vagabond

In Stormbringer 1 - 4 , if you rolled up a beggar from Nadsokor, there was a very interesting disadvantages table circa 1981. -V

And yet D&Dv4 is top RPG dog at Amazon day in and day out currently. No other FRPG comes close (Dark Heresy is the closest, and it is far behind). And, as far as RPGs go, Star Wars is the nearest competition. D&Dv4 is still the 800 lb gorilla. People said the same about 3.5 when it came out, that they stopped buying and playing, etc. But it still sold very well, and many of those that complained came back into the fold. I suspect the same will happen with v4. -V

Even quicker, using the above formulas as a base, Specials are approximately the Skill's hundreds and tens digits multiplied by two (i.e. 87% is 8 * 2 or 16% though if you divided it out correctly it's 17%) and crits are approximately the Skill's hundreds and tens digit divided by two (i.e 87% is 8 / 2 or 4%, which is the same as 87 / 20 rounded down). This works perfectly well above 100% as well, with say a skill of 163%, specials are 16 * 2 or 32% and crits are 16 / 2 or 8%. -V

One of the main reasons I have never liked doubles as crits is if you have a 98% skill, your only two failures are 99 and 00, both of which are now fumbles. I don't like that a "master" in a skill can only make catastrophic failures, and has a 2% chance of doing so. -V

Why shouldn't they be harder to break? They are larger and designed to withstand the punishment. Weapons are smaller and not really designed to block crushing blows. -V

As I posted above, in Elric!/SB5, weapons break if their AP/HP are exceeded by the blow, while the shields lose AP/HP if the damage inflicted exceeds their current rating. Weapons weaken purely as a result of a superior attack (or parry) regardless of damage inflicted, shields do not suffer the same. And, as far as SB1-4, the rules were pretty much consistent. The only fix I believe was in relation to demonic weapons. Originally, they never broke. A fix was put in place later that lessened the immunity. I'll have to check. -V

OK, first, consider the cost of summoning the demon. Minimum 9 MP, more likely 30+ MP to summon a "demon of attack" with skill of 100% and 2d10 damage bonus. Plus the POW vs. POW contest to bind. That's significant risk over the sorcerous artifact. Also, to even summon a demon with 100% or better skill, it has to be a major demon with a minimum of 4d8 POW for an average of 18. That's a pretty steep POW vs. POW test. In another thread, I posted how to get a demon with the minimum MP spent, it would take about 19 MP IIRC (Minimum 9 MP to summon, plus 10 MP for the 100% attack/2d10 damage). But that leaves 4d8 POW and 1d8 for the rest of the stats. 1d8 STR, DEX, SIZ and CON does not make for a very "combative" demon. I'd houserule that you'd need at least 3d8 in all of those, so add another 8 MP. Also, a demon of combat without appropriate armor also sounds unlikely - I would houserule that armor must closely match attack/damage as well. Say another 7 MP to get solid armor. We're now looking at 34 MP minimum. Now, using the Elric! rules, an equivalent demonic bound weapon would be an eternal bind, not a regular bind. So, that's 3 POW sacrificed, not 1 . I believe there was a correction to the Elric! rules somewhere, but the BRP book does this correctly. The 1 POW bind is not permanent, it is short term. So, unless you want to keep binding the demon to the weapon after each bind lapses, you keep spending the 1 POW. -V

