Mugen

Sure, but random armor already turns damage as a whole into pseudo-curve bells (trapezoidal distributions, in fact). In BRP, most 1 handed weapons tend to have damage expressed as a single die : 1d4+2 for daggers, 1d8+1 for broadswords, 1d6+1 for shortswords, and so on. When hitting someone in a platemail with a broadsword, you do 1d8-1d10+2 damage, which is not linear. Damage bonus also helps in "delinearizing" damage. I'm not sure rolling that many dice is necessary, honestly, and I think reducing the amplitude of random protection could be sufficient. Edit: a solution could be to always roll the same 2 dice (2d4 or 2d6) for a triangular distribution, adding weapon factor and damage bonus, and subtracting armor factor to it.

Funny. French edition of RQG is done by Deadcrows studio.

When I ran the Masks of Nyarlathotep, I decided investigators were all members of an "explorators club". One of my players even decided to use the Dalton brothers (those from the Lucky Luke belgian comic book, not the historical ones) basis for his characters. However, it was only really introduced in the first session of the campaign, and when I remembered them months after that they could introduce characters through that club, they vehemently said that club had never been mentioned...

A long time ago, I did something similar to the initiative system from the Advanced Combat system of Revolution D100, in which your initiative is both your turn order and a number of "action points". When your turn comes and you take an action, you need to spend some of your initiative points to be able to do it, and this new initiative count tells when you'll be able to act again. Say for instance your starting initiative is 13 and you do an attack, which costs 5 Initiative. Your new Initiative is now 8, and might act again at initiative rank 8. When Initiative count reaches 0, a new round starts and everybody gets its whole initiative back. RD100 calls those Initiative Points "Strike Ranks", and sets their value equal to the average of STR and DEX. IIRC, my version used DEX and INT.

The non-linear nature of Mass/SIZ ratio has strange implications on the meaning of STR versus SIZ opposed rolls. Adding X points to SIZ means you multiply the associated Mass by an exponential factor (2^(X/24)), but your chance of success is only reduced by a very linear -5*X%.

That's how I created my homebrew world : I loved RuneQuest 3 rules, but my attempts to make a campaign in Glorantha all failed miserably, as I was not able to understand it correctly with the published material. Plus, I felt like there was a huge disconnection between the lore and the rules. So, I created a world that would conform to RQ3 rules and that I was sure to understand, as it was my creation.

As for myself, I tend to mix a lot of things from cousin games Mythras and Revolution D100. I like to have few skills (a dozen), but with specializations. That is, instead of disconnected Climb, Jump, Throw, etc. skills, I'd have a single Agility skill with optional specialties for those who want to focus on one or more aspects. That is, a professional Alpinist would certainly have a Climb Specialty, which he'll add to his Agility skill when climbing. I like the generic conflict rules from RD100 and M-Space (Mythras in space), which is a rather abstract system where each protagonist starts with a number of points equal to one of his characteristics, and the goal is to make your opponent lose all his points through skill versus skill oppositions. I also use the Pendragon and Mythras rules for skill oppositions, with a twist. If one protagonist gets a better success level, he wins. if both protagonists achieve the same level of success, the one with the highest number on his d100 wins. The twist is that usually, those kind of rules consider that if both fail, there is no winner. Using the Resistance Table equation in oppositions as a baseline for chances of success (that is, Chance of succes = 50%+[difference betwwen both skills]), would work fine for me, too.

I had a player 30 years ago who was constantly beaten by lowly skilled NPCs. But he managed once to one-shot the "Big Bad Guy" of a session : Critical + failed parry (the NPC had 90%) + good damage roll = Dead.

I don't consider character creation in BRP systems as "rules". I see them more as guidelines to create fully fleshed characters.

I really don't like asymetrical rules. I mean, if I want that a NPC goes down easily, I give him few Hit Points. I don't need a "mook" rule for this. Of course, it means I'd have to change standard BRP rules, because it would require me to put negative CON in order to have NPCs with less than 7 Hit Points. But I would apply the same rules to PCS and NPCs. I also won't bother creating NPCs using the character creation rules used for PCs. I'd just write down the important skills, and assume "default" values for others.

