rust

So I would not have Trade [sage] because a sage is just someone with Literacy and Lore skills.

In my settings "Sage" is more a general description like "Soldier", not a specific

profession or trade. As the soldier is defined by his specific combat skills that

make him a footman, cavalryman, archer and so on, the sage is defined by his

knowledge skills that can make him, for example, an engineer, lawyer or medic.

A Trade (Sage) skill could give some general background knowledge about the

way sages work, for example how to do research, how to write papers, the eti-

quette and customs among sages, and all that, just like a Trade (Soldier) skill

could give a basic understanding of how the military works (ranks, orders, etc.).

However, I would not consider such a skill necessary.

I have decided to use "Trade" for this kind of skill, because - as I understand it -

Craft is limited to the production of something, while Occupation could include

activities that are not related to any specific profession. So in my setting it is

Trade (Farmer), or Trade (Banker), or Trade (Courtesan).

Projects ... far too many of them ...

I am usually working on my "holy worldbuilding grail", the (almost) perfect science

fiction desert world and water world settings, and I think this will continue for a

couple of years, until I am truly satisfied with the result or finally give up the at-

tempt. The current versions (V. 5.01 each) are Godot (desert world) and Pando-

ra (water world). There are also some minor science fiction settings, like the In-

surgency, but most of them are shelved, and I only rarely add something to any

of them.

My second "worldbuilding playground" are pseudo-historical alternate earth set-

tings, usually "what if" scenarios where a small real world nation is replaced with

a fictional one. Among the victims of such replacements were Avignon, Bhutan,

El Salvador, Malta, Qawasim and Socotra, most of them during the early modern

age, but some also during the medieval age or during both historical periods.

Right now I am once more working on an improved version of the Thule setting,

an alternate history of a medieval Prussian settlement on Greenland.

Yes, it is rumoured that a (near) death experience can help a lot to focus one's

mind ...

The way to do this would be to have a single generic perception skill, and have modifiers, similar to advantages/disadvantages of some systems.

I like this idea very much, mainly because it keeps my general skill list shorter

and at the same time encourages the players to decide whether and where they

want more detail and individuality for their characters by choosing modifiers for

the general skills.

I am not yet sure how well this will fit into the setting in question, where certain

modifiers and combinations of modifiers would be so obviously useful that every

player character would be likely to have them. On the other hand, this would al-

so be the same with separate skills.

Besides, in this specific setting the players will create their characters without

knowing exactly on what kind of planet their characters will have to operate, so

the risk that all will take the same modifiers is low.

I have to think it through a bit more, but I really like it.

With the exception of Dodge this is exactly what RQII does. All Perception skills are folded into one skill and all unarmed skills folded into one skill. Most agility skills (climb, jump, throw, run) are also folded into one all purpose skill called Athletics.

Thank you very much.

The Athletics skill is a good idea, I think I will use it, too.

To really cut down on the number of skills, you could combine certain specialised medical skills with fighting skills.

I wonder whether I should introduce a glove with an electrified thumb as an ille-

gal melee weapon ... and a version with an electrified drilling thumb for the use

against opponents who wear a spacesuit ...

For the Godot science fiction setting I am currently working on the characters

will need at lot of technical and scientific skills, which tends to make the cha-

racter sheets a bit overloaded and the distribution of skill points more difficult

than usual - too many skills to assign points to.

Therefore I thought that it could help to to combine the perception skills (Lis-

ten, Sense, Spot) into one Perception Skill and the unarmed combat skills (Brawl,

Grapple, perhaps also Dodge) into one Unarmed Combat skill.

This would eliminate a couple of skills from the list and make it a bit easier for

the players to spend points for the more setting specific technical and scientific

skills their characters will need, I think.

Before I do that - is there any important reason why this would be a bad idea ?

Thank you.

I'd say the simplest approach is the best - outside their speciality but within their broad field, treat tasks as one step more difficult - so automatic successes become Easy (2 x skill) tests, easy tests become routine, routine tests become hard (1/2 x skill) and hard tests are impossible outside their speciality. So the Habitat Engineering specialist with a skill of 60% would have a chance of answering a routine Construction Engineering test but at half skill (30%).

Thank you very much, this is what I was looking for - problem solved.

The setting I am currently working on will have a number of characters, mostly

engineers and scientists, who learned a basic engineering or science skill and la-

ter specialized in an advanced field of that skill.

An example could be an engineer who started as a construction engineer and la-

ter got advanced training as a habitat systems engineer, or a biologist who later

became an ecologist or a geneticist.

The habitat systems engineer will of course still know a lot about other fields of

construction engineering, and the ecologist will still know a lot about other fields

of biology, but of course less than about the field he specialized in - only, how

much less ?

I could use the Root Skill / Branch Skill approach of the Ringworld RPG to solve

this problem, but I do not really want the additional complexity of that system.

On the other hand, I have no better idea how to handle the relation between a

basic and an advanced knowledge and skill.

Help with this would be most welcome - Thank you.

Er, well, at least the chance to see your name in print and earn enough money to buy your next BRP supplement?

No, not really. While it is not that difficult to translate the mechanics and the

general framework of a setting, the "fluff" that transports the "feel and mood"

of a setting requires more language skill than I have.

I can write such texts in German, I even managed to sell a few science fiction

short stories (and therefore know what my name in print looks like ...), but to

do it in English in about the same quality would be hard work for me - and I do

not want to see anything in lesser quality published.

