olskool

I have read this thread with some interest and have some thoughts on the subject.  As a 3-Gun and IDPA shooter, I can tell you that Recoil is a thing and that Automatic Fire is much less accurate (and therefore should not provide a bonus to hit) than fast Semi-Automatic fire.  I have a couple of ideas that I have garnered from a few different game systems which might add a touch of realism to BRP.   I have been considering these ideas for CoC but haven't gotten around to it yet.

RECOIL:

    Twilight2000 V2.2 had the best idea on how to handle this.  They gave every weapon a Recoil Number that was subtracted from STR.  If the number was less than STR, then NO PENALTY was assessed.  It the Recoil was higher than STR, then a penalty was assessed equal to the difference.  When assessing penalties, Recoil totals FOR EVERY SHOT were added if multiple shots were taken with a weapon during the combat round. 

        To do this in BRP, you could just Google the formula (commonly available) for Recoil Energy for a given caliber and weapon type (rifle, pistol, shotgun) and use those Recoil Energies to build a chart to compare STR to.  It should be noted that some calibers such as 10 Gauge, .338 Lapua, .50 BMG, and .416 Rigby (just to name a few) will have Recoil values that even exceed a STR of 21.  This means that even the strongest character is looking at a penalty for shooting these calibers.  The Recoil value for Automatic fire would be MULTIPLIED by the number of rounds in a burst.   This alone would make Automatic fire less accurate.  I would modify the Recoil Value of a weapon by several factors:

• Folding Stocks:  The "wobble" inherent in folding stocks will INCREASE Recoil.
• Compensators:  The various makes of compensator will help REDUCE Recoil.
• Semi-Automatic Actions:  These absorb either gas from the firing or actual Recoil Energy to "function" the rifle or pistol.  This would REDUCE Recoil.
• Open Bolt Automatic Weapons:  The "back-and-forth" cycling of open-bolt "slam fire" causes a disruption of the sights which will INCREASE Recoil (overcoming the benefits of Semi-Automatic functioning).
• Closed Bolt Automatic Weapons:  Weapons like the MP5, MPK, UMP, and most Assault Rifles will fire from a closed bolt.  This means that the bullet has left the barrel before the action starts to cycle.  These weapons would see a REDUCTION in Recoil during auto fire.
• Forward Grips:  These help hold down muzzle climb and would REDUCE Recoil.
• Bipods and Tripods:  These both stabilize a weapon and add weight to it (which also reduces recoil).   This will REDUCE Recoil.
• Sound Suppressors (aka Silencers to the uninitiated):  These will often REDUCE Recoil as they slow down the escaping barrel gasses to subsonic velocities (to reduce the effects of sound).    

These are just a few of the Recoil Modifiers that can be used. 

Bracing A Weapon:  A pistol may be held with two hands and a shooter may "tie himself" into a rifle sling in order to reduce the Recoil Value of the weapon in question.  I would allow an increase in STR of 1 for the purposes of Recoil Control. 

Rate Of Fire:   

      Automatic Weapons have variable rates of fire.  An experienced shooter will often fire a burst lasting between 1/2 A SECOND and 1 SECOND.  Any more and "muzzle climb" will pull the weapon off target.  Thus a weapon's "practical rate of fire" will be much less than its "cyclic rate."  An easy way to determine a given weapon's rate of fire BASED ON EFFECTIVE FIRE RATES would be to simply divide its Cyclic Rate by 100.   This formula produces a 6/10ths of a Second Burst.  Thus an AK with a 600 rpm Cyclic Rate would have a ROF of 6 bullets.  The Thompson M1 would have a ROF of 7 (700rpm Cyclic Rate).  An M3 "Grease Gun" with a Cyclic Rate of 450 rpm would have a ROF of 4.5 (you can choose to round either way).  This helps reduce the number of bullets fired to a more manageable level while preserving realistic weapon behavior. 

Varying ROF:

     Shooters may choose to fire a "short, controlled burst."  This will HALVE BOTH THE ROF AND THE RECOIL of the weapon.  This is done to conserve ammo or reduce To Hit Penalties.  Shooters may also choose to fire a "long, controlled burst."  This will DOUBLE BOTH ROF AND THE RECOIL of the weapon.  This is done to ensure that a target (or targets) is thoroughly bracketed by auto fire.

