Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

114 Excellent

About Al.

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • RPG Biography
    Since 1987 Dragon Warriors then d100 games then lots of Indie
  • Current games
    Running PenDragon, Playing D&D 5e
  • Location
    In the space between my ears
  • Blurb
    Nervous of social media

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It works brilliantly. BoL does this for all damage (Conan stops for a quick swig of wine after the fight has ended and he's good to go) but that doesn't really fit with the way I want by BRP/RQ/d100 games to go. In a more pulpy campaign I'm sure that it would be excellent.
  2. How to make RQ scenarios less lethal? 1. Make it clear (show don't tell) how lethal RQ combat is. 2. By making the first couple of fights fist fights (or possibly allowing staves and cudgels) so that players get to experience how quickly characters can drop down when dice rolls go against them. 3. Shamelessly stolen (I think from Barbarians of Lemuria but I might be wrong) I rule that a character who is still conscious at the end of a fight immediately regains half of the damage inflicted by unarmed attacks (it turns out that the bruising, winding and pain weren't that bad) but anyone KO'd or worse has taken proper physical damage and gets no such break. That way when the first sight of foes with sharp metal implements happens Players are already thinking 'how can I avoid this fight?' 'how can I stack the odds in our favour?' 'where's the best spot for an ambush?' 'why haven't we all got bows?' and thinking like the gritty ne'er-do-wells they need to become (for a short while at least)
  3. If it's an 'ideal' setting. Then it's post-scarcity. The concept of currency exchange is only necessary if things are in scarce supply and there needs to be a method of ranking desire for a thing. (By all means sidestep any concept of how valid that system of ranking desire is to leave politics out of it, because that won't matter in your setting) Maybe money is only necessary when dealing with barbarians (like C21 Earthlings)?
  4. My copy (via Aeon publishing) arrived today. Unfortunately I'm half way through redecorating number one son's bedroom so I've not yet made the time for a thorough read-through. It looks beautiful though.
  5. Inspired by an old edition of Tales of the reaching moon (where PC's could gain a Humakti heroquest power of automatically inflicting a critical for the low-low price of losing 1 point of CON): how about losing as many points of CON as the victim has Rune Points? Losing POW does not quite make sense to me, but losing CON and coming closer to death (and being Humakti that's permanent death) seems appropriate.
  6. I've not read the whole document, so I might be off on my analysis. But it strikes me as a huge labour of love work, very comprehensive and very kindly shared for one and all to look at. I'm not convinced that I'd change much or any of the hodge podge of rules that I currently use. But the teenage me would have absolutely loved to have got his hands on this. It's very much the deluxe BRP book I wanted way back when. I suspect that (if word spreads far enough) this could be very useful to lots of GMs and players looking for something d100y which covers everything ready-to-use.
  7. 'Shadow' on Netflix. A Black South African version of The Equaliser.
  8. Abolsutely agree. Take a leaf out of Herbert's books. He wanted the denouement to be hand-to-hand combat between heroes which could not have happened logically if The Guild had space superiority and energy weapons. So he found a combination of technologies which made the use of energy weapons from space a non-starter. If I read this right you want anti-grav cars in urban centres and you want rotating habitats which don't make sense if artificial gravity is a thing. Maybe anti-grav/repulsorlift/gravitic-reaction only works against the kind of big, stable gravity well that forms around/due to a planet? So the habitats don't make a big enough dip in space-time for the fields to work against? And maybe those fields ONLY work AGAINST gravity wells? Thus artificial gravity just can't be done. Or maybe the anti-grav cars aren't anti-grav they're maglev and the habitats just don't have a strong enough magnetosphere to push against? Unfortunately that might mean no anti-grav cars IN the habitats.
  9. That fourth party member looks a little bit overpowered.
  10. Fair one. I slipped into using two acronyms which I've internalised to the extent of not considering my audience: IMO - In My Opinion became IMMOO - In My Monkey Overlord's Opinion - during a fairly heated debate on another RPG forum (some people stating that all statements should be prefaced with IMO to avoid being presented as incontrovertible fact and others responding that of course everything they stated was in their opinion, it wasn't forced upon them by their Monkey Overlord). MGF - Maximum Game Fun - the idea that whatever rules decisions we make should be to maximise how much fun we are having at the table rather than elegance of algorithms, being true to the source materials, believability, realism or other fine sentiments. So I suppose in plain language: In my opinion, which I do not expect everyone or anyone to share, I think that; the most fun version of the experience rules would be if half of the improvements are chosen by the player and half allocated according to which skills are successfully used most often.
  11. I think (and all obviously IMMOO) the hybrid halfway house model allows for MGF.
  12. YUp. 'Dexterity' already includes both fine-motor (Dexterity) and gross-motor (Reflexes or Agility or Speed). 'Intelligence' already includes academic ability and depth of thinking (Intelligence) and acuity, processing-speed and awareness (Perception)*. So folding Charisma into Power and/or Size into Strength make perfect sense and quite inline with the existing precedence. *admittedly the d100-family is not completely consistent here: sometimes Perception depends upon intelligence (the Idea roll for example), sometimes on Power and sometimes on both.
  13. I guess this boils down to, do you want to add new rules or make use of existing ones? Using existing rules: Call for lots of Charisma (App x5) rolls when meeting new people And adjust any subsequent rolls against Social Skills according to how well (or not) the Charisma roll went (Inspired by the PenDragon Inspiration rules: a Critical raises the skill's level of success by 2 steps, a success raises by 1 step, a failure reduces by 1 step, a fumble reduces by 2 steps) Possible new rules: Don't roll for CHA/APP; this (inspired by listening to the Iliad a few years ago) is calculated as the average (mean) of the rolled characteristics. Special, competent characters have greater Charisma than dullards The RQ3 recommended penalty of -10 for observers from another species is then applied (Tusk Riders of course get -10 from their own species as they hate themselves too) Starting characters begin with as many points of AP (armour) as they have points of APP. So that the handsome, fashionable warrior has handsome, fashionable armour whilst the scruffy. moth-eaten thug has scruffy, moth-eaten armour. One which could apply for all characteristics and characteristic rolls. When using a Social skill roll against said skill and Charisma (APP x5%) roll on a single d100. Succeeding at one of these is a partial success. Succeeding at both is a Full Success. So long as the roll is a success for the lower score then Specials and Criticals come from the higher score i.e. Charming (APP 17) but crude (Art (Courtly Manners) 25%) Osman is called upon to blend in during a reception at the King's Court. If his player rolls: below '17' then he has Critically Succeeded - nobody even notices his presence, he snags some fancy food and overhears a clue between '17' and '25' then he has Fully Succeeded - he is in no way out of place between '25' and '85' only Partially succeeded - he makes a few booboos but charms his way out of it over '85' failed completely - forgetting to bow to nobles gets him noticed in all the wrong ways '99' or '00' - calling the King 'mate' is going to cause some problems imminently
  14. Like all great insights; that's obvious now that you've said it! Ta.
  15. Some of those (following the link) are properly terrifying.
  • Create New...