Al.

I like granular damage dice for human-size combatants. (+1, +1d2, +1d4, +1d6, +1d8, +1d10, +2d6 as posted here somewhere previously) After that I stick to adding to extra d6 for bigger beasties as the difference between Pete Polar Bear and Paul Polar Bear are of less interest to me. I halve damage bonus (or damage penalty) for projectiles (thrown or shot) I step damage bonus up one step if using a weapon with 2 hands (applies equally to gripping my Shortsword 2h KenJutsu style to swinging my Greatsword) and that means that a negative is moved one step closer to zero (so Donald now has a reason to grip that Hatchet with 2 hands) I used to use different size dice for thrown (d4), 1 handed (d6) and 2 handed (d8) with the chart giving +1/2 die, +1 die, + 1 1/2 die, etc. And it worked very well for a group where we all knew the houserules. 'Twas a nightmare first time out of the box with a new set of players though. I'm not sure that the RQ4:AiG fixed damage modifiers rule was a disaster (and I've used it without any real pain) it just did not quite feel right. It also meant that BIG beasties made PCs go squish with no chance of a lucky low roll. Al

Absolutely spot on. My imagination may be fired by clever ideas/setting hints/adventure seeds or I may use them wholesale. Al

You're in good company there coz so did the authors of Ringworld, Elric! (sort of) and BRP Al

I've used this list in two different ways (for two quite different games) Version 1 11 Skills You can boost a specialisation separately from the main skill. Usually only one specialisation per skill (you can have more but its a bit pointless as you will see in a mo) Doing so is twice as effective (i.e. in creation putting 10 points into Athletics raises it by +10%iles, putting the same 10 into Climb does not raise Athletics but raises Climb by +20%) Raising a Specialisation has NO effect on the core skill Raising the core skill does also raise any specialisation (i.e. it stays X%iles better than the core) Version 2 Specialisations work as per BRP book (and outlined, badly, by me elsewhere on this thread) Al

Not quite sure if this is what you want but it may help. The single slimmest skills list what I 'as ever used is: Skill - Sample Specialisations Athletics - Climb, Jump, Row, Run Combat - Brawl, Shield, Spear, Sword Devise - First Aid, Pick Lock, Repair, Trap Influence - Bargain, Beg, Fast Talk, Inspire, Intimidate, Taunt Knowledge - Animal Lore, Mineral Lore, Plant Lore, Weather Lore Magic/Psi - Sorcery, Alchemy, Diabolism, Necromancy, Enchantment Missile - Archery, Crossbow, Handgun, Heavy Weapon, Sling, Throw Perception - Listen, See, Track Perform - Dance, Play (Drums), Play (Lute), Poet, Sing Pilot - Boat, Car, Helicopter, Tardis Stealth - Conceal, Disguise, Hide, Sneak Al

Oh what? That's what I've been whining about wanting Chaosium to publish. Tat leaves me with nothing to complain about now Al

good one Boston Harbour did you say? I've read (and this really goes under the heading 'any sentence beginning with the word 'apparently' is automatically going to be bollocks') that Tea as supped in Britain (although not by me as I cannot stand it) is China Tea transplanted to India and grown in those (very different) conditions as the demmed Chinese wouldn't give into British demands for enough Tea and there was a shortage ('by gad') even after fighting a war to force them to take Opium ('go on, its good for you really') in exchange. Anyone know if that's true or I've been suckered (again) Al

good one Boston Harbour did you say? I've read (and this really goes under the 'any sentence beginning with the word 'apparently' is automatically going to be bollocks') that Tea as supped in Britain (although not by me as I cannot stand it) is China Tea transplanted to India and grown in those (very different) conditions as the demmed Chinese wouldn't give into British demands for enough Tea and there was a shortage (by gad) even after fighting a war to force them to take Opium ('go on, its good for you really') in exchange. Anyone know if that's true or I've suckered (again) Al

In the words of Al Murray 'yeah they really cut the old umbilical cod with that one. Still talking English and still fighting on the same side as us'

Absolutely agree BRP has an approach, slightly broadened from previous d100 games, or specialisations in skills. If one has a specialisation in a skill but not the one called for then roll against half of that. i.e. I have Ride (Horse) at 100% and need to leap onto a camel to pursue the devilish, dastadly villain unfortunately I do not have Ride (Camel). So rather than rolling against base I roll against 50% (half of my highest specialisation) I have taken my red pen to the existing BRP skill list and folded more skills into meta skills as specialisations. SO that people who want to be spelunkers can be but those who do not will still have a reasonable chance of succeeding. Al

