Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Al.

  1. I think you credit us (we?) teachers with having more power over the curriculum than we actually have.
  2. Since the sweet spot for BRP games is generally* reckoned to be 50-75% why not: 70 65 65 60 60 60 55 55 55 55 50 50 50 50 50 * with the ever-present provisos that all generalisations are rubbish and there's no such thing as consensus on the interweb
  3. 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.
  4. 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)
  5. 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)?
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 'Shadow' on Netflix. A Black South African version of The Equaliser.
  9. 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.
  10. That fourth party member looks a little bit overpowered.
  11. 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.
  12. I think (and all obviously IMMOO) the hybrid halfway house model allows for MGF.
  13. 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.
  14. 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
  15. Like all great insights; that's obvious now that you've said it! Ta.
  16. Some of those (following the link) are properly terrifying.
  17. Those look brilliant mate. Well done.
  18. Terrible starting skill percentages are an artefact of RQ2's generation of RPGs. That's neither good nor bad. Plenty of people love the challenge of starting a D&D character with 1 HP and no armour or an RQ character with no skill higher than 25% (and most rather lower), feel that competence is to be earned through time served and that anyone starting with a competent character is missing out on some (or all) of the fun. And they enjoy their experience of the hobby. So I definitely would not say that they are doing it 'wrong'. It's just not for me. I found (find) it weird that people who insist on random rolls for characteristics, starting cash and social status are equally insistent that starting skills will uniformly be low. If you have the time to spare (and/or an app or online random number generator) why not take a leaf out a (throwaway) comment in the SB3 bestiary? Roll 1d100* in turn for starting skill rather than using base chances. It takes bloody ages but can give some surprising results ('out of all those rolls why is my Mostali only sh!t in Crossbow and Weapon making?' or 'why is my Uroxi's highest skill in Sing?') *rounded to the nearest 5% in RQ2 obviously
  19. Absolutely. (All IMG obviously). Curses are not be-all-and-end-all they set the ground state and default settings. PCs are entitled, enabled and allowed to behave however they wish. It's just that their background and choices set up consequences. Yelm's curse sets the default. But faith in and worship of Orlanth allows that to be trumped. But another character's faith in and worship of Yelm allows, encourages (and maybe compels) them to correct the anomaly. In this particular case the Duck's community will no doubt use Cloud Call and/or Shield to protect their comrade from the Evil Emperor and his minions.
  20. Yup. Not surprising since that was the way that it worked in T&T as well. Since it fits with my (incomplete) understanding of probability curves and distribution I've always liked that model. During lockdown I've been reading the various RPGs that mates have lent me over the years and which have just sat on my shelf gathering dust. I really like the bonus chart (for want of a better term) in the D&T Cyclopedia and will look to use that, unfortunately in d100 rulesets the many non-human races have characteristics which fall outside of the 3-18 range.
  21. I tried to resist but my inner pedant won't let me. Plasma is not between Gas and Solid. It's more akin gas with so much internal energy that the electrons disassociate. Hence plasmas will conduct electricity. This next bit might be bias and falling for company propaganda (I used to work for a company that made CNC lasers for sheet metal work). The problem with plasma cutters for sheet metal cutting is the tendency of the beam to 'wander' affecting accuracy and quality. There was a time that lasers could not generate sufficient energy to cut through thick steel and so plasma cutters were the only game in town. But more modern lasers are powerful enough to cut a decent thickness of steel and do so with greater accuracy and repeatability.
  22. As a kid I was Star Wars or nothing. So although I recognise the names of those series I never actually watched them. I did enjoy Monkey though (largely because Dad outright forbad me from watching it, so I watched it at my mate's house instead) Marrying a lady with a borderline obsession with comic books (and three boys who have followed in those footsteps) has led me to be a bit more cosmopolitan. Or maybe the quality of newer TV series has just improved massively. I'll add a vote for Misfts, although I stopped watching at the Time Travel Let's Kill Hitler episode not by any conscious choice but just sort of watched other things. Nu-Who must count as a superhero of the cerebral variety.
  23. Great thinking. Combine a CRWS and MLA weapon in a single device. Constant lower-power CRWS for targeting and ranging, ramped up to ionise a pathway, shoot the gas payload via MLA then ramp up CRWS again to turn the gas to plasma at or just before point of impact. Since the gas is travelling (very fast) and the CRWS has an effective flight time of zero this might even work. Right, that's the Science. Now we just need some clever chaps to do the Engineering and make it happen.
  24. I thought that the latest thinking was that 'brown NOTE' turns out not to be a thing. That's no reason not to use it in a sci-fi game though. No doubt the Minovsky-frequency would do it.
  25. All of the best things in Physics involve magnets (all of the coolest things too, ho ho) So MLA (Magnetic Field Accelerator), Gauss, Coil, Rail guns for physical projectiles. Either with solid slugs for hard targets or flechettes for fleshy ones. Obviously the line in 'Eraser' about accelerating a physical projectile to the speed of light is b0770ck5 (law of conservation of momentum for one thing) but being able constantly accelerate the projectile along the whole length of the barrel will allow for a much higher muzzle velocity. With no chemical explosion to provide the impetus presumably recoil is reduced too. Blasters, Plasma and so on I would suggest also use magnets. A slug of hydrogen gas energised with a laser to cause a state change to plasma and then magnetic field to accelerate it along the gun barrel. The tricky bit I believe is that the lovely conductive hydrogen plasma will then dissipate rapidly once it leaves the magnetic field. If your setting already includes repulser fields (manipulating gravity fields rather than magnetic fields I guess) then you can use those in place of magnetic fields. Directly attacking targets with a repulser field presumably would cause physical trauma. And allow to move things at distance which might be less explodey and sexy but potentially even more useful (good luck using missiles against me when I've already remotely detached key parts of the launching and arming mechanisms). Lasers are of course only one part of Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS). Radar came about after initial attempts to create a death ray. It turns out using the wrong end of the EMS. The higher the frequency in EMS the more energy per photon and Radio Waves are longest wavelength and lowest frequency. So your CRWS (to steal an acronym from the late, great Iain M Banks - Coherent Radiation Weapon System) could include general purpose optical lasers, anti-personnel short range lower frequency Microwave and IR 'heat rays' and longer range, high penetration, high energy Gamma Ray and X-Ray weapons.
  • Create New...