Thalaba

Now that I have my book.... I see that in the armour table on p. 259 it lists the armour with a skill modifier to Physical skills, or Perception for helmets, etc. On p.261 under Skill Modifier it says "this modifier is applied to any listed skills (or skills within a category), and the GM may apply it to any other appropriate skill". On page 203 "Armour: Skill Penalties: Armour can inhibit certain skills...particularly the Agility roll or other physical actions such as the Climb, Jump, Stealth, and Swim skills. Some armour descriptions in chapter eight include negative modifiers to these skills. Weapon skills are unnafected." (emphasis mine). I'm pretty sure the intent is to only have these skills affected by the armour penalty, and others at GM discretion. You are right that the wording in the armour table section would suggest it applies to all physical skills, but I don't believe that's the intent. It's one for the errata, for sure.

I've been pretty impressed with the amount of interest that Classic Fantasy and Fractured Hopes have been generating. I think this illustrates that point that it's the supplementary material which will be the best draw. Getting the most popular monographs into actual distribution will be something for the near future, I imagine.

Does the free quick-start guide not provide this? I haven't read it. Or does there need to be a 'players edition' of BRP somewhere in between? Somebody mentioned D101games/Drules - ironically, don't these free and very similar rulesets dilute BRP's potential customer base? Would BRP be more popular if they didn't exist? (NOTE: I'm not faulting them in any way, just speculating here). Thalaba

I meant to reply to this last night with my book in hand - but I forgot so I'm going by memory which could be muddled by RQ3 and houserules. Ride should be a physical skill, not a communication skill. The limiting rule doesn't limit riding to your weapon skill - it limits weapons skills (and other actions performed while riding) to your RIDE skill. I would say that this is your RIDE skill plus your PHYSICAL modifier. Using RQ3 encumbrance rules (and I assume this is the same with the BRP option that mimics them) your encumbrance is not deducted from ride, only affects your Dodge, Sneak, Jump, and Swim (and spirit magic). I really don't remember how armour penalties work from the BRP book, but I would assume they don't affect your RIDE. Perhaps someone can confirm this.

What does 'balance' mean, in this context - can you provide an example? Are these recognized phases of something? Please explain. They do? Personally - I like a toolbox. In fact, it's what I would recommend as the approach for a generic game. All this 'tightening' you are talking about makes sense for specific settings and scenarios, but the BRP core rulebook doesn't present any of those, so why would it 'tighten'? I'm pretty sure the 'tightening' is meant to happen at the setting/sourcebook level, where you can get pretty specific about which rules are in use and so on. And for us do-it-yourselfers (I'm sure there are more besides me) I'm glad to have a product that doesn't assume for me what and how I want to play. By positive, I think you mean 'constructive' or are you referring to the tone of the language? I would agree with both, actually. I'd like to hear about the criticisms you've been holding back on - I find these types of discussions pretty valuable and they inform how I run the game. They also inform future editions. But please, explain clearly what they are so that people can discuss them in an informed manner.

Those are some nice looking maps! :thumb:

I find music too distracting to listen to while I'm GMing - I could probably do it with that Sting song (nice one btw), but the others are too bombastic for me to have in the background while playing. I do a lot of improvising and acting, which pretty much takes most of my focus. That said, I am heavily inspired by music in my scenario writing and often the things that happen in game are inextricably tied to specific bits of music in my mind. I can pick out music that would go towards making the soundtack to my game, but I wouldn't use it as background music. These are some of the (wildly diverse) bits that are flavouring my current game: YouTube - Ralph Vaughan Williams: Job, A Masque for Dancing (1927/1930) Scene VIII e IX YouTube - Ravi Shankar - West Eats Meat!

I got my Cthulhu Invictus today, too.