Managing Multiple Shots During Play:

     As you may have guessed,  this set of rules will have you rolling for an "attack" with EACH ROUND in a Burst.  To manage this, I figure out all of the modifiers and then divide the total by 10.  I then round all fractions down because auto fire is generally less accurate than semi-automatic fire.  This is the new chance to hit using 1D10's (which we tend to have more of).  Thus, if a player's modified chance to hit is 38%, his To Hit using 1D10's is 3 or less.  If this character was using an AK (Cyclic Rate of 600rpm), he would roll 6 1D10's with every result of 3 or less hitting the target.   

A note on multiple bursts during a round:  I use 4 range bands for my game... Short (full Skill), Medium (Skill x 0.75), Long (Skill x 0.5), and Extreme Range (Skill x 0.25).  It takes MULTIPLE SRs to fire beyond Short Range.  This is to take into account the time needed to aim and also factoring in projectile travel time to the indicated range.  Thus my ranged fire can consume several SRs.  The costs in SRs for each Range Band are... Short (1 SR), Medium (2 SR), Long (3 SR) and Extreme Range (4 SR).  Long Bursts ADD 1 SR to the aforementioned totals.    

Special Types of Automatic Fire:

        Sometimes, it becomes important to ensure that a target be "neutralized" by a burst of fire.  One way to do this is to "saturate" a target with autofire.  

Saturation Fire:  To perform this type of automatic fire, you divide the weapon's ROF by 2 (rounding down).  The remaining total will add +10%/+1 to the Hit Number and be the number of dice rolled for the attack.  For example, the shooter with the AK above chooses Saturation Fire.  He will Roll 3D10 to hit his target and his To Hit will increase to 68% (rounding to 6 in 10).

        Sometimes a shooter needs to hit multiple targets with a single burst.  This is known as "grazing fire."

Grazing Fire:  To perform grazing fire, the shooter will divide the ROF by 2 (rounding down).  This is the TOTAL NUMBER OF TARGETS OR METERS OF AREA that can be engaged with a single Burst.  The AK in the previous examples could engage 3 targets or rake 3 meters of a map (to engage widely spaced targets) with a single burst.  Grazing Fire cuts the To Hit in HALF due to the "sweep" of the weapon during the burst.  The shooter with the AK above would have to roll a 1 on 1D10 to hit three targets charging him with a 6 round burst.

       Grazing Fire and Saturation Fire may be combined.  Grazing Fire is ALWAYS figured first.

Stray Rounds and Dispersion:

      Rounds which miss the target simply don't disappear, they travel on until they hit something.  Half of all the rounds in a burst which miss a target will "attack" anyone else standing in line with the 1-meter hex/square the target occupies.  Rounds will go out to the end of the Range Band (sht, med, etc...) the Target was in OR a distance equal to the range in meters to the Target.  Rounds fired into the "empty" 1-meter hexes/squares between targets fired on with Grazing Fire will ALSO travel to the end of the Range Band OR a distance in meters equal to the range to the target.

      Most automatic weapons also include a bit of "inaccuracy" which is designed to develop a "cone of fire."  This cone of fire is known as Dispersion.  Dispersion grows as the range increases.  This will cause some rounds in a burst to "drop away" from a target (this occurs with shotgun pellets too).  Dispersion depends on the range from the muzzle and the size of the burst fired.  Rounds which are lost MAY NOT be counted for To Hit rolls or in calculations for the Special Burst types.

Dispersion Chart:

              Burst Size                   Rounds Lost By Range Band 

• 2 to 4 Rounds:              1 round at Extreme Range
• 5 to 8 Rounds:              2 rounds at Extreme Range, 1 round at Long Range
• 9 to 12 Rounds:           4 rounds at Extreme Range, 2 rounds at Long Range, 1 round at Medium Range
• 13 or more Rounds:    8 rounds at Extreme Range, 4 rounds at Long Range, 2 rounds at Medium Range, 1 round at Short Range 

As you can see, larger burst (like those from MG42 machineguns) will suffer greater ranges of Dispersion than slower firing weapons. 

Suppression:

I make my players make WILL checks (I added the WILLPOWER characteristic as a measure of "mental strength" to my game) for suppression.  I subtract the Burst size from WILL before they roll WILL X 5.

