rust

So BRP should be promoted as "the CoC without Cthulhu"?

Well, actually ... :shocked:

However, CoC obviously is the BRP version that does something right, so we

should take a look at it, and the line "compatible with Call of Cthulhu" could

well influence sales of BRP material over here.

On the other hand, BRP supplements like Rome - well researched and well pre-

sented - are as good as the CoC supplements and cover the historical genre

without having to mention the Mythos, so the main problem here is probably

to tell the potential customers that they do exist.

On a science fiction waterworld, there are probably many alternate energy sources which could be exploited, if you feel so inclined - wind, wave, geothermal, differential. All of which require lots of infrastructure which needs to be built and maintained out there in the Wet & Wild.

Yes, exactly - suitable locations have to be found, explored and secured,

the construction teams have to be protected, their camps will look like the

station in "Outland" and will have similar problems with drugs and crime ... >:->

A quibble I have is that, based on your description of Pharos' volcanic activity, surely there would be the occasional volcanic islet or three.

I am thinking more of the kind of volcanism that exists in deep sea trenches,

like for example the "black smokers" with their own unique ecosystems based

on chemosynthesis instead of photosynthesis.

And I also think that on a planet without any continents to weaken them the

storms and waves would probably get powerful enough to destroy everything

close to the ocean surface, so coral reefs could probably not form within a

few dozen meters of the surface.

But in the end these are all rationalizations, I just decided that the planet is

without dry land and has some very shallow regions at best, because this is

how I imagined it first, and make up potential reasons why this could be so.

Well the submersible ship would solve the antigrav concept.

The submersible spaceship is on my list, too, although it seems that a transfer

point on the ocean surface, where passengers and cargo would be transferred

from the spaceship to a submarine, would come cheaper in the long run - at

least in the Traveller system.

However, air dock, partially submersible dock and submersible spaceship do

not really solve my problem in the short run, because they only become pos-

sible once the colony has begun to either gain income from trade or to deve-

lop its own industry, because importing the necessary materials would require

a lot more money than my economic model would allow the colony to have.

Until then, the occasional tramp trader from a neighbouring system, with a

spaceship that is not designed to handle "water landings", will need a way to

trade with the colonists, and this is where I think I need the "antigrav magic"

- although I will make it possible for spaceships only.

Thank you, a very interesting idea.

I am not sure whether the weather (hurricanes, etc.) would make such a

kind of dock possible, but on the other hand a dock floating on the ocean

surface would be in an at least as bad environment - unless it could sub-

merge deep enough beneath the waves without destroying the ships that

are docked at it at the time.

There are several concepts I am playing around with, and you have added

another good one, but all of them will become possible only after the colo-

ny has already been established and has begun to start some major con-

struction projects.

Until then I see no really good way to avoid the "antigrav magic", but it al-

so does not really worry me - if I use a faster than light drive that is some-

how based on the manipulation of gravity, I can just as well add this fea-

ture to it, I think.

I think this illustrates what I mean:

I did not miss your point, I am just not aware of any historical or ballistic information to support it.

Several documents mention the introduction of the bayonet as the reason

for disbanding the pike formations, because the musket with the bayonet

was now used to protect the infantry soldier from cavalry attacks.

To do this successfully, musket plus bayonet need a certain length, they

have to reach up to the horse's body with the stock on the ground and

the barrel inclined towards the attacking cavalry.

However, I have no idea whether this worked because the rifle plus bayo-

net had this length anyway, because especially long bayonets were deve-

loped to reach the required length, or because it influenced the decisions

concerning the length of the rifle and its barrel - probably a combination

of all three.

I remember a discussion during my military days, when some soldiers complai-

ned about the new submachineguns that had replaced their rifles. In their

view, the lighter and smaller submachineguns were useless both as "silent

weapons" (e.g. when hitting someone over the head from behind, I guess ...)

and in close combat once one was out of ammunition. All the advantages of

their shiny new submachineguns did not impress them at all, they wanted

something big and heavy ...

Having started this thread, I can just as well continue to ramble ...

With the planet itself as the "main NPC" of the setting, one needs (or at least

wants) some information about it.

The amount of detail offered by the world design system of a science fiction

roleplaying game varies widely, with Traveller at one end and GURPS at the

other end of the scale.

For example, my newly discovered water world looks like this in Traveller:

X96A000-0 Ba, Wa

It has no starport, is of above average size, has a breathable atmosphere,

is entirely covered by water, has no population, government, law level or

technology level (yet) and is treated as a barren water world for trade pur-

poses - and this is all the information one gets about the planet and its

system.

