K Peterson

16 hours ago, Mankcam said:

Yes, ToC certainly has captured a fair bit of the old CoC market, and as you say, it does have a big presence on Yoggie. 
...
It will be interesting to see how it holds up to ToC and whether or not it reclaims fans back from Gumshoe to BRP

From my experience with it, ToC really seems to offer such a different play experience than CoC, even 7th edition. Pulp or Purist, it turns the storygaming-dial so far away from traditional play that I'd wonder if any converts would want to go back in the direction of CoC. Even with some of the rules tweaks and options that have come about in 7e.

And, isn't there supposed to be a ToC 2nd edition in the works? I thought I'd seen some posts about it on other forums.

How did you track down a copy of this obscure Rpg?

I don't even have to read the article to know this is true. I have first-hand evidence! 

I've got a pile of 15mm sci-fi minis stashed in my garage, but they're mostly from Khurasan, RAFM, and a few other random manufacturers. And I've already got a copy of Griffin Island, so I won't be much help, unfortunately.

10 hours ago, pachristian said:

So how high should a character's characteristics be?

High enough to fit the power level of your campaign? If the emphasis of your campaign is on larger-than-life heroes then find the characteristic generation system that's going to meet your needs.

Personally, I don't run those style of campaigns so I don't feel the need to emphasize high characteristics. Varying skill levels, yes, but not necessarily larger-than-life characteristics.

Quote

You should have enough to points to create a favorite fictional character. There are few things more annoying to me than to be told that "you can't duplicate Captain Blood. He's a hero." Excuse me? Because I'm a player-character I'm supposed to settle for less native ability than some named book or movie character? 

In this case, you need to look beyond mere characteristics and consider how many skill points you're going to provide - or how previous experience shapes the character's skills. Characteristics, alone, aren't going to paint the picture of how capable your hero is going to be. They're likely to have far less impact than they do in Pathfinder (a guess from me - I've never played Pathfinder).

If you want to duplicate Captain Blood your hero better have the skill levels to back that up. That's where I'd suggest you really focus rather than just on characteristics. Otherwise I doubt you'll get the results you're really looking for.

For me, the best part of the CoC7e Kickstarter bundle is S. Petersen's Field Guide to Lovecraftian Horrors. That thing is so damn sharp that I was blown away by how it looked in print. I'm regretting not getting it in hardcover. Great artwork - a really nice product.

Not sure what is the best fit for CoC 7e. The new Delta Green rpg uses the SIGINT (signals intelligence) skill to cover signal encryption, surveillance, code-breaking, and communications intelligence (which Morse code might well fit into).

The closest to a 'rarity index for equipment' I've seen is some combination of the wealth level values for equipment and a character's Status skill. And potentially penalty modifiers to a Status skill roll to acquire the rare/unique equipment. And a drastic reduction of a character's wealth level if they buy an expensive item.

How do the FFG rules handle equipment rarity? Is it simply an extremely high cost? Or is there an extensive process to find and negotiate the purchase? 

With BRP, I could see a whole string of skill tests required to even find a rare or unique item. Leveraging Mental or Perception-type skills to track the item down, and a Communication skill test or two to purchase the item from a seller. Hell, the search for a unique item could be the basis for a campaign!

I don't think it really matters how Chaosium refers to the new edition, internally. Call it "RQ4" (or CRQ4 ) or whatever in your conference calls. Knock yourselves out. Your decision, and the labeling you use, won't matter when it comes to forum threads, or in face-to-face conversations between gamers. When the label comes up it'll probably lead to more confusion than clarity as a gamer tries to figure out which-the-hell edition the other gamer is talking about.

Probably not as much a concern with the newer RuneQuest gamer, who will simply categorize the game as "RuneQuest", and everything else as "old stuff". Unless they have a conversation with an RQ-grognard...

Quote

Referring to the new version of RuneQuest as just RuneQuest is fine, as long as there does not follow an even newer version of RuneQuest in a few years.

RQ4.5? God, let's hope not.

16 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

All in all, my advice would be to NOT use firearms in conjunction with the SR system. The SR system highlights size and weapon length, two factors that are completely irrelevant for firearms.

Size and weapon length are irrelevant when it comes bow-fire as well, which is simply based off DEX and reload time. The SR system was designed around that factor. Perhaps stretching it a little to include firearms wouldn't be impossible.

