Simlasa

I'm curious to see how the CF psionics differ from those in Luther Arkwright...

I'm out of the loop on Classic Fantasy. Does " A taster for the Unearthed Companion" mean that the Expert Set book is a portion of a larger, upcoming supplement?

I like the idea of magical 'radiation' in general for whatever arcane equipment a person might carry. I'm tempted to call it 'personality' though... so that, if stored together, my invisibility potion might alter my healing potion... but also that my magic sword might not get along well with my magic shield, setting up some sort of rivalry that comes out at inopportune moments. Serving as a check on loading your character down with too many magical widgets... or having to at least be careful in how you do it. Like, maybe fire spells are very competitive and boastful, and if stored together they have a tendency to 'show off' by exploding prematurely. Maybe invisibility potions are shy and get harder to find when they're around more brazen types.

At least until Disney takes an interest in it...

This is some really great game session write-up-ing. Inspirational. And fun to try to recognize the bits from various LotFP modules. Thanks for sharing!

Not even just 'fantasy' football, but regular spectator sports as well, are full of imaginary participation on the part of the fans. Guys I now who get all worked up about 'their' team and talk in terms of 'we' when referring to what happened during a game, as if they were on the field playing. I've got a friend who has loads of Seahawks memorabilia in his house... but he's never played football, doesn't even live in Seattle. It's really no different than the guy with fantasy swords on his walls. But somehow watching sports on TV is more macho.

To be honest... even though I can join in the fun of listing licences I'd like to see, I just about never play or run games in licenced settings. But I WILL buy them and strip them for parts... twist them around till even their creators wouldn't recognize them. Like, I'm a fan of the Luther Arkwright stories from way back, and I pounced on the game as soon as it became available... but that's not so much because I wanted to run a game in that setting, it's more because I knew what sorts of stuff the setting is made of and that that stuff would (hopefully) get codefied to RQ6. Stuff that I could then turn to my own purposes... which is something kinda like LA's multiversal espionage, but mixed with Moebius and Jodorowsky and lots of other influences. So if I say I'd like to see a Warhammer Fantasy licence... I'm really looking for a Mythras version of its careers, magic, and creatures... ways to run those sorts of adventures, with that whimsical yet horrific tone... but I don't really need all the IP names in place. As long as I can see the connection I really don't care if it's called 'Warhammer.' But licenced versions of well known titles do help me make that connection right off... while something like Thennla, cool as it is now that I've gotten around to reading it, didn't (in fact, I originally bought it under the mistaken impression that it had rules for gigantic automatons... not realizing the Simulacrum is unique and only 8 feet tall!). If I see a licence I recognize, then right away I can make some good guesses about what's in it... but if it's 'Tony's Homebrew' I'm either going to have to get a good look at it (harder to do these days with far fewer games on store shelves) or wait for word of mouth and reviews (good reviews, not just Tony's pals giving him a boost). Not that a licence is any guarantee of quality (as we've all seen)...

I was just reading through 'Dragons at Dawn'... an OSR-ish game purportedly based on the game notes of Dave Arneson. What struck me is that, except for three spells all the magic in the basic game takes the form of potions, powders, gases, etc. Cooked up ahead of time in magical laboratories. Mostly one use per item... with various complications depending on who is using them... and you don't know if the spell worked till you use the item. So there's some really early RPG precedent.

I was assuming a campaign setting and interconnected adventures... but I like self-contained 'one-shots' as well. So less need to be consistent... like say a collection of horror-themed adventures that focused on certain creatures/situations. Maybe stated for more than one system, like the good old days.

That kinda sounds like the Marksman special effect... but for melee attacks. Either way you still have to roll well enough to gain the effect.

I agree with the sentiment of trying to forge something new and not rehashing Lovecraft's Mythos (much as I love his stories and CoC). But it does seem to me that a horror game needs a cohesive cosmology/mythology/setting... rather than just a mishmash of random 'monster hunting'/monster-of-the-week. Games like Kult and Nephilim and The Whispering Vault are decent examples of having something like 'unified field theory' of magic and the supernatural... even if it's mostly veiled from the PCs understanding, at least at the start of the campaign. So I think it would be best to have a compelling kernel of that stuff in place before proceeding. Otherwise it's just as well served by collections of monster stats we already have access to.

I can see the disarm attempt happening if there is a strong desire to not harm the opponent, take them alive... striking blindly sounds like an act of desperation in a bad circumstance of surprise or darkness or amid some magical effect. I'm not troubled by the before/after thing so much... one is a plan and the other a response to opportunity... a real battle would have both come into play. My friction is on the perceived slowdown that comes with choosing, vs. just declaring (or not), and the somewhat fiddly nature of some of the effects (requiring further rolls). Choosing from a set of maneuvers puts some Players into test-mode, thinking there is a 'best answer', play grinds to a halt while they analyze their options. If there is no list to choose from, if the Player just knows that their excellent attack opened up an opportunity, it allows them a more creative move of furthering their plan of attack, if they had one, or dreaming something up on the spot. Not that I don't love Mythras as is... I'd just like a faster/less detailed version of combat maneuvers... for certain genres or styles of play... and to attract people who are put off by the RAW as being, "too crunchy!" Also, to answer Rosen's question, I do see a lot of Players in combats (in other BRP systems) trying for stuff like called shots, pushbacks, trips, disarms, etc. Magic World/Stormbringer has spot rules for some of those... but sometimes Players will be more creative than what's in the book, which calls for a GM's ruling. Happy Thanksgiving to those here in the U.S.!

