Claudius

I am surprised you didn't take this step before. So much going back and forth among MRQ1, BRP and RQ6, it seemed natural that you would come up with your own system, in order to not depend on licenses.

I am very happy with BRP and MRQ2/RQ6 and in theory I don't need another 1d100 system, but on the other hand, your ad sounds very interesting. I like specially this part:

QUOTE

The core is way lighter than Legend, almost as simple as OpenQuest (maybe actually simpler, in fact). And the advanced combat is crunchier than Legend. So no, it is not Legend-lite.

UNQUOTE

I have a request, please make your system be entirely compatible with BRP and RQ6. Fans of 1d100 mix and match systems and supplements freely.

Kind regards

Thank you, I understand. Anyways, it's great that, thanks to Lulu, your catalogue will never be out of print. In fact, when BRP Merrie England is available on Lulu, please make us know, since I don't have a copy.

I'm late to this discussion, and I don't think my opinion will be very popular, but if it depended on me, I would get rid of all the different subforums, and would have one forum for the entire family of 1d100 systems. Yes, one forum for BRP, RQ6, Legend, Openquest, etc. I would keep the Alastor's Skull Inn, Glorantha, and More Games forums separate, and that would be it.

I've got a question, will this Lulu POD version be in Din A-4 format, like the old version, or in American Letter? I already have BRP Rome, and in spite of having been raised with Din A-4, I think the American Letter format is just better.

 

 

Next title that goes on Lulu: Merrie England by no-one less than Soltakss. Stay tuned.

I'm looking forward to BRP Merrie England being available again. Please keep us informed!

I'm concerned with the breadth of the combat styles referenced in the Nomad section of the preview, as I'm a fan of a finer grain of skills, but I'll reserve any judgement until I lay hands on the finished goods.

I'm the opposite, I hated one-different-skill-for-every-different-weapon. It drove me bonkers that if you lost your sword and picked a spear, your combat skill dropped from 90% to 25%.

Hardback is simply too expensive for us at this stage, but we may make a collector's hardcover edition available a little later. RQ will be available as a print option via Drivethru, and I believe their hardback format is reasonably good, so you can still get a hardback by going down that route if you prefer.

You said it clearly enough, but I would like to make sure I understood it correctly. Is there going to be a hardback POD version available on rpgnow/drivethru? That would be very good news.

Thank you for informing us about the delay, unfortunately such things happen. I don't care how long I have to wait, if you need more time to finish the game, so be it. I hope RQ6 will be at least as good as, or even better than MRQ2.

The vague assurance that something might happen suggests that I shouldn't hold my breath waiting. I'm sure I can finish my own setting before they redo LoS.

Unfortunaly, I'm afraid you're right. It sounded like "maybe we'll do it, maybe not".

Thats a great news.

Finally I could not get the RQII Vikings it was unavailable at Amazon when I ordered it...so I cancelled the order.

I will then wait for that one

A pity you gave up on getting MRQII Vikings, it's an excellent supplement.

Mythic Iceland looks interesting, I think I'll grab a copy, even if I already own MRQII Vikings (and AHRQIII Vikings). You cannot have too many good supplements about vikings!!

Ah, I see - another serious case. It is not very infectious, so your familiy mem-

bers and others are probably safe, but the medication is somewhat expensive,

the standard treatment is 1 book / month ...

You understand me very well.

Nooooo, Simon, please! Not another retro-clone!

I can't have enough versions of 1d100!!! I want more!

So, you're happy calculating the special success chances for 33%, 77% and 123%? No cheating. Let me know how many seconds it took you to calculate them.

Exactly my point.

In AHRQ3:

33%: 7

77%: 15

123%: 25

I can do it in my head, but it takes me some effort. During a game, a few seconds is too much time.

In MRQ2 it takes no effort at all. But as I said before, I hadn't realized they had changed the rule in BRP. It's more intuitive now.

Not sure, but I think you make it too complicated: in BRP 37% is rounded to 40, 20%=8 and 5%=2 - easy. Are the AHRQ3rules really that fiddly?!

Yes, it was that fiddly in AHRQ3. And I must confess I didn't know they had simplified it in BRP, a great idea.

Some people don't even think that others are playing RQ. For instance, what about those folks playing HarnMaster? I foor one, consider it to be closer to RQ/BRP than I consider MRQ, but HarnMaster never claimed to be a BRP relative.

It's true Hârnmaster is not perceived as a BRP relative, but it clearly is.

But I have to disagree with you, MRQII is closer to AHRQIII than Hârnmaster is.

I don't really have anything against Mongoose (maybe because I was cautious about buying their stuff to begin with, so I never got burned). But like others I feel the main value added by MRQ was options and refinements that could be brought back to BRP. For example, the "culture-based character generation" and magic systems in MRQ seem like improvements on RQ3 and, at the same time, nicely applicable to a variety of bronze age/iron age/S&S settings.

This. One thing I miss a lot in the BRP golden book, is culture-based character generation as in AHRQIII or Stormbringer 4th. The character generation in BRP reminds me a lot of the one in Elric/Stormbringer 5th, which in my opinion is very bland.

?!

