Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Sean_RDP last won the day on February 1 2016

Sean_RDP had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

191 Excellent

About Sean_RDP

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Atlanta, GA USA


  • RPG Biography
    I began playing RPGs in 1981 with BASIC D&D. Since then I have rarely met a game I would not at least roll up a character for. I prefer to play or run a variety of games and systems. I am also a (atm) amateur designer and have written modules for the RPGA Living Greyhawk and Living Dragonstar campaigns. (Both are now defunct).
  • Current games
    D&D 5E; Edge of Empire; Designing several new systems of my own.
  • Location
    Atlanta, GA
  • Blurb
    Writer, storyteller, gamer, lover, and slayer...

Recent Profile Visitors

2,828 profile views
  1. Sean_RDP

    Recommend a Dungeon Crawl

    I always liked Lord Skyppen's Mansion. It is (obviously) already BRP compatible and has a ton of variety. I like the Desert of Desolation Series, but the middle one might be the best dungeon crawl? So Pharaoh, Oasis of the White Palm, and Lost Tomb of Maartek But I always pimp X1 Isle of Dread and X2 Castle Amber. X1 ALSO has ships involved, which could be really cool.
  2. Sean_RDP

    Five (5) Things Essential to a Magic World setting

    Couple things I want to circle back to, but on Moorcock.. I think it is okay to say "Hey, make it Moorcockian" (like saying Dickensian?) and legitimate. But, stepping away from that to some extent is good and I hope folks keep bringing their thoughts. Sailing - what is it about Sailing that people feel is so wrapped up in how we want to have our Sword & Sorcery? Multiverse - Why is this important? I am not saying it isn't, just curious as to what the thought process is. Just nostalgia OR does it add an important element to the game?
  3. Sean_RDP


    Do they carry organic Long Pork? I am pretty sure Whole Foods does
  4. Sean_RDP

    RQG: Disengagement

    To illustrate why I think this is incoherent in general, let me focus on the initial basic question Free Attack If you Flee, your opponent gets a free attack. Free attack? Is this an attack outside their normal attack OR does it use up their normal attack? Example. CharA is Fighting Broo1 and Broo2. The two Broo are primed to attack on SR 7. CharA has had enough and is fleeing. So each Broo gets a free attack if they want it. IF they take these attacks, do they still have their normal attacks on SR 7 or not?
  5. Also this is awesome.
  6. So from my limited use of virtual table tops and stuff The biggest con for Fantasy Grounds is price and learning curve. But some people swear by it. Roll20 can be free and it works fine for what most people need. Now if you are doing mostly theater of the mind anyway, Hangouts or Skype work fine. Like any campaign running in the VTT just takes some prep but once it gets going, you should have tons of fun.
  7. Sean_RDP

    RQG: Disengagement

    Grid/No Grid is entirely beside the point. Nothing I describe above requires the use of a grid or miniatures. When we played RQ (back in the day) we didn't use a grid or miniatures. I cannot remember an instance where one side or another tried to disengage though, so I have no anecdote / example. Even with fictional positioning (love forgie terms) and theater of the mind, the rule in RQG seems unclear and a bit incoherent. I understand the intent of the rule and it certainly takes into account some shenanigans, like one person is mounted OR one person has a longer weapon. I think the rule works just fine or will work just fine if it is just massaged and cleaned up a bit. Right now it just seems very vague and hand wavy for a game that is so specific in other regards. The same with being engaged. Logically when I engage you, you are engaged, simple as that. But the wording makes engagement sound too much like a consent kind of thing. /shrug
  8. If I were to ask folks to give their five essential "things" to a Magic World campaign/setting, what would you say?
  9. Sean_RDP


    I have never played that one in any system. I find X1: Isle of Dread makes a great port over from the B/X D&D. Now that I think of it, B4: Lost city might as well.
  10. Sean_RDP

