Jump to content

peterb

Member
  • Posts

    169
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by peterb

  1. BRP is just the same and omits APP - but that's a mistake, IMHO. What about manticores, sphinx etc (that even have human faces)? I certainly wouldn't recommend you spend effort removing it from your algorithms.

    Yeah, I'll just alter the algorithm as I noted in an earlier post up-thread.

  2. Mummy

    STR: 6d6+3

    CON: 0

    SIZ: 6d6+3

    INT: 2d4

    POW: 3d6+3

    DEX: 4d4

    CHA: 3d6+4

    AP: 10 Move: 2

    Attacks: Fist 55

    Skills: Hide 35, Listen 40, Stealth 35, Spot 40

    Here we have an example of how the algorithm STR = SIZ does not work well in all situations. And also how D&D uses CHA in rather strange ways from time to time... I guess they reason that Mummy's are fearsome and that's why they have such an high CHA stat. The AP value is way wrong...

    I should note that I already have the statblocks for most creatures from RQ (it's in the MRQ SRD) so I'll be using them instead of the D&D values.

  3. Intelligent creatures should have APP as they can interact meaningfully with other intelligent creatures. An Orc having APP is no different to a dragon or griffin having APP.

    Some people might argue that even things like sheep have APP .....

    Hm, you do have a point. In RQ (III) animals didn't have any APP. What about BRP? I guess I could include it and people that dislike APP for other creatures than sentients could just ignore it. At the moment I base APP on the average CHA value from d20. Maybe one should standardize and just rule that all non-sentient creatures have an APP of 2d6? But then there are creatures like Unicorns... I think I do like this, I standardize per creature type (which is given in the SRD). So animals get, lets say, 2d6; magical beasts get APP based on SRD CHA; slimes, oozes and such just get 1 and so on.

  4. Griffin

    STR: 4d6+4
    
    CON: 3d6+5
    
    SIZ: 4d6+4
    
    INT: 2d4+1
    
    POW: 3d6+2
    
    DEX: 3d6+4
    
    APP: 3d4
    
    Move: 3, fly 8 (average)
    
    AP: 6
    
    Bite 55, Claw 40
    
    Jump 40, Listen 30, Spot 55

    A RQ III griffin is much stronger and larger (10d6), it has fixed INT 6, the POW/WIS is the same, and the DEX is quite a bit higher (3d6+12). Animals does not have APP (I need to correct that part of the scripts). Bite is 50 and Claw is also 50. The skills are only half right.

    Since RQ III was released (long) before D&D 3E any similarities is not a fault of Chaosiums...

  5. Sorry, you've lost me. I don't have the 3.x MM, so I don't know the size category they give a T.Rex. If it's "Huge", does that mean you'd give it HP equal to CONx4 ? Either way, since I don't know the typical CON either, what would that make it's HP?

    A T.Rex is "Huge" and have an average CON of 21. So using Harshax's system it would get 84 HP.

    The monsters from 3E can be found at Monster Index :: d20srd.org

  6. Actually, it's pretty close. And where it differs, I like your version better. Higher SIZ, hence more HPs, and more reasonable AP IMHO.

    Care to publish any more creatures, for comparision purposes?

    Aboleth:

    STR: 6d6+5, CON: 4d6+6, SIZ: 6d6+6, INT: 3d6+4, POW: 3d6+6, DEX: 3d6+1, APP: 3d6+6; Move: 1, swim 6; AP: 7; Tentacle 55%; Knowledge (any one) 60, Listen 85, Spot 85, Swim 40.

    Creatures like Aboleth and other "high level" creatures tend to have get very high skill bases and that's one of my problems presently - how to get the base chances right.

  7. Yes, you're probably right. I prefer to keep the D&D HP values, but that's non-standard and may be too much.

    Does your algorithm match creatures already published in BRP well? For example (dragons are too variable)...

    T.Rex: STR 10D6+32 (av.67); CON 4D6+21 (av.35); SIZ 6D6+32 (av.53); HP 44; AP 10; Bite 50% 2d6+db; Claw 35% d4+db/2; Kick 45% D6+db.

    My way would give 'em 80-90hp (from MM, not sure how many HD they have in 3.x). How about yours?

