Atgxtg

There are some ways to light a fire under people like that. Try running an adventure while they are training. That is always good. Three days into training an a PC gets jumped, shanghaied and finds himself in the slave pits. Or just have things happen and point out what the PCs lost out on. Or just say "Okay how many years do you want to train for. Let me know hen you want to play". Then run a high powered game. Chances are they won't be up to it (an 120% skill in the hands of someone who worked his way up is a lot nastier than the same skill in the hands on someone who just wrote it down before starting play) and get slaughtered. Two or three times repetitions and they will probably figure out that they aren't ready for the big leagues yet.

Yeah, but my common sense tells me that some people are faster than others. I always viewed the DEX SR thing to be a way of segmenting the movement so that quicker character could move an extra 6 or 12m. I think I'll pull out MC and see if it addresses that.

Transformers the RPG.

I thinkit should mean something. Or be ditched. The problem with it "being the Gm's responsiblity" is that, frankly, it doesn't get used , nor does it affect things. There are a few games where APP can be important. GURPS for one, and it's both an invalauble asset and sword in the back in the James Bond RPG. It R/BRP is mostly something to write on your character sheet. Ah, so you got the types of player who would hang around training until doomsday? I've had a couple of those. Generally, I just keep running adventures and if they want to stay in town training for a month real time while the rest of the group is adventuring they earned the skill points. About the only time where I saw a large block of training being done was when the group was traveling on a ship and had a lot of free time. So a couple of characters asked the resident swordmaster for a few lessons. It kinda grew from there. It was kinda nice of the sorceror, too. He proved to quite the surprise with a 70% sword skill.

Neither is anyone who remember Gleek's name. :D Seriously though, none of the SF balanced out with Superman, Thats the point. A GM doesn't have to balance out the power levels-if he is doing something about it. In my last Marvel SAGA campaign, I had one guy with Superstrength, who could fly, and was resistant to most weapons. Another hero had no superpowers and carried a bow with a half dozen trick arrows. Were the balanced in power? No. Did it matter. Not really Each brought their own abilities. Sometimes the arrow guy could fire a gas arrow and take down foes meant for muscles. Or sometimes he could use his high tech skills to solve something that our resident Superboy couldn't. It all worked. And every one in awhile, kid muscles would dodge or use his wits and catch people by surprise, as it was so out of character.

That's what I thought it said, too.

Unfortunately that is due to business. There has been a tendency in business to look at all of life and a "survival of the fittest", ":kill or be killed" point of view. It's split over in many other areas. It is one reason why the US government has been so ineffective. Many politicians are/were businessmen. Putting a competitor out of business might be good from a business point of view, but putting industries in State X because you are in State Y doesn't help the country. It's like fighting for a seat in first class while the entire plane is plummeting to the ground. I used to see a lot of this while I was working in at a hospital. There was a lot of backstabbing, and a feeling that it was alright to get screwed as long as you knew someone who was betting screwed worse. Not everything is a competition.

We never did that. But then we usually had much better parry scores.

Huuray for Rurik. Game balance is really a myth. Sort of a shortcut for GMs so they don;t have to do as much work. If an X HD monster is a threat for a X level party then everything works out okay. Only it isn't ture. It all depending on the way the GM sets up and runs the encounter. Three kolbolds aren't a match for a 3rd level fighterm unless the GM gives them magic weapons, a defisible position and surprise. Likewise, characters aren't designed to go up against each other. So a GM should be able to run mixed groups. Many RPGs adress the issue. In the comics, for instace, the big bad villians that can go toe to toe with Thor, are often vulnerable to weaker characters in some way. USusally from a weakness in between the ears. Or, they have allies who are more suited towards other characters. Reviving the Super Firends example, or, using the JLA, while there were some real brusier in the Legion of Supervillians, there were also foes for the other heroes to defeat. Often, in fact usually, the really powerful physical foes weren't the ones who were the most dangerous. So while Mister Steroids might be slugging it out with Roboticus, Captain Hamster might be busy preventing Doctor Nefaruius from setting off a nuke. All valid.

