Trifletraxor

Oh, and yeah, one more question: When would you not allow a character to be resurrected? Sever to head, chest or abdomen was my rule. SGL.

With the RuneQuest weapon tables, my players usually chose the same weapons over and over, because some weapons due to less damage or armor points just became filling on the weapon table. Bows f.ex did 1d8+1. A throwing knife, dagger, axe or spear did less damage and had shorter reach, so why would anyone choose those missile weapons? The heavy crossbow was sometime employed due to its high one-shot damage, but the other crossbows where too slow for use (the one that didn't had puny damage so no reason to use it). Among the bows, the composite bow was the one who where always chosen. Missile weapons showed this very well, but the same also applied for the melee weapons (though not as strongly). Some weapons where never chosen. With the STR and DEX requirement being as low as they where, there was really no reason not to pick a bigger weapon. I considered (but haven't tried out) assigning damages to weapons like this: natural weapons (for humans): 1d3 small 1h weapons: 1d4 short reach 1h weapons: 1d6 regular size 1h weapons: 1d8 bastard weapons 1h or 2h: 1d10 long reach 2h weapons: 1d12 Then differentiating the weapons based on the type of damage it did, or what weapon group it belonged to. So long as I've played, none of my players have used a scimitar unless forced to due so, because the broadsword is just better. Anyone else who've had this problem? SGL.

The old rules said unconscious at 2 hit points and dead at 0. What kind of houserules have people employed here? I experimented with immeadiate death upon severed head, chest or abdomen (with impaling & crushing damage maiming at double hit location HP damage, but severing at tripple HP damage), and at -CON HP. Below zero the character was unconscious, but had a (CON - negativ hit points) x5% chance of surviving the round. They usually did not survive any longer, but at least they had a chance. Also, with Resurrection, I've always played 3rd edition RuneQuest, but I like the mechanics of the 2nd edition RuneQuest Resurrect spell better (it fits better in Glorantha, but I'm not sure how good it would be for other settings). What are your opinions on this? SGL.

Oh, now I got it. You were refering to my avatar, not me being banned from the MRQ forum 3 times. Stupid me... Well I was just being "in character", you see, my trollkin PC has a INT of 9. Can't help it. SGL.

Yeah, yeah!! Details Jason, details! Sverre.

Are you implying that I exibit anything less than perfect behaviour when I frequent forums? That's outrageous! :eek: <club-club!> Sverre.

Well, if 6000 gamers roll for 30 minutes... 20% and 5% is fine. I would prefer 10% and 1%, but I'm pretty used to 20 & 5. Cheers, Sverre.

What's the big discussion about really? Hero points will not be part of the default system, which should satisfy the grognards like me, but it's included as an optional system, as a lot of people like to use them. Hero points have been included in many peoples houserules for BRP allready, so I don't see any problem with that. It all depends on what type of game you like to play. No need to call names. Now, time to break up the thread! :cool: SGL.

"Why is BRP not that popular?" is the biggest thread here on the forum, but most of the topics in the thread is not directly related to the original topic. Time to open some new threads? (Looks like we're only bitching about d&d being bigger than brp. ) SGL.

With hit locations gone, won't that make the damage a bit too low? It would on average take 3 normal hits to kill someone with a .45 with those revised damages. Some armor in addition would make it really hard. (must say, I have not that much experience with firearms and RPG so I do not really know how it works during play) Sverre.

If not, there's always the hungry wiki! SGL.

I agree. Drop the current rather weird cover, and opt for a simple one. Chaosium logo plus some selected words would do fine. MUCH better than the current cover. It would look more inviting too I think. SGL.

I like both those suggestions! SGL.

D100 skill resolution. :cool: SGL.

An illusion of danger could be fudged by the GM, if skillfully done. But a player with a high level AD&D character would have to be delusional if he thought his player was in any sort of danger (unless the DM had deceided to kill him that is). That's where being carefull comes into play. I seldom ever lose characters when I play. Well, some of them have died several times, but DI or resurrection have brought them back. One member of our group burns through characters though, they are usually frontline warriors that don't back down. He's an AD&D player we converted to BRP some time ago. Still, with all the dead characters, he've said he wastly prefer BRP and the danger you find there. You're probably right it's not for all people, but it have been one of the main characteristics of BRP. A deadly, gritty game. Having hero points as an optional rule is okay for me, but if it had been made a default rule, I think it would ruin some of the game's original spirit. Sverre.

I care to disagree. To find your starting % in a particular skill (and there where many skills), first you had to look up the base chance, then you had to calculate a skill modifier to add or subtract (and also look up how it was calculated), and then in the end you had to add a number multiplied with your years of experience. Figuring out the starting skills for a character took way too much time. :cool: IMO. Sverre.

That's true, but the big difference btw the "default" and the "optional" rules are that the default rules are those who will be supported in future supplements. (By the way, Gianni's basicrps site have a transcript of the original "core" rules, stripped down to the absolutely minimum needed for play). Sverre.

What where the changes from BRP? Was there some improvements that could be houseruled into BRP? SGL.

Though I do not like hero/fate points (what was the new BRP name for it by the way), you do have a point there. I just feel some of the feeling of danger disappears if you f.ex. knows you have 4 HP left. Char-gen was horrible, at least the old RQ3 one. Took ages calculating stuff. And I had to do it all, cause the others hadn't learned the rules by heart! Special, criticals & fumbles. Easy math you would say, yes I agree, but it's still math, and many people are not good with instant math. Sverre.

Haven't played that one before no. I've been one of those traditional RuneQuest in Glorantha nuts. (with a tiny dish of Cthulhu now and then) When I worked on houseruling MRQ, I operated with 10% critical hits and 1% perfect hits. Very easy to calculate, and the combat flavour remained. I also made fumbles easier to know by heart. I have no problems calculating criticals and specials, but with some do, and it bogs down the game a bit. Not much, but I find it kindoff unnecessary. I prefer not having to calculate at all. Sverre.

Some alternate rules for the wiki on the way?

Hmm. RQ combat took pretty long time before, I do hope it's not getting any slower... Sverre.

I've only used luck rolls for non-combat related stuff, fumbling the climb roll with a certain death drop, etc. How have you guys used it? :confused: Sverre.

I've sent him an e-mail to tell me when it's out so we can add it. Looks like there will be a setting and some scenarios too! :-) Sverre.

I feel GM fudging is appropriate in certain situations, where the PC otherwise would get killed instantly with no say on the outcome. I then make care taht the player do not know I'm fudging. In my games it's often starting characters who die first. Not because their worse, but because the player hasn't got attached to it yet and so is not as carefull as he/she could be. Hero Points as an optional system is no problem for me. It seems like many people use them allready. I am however strongly against having them as part of the default, as BRP have allways been a "deadly" and realistic game compared to the rest. (trying to break up the old thread into new ones ) Sverre.