Jump to content

RosenMcStern

Members
  • Content count

    2,399
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    29

RosenMcStern last won the day on May 12

RosenMcStern had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

783 Excellent

2 Followers

About RosenMcStern

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 08/25/1964

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.alephtargames.com/
  • Skype
    paolo.guccione

Profile Information

  • Location
    Somewhere in the EU

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    BRP, RQ, HQ, what else?
  • Current games
    BRP, RQ, HQ, what else?
  • Location
    Somewhere in the EU
  • Blurb
    Now roll for 1d6 SAN loss for seeing my actual picture....

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. RosenMcStern

    Splitting attacks in RQG

    Yeah, but it is a 70,4% chance of not hitting with the split attack (0,88 x 0,80) versus a 71,5% with the single attack. It is marginally better, does not take into account the risk of succumbing to the counterattack by rolling 96-00 on your own parry, and most likely other combination of skills favour the single attack. For instance, with deleriad's second example of 140 vs 80, the single attack has a 57% chance of hitting unparried, while the split attack is [(100 - 0,7 x 0,2 ) x (100 - 0,7 x0,4) = [0,86 x 0.72] = 61,9% chance of failure, i.e. 48,1% chance of success. Not a good idea, it is almost 10% less. But the main point for me is... do you really think that all these calculations will cause less indecision paralysis than picking an effect after rolling ? Because some players will not make up their mind without calculating all possible chances.
  2. RosenMcStern

    Javelin - 1H Spear or Thrown?

    Not true. Shortsword was a different category in RQ3 Never made much sense to me, in truth. It almost never happened, as you would normally use the "cultural skills" for weapons in RQ3. And again, there was a rule in RQ3, too, which said that you had a termporary disadvantage for using an unfamiliar weapon (not weapon category). Never really used it, but the rule was there.
  3. RosenMcStern

    Javelin - 1H Spear or Thrown?

    Really? I recall skills applying to broad categories, not specific types of weapons. It was *certainly* this way in Land of Ninja, where Kenjutsu applied to both Katana and Wakizashi, and it did not specify that this was different from the standard rule that 1h swords covered all weapons in the category. It _did_ specify that the skill covered 1H use at -10%, however, so it is rather clera to me that the RQ3 norm was skill->category and not skill->weapon.
  4. RosenMcStern

    RQG Sorcery

    Was it? I can find no reference to this fact anywhere. Many people have a different opinion about the playability and balance of RQ3 sorcery. They would add back that medieval flavour that was de-canonised long ago. I would not recommend doing this.
  5. RosenMcStern

    What changes to include in a second edition?

    Please have a look at the below post. This is going to become the standard format for NPCs, it is important that it be the most usable format we can achieve.
  6. RosenMcStern

    What changes to include in a second edition?

    Advice noted. And it may be the right thing to do, in fact.
  7. RosenMcStern

    Simplified Antagonists

    Okay, before going on with the task of quick generation of NPCs, let us review the basic information needed for a "goon" in a game. Below are two sample opponents I will post on the Rise of the Yokai Koku campaign - something very basic, to use in case you need generic guards for a castle or temple and you have not prepared them before. Is this stat block format adequate? Can you spot anything missing? Anything that should not be there? [the Basic Combat score is only useful in BC, and will probably be removed in RotYK, which is more Advanced Combat oriented]. Is it clear and usable? Note: the final version will include also the note field for weapons (impale, slash, etc) and hit location stats superimposed on the picture.
  8. RosenMcStern