No, I think it is still relevant here. One of the primary elements I see mentioned in positive recommendations of Mythras are the combat maneuvers, but they also seem to often be at the heart of why I see people shying away from Mythras as 'too complex.' Jux is correct that they do slow combat down for some groups, I've seen it in the RQ6 games I've played. Cards might be the answer for some people... but not all... and maybe less so online (the only place I've played RQ6 so far). Even if I do want to borrow the idea for other BRP games, Mythras is the genesis of it... and we're talking about ideas for simplified/streamlined Mythras.

I guess I meant doing away with a formal list of options as well... but otherwise, yeah, pretty much what I'd considered trying in Magic World.

I enjoy DCC a lot... largely, I think, because of it's embrace of random tables and how that brings the unexpected. Luckily any system can make use of such things, if desired. But otherwise, yeah, very different game. While I don't want random combat maneuvers... I also agree that the Mythras cards aren't appealing. Not to me, anyway. Aesthetically, I just don't want the extra bits at the table... they start to remind me of a board game (though I love board games I prefer RPGs be less... material), and really, I'd prefer a method where I just declare what I'm attempting up front than choosing from available options.

I'm not a fan of the 'Bowery Runners' element either. I'll run it with PCs as members of the 5 Points community instead, possibly members of a gang... and likely leave the Mythos out of it, at least to start. Let a sense of community set in and then, maybe, if some strangers show up coincident with folks disappearing (not all that uncommon of an occurence in 5 Points), they might have suitable reason to look into it... or look for a way to profit off of it, before things start to go horribly wrong.

I see the choice made as being a reaction to an opening that occurs during the moment of attack vs. parry. So it's placement in time doesn't bother me and I don't think I'd want it to be random. I wonder if part of what makes it slow is the element of 'choosing' from a set list of possibilities... analysis paralysis and all that. I've been playing lots of Dungeon Crawl Classics lately and warriors in that game get to roll for Mighty Deeds with each attack... which are somewhat similar in concept, if not execution. There aren't formal parries in DCC... it's the basic D&D thing of rolling attack vs. AC... but the relevant things about Mighty Deeds are: 1, They're declared before the attack is made. Like, you're fighting a guy on a ledge and declare that you're trying to knock him off. Both the attack and deed roll (made at the same time) need to succeed to pull the deed off (the attack might still succeed on its own). 2. There's no list to choose from... you just come up with whatever you want to try to pull off and the GM will adjudicate if it's possible or not, maybe suggest an alternative, "The giant is too tall for you to lop off it's head but you might be able to take off its foot..." There's really not much to it and it's really fast in play... but it is a lot looser in feel than RQ6/Mythras... relies more on GM rulings. It's something I've considered trying with our Magic World games, which are, again, looser than RQ/Mythras... just declaring some additional effect you'll pull off if you roll an attack that succeeds at a sufficient level.

Similar to what I've seen with characters trying to carry naptha-filled jug grenades. Any attacks on you have a chance of breaking a container or two. You could cushion them in bundles of straw/cloth, but that makes them bulkier and maybe harder to get at in a hurry.

I'm all for creative but lot of the stuff I see pushed as 'innovative' is just gimmickry IMO. Just shifting the furniture around because you're bored and want to pretend you live in a new house. Meh. I don't want a "NEW AND IMPROVED!!!" BRP... I want new settings, new resources to use with the games I've already got. A tweak here and there to push particular concepts, but not shredding what works to chase after the approval of those folks who can't seem to play a game for more than a few sessions without jumping systems.

This bit has me picturing the usual plot of an episode of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. Underling of the week and his gang of goons rolls into town and starts trouble... meanwhile the BBEG sits off in his space fortress safe from harm.

I'd favor a much more stealthy approach early on... getting agents in place to gather information and disrupt defences... set off a global zombie plague and other magical diseases to soften things up. Mind control some key military leaders. Then come in with the dragons and screaming orc hordes. Play it out like Twilight 2000 with a supernatural armageddon.

Stargate? Supernatural? True Blood?

Thanks for making that! Should be pretty useful at the table.

I'd buy that! (I'm pretty sure my money is safe though. Even though it's officially defunct now I doubt GW would ever rent it out or sell it).

Also... Pellucidar, ERB's hollow world setting... cavemen, dinosaurs, Mahars, victorian inventor-explorers.