This is my take on AutoFire in BRP. 

On 6/3/2017 at 2:04 AM, Mankcam said:

For a simple game like what is proposed, I would possibly consider combining as many skills as possible

Eg:

• Spot, Listen  = Perception
• Sneak, Hide = Stealth
• Brawl, Melee, Ranged = Combat
• Sleight, Devise = Manipulation
• Athletics, Dodge = Agility

Then I would possibly allow specialisation bonuses for particular actions within the scope of that broad skill: ie Combat (Swords), Combat (Bows,etc), Agility (Climb), Agility (Dodge), Stealth (Sneak), Stealth (Hide), Manipulation (Lockpick), Manipulation (Pickpocket) etc. 

This way the core skill list remains concise, yet it is flexible to allow some focus in particular areas. It also makes every skill consistent with how the knowledge skills work ie: Language (German), Lore (Archaeology), Survival (Desert), etc

I would probably introduce an Etiquette skill, and get rid of the Streetwise skill. Streetwise could be covered by Survival and Etiquette, depending upon what the needs are. For example, Survival (Urban) should cover some things, and Etiquette (Streetwise) could cover others. Other specialisations of Etiquette could be Etiquette (High Society) or Etiquette (Corporate Workplace), for instance (just spit-balling ideas now...)

As usual, some skills would not be able to be rolled without a specialisation (such as the knowledge skills, etc). 

The trick would be not to allow for too many specialisations, otherwise it defeats the purpose of having a concise skill list.

Just an idea.

 

Games Studio 93 had a novel way of addressing Skill Specializations in Twilight 2013.  In addition to the basic Skill, a player could buy a Qualification to that Skill.  Essentially, a Qualification was a "Skill within a Skill."  A basic example would be the Medical Profession.  All Surgeons are Doctors, BUT, not all Doctors are Surgeons.  Thus players could buy a Surgical Qualification for their Medical Skill.  Other examples would include things like... EOD Qualification for Demolitions, Rebreather Qualification for Diving/Scuba, Multi-engine Heavy Qualification for Pilot (with most character pilots only qualified to fly single engined planes like Cessnas), and Hacking Qualification for Computer Science or Computer Operation.  The rules for a Qualification were pretty basic;

1) The Qualification must be bought just like the more general "Parent Skill."

2) The Qualification could never exceed the "Parent Skill's" rating.

3) Using a Qualification generated experience for BOTH the Qualification AND the "Parent Skill." Using the "Parent Skill" alone generates experience for ONLY the "Parent Skill."

4) A player may ask for the inclusion of a Qualification IF the GM agree's to it and the definition of what it would cover during play.  Under this rule, new Qualifications can be added at will... giving an infinite "Skill List" with only a few "Base Skills" to cover most general activities.  

This system was both "open-ended" and could be very "detailed" if enough Qualifications were added.

This is just a vague idea that I've been kicking around.  What if you combined Listen and Spot into a singular Perception Skill.  I'm really not sure about this because I like the idea of Listen and Spot being separate, but Perception could be used for everything (touch, taste, and smell too).  Going the other direction, I might add Smell because certain characters (Trolls?) could have a highly evolved sense of Smell (Werewolves defeating Invisibility with their's comes immediately to mind).

5 hours ago, Al. said:

Please consider that stolen. More please.

Borrowed?  I give these ideas in the hope that they will be used.

4 hours ago, Trifletraxor said:

I very much like the idea of the damage bonus being modified by the weapon strength requirement as it makes good sense, but I'm keeping the traditional form of damage modifier for D100rules, at least for now, as it's going to be a rules-light system.

 

There is nothing wrong with that.  It's your game, use what YOU choose to use.

That being said, there is no reason you have to follow Chaosium's ratios for damage bonuses.  You could, for instance, make your "average range" (where you get no bonus) larger.  This reduces the damage bonus/penalty to only the strongest and weakest characters.  For example:

• STR  1 to 5:      -1D4 Damage Penalty
• STR  6 to 15:      0 Damage Bonus
• STR 16 to 20:  +1D4 Damage Bonus
• STR 21 to 25:  +1D6 Damage Bonus
• STR 26 to 30:  +1D8 Damage Bonus

It would just keep going like this.  I used actual dice in the chart (instead of simple bonuses) because you have a dislike for "partial dice" (1D2, 1D3).   