    Tanaka's observations

    More interesting commentaries by Simon: The problem is that Rd100 is not a setting but a toolkit. A weapon list or armour list encompassing all items used in history would be simply huge, and lead to anachronisms that some groups do not mind, while others dislike. Giving instructions about how to personalise equipment to your taste is the best way to solve the problems for those who care, whereas those who do not care can just skip those four pages. You appear to be part of the "do not care" group. Supplements, of course, can provide a more specific equipment set which bypasses the need to design items. The "build your own" rules are there for when you do not have a supplement for your setting. This is a characteristic that only exists in the core rules. In your campaign, you use one system or the other, not both. Same for supplements. For instance, Merrie England uses currency (advanced currency rules, I would say ), while Rise of the Yokai Koku will only have values. But the core system must explain how to use both systems. Historically, the sword was the weapon with the most special techniques developed/taught. However, please note that unlike it happens in other games, axes and maces are better in Revolution when used by a fighter who has no special stunts. This was a specific design choice to counter the fact that swords have more special techniques and more "high quality" versions in the weapon list. As many people said, effect-based combat is a love it or hate it thing All in all, it sounds like a big "You will find some options that you find unnecessary in this book: remember that it is written with multiple tastes in mind, so ignore the parts you dislike" warning at the start of the book, and the equipment chapter (where in fact there is already one) would be a good idea.
  9. RosenMcStern

    Tanaka's observations

    Tanaka has posted some relevant observations on rpg.net. However, the thread there is a sell me / tell me and I do not want to clutter it with details which are relevant only to whoever has some play experience. Better go on with the discussion here. Partially true. First of all, Fire Blade is not variable, and Absorb Fire would completely negate the Might of the Fire damage: the effect is the same in Both Advanced and Basic Combat. Should the Fireblade take effect, the rules do not specifically tackle this case, but I would say that since Fire Blade adds 1 might of fire, then it provides only 1 Might to damage in Basic Combat. Still relevant, but not a showstopper. Damage Enhancement is more powerful than Protection. True. However, this was thought of, and intentional. Do not forget that damage in BC is not "wounds", but also tactical advantage. In AC, there are several ways to bypass armour, and the person with Damage Enh. has a higher chance of winning over the one who is only using Protection: the Protected warrior can still score a hit and not do enough damage to win, the damage enhanced one will certainly end the fight with the first use of Choose Location, Maximum Damage or Coup de Grace. This is reflected in Basic Combat by the fact that Protection is only worth 1 or 2 points. This is more relevant. Haste is very powerful in AC, and hardly effective in BC. For groups which use mostly a narrative approach, Haste is recommended as a tool for chases, not for battles. Consider that a Haste 2 automatically ends the Chase with the spell user winning. The rule is misinterpretable, it seems. What I intended is that you need to have Heal available to regain RP on an advantage defense, not that you must roll Heal. Like many other spells, Heal is useful in BC to justify a narrative, rather than for rolling. In BC, you are supposed to roll only for spells which have the Overcome Trait, (or for a buff if it is useful to add damage to your weapon roll). Not for Heal: the healing roll is subsumed in the roll for defense. Unlike BRP/RQ/Mythras magic points, Rd100 exertion points are meant to let you cast at least a dozen spell in combat before being forced to stop. The case when you cast 20 spells in Basic Combat, outdoing what your character would be able to do in AC, is extremely rare. Believe me, in all spellslinging battles I have run, magicians ran out of Channelling long before they could drop to zero Exertion Points. This is legit, as I suppose players expect their magic to be effective when their characters take the time to learn it However, I have a feeling that they have still to depart a little bit more from the usual BRP paradigm of HP attrition. Basic combat is based on attrition (advanced combat is not), but not attrition of wounds. Once you think in these terms, things make more sense. Provided that powers cannot be 100% equivalent between basic and advanced combat, in any case.
  10. RosenMcStern

    RQG: how much RQ3 still in it?

    Be warned: if you open a blog with the subject "How to be a munchkin in RuneQuest" or "PowerPlaying in Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha", I will NOT suggest others to read it
  11. RosenMcStern

    What changes to include in a second edition?

