Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Mugen

  1. @Alex@Ian Absentia I redacted my post, is it ok for you ?
  2. I agree. I feel like RQ1 was originally designed as an alternative to D&D, and modified over time.
  3. I've heard many times that it was abandoned because its main author, Olivier Jovanovic, had serious problems with US Justice, even if he was found not guilty in the end. I still don't know if the relationship with RQ4 cancellation is true. IIRC, it was a common discussion topic on the runequest rules discussion mailing list I was part of around 2000. I don't remember it, but I remember my conclusion was similar to yours : nothing really interesting except for Sorcery.
  4. The problem I see with this method is that you'd have very different results, depending on the units of your skill. Skills with values that are multiples of 10 will have a linear distribution, as, obviously, he's going to have as many successes with 1s or 0s as the second digit. With other unit digits, you'll have more lower results than higher ones. Obviously, if your skill is 41, you'll have 1 more possible result where you roll 1 than if it is 40. You could roll a 3rd d10, like in C&S, and possibly use mechanisms such as dice swapping, or reducing your chances of success to have better results.
  5. That's very close the values in the MRQ/Legend/Mythras games, except they kept using dice instead of fixed numbers : STR + SIZ DB 01-05 -1d8 06-10 -1d6 11-15 -1d4 16-20 -1d2 21-25 +0 26-30 +1d2 31-35 +1d4 36-40 +1d6 etc. Those games also use (SIZ+CON)/5 as a basis for HP per location, instead of the RQ3 math were limbs get 1/4th, 1/3rd or 40% of HP total. IIRC, Arms have 1 fewer HP than this base value, while chest get +2 and abdomen +1. Even Combat Actions in Mythras are based on a 5-points step mechanism, except you only get 1 every 10 points, not 5. In fact, a d20 based version of Mythras could almost divide all characteristics by 5 and use a 1-4 scale instead of 3-18. Fixed numbers give a smoother distribution, but I prefer dice, as I think their randomness gives a less dramatique edge to high level values. Of course, rolling 1d8+3 prevents you from rolling 14, contrarily to 1d8+1d6, but it also prevents you from dealing 0 damage to creatures with AP under 4.
  6. @Lloyd Dupont My intention was not to say everything will fall apart at the same time (the time scales involved in this process are absurdly long), but precisely that Black Holes will remain longer than any planet or life form 🙂
  7. @Lloyd DupontDupont the reason why I thought the civilization had to master a technology to protect itself from the effects of expansion is because it will also affect matter at a very low scale. Theoretically, even protons might disintigrate. If Space is so distorted that even objects with such extreme gravity as black holes can't remain whole, there's no reason a human body can.
  8. Sounds a lot like a very dark version of Metamorphosis Alpha, the first SciFi RPG ever. 😄 What puzzles me in your description is that there seems to be nothing remaining in your setting except the ship. That makes me think we're in a time in the history of the universe where Space-Time has expanded so much that even black holes can't hold their gravity anymore. According to this wiki page, it would be between 10^100 and 10^2500 years after the Big Bang. https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futur_d'un_univers_en_expansion Which means the civilization the ship comes from found a way to reverse that process, but could only do it in the vicinity of the ship. It means they managed to do it when it was still possible, and that time was much closer to our time than the time the setting takes place. Why is there only one ship ? Are there more than one, but the Space-Time is so dilated it's not possible to reach them anymore ?
  9. Oh, you mean Legend of the 5 Rings style raises ? I thought that you wanted to use it in conjunction with the 1 success/30 points. In my understanding of your proposition, if a character with skill 40 took a 30% malus to get a raise, he only had 10% chance to get 2 successes instead of 10% chances to get 2 success, plus 30% chance to get 1. If your skill is 120, on the other hand, you only lose 5% chance of success (in case you keep a maximum chance of 95%) for 1 success.
  10. It's more a mix between RM's open-ended rolls and RQ crits, as your chances to benefit from this rule are equal to 1/20th of your skill. Plus, what you'll get from that second roll is limited by your skill, contrarily to RM, where the second roll will add 1d100, no matter what your skill is.
