sladethesniper

Sounds good...especially if I can put right into a Call of Cthulhu one shot (or mini campaign).

-STS

ummm...

I think that I am going to have to "agree" with Aikighost. I liked the settings of Witchcraft and Armageddon a lot...but instead of converting stats and numbers from Unisystem to to BRP (for Call of Cthulhu use), I just took the ideas and went from there. The system itself didn't do much for me, and I really didn't see all that many crunchy bits to be gained from the conversion...so I did took the RIFTS approach...I just took the names and ideas and BS'ed the stats to what I wanted them to be...

Granted, if you really want the conversions, I can dig up some Unisystem stuff on PDF and post it...

-STS

Hello all, just a quick note to say that I won't be around that much for the next 18-ish months. I'll be enjoying Afghan cuisine for the nexr six months, then off to historic Baghdad for 12 months.

I just want to say thanks for the good discussions and good gaming...even you aikighost.

Don't delete my profile for at least 3 months.

-STS

I prefer personality guidelines and GM rewards for keeping a player in character. That lends itself to characters that change over time, allows a modicum of GM control for out of character actions and lets them grow. Of course, the previous statement is opinion and not able to clinically proven.

Of the very few games that have personality mechanics in them, I have used them each exactly once, and never again.

-STS

Better you than me PK...If you get to Trashcanistan or Iraq in the next 18 months, drop a PM.

As for your submission, now that you have Mythos in it, I'll buy it. I have a shelf full of monographs, so you'll at least get my dinar!

I'm a big CoC fan.

-STS

I like the idea, a lot. These wild dice could be used as a control for the "power level" of a game, similar to the Fuzion...

For 0 dice, it will be a very street level game, to 3 dice for a cinematic, to 5 for a superworld campaign.

Very nice.

I tried to download the file, but XML files aren't working to well for me lately, so this is just based on what you wrote in the thread.

-STS

OK, I posted up the sample setting in the downloads sectionBRP Central - Downloads - Vhraeden Sampleand asked for some feedback, and so far, 20 downloads and 0 feedback. Maybe because no one knows my email...so here's a thread for that feedback I asked for.

If it sucks, I can totally deal with it...but this is a serious attempt to get feedback for two reasons: 1) to improve the setting if possible and 2) to improve my creative skills.

As this forum is not my private advertising space, I won't post back in this thread or bring up the topic again, but if you took the time to download it, the least you could do is say "hey this blows" or "s'ok...I guess".

I would have put the full PDF up, but at over 10 Mb it was a bit large and I doubt anyone would really look at it....

-STS

I think this idea is mostly encountered in "roll-under" systems. Would you ask a maximum skill bonus of +100 in RoleMaster, +20 in D&D or +10 in Ars Magica ?

I do...but I am apparently in the vast minority ;-(

-STS

I'll buy that It also makes a nifty mental image.

:focus:

I think that 4E will, IMO simply be a rules set that I pull from to add to my Warhammer 40K/Inquisitor/Warhammer games (or my Star Wars mini games) or Heroscape mini game rather than add having it anything to any RPG that I play.

-STS

If you've got CoC and want angst...I recommend Pagan Publishing's Delta Green series...

Angsty but not emo, modern but not cyberpunkish, awesome but not egotistical...

5 out of 5 for modern horror! Will need some tweaking to play a monster, but it is good.

-STS

Ah, but was it FUN? I love BRP as a game, but having played with some complete buffoons, the system does not guarantee a fun game. Likewise I have played exceptionally fun games using D20, Palladium games wonky rules, etc.

Granted, some systems make the fun easier/harder...but it the game master, fellow players and the adventure that make the GAME fun or not, the rules set can hinder or help, but claiming that 4E is an abomination of gaming and will doom all who play it is a bit disingenious...I am positive that there are some very good DM's out there that will have great and fantastic games using it, just as I am sure that there were people who had fun playing Phoenix Command in the early 90's (or not...it was the hardest and most unfriendly gaming system I've ever seen).

With that said, I won't be running any games in 4E, but I am sure that I will play in several games using it, and after the learning curve levels off, I may even have fun during it.

I am still a hardcore BRP fan, but bashing a system is rather pointless...a GM's skill and ability to craft a fun story is far more important.

