vagabond

Very cool - and useful. Some ideas fit my view on how to do Isho and dyshas in Jorune

Back on the attack ... some WEG d6 Star Wars gaming with my gf and kids has inspired me to dig out my notes ...

On 1/15/2020 at 6:52 PM, ORtrail said:

I am convinced you'll have this completed before Far West sees the light of day. 

I hope so, though I just crushed my finger tip ... 8 weeks with a splint on my writing hand. Plenty of typos too.

Hi all,

I am back. Trying to pick up where I left off, and recall everything I had going on. Pulling all of my notes together.

Hope to get back on the horse so the speak ...

 

Cheers!

This is something I've been giving a lot of thought to. My opinion is that it needs to be considered on a case by case basis. Some settings are worth considering as full games, others as supplements to the BGB. I' not interested in making any sort of hard and fast rule about this at this point. But I expect in the future you'll see some full games, ala Magic World, and some supplement/setting books ala Mythic Iceland or Blood Tides.

I think Ben is right. Sometimes, a setting requires enough modifications and optional rules to make it work, doing it as a sourcebook is not optimal. Other times, this kind of wrenching is not required, and a supplement is sufficient. Not having the flexibility to handle both cases is short sighted and can pigeonhole/hamstring the development and publishing of material.

Sorry to bring this thread back to life, but last night my age old concern with the purpose and function of the Allegiance rules reared its ugly head again. In my mind the rules as written make no sense, and don't reflect the background.

 

In the Elric stories, the main protagonists are always looking for Tanelorn - the City open to those who follow Balance. However, this is a difficult path, and the balance is a fine line between Chaos and Law. It is hard to attain, and even harder for one to maintain. To reflect this, I think that devotion to Chaos and Law tend to be two ends of a spectrum, and followers of the Balance look to attain a true equilibrium.

 

Mechanically the rules could go like this:

• There are only two Allegiances - Law & Chaos.
• All Characters start with 40% in one trait and 60% in the other (depending on background, race, etc).
• The two totals are counter matched, so as one goes up the other goes down.
• To achieve the Balance a character must get both to 50%.
• If either Law or Chaos reaches 100%, then the character becomes an Agent of that Power.
• At various times, based on events or actions, a player could be asked to roll against an Allegiance to see if they succumb to it's influence.

Any thoughts?

 

Marcus

I actually had a similar idea some time back. Drop Balance, and only use Law and Chaos. To achieve Balance, Law and Chaos must be kept in check, and moving too far in one direction or the other moves you into Agent/Champion. I also had an idea for Redemption - moving back towards the Balance should a character become an Agent/Champion (a la Rackhir). Basically pulling from Pendragon's Passions/Traits, various Allegiance rules from Elric!/SB5, and elsewhere. I also tapped into some corruption/madness stuff to add to the power gained from becoming an Agent/Champion.

That sounds like a hoot. Using SB to run Hyborian Kingdoms stuff is great. I did a bunch of that back in the day with the GW hardcover version of the game (SB 3, I think).

Well, considering Elric and Conan met semi-officially in Marvel Comic's Conan (a story actually written by Mike himself), there is precedence to do an EC/Conan crossover. Which, of course, can be extended to add some Cthulhu Mythos as well ...

 

 

Muuhaahaahaahaahaahaa !

My issue with Skeletons and Zombies under the sorcery rules is two-fold. First with the POW expenditure you run into the problem of the minimum POW of 16 needed to cast spells. A sorcerer can't create too many of the undead without crippling himself magically. Second, summoning elementals and demons to do your bidding is such a better option. They cost more magic points to create, but are so much more powerful than say a skeleton that the POW expenditure is actually worthwhile.

I've always played the old school Stormbringer way - INT+POW >= 32. That way you could have very studious wizards who spend countless hours pouring over tomes, but need to be very careful lest they lose too much POW and thus the ability to cast/summon becomes more and more difficult. Or, you can have characters with raw, unbridled power and ability, but lack the knowledge to grasp the nuances and truly arcane arts. Or, you have the god-like Melniboneans, who have the INT and the POW, and are the source of nightmarish fairy tales and can level whole armies/fleets.