4 hours ago, Trifletraxor said:

What's the reasoning behind this tweak?

I'm still of the mind that there isn't as much "variation" in the Human race as many might think.  Also, I do not understand why a percentile based game that uses Humans as the "Standard" by which other races are "indexed" (being either "better" or "worse" in a given characteristic) is still using 3 to 18 with a 9 statistical average and a racial maximum of 21 (which exceeds the 20 that a 100% would derive to) as its base when, statistically, it should be using 20 as its statistical "high mean average" (with a 10 statistical average characteristic).  I believe this was a throwback to older dice games (wargames) that used the 1D6 exclusively.  My 5 to 20 range for characteristics is a little closer to "statistical average" (11) for a percentile based game, shortens the spectrum/range of characteristics from 15 rolled variations and 18 racial maximum variations (based on the 21 racial maximum) down to 15 rolled variations and 15 racial maximum variations (with a mean average of 10 out of 20).  This has very little impact on game balance but helps when new races are added (and to reconcile current races).  

As an example, I will compare the SIZ of a couple of races (I know you are not using SIZ, but it is an example of "scaling" characteristics that we can all easily visualize).  Let's start with Dwarves versus Humans.  I'm going with a Middle Earth style Dwarf here.  The description of such a race says that they are about 2/3rds the size of a normal man.  If this is true, and 3-18 gives a 9 average, the average Dwarf should be SIZ 6.  In RQ2,  Dwarf SIZ is 1D6+6 for an average of 9.  This is the same average as humans yet everyone (even Chaosium) talks about Dwarves like they are smaller than humans (and yes I know that SIZ can refer to "girth" too).  How would Hobbits (who are considered half the size of Humans) be successfully modeled?  How about Pixies?  I decided the "solution" to issues like this was to "shrink" the normal human characteristic range in order to leave more "room" for other races to varying characteristics.  Your game may vary of course.                

I think I'm going to adopt the idea of Subtracting the Weapon's Required STR from the Character's STR and giving a bonus of +1 for every 5 points of Surplus STR the character has.  This provides the lower damage bonuses I desire while not allowing fighters to "double dip" by using a larger weapon in tandem with a large Damage Bonus to push their Weapon's damage to extreme levels.  It is also very easy to calculate.

I have also thought about the HTH damages listed in the basic game (I use Fantasy Hero's STUN system myself) and how to fix them.  My initial thoughts would be to base them on the Character's STR score.  Something like this might work.

Punch Damages:

• STR 1 to 8:    1 Point of Damage
• STR 9 to 16:   1D2 Damage
• STR 17 to 24: 1D3 Damage
• STR 24 to 32: 1D4 Damage
• STR 33 to 40: 1D5 Damage
• STR 41 to 48: 1D6 Damage
• STR 49 to 56: 1D8 Damage
• STR 57+:        1D10 Damage

Kick Damages:

• STR 1 to 6:     1 Point of Damage
• STR 7 to 12:    1D2 Damage
• STR 13 to 18:  1D3 Damage
• STR 19 to 24:  1D4 Damage
• STR 25 to 30:  1D5 Damage
• STR 31 to 36:  1D6 Damage
• STR 37 to 42:  1D8 Damage
• STR 43+:         1D10 Damage

Headbutt Damages:

• STR 1 to 10:    1 Point of Damage
• STR 10 to 20:  1D2 Damage
• STR 21 to 30:  1D3 Damage
• STR 31 to 40:  1D4 Damage
• STR 41 to 50:  1D5 Damage
• STR 51 to 60:  1D6 Damage
• STR 61 to 70:  1D8 Damage
• STR 71 to 80:  1D10 Damage

For every 10 points of SIZ OVER 20 a creature has, add 1 to his STR score for determining his HTH damages.  The above damages include all "STR Bonus damage" as well (no added Damage allowed).

Keep in mind that these damages are designed to put HTH damages into a lower "Damage Threshold" than stabbing someone with a dagger.  Only the largest (and strongest) creatures should do damage like weapons with their bare hands.    I also figure human Characteristic Scores by rolling 3D6+2, making the range of Characteristics from 5 to 20 (the species maximum) in my game. 

