Jump to content

Rurik

Member
  • Posts

    501
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rurik

  1. Absolutely. Something like: Light Handgun, -2 steps Medium Handgun, -1 step Heavy Handgun, No change Very Light Rifle (22LR) -1 (or 2, it's pretty damned weak) Light Rifle, No Change Medium Rifle +1 Step Heavy Rifle +2 Steps I used weapon classes for simplicity's sake. You could assign a value per round, or weapon, etc.
  2. Actually, I just had a prety radical idea on weapon damage. What if the Damage die was based on Skill (or adjusted to hit chance) and then adjusted up or down based on the weapon/round used. This would account for placement by having higher percentage shots likely to do more damage. It might work best with exploding damage dice, so even low percentage shots could kill. Or have specials and criticals boost the damage die a number of steps (3 on a Special, 5 on a Crit for example). Something like: 01-20% 1d4 21-40% 1d6 41-60% 1d8 61-75% 1d10 75-90% 2d6 91-100% 2d8 100%+ 2d10 That scale is for example, it needs work (more possible results).
  3. The question becomes which real world data do you use? It seems people can never agree on that.
  4. Must be those flowcharts that give it such a nasty rep.
  5. Edited because I can't delete posts. Damn you Dice Roller!
  6. For those who play, have played, or will be playing in Glorantha, what is your preferred flavor? Personally, I can play in any of the settings (I know people who stick with RQ2), but am rather excited about the Second Age - I just haven't decided on a ruleset. It may well be BRP with some MRQ Magic (their Sorcery and Dragon Mysticism at least). SimpleQuest looks intriguing, as it is basically the MRQ SRD reverted back much closer to its' BRP roots - but I love my Hit Locations though.
  7. Wow. I would say overall Chaosium/BRP has at least as strong support overseas (Europe) than in the US, if not even stronger support. I agree the Monographs are overpriced for what you get (but so are most 'niche' products compared to more mainstream products) - but making them prohibitively expensive overseas is a big mistake, as well as a disservice to their loyal European fanbase. I'd never thought about that before (but then I'm not really affected by it).
  8. I've always been an unconcious at 2 dead at 0 kinda guy.
  9. All valid points, though I think we are talking about a slightly different things. What you are describing is pretty much like Morale to me. Morale is actually rarely modelled in RPG's (old D&D had it though). I'm talking about more of mental discipline under fire. The two are similar but different. I'm not talking about modelling fight or flight, but the ability to overcome fear and chaos in battle. Most soldiers can pop up from behind cover and fire at an enemy, but not everyone can pop up, take a careful bead on their target, and squeeze the trigger evenly while being shot at - that takes one hardened MF. Actually, on that note, I forgot to add suppressive fire to aspects of modern combat that are not modelled in BRP. Suppressive fire is effective partly from this hard to overcome sense of self preservation. Certainly any optional rules that model combat psychology could be used in medieval type games, though honestly I have never missed them in those type games, just as I don't miss better penetration modeling in fantasy games. Where I miss them is in modern, firearm intensive games. BRP as is is fine for CoC because the focus isn't on guns. But when I want Mossad* commando raids I do miss them. *Did I say Mossad? My bad, I can't possibly prove that, as these people who infiltrated a Pakistani Military base and assassinated their top Nuclear Physicist couldn't possibly be traced to Israel, as they have no discernable background at all.
  10. It sounds like Cthulhu Now is the most detailed set of rules that can be recreated using the BRP rules and options from what I've read so far. Which is fine for many games, but lacking for a Special Forces/Mercenary type game or another one where gun combat is central.
  11. While the psychology of combat applies to melee as well, in a medieval type game most combatants are conditioned for personal combat to the point it is a non factor (until the Fear Spell is cast, or some creature that inspires fear come along). Also, the best defense against the axe weilder in your face is fighting back, or at least defending yourself. Curling up into a little ball and wimpering like a baby is not likely to save you. When being shot at on the other hand, the fetal position is a much better defense, particularly with good cover. Shooting back while under fire just does intuitively seem the best way to save yourself when you have a perfectly good ditch. Modern soldiers, even with the best of training, panic under fire. That is why people trained in firearms that can hit a target every time at a range miss with most rounds in a real firefight, even at very close range. The question becomes is it significant enough to model, and the answer to that is going to vary by each gaming group and game. I'd probably not use these rules for a pulp, Indiana Jones type game. But for say a game where the characters are say Delta Force or professional mercenaries against say third world military forces I'd say such rules would be very desireable.
  12. AP Rounds lose accuracy because they are teflon coated. The reason is that AP rounds are made out of harder metals (steel or alloys) than non AP rounds. When first being developed the hard rounds ruined a weapons rifling in short order. The teflon coating helps reduces friction and so the round does less damage to the barrel's rifling, but also does not 'take' to the rifling as well, and less rotational spin is created (which is the whole point of the rifling). Good old soft lead takes to the rifling very well so actually shoot straighter (and also does verry little damage to the rifling because lead is so much softer than the barrel's steel). Positive I've never read Timelords. Sounds decent though.
