Enpeze

I think STR is the most important ATT for fast sprints and CON for longer joggings. Eg. its fascinating that very strong trained guys in real life are also excellent sprinters, even without a sprint training. I dont think that DEX has much to do with running, at least not how I interprete this stat. SIZ could improve MOV but only if it is just limb lenght (like many of these marathon joggers from Africa have long limbs) and not body fat. But the interpretation may vary from GM to GM. (or even character to character) Regarding SIZ which affects HP and damage. I think the official interpretation is clear going into direction body mass and not limb lengh/height. OTOH the RQ strike ranks is going in direction limb lenght and height. A contradiction.

Ok, but at least after a head butt the involved parties should suffer from reduced INT rolls for some minutes and from an extra orientation roll.

Interesting question. Its time for a handy linear speed/Move table. In Gurps there is one such table and cleverly its combined with minus modifiers on shooting. (shooting at moving targets with different speed and shooting if the shooter is moving itsself with a certain speed)

SIZ? then maybe some people would like to play fatman in your game.

I totally agree with you .

I think the wild west stuff has to do with the question Fate Points or not. The genre Western in its heroic and pulpy mask is not that different from other typical roleplaying genres like sword and sorcery or space opera. The approach of the story is similar, also the typical distribution of character roles etc. So if conan frees his imprisioned princess (farmers daughter) or if barbarian bran mak morn kills the evil sorcerer (or the evil rancher) at the end of every story, it does not make much difference. But the question for me is, if BRP is suited for this type of action or not. I dont think so, but other BRP fans surely do. So if I am wrong (I think I am not, but lets this assume for the discussion) it remains the question how the very essence of such a pulp hero (western, eastern, space oper or S&S) should be portrayed. Double+ PC hitpoints like I suggested or a Fate point model ala WFRP. Another question which is important is how cinematic gaming and pulp gaming is dependent and influencing each other. Are cinematic games automatically pulp games? Are they even the same? If yes, then the BRP without Fate Points or double PC hitpoints is probably not usable for cinematic roleplaying games. (see above) the logical consequence is to use another rule system for such type games. (maybe SotC or Savage World)

another great advantage of pdf is that you can print out only the needed parts of the book and then give it to your players.

How do you like it?

Shadows of the Century I guess. (one of those new rule systems)

I always thought, pulp is non-simulationistic. Its hero-centric and the story is bended around the hero. (to enable another story with the same hero in the next magazine) He has to survive or the reader (or player) is not satisfied. Even in not-so-pulpy westerns like tombstone there are scenes where the villain is able to fire at least 20 shots with 2 pistols without reloading. In italian pulp westerns the hero (or villain) is able to kill 1 person per second with one shot. How do one want to play such impossibilities out in the BRP rules? (I dont really understand why some people want to play these pulpy hero things, thus the question of "how" is only a theoretical one) So the solution (also for the sake of a good roleplaying game) for this dilemma is to play a mix of pulp and simulation - as you seem to suggest in your post. For me the answer is clear. 80% simulation, 20% pulp. For others it may be the reverse. I am not against detailed weapon data, especially if they are researched for a scenario which is focusing on those differences in ammo etc. (and having the right ammo at the right place is a matter of live and death) But I just do not see the necessity of detailed weapon data in a typical pulpy western scenario, where it is clear that the hero kills 6 black hats in 6 seconds with head shots. (right ammo or not...) If Custer has been a pulp hero he would surely have won Little Bighorn - just with his bare fists.

Why? If you play a pulp western game, there should be hungry wolves, snakes and bears behind every second corner. No need to hide them. I mean preambel: riding through the town scene 1: duel with 6 black hats (needless to say - hero wins), interim: riding through the desert scene 2: ambush of 6 hungry kojotes (of course hero kills them), interim: riding to the ranch scene 3: final shootout on the evil villains ranch (hero wins again killing 6 black hats, 1 bear hiding behind the corner plus 1 evil villain - but unfortunately hero receives a small wound from the evil villains Colt .45 Peacemaker MkIV/D7A superspecial - just to have a use for all the carefully researched gun data) scene 4: rescue of the farmers daughter (of course she falls in love with hero) interim: riding with girl into the sunset

My biggest rule gripe (beside the idiotic skills "head butt" and "kick" with 1d6 damage) about CoC has been that a character has only a parry OR an attack per turn, but not both. (exception swords and -oids AFAIR) This sounded very "un-BRP" and I never used it.

I would prefer a hardback too, even at increased costs.

This is one of the reasons why I never liked the Western genre. (too artificial, immature and hero-centric )

Well that spell sounds "overpowered". But with your multiple resistance rolls, I think you found a good solution to counter this.

and? How was it?

I would like source books as pdf. Core book dead wood of course (and pdf) But I would be surprised if Chaosium has the will/skill to do this. It seems they still live in the 80ties of the past century. (see Chaosiums obvious problems of handling email) Well at least they make good games. Thats what really counts.

Cthulhu Rising I guess.

Yep. I forgot. The wiki is even better than the raw threads.

Look at the 2 threads Q&A with Jason Dural to learn more about the new DBRP.

I, and other BRP GMs I know, use idea and luck rolls quite often. Of course it depends on your playing style as GM. If you have never used them in the past years, you probable have substituted these rolls by other mechanics. Or maybe you prefer to play games in which such situations dont come up. In CoC adventures you can find many examples how idea and luck rolls are used.

I have problems with fudging. I am against it. And I am against cheating. The gods of destiny will crush those who betrays them. (and take their stuff)

I am sure this is one of reasons they want to release this book. Another nice reason is to have the best of the different versions reprinted and again available for everybody. I mean the younger generation of gamers often dont have an idea what ringworld is and if you mention WoW they probably think "...wtf has World of Warcraft ^roflmao^ to do with those old farts with the dragon logo? °lol° 111! lfg ".

atg, so it comes down again to the point of "playing style". Your style is to replace the use of ATT rolls by skill rolls. My style is to use both ATT and skill rolls. Up to this I dont have any problem. Everybody should use the style he likes most. But in your previous post, you seem to explicitely make a statement (see below) which implies that there is something broken with the system because ATT are not important. And this generalizing statement I think is wrong. As I see it now after reading your answer, ATTs are only not important if someone plays BRP according to your playing style. "atgxtg - One thing I don't like about CoC and most of Chaosium stuff based off of it is that except for hit points and damage bonus, you stats are meaningless. The statx5% rolls rarely came up, as there was usually a skill that replaced the stat roll. So if a character had a 13 or 17 Strength tended to make little difference. "

Forgiving without hitlocations? Do you mean that its not easy to kill a person with a single shot? Hm. its a little bit more difficult I agree (not regarding impales which are often deadly), but isnt this like in reality, where the most victims of pistol shootings survive a single hit ?(only to die of gangrene) Another story is a rifle, of course. But rifles seem also in BRP very deadly. Eg. 2d8 assault rifle are often enough capable to kill with a single hit a 12 HP person. I am not a wound specialist, but this seems not unplausible. For cinematic games I agree - never seen Bruce Willis dying suddenly during a fire combat. (only John Travolta but this another story) So I assume not do die in such a miserable way belongs to a real cinematic game. But why should sudden death be a problem in non-cinematic environments (aka reality)? Or do you want to introduce a third type of game called "reality without sudden PC death"?