Tanaka84

Members
  • Content count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Tanaka84

  • Rank
    Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    I've been playing for over 18 years, started with ad&d and have tried and played dozens of different games, from savage worlds to small indie games.
  • Current games
    Star wars ffg
  • Location
    Caracas Venezuela
  • Blurb
    College professor, social psychologist, happily married, geek, lover of rpgs video games and pop culture.
  1. I'm not going to write a long reply, because that's not the purpose of this thread; but you really opened my eyes, thanks for the insight mate. I'm going to look at Basic Combat with a fresh set of eyes. Ok, so, let's avoid the N-work (not that N word!).... hmmm how about M-space's name AKA Quick Combat, I like the sound of that, and it doesn't feel like it;s a little brother to advanced combat Thanks again mate!
  2. So, here is a neat Idea, let's work on the How to do X in Revolution thread, and then it can be published as a PDF collection as an OGL thingie... or better yet, maybe a zine
  3. - A short one/two page table for adjudicating spells in Narrative Combat -and remove the Narrative combat explanations from the spell list- - Related to the first point, perhaps an optional rule on using overcome powers in narrative combat; the way it is right now, it´s a waste for a character to have several overcome spells, as mechanically they all do the same thing (Loss of RP). - An optional rule for "creating obstacles" as a support action in conflicts, that is, situations that prevent a character from taking a certain action until they are overcome. For example, "I use my elemental wall talent to create a water wall, preventing them from running", this forces the opponents to change their tactics. This could be used in conjunction with the second point above, so a mind control spell could be used to prevent a creature from attacking (until they win a roll for effect against the caster in a battle of wills).
  4. First Paolo, thanks for the reply, this what I love about Alephstar the most, you love this game and are always in touch with your fans! Second, keep in mind that I fully recognize that this is a subjective opinion I guess that my perception is based on two aspects: - First, if you want to keep the engine within the purview of basic combat, there is a lot of information in those chapters that you have to discard, and while you really learn the rules, it's not obvious what is supposed to go with Advanced Combat and what has to go with basic. - As for the second one, some guidelines on how to handle powers in basic combat beyond "check the basic combat section" would have been awesome, in fact, that post right there needs to get pinned for newcomers to read Having said that, my playtest session was fantastic, and I really want to write my own game using the engine. Keep up the good work mate
  5. Agree on both ends, the basic combat section feels like an afterthought due to how little it interacts while half the book (equipment and powers), which is unfortunate since its really versatile in comparison with advanced combat (which models tactical an "realistic" combat specifically)
  6. Find what RD100 is good at and recommend it when the need arises Figure out the target audience and current perception of the game, for example, being a BRP derivative people will probably perceive the game as deadly/crunchy. An introductory/quickstart product like Savage World's Test Drive rules; the book while amazing is a huge beast, with many subsystems. A barebones product let's newcomers (specially non-BRP gamers) test the game without having to sit down and read the whole thing. FFG's beginner box introduces the Star Wars system in very manageable chunks. Conversion documents for popular media: Star Wars, Marvel, Westworld, GoT, Walking Dead. A couple of years ago someone explained the Avenger's battle in New York using Fate Accelerated, that drew many people into the game and helped grok how the game was supposed to be played. Make podcasts, write to kurt wiegel or other reviewers with a fanbase to put the game on their radar, post actual play's on youtube. Keep the content moving, make a fanzine Build a community on G+ (Sadly, while I love forums, communities are easier to access with cellphones and tablets) with links to the content I've talked about above, direct curious folk to said community. Make products using the OGL Ok, that's a long list
  7. Hello everyone, name's Gustavo. I backed revolution d100 and might have found my new rpg darling. It's a great system and I'm dying to give it a try. Having said that, I've hard a hard time digesting the rules. I guess that it has to do with the fact that this my first d100 derived games (aside from CoC 5th edition which seems rather tame in comparison). 1) by default powers work just like traits, that is, one must invest a trait slot to learn them, is that correct?. If the answer is yes, it would seem that wizards need to dedicate a lot into concentration to get enough slots for both powers and manipulation traits. 2) on page 26 under the "multiple traits" header the rules state that a character gets a bonus to the roll if more it had more than 1 applicable trait. Is this how it works in conflict resolution as well? Or in conflict resolution should one always resort to support actions? My interpretation is that if it would make sense to apply both traits immediately then the character gets a. Multiple trait bonus, but if it needs some preparation then it would require a support action (and neither trait could be used for support). I'm pretty sure Im going to be making lots of questions from now on, so I'm sorry Happy new year everyone