Jump to content

Vile Traveller

Members
  • Content Count

    1,453
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by Vile Traveller

  1. In a sense, I think that's part of the question - which of the systems is least campaign-dependent? Which is easiest to adapt to different settings?
  2. Legend has a bunch of magic systems from the get-go, and a few more in supplements. Which do you think makes the best "basic" or "standard" system for a game, and why?
  3. I think if you're going for the Master of Orion thing then go ahead and indulge those guilty pleasures of fantasy-tech. I like hard SF games, but you have to accept that dealing with physics becomes a big deal - fine if your group likes that sort of thing, but it cuts out a lot of fun options in play because the universe really doesn't like you to have too much fun. Most of us also don't really know that much about the science, so the research can become a chore and you will have the inevitable player who knows more than you about astrophysics and won't let you forget it. ๐Ÿ˜‰ It may simply come down to what you want to be the core of the campaign, the Science, or the Fiction?
  4. Taking things out of the context of BRP, I actually believe a skill-based RPG would be better without any characteristics at all. I think their existence in BRP is simply due to the evolution of RQ out of D&D. But I've gotten used to the seven in this game (whether the last one is CHA and APP), so I'd be reluctant to drop any regardless of their mechanical utility. ๐Ÿ™‚
  5. We did the same in the '80s when we were more energetic.
  6. Sorry, it probably wasn't clear that that's what my last point was aiming at - characteristics do a great job of building an image of a character, and APP is probably the most important one of the lot in that respect.
  7. Well, characteristics do do a lot of things in BRP apart from (slightly) influencing skills, and have done so in other games long before skills were a thing. Damage bonus, ability to wield heavy or tricky weapons, strike rank, hit points, resisting poison, etc., etc. That's one of the reasons I've moved away from skill category bonuses or characteristic-derived base chances for skills. In some ways, their most important feature IMO is simply helping players visualise characters (PCs and NPCs alike).
  8. Interesting skill list, I like the idea of a Balance skill that includes Stealth. I've long struggled with finding a name that could describe some kind of "transport operator" skill covering mounts, carts, boats, and the like ... you're not helping with Ride/Pilot! ๐Ÿ˜„ While in principle I approve of the idea of prerequisites for spells, or some kind of sequential/ escalating learning system, it's unlikely I would use it in this project. I've played with such a system (in GURPS), but it wouldn't meet the "entry-level" design goal for me.
  9. Got mine, the PDF looks great in terms of content and appearance. Looking forward to the arrival of the print copy - should get here just barely in time before I move!
  10. Have you ever tried using a biro on your face? Smudges something terrible.
  11. I like the solid pseudoscience of GURPS Ultra Tech for all my futuregun needs. Needlers, coilguns, (particle beam) blasters, electorlaser/stunners, x-ray lasers, you name it.
  12. Well, that's your problem, right there. Technically, traditionally, and tectonically no book including heroquesting rules can ever be published.
  13. Everyone knows goblins are amphibious.
  14. Right. Clearly they should have been replaced with goblins.
  15. I like the illuminated interior, but that cover looks a bit D&D 3E ... surprised that it didn't get some matching cover art.
  16. That makes me think .. the easy way to make sure players are smarter than their characters is to make INT the dump stat! ๐Ÿ˜†
  17. I think APP is an artefact of an era when many systems were trying for maximum "realism", and physical appearance may have been seen as more definable than charisma. I remember splitting SIZ into SIZ and WGT (weight) at the time, too. There is an argument to be made that charisma is already represented by Oratory or other communication skills, which can be slightly improved by having a high APP (making a good first impression). I think either characteristic works fine, but I'm inclined to stick with APP in BRP-derived games just because it's one of the features that sets it apart from many other systems. One of the most important features of characteristics, and one which doesn't get much attention, is that they define a mental image of a character, and you could say that APP does this better than CHA. Adding descriptions to a character sheet is all well and good, but if characteristics can do that job, too, they are doing a better job of pulling their weight. I do think there is a fundamental difference between role-playing physical and social skills, though. We can't role-play piloting an aircraft or fighting a dragon at the table unless the referee knows quite a bit about flying or dragon slaying, but we can role-play two characters having a conversation because everyone is familiar with that (whether or not they are any good at it). I never let players just "roll for Oratory" without them having a good idea of what their character is going to say, same as I don't allow "Search" unless they tell me where they are looking and what they are looking for. I see skills as a resolution mechanism, but not a substitute for role-play.
  18. Well, share it when you feel you have something to share - actually, just before, or you might never think it's "good enough"! ๐Ÿคฃ
  19. Yeah, that's one house rule I implemented some years ago - skill category modifiers (or even basing them on two characteristics) is too fiddly to calculate and re-calculate, for such a negligible impact. I just use flat skill base chances like in the original BRP booklet nowadays. Characteristics still do plenty of work what with derived stats (like hit points, damage bonus, etc.), characteristic rolls, and simply help with visualising a character. So, you have an SF setting, is there a thread somewhere? ๐Ÿ‘€
  20. You need to be quite clear which options you have switched on and which you have switched off if you're presenting BRP to a newcomer. Even if you go full-on crunch you're still not using every option. If you come to the book cold and think all those rules are there to be used at once, it can be pretty off-putting. Or, as you say, you can go with MW (though I assume you'll have to tailor it to your SF setting?).
  21. I think you can make it sufficiently distinctive to get away from the "back door of Moria" trope. Have you seen the TV series Britannia? One of the filming locations is an abandoned quarry called Velkรก Amerika, which is used as the citadel of the Cantii. Looks perfect as visual inspiration for this, although of course the Dwarves of the Southern Reaches are probably better architects than the Celts. ๐Ÿ˜‰
  22. Although I've used most of the standard hooks and occupations, in my experience all players eventually (or immediately) gravitated to the rebel/mercenary campaign. Rebel because they rarely played nice with authority.
  23. It probably wouldn't hurt to have a couple more sub-forums under Mythic Worlds, even if they don't get a lot of traffic. And having a sub-forum in the first place might even encourage some more threads. I don't think Trifletraxor spends that much time trawling the conversations here anymore, but you could always PM him to ask. For a beetle, he's remarkably approachable. ๐Ÿž
  24. Known Space is a very interesting SF setting in and of itself, even without the Ringworld. I remember a German gamer* who used to post on various Traveller forums who was heavily into some very interesting hard SF worldbuilding using Known Space as the background. The Known Space element was unfortunately why he felt unwilling to publish his material. *EDIT: Oh wait, rust also used to post here many moons ago!
×
×
  • Create New...