Ars, I think you have a point about the changing culture. People have a tendency to treat things as win-loose that aren't. A good deal of the philosophy behind Aikido is based on that. We see things in terms of "winners" and "losers" where the term doesn't apply. Take a look at how people look at their local sports teams.

It isn't the primary contributor. THe weapon is. STR 's effect is as imprtant as SIZ and SIZ also adds to HP. STR is limited becuase of the big gap between +1D4 and +1D6. Since you need a 33 to get the +1D6, that makes training STR up really only vialbe for with stats close enough to hit a bracket. Training any stat up by more thatn a point of two becomes very difficult. Unless the stat was really bad off. Not really. Not when you consider that going first and striking first are not the same thing. A character could train up weapon skills much faster and get a more concrete benefit. Several things. For starters POW points. That sort of bumping really only comes in a high PW campaigns. Besides if bumping up DEX and STR weren;t providing benefits, a character would be better to pick up more bludgeon or bladesharp. Unless someone is sitting near a cusp, the benefit per magic point favors bladesharp. I can't think of any. If you aren't using Cat mods. Not in the human range. Gaints have problems with falling damage and are easier to hit, but without cat mods there isn't much that makes going from SIZ 12 to SIZ16 unappealing. Probably one reason why SIZ can't be trained. Nope/. Independant of interaction skills. THe reason being that any modifers for APP to skills arew minor. Someone with Persuade 30% and an 18 APP isn't as good as someone with APP 10 and Persuade 40%. It is similar in some ways to the problem some games have with lifting skills. While any character can have a high skill score. The guy with the 6 STR shouldn't be able to lift more than the guy with the 20 STR.

What do you consider earning it. Sounds like you view character advancement as a reward for playing. Technically speaking it';'s the guys who take the time to study and train who earn it. As for how fast they advance, in our groups is was more a matter of having enough spare cash to hire the tutors. Plus the fact that is skills go up faster that the player's ability to use them, it leads to a higher mortality rate. I had one guy break 100% and immediately started going after two guys at the same time. Double teaming negates the 100 advantage, and two guys at 50% area threat to one guy who attacks twice at 50%. The second guy who hit 100% concetrated on one-to-one fights. I disagree. Basically why track it as a number if the number has no meaning. I'm strongly against tracking worthless stats, and I also don't like it when some stats are much more important than others. The problem wiht "roeplaying it" is that is it unfair to those who have a good APP vs thouse who have a good STR, CON , or DEX. In the real world a high APP score opens many doors (some to bedrooms) and can get you out of a lot of problems. It can get you out of a traffic ticket, get served first in a coffee shop, or stop traffic while you walk down the street (see all of that happen). In the game is it more along the lines of "What her APP?" "17" "I want to go to bed with her" We don't make swordsmen "roleplay" their STR or skill, we don't make scholars "role-play" their INT and knowedlge skills. We should hand APP the same way, or get rid of it.

But is ins't really a sidekick thing, more of a focus thing. For instance, looking at the Avengers, Captain America has no real superpowers (his physical stats are at peka human, maybe slightly above), and yet he is a fomidable foe for any villain. Likewise the Waspe went from being a sidekick/airhead/girlfriend (acutally she was more a daozel in distress prisor to the Avengers) to an independent hero who could pack quite a whallop in a small package. A lot of how these characters can coexist on a team with the likes of Their has to do with just how the comics ar written, and how superteeams can be run in an RPG.

