Atgxtg

Cathars are in K&L too. Traits: Chaste, Generous, Modest, Pious, Temperate; Bonus: +2 Hit Points, +1 Healing Rate, +1 Armor Manichaeist: Traits: Chaste, Generous, Modest, Pious, Temperate; Bonus: +2 Hit Points, +1 Healing Rate, +1 Armor Note that they are identical.

You might well ask why they haven't been able to get around the whole Trollkin thing. It is something that that might be desired, but that doesn't make it possible. Plus I don't think the benefit would be worth the trouble. Most people who wield iron weapons are Rune Lords and thus pretty powerful warriors regardless of iron weapons or not. So I don't think the immunity would help the trolls or aldryami all that much, as a runelord with a Bronze weapon, and magic is still going to cut down troll and elf just as easily.

Manicheanism is actually listed on Pendragon's Knights & Ladies, too, so you can use that top determine what traits to underline. You might want to include virtues that are not religious, but reflect sort sort of behavioral idea, such as Pendragon's Chivalry, but for something else. Pendragon has touched upon that a bit with Romance and Evil. It's all subjective, it just that there can be cultural values that help create common good and bad, or good and evil. As Ian Absentia points out So what happens is that by accepting a certain cultural or religious set of standards and definitions we get good and evil defined for us. It can make acts that would normally be considered wrong to be virtuous due to a "higher set of values". For instance, the excesses and atrocities committed when the European powers colonized the New World, were considered to be acceptable, as they were bringing Christianity to the natives and saving their souls. Most people today probably wouldn't agree with that or consider it to have been a good thing.

Yes I am, although it is not the only RPG to do so. A lot of RPGs do thwe same thing. Notice how many RPGs subdivide the PCs by clan, tribe, homeland, etc. and then do customized books for each of those groups. World of Darkness is another good example, but there are many more examples. Note that I'm not saying every such subdivision is a deliberate attempt to raise sales and profits by spreading content over multiple books, only that many such supplements lend themselves towards that. Yes, providing that the supplements are good enough to sustain the game. With D&D there were other factors. It was the first major RPG released and had been #1 in the early days, and many RPGs were really just knock offs of D&D. TSR clamped down on that, but it started to backfire when AD&D started to slip in popularity. The 3.0 OGL pretty much allowed D&D to regain dominance by making it very attractive for third party publishers to write for D&D instead out creating their own game system. It worked too, and virtually everybody published a D&D supplement or two, thanks to the larger market share of D&D over their own game systems. In the end is worked but backfired when WotC tried to eliminate the competition with the release of 4E, which was not OGL. But many fans didn't like 4E and so Pathfinder came about, basically a revised version of 3E. There are other reasons too, including how much money can be spent to promote the game, and get it into local book stores. So any new gamer is far more likely to be exposed to D&D and start with it, as opposed to most other RPGs.

That used to be the case in the old days, before some RPG companies got big, TSR eventually had a staff, and were able to afford quality art too. With Chaosium, Steve Perrin wrote most of the rule books in the 70s and 80s, but didn't own the company. I think these days most companies can and do hire people and buy art, although thanks to PDFs and print of demand, the smaller indie companies are making a comeback. Yes, although with most RPGs it is usually only one or two players at the table, at most. D&D is different. The existence of special class, race, and other splatbooks, get players interested in buying the books so they can take advantage of any special rules, prestige classes, feats, magic items,, etc. to maximize their characters. Much like with CCGs they are buying product to chase bonuses.

I'm not fond of death by GM decree either. There is a reason why we use dice to roll for things. In no small part because most people's "common sense" beliefs are factually incorrect.

There is no way for him to stop me. Only if tyou try to move past him, or if he can reach the point you are moving to before you can. If you are doing it right, you won't be within striking distance. Unlike how most RPGs put two melee combatant's about 3 feet apart and assume that is where they stay, in a real fight, the combatantants ususally satay just out of striking distance, and step in to attack, and then back out if the attack isn't successful. The thing is the game makes it much more difficult to disengage that is actually is. Stopping someone from disengaging is actually more risky to the character trying to prevent the disengagement than the the character backing away.

And that is pretty much the bane of being an RPG designer. It's usually the company that publishes the game that makes any real money. For authors it usually works out to less than a minimum wage job. The authors get so many cents per word for the game. The company isn't guaranteed to turn a profit either. Also, a "dead" RPG that a GM or group prefer to a living one still "works". There are no real drawbacks to running a 10 or 30 year old RPG that you like, and have run. Yes there are not any more supplements for it, and no more adventures, but such a GM is well used to writing adventures for their group, and/or adapting ideas and adventures to their preferred game system. There really is no need for a GM or player to buy new stuff. That was one of the reasons for the RPG company crash awhile back. Everyone tried to jump onto the CCG bandwagon, because collectible cards meant that all the players would continually buy more cards to stay competitive., as opposed to a RPG where not everybody will but the books.

Yeah OGL helped D&D 3.0 regain prominence when AD&D was slipping, and Mthras being Open is exactly why M-SPACE would up being written for that system instead of BRP, as the author originally planned. The obligations for a licence from Chaosium at the time made Mythras more appealing as it was a similar game system without the investment cost.

