Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


lawrence.whitaker last won the day on April 21

lawrence.whitaker had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

924 Excellent


About lawrence.whitaker

  • Rank


  • RPG Biography
    Co-Owner, The Design Mechanism, Co-Designer of Mythras, RPG writer for 30 years
  • Current games
  • Location
    Grafton, ON, Canada
  • Blurb

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. lawrence.whitaker

    On bonuses

    Actually, tigers in RQ6/Mythras have a Stealth of 72%, plus the Camouflage ability, which imposes a hefty (two difficulty grades, which effectively halves the Perception skill in normal conditions) penalty on attempting to spot them...
  2. lawrence.whitaker

    Balancing nonhuman player races

    [quotejSo basically, you have no suggestions to make other than those already in the rules? [/quote] I’ve just offered you several very valid suggestions that don’t involve imposing arbitrary mechanics to impede one particular character example (that you suggested). Mythras makes every effort to avoid arbitrary restrictions, penalties and limitations (without very good cause) throughout its mechanics. It’s part of the game’s design philosophy and quite carefully thought through. So, no. If I had such mechanical solutions to offer, they’d be in the rules already. And I think Matt E makes an excellent suggestion; take a look at how Classic Fantasy handles class and race parity there - although you’ll find it’s based on structuring advantages, rather than imposing disadvantages.
  3. lawrence.whitaker

    Balancing nonhuman player races

    Rather than imposing arbitrary (and divisive) mechanical disadvantages on the dragon character, highlight the social and roleplaying implications: 1. How is a 40' dragon going to fit into Ye Olde Tavern to meet the patron? How bored is the dragon player going to be when the characters decide to explore the Grimdark Caverns where everyone of SIZ 13 and over has to crouch? How about the delicate trade negotiations where the dragon has to remain absent because the ambassadors of Grimdark Kingdom are simply terrified of giant fire-breathing reptiles? 2. Everyone for miles around is going to flee when the party shows up, their tame dragon in tow. This is going to make life tough for everyone, no matter how friendly the dragon might be. 3. The sheer amount of food the dragon needs to consume means it will likely be more concerned with feeding than adventuring 4. Those eager to slay a dragon to prove their worth/take vengeance/wear its hide/steal its gold are going to target the party and come up with highly inventive ways of beating the dragon. And the characters. 5. Dragon psychology is most likely quite alien to human psychology, with separate passions and drives. Reinforce those to the hilt. Would a dragon even want to go adventuring? Part of the problem of imposing mechanical restraints to achieve some kind of parity between characters can be difficult to do. It always breaks down at some level, and quite often, the mechanics have to be tailored to the species. You wouldn't apply the same mechanics devised for levelling a dragon to, say, a harpy, or an iqari (side note: Pete played an iqari very successfully in one of my campaigns, and despite the game advantages iqari enjoy, there were plenty of social limitations that meant we didn't need game mechanics to enforce parity in the party), so there's no one-size-fits-all solution. I'd also balk at the Negative Luck Pool idea. Why should my dragon be incredibly unlucky for X% of the time? What, aside from game balance, is the justification for this? Basically, if GMs allow non-human species in their games, and especially highly exotic ones, then you need to accept that they will not be the same as human characters, and trying to engineer balancing mechanisms are likely to become arbitrary and unsatisfactory, the more removed one becomes from the human norm.
  4. lawrence.whitaker

    R'lyeh Reviews - Classic Fantasy

    On the fence regarding Classic Fantasy? Wondering what it does that other dungeoneering games don't? Take a look at Pookie's review to find out more.. http://rlyehreviews.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-other-osr-classic-fantasy.html
  5. lawrence.whitaker

    Mongoose "Empire" book?

  6. lawrence.whitaker

    Mongoose "Empire" book?

    The MRQII book is (or should be) clearly labelled MRQII. They MRQ1 version has the convoluted red and black cover with the garish 'RuneQuest' logo.
  7. lawrence.whitaker

    Mongoose "Empire" book?