It's not a contest. IMO it is usually better to play a campaign with one game than to play 50,000 one shots. But my overall experience with RPGs is probably as extensive as Drohem's. I've played a lot of RPGs over nearly 30 years. Most of those games metntioned I still have. I used to game at the local gaming store, and twice a week would check out the new RPG systems. For a long time, I would buy a new RPG each week, and probably had most of the RPGs on the market. Probably kept in the lead until the 90s, when supplments started coming out a lot faster and for a lot more games. For someone to said I'm wrong about something is fine. For someone to say that I "lack breath of experience" with RPGs is incorrect. For anyone to do so, they should at least have enough experience with the games mentioned to back it up. I don't think Klye has that. It;s liek the argument over RQ magic that got ignited in the BRP/MRQ differences thread. It got heated and long not because people didn't know what they were talking about, but because they did. Many had different experiences, or used variant rules that may not have applied outside of their own experience, but they knew what they were talking about.

I don't. THe problem is that once you generate the character changes in stats should affect the skills. Someone who is partially paralyzed and looses 5 points of DEX should loose some skills. Likewise if someone spends time in the gym building up his muscles, his Athletics skills should go up. Maybe you would never. Many of my players did. While you don't train DEX to imrpove one skill, the fact that it will improve 20 or 30 skills is a good reason and makes it cost effective. Training for DEX SRM or RoF is only worth it if a character is on the cusp. SGL.

Perhaps. The question is, do your players know what power level the campaign is being set at? Oh, and the team of superheroes concept is better served by pretty much any example other than Super Friends. IMO the best thing that ever involved them was the "wazzaup" spoof.

Jason, I was wondering about spaceship. I know there is a starfighter in the BRP zero book. BUt your comment on the "big missile table" being mising has me wondering what sort of damage are starship weapons being ensvsioned as doing. For instance that Starfighter has 18APs and 150HPs. Even an energy cannon (4d10+4) is going to take over a dozen hits to destroy one. I take it there are some more devastating weapons for ships in a Sci-Fi setting?

Yeah. With a su[ers game I'm not worried about keeping power levels in check. That's what supervillians are for-- "Oh, no It's Roboticus! He made from invicium and immune to even the Blaster's raw energy power. We have only one chance! Quick wimpy sidekick, go fetch the lemon juice, and hurry! Or we all doomed!"

Well in RQ3 that you had to match the level of success kept dogoing down a bit. Someone got a special and you were in trouble.

Basically true. But without cat mods DEX for initiative is overpriced. STR too. While there is a STR+SIZ db, hitting 1D6 is tough. Hitting 2d6 is pretty much impossible. THat is, barrring magic. Even with magic, it is usally better to up the weapon that the STR. CON Is it's own reward. I'd say SIZ is too. Without CAT mods SIZ is pure profit, since it is basically CON and STR rolled into one stat. True is doesn't help you with poisons (we disagree but going by the book here), but it does help with HP and Damage Bonus. POW is almost always valauble, since there is almost always something to spend POW points on. INT and APP Are the losers. APP still is, cat mods or not. Something needs to be done with that stat or it should be done away with.

