Narl

16 minutes ago, styopa said:

RQ is deadly.  Always has been.

The rule as written though is sort of pointless. No way are you going to get healed by the end of the round you take the wound because everyone has already declared their actions. It should either be instant death or death at the end of the next round.

I am a longtime BRP player and I'm looking forward to RuneQuest in Glorantha! I've been taking a look at of some of the differences from BGB combat to RuneQuest and noted one rule that seems overly harsh:

"When an adventurer has taken enough damage to reduce their total hit points to 0 or less, then the adventurer dies at the end of the current melee round unless healed or otherwise brought to positive hit points." RuneQuest p. 146

The BGB has the following rule:

"If your fatally-wounded character receives medical attention (through First Aid, Medicine, a power, an item, or some other means of hit point restoration) in the round he or she received the fatal wound or the round immediately after, and his or her hit points are brought up to 1 or more, your character has almost died, but will survive that particular injury." BGB p. 209

With RuneQuest requiring declarations at the start of the round, it seems very unlikely anyone is going to be brought to positive hit points in the same round they take a wound.

The BGB rule has created quite a few exciting and desperate situations the round after a wound. The potential for instant death in RuneQuest is still there with triple hit location wounds, but going to zero total hit points is an accumulation of smaller wounds that doesn't seem to me to make for a better game.

Any thoughts on this? Or good reasons for characters dying in the same round they go to zero?

On 8/14/2017 at 5:38 PM, simonh said:

How many current BGB owners would be interested in a new version with a dozen extra pages to cover the RQG and CoC7 variant rules?

Just getting rid of the Hobo font would be enough to get me to buy a new copy. :-)

11 minutes ago, tedopon said:

As much as the "Homebrew for Life" gene flows through my veins, I want to believe that anecdotal statement from WOTC. 

It was from an actual survey they did, not anecdotal, and likely is contrary to what their marketing department would like to hear or share. Here is the exact quote from Chris Perkins:

"A great bulk of those who play D&D run homebrew settings. But of those homebrew campaigns, over half of those homebrewers do pillage from other settings ... 15% or 50% of the world they've created has hawked stuff from other worlds. They're comfortable pillaging our products for ideas. That homebrew number, I can't remember the exact percentage, but I think it's like 55% homebrew. And then it's like 35% Forgotten Realms, and then everything else ... Very few people right now, turns out, running Dark Sun campaigns. A sliver of a sliver. Very few people running Hollow World campaigns. Very few people are running Mystara campaigns. It pretty much goes Homebrew, Forgotten Realms, I think Greyhawk's at 5% ands then everybody else is at 2% or 1%."

I've heard the same figures from Mike Mearls as well. It surprised me too, but then there is a vast number of D&D groups that happen at homes with little or no connection to local shops, cons, forums, other groups, or the wider gaming world at all.

I really hope that a setting-independent BRP continues to be produced and supported by Chaosium. While I have always enjoyed the many Chaosium settings, homebrew is what I enjoy most -- it allows for more creative indulgence. I recall that WofC did a survey of DM's a couple of years ago and even with their focus on Forgotten Realms, the majority of D&D games were still run in homebrew worlds.

As a GM, creating your own concepts and setting, and then creating stories within that setting, are the height of creativity, and Chaosium should support that.

Though they vary, quite a few of the monographs I have are better in content and art than the few Chaosium-produced BRP products of the last half a dozen years.

The question should not be "do we get rid of the monographs?", but "how can we produce Chaosium BRP products that are actually professional?".

Ordered it last week and it should be here Monday!

Does it have pregens? If not, do you have any Rich?

But when we would hit, it was always in the abdomen for maximum pain.

Wow, I thought Chaosium was past these sorts of issues.

They are not getting another cent from me until they start doing right by their authors.

I'm with Filbanto. No more of my money to Chaosium unless they are paying their authors.

Eventually someone in the rubble will get smart and start herding goats. I hear they love kudzu.

I'm really looking forward to picking this up at Gen Con if you guys have it ready by then. Any chance of RQ6 sessions being offered at Gen Con?

For bow types, really, the shape doesn't matter. Bows are human powered weapons, all Compound/Recurve bows do is give you a higher draw weight in a smaller bow

I can tell you no Hun archer fired a 120lb draw bow from horseback

Heres a couple videos that help explains it

The guy in the video really doesn't understand bow design. And compound, composite, and recurve bows have significant advantages in terms of efficiency that have nothing to do with size or draw weight.