Quote

It is not designed for that kind of weapon, and risks to produce clunky results.

Potentially. Any house-ruling I do might reach the clunky mess that's currently presented in the BGB.

For me, some tactical, initiative option, somewhere between Strike Ranks, and DEX Ranks or CoC's Phases, would be nice. Something intuitive and elegant. Perhaps I'll just have to end up settling for DEX ranks in the end...

The BGB has some guidelines for using Strike Ranks with Modern and Futuristic firearms, buried in the equipment lists (pp 255-257). They fall under the same SR/RoF rules used by primitive and historical missile weapons. But they have never really made sense to me, or matched up well with the default Attk rules. I wonder if there's a better way to model firearms within an SR framework. (Because I like SR, the tactical grit they add, and have never used them anywhere besides in fantasy campaigns )

Most firearms use the 1/SR rate-of-fire, which translates as: fire on DEX SR, and then again on (DEX SR + 3), and so on until you reach SR 10. Light pistols, bolt-action rifles, and sniper rifles (for example) all use the same SR RoF which makes it seem like these buried rules were just tacked on.

Also, something else I've never understood: what the hell is 2/SR. Two shots fired at DEX SR; two more on (DEX SR + 3)?? Or a shot fired at DEX SR, and the next fired at (DEX SR + 6)??

I'd really like to write up some house rules to address the weirdness in these rules. And then try them out in traditional CoC, Delta Green, or a Scifi campaign.

2 hours ago, Chris said:

I have a basic rule that a PC whose player is absent can not die, any other character can if the player makes bad decisions.

I do something like this. If a player can't attend a session I give them the option of having their character involved in the investigation/adventure or not. And if involved, they're run by the other players and by me.  

If their character is not involved, a convenient excuse is given for their absence. The character is at no risk but, also, won't acquire experience checks or otherwise benefit from the session. If they are involved they acquire experience checks, and any session benefits, but are at the risk of death and insanity.

On 4/1/2016 at 11:13 AM, Kränted Powers said:

:

 

Personally, I like 'Example 1' within the context of being an example of Gloranthan cultures, and differences in dress between cultures, social class, and between the sexes. I don't take it as a reflection of what adventuring-types will look like, and the postures/poses they will take. These individuals represent the different social classes found within the cultures - an example of what the people around the adventurers will look like that they will interact with.

I prefer a mix of art representing what adventures/heroes look like within the setting as well what their environment and NPCs look like. I find that more immersive for me than just seeing pictures of cool heroes doing cool shit. It could be argued that these people could be doing more interesting things than standing in line for a mugshot - like interacting with their environment - and I'd agree with that.

Example 2 is just pure drek to me. Something I would expect in a Mongoose Publishing product, not something that I'd expect to be used by Chaosium or Moon Design. Unprofessional, tacky, no reflection of culture. Just ridiculous cheesecake.

Chaosium's call, of course... but maybe you guys should take it to private message? Or, hell, just ignore one another? Antagonize one another on your own time. 

11 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

By plot armor, I am referring to ensuring that PCs or NPCs survive regardless of dice.

Ah. In that case, definitely no. I don't play in that style - and to me, it feels like rather hollow experience.

The implication with plot armor is that the PCs and NPCs are intended to survive, so that the GM can tick off his dramatic scenes and get everyone to the story climax, unscathed. The story plays out exactly as the GM intended it to, with the players being malleable to the highest priority, which is the story or plot. The bad guy / boss monster must survive till the end so it's confronted in the thrilling climax.

IMO, from a player-perspective, it's like being a passenger where your actions have no real impact, and you're just along for the ride until you pull into a story-climax station. Not an interesting way for me to play, personally.

Quote

When I need to protect the plot (not NPCs) I have the enemy plot on a timeline, so there are specific points that PC actions can influence the enemy...

I don't protect the plot, or feel the need to preserve the storyline, even when I'm running published material for Call of Cthulhu or something else. Plots/stories/adventures rarely survive the plans and actions of the players. And often the players can take the plot in an unexpected and more enjoyable direction than what the GM planned out originally.

Can you define plot armor? Are you talking absolute 'script immunity' or some kind of mechanic to lessen the risk of PC/NPC death? Or something else?