No Kyle, you are assuming that I lack breath of experience. This is the second time you've made an assumption about other people's experience. I actually owned and of played a lot of the games you listed. I can also point out that many of them are not role-playing games. All the ones from Heritage models for example, were minatures games. Hammer of THor was a very extensive board game on Norse Mythology, with something like 1000 different counters. I bought it, and never could find anyone to play it. It was detailed, but it wasn't an RPG. Neither are rules for skirmishes. A good half of your list are games that are not RPGs, but ARE about killing things. Let me ask you a question about you're experience. Wore you gaming during the first decade? I was. I don't think you were because if you had been you would have noted a big difference between the early games of the 70, and the games of the early-to mid 80s where the big changes started to occur. Also, I suspect you are not gaming in the US. Fir, while many of these games did come out. Not all ofd them got into circulation, or were played. For example, I owned the Flash Gordon RPG. I wasn't really an RPG, AND it was a linerar story. The character went through the book in the same order as the episodes of the serial. Everything was predestined. It looks to me like you just copied as list and posted it without any knowledge of the subject matter. I've played Bunnies & Burrows (once). I was linerar. I think I played 2nd edtion, too. Chainmail isn't a RPG. It a minatures game at man-to-man scale. THere is no role-playing, just mantures fighting. THe big difference is that unlike most games that preceeded it. In chainmail you could have wizards, elves and dragons. Actualy playing of any of these games, or even reading any of them, as opposed to looking at the titles would prove that indeed they were linear and focused on killing things. For the record, my breadth of experience includes the following: (1971) Chainmail - (1973) Dungeons and Dragons - (1975) Tunnels and Trolls (1975) Boot Hill (1976) Bunnies and Burrows - (1976) Metamorphosis Alpha: Fantastic Role-Playing Game - (1976) Knights of the Round Table (Not an RPG. It's a board game>) (1977) Chivalry and Sorcery - 1st ed (1977) Traveller - 1st ed by Marc Miller (1977) GDW (1977) The Fantasy Trip - Melee ed by Steve Jackson, Howard Thomson (1977) Metagaming (1977) Superhero 2044 - 1st ed by Donald Saxman (1977) Gamescience (1977) Flash Gordon and the Warriors of Mongo - 1st ed by Lin Carter, Scott Bizar (1977) FGU (1977) Dungeons and Dragons - Basic Set 1st ed ed by J. Eric Holmes (1977) (1977) Space Quest - 1st ed by Paul Hume, George Nyhen (1977) Tyr Gamemakers Ltd (1978) Dungeons and Dragons, Advanced - 1st ed by Gary Gygax (1978) TSR (1978) The Complete Warlock - 1st ed by Robert Cowan, Dave Clark, Kenneth M. Dahl, Nick Smith (1978) Balboa, Inc. (Either this one of the 1975 one) (1978) Gamma World - 1st ed by James M. Ward, Gary Jaquet (1978) TSR (which is actually Metamophis Alpha 2nd edtion) (1978) RuneQuest - 1st ed by Steve Perrin, Ray Turney, Steve Henderson, Warren James, Greg Stafford (1978) Chaosium (1979) Ysgarth - 1st ed by David Nalle (1979) Ragnarok Press (1979) Villians and Vigilantes - 1st ed by Jeff Dee, Jack Herman ] (1980) Skull and Crossbones - 1st ed by Gerald D. Seypura, Anthony LeBoutillier (1980) FGU (1980) Land of the Rising Sun - 1st ed by Lee Gold (1980) FGU (1980) Rolemaster - 1st ed by S. Coleman Charlton, Peter C. Fenlon, Kurt H. Fischer, Terry K. Amthor (1980) Iron Crown Enterprises (1980) Bushido - 1st ed by Paul Hume, Bob Charrette (1980) Tyr / Phoenix Games (1980) Basic Role-Playing - 1st ed by Greg Stafford, Lynn Willis (1980) Chaosium (1980) The Atlantean Trilogy: The Arcanum, The Lexicon, The Bestiary - 1st ed by Stephan Michael Sechi, Vernie Taylor (1980) Bard Games (1980) The Morrow Project - 1st ed by Kevin Dockery, Robert Sadler, Richard Tucholka (1980) Timeline, Inc. (1980) Melanda: Land of Mystery - 1st ed by Lee McCormick, John Corradin (1980) Wilmark Dynasty (1980) Dragonquest - 1st