Ian Absentia

Yes and no, depending on which way you're looking at it. Opposed pairs of Traits appeared in the Thieves' World boxed set (1981) and later in Wyrm's Footnotes No.14 (1982) before they were adapted for in Pendragon (1985). But you're right in that the concept of Runic dichotomies, whether or not they had a mechanic tied to them, went back at least to the origin of RuneQuest, and likely prior to that. !i!

If I take your meaning correctly, a special result on the Initiative roll might add bonus APs (or subtract them on an especially bad roll). I like the idea in general, because it represents the fickle finger of fate, but... ...Mythras makes an effort to reduce some of the randomness of die-rolling in combat simulation by shifting the emphasis to strategic and tactical choices by the player. Arguably, a number of the Special Effects, which are themselves the result of randomised rolls, grant actions that effectively represent several APs. Similarly, Combat Style Traits often result in similar effects when the player chooses to employ them. !i!

The Action Point economy in Mythras can't be understated. For Imperative, the keep-it-simple version of the rules, APs have been leveled off at 2 AP for player characters. It's the reasonable expectation of how much a regular, competent person can get done in a limited amount of time -- nothing particularly impressive, like with even 3 AP, or painfully sluggish as with only 1 AP. A character or creature with 4 AP (or higher!) can quickly turn into a murder machine in combat, or at least hold multiple opponents at bay. The escalation in potential mayhem from 2 to 3 to 4 AP and beyond might be geometric, not linear. It's a matter of what that person can continue doing while others have been maneuvered to a standstill. !i!

Opinions vary. My bitter fruit is rooted in their editorial direction with Traveller some years before they took a similar approach with Glorantha. Let's just say that some people are convinced that more is not only better, but best. And now I'm airing old grievances. Shame on me, and shine on. !i!

That's good of Marc, and I appreciate his gesture of good faith. I do not appreciate the direction Traveller has taken with Mongoose. That said, go with grace -- I'll not be a fellow traveller. !i!

...and... I recall the first assignment we were given in a GIS course in university. Draw a map relevant to your daily life. Do whatever you want with scale and orientation, legend and symbology. Just make a map that represents what you do, where you do it, and, if needed, how to get there. It quickly became clear that a "map" is essentially a "memory palace" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_loci) set down in physical form -- the discipline of Geographic Information Systems builds out rooms and furnishes that palace. Presumably, a map exists to communicate that internal experience to someone else, though it's often to reorient the individual to their own. In our next episode, we'll discuss how magical sigils are multi-dimensional intersections with a 2-dimensional plane. !i!

And another thread connects with the tapestry. Thank you! !i!

Rubble and Ruin, which started as a BRP product and migrated to Mythras: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/354244/rubble-and-ruin It's quite recognisably Gamma World but less gonzo than most iterations. There are also a couple of versions of Moorcock's Hawkmoon out there, if Thundarr is a little too cartoony (I'd love to play in the road at that intersection!), though they may not be easy to find. !i!

I can see myself now, cloth cap, tweed coat frayed at the elbows, puffing on a pipe: "Yes, yes, I once engaged in these 'role-playing' games...until I realised that I could make money off of them! Do I credit any of the others who played with me for the creative process? No more than I credit my readers for purchasing my books and enjoying them -- which is to say, of course, immensely. What? A Netflix series? I'm sure you've heard as much about that as I have..." !i!

In the interest of self-contradiction... As a GM, part of the game for me is exploring the imaginary world as a sort of advance scout. Something I'll do on my own time, and maybe of only personal interest. I'll look at parts of the world that my other players may find interesting and I can incorporate into the campaign. I may research cultures or events or practices that I think will be fun. Ata mechanical level, perhaps I'll find some set of rules or a variant of some kind that'll prove exciting in play. And a lot of this is hard to track preparation for a specific game session. But the flip-side of this is this question: How do I keep all of the above from causing inertia? A lot of good ideas that actually keep me from putting a functional outline together and getting the gang to the table. How do I keep my personal gratification from obstructing our communal play? !i!

In the broadest sense: It's like BRP, but with focused editing. More specifically: It's the goodness of Elric! without the licensed backdrop. Others can speak to the worldbuilding aspect of it, but I love it for the clean version of the BRP mechanics that developed through Stormbringer and Elric! in the '90s. Powerful and evocative, yet lean and not too crunchy. !i!

I've wondered this myself, and it leads to all manner of discussion and argument regarding providence and causality and the need for a divine bureaucracy. For instance, why isn't New Pavis catching fire and being rebuilt regularly considering the environment where it's located and what it's built from? And I'm not satisfied with the "mythic" response, preferring a middle-ground with the mundane here and the influence of the divine there, not always relying on each other. But, as you suggest, that's because I'm looking at it with an alien philosophy that doesn't hold sway here. !i!

Furthermore, how much of DEX is an expression of intellect, and not just physicality? And how much do STR and CON and POW tip the 3-point balance board against one another? And this is where I wondered whether or not characteristics are superfluous. Maybe rather than cluttering the character sheet with the individual pieces, you simply list how they ultimately expressed. Which more or less brings us around to QuestWorlds rules, and almost entirely off-topic from the OP. To be sure, I like the granularity of characteristics and derived stats. I even enjoy them. But there are times in play (most of the time?) that I really want them to stay behind the curtain and just hand me a concise outcome instead of a lot of moving parts. !i!

Or this stringy, but apparently important hooman here for that plump, but seemingly insignificant one over there! !i!

This is sort of a can of worms, not unlike the discussion of Armor vs Resistance in Superworld -- one is the first line of defense, the other is the chance of avoiding anything that gets through. In the case that we're discussing here, does DEX provide a bonus for landing a blow in the first place, or does it add finesse to the amount of damage caused? Does it do both? I had a look at the document, though not in great depth. I appreciated where it was going, attempting to incorporate multiple axes of characteristics in combat, but the question of Chance vs Effect immediately came to mind. If any given characteristic is going to affect the chance of success, should it also affect the impact of the action? Is there a point at which too many variables are being factored in to calculate an abstract outcome? Lots of rhetoricals here, but it's getting toward the notion that characteristics may be superfluous. !i!