Harshax

RQ3 is what I am most familiar with, and you calling it exactly what it was "conjuring" gives me the idea to keep those spells in place as conjuration magic. Funny that never occurred to me.

I need to dig up my old RQ Excel Character sheet (fully automated. . . just saying), I have the intensity lists printed there. Maybe illusions cost less than conjuration, because they are easier to dispel. They can be dismissed with dispelling magic, and additionally characters can resist with an idea roll the first time they interact with one. The more complex the illusion (sight, touch, weight, etc), the more chances a character has to resist it. Should the illusion overcome the character's INT, then it is treated as reality for the duration.

Have to think that through a little more. Sounds like too many dice rolls. Then again, I'd love to somehow translate illusionary damage into temporary SAN loss or something. >:->

Well, in RQIII, illusions are temporary reality.

So an illusory sword, with illusory substance and illusory sight is as efficient as a real sword, as long as the magic lasts.

Q Who needs to carry a sword when a magical one can be conjured?

A anyone who will fight a magician who knows dispell magic, because a bronze (iron, silver, wooden ..) sword will not disappear when such a spell is cast on it, while the illusory one will

Jean

The nastiest trick is to have an illusory floor concealing a gorgon. Experienced characters will detect the illusion, dispell the illusion and free the monster ...

You have a large number of people disliking the 4'th edition rules as well. Infact, NPR even mentioned about it in their interview with one of the aintitcool people how a large number of fans are disappointed with the new changes. You can't please everybody...

I wouldn't come to the same conclusion as you regarding the story, but this quote from the story. . .

Player Jeremy Lueth says if the game gets more popular, maybe non-players will see it as a little less geeky.

. . . makes me think he and anybody else who doesn't think gaming isn't cool, can go jump in a lake.

Hyperborea is as exotic and colorful and scary as Zothique but is set at the beginning of history rather than the end...

The beginning for Conan, but certainly the end for all of his enemies.

Alternatively you could instead use the SB5 rules for demon creation. I am sure they are perfectly suited to the BRP sorcery rules. Why re-inventing the wheel?

One less book to carry around.

When I played RQ3, Illusions were effectively Real. :confused:

Not sure if I want to go down that road again. How have you ruled on illusions in your BRP games?

I've only briefly looked over the sorcery rules for creating demons, and their entry in the creatures section.

Does anyone think it plausible to create demon abilities using the Super Powers rules? Should it be a straight 1 POW for 1 Level of a Super Power?

Any comments?

Just read this morning in Spot Rules for Fire and Heat:

Armor protects for 1/2 its value for 1d6 rounds, IIRC.

I actually think 1d6 for 3 PP is too expensive of a spell, considering that the same Spot Rules lists a torch as being 1d6 damage. Then again, I'm basing this opinion on wanting to run an epic RPG where Player Characters theoretically have Hit Points equal to the average of SIZ & CON, plus their POW.

Simlasa touches on many points that make the EDU stat difficult for me to find useful.

I do find the idea of 'Common Knowledge' to be a useful mechanic however, but it is easily a function of the Idea Roll. What is Common Knowledge for a character can be surmised from hir Profession, Status (Credit Rating), Birthplace and if necessary, Gender.

Besides, it is the most easily broken Characteristic in BRP. I've made CoC characters with EDU in the mid 20's and created skill-monsters that far out-shined most of the investigators in my group.

:focus:

I would not include EDU for most creatures, especially those who do not typically have a APP characteristic.

For Sentient creatures, I would probably create a table of Pros and Cons that would offset EDU from the standard 3d6. eg:

Short Lived, Savage Culture: Lower EDU

Long Lived, Enlightened Culture: Higher EDU

Nomadic Culture: Lower EDU

Illiterate Culture: Lower EDU

Ancient, Established Culture: Higher EDU

Feudal Culture: Nobility: Higher EDU

Feudal Culture: Serf: Lower EDU

etc.

This seems like the preferred Method for dealing with the Attribute, as it seems important only when a PC wants to play a monster. In real life, humans of different cultures and regions can have vastly different EDU scores, the same should hold true for Orcs, Ogres or other sentient creatures.

An Orc taken from native culture and placed in University by the Sorcerous Duke Brothers, might have a much higher EDU than one left in their natural habitat. Nature vs. Nurture.

It is a bit of a bummer to think that my BRP characters are never going to have a real pretty character sheet. For example: I do not want a hit location chart, depending on the game I may or may not want an EDU stat, and the exact skill list is going to vary by game as well. If I want something pretty, I'm going to have to learn how to make PDFs I guess.

A clever fellow over on Dragonsfoot.org used Adobe to create an old school 1st edition D&D Character Sheet for Castles & Crusades. By using Layers, he was able to swap elements in and out.

Don't want Hit Locations? Uncheck the Layer, now you have space for a Portrait.

