peterb

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

Well, this is my translation of Fireball:

I've just uploaded an revised wizardy document on my website (see links in the first post of the thread) to address the omission of rules for casting time.

Yes. It used to be Spell Level + any manipulations. But as I read the conversions I did a few years back and did a few new ones I realized that all spells basically had the same default effect (10 m range, 10 min duration and 1 pt of damage). So it made more sense to give all spelsl a basic cost of 1fp + any manipulations. Some spells are more complex than others, that's way they modify the art skill. I noticed that I forgot to add a note about that, so I need to update the text. The rule is found in the Spell Properties chapter of "Wizardry Spells":

GORE have made quite a few translations, but not all spells are translated. The translation is also not done the same way, or to put it another way, does not follow the same algorithm. The authors of GORE has chosen a different way of translating d20 spells to d100 standards. Their way is not better or worse than my way. There are many roads that leads to Rome...

Hmm, I've just checked the RFT spell file and it didn't look that nice... I've updated my first post with a link to a zip file with all the spells in MS Word (2003) format if people happen to prefer that format...

As some of you may have noticed, I have in a few threads been fiddling around with how one might go about when transforming d20 spells into a d100 and BRP compatible format. I actually started a similar project several years ago and forgot all about it I wrote a rules set called Wizardry (published on the RQ and BRP mailing list in July 2004) and even made a rough mechanic transformation of quite a few D&D spells. I've picked up the trail where I left it and has edited a few more spells (at the present I'm on on the letter "E"). In any case I'd like to share my progress so far. Below you'll find links to a zip file with a rtf-file containing the converted spells. You'll also find links to my wizardry rules. I'd like some feedback (if anyone would be so kind and take the time) on the conversion so far. I've edited A to D, so there should be quite a few examples of how I convert spells. I'm also posting this in the hope of recruiting some editing help. If we could assemble a group of people, each editing one letter (all the S's, T's and so on), we could fairly fast and easy get one set of converted spells done. If someone else would want to change the spell data (adding some of the data I removed for example) to fit their idea of an d20 conversion, it would make their task easier if they had a batch of spell descriptions that where already transformed and adapted to d100 and BRP. Well, anyway here are the files: Wizardry Spells zip file (document is in rtf format) Wizardry Spells zip file (document is in MS word format) Wizardry rules (in pdf format) Wizardry rules (in openoffice format) Wizardry rules (in MS Word format) Note: Wizardry was updated 2008-05-03

I just found out that I'm absent minded A few years ago I wrote an short rulesmodule called "Wizardry" which details an alternative wizardry system. It was partly designed with the porting of d20 spells in mind... I had completely forgotten about it. I even wrote three editions, moving from MP use to FP use... I'm getting old... Here's a link to a copy in pdf-format and here's a link to the same document in openoffice-format. The document is licensed under a Creative Commons License. And yes, I almost forgot, I've added a d100-Compatible logo...

Oh, they did, they did... they even tried to claim the Glorantha trademark... Well, Stafford made some comments on the Glorantha-L list that would lead you to think otherwise and if you study the copyright notice in the MRQ SRD:s OGL, the SRD is claimed to be based on "original material by Greg Stafford".

Just some notes for the record(s)... Chaosium never lost the copyright to RQ, they sold the trademark to Avalon Hill. And then they licensed the contents of the game (under an exclusive license one has to presume) to AH. Avalon Hill was bought up by Hasbro at the end of the 90's and was transferred to Harbro's fully owned subsidiary company WotC. Someone at Hasbros legal department failed to renew the trademark registration for Runequest, so the trademark lapsed and Issaries (Greg Stafford's company) nicked the trademark just under the nose of Chaosium. So that's how Issaries and not Chaosium got the trademark Runequest. Since the rules of a game is not copyright protected and since Stafford had some part in writing the original Runequest rules, Mongoose was able to reproduce large parts of RQ II and III in MRQ, which is why the games are so similar. /Peter

One could also say that the runes associated with a god gave you a good idea of what domains (in d20 terms) a god was associated with. The main god of a domain had a double runes. The main death god thus had two death runes, the Red Goddess had two moon runes, etc. /Peter

The idea of a d100 system definition is meant to create a larger compatible body of works. AikiGhost's "d100 Rules System" is quite nice but it actually has a few "non d100" features. Stats in the 1-100 range is one, rolling above a threshold (as in d20 but using a d100) is another. In fact the system system seems to me as a blend between BRP and Rolemaster. Nothing bad about that, I'm not trying to bash AikiGhost's system in any way, but the game system is quite far from what I perceive as the common definition of a "d100-system", and that makes the system quite incompatible with other d100 material. Again the idea is to create a symbol indicating compatibility and to define what is meant by the statement: "compatible with the d100-system".