    I think it depends which version. There was the MRQ1 version, which focuses on Empires exclusively, or the MRQII version, which contains an overhauled combat system for warring states, and folds into it the rules for factions. It's the better of the two.
  8. lawrence.whitaker

    [New Release] Waterlands, a Mythic Britain Adventure Supplement

    It's a terrific piece of work that crams a great deal into a small space.
  9. lawrence.whitaker

    [New Release] Waterlands, a Mythic Britain Adventure Supplement

    The use of 'The Fens' appears in our marketing blurb to help those not overly familiar with this area of Britain, and to help visualise what the Great Mire is like. In the campaign itself, the people of the region call it The Great Mire, or refer to their local settlements, and don't use the word 'fen' at all. To convey the kind of area it is (which is more than just a marshland or extensive bog), the words fen and fenland are the best ways of conveying the impression.
  10. lawrence.whitaker

    The big list of D100 settings

    Change the title perhaps, but certainly don't throw away the idea of compatibility, because, as I think has been shown, the compatibility between seemingly disparate rules may be much higher than first realised. If one knows that the least one has to do is multiply a skill's rating by 5, and perhaps add a bonus of some kind, it makes many supplements and adventures much more useful.
  11. lawrence.whitaker

    The big list of D100 settings

    Well, in Rolemaster, it's take your skill value, add it to a d100 roll, and if you score 101+, you succeed.The probability of success is no different to rolling under one's skill with d100. Very true. But my point is that, if one wants to specifically exclude certain systems from the d100 compatibility matrix, it involves building in more and more conditions that actually dilutes the original intention. I agree with your earlier point that what's really important is how easy/intuitive it is to pick up say, a Bushido scenario, and run it with the d100 rules of your choice with minimal effort. It always helps to know a little about the system of creation of course, but if you know that the skills in a Rolemaster stat block are essentially %ages, then you can, by and large, wing it well enough. Or multiply the Bushido BCS by 5 to gain the equivalent Mythras skill rating, remembering that Bushido characters add their level, which is on a 1-6 scale, thus conferring a 5% to 30% bonus. What it really comes down to is, with an exercise like this, the moment you make an exception for one system (and even for the best and most legit of reasons, as is the case with Pendragon), then it potentially opens up cases for more and more exceptions, that then require more and more disqualifiers to avoid the sort of situation you'd get by taking the d20/d100/roll under/roll over situation to its logical extremes and finding that D&D and RQ are, in fact, more closely aligned than one might otherwise consider.
  12. lawrence.whitaker

    The big list of D100 settings

    Correct. It would. And herein lies the difficulty with trying to create a taxonomy like this. All d100/BRP games have exceptions designed to emulate either the fictional work they represent, or their genre, or something else. You then end-up having to build a very complex set of rules and conditions to accommodate everything comfortably, and, in so doing, find that you're pulling in systems you'd have never considered to be d100 compatible or technically shouldn't be, but, because they fit the bulk of the criteria, somehow find their way in there. Pendragon's a case in point. It's a Chaosium game, and has most of the common d100 elements, but uses a d20 as its resolution mechanism. So, if we want to include it in the d100 grouping, a new exception is created to cover d20 resolution. This pulls in the FGU games, HeroQuest, and probably a whole bunch of other games one might not have considered. And then you get Rolemaster, which has characteristics, skills, crits, fumbles, and uses a d100, but works on a roll over mechanic. Some would argue that the roll over mechanic disqualfies it, but others rightly point out that it's just a reversal of the maths involved; so arguably, it should be in there. And, if you then apply the logic used to include Pendragon, then you could argue that taking a d100 roll-over mechanism and dividing by five gives you a d20 roll-over mechanism. Which just happens to apply to D&D (3rd edition and above), which also has skills, Hit Points, Crits... Essentially, all roleplaying games are related. Mechanics developed for one system are copied, or used as inspiration, or readily lifted, and find their way into games that one might consider to be completely unrelated to the original hypothesis, but, because you've created a whole bunch of exceptions, actually end up qualifying. I'm actually finding it quite interesting as an exercise to see just how inter-related many different systems, by many different creators, really are. But it's a very difficult exercise to keep 'pure'.
  13. lawrence.whitaker

    The big list of D100 settings

    I'm curious to know if, as a publisher of a D100 game system, you agree with those minimum criteria or if you would add any. I think that the minimum criteria, and allowing the resolution dice to include d20 and d10, leaves the exercise open to a lot of edge cases - like the FGU games and Rolemaster. You could perhaps include magic fuelled by Power or Magic Points (if not already included upthread), but that won't disqualify games like Bushido.
  14. lawrence.whitaker

    The big list of D100 settings

    Bushido has levels and armour that reduces the chance to hit, but that's about as much as it has in common with D&D. Otherwise, all three games precisely fit the stipulated criteria. Both Daredevils and Aftermath are overly complex, but they still tick all the qualification boxes for d100 compatible games.
  15. lawrence.whitaker

    The big list of D100 settings

    As mentioned on RPGnet, you should also include several of FGU's games: Bushido Aftermath Daredevils They all fit the d100 compatible criteria you've established.