    From the data in the SRD a Tyranosaurus would have:

    STR 10d6+32, CON 6d6+14, SIZ 10d6+48, HP 59, AP 5, Bite 55%.

    Because I decided to use the STR value as a base for SIZ some inconsistencies with existing creatures will happen. I figure that most large creatures have more SIZ than STR, but that might be a false assumption on my part... Maybe one should use the average of the average values of STR and CON instead and possibly add or subtract a few points based on size class.

  8. I think HP is very important for the 'character' of a monster, and should be kept close to the D&D HPs where reasonable. Knowing HP and CON, SIZ would then be defined. Obviously it doesn't work for all D&D creatures: some have more HP/HD than they should from Size alone. So I'd apply some sort of 'cap', according to size category (the extra HD/HP giving extra Dodge capability, say). Or are you taking the view that D&D HPs need to change, being generally too high for BRP?

    I try to convert the creatures so that they conform to the normal scale of powers in d100 games. From this follows that I change the HP value of the creatures - so yes I do think the HPs needs to change, they are too high for BRP, IMO.

  9. Does your method distinguish AC factors that are due to DEX-type bonuses? They should add to parry and/or dodge skills somehow.

    The d20 SRD has been translated into XML and from there into various DB formats, that's my source. The armour class record for an Aboleth, for example, looks like this:

    16 (-2 size, +1 Dex, +7 natural), touch 9, flat-footed 15
    This function parses that string and returns the natural AC bonus, which I use as natural AP.
    Public Function parseAC(armourString As String) As Integer
    
        Dim armour As Variant
    
        Dim tempStr As Variant
    
        Dim natural As Variant
    
        Dim cleanedStr As Variant
    
        Dim apValue As Variant
    
    
        armour = Split(armourString, ",")
    
        apValue = 0
    
    
        For Each tempStr In armour
    
            If InStr(LCase(tempStr), "natural") > 0 Then
    
                cleanedStr = Trim(tempStr)
    
                natural = Split(cleanedStr, " ")
    
                apValue = natural(0)
    
                apValue = CInt(Right(apValue, Len(apValue) - InStr(apValue, "+")))
    
            End If
    
        Next
    
    
        parseAC = apValue
    
    
    End Function[/code]

    So, no I don't use the DEX bonuses in my calculation.

    Once you know their CON, how about using their HPs to calculate SIZ?

    But HP in DnD does not reflect CON + SIZ, at least I have not been able to any such relationship. In 3E all creatures are sorted into a set of Size categories. I base my calculation on that plus the STR value of the creature. SIZ and STR are often somewhat related in BRP.

  10. I’ve been fiddling with a conversion of creatures from the d20 SRD (i.e. from the DnD Monster Manual) to BRP. I need the data for my Creature Generator spreadsheet. Since the data is available in XML and DB formats it’s not that difficult to do a translation. I’ve chosen the quick and dirty route and imported all data into Excel and now I’m almost done with the translation scripts.

    When I’m done, creating a word document and a PDF printout of all the creatures won’t be that much trouble, in fact it will just be a matter of writing a VBA script in Word that merges the all the information from the Excel spreadsheets per each creature and stores that as a creature description in a Word document. Before I do that I’d like to see if anyone has any objections to my transformation algorithms.

    1) Stats

    I base the conversion on the average given in the SRD. The stat is divided by the average dice value and the reminder is added as a dice bonus. The choice of dice is based on the average value.

    '---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ' Procedure : getDiceString
    
    ' Author    : Peter Brink
    
    ' Date      : 2008-05-10
    
    ' Purpose   : The average stat value / 6 would give you the number of dices used. But
    
    '             we dont use more than a handfull dices. We first need to analyze the
    
    '             average value and decide how many dices we will use. We then use the
    
    '             remainder as a point bonus.
    