OK. Here is a suggestion for a very basic d100-charter, based on Simon's post up-thread: *********** This publication is d100 compatible. That may not mean much to the reader, which is why the d100-Community has created a d100 charter, a document detailing what the community believes is meant by a “d100 game”. A d100 compatible game contains game mechanics that, at the very minimum: Uses a D100 as the prime die when resolving situations, Uses Characteristics that are based on a Dice Roll but not solely random, Defines human characteristics as being typically in the 3-18 range, Uses Hit Points being derived from Characteristics, Defines damage as being weapon + personal – armour, Defines previous Experience being Background/Profession based rather than based on a Class, Uses no Character/Race Classes, Uses no Experience Levels, Uses percentage based skills, Make use of incremental experience, And resolves skill rolls and task resolutions by rolling below a target number on a D100.

Of course you can use it. The logo is not of the very best quality, I do have a logo in higher resolution (also in PNG format) that you may have if wish. As I think of it, maybe I should release the logo under a CC license (or even public domain) just so that people understand they may use it freely. To be frank, IMO, the logo lacks originality and is therefore public domain. I see what I can do about a PD-declaration...

Sounds good. The "d100-Compatible" definition should, just as Simon says, be kept to a minimum IMO. The reason being that it's better to be somewhat to inclusive than to exclude. And as Simon wrote in another post, and as several others have pointed out, I agree that the "big" companies would probably not be particularity interested in such a logo. But that's not the main purpose. My idea was to create a community standard and a logo that the community, fanzines and hobby-publishers can use to indicate what type of game they are supporting.

The method I devised and posted up-thread is in fact designed to deal with some of these problems. All the methods I've posted are intended to be used in a automatic conversion routine that converts d20 spell data into BRP (or d100 if you want) spell data. One problem one cannot handle programmatically is very powerful spells. The only thing one can do is to mark them as problematic and alert a GM about the potential problem. Well, I wouldn't be using MRQ if I made a conversion. There's absolutely no problem converting d20 spells to BRP, legal wise. The game system in it self is not owned by anyone. The terms being used in any given game system (hp, AC, magic points, fatigue points, SR etc.) are for all purposes public domain.

Yes... but a fireball is an area spell. Some spells would probably need a bit of tweaking. I would, for example, downgrade Magic Missile to 1d3 damage (but ignoring armour, needing a POW v POW win). Essentially it would become an improved Disruption spell. Good idea. I wouldn't complain, the method that is easiest to use should be used.

As a response to the comments above, I wrote this bare bone alternative wizardry system: Fatigue and spell buffer Each school of magic is a separate skill. Spells need not be memorized. Spells can be cast from books, at double the casting time. Each spell has a difficulty rating of 0 to 45 which is subtracted from the school skill level (d20 spell level x 5). Casting a spell is tiring. Each spell has a FP cost equal to its difficulty rating. Spells with DR 0 costs 1 FP to cast. Spells can be manipulated by expending more fatigue points. Each expansion of area, range, duration or additional targets or missiles costs 5 fatigue points each. Example: by default the spell magic missile creates one magic missile, adding three extra missiles costs 15 additional fatigue points, for a total cost of 20 FP. As the mage improves her skills she will become less fatigued by casting spells. This improved ability to manipulate magic energy is represented by a Spell Buffer. A wizard’s Spell Buffer is equal to one tenth of her combined magic skill values (rounded to the nearest whole number). A wizard with a total of 93 points in three skills thus has a Spell Buffer of 9 points. The Spell Buffer can be only used instead of FP to fuel spells. The mage recovers the buffer at the same rate as she recovers FP. A wizard can only manipulate an amount of fatigue points equal to half her school skill level, drop the reminder, at any given time. Thus a wizard with a skill of 63 can only manipulate a maximum of 30 fatigue points at any given time. She couldn’t expand a fireball (a 15 FP spell) more than 15 points and she couldn’t cast a spell with a higher DR than 30 (a 6th level spell in d20 terms), in effect a wizard cannot cast spells with a d20 spell level higher than the 10s digit of his spell school skill. Expanding fatigue points to rapidly could be dangerous as the wizard runs the risk of exhausting himself, possibly even killing himself. Learning a spell is a two week task that has a chance of success equal to school skill – difficulty rating. A wizard with 55% skill would need to roll 40 or lower to learn the spell fireball (DR 15). A wizard may add a week to his studies and increase his chance of success by the average of his INT and POW (rounded to the nearest whole number) percentiles. Our wizard, with INT 14 and POW 15, could thus add 14 percentiles to his chance of learning the fireball spell.