Now I think I can understand more where many of your objections are coming from. You were playing a much more gonzo version of RQ than I ever did. Many of your objections to the system don't seem to apply at the level we were/are playing at. I find the difference interesting. In any case, it is certainly not true in our games that parrying APs exceeded weapon damage. There are so many factors involved in defence that it would be difficult to model them all. True, if someone tried to block an axe blow with a spear haft, it would be easier to snap than the blade of a bronze sword. But on the other hand, most early bronze thrusting swords had the blades rivetted to the hilt and so it was that connection that might very well have broken, not the blade. Damage caused to a weapon in BRP makes no assumptions about which part of the weapon is damaged - only functionality is affected. I'm also sure there would be a big difference depending on whether you chose to block a blow outright or deflect a blow. Might be an interesting excecise to model this...hmmm. IIR a critical parry is needed in RQ3 to deflect a critical attack, is it not? Or am I remembering my house rules. I don't have the manual with me. In any case, your model is ignoring the effect of multiple attacks, which are the norm in my game. Even with a massive AP shield, you could still only deflect one incoming blow with it per round at 99%. Not much help when fighting three great trolls. Furthermore, a 300% skilled fighter is at a great advantage over a 100% skilled fighter - he can attack three foes in one round at 100%, whereas the other guy can only attack one foe. He can also hit a specific location on his target much easier. I remain unsold on the argument to date (but not necessarily unwilling to buy if the sales pitch is right). Thalaba

Yes, I'd like to see this too, if you don't mind - it sounds intrigueing.

It can easily get that way. Some of the powers in the books (like Sorcery, Psionics, and Super Powers) are abilities that are had over and above skills, and so it's recommended to give non-power using characters higher skill levels to compensate. Others (like Magic) really are skills, and if you award them in the same way as other skills then the balance will suggest itself. But there are other factors that can help balance out powers that are maybe not so explicit in the book. These are things like having to make great personal sacrifices to get power, power users being socially ostracised and necessarily hidden, powers being only of limited use, powers being offset by weaknesses (as with Superpowers) or Geases (as with the RQ cult of Yelm (?)) etc. There are definitely ways to set up your game world to help keep powers in check. Thalaba

I don't think there is much to be worried about, here. As Charles said, you should make it plain to the players that magic won't be something they start with, but that it is possible for individuals to learn it later. That will put the bug in the mind of the players who might want to learn it later to prepare for it now (making a scholar character, for instance). Be warned that if a PC makes 'getting magic' a goal, you will have to satisfy this goal at regular intervals in the campaign. If, as Charles said, you simply tell them there is no magic except in myth, and then they later discover there is magic, there is a good chance the PCs won't want to learn it for themselves. They may, in fact, see it as a factor of evil and stamp it out when they see it. There's nothing wrong with that, of course. It's classic Sword and Sorcery. But you should decide now if you think 'some PCs should learn magic', or if 'you don't care whetner they do but they can if they want to'. Like skill advancement, it's pretty easy to limit PC's access to magic in a game. In classic RQ access to magic was pretty easy thanks to the cult structure, and many people aspired to be rune lords and so on and kept getting more magically powerful. This, I think, is where Rosen is coming from in his comments. But you don't have to follow this model at all. You can keep magic rare. If you use BRP MAGIC (or Basic Magic (BM) Sorcery) then each spell is a skill that will start low and increase slowly. Likely these skills won't increase any faster than the the combat skills of other PCs unless time is taken out of the campaign to specifically develop them. For this reason I don't think the magic user will outshine the others. If you use BRP SORCERY (or BM Divine or Spirit Magic) then the availability of magic is entirely dependant of finding someone to teach or grant it to the PCs. And since you, the GM, controls the availability of magic teaching NPCs, you can limit the availability of spells very easily, only allowing PCs access to them when you think the time is right. Contrary to Rosen, I wouldn't say that spirit magic is cheap and easy - at least there is no reason it needs to be. To get spirit magic, you have to find someone to take you into the spirit plane to teach it to you. This will likely be an exotic shaman, perhaps someone the PCs don't really want to deal with. He may strike bargains with them, forcing them to perform unsavoury or difficult tasks. Then, they will be taken to the spirit plane and have to defeat a spirit in spirit combat in order to learn the spell. This can be quite risky, and there is a chance of failure. Lastly, a single spirit magic spell probably isn't very powerful, so it won't overpower anyone. If you are playing with the fatigue rules, then wearing armour and weapons reduces the chance of casting magic, further limiting the usefulness of spirit magic. So yes, the obtaining of magic can be more troube than it's worth. All of my players have gone the martial route, though they all have some spirit magic. They usually only cast magic when they aren't wearing armour or when they have a lot of time to perform a ceremony to increase their chance. They have only once taken the oportunity to learn magic from a source that wasn't their their tribal shaman, and they haven't had access to their tribal shaman since the beginning of the game. Magic items are very rare in my game, and not super-powered. When the PCs do find magic items (and they do) I don't tell them they are magical or what they do without some experimentation. They actually have a bunch of magic items they never use because they are not aware they are anything special or afraid of what they might do. Furthermore, many of my magic items have to be attuned to the user by expending a POW - something my PCs are loath to do since they don't accrue POW very easily. Lastly, I would reiterate what Charles said about healing. Without magic, you may want to have the Medicine skill, or some special healing herbs or some other means of healing. Or, you might give them CON+SIZ HP and run an episodic game where they have time to heal between episodes. Or, a rare healing magic item might do the trick. Thalaba

