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
    Excellent suggestion. I never liked Appearence either, but as Mankcam says, it works much better as Appeal.
  6. 2 points
    I never liked APP replacing CHA, but your suggestion suddenly makes it work
  7. 2 points
    I always make charisma rolls against a different species a difficult roll as well as social skills if the races are opposed.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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
  11. 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.
  12. 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?
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    Ummm, that's not a cow! 🙂
  15. 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.
  16. 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).
  17. 1 point
    I mostly don't allow animals (ordinary non-sentient beasts) to "parry" as such. I do allow a dodge. After you hit them once or twice, they figure out that the hitty-thing hurts. If it hurt a LOT, they'll try to dodge. If it only hurt for 1-3(ish) HP's of damage, their version of "Parry" is to BITE it, like it was the swipe of another animal's paw, or something. In the wild, this is a very effective strategy. However, this amounts -- more or less -- to sticking their head in the way of the Adventurers' weapon. 😨 Granted, they meet the blow fangs-first -- and the sakkar, IIRC, has some pretty serious fangs! -- but it's generally not a winning strategy vs. armed humans carrying weapons to get through the armor of human foes...
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. 1 point
    In my Age of Arthur writeup, Merlin is the brother of Fflur and helped Julius Caesar invade Prydein as he wanted his sister to marry someone more important than Caswallawn. Caesar took her back to Rome and Merlin realised that he made a mistake and helped Caswallawn bring her back. He then spent the next 500 years plotting against Rome and trying to drive them out of Prydein. In my version, he met the young Jesus when he was brought to Prydein by Joseph of Arimathea and they came to an arrangement that Jesus was a part of Prydein, but his priests should wear their hair in the druidic fashion, explaining the Celtic Church's distinct tonsure.
  24. 1 point
    Your sleepy mistake prompted me to seek out a copy of BRP Mecha. Arigato gozaimasu!
  25. 1 point
    10 weeks? Timing with the RQ "Classic" kickstarter is a bit suspicious...
  26. 1 point
    Heh heh this is excellent Sunwolfe
  27. 1 point
    Oh, I like that. I had never thought of it like that. Very cool
  28. 1 point
    I have much the same story as you. Played D&D since the late 70s. Made my way through more systems than I care to remember. Was never quite happy with anything I tried. A few years ago I decided to design my own system and set to work. Came up with a good core rule set. Cruising other forums for advice, someone told me I was reinventing BRP, which I never even heard of. I found Trifletraxors wonderful site here and have been quite happy since. Hopefully you have the same success!
  29. 1 point
    Belgian? What Belgian? They were DUTCH pancakes, and I should know, as I was making them! I am glad you enjoyed them.
  30. 1 point
    I'm still hopeful that the hints Rick Meintz has dropped here and there (mostly in obscure places it has to be said) about a compiled WoW will come to something. Everything now looks like a company trying every which way to reduce costs to stay in business. I hope one day things look up again and BRP gets another look in, but that's going to be a steep hill to climb. Even producing acceptable PDFs of old product takes time and money that the return might not justify, and PoD even more so. Well, that means for now it's back to A:e for me, and Alephtar's upcoming Kickstarter ...
  31. 1 point
    I think your rant is brilliant and beautiful, as sad as it is. I feel the same way, and you articulated it very well. I used to play DnD if I wanted fantasy, Star Wars d6 if I wanted Sci-Fi and Cthulhu if I wanted horror. When BGB came out I saw how I could make anything we wanted with those rules, all running like "old" cthulhu (our favorite game). We made worlds of Superheroes, space operas, modern day espionage, post apocalyptic. I told everyone BRP is the ONLY system you'll ever need. My uncle passed it on to me, I passed it on to my brother and dad, my brother passed it on to his kids, I got 3 generations playing BRP. When my dad thinks role playing, he's thinking BRP cause we never needed anything else. In the last 5 or 6 years I've bought more chaosium products than ever before, yes, I still got a lot of cthulhu stuff, but it was BRP supplements and monographs that got me excited and inspired. If we never see a BRP book again I could continue to play till I die and never really notice, I guess. But still it sucks. I have RQ6 but I prefer BRP. CoC7 is ok, I just really hate the x5 stats. See we have a lot of games where one character from one genre might show up in another world, and it was never a problem. Now how am I gonna take a 1920's character on a TARDIS ride and drop him off in the Southern Reaches. I'll have to do math, boo! Anyway, now I'm rambling. But I feel your pain, I'm there with you, still waiting, still hoping.
  32. 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...
  33. 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.
  34. 1 point
    I'm glad you enjoyed reading them.
  • Create New...