    '---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    '
    
    Public Function getDiceString(averageVal As Integer) As String
    
    
        Dim noDice As Integer
    
        Dim diceType As Integer
    
        Dim diceMod As Integer
    
    
        diceType = 6
    
    
        Select Case averageVal
    
            Case 1 To 4 'split in number of d3 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = CInt(averageVal / 1.5)
    
                diceMod = averageVal Mod 1.5
    
                diceType = 3
    
            Case 5 To 10 'split in number of d4 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = CInt(averageVal / 2.5)
    
                diceMod = averageVal Mod 2.5
    
                diceType = 4
    
            Case 11 To 17 'split in 3d6 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = 3
    
                diceMod = averageVal - 11
    
            Case 11 To 20 'split in 4d6 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = 4
    
                diceMod = averageVal - 14
    
            Case 21 To 40 'split in 6d6 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = 6
    
                diceMod = averageVal - 21
    
            Case 41 To 60 'split in 8d6 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = 8
    
                diceMod = averageVal - 28
    
            Case 61 To 80 'split in 10d6 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = 10
    
                diceMod = averageVal - 35
    
            Case Else 'split in 10d10 and add reminder as +p
    
                noDice = 10
    
                diceMod = averageVal - 55
    
                diceType = 10
    
        End Select
    
    
        If averageVal = 0 Then
    
            getDiceString = "0"
    
        ElseIf Not diceMod = 0 Then
    
            getDiceString = noDice & "d" & diceType & "+" & diceMod
    
        Else
    
            getDiceString = noDice & "d" & diceType
    
        End If
    
    
    End Function
    SIZ is a little bit different matter as it's not given in the SRD. I base the conversion on the broad size category and the STR stat value.
    '---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ' Procedure : getSizDice
    
    ' Author    : Peter Brink
    
    ' Date      : 2008-05-10
    
    ' Purpose   : Uses the STR dice and the Size value of a creature to create it's SIZ dice
    
    '---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    '
    
    Public Function getSizDice(creatureSize As String, strDice As String) As String
    
    
        Select Case LCase(creatureSize)
    
            Case "fine" 'SIZ 1
    
                getSizDice = "1"
    
            Case "diminutive" 'SIZ 1-2
    
                getSizDice = "1d2"
    
            Case "tiny" 'SIZ 2-4
    
                getSizDice = "1d3+1"
    
            Case Else
    
                getSizDice = parseStrDice(strDice, creatureSize)
    
        End Select
    
    
    End Function

    2) Move

    I divide the d20 move rate by 10 and drop all reminders, this gives a reliable translation to BRP, IMO.

    3) Armour

    Here I just parses the armour record and uses the natural AC bonus as a AP value.

    4) Skills

    I wrote a skill conversion function for the Creature Creator and I use it here to convert a d20 skill to an equivalent BRP skill. The skill ranks are multiplied by 5 and this gives a first rudimentary conversion. However, the skill levels seems a bit high so I'm wondering if I don't need to write a more intelligent conversion routine.

    5) Weapons

    Same as with skills, the skill rank is converted. This can lead to quite high base chances. But some creatures in RQ also had high base chances. A more general conversion algorithm is probably needed here... The weapon type checked against those I have in the Creator.

    6) Hit Locations

    I use the categories of hit locations from RQ Creatures. I also need to create a few new ones. No problems here as far as I can see.

    7) Description

    The description contains of a few sections. The first is just a short description of the creature and that only needs to be extracted. The second is a very brief note on the creature's combat tactics, also only needs to be extracted. Then there are notes about special powers and the like. I don't really plan to keep those - but I haven't decided yet. There are also notes on the creatures skills, or what skills the creature has any racial bonuses in. I'm wondering if one perhaps should use these notes when assessing the average skill values and perhaps that will lead to a better choice of base skill levels.

  11. Really ?

    I had the following RuneQuest 3 references in mind :

    A 1-point spirit magic spell deals 1d3 damage.

    A 3-points divine magic spell (which means 3 POW were sacrified to learn this spell) deals 3d6 damage.

    In Sandy Petersen's Sorcery rules, a X intensity spell deals "1dX" damage.

    Yes, Firearrow and Fireblade have a higher damage/MP ratio, but they require a weapon to be effective.

    Our references are very different :)

    But also note that the firearrow and fireblade spells replaces the damage of the weapon and the size of the weapon does not matter, its the fire that does the damage. And they also doesn't ignore armour (as disruption does).

    The higher cost of divine magic is partly due to their near automatic chance of success and their long range and duration. I still think Gurps magic fits like a glove with the existing magic systems.