I've been running a weekly low-fantasy bronze-age RQ campaign for the last year and a half, now. When we started, character had their highest skills in the 50-60% range, a number of medium skills in the 30-40% range, and a lot of low level skills. A year and a half later I would say the original characters have a few skills approaching 90% (very rare). most midling skills in the 50-60% range, and there are still a lot of low, seldom used skills. In another year's time, I doubt we will have more than a handful of skills in the entire party above 100% - and these will be weapons skills. Whe weapon skills are over 100%, you will find that people will start dividing them into two attacks, making aimed blows, etc. so 100% still won't seem high enough. I let the players roll for skill checks at the end of every campaign chapter when they enter a town or city (without being chased) and can relax. This works out to about every 3 or 4 sessions. They definitely look forward to making their advance rolls. Now, I'm not sure what you mean by long term, but you can certainly keep skills from getting too high if you pace it right. Now, having said that, there are a number of people on this board who cut their BRP teeth playing Stormbriger instead of CoC or RQ, and Stormbringer recommends players start with weapon skills over 100% and go up from there. I've heard many people here say that this is how they like to play it. So for that reason I would say that PCs crossing the 100% threshold shouldn't be too much of a concern - it's certainly playable and probably a lot of fun. Besides, there are many ways for characters to advance besides increasing their skills. My players have so far enjoyed upgrading their armour, then training up their strength so they could wear the armour, then increasing their POW so they didn't get defeated by enemy spells or spirits or curses so much. They have yet to put any concentrated effort into learning new magic. So, to sum up: 1. It's not too difficult to keep skills from climbing too high if you pace game. 2. If some skills do go over 100%, the game is still fun and playable. Some say it's the only way to play. 3. Having skills over 100% doesn't mean an end to character advancement by any stretch. Hope that helps! Thalaba

I usually get a pretty quick reply from Dustin, but he's busy with other things at the moment so he's not as available as usual. The one time I had a shipping question, though, I was referred to Fergie who never bothered to respond to my e-mail query at all. That said, I recently received a package from them (last week) which I bought prior to the sale (fool that I am). An additional book I ordered during the sale has not shipped yet, though. I'm guessing there might be a backlog in getting sale items out. No excuse for not responding to e-mails, of course. Thalaba

Welcome, Craig! Like the avatar!

Hi Gianni, The old RQ3 Magic book does have rules for rituals, so I would have assumed the Basic Magic book also does (unless this was omitted for some reason). The rituals covered were enchanting, summoning, and ceremonial rituals. The basic rule boiled down to rolling on the appropriate skill and expending one or more points of power. Was there something more you were looking for in terms of ritual rules? Some specific effect or idea that you wanted to see modelled? Tywyll is working on the Grimoire at the moment, and this includes some ritual 'spells' or effects. If you have any ideas that you think he should include, I'm sure he would be happy to hear them. And, for what it's worth, I love to hear descriptions of rituals - they add a lot of flavour during a campaign. Thalaba

The biggest advantage to the battle map is that you can quickly draw the environment on it - trees, campfires, hidden temple entrances, etc (but not cliff tops - those should always be shrouded in fog ). If you are concerned about angles, you can get a hex map instead of a grid. Thalaba

I meant the bolded one, although the last one has some appeal, too. I was just thinking about the new 'edition' of WFRP and how different it is from previous editions.