ed by Eric Goldberg, David James Ritchie, Edward J. Woods (1980) SPI (1980) The Hammer of Thor: The Game of Norse Mythology - 1st ed by Joe Angiolillo (1980) Gameshop (Not an RPG, as as many of the RPGs you listed) (1980) KABAL - 1st ed by Ernest T. Hams (1980) Kabal Gaming Systems (Argh, the hardest game I even ran. You need a claculator for this one) (1980) Space Opera - 1st ed by Ed Simbalist, A. Mark Ratner, Phil McGregor (1980) FGU (1980) Odysseus - 1st ed by Marshall Rose (1980) FGU (Character only have one stat, and the game is about killing things) (1980) Top Secret - 1st ed by Merle M. Rasmussen (1980) TSR (1981) Fringeworthy - 1st ed by Richard Tucholka (1981) Tri-Tac Games (1981) Wizard's Realm - 1st ed by Niels Erickson, C. Polite, W.G. Murphy (1981) Mystic Swamp (1981) Champions - 1st ed by George MacDonald, Steve Peterson (1981) Aftermath - 1st ed by Bob Charrette, Paul Hume (1981) FGU (1981) Crimefighters - 1st ed by David "Zeb" Cook (1981) TSR (1981) Arduin Adventure - 1st ed by David A. Hargrave (1981) Grimoire Games (1981) Wild West - 1st ed by Anthony P. LeBoutillier, Gerald D. Seypura (1981) FGU (1981) Stormbringer - 1st ed by Ken St. Andre, Steve Perrin (1981) Chaosium (1981) The Mechanoid Invasion - 1st ed by Kevin Siembieda (1981) Palladium Books (1981) Call of Cthulhu - 1st ed by Sandy Petersen (1981) Chaosium (1981) Heroes of Olympus - 1st ed by B. Dennis Sustare (1981) Task Force Games (1981) Merc - 1st ed by Paul D. Baader, Walter Mark, Lawrence Sangee (1981) FGU (1981) Universe - 1st ed by John H. Butterfield (1981) SPI (1982) Gangbusters - 1st ed by Mark Acres, Rick Krebs, Tom Moldvay (1982) TSR (1982) Swordbearer - 1st ed by Arnold Hendrick, Dennis Sustare (1982) Heritage Models (1982) Man, Myth, and Magic - 1st ed by Herbie Brennan (1982) Yaquinto (1982) Phase VII - 1st ed by Dennis Drew II (1982) Cheshire Games (1982) FTL:2448 - 1st ed by Richard Tucholka (1982) Tri-Tac Games (1982) Neighborhood - 1st ed (1982) Wheaton Publications (1982) Daredevils - 1st ed by Bob Charrette, Paul Hume (1982) FGU (1982) Pirates and Plunder - 1st ed by Michael S. Matheny (1982) Yaquinto (1982) Recon - 1st ed by Joe F. Martin (1982) RPG Inc. (1982) Worlds of Wonder - 1st ed by Steve Perrin, Steve Henderson, Gordon Monson, Greg Stafford, Lynn Willis (1982) Chaosium (1982) To Challenge Tomorrow - 1st ed by Dave Nalle (1982) Ragnarok Press (1982) Timeship - 1st ed by Herbie Brennan (1982) Yaquinto (1982) Behind Enemy Lines - 1st ed by William H. Keith, Jr., Jordan Weisman, Ross Babcock, Eric Turn, Steve Turn (1982) FASA (1982) Star Frontiers - 1st ed by "TSR Staff" (1982) TSR (1982) Starfleet Voyages - 1st ed by Michael Scott (1982) Terra Games (1982) Fantasy Wargaming - 1st ed by Bruce Galloway, Mike Hodson-Smith, Nick Lowe, Bruce Quarrie, Paul Sturman (1982) Stein and Day (1982) Star Trek - 1st ed by Guy W. McLimore, Greg Poehlein, David Tepool (1982) FASA (1983) Mercenaries, Spies, and Private Eyes - 1st ed by Michael A. Stackpole (1983) Blade (a division of Flying Buffalo) (1983) Timemaster - 1st ed by Mark Acres, Gali Sanchez, Garry Spiegle, Andria Hayday, Smith (1983) Pacesetter (1983) Ringworld - 1st ed by Sherman Kahn, John Hewitt, Lynn Willis, Sandy Petersen, Charlie Krank, Rudy Kraft (1983) Chaosium (1983) Palladium Fantasy Role Playing Game - 1st ed by Kevin Siembieda, Erick Wujcik (1983) Palladium Books (1983) James Bond 007 - 1st ed by Gerard Christopher Klug (1983) Victory Games (1983) Wizard's World - 1st ed by David Silvera, Douglas S. Krull (1983) Fantasy Worlds Unlimited (1983) Bureau 13: Stalking the Night Fantastic - 1st ed by Richard Tucholka, Chris Belting (1983) Tri-Tac Games (1983) Witch Hunt - 1st ed by Paul D. Baader, Roger Buckelew (1983) Statcom Simulations, Inc. (1983) Lands of Adventure - 1st ed by Lee Gold (1983) FGU (1983) Other Suns - 1st ed by Niall Shapero (1983) FGU (1983) Powers and Perils - 1st ed by Richard Snider (1983) Avalon Hill (1983) Privateers and Gentlemen - 1st ed by Jon Williams (1983) FGU (1983) Espionage - 1st ed by George MacDonald, Steve Peterson (1983) Hero Games