  12. Isn't it redundant to add Magic category PLUS Magery if Magery and Magic category are functions of POW ?

    Perhaps, I think a base chance around 35-40% is reasonable. Spells in Gurps are much more like recipes, they are not full-blown widely applicable skills, which IMHO warrants the relatively high base chance.

    I also think fatigue costs should be doubled to adequate MP costs.

    I mean, casting a firebolt that deals 3d6 damage to a target with a 3 MPs expanse doesn't seem right to me, and most GURPS fatigue costs 1 to 4 fatigue points as far as I remember.

    Ah, but a fireball only affects one target in Gurps. So a 3 MP fireball spell is functionally equivalent to the 3 MP Firearrow spirit magic spell. If you want to have an exploding fireball you'll have to spend much more MP. A 3d6 exploading fireball would cost you 3 x 2 = 6 MP and deliver 3d6 dam to everyone within 1 m, 2d6 to all within 3 m and 1d6 to all within 6 m. With either kind of fireball you'll need 17+ POW to do more than 3d6 dam.

  13. Ah, the Giant-with-a-dagger paradox! Maybe just "damage bonus cannot exceed base weapon damage"? (Or twice base damage)?

    One way might be to rule that when a creature uses a weapon with a STR requirement less than one third of his own STR then the weapon only adds +1d6 extra damage to his damage bonus. If the creature STR is more than four times higher than the weapons STR requirement then the weapon adds a flat +2.

    Example: a Giant with STR 45 that uses a Halberd (req. STR 13) does 6d6+1d6 damage. If the Giant used a dagger it would do 6d6+2. If the Giant uses a trollmaul, it could make use of the momentum of the weapon and do 3d6+6d6 in damage.

  14. As a soon-to-become-legal-professional (when law school is done) I do have a few opinions on the matter. Mind you, these are my opinions, take them for what they are worth...

    Based on how you phrase your question you really ask: what are the limits to someone's ownership of a rule, where does it end?

    Well, to be frank, the ownership does not even begin. Rules (as such) cannot be owned. A rule is an idea. The only way one can own an idea is by claiming a patent. With the exception of the U.S., rules of games are excluded from patent protection all around the globe. Everyone is free to express the rules of the game chess.

    What one could claim ownership (the copyright) to is the way one has expressed an idea.

    A claim of copyright is only valid if the expression is "original". The concept of originality is, unfortunately, not the same in all nations. Europe has it's version, the U.S. another and the U.K. still a slightly different one. The former European colonies have imported European copyright notions, the same goes for the former eastern-block. To make matters worse, there are some (in some cases quite subtle) differences between the European nations concepts of originality.

    A very basic definition of originality is: an expression is original if it's the result of a human beings own personal, independent, creation.

    So, based on this very basic definition, a description of a games rule, that is the result of someone's own, personal and independent creation, is copyright protected.

    There are a few problems here. What is really meant by personal, by independent and by creation? It's here the laws of Europe, the U.S. and the U.K. begins to differ. In Europe courts, particularly in Scandinavia, use a help rule called "the double-creation criteria" => A expression is not original if the possibility of independent double-creation is not minimal.

    That is, if you have reason to suspect that the probability of 10 (or more) experienced roleplayers, who all know of the ideas that makes up a given RPG, could independently produce the same or very similar expressions of a given rule are more than minimal (say more than 10% probability) then those expressions would not be original, and thus would lack copyright protection.

    So to answer your question. In my opinion a description of a rule of a game is, at best, protected against direct copying. There is no protection against adaptations or derivative use.

    If someone describes a rule with his own words, then it's quite OK.

    Finally, try to avoid falling into the trap of assuming that just because a text derives from the ideas presented in another text, it's also a derivative text. The idea is unprotected. It's fair game. You may derive from other peoples ideas - that's one of the fundamental concepts of copyright legislation. Only expressions are protected, not the ideas they contain.

  15. You are just assuming that "It is good because it was in RQ4". This is no point. Removing the +1/+2s has just the effect of reducing variability among weapons, and this is by no means an improvement. The flat additions represent weapon shape in RQ3/BRP: curved blade weapons have +2 but a smaller die, straight-bladed weapons have +1, blunt weapons have no blade bonus. Polearms are the only exception.

    Removing flat bonuses yelds the improvement of scimitars, battleaxes, broadswords and maces having about the same statistics. If that is what you call an "improvement"...