-STS

Since I have been on this forum (and a few others) where skills are given a theoretical maximum, I ask the following question (granted it should be a poll, but I don't know how to do one :eek: 'cuz I suck):

Does a 100% in X skill mean a 100% chance of doing something (hit an opponent, build a rocket, embezzle cash) with that skill modified by circumstances...OR does it mean the amount of knowledge that the character has in that field of study?

It is important to recognize the difference...since IMO if it is merely a marker of ability, then we can have skills that go into the high hundreds...

but,

if that 100% in a skill means that the character knows everything there is to know about that area of knowledge, then the only real way to give skills over 100% is to say that the character is adding to the amount of knowledge available, like Einstein would have had physics above 100% in the 1940's or Nakayama Hakudo would have Katana (or Swordsmanship) at above 100%, or Sun Tzu would have Strategy at 100% +....

Just curious to see what others think.

-STS

It's very easy to run an urban dark world/goth type campaign with BRP. I ported over all the White Wolf stuff (1 dot = 20% for skills, knowledges, abilities and 1 dot = 5 for attributes, used BRP for everything else) and it runs very easily.

The great thing about BRP is that it scales very easily from low level stuff (Call of Cthulhu) to insane power levels (a lot of the stuff online) and it allows other stuff to ported into it very easily (Interlock, Storyteller, Palladium, etc.)

Not having access to BRP Zero, I used Call of Cthulhu for 90% of the creature inspiration for my setting with Elric! making up the 10% for demons and other powerful beings.

-STS

Finally revisiting this setting. It is now complete, playtesting is done and now just need people to check it out.

It is posted in the downloads section.

BRP Central - Downloads - Vhraeden Sample

If you do download it, let me know what you think, good or bad.

Be advised it is only the sample. That means it has chapters on the world, a story, three races, 2 nations, 7 locations, complete rules and character creation.

If you download it, like it and want the full pdf (sans artwork) email me at sladethesniper@sbcglobal.net

-STS

True about the cost.

I do like the energy types, and so I already stole them from 3E for my BRP games. It all fits together nicely for a derivative magic system.

-STS

OK, I'll agree that it seems nifty to move your opponents around, but wouldn't that simply be a codification of how many items/effects already do that (teleport, daze, stun guns, wind blast, explosions, gravity effects, throws, displace, etc.)?

One fiddly bit isn't bad, it's just not worth the cash. Granted, eventually I'll probably dole out the cash (since my son loves D&D and all the munchkiny evil-ness therein, plus the 4E minis are already out...and of course he's hooked on them) for 4E, but not any time soon...maybe for his birthday next year.

I am all about taking ideas from any game system and making them work for me.

-STS

I concluded after some thought that a) a lot of this stuff is covered in the new BRP in the Spot Rules and they are functions of skill (i.e. experience and training) not raw ability (i.e. stats).

No reason to go into that too much since Nick has beaten me to it (again ;-( ).

To add to it, however, there is one little thing that D20 does that would benefit BRP skills. The way d20 shows how each skill is used in the skill description is a very good idea. That way all the different uses of a skill (feints, increasing parry, increasing damage, skill specializations, etc.) could all be rolled up nicely into the skill description text.

There are two issues with that, though. One is that each skill description would become very long (although you could do it by type, such as combat/weapons skills, knowledge skills, etc.) and the joyous freeform skills creating rampant in CoC (flail about wildly 25% 1d4 damage) would be harder for GM's to just "wing it" if they went with this idea.

I agree with Nick that keeping skills (and not having gobs of feats, modifiers, etc.) as the basis for the majority of player rolling is the way of BRP.

After all, what good is having Warhammer 138% if some mook with lots of POW/MP's can be just as good as you are for a bit, or someone has some modifier that makes their 80% skill better than your 100%+ skill? Skills should represent a field of study/compentence in its' entirety.

:focus:

One disturbing thing I noticed is the "movement around the battlefield" effects described. My question is "why"? PC's can move around just fine, or use magic items/spells/tech items to enhance it...so why make more rules?