This may be sufficient for an occasional visit during a planet hopping space

opera campaign, but not for my purposes, and so I turn to GURPS Space for

a more detailed data set, and once my trusted pocket calculator has defea-

ted the hordes of hostile formulas, I get this:

World Type: Standard (Garden)

Diameter: 14,928 km

Gravity: 0.97 G

Density: 4.58 g/cc

Axial Tilt: 11 degrees

Atmospheric Pressure: 1.29 atm

Atmospheric Composition: Nitrogen-Oxygen, occasionally polluted by volcanism

Hydrographic Percentage: 100 %

Climate Type: Warm

Temperature Range: 21° C – 42° C

Resource Value Modifier: Abundant (+1)

Habitability Score: + 5

- and this is only the physical "makeup" of the planet, the data sets for its

(future) population and for all the other bodies of the system will be just as

comprehensive, if not more so.

While this is almost too much of a good thing, it helps to imagine the world,

and provides some inspiration for a campaign there.

For example, an atmosphere occasionally polluted by volcanism ... sea mount

volcanoes, seaquakes and tsunamis ...

It looks to me that if you are not going to use the Mythos much, BRP will probably let you do as much and more.

True, of course. However, for those players who were interested both in mo-

dern historical or pseudo-historical settings and in the BRP system, Call of

Cthulhu was the only available supported system, and it usually also had by

far the best researched supplements - and this has not really changed yet.

For example, if you want to play something like "Casablanca", the "Secrets

of Morocco" supplement is the best setting material you can get, and if you

want to send your Victorian adventurer into the Himalaya, nothing beats "My-

steries of Tibet" when it comes to details about the local culture.

This combination of system and supplements has convinced many players to

use Call of Cthulhu as their favourite "modern world game" while ignoring the

Mythos part of it.

And I think that many authors of Call of Cthulhu supplements were well awa-

re of this, because the Mythos stuff is often just added to the end of an

otherwise perfectly "non-cthulhoid" setting description.

I have always run COC without the mythos, as a straight horror rpg; vampires, zombies, haunted houses, etc.

This is what I like most about CoC, one can use it for the entire roleplaying

spectrum, from historical campaigns through "soft" and "hard" horror up to

fantasy (especially if one includes more magic and the Dreamlands) and even

some science fiction - typical BRP, one good rules system "to rule them all".

Germany only, or also Italy and Provence?

Each of the three history chapters contains a description of important events

and developments of the period, then a more detailed look at the Holy Roman

Empire, and this includes events in Italy, although it is not mentioned often -

except when it comes to the Popes, whoever wrote that part of the book

really loved detail.

Then follow shorter descriptions of what happened in Scandinavia, Russia, By-

zantium, The Caliphate, the Iberian Peninsula and the British Isles, usually one

half page to one page each.

Finally each of the history chapters has a description of something especially

important for the age or especially useful for roleplaying.

In the early middle ages this is the Viking Raids, in the high middle ages the

Crusades, and in the late middle ages the Plague.

In the end, I think that Italy (except the popes - every single one of them

got a few lines) and the Provence are mentioned "in passing" whenever an

event there was important for the Holy Roman Empire, but there is not much

detail about them.

Er... So is it something like 'BRP Mediaeval Europe'?

In a way, yes.

It contains chapters about the Early Middle Ages (600 - 1050 AD), the High

Middle Ages (1050 - 1250 AD) and the Late Middle Ages (1250 - 1600 AD),

about Secular Life (e.g. cities, knighthood, etc.), about Religious Life (e.g.

the Vatican, monasteries and orders, etc.), about Non-Euclidian Life (the

Mythos part of the book, about 30 pages), about Medieval Characters (in-

cluding professions, skills, equipment, etc.) and two adventures.

The regions outside of Europe (the Caliphate, etc.) are mentioned and des-

cribed, but not in much detail, the focus is on Europe, and here understan-

dably on the Holy Roman Empire.

Any compatibility with Cthulhu Dark Ages? or is it an altogether different take on the mediaeval mythos?

I never bought Dark Ages, but according to what I did hear from others,

"Mittelalter" has no connection at all with Dark Ages. Besides, the Mythos

is hardly mentioned in "Mittelalter", it is mainly a very good history book

with roleplaying material.

Is it an original German CoC supplement, or a translated one?

It is an original one, no translation.

