Atgxtg

But what percentage of Uz are trollkin? Troll forces are made up with a few tough tanks, supported by lots of second rate skirmishers.

It's pretty much a walk over for the elves, as long as the fight starts at range and the elves have the chance to keep their distance (basically skimish). Arrows are extremely effective since they can impale and a character can usually fire two shot a round. Plus there is a lot of good battlemagic, such as speedart, multimissile, and mobility, that all plays well into this. Trolls might be good with slings but they're just not in the same league. Now, in an enclosed space, where the trolls can get into melee, it quickly shifts into their favor. Most of the trolls advantages kick in then.

Yeah. I've read that sometimes highly attractive people aren't asked out because average looking people would consider them "out of their league."

There are no concepts from Superworld in Wild Cards. Superworld is basically a set of RPG rules for running a superhero game without any sort of specific setting to speak off. It's not liek Superworld invented and introduced the concept of Superheroes. The Wild Cards books used setting an characters that were either drawn directly from GRRM's campaign, or inspired by it. Had Steve/Chaosium created the setting and/or characters used in Wild Cards, with Superpowers a byproduct of an alien weapon, etc. then it would be a different story. RE Game of Thrones. With a fan project, even one by a profession RPG designer distributed over a company owned website, the odds are still slim, and depend mostly on how high a profile it draws. A lawsuit is actually pretty unlikely, mostly because it would probably cost the copy-write holder more money to press the suit than they would be able to claim in damages. That said, if the copywrite holder or a "liscee" felt their interest were bring damaged, a "cease and desist" would be sent and they would probably bring pressure to bear to stop the distribution of the of product. Especially one that was being sold. And with a free fan project there is the very real possibility that any sort of legal action could generate bad will with the fanbase that could cost them more than the alleged damages of the project. Just look at what happened with Palladium a few years back.

I think it's high Charisma and/or Appearance that is probably getting shortchanged. In real life, someone with the looks of a model gets treated nicer in a lot of ways, everyday, just because they are so cute. Yeah, they might get hit on more often than most people, but they still get a a lot of perks from a lot of people, including those who aren't hitting on them. I can only think of a handful of RPGs that really factor Charisma and/or Appearance into NPC reactions and behavior.

1 reroll per session should cause any problems. It will speed up advancement a little, but nothing unbalancing, although it might be a problem once the characters master (i.e. 90%+) some skills. So you might want to place some sort of restriction against using the reroll for very high skills. Or not.

Exactly. I've seen games where low CHA characters are played as very socialbe and charismatic, and games where somepbody is acting like a total jerk, but has a high CHA on the character sheet. Now some of that is bad RPGing, but some of it is due to the fact that it's hard to handle the "fine tuning" of social situations.There have been a few posts where somebody is commenting about social situations in an RPG and says something like "Why don't you just roleplay it?" My usual response is to say "For much the same reasons you don't just roleplay combat." Its not so easy when a character is fairly personable, is acting nice, but might still have some resistance to achienving thier goal-like getting somewhere with a pretty girl, or charming thier way out of a speeding ticket. It's pretty difficult to roleplay something like James Bond's appeal with the ladies. You need game mechanics to handle that properly just as much as you need them to resolve a firefight.

Probably not. Most GMs award experience checks each game session, and chances for experience rolls tend to be a bit less frequent. For us it was typically at the end of the adventure and/or when there was a decent amount of downtime in game. You don't want to go too many sessions between rolls or you reach a point where players have most of thier signficant skilled checked and have nothing left to check off. As far as XP goes, why bother? If you want to use some sort of reward system, just hand out experience rolls. It will save you the bother o working up point values for things and doing a bunch of math to divi up the XP. One thing to watch out for though is that awarding XP rolls can lead to faster improvement and/or characters improving in things that they never actually used.

Which in not all that difficult. There is about a 94% chance of rolling a 5+ on at least one of the attributes.

No, you will see MORE characters with 18s!. With a compltely random method there is only about a half a percent of a chance of getting an 18 on 3D6, and about a 3% chance with 2D6+6. But with your method all it takes is for someone to get at least an 11 (a 50% chance) and then decide to spend the points on it. The end result is that while the vast majoirty of randomly generated characters won't have an 18, about 99% of the characters generated with your method could have an 18 if they so choose. I think that depends on which improvement methods you use and how long term the players are with their thinking. Putting an 18 into STR, CON or (especially SIZ) gives the character a higher MAX for the other two.

Only if you are adding them together. Sure it's problematic. There is an extra chance of any number coming up. So there are just as many characters walking around with an 8 as with an 10 or 11. Now I know you are letting the players spend points to raise the values further, but but it's still going to be problematic. You will see a lot more characters with ultra high and/or ultra low stats with a flat distribution. I think something like 2D3 or 2D4 (with add) will serve you better.

Not even any sort of bell curve? Ouch. I'd hate to be the poor guy who rolls a few ones during chargen. Low attributes hurt a character in BRP a lot more than high attributes help him.

IMO the problem is more with Sorcerers than anyone else. Those with elementals and demons can pretty much mop up the floor with those who lack them. At the very least they should have made the forces of Law more powerful in order to give Chaos some sort of fight.

In a way in reminds me of the old Bond RPG. In that game the wound taken from an attack was determined by the Damage Class of the weapon and the Quality Rating (=Success Level).

Say, does the success level of the attack roll affect the lethality in any way?

Yeah some sort of method to factor in the target's capabilities seems vital. I'm not so sure that a burst from an Uzi would drop a T-Rex dead in it's tracks. At least not before it got a chance to try and bite the one who shot it. It would probably bleed to death or die from infection or something, but not fast enough. I'm not fond of opposed rolls in RQ/BRP, (hence my referencing the resistance table) but at least the opposed roll would be a step in the right direction. I'd say go with HPx5%, not CONx5% because SIZ matters. A 5 ton critter has a lot more muscle and bone that a bullet must pass through in order to wreck something that can kill or disable it right away.