If you put any reflex in a bow's limbs (making it recurved to any degree), it will result in more efficiency and therefore higher arrow speed. If you take a 64" longbow (with no reflex in the limbs) that is 50 pounds at 28" draw vs. a 64" recurved bow that is 50 pounds at 28" draw, the recurved bow will impart more energy to the arrow, resulting in greater speed. English archers did figure this out on their own at some point and some archers would put a bit of reflex on their otherwise straight bows.

Higher arrow speed, or a heavier arrow at the same speed, means more penetration and more "damage".

Material matters too. Lighter limbs or a material that recovers faster (carbon in modern bows) results in more efficiency. If you build a bow out of a lousy bow wood and one out of yew, the yew bow is going to shoot further and faster, even if they are both the same draw weight.

So you can have a more efficient or damaging bow at the same draw weight. Design and material do matter.

If you are going into a lot of detail on this, be sure and only allow short bows from horseback. Longbows don't work out so well for obvious reasons.

While we're moaning, though, I will say that "In Search of the Trollslayer" (the only official Chaosium BRP straight fantasy scenario, right?) does suffer from dreadful production errors.

Plus an incorrect implementation of the magic system in the sample wizard character.

Sarcasm apart, this is SO sad and I feel so stupid having ordered this unusable "adaptation" in the latest sale. They are really taking advanage of the stupid loyalty of a bunch of fans like me and finishing dilapidating what remains of the goodwill capital attached to their brand since a long gone age when they put forth quality products.

Yes, I definitely felt stupid in my loyalty after buying this book.

I am sorry but there is a difference between a small company with scarce means and a company that just does not give a damn about what their throwing out. Chaosium seems more the second than the first. When was the last time they did anything half decent in-house?

I doubt anyone at Chaosium actually plays BRP. How could they possibly produce something decent in house?

My copy arrived today. I knew what to expect as far as it being a cleaned up version of Basic Magic. The cover and layout look great and it will attract some attention on the shelves. The interior art is cool.

I've only read the introductory section, but it closes with a discussion of DEX ranks that is quite different from how I interpret them and how my group plays them.

I see the announcement on the Chaosium website, but I don't see it in the catalog. Did you get the only copy they had?

Narl picked up the pre-release copy at Gen Con. I swiped it from him for the past couple of weeks. I've read through the Rune Magic chapter and skimmed the rest of it and it promises to be a very nice supplement.

Charlie mentioned at Gen Con that they are going to add some additional art and possibly change the cover as well.

Redcrow, are you on a Mac? I've had some success "fixing" Chaosium PDFs by opening them in Preview and then saving them under a different name.

I sure don't claim to be an archer, but I found it a lot easier to shoot a bow after I took my heavy jacket off when I was messing around last fall. Maybe I should only apply a penalty for wearing padded armor? I guess I was thinking about things like the string catching on your forearm or trying to shoot across a pigeon-breast cuirass. Agree with the crossbow comment.

I've been shooting recurves and longbows on and off since I was a kid. Interference from clothing can be overcome with wearing appropriate clothing and armguards. For armor, I'd think it would be the same way. It needs to be reasonably close-fitting at least on the bow arm and any archer would wear a bracer, typically with an integrated glove since longbows didn't have shelves.

Any closed helms would definitely interfere, as would nasal helms. I'd rule you can't even shoot a bow with a great helm on.

Filbanto, The Medieval Archer by Jim Bradbury is a great book. You are welcome to borrow my copy if you like.

My son and I had a fun time playing in your game, Matt. Thanks for running it!

I picked up Mythic Iceland and from what I have read so far it looks excellent. The Gen Con version is a proof edition so it is still in need of some minor editing. Charlie mentioned they may change the cover art as well. I also asked Charlie about what else they had upcoming for BRP and he did mention they had a hardback screen in the works, similar to the CoC screen.

In my BRP fantasy game, I allow use of Knowledge (Nature Lore) to gather herbal supplies, which then allows a bonus to First Aid or Medicine rolls as long as the herbal supplies last. A pretty abstract way to do it, but simple.

2. I'll be using a magic system along the lines of the Sorcery powers. What kind of tradeoff at chargen (skill points? attributes? other?) works best to balance the advantages of sorcery use?

I prefer the magic systems that require skill points to be put into spells. This serves to even things out to some degree, though not completely. I like Magic from the book, but I've adapted some of the Sorcery spells to it to expand on it.

Any update on this? Any chance Cubicle 7 will have it at Gen Con?

Great news for RQ!

Any plans for a "Glorantha for beginners" type release with the basics and a few straightforward adventures? Something that would generate enthusiasm in a GM new to Glorantha, rather than feelings of intimidation. :-) I think that would help get more folks interested in Glorantha.