Mugen

Nitpick : it's CON and SIZ, not CON and STR. Also, Hit Points can be lower if your CON and SIZ are below average. Say you have CON and SIZ 6 (which is possible in Storm), your max HP would be 3, and not 6 as it would have been using the average value.

Unless you consider each pilot is responsible for one part of the robot. Or you could use some kind of "Everyone is John"-type rules...

There has been quite a number of BRP-derivative fantasy games since the release of RuneQuest 1, and each have their own features that make them unique and enjoyable (or not). As for myself, BRP fantasy games have been an important part of my Roleplayer life. I've discovered them through StormBringer 2nd edition, and it was so much better then D&D in my eyes I stopped playing it for a long time. Each of the BRP fantasy games I played had different appeal to me, and different flaws and qualities. One of the things that is more specific to BRP fantasy than other genres, though, is the proeminence of melee combat. With time, I grew dissatisfied with its focus on wounds as the only interesting outcome of a blow. In its more simple incarnations, it results in long successions of rounds where attacks either miss or are parried. In more complex ones, or in Pendragon, it's less of an issue, though. Nowadays, I prefer a different approach to Hit Points, which is not directly correlated to wounds. Even if you completely avoid to be hit, you may lose HP because of exhaustion, or losing ground.

I think the impact of "advantage" style mechanism on critical success chances is sufficient to make it interesting for high skills. However, rolling 3d10 and taking the 2 lowest ones is just too good... I'd let the player roll 2d10 and keep the best/worst for the tens , and roll a single d10 for the units.

Given that Chaosium built RQG on games dating from the first half of the 80s (Pendragon being the most recent game in the lot), I doubt they are in the mood for making a new edition of Pendragon that diverges from previous editions, and based on recent RPG design. I just hope they won't do the same as they did for skill opposition in RQG and just compare success levels... I think the game could benefit from removing the split between characteristics and skills, except perhaps for SIZ and/or CON. I would also change the system to make it more like HeroQuest, with success levels bumps instead of the current crit rules.

As I said, I guess it's just Pendragon coming back to Chaosium after 5.X editions having been published by Nocturnal. I don't expect any major rules change. EDIT: After a quick check, 5.2 was in fact published by Chaosium... Well, ignore my comment above...

Well, in the video below, Stéphane from Edge (the video don't say who he is, or even what his last name is) explicitly talked about a 6th edition of Pendragon (the Pendragon part starts at 18:03). Edit : I think it's Stéphane Bogard, studio coordinator at Edge, mentioned here: https://www.chaosium.com/blogchaosium-announces-new-licensing-deal-for-french-and-spanish-with-edge-entertainment/ My guess it's just Pendragon coming back to Chaosium, basically.

Well, in previous editions (like the one I used in my campaign), you inflicted normal damage on a critical success when in Defensive stance... Needless to say, a lot more players used that tactic... I remember I wanted to change the rules for crits, but I don't remember the details. I remember I was influenced by HeroQuest, so it's possible my intent was that if both rolled a crit, the highest roll was the winner, but his roll was downgraded to a normal success. Anyway, my players didn't want that change, because they had some pretty bad experiences with me a rules change in a previous game (but it was a homebrew system)... On the other hand, one of my players put a lot of efforts in-game to obtain a "magical" mace that was unbreakable, so he was basically asking for a rules change in his favor... That was exactly my experience, too.

Well, with Inspiration and combat stances, it's not very difficult to go beyond 20.

That was actually a problem for my players, as they felt they couldn't focus on another 1 handed weapon on the long term, and have a character with a different fighting style from their previous one. We also experienced a lot of fumbles, to the extent that a recurring joke was that they should stop use grease to clean their swords...

I'm also not impressed by the (dis)advantage mechanism. It's good that D&D 5e has less little bonus to hunt, but sincerely I'd rather just take the highest bonus and malus, or even just eyeball global difficulty.

As a side note, the POW gain from defeating a Disease Spirit seems to me like a typo in the rules, but I digress...

Remember that the metals that are named "bronze", "copper", "iron" and so on in Glorantha are not the same as their Earth equivalents. That's the reason why you can find natural bronze, for instance.

My personal taste would be to have Hit Points representing a character's fatigue, energy and morale rather than just actual wounds, instead of having 2 different jauges for fatigue and health. That would result in a game where Hit Points are lost more frequently, but also recovered quicker. Going under 0 HP would result in malus to skills. Real Wounds would result in reduced HP Maximum until fully healed, and Death would occur when max Hit Points are reduced to 0.

Also this summer, the first Kaamelott movie will finally be released. It's based on a french comedy series which relies heavily on language and the actors' performance, so I doubt it translates well in English. Nevertheless, what was initially a light-hearted series of short films loosely based on arthurian legends eventually turned to be a more profound and personal work, as Arthur, unable to find the Grail or give an heir to the throne, slowly fell into depression. Launcelot is also a very interesting figure. Originally the right hand of Arthur, he eventually left the court because he disagreed with what he considered laxism from Arthur's part. He met a strange hooded man (Meleagant) who influenced him and turned him into Arthur's worst enemy.

I'll second Mythras.

The way I see it, an armor protects you from a blow in a way that is very different from the way a parry does. An armor is a passive protection, whereas a weapon is an active one. Basicall, a parry is an attempt to intercept, block or deflect a blow so that it doesn't hit your body. The geometry of the tool you're using, and how it helps you use your strength to counter your opponent's is very important. What type of material it's made of will determine how long the item will stay in shape before it breaks or its shape is altered to such an extent it can't be used as a weapon. On the other hand, a piece of armor is here to reduce the impact of a blow that already hit you, by dispersing kinetic energy and sometimes changing the nature of a wound (for instance, when a sword can't make a cut and instead just leaves a bruise). Small shields are also quite different from other weapons, as they're basically just additional layers of armor over your forearm. Which doesn't mean I think the kinetic energy of a parried attack magically disappears after a parry, or that an armor's geometry is not important for making it more effective.

IMHO, having one value for protection value and durability only really works for bronze items. Items made with a more resistant material should not protect more, only stay in shape longer.

Amen. From what I understand, they only really had two possibilities in mind : either use RuneQuest 2 or RuneQuest 6 (now Mythras) as a basis, and didn't consider any other option. And they chose RQ2 because the other one was just too counter-intuitive for their playtesters (which were not RQ2 grognards). As much as I love Mythras, I would have loved that RQG had envisioned a third option.

Did I mention it was a ghost speaking ?

Hey, I lost my right arm and left leg, but finally earned an experience check. Totally worth it !

Sure, but will you risk using it in combat in order to gain experience with it ?

Anyway, there are clearly two different category of skills in all (skill-based) RPGs : those that are necessary for the game, and those that are rarely used and ever more rarely useful in the course of an adventure. It's fine to know how to play Harp, but it's rarely used in-game (even moreso if "Harp" means the ICE game) IMHO, Character Creation should take this into account and make "less useful" skills easier to learn.

Ok, I misunderstood your post.

Well, to be honest I think that if you try to factor skill utility, it's possible warrior packages will be 400% worth and Scribe 50% As a side note : really, Farmers receive no points in Farm and Entertainers no points in Play(Instrument)? That's odd. But it doesn't really matter as you only ultimately need a handful of skills in CoC.