Narl

More varieties of polearms. Like thirty or so.

Yes I thought that looked odd. So the wizard should have more spells?

He has the capability to have in memory up to nine spells. Though that doesn't mean he necessarily knows that many. The ones he does know, he can cast at up to ninth level.

Can anyone recommend a modern or near future setting for BRP (or derivative) rules? My group want to do some gaming with firearms.

It is near future post-apocalyptic so I'm not sure if it fits your criteria, but you should look at the Rubble & Ruin monograph. Great setting, and it adds some excellent firearm rules to BRP that are easy and fast. You can check out the rules here:

http://basicroleplaying.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=99

Personally, I wouldn't want to play BRP with modern firearms without some healing powers or high-tech healing. Rubble & Ruin includes psionic healing.

That's what I'd hoped and I like the bit about the idea roll too :-)

Son #1 is running Troll Slayer soon for me and son #2. Happy days!

Thanks.

Awesome! I run a BRP game for my three kids and they love it.

Note that there are some issues with the pregenerated wizard character in Troll Slayer. Magicians who use Magic don't memorize spells by levels, they just memorize INT/2 in spells and can cast them at a level up to INT/2 (as power points permit).

You forgot to quote this part of p189:

"Powers used in a previous round will “go off” at the beginning of a new combat round if their effects are not instantaneous"

So if they are instantaneous, the power goes off at the characters INT rank (or DEX rank, if you use the optional rule). Otherwise, the power gets of at the beginning of the next round (again the INT rank), if it takes longer to cast. Some spells need to be cast longer than one round.

To me it seems there is no discrepancy in the rules, only is a bit left off at one point.

I think trying to combine the two rules just muddies things up. I'd just go with what it says in the Magic section, which is right in line with how it was done in Worlds of Wonder. Pretty much the entire magic section is straight from Magic World.

There are some discrepancies in the rules between how Magic works and how Powers work by default. I generally have the rules in the Magic section take precedence over the default rules. Magic assumes that you will have spells go off in the Action phase based on DEX rank (per the optional rule on page 189). You can cast one spell per round (as long as it isn't so high level that its DEX rank cost puts you into the next round) instead of an attack.

I have casters declare their spells at the start of the round, and they go off at DEX rank minus the level of the spell. If a caster is interrupted in some way before the DEX rank their spell goes off, they need to make an Idea roll or it fails.

I think that guy has a point, RPGs are dangerous and evil, but his way of exposing them is soo 80s. Now, this guy doesn't pull any punches:

http://www.ilmatar.net/~np/gameofsatan/

"Evil roleplaying games are sliding nude teenage girls on a greased pole straight to the FLAMES of HELL for ETERNAL TORMENT."

What a quote!

I don't think you need to assume that the character is actually dead during that time -- they are dying and systems are still functioning, but about to fail, and if you don't get them to positive hit points before the time limit, that is when they actually die. That is how I've always seen it.

If you are using the Magic system in BRP, which is based on Worlds of Wonder, you can just add spells to items. A +1 great axe equivalent would be a great axe with Sharpen 1 on it, and it would have +5% to hit and +1 damage. A Ring of Protection +3 might be a ring with Protection 3 on it.

You do want to differentiate how and when the spells in the items take effect. For the axe or ring, you'd probably want to say it is always on and activated.

For a wand, you would want to require the user activate it. Per the BRP rules, most items have their own power points and skill levels. I use the Worlds of Wonder item rules, and require the user make a Luck roll to use the item instead.

Considering that Status has a checkbox, and it explicitly states under the skill that you can't advance it via the normal improvement rules, I'd say there are mistakes in the sheet.

As far as how advancing and training Knowledge skills go, I think it is up to the GM how to handle it since I don't believe the rules will give you a definitive answer.

If you use a Mac, I've found that opening them in Preview, then saving them under a different name (you can change the name back later) also works.

I ordered the limited edition Masks of Nyarlathotep and Fractured Hopes.

BTW, Merrie England is on Amazon for preorder at a nice 34% discount.

BRP may have flaws, but because I really like so many aspects of it, I can overlook those flaws, something I can't seem to do with other RPG systems. Almost like being in love.

Ahem!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogre_%28game%29

Looking forward to the deluxe reprint of this later this year. I heard the boards are going to have a linothorax-like finish.

