Jump to content

Al.

Regulars
  • Posts

    540
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Al.

  1. Absolute agreement from me. I didn't realise when Gold Book BRP was being mooted, written and playtested; but what I actually wanted was a slightly update version of Worlds of Wonder. Gold Book BRP is a great work, and only in retrospect did I realise that the bits I didn't like were not because they were in any way bad or wrong themselves, it just wasn't the book that I wanted to buy!
  2. I go through phases of using one system for everything (too intellectually limited to hold several sets of rules in mind and too lazy to make notes and play aids or to re-read). I've used PenDragon for Dr Who, Star Wars, Samurai, Dark Ages, Golden Age of Piracy, Ringworld, Discworld, Fables (the comic books) and others I've forgotten. And played in Ancient Greek, Glorantha, Forgotten Realms and DC Comic book superheroes run by others. I think that the central rules are so strong that they cope with any setting (but see above). Of course my view of which bits are the central rules and yours may differ wildly.
  3. Maybe everyone else has decided that OQ is perfect as it stands?
  4. There used to be a discussion on this very same topic on Greg Stafford's KAP forum. I've not visited it recently and my google-fu is apparently very weak as I cannot find it again now (possibly it's been taken down as mark of respect but I don't feel confident in making that assertion, you may have better luck than I at hunting it down) Suggestions: Knights begin with as any Armour Points as they have APP points (handsome, fashionable Knights have fashionable armour, scruffy wolfsheads have mismatched, sruffy wolfshead armour) if this is not possible due to the current era then they have have multiple suits totalling that many AP. APP is not rolled, it is the average (arithmetic mean) of all other characteristics other than SIZ. Inspired by the descriptions of Homer's heroes (not THAT Homer). At creation (or now if retroactively applying a house rule) choose one Social Skill which starts equal to APP
  5. Yes please Monday or Wednesday possibles for me Al
  6. Warning: confirmation bias ahead. All of those well-made points* all reaffirm to me that giving the greatsword and bastard sword 1d8+1 impaling damage is 'about right.' * genuinely not deliberate
  7. In RAW I don't think that Greatswords (or Bastard Swords) could impale at all. So maybe this rule nicely encompasses the blunt chopping tip of a Greatsword being sub optimal for skewering said dinosaur through the vitals?
  8. I think that the premise for riddles has changed over the game's history. When I first read them in RQ2 books they were very much of the anti-joke format ('What's the difference between a rabbit? One of its ears are both the same' style of thing) and were usually 'What's the difference between a <insert RQ skill name here>?' Somewhen along the line that has changed to be a format of there being a genuine answer and lateral thinking is encouraged. Personally, I'd happily play in a game which used either format. Showing how groovy, liberal-minded and open to illumination I am. But I'd be grumpy if I wasn't told which format was to be used and was expected to know instinctively what the GM thought was the obvious and correct approach. Showing that I'm really not that open to illumination at all.
  9. The old ICE MERP game had a solution to this, if no characteristic was 90% after rolling them then swap any one score for 90% (in MW that would be an 18 of course)
  10. Instinctively: Ride In game: whichever skill most players* had actually raised during character creation. * as in players had raised the skill of their make-believe characters, I wouldn't be looking at RL driver's licences or cycling proficiency badges
  11. Presumably 42 is the rate at which Fast Talk riddles are expanding?
  12. The bucket full of dice - when attacking roll d100 (to hit) d20 (for location) and damage dice (for erm well damage) together. The 'get on with it man' principle - any die roll which falls of the table or lands cocked or anything which slows down play is a fumble
  13. The (borrowed from) Baker principle - say yes or roll the dice. If players are asking questions and there is nothing at stake, keep saying yes. Don't block good ideas or insist on dice rolls for everything. The (anti) Boyle principle - it is better to be kind than correct. Small mistakes and errors can be ignored and glossed over. The Richards principle - start in media res, get the session started with excitement and backfill the details once the players are engaged. The Richards irreducible clue and content corrollary - if the players have to find a specific piece of information to progress the story, then they are not rolling to see if they can find it (they have to) they are rolling to see what additional information they find. Of course the players don't have to know that at the time.
  14. How about an amnesiac Dragonewt? Since your boss doesn't know huge amounts about Glorantha and lengthy exposition is dull for all concerned that neatly sidesteps all that. She doesn't know because her character doesn't know. It also gives a reason for adventuring: how did I lose my memory? what's a memory? what is a me? The Dragonewt's meddling with Necromancy might be related to that amnesia. Cause? Effect? Completely irrelevant? Since nobody in either Glorantha or Real Land understands Dragonewts or how they behave, or why; that should apply doubly to an amnesiac, lost, forgotten Dragonewt. Hence nobody can tell you that you're doing it wrong. (And if everybody in your game is new to Glorantha then there is nobody to feel upset that you are doing it wrong anyway)
  15. WRT Swashbuckling and the deadliness of PenDragon combat without PenDragon armour I had a similar problem when roughing out my Daimyo game (since Saborai would only be wearing their armour in a pitched battle and I wasn't planning on having any of them) All I did was offer the winning player in an opposed combat a choice: Either inflict half rolled damage and take none Or inflict full rolled damage but take half rolled from the loser In a setting where Death is a feather and duty a mountain but a Saborai owes it to their liege lord not to throw their life away it makes for a proper moral choice in combat.
  16. In answer to OP I used lots of limited one-trick bound items (inspired by the Spot rules on when to use the Demon's ability and when to use the owner's) Smoked Glasses with Search% Crystal Ball with Million Spheres% Compass with Navigate% Card Deck with Insight% As an aside My 'solution' to the 'problem' of demon weapon escalation (even way back with SBIII) was that no Demonic power could take an item above TWICE its mundane value i.e. Stormbringer being a Greatsword inflicts 2d8 and cannot be boosted by more than 8 points on the roll table (i.e. RAW 2d8+1d10+1d6 my tweak - see below - 2d8+2d8) The other changes I made included smoothing the Elric! roll table so 1d10+1d2 becomes 2d6 then 1d8+1d6 then 2d8 then 3d6 then 1d8+2d6 then 2d8+1d6 then 4d6 etc etc; I freely admit that this was more to do with my low grade (amusing rather than life-altering) OCD than because it objectively made the game any better
  17. 1) Raise the characteristic, raise the skill. But I get the central premise of your question and I'd like the opportunity for a skill or test or roll to be improvable separate to the characteristic 2) Very true. And one of the things that potentially makes CoC more fun than other games. 3) As far as Skills go you are quite correct. However in all of the WoW subgames. Idea = Int x3, Luck = Pow x3, Persuade = Cha x3, Dodge = Dex x3, etc
  18. Don't bother, they're no better than VHS. Hold either of em up to the light and you still can't see a darned thing. I believe that Johnny Foreigner is doing marvelous work on developing a colour Daguerreotype though
  19. I'd second (third) a call for Dragon Warriors Legend. Morris and Dickinson were both big contributors of RQII material to WD and the whole combat mechanic (but not Rank and Profession) came from a house rule Morris suggested in WD for speeding up RQ combat. Also for your consideration: Neal Asher's Polity series (I really don't like his right wing views or refusal to acknowledge Banks as an influence and a single Culture ROU could bend the entire polity over its knee and spank it; but it's a setting which is ripe for RPGs in a way that the late, great Mr Banks' works just aren't) The Lies of Locke Lamora setting (but not the increasingly weak sequels) Joe Abercrombie's First Law books (I know that he is an avowed D&Dist but I think that the d100 rules are a better fit) But I do think that the advice to hoover up public domain out of copyright settings is a much more financially sensible route (if nuChaosim actually make some money from these then they can assuage their and our guilt by contributing to a cause dear to the heart of the original author)
  20. Whenever I've run PenDragon at cons (which I've done many times) I always have a sheet on the table stating This is Literary Fiction not Historical Fiction King Arthur is the Land Do the Right Thing The system works brilliantly when there are real social constraints and expectations (I've used it for Samurai/Saborai, Celtic, Dr Who and Archaen games without any trouble, and I don't think that I'd use any other system for any of those settings now) I found the 4e magic system really interesting to read but horrible in play. The OriginalMagicWorld magic rules work surprisingly well alongside (with the advantage that the zap-bang-flash spells can just be removed if desired or kept if required) A friend of mine had a simple lifeforce magic system in a one-off con game which worked brilliantly (my Celtic Witch could heal as many HP as she sacrificed Con of victims for example) I'm confident that one could run a D&D/Pathfinder level of high-magic-fantasy quite easily
  21. Al.