No it doesn't. Nothing in the clip points to the characters having a reduced movement. All it shows is that one guy is a show off who doesn't kn ow how to fight. That is kinda typical of alot of armchair martial artists. There really ins't all that much he can do about it, other than maybe cut you off or hit you as you go by. I get that, but the thing is, in a real fight people fairly easily move into and out of striking distance. Generally you come up with a plan, step in, make a few attacks/moves and then either exploit any opportunities that caused or step back and think up something else to try. When I used to fight with practice weapons I could easily move 8 m or more in 12 seconds. Or in 3 seconds for that matter. Especially if I stepped back from my opponent first.

Kzin PCs would probably benefit for traits and passions, ported over from Pendragon or RQ4. They will help to give the PCs that sense of bloodthirstiness and aggression that could work for them.

Which is somewhat ironic considering that shields in RQ are probably the most useful shields ever get in any RPG.

I like the light squeeze modifications. In play I had a evil knight get a hold of a manor and it quickly became apparent that squeezing the peasants only made sense if the knight was planning on moving on once the ran the place into the ground, and the whole evil lord squeezing his peasants was counterproductive.

You're missing the point. If he donates 10000L to the Storm BUll cult he wouls suddenly have an incredibly high Loyalty to the Storm Bull cult, which would end up opposing everything Cacodaemon stands for. So he new Loyalty would probably force him to hunt down other members of his cult and maybe even commit suicide. Yes, but Kin gs and Queen s didn't get their loyalty changed because of it. Coming from from a long history of Pendragon. where the Loyalty/Passion rules originated, this whole thing looks like a nightmare to me. Someone can go from having no Loyalty to becoming a fanatic just by donating some money. So anyone who is rich will end up being more devout just because they can afford to donate more., even if they do nothing else for their faith.Considering the stipulations of Rune level characters towards donating 90% of their income to their cult their loyalty scores will quickly outpace all their other scores, and we will se Loyalty scores of 4 or 5 digits.

Quite a bit. Like say the people who are actually doing all those upgrades and spending the MP. The problem with Loyalty for gifts is that anyone could donate money to any cult and get instant loyalty. So a Cacodaemon cultist could ride into town, dump a small fortune to the Storm Bull cult and instantly become a loyal Storm Bull cultists! Of what if someone make a donation in someone else's name?

Yuk. Bad rules.The rules used to say you could improve you skills by buying experience potions, too, but it was a bad idea so it got dropped. Yes, but none of that would actually make someone more passionate about something. I mean a Lunar governor could just make a big payoff to the Orlanth cult and become a member of high standing. In a couple of years they could probably co-opt every local cult and lunarize them.

Okay, I'll ask: Why should my giving a temple a 10000L bribe, donation make me a fanatic? I could see it making the temple better disposed towards me, but it shouldn't make me more devout.

That sounds good to me. There is alot of good stuff from the old days in BRP and I'd love to see it supported and updated. I think that could be an ideal situation. An OGL version would make BRP better know and more easily available, and allow BRP to pick up new players who are dissatisfied with their current RPG

Probably wishful thinking. AFAIK BRP is essentially dead as a stand alone line as far as Chaosium is concerned, although someone did pick up the rights to redo Magic World. Apparently books focused on a particular setting do better these days that generic rule sets that can be tailored to a particular setting. Most modern GMs seem to what the game to do the heavy lifting for them and provide a setting, and adventures. It why game books now tend to have a much higher page count w ith lots of flavor text to help establish the setting.

I don't hate it but I think it is the worst cover on any KAP product. It looks too "Saturday morning cartoon-ish", and does not invoke any Arthurian feel to it. The nobles on the cover do h ave anything to identify them as Arthur, Guinevere or anyone else for the literature. For me it falls flat, and is a big downgrade from the First Edition cover. I think overall KAP4 is a better book, mostly be incoprating the expanded chargen rules, which got dropped in KAP3.

Maybe, but it bad marketing to expect people to have to do a google search to find out what a product is about. If you have to do a goggle a search to find out a Big Mac, Quarter Pounder or Happy Meal are it's not the consumer's fault but one of marketing. if the potential customers do not feel like researching the product and just give it a pass t he company looses out. So rsanford reaction is a valid one, and shows interest and could lead to a sale.

Well to be fair the cover was by Mike Weave, not Lisa Free.

Basically you are buying wealth and money. Someone with a higher Credit Rating makes more money, lives in a better house or apartment, and can get more expensive items more easily. That said, as Numtini has pointed out, it probably won't be all that important in play as a Keeper doesn't want to have the Investigators fail to save the world simply because no one can afford tickets to Rio. But having the money to afford the tickets might give the investigators options that could make certain parts of an adventure easier. For instance, being able to afford a few elephant guns, as opposed to s ome light rifles, might help when trying to take down some large creature.

Yes, it if is from cards drawn then it sort of makes playing cards moot. A card that might net anther 2 or 3 gentility doesn't mean so much if players are getting that just from drawing cards. Yes, that is how the rules are written, but I don't believe that is how they were intended to be played. No only would doing so greatly increase the geniality/glory awards, and make card play much less significant, and doing anything other than drawing cards the equivalent of throwing in the towel, but it would pretty much give the win to the character who draws the most cards, just about every time. So I just don't believe that was the intention.

LOL! I'm still testing the wall with my typical Dwarven repeating catapult.