5 hours ago, Simlasa said:

I'd always assumed that sort of thing was covered by POW already... that POW is a combination of presence and willpower... seeing as it powers (directly or indirectly) magic and is what you fight off spirit possession and mind domination with.

I made POW a "derived characteristic" so that sacrificing it wouldn't reduce your Skills.  I use WILL in essence for what POW was originally used for so I don't have to recompute the character's Skills when POW loss occurs.  In my games, this is important because just learning a new spell involves the sacrifice of a permanent point of POW (something I do to keep Magic limited in my campaign).  You can combine WILL and POW if you want to make Sanity Loss a little easier on the character.  I use different characteristics to defend against spells and special effects.  For example, with spells involving Suggestion or Hypnotism, I use the Attacker's CHA against the defender's WILL.  Of course, your game may vary. 

I love the layout.  I have seen too many books lately with really "tight" and "confused" layouts in order to cut printing costs.  I'm also a fan of being able to attach index markers to pages WITHOUT covering up any text.  I'm "Old School" that way....  

10 hours ago, Trifletraxor said:

What rules do you use for Reach?

 

Understand that I used miniatures and a hex map when I gamed.  Each hex was 1 meter and a single character or NPC occupies each hex.      

In my game, every weapon has a Reach in meters.  This ranges from 1 to up to 5 meters based on the weapon (see my post above for the Reach of typical weapons).  A character must be able to reach his opponent with a weapon to attack them.  A dagger has a reach of 1 meter while a long spear has a Reach of 4 meters (this Reach may involve some "minor" movement which is included in the Reach due to the "footwork" most attacks involve).  If you cannot reach a target you wish to attack, you must move to do so.  This will cost you Strike Ranks to do.  You may move up to 4 meters per SR but if you move more than 1 meter per SR, a reduction in Attack Skill will occur.  At 2 meters of movement, Skill is reduced to 3/4.  At 3 meters of movement, Skill is reduced by Half.  No attack can be made if you move 4 meters until you spend 2 SRs to "stabilize yourself" (and then spend the SRs to attack).  You may remove the skill penalty if you spend 2 SRs to "stabilize yourself" before attacking.  For more info on my Initiative System just review my post above.   

9 hours ago, Trifletraxor said:

I've never found the damage bonus to be a big part of the "arms race" as it's a relatively static bonus, in my group it's been gear acquisition and magic that have turned groups unplayable in the end. But I have problems curbing it, as a couple of munchkin players really enjoy the powergaming bit. I've tried to slow it down, but haven't eliminated it. What do you do for "reward"? Or do your group consist more of "real" roleplayers?

2

I posted an example of the type of "arms race" I'm referring to in my reply to Mugen above.  In that example, I'm pointing out just one consequence of "min-maxing" a character to do damage in combat (as that relates to the characteristics used for determining a damage bonus... note that those characteristics are also used in the attack bonus too). 

I have always been an avowed "realist" when it came to GMing my worlds.  Equipment is EXPENSIVE and most adventurers start very poor.  In addition, swords and armor can be damaged in combat forcing the purchase of newer equipment.  I always enforce the purchase of replacement equipment such as rope, torches, and fire-making equipment.   I also did NOT change the price of training or magic.  What I DID do though, is bring money down to a more realistic level.  In my game (an RQ2-RQ3 hybrid game), the average town resident made about 100 Guilders/Lunars a YEAR.  My treasure hoards were based on this level of coinage availability instead of the 1000 Lunar level that Chaosium seems to have used originally.  I have significantly increased the cost of most metal armors because real world metal armors were very expensive even in the Classical Age.  This makes metal armor "treasure" in my game.  If the characters cannot wear it, they can sell it.  Metal (even broken weapons) has tremendous value as a resource in the ancient world.  It takes a large amount of effort and several key resources to smelt metal.  This means that even "cheap" metal weapons and armor have significant value as recycled materials.  This also applies to wood, cloth, leather, and other materials.  The problem becomes getting that stuff to the people who will buy it (or in a great many instances TRADE SOMETHING ELSE for it).  