5%= 10% halved

20%= 10% doubled

never thought it is challenging ...

Not as simple as you put it. In MRQII criticals are 10% and you ALWAYS round up, whereas in AHRQIII, you round up if it's 0.5 or higher, or down if it's lower.

For example, let's say you have a 37% skill, OK? In MRQII, your critical is 4 (3.7, you round up), easy. So, in AHRQIII, you'd get 2 for a critical, and 8 for a special, wouldn't you? NO. The critical is 2 ( 1.85, you round up), true, but the special is 7 (7.4, you round down). It's more intuitive in MRQII.

Your interpretation of the rules makes perfectly sense using the hit location system. This is accuratly described page 260 under the helmet entry.

However, i would like to use a fixed armor system with no hit location. Since lacking a helmet implies -1 or -2 armor penalty, i think adding an helmet on an armour with no head protection ( for instance plate armor of page 259) will conversely add +1 or +2 to the armor value .

This is fully consistent with the armor value for the knight NPC of page 363 ( 10 armor described as full plate and heavy helmet ),ant that seems to confirm my analysis.

My original concern was to know if it makes sense to use fixed armor value without hit location system. Your answer may indicate that you don't recommend this.

Regarding the knight example, I stand corrected. You were right, according to the official rules a helmet adds points to armor*, which means that fixed armor and random armor don't match very well, since using the fixed armor rules without the hit location rules is clearly more advantageous.

Going back to your question (does it make sense to use fixed armor value without hit location system?), I'd say yes, it makes sense, but with the caveat that fixed armor without hit locations offers more protection than the other rules (I think this is wrong, but it's the official rule). I'd houserule it, so that wearing a helmet doesn't add armor points, but that's me.

By the way, where did you see that not wearing a helmet gives a -1 penalty? Maybe there lies the explanation.

EDIT *= I don't know whether it's in the rules, but that's what one can infer from the knight NPC example.

Unfortunately, 8 point is without head coverage. Heavy helmet adds 2 points for a total of 10 (which is consistent with the NPC knight armor described in BRP).

That's not correct. If you have a look at the armor table, you'll see that the locations a full plate covers are "all but head". If you want to know how much fixed protection a helmet gives (that is, if you want to use the "armor by hit location" rules), go to page 262. A heavy helmet gives 8 AP, and a light one gives 4 AP. At least, that's my interpretation of the rules.

Hi everybody,

Well, since i'm new on this forum, i assume i can ask a stupid beginner question :

in the new BRP the armor may have a constant value ( ala Runequest ) value or a random value ( ala Elric/Stormbringer). Unfortunately these values do not correspond well to each other: for instance, 8 pt of constant protection ( plate armor ) corresponds to 1D10 random protection ( average value 5.5 ).

Traditionally, constant armor is associated with random hit location ( RQ2/3 ) and random armor with major wounds ( Elric/Stormbringer ).

However i intend ( for role playing in Middle Earth ) to use fix armor and major wound.

Do you have any advice on this?

Thanks.

I thought it was a mistake until I realized this: in the random value system helmets add a bonus. So, if you have a plate armor and a heavy helmet, you have a 1D10+2 protection (average value 7.5), which is nearer to 8. That makes more sense.

OK. Fine.

I'm inclined to agree with you. It's just something I'm thinking about as I go along. It may be better to leave it alone.

I won't hate you for wanting to houserule BRP :innocent:, I just think that your houserule is too powerful. Besides the splitting attack skill, I'd add some penalty. For example, you've got to split your skill (as in the official rule) but you're not required to have 100% in order to do so. What do you think?

Why wouldn't you use the existing Splitting Attacks rules? Ie, if you have over 100% in an attack skill, you can make multiple attacks by dividing your skill to no less than 50% (so 100% would give you 2 attacks at 50%, 150% would give you 3 attacks at 50%, or two attacks at 75%, etc).

Cheers,

Sarah

I guess that's because he doesn't want it to be necessary to have a 100% to split an attack, because he feels the requirements are too high. But I feel the requirements are too high for a good reason, making two attacks is overpowering. That "splitting attack" skill is an überskill, way too-powerful. If you added some penalty, you'd mitigate it somewhat.

27.97$ for BRP? ;-(

Crap, I should have waited. I paid 47.93$ (31.42€) and I didn't receive it yet, Amazon says I should receive it on August 26th. ;-(

Well, maybe I'll get Ashes to Ashes.

Hi!

After some lurking, I made up my mind and registered. I post at rpg.net and therpgsite as Claudius, my real life name is José, I'm 32 and I'm from Spain. D&D BECM was the first RPG I played (I was 13 or 14), but the first RPG I owned and loved was RuneQuest 3rd. I have played, run and loved other games (including other BRP games like Stormbringer), but RuneQuest left an indelible mark on me. When RuneQuest was put out of print, I thought I'd never see it again, so you can imagine how excited I was when I heard about Basic Roleplaying. I haven't got it yet, my copy must be crossing the Atlantic and I'll have to wait a while to get it (Amazon says I'll receive it in August). In every case, I'm very happy to see this BRP revival, and I can't wait to have it in my hands and see what I could do with it.