But, that's me ...

I have the Magic Book, copies of some other d100 games with magic in them, and so on. I'm wondering about adding some new spells specifically if I run something -- things that will hopefully surprise players and people who read about them. But I don't want to go overboard in terms of spell power either -- I want these to by things a PC can cast (if she can learn them) without ecxhansting all their Magic Points in one shot and without totally upstaging the rest of the party.

Example: I want to be able to enchant a blade with Elemental Sharpness so that it can cut through any inanimate material. Things like pesky knots of the Gordian variety, reinforced wood-and-steel doors, obscene idols to the Unhallowed Ones, and so on. But the knife or whatever cannot penetrate living material at all, and does no damage to living things in combat from the edge (it would probably still leave a thin welt if it struck exposed flesh, but it wouldn't cut or penetrate the skin). You could cut a steak with it, but not a live cow. The spell would be of limited duration -- you might get one or two cracks at your slicing, but after that it either goes back to being a normal blade or becomes useless (losing its edge altogether, until you have the chance to go see a weaponsmith to get it sharpened again). In an extreme case the weapon could be utterly destroyed when the spell ends, shattering into a million pieces or crumbling to dust.

Now in a points-based system like Hero modeling this is a relatively easy collection of advantages and drawbacks that affect the spell's point total. There is no such guidance in most BRP fantasy settings or games. I'm wondering about things like the MP cost to cast, the number of spell levels it would take up, and so on.

It would, of course, function differently if it were a Divine spell as opposed to a Sorcery.

The old Elric!/Stormbringer 5th RPG had two supplements that allowed you to create your own spells to some degree. Basically, you pulled in various powers, and the rules told you how expensive in MP (and possibly other costs) the spell would be. Unknown East and Corum. IIRC, Advanced Sorcery will have the rules from Unknown East in it.

Ian

Sorry for late answer. It seems I was wrong about the edition.

"The fourth edition of STORMBRINGER is copyright 1990 by Chaosium Inc."

Printed in Finland in 1992.

OK, in 4th edition, this is a summary of CV and POW:

The Chaos Value (CV) of a demon is derived from the total of the summoner's stats (STR, CON, SIZ, INT, POW, DEX, and CHA). This total, minus the demon's POW, is the CV. The CV is used to purchase the demons powers/abilities. All of the powers/abilities have a listed cost in CV. Sorcerors are only allowed to assign a percentage of the CV, the GM assigns the balance. The demon must at least have INT, POW, CON and SIZ, with POW pre-determined as below.

The demon's POW is a base 3d8. For every 1d8 less, the demon has 20% less CV and the sorceror gets a 25% bonus to summon. For every 1d8 more, the demon has 20% more CV and the sorceror gets a 25% penalty to summon.

This is all from section 5.6.1. Section 5.7 states how the stats are assigned, and 5.7.1 has the powers and their costs. 5.6.5 has a good example of how it all works.

Hey guys, thanks again.

Let me ask you a question as I feel we've reached an impasse as far as what my tastes can handle. I want to propose a different way of handling skill checks (for myself), and I want you guys to tell me how much work it would take to implement it (if you don't mind).

SKILL CHECKS

Easy = no roll.

Could mess up = roll for fumble.

Difficult = roll.

Very difficult = roll twice (unless you crit on the 1st roll).

Extremely difficult = roll for crit.

HOW SKILLS WORK

Skills aren't a relative scale, they are absolute. You can use this scale to compare any creature to any other.

The range is from 1 to 99. After this, you would add a decimal and go to 99.99. In theory, you could go to 99.99.99.99.99 etc, but probably wouldn't need to.

The multiple decimals represent multiple d100 dice rolls. Multiple rolls (although very rare) could build anticipation.

A skill of 100 is perfect.

A skill of 99.12 gives you a 12% chance of crit. A skill of 99.99.01 gives you a 99.01% chance of crit. A skill of 100 gives you 100% chance of crit.

A skill of 99.07 still gives a 9% chance of crit until you reach 99.10 (this is the quirky exception. lol)

A skill of 99.01 has a 0.10% chance of fumble. So, to fumble, you'd have to roll '00', then '91' I believe.

