Al.

The way I did done do it was Start with 1d8 Spheres and/or Runes Each counts as 1 towards Int limit (not 8 I think as RAW) The (almost universally admired) house rules about replaying 4 to 1 with 4 to 1 on the roll table But casting a spell/effect where the caster knows Rune and Sphere only costs 1 MP The net effect is "about the same" without the temptation for me to put huge values for Int and Pow for NPC Sorcerers or PCs to boost their characters likewise. Al

Singular of 'dice' isn't it?

Good beer in good company restores lost SAN

I like coffee and I do not mind stout but combining the two sounds revolting. I refuse to try it. If you do not agree with me then you are not a true beer drinker and are disrespecting beer. You are no better than those weirdos who like chocolate orange. Must go the rag and bone man is coming with his dead horse and it needs a flogging.

Why would it annoy you? One of the charms of our beloved d100 extended family is modularity. It is easyasaurus Rex to plop in a rule one likes from one game into another without (too much) fear that the algorithms will all suddenly stop working. I liked the critical s on 01 to 05 in MW (and originally CoC I think) when it got changed in errata in didn't in my game Likewise I really like RQ6 combat styles* and slotted those in to MW without any drama I like Elric 1 spell takes 1 slot in memory more than RQ3 1 point of spell takes 1 slot changing that was easy ( really easy since the three games I ve played with MW are all with ex Elric buddies who tend to assume that the rules are same as in 93 unless explicitly told otherwise) If you like hit locations it is easy to put them in MW, all of the tools which you use (let's be honest after this long running RQ3 you probably have them internalised and can pluck the numbers from no where without reference to a book anyway) will still work with MW * I do like to fiddle though so allow the option of characters concentrating on one weapon in a style at the expense of overall competency. That has not broken anything either

OBVIOUSLY authors will give official but my reading is that you get +20 per d6 (as per page 17) and that page 21 is incomplete

Yup

That is usually my thinking as well but in the interests of accuracy: the book uses a very sensible format which a) is very easy to read on screen lends itself to printing two pages per sheet for hard copy

Downloaded fine for me. Amusing typo/spellcheck error page 19 bottom left.

Caveat Reador: I've not read new MW and the rules therein may be far better than this suggestion. I just add +20 to a skill category (I suppose in NMW that would be added to the skill category modifier) Physical Force and Skill = +20 all Physical skills Technique, Craft, Expertise = +20 all Manipulate skills Out think and out manoeuvre = +20 all Perception skills Manage others = +20 all Communicate skills

Thanks for posting these. Classic example of reading rules before worrying about them, I did not like the idea of half STR being the bonus for Agility type skills, but actually those in the Physical category suit STR and the ones which better fit DEX are all in the Manipulate category anyway. I like.

I preferred Hobbit to any of Tolkiens other books, possibly as it was tighter and leaner. I feared when I heard that it was going to be stretched to 3 films. But: The only thing which niggled me in the first one was the number of fight scenes which all followed the same format Baddies, aargh Most of us run away Two stand and fight They nearly get overwhelmed The others turn up again and save the day The footnotes and asides were developed nicely I thought Perhaps we will get to see the scouring of the shire? Number one son immediately asked if we could pop into the library after the film and he borrowed the book and promptly read it with every are moment. So job done.

Self evidently any death is a tragedy for friends and family. Lynn was one of the very few RPGs company honchos I ever had contact with and he was an absolute gent. RIP

Singing in the game just siiiiiiinging in the game

Have you considered making the players make all of the dice rolls? I don't care whether the goon blocks the sword strike I do care if I hit him, sort of thing. Since players are emotionally invested and excited they should get to rattle the bones This is something I've done for years with target number based games (well Star Wars d6 mainly but have vague recollection of doing so with Shadowrun first ed. a long time ago) but only fairly recently realised that I could do so with d100 by using the resistance table (sort of). Since resistance table is based on characteristic vs. characteristic the difference of 1 point is 5 percentiles With skills I make 1 point = 1 percentile i.e. algorithm is 50 + (PC skill - NPC skill) When the player is active the results are obvious and familiar They may need inverting in some situations My character (Dodge 30%) wishes to avoid being skewered by the Badger Spirit Helvenian (Spear 65%) Chance = 50 +30 -65 = 15 01 Critical - he misses and falls over and I get a free action (run away!) 02-03 Special - he misses and I get a free action (run away!) 04-15 Success - he misses 16-95 Failure - he hits for normal damage 96-00 Fumble - he skewers me for double damage Skills Lots of good advice already but when off-the-cuffing I use the RQII Dragonewts scale: Crested (Novice) 25% Beaked (Trained) 50% Tailed Priest (Expert) 65% Full Priest (Master) 90% Weapon damage Pistol 1d10, Carbine 1d12, Rifle 1d20, Artillery 1d100 Unarmed 1d3 Impromptu 1d6, Sidearm 1d8, Melee 1d10, 2h weapon 1d12, Great weapon 1d20