Want to Include EDU in the stat block? That Layer is placed over the one without EDU.

I have Adobe 6, but lack the time or expertise to do something like this rapidly. Maybe I'll give it an experimental go over the weekend.

Too close to chia-saurs ...

Which might be interesting ... living terracotta and plant based

dinosaurs ...

-V

Created by militaristic Aldryami no doubt.

Since getting my BRP, I've been avidly jumping back and forth through the PDF. I'm very excited to sit down a draft a campaign or three, but I'm totally stumped! I've got this great toolkit, and tons of ideas, but I can't figure out exactly what to do with it!

So my question for all of you is whether you're kicking off a new game with the compendium, and if so, what are you going to run?

Tal Stormbringer

Perception Power

I think you should interpret Perception scores as -/+10 to Perception related skills, and not the POW Characteristic.

Just my 2d

EDIT:

Speed should affect Move

Yes, I think it is possible, but some things would be different.

For starters you would need to covert Taslanta stats into BRP stats. You can probably work out a relationship too. So a +0 in Taslanta might be a 10 in BRP, and a +4 might be an 18 (I'ds be awhile since I looks as Taslanta, so I don't remeber what the "human" range is for stats).

For starters, make a table and ask yourself if the results feel right. The first column shows the Taslislanta stat, the 2nd is the BRP conversion.

-4     1d6

-3     1d6+3

-2     2d6

-1     2d6+3

0      3d6

+1     2d6+6

+2     3d6+3

+3     3d6+6

+4     2d6+12

I think the biggest obstacle would be that RQ/BRP tracks a lot of info that Taslanta doesn't, so you would be forced to fill in some gaps.

The quick method would be to pick a couple of skills that each race starts with +20%, and if necessary, a skill or two that starts lower than default. This method allows you to create a large table of skills and races, and make it easy to cross-reference.

Balance btw the races is not really needed to have a balanced game. Either let "weaker" races start with more experience at char-gen, or don't allow people to create characters of the stronger races until the group is experienced, and a replacement is needed.

Talislanta didn't balance races or archetypes. RQ didn't either. I wouldn't for a conversion. The balance comes from the setting not the rules.

You mean a review from someone who likes it?

I mean a review by a good writer who can give BRP an objective review that is enjoyable to read.

We need a pleasant read of a review on rpg.net asap. Unfortunately, I don't have time to properly review a 400 page rulebook.

I have been reliably informed that she has moved away from illustrations for ethical reasons. I don't know if she's given up all illustrations, or just fantasy ones. Regardless, I feel it is a tragic loss to the entire gaming industry.

Just once I'd like to see people are worried that the specials for Craft:Basket-Weaving are too powerful, or slow down the game or some such.

I have a suspicion that the real major flaws in any game system go unnoticed becuase they don't involve the possible death of a PC.

You should check out HarnMaster.

The book looks awesome. The illustrations are fantastic. I can't wait to buy a print copy. I am welled up with pride to see my name in the playtester credits.

Guilty admission #1: I use to have a huge crush on Lisa Free.

Guilty admission #2: I feel a little playtester guilt now that I see the entirety of the powers chapter.

Could you speak a little more on the differences mechanics-wise between clerics and wizards?

Anyone know when the BRP PDF will become available? I ordered it on 5/18, and the 'My Downloads' section seems to be broken.

What are these.? What out of 420?

I thought these were "420" pot smoking references . . .

When I start my next BRP game, I will likely use something similar to the Pendragon traits. Instead of documenting all 13 pair, I will let each player choose 3 pair that reflect some of the character's core personality.

I agree wholeheartedly with HedgeHobbit's list of why Personality mechanics are good. Point #2 is especially important to me, as it allows me to craft scenes around the characters, and not always around the player's personality.

This is a very important tool in my opinion. I will often structure combat encounters based on the overall weapon skills of the party, and with a little personality mechanics to inform me, I can do the same with social encounters as well.

Are you answering my post? And what book are you putting back on the shelf?

Oops. Thought I quoted you. I was in fact responding to you, and it is sladethesniper's book I put back on the shelf.

My favorite sandbox is Savage Worlds.

A sandbox is definitely interesting, and you are right to a degree, but my other points are still valid:

The text is dense, and reads like designer notes, not a setting.

If I were to reorganize the material, it would flow thusly:

1. Here is the world, it is in flux because of this . . .

2. Enter your the character, who is trying to do . . .

3. Hir antagonists are . . .

4. One good setting, that reinforces the tone established above

5. All the inclusive technical bits that show this is a sandbox

As it stands now, I looked at it for 5 minutes, then put it back on the shelf.

Not until you mentioned it. Maybe we'll get a response from someone who has one of these machines:)

Maybe someone who's viewing the site will buy BRP!

And contribute to this thread!