A skill of 99.55 has a 0.05% chance of fumble. So, to fumble, you'd have to roll '00', then '96' I believe.

A skill of 99.99 has a 0.01% chance of fumble. So, to fumble, you'd have to roll '00', then '00' I believe.

A skill of 99.99.99 has a 0.0.01% chance of fumble. So, to fumble, you'd have to roll '00', then '00', then '00'. What are the odds? Crazy.

Needless to say, if you're using decimals, you probably won't see fumbles for a long time.

You can arbitrarily limit how high in skill any creature can go. 99? Sure. 99.50? Why not. 90? K.

Anyway, how much work would be involved in using a system like this for myself? Are the rules for combat and magic and such intertwined into the way skills work? I haven't read the book in a while. Sorry. Just wanting some quick and dirty expert advice. I'm. . . testing the limits of the flexibility of BRP. lol I didn't spend all day thinking this up, so it may be a horrible, horrible idea. But would something LIKE it work, maybe?

I think you are really starting to overcomplicate a very simple system.

Multiple rolls to determine success - probably not a good idea.

The whole decimal concept is just weird, and produces effects very different from RAW.

Again, I would try playing it as is for a while before tinkering.

Ian

Hey guys/gals,

Thanks for your responses!

Yeah, my problems aren't about doubting whether the game works on a technical "math" level. Of course it does, I'm sure it does, it's been around forever and all... it's just my own subjective/aesthetic/psychological problems I'm having with the percent system. I think my problems stem from the idea that this skill rating scale seems to mean so many different things. Here's what I've gathered so far:

1. It is a rating of how "good" I am as a human. 120% means I'm beyond the average human max potential of 100%? In this context, it is a comparison of how "good" I am as a human compared to another human. In this context, it makes sense to go past 100% since we're comparing me to others.

2. It is a rating of my percent chance of beating the average challenge as that challenge pertains to humans since this is a human scale. So, a 50% challenge for a human may only be a 90% challenge for a demigod. This view only works until the skill reaches 99% because in this context, it doesn't make sense to beat a challenge 101% of the time since 100% or 99% is all that one can reasonably expect, but after 99%... okay, so if the human and the demigod are both at 99%, what is the difference? Human scale athletic challenge 99% vs demigod athletic challenge 99%... would you give the demigod bonuses while penalizing the human?

3. The remainder of value past 99% pertains to a "bonus section" affecting how often I crit and various battle stuff. Even though its a part of the same number, we use this section in a different way... I think.

I'm pretty sure I could play and run this game, but my imagination is angry with it. lol

Question: Why are there different scales of skill rather than using this to compare me (human) with the monsters I fight? Does the SIZ attribute pertain to only humans as well? I thought that was so I could see just how big Cthulhu was in comparison to myself? I was thinking of the skills the same way. Oops.

I don't doubt the system "works" as written. I don't doubt any of these RPG systems "work". My problem is one of cognitive aesthetics I guess. I'm sure to other people smarter or different then myself, this "core mechanic" is super intuitive and beautiful and all... I just wish I was one of them. lol Guys, correct any mistakes I made above, please. Thanks for your patience.

Stick with 1) and you'll be fine

Also, understand that in many cases, when dealing with Lovecraftian or gods/demigods, etc. , often times the source material states that what you are dealing with is not the actual true being itself, but an avatar of the being, a representation of it. So, while the "earthly" stats and skills may be related to the human/normal scale, in reality, the being encompasses much more.

SIZ can be compared with humans assuming similar physiology (i.e. bipedal, simlar to human proportions). However, for some animals and creatures based on animal like (or totally alien) physiologies, this comparison does not work (same with inanimate objects like vehicles, walls, buildings, etc.) The comparisons will work in a pinch, or for a quick look, but they break down at the extremes. The Big Gold Book has two distinct tables for SIZ, one for human/humanoid, and one for a more generic comparison.

Ian

Hey Ian! Thanks for your quick response.