I'm really looking forward to this one! I'd like to someday run a game in the vein of the old 1980's BBC "Robin of Sherwood" series and this looks like it would be excellent for that.

In this thread, I've seen both "Age of Eleanor" and "Age of Chivalry" as subtitles. Is this a title change just to differentiate the MRQ from the BRP release? Or is the latter a book that will release in the future? I'm just a little confused on that point.

The crit calc is for a house rule, and the special calc is modified for our crit.

Okay, thanks for clarifying that it is for a house rule. Sorry to be nitpicking, but I've spent too much time thinking about this sort of thing -- I play BRP with my kids (ages 6-11) and I'm always looking for easy methods and shortcuts. They like using a chart and it is the best method I have found for them that preserves specials and criticals.

I'm in the process of making them a character sheet that has the chart right on it next to their skills. I'm going with the always round up method since it makes for a shorter chart.

But, guys... no rounding is necessary. There's no need to find the exact special/critical chances by dividing the skill. A simpler way is to multiply the number rolled by 5 (or 20) - if the result is less than the skill, then it's a special (or critical)...

That doesn't come out accurately either (unless your house rule is to round everything down). If I have a skill 30, I should Critical on a 2 or less (.05 x 30 = 1.5 rounded to 2). By the above method, if I roll a 2, multiply it by 20, I get 40, which is not under my skill.

I don't believe there are actually any shortcuts to this (besides taking 10% and either doubling or halving it, leaving all the decimals, and rounding according to however you play). Or you can use a chart but some of the more mathy people at the table might give you a hard time.

For a special, just use the tens x2 and discard the units if 1-4, add +1 if 5-9 (ie: 147: 14*2+1; 143: 14*2)

For a critical, do it the other way round

About half a second each (maybe 2 seconds the 3 of them?)

33 = 3*2 = 6

77 = 7*2 = 14 +1 (cause the unit is 5+)

123 = 24 = 12*2

EASY AS PIE!!!

We use "easy specials" (like above) and "easy 10% crits". Everything works fine (but again, all chars are well over 100% fighting skill, and theres not much chance to hit people.

Also, outside melee combat there's no specials.

Are these calculations for a house rule? They don't work with BRP rules as written (normal rounding). Nor do they match with the chart in the book (round up).

For example, 123 skill would give a Special on a 24 or less by your calculation method, while in truth is is a 25 or less for a special (.2 x 123 = 24.6 which rounds up to 25).

Narl - I've a copy of Hans Talhoffer's book. 15th century woodcuts of judicial duels. Very cool, though a good 600 years later than the Viking game you plan on running:) Remind me to dig it out when you come over to game on Wednesday.

Sounds interesting. I'd like to take a look at it. Thanks!

I can definitely see that since it changes your whole body angle and what parts of your body you need to defend.

I'd be really curious to find out from some (non-SCA, real steel) sword fighters how a 2H swordsman compares to 1H sword and shield. I'd want to know if one has a clear advantage over the other. I bet these guys would have some thoughts on it:

http://www.youtube.com/user/DamianLakomski#p/u/1/Ll1HIXwfF8Y

I wonder if the heavier hits from the 2H sword getting through armor outweigh the benefits of the shield?

Your point about realism above in terms of movement kind of cracks me up because I wonder if you think sequenced combat is more realistic? Do you think it is more realistic that missile weapons always go before melee weapons in every circumstance? What if the guy with the melee weapon is point blank in melee range on the guy with the bow? The guy with the bow still can act first. I like it better if both combatants simply roll initiative and let their stats and chance decide who get the drop on the other. Is it really more realistic for a bow armed with a short spear to ALWAYS get initiative over a guy armed with a longsword? Not really. D&D doesn't think so either.

BRP doesn't have missiles going before melee weapons, that rule is only for if they are on the same DEX rank.

You need to have a DEX penalty for movement in a round due to common situations like this:

GM: "You are 25 meters from the werewolf and he is about to charge."

Player: "I have my shotgun loaded and ready."

GM: "Roll initiative." (If you are using that option. Otherwise, if the werewolf happens to have a higher DEX than the player.) "The werewolf wins initiative. He runs 25 meters at you, attacks, and hits for 14 points of damage."

Player: "Don't I get to shoot at him before he gets to me?"

GM: "No, he won initiative." (Or has a higher DEX than you.)

