Jump to content

Al.

Regulars
  • Content Count

    537
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

130 Excellent

About Al.

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Converted

  • 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. All of the following IMHO of course: Ever since I was told that SIZ specifically determines mass in RQ I made Siz for Dwarfs 3d6 (I hate 2d6+6 for Siz and Int for humans with unreasoning and disproportionate passion, if you don't share that presumably you'd go for 2d6+6) I think that the characteristic scores for Melniboneans in Elric! are a better fit for Old World Elves than those for RQ's 'mini-Ents' (I also think that the rules for Ducks in RQ are a better fit for Old World Halflings than the RQ Halflings are) The simplest rule for armour penetrating Firearms is
  2. I think that all unarmed 'brawling' attacks inflict 1d3+db
  3. Not quite RAW but from a semi-official source and very old. There was a WD article for Martial Arts in RQ3 which allowed a Martial Arts roll to 'get up quickly' (in DEX SR) and statement along the lines of 'otherwise we assume it takes a whole round'. And that seems to tally nicely with Lord Abdul's find. On a fumble I can see the character floundering, flailing and tangling up their legs, other limbs and gear which will take some time to sort out; whilst if they are just knocked back off their feet and clamber back up (the best case which matches mechanically the best result for the fumb
  4. When Lockdown 3 started I downloaded the first 6 of these. Having just finished number 6, I'm ridiculously excited by the thought of the rpg.
  5. No apology required Clearly we need to go to an easier system of numbers and smells 😜
  6. Unfortunately lower case l (elle) and upper case I (eye) are the same in the font that most forums use. So there I was thinking that I'd chosen the simplest user name possible (my name) and it's caused confusion ever since. There must be a lesson there somewhere.
  7. Captain Obvious here: hobby forums are a bad place for making bold statements purporting to be objective truth (give me some credit: I am aware of the irony of me just making a bold statement of objective truth on a hobby forum stating that ...... but work with me). Readers and posters on rpg forums (fora?) tend to be opinionated, bright and calling upon their (our) experience of the rule or setting under discussion. The likelihood of those experiences and opinions aligning and there being agreement seems pretty low. That doesn't IMO mean that anyone is wrong though. One of th
  8. My copy arrived yesterday Annoyingly Osprey's website wouldn't work for me (Firefox on OSX) so I had to swallow my principles and order via Amazon; hopefully this won't mean that author loses out financially. It's a beautiful book and I love the size (WHEN face-to-face RPGs return it's a much easier size in slip into my bag and cycle to venue than a standard A4, letter or legal) The illustrations are great (not sure that I'd describe all of them as 'beautiful') I really like the changes made to the rules (not necessarily better or worse than OQ, but they all make sense)
  9. Ironically MW took the guts and substance of the Elric! rules and tweaked and improved them (from adding Crossbows and Fantasy staples to streamlining character generation and adding wonderfully whimsical rules for intelligent talking animals) but didn't take the presentation and fluff (broken record time: layout and presentation of Elric! is still THE BEST I've ever seen even if I don't personally like some of the bigger illustrations). And by not doing the 'soft' stuff so well wasn't taken seriously for the hard 'stuff'. By concentrating on Content over Style the Content was lost. I tho
  10. I believe that I'm correct in saying that these are two explanations of the same system. (Apologies if not). I fully agree that this (these) set of mechanics is by far the most flexible I've seen for BRP/d100. There are a set of houserules (by Charlie Serjios I think, although I'm sure that I have mangled the spelling even if I have managed to remember the name) which used to be hosted on Tom Zunder's webpage for improving them which make them even better. The ki rules from RQ LoN and/or Arete rules from Magic World Advanced Sorcery are also really flexible with a more low key f
  11. A chap would have to be a complete killjoy and pedant to point out that current thinking amongst biblical scholars is that the number of the Beast is 616 not 666 (some kind of translation error). So I won't mention it. I do however like the more recent translation that Moses parted 'the Reed Sea' rather than the 'Red Sea' not as impressive for Charlton Heston to perform but more believable.
  12. The Demon ability rules from Elric! make a great basis for a generic powers system (not a huge surprise, they are an evolution of the Demon powers and CV system from SB4 which were themselves an evolution and improvement of the superpowers from Superworld) The roll table in particular does a brilliant job of correlating effect with cost (although being an inveterate rule fiddler I went for using dice of a more similar size 1d8+1d6 not 1d10+1d4 and so on, I'd struggle to say that such a change is needed as such though). I personally find it necessary to cap the effect of any power (no
  13. g33k beat me to it! It would be easier for ME (and I suspect a few others) if Chaosium just published its OGL under exactly the same terms that WOTC did. But I don't own the IP. So what is easiest for me ain't the point. The Chaosium chaps have obviously seen some downsides with that model (and it's not hard to think of a few, Pathfinder for one) and have decided to go another route. Now either my desires are an edge case which Chaosium will need to rule on (with due consideration of will this set a precedent which they don't want to be bothered with in the future)
  14. Hi Lloyd I can't argue with any word that you've typed there. At some point (and I'm under no illusions that this isn't going to be soon, I'd be very surprised if any of the senior Chaosium bods haven't got a number of things both more urgent and more important than responding to this query) I'd like to get an official response. Which I imagine which will be one of: A) Yup, the strength of the system means that these won't break anything Bee) We're happy with some of those, but all of them together moves too far from the agreed core, pick <a number> but leave the rest
×
×
  • Create New...