I'm not sure I'm following your first point. I'm trying, please forgive me. You said it's easier to deal with knowing what you have to roll against before you roll. I'm not sure I understand this. Whether you change the roll or the target, even if it is multiplicative, I'm not sure why this makes things easier or harder. Would you not know the same information either way? Sorry, I'm probably not seeing something. Please keep trying with me. This is a problem of... verisimilitude(?) I'm having, I think. I mean, if my skill is 70, then a harder challenge would not make me less skilled. My skill would still be 70, but my attempt in that moment (represented by the roll) would be what is handicapped. But telling me that I now have to beat 35 instead of 70 feels like I'm not as skilled, which doesn't make sense to me. Like rolling under, this FEELS strange. People don't lose skill, they simply face easier or harder challenges...

To get into this a bit more - think of it this way. The way BRP based games have been designed and implemented, the knowledge you have when attemtping to do something is front-loaded - you have pretty much all of the knowledge of what it takes to succeed in front of you. Your skill rating is your target number under normal challenges. When something is sufficiently more difficult (or easier), since there is no other target value than your skill level, the skill level is modified. In the end, whether you modify your skill level, or some arbitrary target number, the same effect is garnered - your skill is made less effective by the difficulty. So, it really doesn't matter what you change. In BRP, the skill is modified since that is the only thing that can be.

What bugs me about the percentage thing is that it doesn't "feel" like a percentage. My intuition "wants" the skill rating system to stop at 100 which would be god-like and perfect.

The fact that you can go past 100 makes me lose my sense of scale in some weird way. 100% should mean that I win 100% of the time, period, no matter what. But it doesn't.

This bugs the fire out of me.

I want to see things like this:

90 = max human

91 = mutant

93 = something...

95 = superhero

99 = demigod

100 = theoretically impossible in this universe (or some Cthulhu-ish sounding explanation) lol

I wish the skill level and crit level would rise independently or something. So, you could stop at 99, then your crits continue to improve even though you stop at 99 skill.

I think my problem is with "verisimilitude". I'm not sure if I'm using that word right.

And this is what bugs me about percentages and an artifical limit of 100%. It's just math. 12 is 120% of 10. 20 is 200% of 10. Percentages describe relationships between values. Just because you define one value as the one you are comparing things to, does not mean you cannot have something greater. Same thing with fractions. 100% is 1. Surely you can have 1 1/2 (or 3/2) of something. You are not constrained/limited to a single value of 1. Percenatges are the same, they can exceed 100% if that is what the relationship dictates.

Further, you really need to read the books more closely. The skill levels are succinctly defined in the BGB as to what they mean. It is the level of compentency on a human scale. Demigods, superheroes, etc. go beyond that scale. Read the Skills chapter again with all of this in mind. And, 100% has never meant, in BRP at least, that you always succeed. Again, the Skills chapter states this. There is always a chance for failure unless the task is so easy, a roll is not necessary. And, in all reality, what you are asking for about skill and crit level rising independently is pretty much what is happening. While your skill level can increase beyond 100%, a roll of "00" is always a failure, so it "stops at 99". However, as the skill level continues to increase, so does the crit level.

Ian

Hey Ian! Thanks for your quick response.

I'm not sure I'm following your first point. I'm trying, please forgive me. You said it's easier to deal with knowing what you have to roll against before you roll. I'm not sure I understand this. Whether you change the roll or the target, even if it is multiplicative, I'm not sure why this makes things easier or harder. Would you not know the same information either way? Sorry, I'm probably not seeing something. Please keep trying with me. This is a problem of... verisimilitude(?) I'm having, I think. I mean, if my skill is 70, then a harder challenge would not make me less skilled. My skill would still be 70, but my attempt in that moment (represented by the roll) would be what is handicapped. But telling me that I now have to beat 35 instead of 70 feels like I'm not as skilled, which doesn't make sense to me. Like rolling under, this FEELS strange. People don't lose skill, they simply face easier or harder challenges...

What bugs me about the percentage thing is that it doesn't "feel" like a percentage. My intuition "wants" the skill rating system to stop at 100 which would be god-like and perfect.