    After a long meditation on the subject (well, maybe not so long), I have decided that we will publish a revised, cleaned up version of the ritual rules in the Rise of the Yokai Koky campaign. This will take place even if the crowdfunding does not succeed. It makes sense for the campaign, as rituals are central to the storyline, and we had at least one case when the player characters made their own ritual. At the same time it will be an important complement for the core rules. It shuold not take more than a couple of pages. The SRD will be updated during the course of Summer, too, and will contain the clarified rules. This is not the beginning of a "let us split the rules among various books" phase for Revolution D100. We are still supportive ot the "one book with all you need to develop your own game" approach, with packages and supplements providing game worlds you can play "out of the box", not essential rules which did not fit in the core book. A hypothetical second edition will see the new version of the rules included in the core. All references to the recent polemics about "one other game" not containing the disarm rules in the core book are absolutely coincidential, of corurse. The problem with rituals in RD100 predates "the other game". And for those who had not understood it yet, one information that we cannot include in a published book: rituals in Rd100 are like rituals in 13th Age. Oh yes.
  12. RosenMcStern

    RQG: Disengagement

    In some cases, i suppose so. But not in the average case.
  13. RosenMcStern

    RQG: Disengagement

    The rule about unengaged movement occurring First does. Once free to move, the feeling character goes faxter and moves earlier.
  14. RosenMcStern

    RQG: Disengagement

    This reminds me of my times in the 80s, playing RuneQuest with people who had played too much Fantasy Trip. The point is that some games - nominally those which use a grid, like D&D 3.x or the aforementioned TFT, have the concept of "engagement by grid position". Once you are adjacent to a melee-capable opponent, you can no longer move freely. Please note that this is a direct derivative of the wargamey concept of Zone of Contol (ZOC), and TFT even explains in which hexagons a character projects a ZOC and allows a one-hex shift in the ZOC like many wargames do. It is a perfectly effective way of handlng combat, if tactical combat is what you are after. However, RuneQuest, which is a game that does not expect players to use a grid, treats engagement as a matter of "fictional positioning*". This means that you are engaged in melee when you have narrated an exchange of blows with another guy, and you are no longer engaged when you have narrated a disengagement. The simple fact that the other fighter can move at the same SR as you after you have disengaged does not trigger engagement again, as there is no "adajcent figures are engaged in melee" rule in RuneQuest. * fictional positioning is a forgie term introduced, or at least used mainly, by D. Vincent Baker.
  15. RosenMcStern

    What changes to include in a second edition?

    Yep, as I wrote in the other thread, this is the point which is most in need of clarification. And it is a very important point, not a marginal one. To explain this with an actual play example, now that I have made some details of the Yokai Koku playtest public: the second playtest group used a ritual to win the campaign by defeating both enemy armies, whereas the first one had to resort to the good old frontal assault technique and got TPKed. I hope that this clarifies how important rituals can be. One of the big problems is that ritual casting can be applied to non-magic powers (Psi and even superpowers), so the term "ritual" may become misleading. However, "improved activation" is not particularly clear, either. -------- While we organize a big errata for this, let us try to solve Zit's doubts in a quick way: all powers can be pre-activated so that they take effect in Adventure Time and last till the end of the next conflict in Adventure or Combat Time; Channelling limits the amount of powers you can pre-cast in this way. Arcane Magic and Psi can be pre-activated for indefinite duration in Adventure or Narrative Time (i.e. they do not expire at the end of the next conflict), but they use up double and triple their cost in Channelling in this case. All powers except cantrips (and even cantrips in some environments, for instance the Yokai Koku) can be extended in duration, range and scope of the effect by ritually casting it in a conflict. For instance, Project Lightning can be used to create a thunderstorm by improving its range, duration and scope. Fire magic could create a drought, etc. However, this requires a different casting procedure which requires a Conflict against the full Value of the effect, multiplied by the time scale, which means a very high Value to defeat. For instance, let us say I am a magician with Channelling 7, Focusing 8. If I know Protection. I can keep Protection 9 active in Narrative Time on one single target at a cost of three Channelling points (Arcane Magic costs one point of channelling per manipulation, not per Might). This means me and my bodyguard have Protection 9 always on, without any need for a ritual casting: very convenient! Now, if I want to shield an entire castle from harm because it is undergoing catapult fire, the effect cannot be so strong. In this case, I need to calculate the Value of the effect (Target 1, Range 1, Might 8, for a total of 10) and multiply it by three if it has to last more than a few hours. That makes 30 points of opposition to beat, something that even a powerful magician cannot hope to achieve without suffering Consequences. A wise magician would not attempt to use more than MIght 4 in this case.
×