I dunno the idea of just making a shot difficult if STR is exceeded seems nice and simple, though. Of couse both options could be included so GMs could pick whateever one they prefer. I would expect 2H use and/or bracing to essentially reduce the STR min. About 4 points seems about right for two hands. And probably the reverse (or twice that) would apple when frining a 2H weapon with only 1H. So someone with STR 9 could get away with firing a STR 11 pistol without a penalty if they used a 2H grip. What I don't like, it that it seems that the lethality % is applied the same across the board to any and all targets. I much rather do something like divide the lethality by 5% and then math that against the target's hit points on the resistance table or some such.

Well I think you might have done just that. If we set the min STR based on the recoil energy (say by using my table above and adding an offset to try and match it up with existing min STR values for firearms) and then treated anything above the character STR as difficult, it would work. I'd just need to add in a modifier for using 2 hands, bracing, and autofire. Oh, and probably something for when the weapons' STR greatly exceeds the character's (so that there is a difference between minSTR 15 and minSTR 50 to a STR 10 character). But doesn't that mean that the stats of the one hit doesn't matter at all? That could make a big difference when dealing with large beings and others with very high stats. A burst from an Uzi probably won't kill a T-Rex right off.

Close but not quite. The mass of the weapon being fired and if/how it it braced makes a big difference. Autofire is another factor since you have to deal with the recoil of several shots at one time. Shooter's skill would play a factor as well. Generally perceived recoil tends to play as much a factor as actual recoil, and greater skills lets someone get better and handling both. It's not as assumption, more a matter of practical design. Generally speaking, the heavier the bullet, the greater the energy, and thus the stronger the weapon must be to fire it. To make a weapon stronger you either have to use stronger materials or make it heavier. The assault rifle is based on the idea of reducing the range and mass of the standard WWI military rifle round (7.62/.303/.30-06/7.92 etc) in order to reduce the weight of the rifle required to fire said round, and the weight of ammunition carried for such a rifle. Realistically it doesn't take all that much STR to hold most weapons on target. Most firearms are designed to be controlled easily. The difficult ones tend to be the heavy pistols/revolvers (high powered high caliber), heavy rifles (big game weapons), some holdout pistols (some are high powered/low mass), and anything with autofire. But, all that said, most of the relevant factors (bullet energy, gun weight, 1-2H, autofire, bracing, and skill) could be boiled down to a small list of "required STR" modifiers.

Yup. I was doing something for Pendragon awhile back that got into the Gothic armor with overlapping layers of plate. It would port over fairly well to BRP/RQ, too. Bascially better protection at less weight and/or better weight distribution. Yeah, and that sword makes a good club, too. Historically, it might make a better club that a sword. Likewise a spear can make a decent staff in a pinch 9and if fact there is a decent amount of overlap between spears and staves). Personally, I don;t mind using the old RQ2 "related weapon" rule to allow fro such cross overs. I'd limit the PC to the lower damage (either becuase of a lack of a sharp edge/point or beucase the mode of use doesn't take full advatage of such). But the point was that while you might be able to use a sword as a club or axe, it probably isn't as good as the real thing. The same holds true for knives. The problem is that in real life getting cut or stabbed in a serious, potentially life threatening injury while 1d3 or 1d4 isn't much of a threat in game terms. Yeah, but it's "damage rating" in BRP terms should probably be in the punch (1d3)+1 or punch+2 levels-at least compared to the other weapons. If RQ/BRP had some sort of stun/shock mechanic things could be different, and a low damage weapon could still wind up being useful and effective. We're always able to do house rules. How "fun" that is can vary quite a bit.

1. Depends. Do you mean just running into the opponent and not really trying to grab, punch or know down the opponent? If they are just running/slamming into the opponent I'd just treat it as an "attack on the run" and have it do 1D3 or maybe 1d4+db. . Probably 1D4 to help make up for the increased momentum from the change (since the attacker is getting his db anyway the usual bonus =for charing- the mount's db doesn't apply). If they are trying to knock the opponent down/flying tacking, I'd treat it as a knockdown attack, and kick in a bonus (say +1 per 3 move on the resistance table) for the movement. if they are trying to grapple an opponent I'd treat it as a grapple, with possibly a bonus for the charge. 2. No. Weapons capable of multiple attacks/ shots per round (missile weapons) allow each attack at full percentage. This reflect the fact that multiple shots from a weapon are separate attacks and don't really combine in the same way a bunch of maneuvers are combined to make up a single melee attack. 3. I'd suggest doing what they do in Pendragon (a related RPG that doesn't use hit locations). In that RPG a successful grapple means the target is seized in a hold for that turn. Next turn the grapple can try to immobilize the target, or throw them,

Yes that is still in there, but it mostly reflects the times. In the last century or so Britian was invaded by the Saxons, and pretty much abandoned by Rome (or at least what's left of it). So you got a mix of clashing cultures.

Except in KAP Culture IS where you are from. There are no Cymri in Russia.

Yeah. It had it's charm, but was very "hit or miss". Yup, it was in all versions of KAP and even showed up a little in RQ3. But the modfiers were generally lower than what you got in SB1

LOL, you might want to take a peek at that old Bond RPG. It did stuff like that. One thing you might consider doing with the half % would be to let it adjust damage. One idea I was toying with was to set the number of damage dice by the SL. So something like a broadsword might only do 1D4 on a marginal success, maybe 2D4 on a normal success, 8D4 on a impale, and so on.