The fact that you can go past 100 makes me lose my sense of scale in some weird way. 100% should mean that I win 100% of the time, period, no matter what. But it doesn't.

This bugs the fire out of me.

I want to see things like this:

90 = max human

91 = mutant

93 = something...

95 = superhero

99 = demigod

100 = theoretically impossible in this universe (or some Cthulhu-ish sounding explanation) lol

I wish the skill level and crit level would rise independently or something. So, you could stop at 99, then your crits continue to improve even though you stop at 99 skill.

I think my problem is with "verisimilitude". I'm not sure if I'm using that word right.

Seriously, just try playing it. As you get more comfortable and familiar with the rules and how things work, I suspect your concerns will go away. The system has been in use, in one form or another, since 1978. With only minor tweaks and additions. It's worked well for many people for over 35 years. I think you will surprise yourself.

Ian

1. The idea that my skill rating is not a rating but a DC in and of itself messes with my head. I WANT to look at this number as a rating, but when the GM modifies this number

due to difficulty, then it feels as though they modified my skill rating, which makes no sense. I know it seems like I'm picking nits, but really! It messes with me.

The GM modifies based on various factors. Some are additive, some are multiplicative. Your skill level is set at whatever rating it is. To make things easier to deal with, instead of applying the penalty after the roll, it is easier to apply it before, so that you know exactly what you need. So, if the task is difficult, the GM may apply a 1/2x, meaning your skill is effectively halved due to the difficulty. Much nicer than rolling and doubling the result after to determine whether or not you succeed.

2. Percentile. What does this mean? How is it a percentage? Of what? If this DC can go over 100, and you can fail on a 00 no matter what, then how is this a percentage?

Doesn't the '%' symbol imply that 100 is the ultimate maximum which means "always and forever?" Again, picking nits, but really. It messes with me.

It is based on a percentile roll (i.e. most things are in terms of percentages), but it is not limited to 100% percent. With the use of criticals (say 1/10 is a crit), a skill of 100 crits on a 10 or less, but a skill of 120 crits on a 12 or less. So, going over 100 allows a greater chance of scoring a critical success. Also, some rules allow you to split your attacks if you have more than 100 in a skill, i.e someone with 120 in longsword can attack twice at 60. In RQ6, you use your skill over 100 as a penalty to your opponent (i.e. if you have 120 in longsword, you roll as if you have 100, but your opponent gets a -20 penalty).

3. Roll under doesn't feel as good as roll over. There SHOULD be a way to easily make BRP an optional roll over system. Couldn't you say if your skill rating is a 70, then you have to roll over a 30? Or something like that?

You could, if you wanted. But, for simplicity, and use of criticals/specials, it is much easier to roll less than your rating, and 1/20 or 1/10 or whatever to get special/critical hit. Knowing your skill rating is 70, it is much simpler to know you need to roll a 70 or less, or score a 7 or less for a critical if using the 1/10 rule. Your way introduces extra complication of 100 - 70 to get "roll a 30 or better", and 100 - (70/10) to get "roll a 93 or better to get a critical".

Ian

It think that this is what I'll do. I'm using BRP.

@sdleary While there is a difference between technique and weapon, what I want as trying to say is that the usual style for a composite bow is thumb draw, and that it wouldn't matter with a self bow, so the difference is already coveredby making Self and Composite two skills. But also adding a third skill or something to allow Persians to fire faster due to their draw style and special skill at volleys.

Skill wise I intend to make each weapon its own skill, but its class relatives (Swords) can be used at a penalty; and another weapon ( Longsword) learned at your Skill (broadsword) - Penalty; for example if you had a 70% in Broadsword you could use a Bastard Sword at 50% and if you made two experience checks with a Bastard sword you'd get it as a new Bastard Sword skill at Broadsword -20.

As others have said, I would make the skill relevant to the style, not the bow itself. Then, one could assign modifiers and characteristics to particular bow types which can be applied to the skill - i.e. some bows have a better range, or are easier to draw based on design, or are more suited to mounted combat. Also, using incompatible skill (style) and bow could levy penalty.

Ian

I asked a similar question some days ago on RPGnet, but I realized, I'd get better, and more informed, responses here.