Hey, it's not an unknown company, it's... well, even from a French point of view, it's a very small company, with only 2 published games and an upcoming Hawkmoon one, which I think means their first game, WasteLand, is dead, as it is very close to Hawkmoon's themes and mood. @rsanfordThe game uses the company's own system, CYD, (Chose Your Die). It's a very classical d10+attribute+skill > Difficulty system. Rolls over Difficulty+10 are "Exceptional" successes, and rolls under Difficulty-10 are fumbles. It's possible to chose to roll a d20 instead of a d10 (hence the system's name), but odd results will count as 0, and 1s and 11s will result in automatic failures.

It's funny that the characters file is, with 58 pages, only 17 pages shorter than the original PC.

It's interesting the PC has chapters dedicated to important characters' history. IIRC, the GPC doesn't, and their stats are in a separate pdf.

The way I understand the message in your quote, it's not about the Chaosium version of Nephilim, but rather a version that originated on a mailing list.

Interestingly, Würm was published in French by the same company that translated Pendragon 5th edition, Icare. Néphilim Légende is published by Mnémos, a traditional book publisher which was founded by the same people that created Nephilim 1st edition.

Yes. That was something that really surprised me when I read descriptions of RQG's Sorcery, after all the talks about fixing inherent problems with RQ3 Sorcery. It seemed like the only problem was the possibility for Sorcerers to have unlimited access to all the spells, and not the reliance on huge amounts of MP, which could either make you pitifully weak or extremely powerful.There was also the introduction of Enhance (INT), which IMHO is just too good to ignore. Presence was the real limitation in SP's rules, and it did a good job in limiting the number of spells a sorcerer could have on himself. Well, perhaps it's just the two of us, but you're not alone. I agree.

It was 4:30 AM when I wrote this. In addition to what I said, I would add that, in France, Mongoose editions are often named "RQ4" and "RQ5", while english speaking fans (the vast majority) call them MRQ1 and MRQ2, essentially to avoid confusion with the unpublished RQ IV:AiG.

That's very rude, and misinformed. You may be confusing the fact that, according to Jeff Richard, Mongoose had no right to make and OGL license using the RuneQuest name. But both Mongoose RuneQuest games, and Mongoose Design RuneQuest 6 were perfectly legal products, licensed by Greg Stafford.

See my first sentence, then.

I voted Common Magic because usually it's Sorcery for "professional" magicians, and Common Magic for non-professionals. But it depends on campaign background, and it can be Animism in some places.

If I wanted to re-work Sorcery rules, I think I would, too, get rid of vows myself, and base Presence on INT and some other factors, such as the magical skills value, and perhaps POW. I would also have fewer skills, perhaps just one per Rune. Spell knowledge would be all or nothing : you either know it, or not. Spontaneous casting without knowledge of a spell would be possible, but with limitations. Surely a lower Art total limit (skill/20 instead of skill/10), perhaps only 1 Art level per 2 MP, and perhaps longer casting time. Perhaps a system where you "build" a spell progressively, and each casting action costs MPs and adds Arts level to the total, but also makes the next action more difficult. I would also make the whole system less dependant on huge MP storages.

As far as i understood these rules, Arts were also skills in Petersen's rules. Yes, that was a really good way to do D&D-like magic. In general, I loved how those rules allowed for many magical tricks, but it was a little too complex, I think. However, whenever I think of a magic system, I have it in mind. Thank you for taking the time to explain all those differences.

This is clearly an evolution of Sandy Petersen's rules, isn't it ? Could you summarize the differences between your rules and Mr Petersen's, please ? I honestly don't have the courage to read through your rules just to figure out what is different. 😓 Concerning "flavorful" versus "generic" spells, I like how Mage:the Awakening or Ars Magica work in this regard, where magicians have access to very generic effects, but casting specific spells is quicker and far more effective.

Well, they tried very hard to reproduce the success of Qin, but with far less talented people... French edition had 4 supplements, though, but I think 6 were initially planed.

Really ? I based my comment on the list on the GRoG, which usually has a list of all published works. I also found no mention of Ar-Kaim or Selenim books for 4th edition afterwards. The only Ar-Kaim book I found was for 3rd edition: There's the Crowdfundind site: https://fr.ulule.com/nephilim-legende/ Then, the GRoG link : http://www.legrog.org/jeux/nephilim There's also a Starter Kit: http://heritiersbabel.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Nephilim-Quintessence-Kit-de-démarrage-HD-V2.pdf Sorry... Honestly, I've read it a long time ago, and don't remember it very well. The "Nephilim" part comes from the fact a character can reincarnate, and the "Highlander" part comes from the fact their powers come in part from a sword.