    In a real fight the real differencing factor would probably not be whether one of the combatants had a scimitar and the other a mace, but who had the greater skill and tactical ability. When designing a RPG, one has to take the "game" part of it in consideration. Giving players the possibility to make choices makes for a better game. So, from that perspective, it's good game design to let scimitars do 1d6+2 in damage and a mace 1d8.

  16. I think that if the duration is staying to a minute (on average) especially if you allow other magic systems in the same game, you'd have to allow high skills to eventually drop the cost to 0, as you can in Gurps. There are still penalties for casting spells while maintaining others (-1 per spell you have active, so I'd guess that would be a -5%), I think there is still a self correcting element to it.

    Ah, I didn't think of that aspect (i.e. comparing with other magic systems). Then it makes sense to allow a really skilled mage to maintain spells at no cost. The skill penalty is not that large but a failed concentration roll (for example after an injury) would probably mean that all maintained spells are dropped.

  17. Actually, it's a bit wonky since technically skills that are a 0% are just that, and you have to buy them from there. Spells would, assumedly, start at 0 unless you bought them, at which they become 30% or whatever the new base is.

    You could perhaps do something like the MRQ version, wherein you spend 10 skill points at which you gain the skill at INT+POW, and VHard Spells at (Int+Pow)/2. Then add Magery perhaps?

    Well, that would certainly work. The main thing is to not make it too easy nor too difficult to play a inexperienced mage.

    At what point would you become immune to those penalties though? As I understand it, you simply can't cast those spells without doing those gestures and rituals, until a certain level of skill at which point you lose those requirements, but you aren't able to cast without the rituals. Or would you simply use the limitations instead?

    I'll use the penalties. At high skill levels mages will be able to afford those penalties.

    Lower casting cost? The spells cost seems about the same between the two systems. Sometimes mush more (Protection costing 2xpt of protection and only lasting a minute!).

    I'm referring to the lower cost to maintain spells that good casters get. See below...

    That doesn't seem particularly fair to the casters, unless you are keeping the rules that at a certain level of skill you can reduce the maintenance cost of a spell (15 or higher in gurps reduces the maintenance by 1 per round, allowing many protective spells to be maintained for free, ). When would that kick in? 75% for -1(15)? 100% for -2(20)? 125% for -3(25)?

    I would use the reduced maintenance cost rule. Multiplying a Gurps skill level by 5 (as you did seems the right thing), so yes: at 75% the maintenance cost is reduced by 1, at 100% by 2 and at every additional 25 percentiles of skill by an aditional one point. The minimum cost would, still, be 1.

  18. You might take a look at Rolemaster Express (or HARP) for another system in which the quality of the dice roll directly affects the damage dealt.

    One way of implementing such a system in BRP would be to compare what the two combatants rolled and add the difference as a damage bonus.

    First you need to implement a method of finding out the relative level of success of any roll. A simple, yet elegant, method to solve this problem is to compare the tens of skill roll with the tens of the effective skill level. For example, assume that Abe and Bernie are competing in a poetry contest. For this purpose the GM uses the Oratory skill. Abe has skill 78% and Bernie 65%. If Abe rolls 50 and Bernie 46 then Abe’s relative level off success was 7 – 5 = 2 and Bernie’s was 6 – 4 = 2, it’s a tie.

    Special successes increases the level of success by 150% and a critical increases it by 200%.

    If the attacker manages to hit (his level of success is higher than 1) then use the following table:

    Effect   Damage Bonus
    
    1               1
    
    2               1d3
    
    3               1d6
    
    4               1d8
    
    5               1d10
    
    6               2d6
    
    7               2d8
    
    8               3d6
    
    9               2d10
    
    10              4d6
    
    each extra level adds +1d6 to the damage

    A win by 5 or 6 points roughly equals an impale, double normal damage. A win by 8 points and up is similar to a critical. The bonus damage will defeat almost all types of armour making it similar in effect to a critical.