As the title says, what is BRP really good at? Like, what sorts of genres or settings lend themselves well to BRP, with no houseruling, following the BGB? For example, fantasy (high and low)? Various sorts of sci-fi (space opera, cyberpunk, hard, etc)? Intrigue/Influence based games? Historical settings (like, using actual history, or history with a twist)? Games with lots of combat? Games with almost none? Social-monster games (like, you're a bunch of courtiers in a king's court trying to stop a war)? Or what?

Very curious here. Bonus points if you've actually used the BGB to run said game that you mention.

As I replied in your post over at RPGnet:

BRP in general really only struggles with 4 color supers (aka high powered, over the top). It can handle just about everything else from street level supers, modern warfare, historical/historical fantasy, high powered fantasy, grim'n'gritty, near future, far future, etc. Using the various options for skills over 100%, high powered stuff goes fine as the "master" in whatever gets a significant advantage when facing mooks. However, there is still some risk - a high leveled master vs. a horde of mooks runs a significant risk of death without a decent plan and good tactics.

I and others here were involved in the proofreading and clarification of rules when Jason compiled/wrote the BGB, as well as Magic World with Ben. So, while I cannot say specifically that I used the BGB, I used the rules that provided the source/inspiration to run games set in Moorcock's Multiverse (using Elric!/Stormbringer and others), Call of Cthulhu, adventures in Athas (TSR's Dark Sun), and I am working on a port of Skyrealms of Jorune over to BRP. I am also fiddling with a John Carter of Mars/Barsoom write up, have played some Star Wars and Traveller BRP hacks, and others.

Ian

I think Ray Turney was comfortable with that side-effect for his game. He figured that combat with huge creatures was a rare enough event in his campaign that he could live with the consequences.

Most times when my characters have faced huge creatures there *have been* fatalities; they are tough to kill even with the normal hit point system. However if you think about fantastic literature (eg. hercules, gilgamesh, siegfried etc.), heroes rarely kill huge creatures by nicking them to death over a long period, but by mighty blows or by exploiting their special weaknesses with cunning.

Skyrealms of Jorune had a very nice combat system that did not use HP but tracked cumulative wounds and severity, as well as their effect on subsequent actions. In my efforts to port Jorune to BRP, I am also able to reverse engineer things somewhat. When I get the combat chapter done, there will be an addendum that brings back Jorune's HP-less combat as an option. It should be fairly easy to apply it to any BRP based game.

Ian

First of all, I own the Finnish edition of Stormbringer. I guess it's somewhat similar to the 2nd or 3rd American edition: there's only summoning-related magic, and race & character class are determined randomly.

I have couple of questions about creating/summoning demons. First, what does the Chaos value (or whatever it is called in English) actually do? The cost of sacrifices needed to summon the demon? Secondly, how to determine demon's POW? Is it determined from the Chaos value? In the demon shopping list it says you can buy any other characteristics with a price of 3 Chaos value / 1d8 of that characteristic, but that Power is not solved in similar way. However, I haven't found any rules regarding the POW and how to actually determine it.

When was this version published? I can look up the specifics of C.V. for you, as well as how initial POW is determined.

Ian

Nick, thanks for the links to Jason's stuff. As far as I can see he didn't stat anyone, but I'll definitely borrow his character sheet.

Thanks for all your input guys, Having not used the mechanics yet, I value your insight. As an update:

I am planning to allow PC's to start with attributes up to 18 and skills up to 75%, as usual. I'm also planning to add a skills cap at 120%. This should allow the characters room for progression, and make sense of the upper-echelon characters in GRRM's world without allowing things to get out of hand. And for the record, I've decided that those upper-echelon guys (like Barriston, Jaime, Arthur Dayne, Garlan Tyrrel, et al) will all be statted with their prime skills in the 90s.

I'll probly end up writing up house rules and character stats for some of the big names, and if I do, I'll put them up here so that other people looking for ideas with an ASOIF campaign can find them.

Thanks again guys.