    Sigh...

    Isn't that when I achieve Illumination?
  22. Al.

    Sigh...

    My comments are well thought out, insightful and beautifully balanced Yours are unnecessary whinging The hardest skill I've developed (and I'm only just over base percentage, however one calculates it) is reading someone else's observation or complaint on a topic which I don't care (or have never thought) about and not just labeling (in my head) that its author is a malingerer and a counter jumper. Just on the principle that misery loves company I assume that I'm not alone.
  23. Thanks for the reply Most of it doesn't need a further response from me beyond 'I agree, that sounds about right' On this particular point: either is a reasonable explanation, I'm pretty sure that it was a conscious decision
  24. The sensible mature person would say play the rules as written for a bit first But that's not me And I'm guessing that most of the people reading this particular thread on this particular forum have played various versions of RQ down the years and houseruled the bits they didn't like In SBIII physical damage modifiers were capped at +3d6 (it was just that the damage modifier from bound demon weapons that could go stratospheric), I wonder if that would help with BigClub vs BigClub? (Whilst retaining the design aim of making Rurik vs BigClub a possibility) I think that the (CON + modified by SIZ) HP is a reasonable design choice. But just the wrong way round. I'm ALMOST certain that the last time I played RQ2 we did it SIZ plus a modifier for CON (it may well have been exactly the same line on a chart as used for the RAW but just reading CON not SIZ) One thing RQ3 in RQG is the negative POW modifier for Stealth. And I think that's still ripe for my all time favourite-house-rule-someone-else-made-up: Initiates or better in Thief and Hunter Cults add their POW as a positive modifier. Completely and wildly off topic (I can defend the others at least halfheartedly): the standard deviation on 3d6 is 3, so why are characteristic modifiers in blocks of 4? I've never understood that.
×
×
  • Create New...