Sir Erwin

Hello everyone! Just to let you know, Brancalonia is the current Deal of the Day on DTRPG.

I stumbled across this setting a while back and I love the idea! I never picked it up, because I didn't own 5e, but I would frequently check back to see if it had been ported to other systems. I wish you the best of luck! I'll be following this thread closely because I'm interested as well.

Wow, this looks amazing! Contrats! Added to the top of my wishlist.

I completely agree with you. I see nothing wrong with more modern games and they can be a lot of fun, but I am happy we have some traditional options. Personally, I prefer the BRP style of game. I don't know why but I feel more immersed in a BRP driven world than in a game with more carefully balanced options. I was very frustrated by some of shady's posts, and my post above was meant to be very sarcastic towards them. I immediately regretted posting it because I never want to come off that way. It was a moment of weakness and I am sorry if there was confusion. I should apologize to shadythedevil as well. I'm sorry for the tone in my previous post. I am not a frequent poster on this forum but I am a very frequent lurker. Many people on this forum, and many of those that responded to your thread, are very helpful, knowledgable, and patient people. I think that when you get your game world up and running with your group, and play with the system for a little bit, it will really broaden your horizons. People would be very interested in your CR system as well.

Oh that's so cool! I had no idea this existed! Thank you for sharing.

Wow, this thread was frustrating to read. I don't understand what you want. Let me try to sum up what I've read so far. You want a CR system. The game doesn't have one. You like the game, but don't like that it doesn't have a CR system. You spent some time with your uncle developing a CR-like system, but you don't like spending time with your uncle. So, you're done right? You got what you wanted? Or, is this some sort of your pizza delivery took over 30 minutes and you want your money back kind of situation? You should be excited! The game was held hostage by its hostile and elderly community, but you were the one to finally bring this unevolved and dead game into the future! If only there was just one person on this forum with experience playing Dungeons & Dragons, they might have caught this issue sooner. If only there was just one employed person on this forum, they might have realized the need for these crucial time-saving techniques. Unfortunately, the book is already printed. It is what it is. We all already have a our copies and you can't take back the weekend you spent with your uncle. So, what are you asking for?

BEOWULF, on the discord server, got an official response from Chaosium on this. They said: "When used to inspire followers, a critical success grants a +5 bonus to a single Skill or Passion of the orator's choosing, lasting no longer than one hour. A fumble imposes a -5 penalty instead for the same period of time."

I see, that makes sense to me. In this case, it would make sense for a knifeman to Defend with the intention of closing in. Thank you for your response!

I'm very sorry if I'm sounding pedantic. I'm just trying to fully grok these rules as written before I worry about houserules or anything like that. In this scenario, would it make sense for the knifeman to deal damage since damage is dealt in steps 3-4, and closing in is done in step 5? He would still be at long range at the time damage is dealt. Also, another point of confusion for me, the rules state that "A character wishing to move to a closer distance must first win their opposed Combat Action, at which point they close in..." (Melee Distances pg. 135) Defend, dodge, and evade are all listed as Acts, and under the Action Classifactions list on page 137, Acts are non-Combat Actions. Does this mean that, if you have the intention to close the melee distance, you must choose an action explicitly listed as Combat?

I really like the cover art!

On page 50, under the Random Method header the text states: "If you roll a Religious Trait (such as Energetic for Christian characters),..." I think either the trait or religion should be changed in the example, since energetic is not a religious trait for Christians.

Page 30, first paragraph in the right column reads "For example, a beautiful damsel sks Sir Nerthaid..."

Hey all! I've been a lurker on this forum for a while but I thought I'd make an account to say I'm excited for this release as well. I'm planning on cozying up with this PDF all weekend.