I prefer the original Elric!/Stormbringer 5 rules. IIRC, it went like this: Any impale attack vs. critical or less parry results in the parrying weapon losing 4 HP - shields are not affected. Any critical attack vs. regular or less parry results in the parrying weapon losing 2 HP - again, shields are not affected. Reverse the results for critical parry vs. success or less attack, attacking weapon loses 2 HP. Regardless of the above, any successful attack vs. the same level or less parry, roll damage. If the rolled damage exceeds the parrying weapons HP by 1, the parrying weapon breaks, and the excess damage is applied to armor/HP of the defender. If a shield is used, any rolled damage in excess of the shield's HP is subtracted from the shield's HP. When the shield reaches 0 HP, it breaks, and any excess damage is applied to armor/HP of the defender. Of course, with a parrying weapon you had a riposte opportunity, and shields gave decent missile fire protection. Stormbringer 1 - 4 made things slightly easier. Any critical attack resulted in the parrying weapon breaking. Any critical parry resulted in the attacking weapon breaking. Critical attack and parry resulted in both weapons breaking. I believe shields were immune, but I'd have to check. Also, you had unlimited ripostes if your attack and parry skills exceeded 90%. -V

Another issue - while Dodge may normally seem to be superior to Parry, check out the differences between them on their respective fumble tables. Dodge uses the Natural Weapon fumble table. It appears to me that a fumble has more significant risks - lose 1d3 rounds, lose actual HP, etc. -V

If you use the Riposte rules, parrying can give you an extra free attack. -V

I would, if you can find them, peruse the Elric! supplement Unknown East which uses a kind of "power word" magic system that will do much of what you seek, as well as the Stormbringer 5 supplement Corum, which has a similar system. -V

Some of the supplements listed on the Home page of this forum will be full blown books and not monographs. Whether or not this fulfills your desires is yet to be determined and out of the authors' control. -V

Chaosium really throws their support behind things like Continuum and Tentacles, and they had had some some success running games at Gen Con Indy. I believe some demos were run at Gen Con UK, but the call for refs apparently did not succeed. And, they do a number of local (to them) cons like DundraCon and KublaCon. -V

I believe that only applies if the Attacker is successful. IIRC, the Attack/Parry Matrix, if the Attacker misses/fumbles, the Defender does not roll. -V

There is no need to defend yourself if someone misses. That said, there is no need to roll for defense of the other side misses. So, in practice, the attacker and defender both failing their rolls should not be an issue. Now, what you can do is if the attacker fumbles, and you choose to make the defender roll for defense as well, and they fumble, both trip over each other. Or, if the attacker fumbles and the defender misses, the attacker falls into the defender, and the defender cannot get out of the way quickly enough. The attacker suffers the fumble, the defender is in a neutral state after shrugging off the attacker. For both attacker and defender failing their rolls, they bump into each other but easily recover, or the attackers failed swing and the defenders failed parry put them both out of position harmlessly. -V

I believe that statement was made with respect to supers and non-supers, and has to do with scale. Yes, when talking fantasy, the difference between spellcasters and non-spellcasters is similar to D&D. I have used BRP to run a Dark Sun/Athas game, where everyone can just about use psionics, but those that really practice psionics and sorcery can become tremendous powers. I am also working on my SkyRealms of Jorune conversion where Isho users can certainly overpower non-users if not held in check by the gamesetting (i.e. laws restricting use and penalties that are enforced). -V

I am having trouble connecting the above query with the subject line. What do the two have to do with each other? Party balance is not required for Fantasy RPGs. -V

For completeness: Elric! Melniboneans: STR 2d8 + 4 CON 2d8 + 4 DEX 2d8 + 4 SIZ 2d8 + 4 INT 3d8 + 8 POW 3d8 + 8 APP 2d8 + 8 Stormbringer 1 - 4: STR 3d6 CON 3d6 DEX 3d6 SIZ 3d6 + 3 INT 3d6 + 1d10 POW 3d6 + 2d6 CHA 3d6 -V

I disagree, I think Elric!/Stormbringer/Corum did a fantastic job of statting up Melniboneans, Menastrai and Vadhagh. The Menastrai stats were done by Loz Whitaker - referenced below. I don't think Loz would mind posting of the numbers. There is so much more to generating a Melnibonean character. STR 3d8 (drop lowest die) + 2 CON 3d8 (drop lowest die) + 2 SIZ 3d8 (drop lowest die) + 4 DEX 3d8 (drop lowest die) + 4 INT 3d8 (drop lowest die) + 8 POW 3d8 (drop lowest die) + 8 CHA 3d8 (drop lowest die) + 8 I'll see if I can find the Elric! values, they differ slightly from SB5. -V

