this a composite of physical attractiveness and charisma - this is still undecided for now) and then account for the woman's confidence in her ability to potentially do better by a simple attribute bonus subtraction or by an attribute vs. attribute chart comparison (using some statistical curve). But even then, we hit upon yet another problem: how do we measure the woman's confidence? Would it be some composite of her overall appeal (charisma and physical appearance) modified by her intelligence/power/(wisdom?)...? My point, overall, is that it is both a subtle and complex question. PS - I also forgot to mention the effect of financial and physical power (even intellectual power) that factors into attractiveness/appeal. Streep's character was a successful fashion mogul, and this certain had an effect on her followers. Women can often find men who are physically powerful to be more physically attractive. And let's not forget the appeal that Leonard Nimoy had in his role as Spock: he had more female fan mail that William Shatner, and yet, in a within the constraints of a gaming system, we might easily be led to think that Spock would have less charisma or even physical attractiveness than Kirk.
  43. 1 point
    I have a stupid amount of RuneQuest, Pendragon and BRp stuff that I never use except to read (it was absolutely worth buying just to read it), and I often wonder about this. I have been a convert to Mythraism ever since I read through RQ6 and I would definitely like to get some use out of all my percentile RPG scenarios and settings with Mythras
  44. 1 point
    A giant mecha and Godzilla, and various superheroes, versus a whole gaggle of hounds of Tindalos, and their leader left several supers dead and a smashed up mecha but a nuke finished off the hounds. What's not to like? LOL My players enjoyed it but were a bit mindblown.
  45. 1 point
    Sure you can. The roots, the fundamentals of the systems are the same. Some tweeking will probably be necessary, but not much. You can get the free pdf of Mythras Imperative to get an idea about how Mythras differs from Openquest. In fact, Mythras Imperative is, if I recall correctly, sufficient to get you going with Mythras Classic Fantasy.
  46. 1 point
    10 weeks? Timing with the RQ "Classic" kickstarter is a bit suspicious...
  47. 1 point
    Oh, I like that. I had never thought of it like that. Very cool
  48. 1 point
    Your frustration is understandable and even justified (IMO). As one of those here who actively hope for the Chroniclers Companion I can say I was a bit depressed to see the "riding off into the sunset" posts as well. It even got me thinking, like you, about other systems. That and the stunning lack of viable news concerning the system I've been in a short term love affair with has me frustrated. It's like I found my soul mate and a couple months into the relationship I find out she's seeing someone who makes more money. (And has a squid face) "It's still early." I keep telling myself. "Restructuring an entire company takes time, much less absorbing and combining two." But then, as I said above, the lack of ANY news has me wondering if my hopes are misplaced. I "hope" not...
  49. 1 point
    It is a good week for Engadget and R&R... I saw this today: boeing-and-bae-partner-to-put-a-laser-on-a-machine-gun-make-the.
  50. 1 point
    I'm glad you enjoyed reading them.
  • Create New...