My other contention with 4E is the bizzare leveling and character pigeon-holing that is increasing with each new iteration. It was bad when everyone in the world was 0 level, but they almost fixed it (although commoners are pretty worthless, but at least they finally have skills...) in 3E, but now in 4E it seems like depending on who you are fighting your HP's change...

Needless to say, color me unimpressed with 4E. I only play two systems (BRP and D20) and it shall remain so for a very long time.

-STS

When looking over all the options for publishing via Chaosium, WOTC, MRQ, others et al, at what point is a product considered "original" with regard to the rules.

To make a setting, almost all of that is original work done by the author, flavor text, etc.

When doing up equipment, it seems that you run a good chance of making a lot of "similar" items...there are only so many swords, pole arms and armor types after all.

With sci-fi, there is a bit more freedom, but a lot of will have a "derivative" feel to it.

The above are givens, the fruit of our creative labors....the question I am asking is a bit more esoteric.

"When using a published rules set, how much change/how many changes can that system support before it becomes something new"?

Basically, you use BRP or Silhoutte or D20 and are using their rules set to create settings, campaigns, etc. but modify the rules set (house rules, options, GM fiat, etc.), at what point, in your opinion, do the new rules change the rules set to an extent to where it is something "new" and not "derivative" (if there is even a difference in your mind)?

This is an opinion question only.

-STS

While I do love the idea of non-lame monsters, I am a bit confused by re-imagining old monsters when that idea has been done before with pretty good results. Are you wanting to Modify Monsters for a homebrew game or make a New Game with New Monsters?

Why not take Vampire:the Masquerade (or the whole WoD) and change the rules set...say each dot = 20% (or 10% depending if you want powerful vampires or Epic Bad A$$ vampires)...dump the stuff that is lame (angsty emo kidz) and keep the good stuff (clans, disciplines, backstory) and go from there. The rules were lame (unless you like handfuls of dice), but the creative work was pretty good.

It would seem a lot less work doing that, than re-creating an entirely new setting. The only benefit of re-imagining Vampires is to publish it as your own. If you are going to for simply a free setting...or a home brew kit bash, just chop up other games backstories...

For ghouls, use the ones Pagan Publishing did in Delta Green...

For most other "classic" monsters, there are some very good ideas in Ravenloft.

There is a lot of leeway to go from Goth to Emo to Splatterpunk with minor adjustments.

I shall now await the flames :thumb: although I do not mean to cause offense...simply opinions...which is pretty much all I am useful for most of the time anyway.

-STS

The biggest problem I see with trying to balance characters is that you've got to determine what constitutes a benefit as far as your game play is concerned. Until you get that idea resolved, making one characteristic, (meaning stats, powers, etc.) worth more than another is really only just speculation.

What I would suggest to find a way to 'balance' characters would be to examine how every aspect of the character will work for your campaign. Let me explain in a way that hopefully, I'll get my point across in.

Let's say as a GM, your campaign will be one that's mainly hack and slash. Obviously, any stat that helps with combat, whether we're talking melee or magic, would be worth more than a stat that helped strictly with role-playing. So for instance, the STR stat would be worth more than the APP stat in that campaign because STR helps in combat, while APP helps with role-playing.

If your campaign is one that deals with political intrigue or other role-playing aspects, more than combat, then APP would be worth more than STR. I'm generalizing to the extreme here, but you should get my point.

So how do you come up with a method of balance? To me, you’ll have to look over what kind of campaign you’re interested in running and then try to determine which stats, powers, skills, etc. are going to be the most important. Then those same abilities would be worth more to have at higher levels. Until you get that information set, I don't see how you'll be able to 'balance' characters for your game.

I hope that gets my point across?

Skunkape has stated what I thought I was trying to say, although he did it in a more appropos and easily understood manner.

Distilled, I think it comes down to the GM, with player input, determining what the campaign will focus on. From that information, make characters to fit that campaign instead of making a campaign to fit characters, which has happened far too many times in my experience.

frogspawner's point:

But it's not necessarily about slapping down the powergamer. Maybe it's just to avoid a fledgeling roleplayer being disappointed, to find their interesting character choice is inneffectual compared to their friends'.

Viewed that way, balanced character creation (which must include races) is actually an aid to good roleplaying.

is valid, and comes close to what I think Tywyll was trying to discuss.