Yes, you are a loser Seriously, the editor that was originally assigned to the mono has dropped out for valid reasons, so there has been some delay in getting things put together. Which kind of means we're all losers - until the the mono is released. -V

That's part of what I am getting at. "Hard" Sci-Fi is a different animal. Sci-Fi with a Psi Adept is not "hard". It may be Sci-Fi, and it may border on Sci-Fantasy, but it is not "hard" Sci-Fi. So, for Sci-Fi (not "hard") with a Psi Adept, imagining that his telekinetic powers act like a giant wedge being driven into the ground 10 feet below and lifting that chunk and shaking it, that is all the detail you need - the same as a sorceror doing the same with a spell. In "hard" Sci-Fi it doesn't work because there is no Psi Adept. So, again, the detail is not "required" for Sci-Fi in general. Traveller does quite well with copious amounts of handwaving. -V

We're talking Psi skills, right? That right there throws the whole Sci-Fi - Sci-Fantasy issue into disarray. Have you ever seen someone drive a pick into a rock? And then see that piece of rock crumble or shift? Now imagine a billion picks slamming into the rock 10 feet below the surface in a circle. Nice earthquake, huh? Did we need any geophysics and and talk of plate tectonics ? Nope. And yet with the fantasy wizard, the same explanation suffices. -V

And in the Fantasy world the GM didn't have to come up describe the spell that caused the river to flow uphill? Or a reason why? Again, in both cases, it isn't truly needed. In both cases, the players may want the detail, Sci-Fi or Fantasy, it doesn't matter. Again, it's up to the group whether or not such detail is necessary, regardless of genre. But in reality, it isn't required. And often times, leads to more conflict when a player challenges the detail because the GM and player have conflicting views of how things work. Miss with an arrow, you might take out a person. Miss with a phaser, you might take out a person. Why does the city block come into play? Because there's something there that will blow it up? If there is a stockpile of volatile chemicals that will ignite blowing up the whole city block, then you are in the same boat with a flaming arrow. Again, no differentiation necessary. -V

And, in my above example, the GM would be perfectly justified by saying "There is no plausible explanation". Because, while the character may have geology, planetology, or seismology skills, he does not have paranormal psych skills. Not everything can be explained by the laws of physics if you are bringing psi skills/powers into a game. But, yes, it depends. If you are going for a hard sci-fi setting, you can supply details if that's what everyone wants. But, that is not necessary. What happens when the GM is at a disadvantage in the scientific knowledge arena, and a player, with or without the scientific background, has his scientist character ask for detail? Does the GM need to provide the detail? Or, can he just handwave it away saying the character learns whatever it is he wants to learn and leave it at that? That's not the system, that's not the setting, that's the group's onus. The issue is not a BRP one, but an RPG one. How much detail do you need? If you need a lot, than that's up to you. But the same holds true for any game - GURPS, Hero, d20, Traveller, etc. As you said, supplements can provide the details, but it is still up to the group to use them. -V

The GM and or player needing to have knowedge (or having knowledge) about seismology has nothing to do with it. The setting is provided by the GM. The level of detail is left up to the GM. The reality is there does not need to be a fault line, molten lava, etc. described at all. The PSI Adept concentrates, succeeds at his Difficult telekinesis roll, and the ground shakes. Yes, you need to define the powers, but that is no different than defining the spells in fantasy. But, there is no need for details about seismology, fault lines, and geological requirements. The telekinesis power creates an energy field with sufficient volume, and "shakes" that volume of space i.e. the power provides the physics. Yes, you can provide the detail if you want, but when you're talking hi-tech and psionics, you've already committed to a certain amount of handwaving. -V