If it helps any - In the original Stormbringer 1 - 4 editions, where Attack and Parry skills were separate, and skills were capped at 100% (without magic), Elric had 90% in attack and parry without the aid of Stormbringer, and was considered one of the best swordsmen in the world. In Elric!/Stormbringer 5th, which is the basis for Magic World, and skills can rise above 100%, he is given an attack of 150% without Stormbringer. Again, he is considered the first or second best in the world.

Ian

My point is that a 6'5 guy with DEX 18 should have a base rate faster than a 5'1 guy with DEX 10. I shouldn't have to roll great on my Athletics/Running to gain an extra metre on him...I already have an extra metre on him based on my Characteristics. But as Pete Nash said today on my other post, you guys want to emphasize Skills and de-emphasize Characteristics.

As mentioned already, SIZ is not height, it is actually more closely related to mass. Also, DEX is not speed, but rather, it represents balance, agility, and reflexes. Absolute speed would be a combination of STR and DEX.

Also, as Loz mentions, re-read the Athletics section, especially the part where it says "For every full 25% a character has in Athletics, he can add an extra metre to his base Movement when sprinting, or half that when running over longer distances." No roll necessary (and Athletics is based on STR+DEX).

Ian

I love the Allegiance system! As opposed to D&D where your alliance dictates your actions, in this system your actions dictate your Allegiance. It seems a lot more logical and realistic.

Also, you don't have to just use religion as your allegiance options. You could also use the same system for things such as allegiance to royal houses, or gangs, secret organizations, etc. It really is a versatile mechanic.

It is indeed very flexible. I am going to use it in the Skyrealms of Jorune port to enhance/flesh out the Drennship system for PCs trying to become "citizens" of Ardoth in the setting, as well as develop other "allegiances" for other city-states/countries/cultures.

I have also been fleshing out the Allegiance implementation for Stormbringer/Elric!, pulling in bits from Mongoose Elric 2.

Ian

Stoatbringer, thanks! Both for the update and inferred editing.

I'll hope that it finally comes forth.

Steve

From Ben back in April:

Well, it's completely written and edited. I believe there are two books ahead of it in queue for layout/art. I also gather that one of those books is nearly done, and that some art has been chosen for AS.

My -hope- is that we'll see AS this summer. As a bonus, I beleive (since they're easy to put together), they'll be fast-tracking the GM Screen pack to come out shortly before or after. So, with luck, by GenCon, Chaosium should have two supplements out for it.

Welcome to the forums!

I do not have Gateway Bestiary, nor do I have much knowledge of All the World's Monsters. I do share a love of the old Stormbringer game (though my version was the Whelan cover, 3rd?). Something about merging BRP and Ken St. Andre makes this world a better place to live in.

Technically, 3rd edition is the GW hardcover. 4th is the Whelan cover, and that was quite a coup for Magic World's Ben Monroe (John B. Monroe in the 4th edition credits). Ben was able to get permission to use the Whelan piece, and he was the one who tweaked the demon summoning/creation rules (if you look closely, they are based on the Superworld Power system).

I love Stormbringer, and pretty much own a copy of everything - I have the thick 1st edition revised boxed set, all the original 1st/2nd edition supplements and scenarios, the 3rd edition GW hardcover, 4th edition and all supplements, Elric! and all supplements, and 5th edition.

Ian

Well, AD&D was essentially a 1-20 scale, and BRP is 1-100, so a +1 in D&D translates easily to a +5% in BRP.

After that, you really have to to a lot of eyeballing. The baseline assumptions between the two systems are different enough that its not easy to do a simple translation. BRP characters tend to be somewhat fragile, no matter how long you've been playing them, whereas D&D characters rack up tons of hit points, and become rather indestructible at high levels.

So, use your best judgement, really.

AD&D alsu used the (in)famous THAC0. So, take the THAC0, adjust for AC10 (assume average man, no armor) to get your new To Hit, multiply by 5%, and that would be the appropriate Attack skill.

For defensive mods, use comparable armor (or if the creature has natural armor, again, find a comparable BRP armor, and use that as Natural Armor), assign a Parry skill (can be equal to Attack or not, your choice), and then adjust if the creature has an AC that is better than what the natural armor/armor, if any, would suggest.

Ian