    EDIT: One could also change the damage calculation completely and base it on the effectiveness of the blow, the damage bonus and add a bonus for the weapon used. The later would then be a fixed value. I would suggest using the average of the dice used (rounded down) - 1 and ignore any added value, i.e. a dagger would do 1 point of damage (2.5, rounded down, -1), a broadsword would do 2 points (3.5, rounded down, - 1) and a pole axe would do 6 points (3 times 3.5, rounded down, -1). A strong human of average size that managed a good hit with a sword would do 1d10 + 1d4 + 2 points of damage.

    A successful parry would soak damage up to shields AP, a successful dodge would avoid the hit.

  19. The Swedish RPG "Drakar & Demoner", which was based on Magic World, but later developed along its own lines (but still always has been clearly a BRP-engine game) used a different table in its 3:rd ed. (from 1987).

    01-16  No extra damage
    
    17-20  +1d4
    
    21-25  +1d6
    
    26-30  +1d10
    
    31-40  +2d6
    
    51-60  +3d6
    
    61-70  +4d6
    
    71-90  +5d6
    
    each additional 
    
    + 20   +1d6 
    Then in the 4:ed (from 1991) the game designers changed the rules again:
    
      01-26  No extra damage
    
      27-29  +1
    
      30-32  +1d2
    
      33-40  +1d4
    
      41-50  +1d6
    
      51-60  +1d10
    
      61-80  +2d6
    
     81-100 +3d6
    
    101-140 +4d6
    
    141-180 +5d6

    They also upgraded the damage two-handed weapons did. A standard human wielding a Greataxe normally did 2d6+2+1d4 points of damage in RQ III (with an average of 11), in D&D 4 (as its known in Sweden) the same human would do 2d10+1 (for an average of 11). Creatures that where strong (such as dwarves) benefited from the new system since it only cared about whether or not you could handle the heavy weapon (i.e. the STR value).

  20. That's pretty cool. Perhaps starting skill in a spell could be different for hard spells and VHard spells. Though, the next question is: how do you learn them at character creation? Can you just put 1% into them and then get them at 30%+1%+Magic Category+Magery?

    Well, that would seem natural. That's how all other skills work. Perhaps one needs to consider increasing the "known spell" level to 50%. Since you must know all required spells, you would have to spend quite a bit of points just to get for example fireball. You would need a minimum of POW 15 plus 3 other specified spells to be able to learn fireball. The average cost would probably be around 30 points.

    How would you handle the spell mastering ability (i.e. the fact that at certain higher skill levels you stop needing to use gestures and such, and the spells cost less)?

    I would convert the gestures rules to penalties for not using a lot of gestures and voice:

    Omitting the foot movements: -10 percentiles

    Gestures with only one hand: -10 percentiles

    no hand gestures at all: -20 percentiles

    Softly spoken incantations: -10 percentiles

    no incantation: -20 percentiles

    I would keep the lower casting costs, but I'll use MP not FP.

    Would you leave the duration as they are in Gurps (baring in mind that Fatique recovers faster than MP) or would you upgrade the durations? Or would you simply allow MP of characters using this system to recover more quickly?

    I would use MP to fuel spells. So I would leave durations as they are, maintaining a spell will eat up a mage's MP really fast...

    In Gurps magic it's easier to create MP storage items compared to RQ. It's in fact very much like the Staff rules from Magic World (which I understand are included in the new BRP book).

  21. Hey Peter. I must sheepishly admit that I've just printed out your pdf. First glance through looks good. I'll have a chance to really read it and comment latter.

    Great! Thanks. The version on the web is edited up to "F", I believe. In the copy I have at home I'm on "G".

  22. If you end up writing up any specific rules for this, I'd be interested in viewing them.

    Well as far as I can see there are are very few modifications you need to do.

    1) Magery. In Gurps magic only those with special talent can deal with complex spells. Magery comes in levels, the recommendation is to have no more than four levels in a standard fantasy setting. I would suggest a rule that states that people with less than POW 15 has no magery. At POW 15 you get Magery 1, at POW 17 you'll have Magery 2 and so on up to POW 23 and Magery 5.

    2) Learning Spells. Since the system really only works with skills per spell you'll need to have a fairly high skill base. I would suggest a base of 30 for ordinary spells and a base of 15 for very hard (difficult) spells. Allow the character to add 5 percentiles per point of Magery to the base.

    3) Spell requirements. You need to know a required spell. I would rule that once you have skill level 40 in a spell then you understand it good enough so that you could learn spells that depend on it.