The recently published German CoC supplement "Mittelalter" (= Middle Ages)

contains more than 300 pages of background information, medieval profes-

sions, adapted skills, equipment and everything else one would need for a

historical campaign in Europe between 600 AD and 1600 AD.

Whether one uses the Mythos material is purely a matter of taste.

rust,

Just what do players do during a CoC game?

The player characters can do whatever a player character could do during

the period.

If one simply ignores the Mythos altogether, Call of Cthulhu is an excellent

"BRP Gaslight", "BRP 1920" or "BRP Now", with all the gaming opportunities of

the historical period between the Victorian Age and today.

The Mythos, going insane and all that stuff is just one way to play CoC, it

can just as well be exploring Dark Africa, running guns to Latin America,

tramp trading in the South Sea or searching for Jack the Ripper - you name

it, CoC does it.

Back in those days, you might not have had the time to reload after a shot before the enemy was upon you.

Yep, especially when you were on the "receiving end" of a cavalry charge,

and were attacked with sabres or lances, both still quite common on the

battlefields of the period.

Since the use of the rifle to defend against such attacks was a part of a

soldier's rifle training, and he would probably have fought much worse if he

had to use a club or spear instead of his rifle, I would allow the Rifle skill for

the parry.

As for using muskets or rifles to parry, most European armies of the period

trained their soldiers in "Gewehrfechten" (German, means "rifle fencing" - I

did not find the English word), techniques to use a musket or rifle with a

bayonet as a close combat weapon, similar to a combination of a club and

a spear, and this included techniques to parry similar weapons.

Something that you have to do but don't really like? Something that everyone else says is really cool but you don't see the point of? Something that is depressing at every possible level?

Spot On.

Sir, I will have to challenge you to a duel now, for insulting my favourite

roleplaying game. :eek:

As the insulted party I have the choice of arms, and I decided to use poi-

soned marshmellows at a distance of 250 feet. :cool:

A somewhat obscure source: An article about the Jewish Company of the

Shanghai Volunteer Force in 1863 mentions that this force was armed with

a "short version" of the "30-03 Enfield".

It seems they either mean the Musketoon version of the 1853 Pattern Enfield,

or - more likely, I am afraid - they went astray completely and confused the

Enfield of 1853 with the Enfield of WW II ...

Otherwise I have found no connection between "Enfield" and "Shanghai", al-

though I suspect that Ward's and later Gordon's Ever Victorious Army was

armed mostly with 1853 Pattern Enfields, because the unit of up to 6,000

soldiers is mentioned as using British arms - and these would probably be En-

fields.

It would be logical if the Chinese had attempted to copy the Enfield, as the

rifle used by most of the foreign soldiers in and around Shanghai, but this is

of course only speculation.

By the way, shouldn't this one have the information we are looking for:

Osprey Publishing - The Taiping Rebellion 1851–66

Jiangnan Arsenal questions.

My most reliable (= academic) source has only the information below - sorry,

copy and paste was disabled.

More could probably be found here, but I do not know how to get access to

this:

Thomas Kennedy, "The Establishment and Development of the Kiangnan

Arsenal, 1860-95" (Columbia University Ph.D. dissertation in History, 1968)

If I remember right, you jumped from water worlds to desert worlds to ice worlds. Does Pharos IV has a really, ahem, erratic climate?

No, not really. I have made a "full turn" and am now back to the setting I

started the series with in 2007, therefore the "revised" above ^^.

There has been so much excellent roleplaying material published since 2007,

both for BRP and my other favourite system Traveller, that I decided to ma-

ke a complete overhaul of this setting, introducing both that material and

all the things I had learned about setting design and campaigns during the

last three years.

Yep, I also think that I could do without FTL drives, fusion power and anti-

grav without damaging the setting.

However, there is the "player demand" to keep space technology simple and

easy to handle, and so I reluctantly introduced the "magic", but restricted

its use to spaceships by making it huge and extremely expensive - much too

huge and expensive for planetary use, except perhaps as an occasional fu-

sion reactor on an industrial planet.

The scenario that finally convinced me to introduce the "magic" was the ne-

cessity to enable "normal" spaceships to visit Pharos IV. With an antigrav that

allows them to hover above the ocean surface and enough fusion power to

do so for some time, I avoided the problem that only specially designed spa-

ceships can land / "water" on an ocean surface (e.g. ability to float, cargo

doors above the waterline, and so on).

Do you think the ship rules presented in D6 Space Ships would work well with BRP and D100?

For those who do not know them, you can download them for free from

Drive Thru RPG:

D6 Space Ships - West End Games | DriveThruRPG.com