Thanks for that. Very thorough. Not gonna make me stop using that algorithm. But can see why it worries you. You are dead right my ruling 'highest skill wins on tie' does indeed mean that highest skill wins nearly all the time. And I suppose it's simplicity causing a simplistic result - higher skill wins margin not so important should not surprise me! Ta

Brutal in enforcing 'better guy wins more of the time' certainly and I've liked the way its worked for a long time but ........ the whole point of fora is to pick other people's brains so: you've obviously spotted/internalised a statistical or mathematical artefact here would you be kind enough to talk me through it (slowly and patiently since its obviously jumped out at you fairly immediately so it must seem pretty darned obvious to yourself)? Ta

Order goes: Level of success Adjusted skill Actual skill PC beats NPC Best narration if two PCs

Yes absolutely. Sorry I wasn't clear. A tie is the same level of success. I.e. crit beats spec beats success beats fail and highest skill wins a tied level of success

Rather than using die roll as a proxy for higher skill on a tie, why not use higher skill wins on a tie? Well the answer is that it is pretty brutal. It is a system I have used for a while (largely because of the newbie unfriendly nature of the blackjack and levels and success hybrid as outlined by others) and like but it is unforgiving. i.e. I face off against the weirwolf in a sprint. With my measly 10percent skill I have some small chance of rolling a critical to get the perfect start, whilst he traps his fingers on the wheel rim (fumble). However if we both race our best race ever (critical) or both seasons best (special) or a good performance (success) then he will whup me.

Much facile nonsense has been typed about ‘Trad’ and ‘Indie’ games but I’m going to assume that we all recognise that human behaviours are on a continuum and that any kind of labelling is only going to identify tendencies and clumps of behaviour. All that taken as read A ‘Trad’ GM acting as creator and curator of knowledge (and there are many such who have a wonderful time GMing and are fine human beings) is presumably going to enjoy using either official cults/organisations/grimoires or their own meticulously crafted ones. I tend to the ‘Indie’ end. I recognise that I’m too lazy for that legwork most of the time and that most of players are at least as imaginative as me (usually more so). So I’d favour this (but probably 1d8 spells due to my years playing SB and Elric! And the association 8 – chaos- sorcery) And allow a sorcerer to choose their own spells in said grimoire and build in their own plothooks and gameworld details to be used later. Do I worry that this is license to munchkin/mini-max/etc? Not really, if that happens it either indicates (to me) that a) the player is a bit of a d!ck and we are going to fall out over much more important things anyway I’ve made my game to confrontional/compettive and that maximising behaviour is probably a sensible survival strategy Do I worry that I’m missing a chance to weld the character to my game world? Not really, if it is really important that the Sorcerer is sworn foe of Archmage Pohl Danjels then I can always add that anyway. Plus the vast majority of players I’ve sat at the table with will add interests and complications that I’d either a) never have thought of never have dared to impose

You get 12 out 10 for this The bonus 2 is for coding it so it runs on my ancient PPC Mac as well as johnny-come-lately intel ones. Any chance of posting the table/list of villain traits for when I want some inspiration not the job done for me?

I suspect that reading my posts is more of a mistake in wasted time than responding to them. I do appreciate the replies (and they're interesting) but I wouldn't want you to feel the need to compose careful replies to what I thought was a pretty blatant a p!ss take [purely Devils' advocate: as there is less than zero chance of any change being made and there's more important feedback to be given and responded in this thread: ordering in English language alphabetically has no negative impact on other language editions; either the translations remain as they are and OL editions are STILL not alphabetical (nothing lost from current) and Eng is alphabetical (small nitpicky gain) or a translator (who is probably good with you know words and stuff) finds German/French/Latvian/Uz synonyms which do fit alphabetically as appropriate]

Are you thrashing this out amongst yourselves or answering me? If the former please carry on and have fun but if the latter there was a healthy dose of urine sampling in my post I wasn't expecting any reply. (FWIW I think that Loz' answer is the more commercially important one) Well of course it does old boy.

Fonts - like Clean layout - like - more than that it is clear on screen and will print 2 per side (4 per page) readably - like x2 'Brawl' more evocative than 'Unarmed Cbt' - agree, but Brawl presumably is a 'combat style' involving fists, feet, knees, heads, mugs, barstools and knives as practiced by Vikingr, sailors and drinkers there's no way my Wushu warrior is using that style unarmed 'Willpower' - like 'Endurance' should clearly be 'Stamina' obviously Why is 'Conceal' seperate from 'Deceit'? 'Passions' - like a lot 300 page preview - well obviously Re-ordering characteristics - alphabetically would be best obviously - its not CDO its just correct