That is what I've seen. I've wiped out more D&Ders from frontal charges that probably anyone else in anything else-combined. Charging ,missile troops was a valid tactic in D&D. Missile weapons did around 1D6, and most fighters could shrug that off while getting in close to hit with their +3 swords and +4 STR bonuses (AD&D). Plus, the archers had a tendacy to stand out in the open nice and exposed. Go to RQ where the archers have planted stakes in the ground or are behind a wall, and the arrows can incapacitate or kill someone and those tactics don't work. Plus while dead may not stay dead in RQ, Dead is usually deader than in D&D. It isn't so much lack of thought, but thinking under a different system. The problem is, D&D players just don't seem to adapt. People who play other games do adapt, but the D&D crowd somehow feel that there is something fundamentally wrong and just can't wrap their minds around the different way of doing things. But I think there is probably less thinking, too, since the nature of the system is more forgiving. Screw up in RQ//BRP and you probably won't get a chance to bounce back. Screw up in D&D and you'll probably wake up to see the Cleric shaking his head.

Could be. Oh, I'd say it was around by AD&D that a bit before the BD&D revamp. original D&D wasn't so linear mostly because the game was still evolving. Generally most dungeons I saw did have a plot. It was just that they threw a bunch of meaningless encounters/obstacles in the way. Basically a limited story will filler. I'd say it was the model for a good decade or two. Not so short lived. True. But sometimes a tangent isn't. If someone goes to the trouble to create a puzzle for the players to solve, then yes the players will encounter that puzzle and it will be necessary to continue along to the next part of the plot. That is linear. So while it is possible to put a puzzle in an adventure, they won't be there for not reason. Not completely different at all. Go to dugeon A, defeat monster B, work out puzzle C and slay Dragon D. If the players don't do these thing the story does advance. So while they have to choice of going left or right in the corridor, they will eventually have to take the right path to advance the storyline. So it is basically a linear adventure with filler. Hardly. I haven't seen one yet where mass genocide wasn't possible. One kick ass group I used to game with even developed some tactcis that would break most dugeouns wide open. Made a beeline to the bootm level. By the time you get there you've gotten tough enough to kill the "boss". Clear our the bottom level and then work your way up, with everything after bottom level or so becoming a cakewalk. Of course they were the guys who won that Slave Pits module where the characters are overwhelemd by the Slave Lord's in a "no win" fight. Since the next part of the module required that the PCs escpae from their cell, it made that linear adventure a bit tough. Not in most dungeouns. To get item A means beating foe B. Foe B's minions will fight the group, and allies if any are prewritten into the adventure. The story is linerar. It is just that they put some randomness in the "triggers". In the end the party will ally with the gnomes, (or whoever the good guys are) and attack the kobolds (or whoever the bad guys are). The rest is just die rolling and racking up treasure and XP. It would if all the options you presented actually applied to a dungeon crawl, but generally they don't. Such adventures typically have some "Save the princess/kingdom/whatever" reason for going into the dungeon. A bunch of meaningless encounters and some significant ones to push the PCs along the path towards the final bad guy. Things like, oh, the PCs joining up with the bad guy, or walking away from the adventure are not even considered. It is really being led around by the nose.

Thanks. That's what I needed to know.