Vile locked it up when he went away to study. What nobody has suggested yet is that maybe MRQ2=FFG BANDWAGON :eek: Kidding aside, the RPG market are suckers for purchasing product written for their favourite franchises, regardless of quality. What's more, some people just like to collect RPG books. From that standpoint, releasing a new edition of a known game is likely going to be a winning proposition for an RPG company, as people who liked previous editions will very often purchase a new edition of the same. It might, in fact, be easier to re-sell games to existing fans than to sell them to new people. I'm willing to bet that even some of the people who didn't like MRQ1 will shell out for the new product, whether it gets good review or not, just because they will be curious or think they want it for their collection. Thalaba

Seconded on all counts.

Actually, now that you mention it, maybe that's the shadow of a large furry rock about to fall on both of them....

I thought it was a rat man, but anyway... People are overlooking that he's rather fashionably dressed and has a gold necklace. This would imply that he's not the average trollkin - there's more here than meets the eye. So I voted no.

There are a couple of things I don't understand about removing SIZ. Let's say you're sneaking into some lair or temple steal some things or slay the bad guy, and you accidentally kill the dwarf (str 24) who was in your party while you were fignting a guard (str 14). Now, to avoid calling attention to your self, you decide it would be best to hide the bodies in the snake pit, but you are not very strong yourself. There is no size, so you must go by strength - it will take two people to move the small dwarf, but only one to move the big guard. Is that correct? What about objects - do they have strengths now instead of sizes, too? What mechanic is used to roll a big boulder out of the way? Thanks! Thalaba

Well, in this case, try to think about what kinds of activites the players will be engaging in. Will they be rooting about in libraries? If not, you don't need the reasearch skill. If you are trying to cover a lot of different things, though, you might end up needing a longer skill list than a shorter one. Have you checked out Fractures Hopes? It's a monograph setting that was written specifically to allow (and make sense of) all the options in the book. You might find it helpful to see what Charles did with it. He, incidentally, built the world around the options, as I understand it, and not the other way around as we've recommended. I wouldn't say they are 'incompatible' - I guess my statement was misleading, so don't be afraid if you want to use them together. You will get tough PCs, but that's OK. Under certain circumstances you might want that - like a Land of the Lost kind of scenario where the PCs meet dinosaurs (who do a lot of damage) but the characters don't have much armour. I was only trying to say that if you were going for a gritty fantasy campaign where combat was a big feature, you might want different options than if you are going for a heroic fantasy, which might be different again from a political intrigue game. But it sounds like you aren't going for any kind of focus like this. More info on the setting and who the players are would definitely help. You said the setting would look weird to a normal bloke, but not to the people who are there. Well, who are the PCs? Are they 'normal blokes' transported to this setting, or are they locals who don't give it a second thought? If the former, you might find the Sanity rules will add something to the game. In the latter case they might not. Thalaba

There are many different kinds of options. Some options will boil down to preference and won't impact play a lot (e.g. point based character creation vs. random). For these, simply choose the one that tickles your fancy, or try them out first to see what you like, or ask your players what they like. Some options have very specific uses mechanically in the game (e.g. those having to do with EDUcation, research, and so on) that will only be needed in some settings. Some options model a very specific effect (Sanity, allegiance) in the game. If these effects are not needed for your game, then don't worry about them. All of the above should be easy to select as long as you know what kind of game you want to run. Some options will impact play and mood quite a bit, such as Hit Locations. But these may also add complexity, so your preference on play style will also be an important factor in choosing these. Some of the options will impact the power level of the PCs in the game, such as high HP, high characteristics, and so on. For these two categories of options, I could see where having more experience with the system would help. Some of these are mutually compatible, others arent. Hit locations, for instance, would be used with Armour by Hit Location, but probably not with Total Hit Points (adding CON+SIZ) or with Variable armour. I can easily see how these might be difficult choices if you are new to the system. For selecting skills, I would definitely prune out any skills that won't see practical use in the game. Weapon skills can be tricky, as you will have to decide your level of granularity first - there are many ways to do this. I think the best thing for you to do is decide what the game is about, first - what is the setting, the mood, the power level, and so on (as Rust has described doing). Once you know that it will be much easier to decide whether a number of options are needed or not. I would suggest you then go through the options and cross off anything that is right out. If you would like to post more info on the game you have in mind and which options are troubling you, I'm sure you will get a lot of advice in helping you decide which are appropriate. Thalaba