How is that going to go over with your players?!?!

In the BRP game I'm currently playing in, we skip Statements of Intent (usually). When it gets to player's turn and they decide to move, change weapons, or do something else that reduces their DEX rank, the GM just tells them what DEX rank it will happen on and they jump in on that rank later in the round to perform their action.

It is still fast and simple, but you've got to do something to account for movement situations like the example above.

If you really wanted to keep it simple, you could house rule that if you move more than 5 meters you can't attack. In that case, the PC would get to blast the werewolf before he gets to him, and the werewolf would just attack in the next round.

We had a good size Rubble & Ruin firefight last night. The additional rules for Risk don't slow things down. You have the Risk rating for the firearm on your character sheet, make a couple of +1/-1 adjustments, and that is it. It certainly is deadly enough. Anytime anyone fires at you, there is a chance you will bite it. My character took 9 points to the abdomen from a bad guy with a rifle. If Rich had rolled higher on the damage, it could have been lights out for Eugene.

We haven't had any casualties yet but it is only a matter of time if we keep stirring things up. We do have healing available through psi powers, and that has saved a few PCs.

I'm not very knowledgeable at all on firearms, but the risk rules do what I believe they are supposed to do, which is really create some serious tension and concern anytime anyone points a firearm at you.

I've been considering this same issue for a Viking game I've been planning. This is one area of the BRP rules that I feel really is an issue.

Why put points in shield when you get the same effect and benefits with just a single weapon and no shield? Without adding in some sort of benefit for a shield, I see no reason rules-wise not to take a 2H weapon instead. The 2H wielder can parry just as well as the sword and board warrior, deal out more damage, penetrate more armor, plus have another 50+ skill points to put somewhere else. I want the sword and shield warrior to have some advantage in terms of defense.

The rules have you subtracting -30% with each parry after the first, regardless of whether you switch from sword to shield or parry with your shield more than once. I considered adding in a "free" parry with the shield, so that it wouldn't get the -30% after the first parry (i.e. get two parries at full shield skill, after that they get -30% per parry), but this only benefits a shield user if they are facing multiple opponents/attacks, and I'd like to see the shield grant a benefit even in one-on-one fights.

I also considered making shield parries Easy, since parrying with a shield is just, well, easier, right? But I think this is likely too much of a benefit and would seriously slow down some fights.

I have two options I'm considering right now:

1. Give all parries made with shields a +20% bonus. I don't want to increase the base chance or the skill rating, but just give all shield parries +20% to the chance. Increasing the base chance or skill rating would slow advancement and do nothing for starting characters (who would still be limited to starting at 75% at Normal or 90% at Heroic).

So, a serious sword and board warrior starting at Normal power would likely have 75% in Sword and 75% in Shield. Fighting one opponent, he is going to parry with the shield at 95%, a substantial benefit that reflects the advantage of a shield but not unreasonable. If he gets attacked by three opponents, he can parry each at 95%/65%/35%.

2. Using Complementary Skills. Another option I'm considering is treating a shield and a 1H weapon as Complementary Skills, per the optional rule on page 50. The same 75% Sword/75% Shield warrior would get the benefit of each skill complementing the other with 1/5 of the skill rating, or a 15% bonus in this case, reflecting the advantages to both attack and defense that a shield offers. He attacks at 90% and parries at 90%. This rule could also be extended to warriors wielding two weapons to give them some advantage since the rules don't offer any currently.

Using the complementary skills option would also have things scaling better than the flat 20%.

Thoughts on either of these possibilities?

Ah, I see, my bad. I looked at the example at the beginning of the book, where

Critical Success is explained, and there it is rounded up. However, on page 175

it reads "Round fractions using normal rounding.", which most probably means to

"round to the nearest".

Rules say normal rounding, but the table on page 172 uses round up. It would be a much longer table if it used normal rounding.

Personally, I think it is easier to use round up, and if you do use a table, it results in a much shorter and cleaner table.

If they were, I would hope that it would be as a supplement to BRP, rather than a full-blown separate game. I've already re-bought rules too many times over the last 5 years! ;-)

SDLeary

Agreed.

A Glorantha BRP supplement would be great! Glorantha is intimidating to get into for a lot of reasons. I'd think Basic Glorantha for Basic RolePlaying would do pretty well.