I agree that coming up with an incentive for players to choose a certain class/profession/race, especially for new players, is important...but, again, in my experience, a beginning player's first character is usually a joint effort between that player (who has a "cool" idea), other players (to point out what would make it "better") and the GM (to give guidance initially and approval to the final character).

Therefore, it seems to me that what it ultimately comes down to is finding a niche for each race/class/profession combination. Some niches can be found in racial stats, profession bonuses and other "crunchy bits", others are found in the setting and the remainder are for the GM to make.

The caveat to that is "coolness". I have played just about every race, including "lame" ones, because the GM said: "We are playing a game about a Goblin tribe...make your goblin...and here's the mods I'm allowing".

It was a fun game, even though I lost my first character in the first "combat" round of the first fight to a 9 year old girl with a butcher knife...critical strike...she was hiding in the cabinet...

Therefore, I would posit that even though a goblin would NEVER, EVER be something I would have chosen to play (along with Twillek violinist/mob lawyer, a D&D druid, or a homeless ex-corporate middle manager, a human District Attorney, a Quickling Mercenary that rode around on his Yak Man slave...) due their ultimate failure as combat monsters, I enjoyed playing all of them because the Characters fit the campaign...

:deadhorse:

:focus:

Ahem...so...I think balance is a GM issue with rules/stats playing a minor supporting role, if at all.

Again, all my opinions.

- STS

Skill levels of 100%+ cause no problems whatsoever in our games, we use the following rules

1. Rolls of 96-99 are always failure and 00 always fumble regardless of skill level.

2. "Feinting", anyone can drop up to half their skill level in an opposed test and drop their opponents defense by the same amount.

This means that guys with 125% broadsword could drop their skill to say 90% thus dropping their opponents parry by 35%. We call it "feinting" because it is mostly used in combat, but we also allow its use in any other contested roll so for example stealth vs listen, etc.

Veeerrrrry Niiiice :thumb: I like that, A LOT. Thank you for a new monster tactic >:->

-STS

The OGL is great. Especially as it allows people to use those parts of the system they like, and exchange the ones they don't with their own houserules. Having something similar for BRP would be great, but isn't going to happen. I'm curious to see the BRP license contract though (if I get a respons from Chaosium that is!)

SGL.

I agree with Trif. Getting Chaosium to "respond to stimulus" is like getting a senator to respond to a query during a non-election year.

Sheesh. Looks like MRQ for me

-STS

Balancing races is like balancing character creation...why?

People are not equal, nor are races...a western heart surgeon is not "balanced" with a an afghan warlord, a somali pirate, a new york gang member or catholic priest...not better or worse, just not balanced.

Same with species...a bear isn't balanced with duck or a dragon or a human. Again, not better or worse, just different.

There shouldn't have to be some sort of enforced game balance, but instead have rules balance and setting balance, both of which are enforced by the GM. The GM sets the level/power limits of the game, sets the type of characters and has more than enough power to say "we are playing Call of Cthulhu in 1928 Boston...so your half Melnibonean, half demon, half dragon, 4th edition, 35th level monk assassin IS NOT going to play in my game."

Then slap them and play with your non-twink, non-power gamer friends.

Just my opinion

-STS

I think that I may continue using the system as it is, and just push the character concept idea. It makes it difficult for powergamers become such since there are too many things available for them to be good at all of them.

I added in Experience Points (though I may change it to Karma or Fate Points or something else, word wise) to let characters save up experience points to put into skills as needed, add to rolls, learn new skills (since I have no skills with "base chances", it lets them save up to learn a skill at say 39% instead of a mighty 01%)

As for rules abusers, there really isn't a way to make a game free of loopholes and still be fun and rules light, I suspect. I admit I have abused the hell out of some games, but oddly enough, those characters never became anything to me but a collection of stats and powers. The best characters I have ever had were usually fairly low powered, standard roll characters with a really good back story and good adventures they went on.

I am fairly happy with how things have gone so far. Will try to play some more tonight...we'll see.

-STS

Wow, I think I may have went a quite a bit off subject...

That's why I always apologize for threadjacking...I'm a sociopathic, threadjacker...woo hoo :eek: >:->

-STS