I don't currently GM with any 'safeguards' in place for PCs or NPCs. I have used Fate Points in MRQ2 before but they're a limited resource.

34 minutes ago, Mysterioso said:

Isn't there a no bells and whistles version of Renaissance available?

Yeah, the non-Deluxe version is free.

5 hours ago, soltakss said:

Black Sails (BRP)...

I think you mean Blood Tide. Though, "black sails" is in the description below the title...

9 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

I think in earlier periods of history, Credit Rating would be changed to something like Social Class or Social Standing or Family Honor or some equivalent measure of apparent trustworthiness and visible wealth.

-STS

The BRP BGB uses Status in place of Credit Rating, with its skill level being tied into social class, base wealth rating and a cap on wealth rating. Cthulhu Dark Ages used it as well. 

7 hours ago, Mankcam said:

The trick is not to hand out too much loot all the time, or it decreases its value in a setting - many old school games were guilty of this, and D&D remains at fault even in its current edition. If I was porting any coinage loot from a D&D scenario, I would recommend about a fifth of what the typical D&D scenario prescribes.

There's certainly less need of piles of loot if your experience system doesn't depend on it (XP = GP acquired), you're not paying out of pocket for an army of retainers, nor saving up to build a fortified stronghold. Or in the case of more modern D&D, you have magic shops in the setting with expensive toys for sale.

But, even in the case of old-school BRP, you're going to need to hand out some steady loot in RQ2 for characters to be able to shell out the cash for skill training, raising attributes, and paying back debts (Battle Magic learned from cults). Unless you plan to limit the growth of the characters.

So, yeah, IMO the need to nickle-and-dime loot comes down to the game's mechanical dependency on it. If training or debt costs are in the hundreds or thousands of coins, or you're playing more of a zero-to-hero-to-regional warlord style of campaign then tracking coins is important. I don't tend to run those kinds of campaigns, so abstraction works perfectly fine.

I use abstract wealth levels as described in the BRP BGB for most of the campaigns I run. But I typically run CoC set in different eras so the accumulation of wealth isn't really a focus. Characters have the equipment and possessions that would be appropriate for their occupations and Credit Rating, and if they want to acquire something extravagant then it's usually a test of their Credit Rating skill to see if they're able to get it.

Every few years I'll run a fantasy campaign, but even then wealth and treasure are secondary to many other goals. 

If you haven't already, I'd recommend checking out the DG QuickStart Guide ("Need to Know") as well as the "Core Rules Manuscript" that's available on the DG Kickstarter campaign page. 

I've not seen the Book of Eli so I'm not sure I could rate how good a fit they'd be. (One of the last post-apoc movies I saw was The Road. Not sure how that compares to BoE).

I think that DG: the Rpg is a solid set of modern CoC rules that has the right amount of abstraction for my style of play. There is quite an emphasis on character relationships (through Bonds) which act as a resource for dealing with stress and sanity loss. If you like that kind of networking of a character's friends/family/compatriots and a sanity-model that's between traditional CoC and Unknown Armies, then maybe it'll work for you.

Converting it would require some work defining the 'professions' for post-apoc play. In this edition of DG, professions provide the primary basis of an agent's starting skill levels (with some free points to spend afterwards). The playtest doc does contain guidelines on creating your own professions, and you'd be spending some time building post-apoc archetypes, I think.

Sounds like a great idea. I wish Chaosium had had this kind of 'initiative'/gaming-outreach program years ago, for 6th edition. New management helps, I guess.

Timing, and... how painful could this approach be? Deflecting a weapon haft with a forearm (I'm guessing) sounds painful at the least, and ulna/radius breaking at worst if you don't have armored limbs. Maybe if you closed with your opponent quickly enough so that he wasn't able to get much momentum behind a second swing.

Modeling it in SB4 would be challenging. In Elric! and SB5 you could use the Spot Rule of closing against a longer weapon with an unarmed parry or wrestle? But, frankly, if you're able to close against a long weapon, why not go on the offensive and start throwing some punches, try disarming the opponent, or tripping him, instead of remaining on the defensive? If the opponent doesn't discard his Lormyrian Axe, he's going to have a tough time choking up on it and dealing much damage unless it has a spike on the end. Or retreating so he's able to extend the distance and get a good swing in on you.