The previous paragraph now leads me to my next "adjustment" to... Treasure.  I made some changes to keep my games from becoming "Monty Haul Campaigns"... yes, I'm dating myself now, how many of you out there remember "Let's Make A Deal" from TV?  If you open your wallet or look at your bank statement RIGHT NOW, how much money do you really have on you?  If you're like most of us, probably not much.  This is because your "Wealth" is not really measured by how much money you have on hand, but rather by how much "stuff" you possess.  I use the same concept with treasure in my game.  If you look at your typical monsters you will find that most of them earn a living "raiding others."  This wouldn't generate much coinage.  It would, however, generate tons of "stuff" (literally).  Many of my "treasures" involved casks of beer, sacks of wine, bolts of cloth, and piles of broken/cheap weapons and armor.  All the things you might find in a cave full of "caravan robbers."  Ransom is also "well and alive" in my game.   You will probably want to bring a pack mule and a hired guard (to watch the mule while you're in the "dungeon") if you game with me.   Oh... and pack mules are kind of expensive and they need to eat.  Once back in town, you need to trade or sell all of that loot.  Sometimes, the "loot's former owner" shows up to claim it (usually someone powerful).  This often results in Persuasion rolls in order to coax a "reward" or "future favor" out of the former owner.  Taxes may need to be paid on the "loot" (I can hear my players saying "damned Lunars" now).  Now you must seek someone to sell (or trade) that loot to.   Most of my "traders" lived by the ideal of "buy low, sell high."   Getting rid of "loot" used to put my players straight in the crosshairs of  Snirvin The Dwarf Trader... "I'd rather lick the fungus from a Troll's toes than pay THAT FOR THIS!"  Next week the characters would witness Snirvin selling something for 5 times what he had paid THEM for it.  He was the most hated NPC I ever had that wasn't killed during the campaign.  Sometimes, you may need to "rub elbows" with the rich (maybe to cash in that "favor" they promised you).  This means that you're going to need at least one pair of nice clothes.  Are you going to carry those around in your backpack?  What if you acquire more "stuff" than you can carry?  This usually results in the party members renting or building a home.  Homes and rentals can get expensive fast.  That's added costs for the party.      

As you can see, in my world, "Powergaming" has to take a back seat to "paying the bills."  What all this ends up doing is forcing the players to make hard choices about "stuff" versus "training"  and limiting characters to a bare "handful" of treasured items such as that "favorite sword" or "my father's old plate cuirass."   Ironically, I have never had a player say that they wouldn't game with me again.  In fact, most of my players seemed to enjoy the struggle to rise from poverty.               

17 hours ago, Mugen said:

Question is : What would be the benefit of doing such relative damage bonuses, compared to a universal one ?

Sure, you'd have less damage values such as 2d8+1d6 or 3d6+1d4, but you'd need to compute a different damage value for each weapon on your sheet.

Computing a damage bonus is no different than computing differential hit probabilities on your sheet and we all do that without complaint.  This would also be done during character creation or "administrative time" before or after a game session and not during play.   Therefore, it really has no negative effect on play time. 

 The real issue is that the Damage Bonus System is currently "broken."   Let's talk about RQ2's basic DB calculation where you average SIZ and STR to get a Damage Bonus.  So let's say that I'm above average in SIZ & STR and I average a 17.  This would not be uncommon in a typical game.  I now do 1D6 extra points of damage with every weapon I use.  If I hit you with an axe I get +1D6.  If I hit you with a plastic "spork," I do at least 1D6 more damage.  If I slap you, I do 1D3 + 1D6 damage.  On the other hand, if you are basically normal and average a 12 for SIZ & STR, you get no bonus.  Do you really think it is "fair" or "balanced" that I can do 9 points of damage with my bare hand while you can only do 7 points of damage with a shortsword or 10 points of damage with a battle axe?  It is examples like this that prompted me to change the Damage Bonus Chart AND look closely at weapon damages.    

There is one other, slightly simpler Damage Bonus option which I had considered and have not abandoned yet.  That would be to SUBTRACT the weapon's Required STR from the Character's STR score.  I would add 1 to the Character's STR score for every 10 points of SIZ over the SIZ required to use the weapon (for games still using SIZ).  The remaining STR would then be divided by 5 (rd) to determine the bonus Damage based on STR.  This could be either a straight bonus (expressed as say +2 Damage) or as a Bonus Die (ie +1D2) at the GM's whim.  I haven't playtested this yet either.