    4) Measurements. Gurps uses imperial measures. There are not that many of those in the book though. Distances are measured in hexes which is equal to one yard, so it could easily be converted to one hex = one meter. The few other instances of imperial measures are easily dealt with.

    5) Modifiers. Modifiers are given as bonuses or penalties of one or more points (Gurps uses skill levels from 1 and up). Multiply by 5 to get the equivalent BRP modifier.

    6) Skills. There's really only one skill that needs to be converted: Innate attack. It's the ability to target missile spells and other supernatural powers at targets at a distance.

    7) Range. Spells are divided into classes or broad types. Missile spells will need some kind of range rule instead of the Gurps one. I would suggest that a mage could fire a missile up to MP * 5 meters with no penalty. Above that his Innate Attack skill would be halved.

    8) Casting Time is given in seconds, use SR instead.

    9) Durations are given in minutes etc. and need not be modified.

    10) Resistance. Spells are resisted using attributes, as given in the spell descriptions. Just use CON for HT, POW for WILL and so on. You could download GURPS Lite to get the basics of the system to help with this conversion.

    11) Damage. I would suggest ruling that spells that deal damage does 1d6 points of damage per power point used.

    There's also a chapter on how to build magic items. That seems to be easy to integrate with BRP, or you could use the rules from RQ or MRQ.

    That's it really.

  23. Just borrowed a copy of Gurps magic from a friend and it seems incredibly easy to adapt to BRP. They use power points which translates directly to mp. Each spell is a skill, but I guess you could use school skills as well. They use a kind of curriculum approach, the mage have to know the prerequisite spells before being able to learn a spell. For example fireball requires that the mage knows create fire and shape fire.

    I know this might not be everyone's cup-of-tea but some people might find it a useful alternative to the existing RQ (III) systems and the "new" BRP systems. An added bonus is that the book is available as a PDF, from which one can copy and paste as much as one pleases... I'm seriously considering adding this to my collection.

    There's a fan created list of all spells, with just the basic data at: GURPS Resources

  24. Magic Missile, Sleep and Fireball are the absolute classic D&D spells... The acid-test of a converted system would be how it handles them, I'd say.

    Well, this is my translation of Fireball:

    Fireball

    Manipulation 3

    Ranged, Passive, Temporal

    This spell creates a fist sized ball of fire in the palm of the casters hand. The Wizard can "throw" the fireball at any target within range and sight, the ball will explode when it hits the target, doing 1 pt of general hit-point damage to the target and any other being (or item) within a 1 m diameter. As with all other cases when damage is applied directly to the general hit-points of a character, use the lowest armour value, e.g. a character which wears a closed helm and a chainmail hauberk has no armour on the legs and therefore takes full damage from the fireball, if he had worn leather boots he would have had one point of armour.

    The target must be within the direct sight of the caster and the ball will fly straight at the target. The fireball is very instable, if the ball strikes something solid, such as a gate, en route to the target, the ball explodes. Throwing the ball at a target standing behind a bush or something similar will set the explosion of when the ball strikes the branches of the bush. If the target has moved, fallen down, died, etc. before the ball reaches him or if the tar-get managed to dodge the fireball, the ball will continue its flight in a straight line until it hits something solid, else if the ball passes outside the spells range the ball just disappears in a puff of smoke.

    If the caster wants to cast the ball through a narrow opening, such as an arrow slit or down a chimney, then the caster needs to succeed with a Throw skill check. If the check fails the ball explodes when it hits the wall, chimney, roof, etc.

    The damage done by the explosion can be increased by amplifying the intensity of the spell, see the amplify skill description for more details. The diameter of the explosion can also be increased by using the volume skill; each level of volume used increases the diameter by one meter.

    The explosion can set fire to combustible items, use common sense, a weak fireball wouldn't set fire to a wet roof but a large (3d6 damage or more) would have a good chance of setting fire to almost anything combustible. Very strong fireballs can melt metals or even glass. The heat of a fireball (for the purpose of determining if an item catches fire) is halved when outside its radius; it is halved again outside more than 2 x radius in meters etc.

    Spell Props: A tiny ball of guano and sulphur.

×
×
  • Create New...