OK. This is my take at a revised fatigue system. It's based on the RQ III system but I've "imporoved" it. You may not agree of course... Comments are welcome - as always. Fatigue All characters have a fatigue point pool equal to the sum of the characters STR and CON. Doing things that makes you tired, such as running, swimming, fighting and climbing, reduces the available fatigue points. Each melee round of hard work (running, hasty swimming or swimming in rough sea, etc.) reduces the FP pool by 2 points. Each melee round of medium work (fighting, swimming, climbing, riding at full speed, etc.) reduces the FP pool by one point. Wearing stuff also reduces the FP pool. When a character carries stuff the sum of the ENC values of the tings carried are deducted from the fatigue point pool. However the ENC value reflects how cumbersome it would be to carry a thing in ones arms or on the back. Some items, most notable armour, do not encumber as much when worn as when carried on the back. The ENC of armour is halved (round up) when worn. An option would of course be to recalculate all armour ENC and rule that when not worn a piece of armours ENC is doubled. When a characters FP pool reaches zero (0) the character becomes fatigued. Every new FP lost reduces all skills by 1 percentile. A fatigued character may not run or do any other hard work. He may fight, cast spells and ride at normal speed, etc. When a characters FP pool is so depleted that it has reached (0 – (STR + CON)) or less the character becomes exhausted. The character must make a CON x 5 (-FP) roll or collapse, if the character succeeds he may still do nothing but walk. Any physical activities (including casting spells) requires another CON x 5 (-FP) roll or the character collapses. If a character drives his FP pool below (0 – (STR + CON + CON)) he may die as a result of the strain. The character must succeed with a CON x 5 (-FP) roll or he dies… A suggestion to simplify play: only count negative FP in chunks of 5. That is if a character has -6 FP, give her only -5 in all skills until she drops below -10. This will lessen the bookkeeping burden somewhat. A character that falls unconscious because his HP total drops below 2 hp looses all positive FP (his FP pool drops to zero). Failing a shock roll, loosing all HP in the head or having a limb severed (i.e. the limbs take twice the normal hp value in total damage) also reduces FP to zero. A character recovers FP at a rate equal to CON /2 rounded up per 5 melee rounds (i.e. per minute). The average character with CON 11 and a FP of 22 thus recovers in slightly more than four minutes. As an other example, a very well trained Dwarf character with STR 16 and CON 22, fully recovers in slightly less than four minutes. It would seem that all character would fully recover in about four minutes. Only characters that are relatively speaking weak but has high cardio (CON) fully recovers faster. But very fit characters manages to recover more FP in a given time frame, which might be crucial in some circumstances. /Peter

I don't have the BRP-zero book so I don't know if there's a fatigue system in the new book. I'm fiddling with a set of conversion rules for d20 spells and is contemplating using FP instead of MP. The RQ III fatigue system sucks and the RQ II system is a bit to basic, so it would be nice to know if there is such a s system in the new book or if I have to devise one of my own. /Peter

Oh. Sorry, I misinterpreted your smiley...

No offence intended but... Having written (and published) a publication called "d100" does not by itself create a trademark. It really doesn't. Sorry. /Peter

Sad, but you are most probably right... :ohwell: Anyway, I just made two prototypes for logos that we could at least recommend the community to use... and it appears as I see them side by side that they didn't turn out at the same size... Well, anyway, you get the idea.

Ah, but the idea is that we needn't do the dirtywork - we could leave that to the authorities. One of the tasks of the consumer protection agencies is to act against misleading commercial practices. A misleading actions is an action that deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer about, for example, the main characteristics of the product (see the EU directive concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices, art. 6.1 for more details). What we would do would be to complain to the authorities that a publisher uses the logo in a misleading way, deceiving the consumers about the nature of his product, and then let the consumer protection agency do the work for us. The purpose of the charter and the logo is to establish a proof of what is it that the consumer expects from a d100 compatible product. Does this make sense? /Peter

Well, the average cost of the average spirit magic spell is probably 1.5 mp. A RQ 3 shaman could only cast some 10 spells a day... and as the average sorcery spell costs quite some mp in RQ3 (due too intensity, range and duration manipulation) a sorcerer would only be able to cast two or three spells a day... The solution is mp storing devices, mp spirits and self-powered magic devices. Also a mage in d100 needs to use magic in other ways, as a information seeking device, to improve defences and so on. Sorcery and the like really takes to much time to cast to be very valuable in combat, in such situation spirit magic rules (and you don't need many of those spells). Sure, one could device means to deal with the problem. One way would be to use Fatigue Points instead of mp, possibly combined with a "spell buffer" that increases with skill. Assume that a mage would be allowed STR + CON FP which he could use to cast spells and that he could add a "buffer" equal to (sum of all magic skills / 10) rounded up that he could spend before tapping into his own strength reservoir. Of course you'll have to increase the cost of the spells by about x 5. But as you may recall FP are recovered faster than MP... Of course for every 10 FP the mage would loose 10 percentiles in all skills. You could also device a spell that allowed the mage to recover 5 FP per MP or 15 FP per point of permanent POW. In a ditch the mage could sacrifice MP and even POW to recover his breath. /Peter