As a general guideline I prefer rolling once against both skills to be tested Example Martial Arts. Roll once against <Weapon used> and Martial Arts Under both - hit do more damage Under <Weapon> but over Martial Arts- hit do normal damage Under Martial Arts but over <Weapon> - never happened to me, weak pont in my argument would need to fudge it Over both - miss Al

Fortunately I didn't read them in order. (Fortunate for me). Otherwise I'd have stopped at the first. I can accept main character's cowardice and venality. And his cheerful racism and misogyny I found acceptable in the context of (pseudo) historical versimilitude and the way he was so even handed with the insults. But the casual rape scene and Flashy's justification of it turned my stomache and turned me right off reading any more. In the oaf's own words for me it was 'the wrong side of enough' Al

I still remember when Bob The Builder pipped eminem to the number one slot in the UK charts. Neil Morissey (the so-called 'voice of Bob' but that's clearly in a Metranon role rather than an indication that Bob is in anyway a fictional character needing a vocal artist to read his lines) was asked if he was worried that eminem might try and take revenge. He responded that his heavy metal machine team would be more than a match. Who will be first to stat up Scoop and co. then? Al

What, when, how? Did you just make that up? Al

Speaking personally use of that term is the only thing that put me off of the game. Which otherwise looks absolutely awesome. It is entirely possible and reasonable to use a term of abuse in a sympathetic way with one's friends. (I have a number of mates who I refer to as 'Paks' and 'Stani' between ourselves - and likewise they refer to me as 'redneck' and 'tipp-ex boy' - but that's because we know and trust each other). Their tales of having burning dog sh!t posted through their letterboxes by the racist moron brigade has made me think about using these kind of terms more broadly and casually. And it is also quite possible to use an unpleasant term without meaning anything unpleasant by it whatsoever. I'd guess that the majority of people mourning the passing of the Washington Redskins never dreamt of using that name and label as a way of bashing others. But....... 'Redskin' has been used as derogatory term by people with very unpleasant views. It also contributes to a climate of thinking about different ethic groups differently and even 'well its only a joke if THEY can't see that, then THEY have the problem, not me.' The 'political correctness' argument gets sterile very quickly. Most of the complaints made under the 'Its political correctness gone mad' banner actually refer to Health and Safety legislation! Many of the best, wackiest and funniest tales of 'Its political correctness gone mad' are entirely made up. For one the 'Winterval' saga in Birmingham a few years back had nothing to do with political correctness and protecting feelings it was about the local chamber of commerce finding a label which they thought would maximise the commercial appeal of that shopping season. Would people happily refer to sports teams such as the 'Pompey Pakkies' 'Reading Ragheads' or 'New York Niggers'? I'd guess not. Terms such as Chinaman and Redskin have a very unpleasant history the fact that people on these boards are not/would not use them in that light does not change that. Neither does the fact that members of non-white ethnic groups use derrogatory terms about whites and about other non-white ethnic groups. My advice: don't use 'Redskin' or 'American Indian' or 'Native' use 'Amerindian' (or even better ask someone who knows what they are talking about), maybe including some sample terms which might cause offense (and if you are better at this kind of thing than I am advice on how to and how not to use these terms to build atmosphere. For myself if I hear an NPC use the word 'nigger' then I've pretty much made a decision about which side (s)he stands) Al

Followed by Colour me confused

Um Could you not treat the handgun as a Melee Weapon? (I'd probably be generous and let player use their highest Melee skill) After all rather than take aim at distance (s)he is instead ducking under beasties guard to touch them with a weapon (like Melee!) they aren't needing to connect with any force which makes it easier but they are needing to pull the trigger at the right moment (which makes it harder) so I'd say that these even out. Depending on situation character should probably get bonuses for outnumbering and attacking from flank and blah blah blah Al

Wasn't that the very raison d'etre for the new BRP book in the first place? That and to kill of the sterile argument about out of print BRP books Voice 1: 'Rule for Lasguns is in Ringworld' Voice 2: 'Cool how do I get it?' Voice 1:'You can't' Voice 2:'I've found a free pdf on the net what about that?' Voice 1:'You are taking the food from baby Jesus' mouth' Voice 2:'Don't be silly' Voice 3:'Okay but you are making it less likely that it be re-released commerically and make money for the author' Voice 2:'Fair point' Voice 4:'Don't care about IP, want Lasguns' I can't see that there are many more rules which could be published for BRP. Much less that should. Speaking personally (maybe unrepresentatively) I cannot be bothered to half-learn any more anyway, Want settings. Want adventures. Al