  11. It's not really simple to decide the right value for those "raises", as it's will always be a benefit for characters with maximized chances of success, but a debatable one for characters with lower skills. If my skill is high enough that my chances of success remain superior to 95% after I took it, you're basically giving me free levels of success. And I might even consider going down to 90 or 85% and still get a good reward/risk ratio. On the other hand, if the cost for extra success is too big, characters with low skill won't take it. Are you going to reduce your skill by 30 just to get an extra success, for instance ? But if you put a lower malus, you give more extra free LoS to highly skilled characters. An "open-ended" system was used in old french d20-roll-under game Celtic Legends. If you rolled "1", you could re-roll the die and add the second margin of success to the first. But it's in fact just another way to implement critical success, and it's also more beneficial to highly skilled characters.
  12. What do you mean ? If I roll 30 and my skill is 75, did I succeed by 30 (I read the die) or 45 (I subtract 30 from 75) ? Neither mechanism is really new. Warhammer 4th edition uses Margins of Success (the subtractive mechanism) and so did old french games Légendes and Premières Légendes in the 80s. The other one is partly used in Pendragon (as a tie breaker), and in Fading Suns 3 first editions. Latest edition of Nephilim uses the 10s of the roll to determine the degree of success. IMO, margins of succes are too much of a hassle to be fun. For instance, just to do one opposed roll, you need to do 3 subtractions : -Subtract attacker's roll from his skill. -Do the same for the defender. -Subtract result 2 from result 1. Simply reading the die is quicker, and is mathematically identical, but requires that you use a counter intuitive mindset, where lower is better in some cases but not always.
  13. @Al.It seems to me CoC didn't have rules for specials and/or criticals prior to the publication of Cthulhu Now (which was either a 2nd or 3rd edition expansion, IIRC), which also introduced localized Hit Points.
  14. Yes, that's a better explanation than mine.
  15. I never thought about it. Thank you! You could do the opposite : if your tens die is equal to 9 and your units are superior to your skill's tens value, it's a critical failure. However, I prefer the method of having fumbles on 99-00 if your skill is under 100, and only 00 if it's above 100. More that 2% complete failure seems too much to me.
  16. I agree with you. But something like "roll under the tens of your skill" doesn't require much math either. It may not be as automatic as spotting a double, but I think that when you compare 06 to 7X, it's quite obvious that it's also lower than 7. And it scales seamlessly with no extra rule or effort with skills over 100%. You don't even have to remember if 08 is a crit or not if your skill is 75, which can be a hassle, given not all games agree on the convention to use.
  17. BaSIC, the french edition of BRP published in magazine Casus Belli had a flat 5% chance of critical success, no matter what your skill is.
  18. From Steve Perrin's Quest Rules : From RD100 :
  19. 2000% was the required skill level to be a member of that "caste" in RQ3 Gods of Glorantha. :) It was obviously not meant as a goal for PCs. Also, I can't answer for @Kloster, but my understanding was that his answer wasn't only about when two characters are opposed, either in combat or other situations, but a general remark about the chances for a "master" to get superior success thanks to his very high skill. I also personally don't think there's anything inherently silly for two masters to reach a skill level so high they have 95% (remember the automatic failure on 96+ rule in RQ) chance to roll a crit. Surely not a very exciting situation in play, though.
  20. Yes. I think it's a pity if a Diamond Caste mostali "only" has 50% crit Chance despite a 2000% skill... Using rolls under a fraction of the skill is only one possible solution, thanksfully, but others tend to involve multiple rolls or use "tricks" (such as the "masteries" and "bump" mechanisms of (Hero)(Wars|Quest)(World)).
  21. You'd have 45% chance of criticals. 10% of the cases would be ties, and half of the remaining cases would see 10s being superior to units. You could use someting similar to Pendragon, and add the 10s of the skill above 100 to the tens. For instance, rolling 34 under 127 would be a crit, as the 2 in 127 would be added to the 3 of the roll. But it's not a very simple mechanism, IMHO.
  22. I only own the free character creation chapter, which is surely obsolete now. It was an interesting read, but I never took the time to acquire other parts of the game.
  23. As it's a topic that is completely different from this thread's and would require a long explanation, I'd simply say that it's something [b]I[/b] consider mandatory in roll-under games to have a meaningful skill range. :) However, I'm not comparing it to, say, RuneQuest's way of handling Criticals and Specials, which requires some maths (except if you've been playing the game for decades). I won't deny spotting a double is automatic, but judging that any roll between 1 and 8 is lower or equal to the tens of 87 is also very quick.
  24. I really don't like this mechanic, as it doesn't scale well with skills over 100. Rolling under the 10s of the skills gives similar chances of crits for the 1-100 range, and doesn't require much maths either.
  • Create New...