  13. As to impaling I've always had guns Impale. That is only way a handgun can kill in one shot typically. To accurately model modern ballistics Penetration (the ability to penetrate armor and other hard substances) and Damage should be differentiated. The Armor absorbing damage model of BRP fails to capture this. It works well enough for Melee weapons, but with modern ballistics, armor piercing rounds, hollow point and hydroshock rounds, and advanced weapons like flechette weapons the combined damage/penetration used by BRP starts breaking down. A 9mm should penetrate better than a .45, but the .45 should be more effective against an unarmored foe. A shotgun does massive damage against an unarmored foe but is not effective against armor. Flechette is sort of the opposite of the shotgun (high penetration but low damage - the damage compensated for by volume of fire and low recoil - making it easy to put a LOT of rounds on target). Armor Piercing rounds should penetrate better than standard rounds, but do less damage. They also suffer a loss of accuracy at long ranges. Hollow Point rounds should do more damage but armor should be more effective against them. Without introducing a seperate Penetration value (though adding penetration is certainly an option for an advanced set of rules) I think a guidline like the following makes sense: AP rounds: Reduce the Damage die one step and any damage add by one. Armor value is halved. Optionally additional hit penalties at long ranges. (A .45 acp does 1d8+1) HP Rounds*: Increase the Damage Die one step but armor is doubled. (A .45 does 1d12+2) On an Impale damage that penetrates armor is doubled. A crit Impales AND ignores armor. Thoughts? Other areas poorly covered by BRP: Auto-fire, Recoil, Psychology of gun combat (performing under fire), and range system (very poor recreation of snipers using RAW).
  14. Umm, Am I missing something here? Your pollmaking skills are worse than mine! I vote pie. If that is not an option I don't think they should be in the core, but probably should be an optional rule. I've never used them in a BRP game before, and probably won't in the future. I do use them in MRQ so far. I like the way they are used for two purposes in that game - there is strong incentive not to use them to fudge rolls unless absolutely necessary. EDIT: Ahh, there it is. I didn't realise you could go back and make a thread a poll afterwards. Cool.
  15. Ummm, have you seen our site admin?
  16. Is hit location information included for all the creatures (as locations are optional)? Thanks again.
  17. Sorry, I wasn't clear. I'm with you 100%. I was responding to: With: I was referring to with the COC rules. A .22 is not going to kill anyone with decent HP in the game, which is to me unrealistic. If you underpower handguns even more, as Joseph Paul suggests, you would be moving farther from reality. That's why I go on to mention the .22 to heart and brain. I'm pretty sure we are on the same page here. Rifles actually over-penetrate, but have so much MORE energy even the fraction that is transferred to the target does massive tissue damage. Personally, I think mass matters more than velocity in damage (again favoring rifles), but that is subjective. That is why I think it is OK to give the .45 ACP higher damage than the 9mm. Personally I think the CoC damage values are good. Pure kinetic energy based formulas are flawed. I look back at Aftermath! which did the same thing. .25ACPs couldn't hurt a fly and no one could possibly survive a high powered rifle - which is wrong. The reason people like them (formulas based on energy) is they can be accurately measured and calculated (though how come games that do this don't adjust damage dramatically with range as the velocity drops is beyond me). You come up with formulas that try to account for the other variables (range, target composition, mass, gravity, etc) but ultimately you are just arbitrarily assigning values in complex formulas - which is really not that different than arbitrarily assigning a value of say, 1d10+2 to a .45 ACP.
  18. How so? As it is it is impossible for a low caliber handgun to kill a moderate sized person, and even a moderate handgun cannot kill a decent sized person easily. Only the .45 and up have a real shot at it, and often require an impale. The BTRC stuff seems to based on energy alone, which is a very flawed way of translating real world guns to Damage in a game, especially HP based games. The damage roll is a result of two things, an abstraction of the weapons capabilities to damage a person or thing, and the location of the hit - which is not affected by energy at all. A shot to the heart or brain with a .22 probably as bad as one with a .45. Second, higher velocity rounds often easily penetrate targets and so only transfer a part of their energy to the target, while a slower round may not penetrate, and so ALL of it's energy is absorbed by the target. I see BTRC rates a 9mm higher than a .45 (because of it's higher velocity) - but the 9mm is more likely to go through the target, while the slower, bigger .45 is more likely to transfer more or even all of it's energy to the target. That is the principle behind Armor Piercing rounds and soft lead or hollow point rounds. Armor Piercing rounds are made of very hard material and teflon* coated and designed for maximum penetration of body armor - but they tend to make neat little holes in soft targets, while a lead or hollow point is designed to NOT go through a soft target, but to expand, fragment, and generally cause as much tissue damage as possible while transferring all of their energy to the target - but they tend to just splat against armored targets. The important thing that two rounds are going to travel at the same velocity and have pretty much the same mass - so the energy will be practically identical, while the damage will be very different. *The teflon is actually not to aid penetration - a bonus cookie to anyone who knows why AP rounds are teflon coated.
  19. Another one: What is the default fatigue system (and what optional systems are there)?
  20. I've been trying to follow and keep up with this thread but have been busy lately. Forgive me if any of these have been covered. First off thanks for taking the time to answer our questions (not to mention, y'know, writeing a comprehensive collection of the BRP rules), and congrats on your daughter. First, how do the opposed roll mechanics work (Spot vs. Hide for example)? Second, Are armor points fixed or variable by default? Also, do armors have different values based on attack types (melee, ballistic, energy)? Third off, it seems from upthread that most of the questions I've been wondering about have been answered, and it seems for the most part BRP will be a collection of previously publications collected and fit together (which is pretty much in line with my expectations). What parts would you say are new, or which sections have the most original content? That's it for now, thanks.
  21. Logolas 'shieldboarding' down stairs while firing off two arrows at a time was a low point for me.
  22. Well I tried to roll it using the Dice Roller but only get "Internal Server Error" messages. Why does he (the god thing) have Levels and Experience anyway?
  23. I was torn between 10% criticals and the RQ style special/crit. I like the simplicity of the 10% crit (I think Stormbringer uses one 10% crit as well but it has been a while), but being a RQ'er at heart I voted the more complex method. It has worked for me for over 20 years now.
  24. What I want to know is what kind of pie is it? That is important information.
  25. I gotta go with the Mouse. To the best of my knowledge Ralph Bakshi never did Superman. Definately tips the scale. I ain't starting another poll for this one tho'.
×
×
  • Create New...