Cool settings Cool adventure seeds Cool adventures A LANDSCAPE GMs screen Some more adventures Now this is mainly personal opinion but........... Mongoose went against the grain at the time in moving AWAY from these things and towards a million and one rulebooks and have made money doing so but Chaosium don't seem* to want to or be geared up to churning out slim hardcover rulebooks every month. Its also personal desire. The BRP rules are not perfect FOR ME. But they are usable and I cannot see them becoming more usable by releasing lots of adendums especially as the core book almost has a rule for every occasion. I'd also love some more Sci-Fi stuff. Al * 'seem' as in I don't know and this conjecture

Cool. Another one off my list of 'is it really in BRP or am I remebering it from a previous iteration of d100 rules' sorted then Which itself borrowed it from RQ4:AiG as said above (and I am sure that some wise soul will point out that it appeared elsewhere even earlier) Hell yeah Al

I'd advise going along the complentary skills route used in AiG. i.e. if you have another skill which might be of use then you get to add 1/5 of it example Mad Adhmed is haggling over a suit of Armour he has Bargain 60% and Craft (Armourer) 60% then he gets to add 1/5 of his Craft skill and so has an effective skill of 72% HeroQuest really ran with this idea (possibly going to far in my opinion) and I insist that the complentary skill must be higher than the one to be boosted (and that you only get one complentary skill for any given test so if Ahmed also has Knowledge (Commerce and Trade) at 60% he doesn't get to add another 12% for that as well. In this situation Stormbringer with Sword 200% can either add +40% or the wielder can use Stormbringer's skill in place of his own. In either case Stormbringer's Sword skill increases separately. Al

SNAP I've sort of settling on 3d6+x for all characteristics for our old friend the bell curve. Although as with most housrulings I do have a tendency to change my mind each time I take another look at my doodlings. I get the feeling (perhaps incorrectly) that the STR and SIZ rolls are an attempt to allow generation of babies, adolescents and adults in one hit and its never really worked for me. Are you suggesting that we all have better things to do than roll lots of dice to make each encountered beastie semi-unique?! I like PenDragon's approach of only listing a fixed value for a beasty's characteristics. If I really want to make a weedy Dragon or super-Panther then I can add or subtract an arbitray amount anyway. Al

I've played a couple of games of Gumshoe and its alright. Nothing mindblowing (no pun intended just limited vocabulary of cliches, sorry) but a perfectly serviceable set of rules. I haven't played Trail of Cthulhu but I've not heard of any great mechanical differences between that and the other settings what I played. Now, several people in my club have real Cthulhu heads on and would use the CoC rules for any game and setting with or without mythos so I feel that I can compare like with like. Prior to playing I felt very much 'you complete Arse you're fixing something which doesn't need fixing; no GM in their right mind lets a game die because of a failed Spot Hidden roll' but by coincidence I played a couple of CoC games after playing gumshoe ones where the GM did that very thing. (And 1 where GM went down the 'make a Spot Hidden; everyone failed? Okay make an Idea roll; everyone failed; okay make a Luck roll' path grrrrrr) I'm not sure that it really has a massively different feel to CoC by dint of rules (the games I played were a bit more reflective than usual but that may have been the plot and/or player mix). The thing which does annoy me about Gumshoe is the tacked on nature of combat. For all of BRP's flaws at least combat and 'normal stuff' have a single resolution system. Gumshoe has a quite clever resource management style of investigative resolution mechanic and then a clunky as can be combat system. I hated it. Al

Firstly, that's brilliant news for Jason personally HOORAY Secondly, I shall slip comfortably into naive optimism mode and hope that this bodes well for Chaosium and its freelancers in general Thirdly, isn't it finished yet? Hurry up you slacker Al

<Raises hands and chants in unconvincing Latin over the corpse of this thread> SPQR and some web-available house rules for RQ suggest <skill = success <1/2 skill = special (or in some cases '2 successes') <1/10 skill = critiial (or in some cases '3 successes') If you want multiple levels of success and want to make mathematics as simple as possible (and no simpler) then that strikes me as a good model. The concern over mental arithmetic (I suppose mental agility might be more appropriate) is well-stated but perhaps not that useful in a debate about a game which most people posting here want to get maximum exposure for. The flaw with 1/10 as Critical and no Specials (which is what I tend to go for as laziness) is that potential damage is much reduced (as shown in MRQ where LongBows and Dragonewt BoneBows become GaussGuns to make up for the lack of double damage special hits) Al