    RQG: Disengagement

    Right, page 195 - Disengaging has 3 options. I get what they are and mostly how they work, but there is some clarification that could help. Retreat, seems self explanatory. You fight defensively the whole round and are then disengaged or unengaged. It seems clear that if you are There is the Knockback. Still makes sense in terms of why you are unengaged and then you can run away. Which after reading answers part of my question for me: you move after the Knockback, which always happens on Rank 12. So before we get to Flee, let me talk about why I see this as problematic. You decide you want to disengage and either fight defensively before retreating OR use the Knockback maneuver. It is SR 12. On SR 1 (or 2 or 3 or your DEX SR) you move your 8 units. The person attacking you does the same. Boom. You are both engaged again. Nothing gained. Now I know the NPC or PC does not have to chase you, but 50/50 the odds are they will and should. It just makes sense to pursue a retreating enemy. I assume that the idea of Disengaging is to be free to move, to retreat or at least maneuver around some. To engage with someone is also a bit unclear. If you are next to a guy with your hands in your pocket and he has a knife, are you engaged? Logically you are but that is never really explicitly stated. It would get really complicated though if engaging in combat were always consensual. So here is how I see the combat breakdown. Are you surprised? Yes or No Are you next to another person with a weapon or ill intent? If NO you may Shoot some missiles Cast a Spell Move up to your Max racial movement Sit back and indecisively not do anything because of analysis paralysis. (You know who you are) If YES, you are Engaged, you may Attack and Defend Defend and cast spells Try something dumb (see above) Disengage or Run Away You Retreat - Defend Only, No Longer Engaged on Rank 12 or Rank 6 if mounted Knockback and if you succeed, you are now not engaged on Rank 12 Flee. Enemy gets free attack on you that you cannot defend against but you can move How far can you move if you flee? Is the Free attack that character's only attack OR is it an extra attack on top of their Attack and Defend option? Can the person trying to stay engaged make 2 attacks on the same or different targets? What happens with a skill over 100%? Can they split their Free attack? I think it might be much simpler this way Disengage. The character may only defend and on SR 12 they move back so there is at least one (or two) units between them and all combatants if possible. If this is not possible, a character cannot disengage. Success means the person is considered outside of melee combat at the beginning of the next round. IF one of the opponents wishes to dispute the Disengage, they make an attack roll versus the disengaging character, who may dodge or parry. IF the attack is successful, no damage is done but the disengaging character cannot move and is still considered engaged. Each additional opponent engaged with the disengaging character imposes a 10% penalty on their defense roll. Flee. The character chooses to just run away. Each adjacent engaged enemy who has the attack option chosen may choose to make an immediate attack on the fleeing character. The fleeing character cannot defend against this attack. This "free" attack uses up the characters attack option for the round. But that is just me. I am okay with the rules as written, there are just some clarifications that would help make them a bit more clear.
  11. Sean_RDP

    RQG: Disengagement

    Pg. 195. The Flee option says the disengaging character is subject to an attack they cannot defend against. Specifically their opponent "can make" an attack that the disengaging / fleeing character cannot defend against. Is this a free attack OR is this that opponent's normal attack that the disengaging character is not able to defend against? If the opponent has a bow, are they not actually engaged in combat? Can the opponent take a bow shot or no? What SR does someone flee on? I am assume SR 1 or is it their DEX SR? Example. Orlanth Bob is losing to a Lunar soldier. O-Bob flees on SR 1 and moves I assume his 8 movement (O-Bob is a human). If the Lunar takes a free attack on SR 1 (or 2 or 3) and say, maims O-Bob's left leg, Bob is obviously not going to flee. Does the Lunar then get their normal attack on say SR 7 or have they used up their attack with the earlier attack? Because if the Lunar had to wait until their normal SR, O-Bob would be long gone and the undefended attack superfluous. Knockback. What SR does someone run away on? SR 12, the end of the round or the SR they made the knockback attack? If the latter, then do they move their full movement OR do they measure the SR they will be moving and if so, would that not add to their SR total? I m assuming they get to disengage this round. Can I knockback one person and flee another if I am engaged with multiple opponents? Apologies if this has been answered elsewhere. I did not put it in the corrections thread because it was more of a clarification, but I can if that would be better.
  12. Sean_RDP

    Really high skills (skills over 100%)

    What rule is unnecessary? Splitting attacks? Reducing the % to hit? I am not sure from context which one(s) you were talking about
  13. Sean_RDP

    Red Sky at Night #1

    So my first RQ player was a Lunar. Leto was a salt of the Sartar farmer (I think...) who had been initiated at an early age. It was college and our GM was fantastic. It left a mark on how I perceive Glorantha, especially the Lunar pov. I am not the world's greatest scholar on Glorantha or even the Lunar way, but this campaign will give me the reason and opportunity to learn as much as I can and maybe teach new players as well. And I definitely want to stream it because I think folks like seeing something different. A few initial thoughts Will use RQG Take place in the (little c) chaos of the aftermath of the Temple being eaten Seven players/characters (obviously) Probably soldiers or part of the same unit. Will start the game In medias res I think. Not a 2 or 3 shot. Looking for something epic So if anyone has thoughts or wants to follow along, or wants to play, let me know. SMH
  14. I would not think they would need to be the same faction. And there are several brands of Protestantism around at that time. So that might make it even more nuanced than simply "Pope/No Pope". Of course not all the players may want to go that deeply into 17th c. Christian diaspora. How are they going to be recruited? As much as being conscripted or pressed into service would be historically accurate, only do that if the players are keen to try that kind of rp. But if they are, it could be fun. I am eager to see how this turns out. Keep us updated!
  15. Sean_RDP

    Hit location damage question and comments

    I can see where it may not seem clear. They way I read it, it all sounds like a single hit to me, because the locations can take more hits than they have HP. As opposed to cumulative damage for those locations. Hrmm. I thought it was cut and dry until just right now.