I've been trying to cajole rust into turning his water world colonization campaign into a coherent sourcebook but he insists that his language skills aren't up to the task.

Well, to translate the "fluff" parts of the setting would be work instead of fun,

so it is highly unlikely that I will ever feel an urge to do it ...

P.S. I believe that if you take on a future world monograph it would make Mr. Rust very happy.

Indeed.

We are still fleshing out the “new species” section of the book, so if there is a particular type of alien you would like to see included, speak up now.

Provided it would fit into your setting, an aquatic or semi-aquatic one would be

most welcome.

Right now I', running Pendragon, an RPG with a very detailed setting, and it really makes no difference as fas as said player is concerned. Yes, it has cost him in terms of his character7s success, weath and status. But even if it gets him killed (and it has come close to at times), he would just shrug, write up a new character and do the same things all over again.

We once had a similar player. Since his character's behaviour caused problems

for the characters of the other players, their characters finally threw his charac-

ter over board during a sea voyage and strictly refused to accept any new cha-

racter of this player as a party member.

I don't know how much of this is purchased for use or as collectables - is there any data or anecdotal evidence on that?

I suspect that this would be difficult to distinuish. For example, I often buy mate-

rial I have no immediate use for, but which may become most useful with one of

the future setting ideas on my list, and sometimes also material as an inspiration

to expand that list. I do not know whether I will really use such material one day,

but I do not consider myself a collector - if some material is outside my areas of

interest, I do not buy it, because I am not interested in a complete collection.

Thank you for the very nice cutouts in the downloads section.

If you prefer wilderness adventures, I think Griffin Mountain could be a good

start:

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=83384&filters=0_0_40050_0

If you are more into city adventures, Pavis would probably be more interesting

for you:

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=83383

More than an only averagely honest character? That doesn't seem fair.

Well, if an only averagely honest characters tells a lie, this is no big surprise, be-

cause people expected him to tell a lie now and then anyway. But if a character

with the reputation to be honest and trustworthy is caught telling a lie, people

tend to be disappointed and shocked, and therefore to remember this much lon-

ger.

I'd rather not penalize players for their character's traits. I see Traits more as a 'carrot' to encourage good RP, not a stick.

The way I use traits, the inner logic of the setting provides the stick: The nor-

mally honest character who is caught telling a lie will from then on suffer from

a negative modifier when attempting to use his social skills with any characters

who have heard about his lying.

Doesn't seem right. Should you be able to have 50% Brave and 50% Cowardly?

Yes. If Brave and Cowardly are the opposite ends of a scale, 50 % Brave does

mean 50 % Cowardly, just like a glass that is 50 % Full is necessarily also 50 %

Empty.

It could also be the solipsism problem, the players' conviction that only their

player characters are real, and all of the other characters of the setting are

just fictional ...

One of the methods I use is the combination of families and social networks of

the characters with the society's customs of blood debt and blood feud.

If the characters harm someone in a way that is seen as dishonourable or other-

wise unacceptable by the society, the relatives and friends of the victim have

the right to demand a compensation from the characters, and if they refuse to

pay this compensation, a blood feud must begin - the relatives and friends of

the characters' victim will kill the family members, friends and allies of the cha-

racters.

Until now I have had only one player who did not understand this concept and

had his character ignore it. As a result this character was killed - poisoned - by

his own sister, because his family had decided that they had to get rid of him to

restore their honour and end the blood feud.

By the way, an interesting quote from Wikipedia about a society that is known

for taking the blood feud obligation seriously, the Greek Mani:

In the era of the Ottoman Empire's rule, the seasoned Albanian soldiers of Ali Pasha

burnt and pillaged the Peloponnese until they got to Mani, the Albanians were stopped

frozen out of fear upon having to come face to face with a Maniot so they were seen

dropping their arms and retreating while repeating the phrase "marr armët e mia por

nuk mua" (Take my arms, but not me), even Ali Pasha himself never entered Mani for

this reason. During the World Wars, Benito Mussolini's Italian regiments from Sicily,

Calabria and Venice refused to enter Mani, saying that they would rather face cannon

fire than a Maniot. The last vendetta on record required the Greek Army with artillery

support to force it to a stop.

A skill roll should be used when no other way is possible or the players undertake a course of action that warrants it. Is that what you're suggesting, Rust?

I usually ask for skill rolls when the result of a character's action is important for

the plotline and there is a plausible risk of a failure. In a way, you could say that

I require skill rolls at the "crossroads" of a plotline, where the results of the rolls

make a real difference for how the story will continue. I rarely request skill rolls

for simple unimportant routine actions, provided the character knows that it is

such an easy task, and I tend to avoid those extremely dangerous skill rolls whe-

re a bit of bad luck can kill a character or the entire party outright - in my cam-

paigns "Russian Roulette Rolls" only happen when a character made a truly dumb

decision and maneuvered himself into such a situation.

Another case where I prefer skill rolls are situations where it is impossible for the

player (and me) to fully understand and describe an action of the character. My

settings are mostly science fiction, and the characters often use science skills

where we know what they attempt to achieve, but have no idea how they could

do it. So, if the geneticist character wants to modify a creature with genetic en-

gineering, the player tells me what is intended, I come up with a difficulty based

upon the general technology of the setting, and a skill roll (or a series of rolls) de-

cides about the outcome.

Rust, do I have permission to use your above paragraph in a game supplement?

Yes, of course.