On 12/11/2010 at 5:17 AM, Trifletraxor said:

The "ratman" is a trollkin. In Glorantha, trollkins are a degenerated version of trolls, weaker in most aspects even when compared with humans. The trollkin in the picture is my character.

 

SGL.

4

I love the illustrations but your Trollkin needs to be "fattened up" just a bit in his torso.  Trolls (and Trollkin) tend to be "barrel chested" with slightly shorter limbs relative to the length of their torsos compared to humans.  That will stop people from mistaking your Trollkin for a "Ratman" (although I have NO problem with "Ratmen" after following SnarfQuest in Dragon Magazine for years ).   In fact, the troll getting blasted in the "Seige" picture appears more appropriately proportioned.  

16 hours ago, Trifletraxor said:

That's a very interesting idea. As you point out, being strong sort of gives you a double bonus, first the bigger weapons and then the bigger damage modifier. I like it. Please tell us if you develop it further.

 

My initial thoughts for Surplus STR would be:

• Great Axes, Greatswords, Mauls, Morningstars, and Poleaxes would do +1 Damage per 2 STR.
• Bastard Swords, Battle Axes, Heavy Maces, Warhammers and Picks, Quarter Staves, and Military Flails would do +1 Damage per 3 STR.
• Broadswords, Bo Staves, Hatchets/Hand Axes, Maces, Grain Flails, and Heavy Spears (2"+ shaft with large metal shrouded point) would do +1 Damage per 4 STR.
• Shortswords, Rapiers, Single Sticks, and Light Spears (thin shaft and small spear point) would do +1 Damage per 5 STR.
• Daggers, Primitive Spears (stone point or just fire-hardened points), and Light Javelins would do +1 Damage per 6 STR.

As I have previously stated, I add +1 to Surplus STR for every 10 points of SIZ over a weapon's required SIZ to use.  In my game all Damage bonuses will be converted to Die Rankings... ie a +3 Damage Bonus becomes +1D3.  You do not have to do this if you don't want to, though.   You can also use these weapons to compare the effectiveness of non-human weapons.  A Halfling Shortsword would compare to a dagger while a Halfling sized Greatsword would be like a Longsword in performance (Damage and Reach).  At the other end of the spectrum, a Great Troll's Bastard Sword would probably equal a Human's Greatsword, while a Great Troll sized Greatsword would be unwieldable by Humans due to the SIZ requirement.    

Anyway, these are my initial ideas on the Surplus STR Damage Bonus.  Please note that I haven't playtested this yet.

12 hours ago, Trifletraxor said:

Why is that?

 

I believe that large damage bonuses, like easily acquired magic, create an "arms race" where the GM must continue to introduce ever larger weapons (and monsters) to compete with the ever larger weapons and ever heavier armor that the players upgrade to.  In real life, most combatants wouldn't do this.  A number of real-world historical figures continued to use the same weaponry they started with throughout their careers.   In fact, if you look at the real world weights of swords you can see just how close swords of disparate length are in weight.  Short swords run from around 1kg to 1.25kg in weight.  Arming or war swords run between 1.5kg to 1.75kg (with broadswords being on the higher end).  Very wide bastard swords may touch 2kg but most long swords run the SAME weight as arming swords despite their longer blades and handles. Claymores or Zweihanders normally only run from 2.5kg to 3kg at the most (for the ones actually used for fighting and not ceremonies).  What were the makers trying to achieve with longer (but lighter) blades?  In my opinion, it was "reach."  They were trying to extend the range at which they could engage the enemy.  In fact, if one looks at many different weapon types, you immediately realize that most weapons fall between 1.2kg and 2 kg in total weight.  This is the "sweet spot" that balances "heft" and "maneuverability."   The primary difference is in how the weapon's weight is distributed.  So what does this mean in game terms?   To me, this means that the difference in damage inflicted is not as widely varying as most games depict it. Therefore, I reduce several weapons' damages to reflect this reality.

To increase the "distinction" between weapon types, I use Reach as an attribute as well as varying *Weapon Speed (represented in Strike Ranks) by weapon type.  I also set minimum standards for STR, DEX, and SIZ for EVERY weapon.  Since the weapons' damages have less variation and there are greater differences in Reach and SR, my players often take weapons like Short Swords, and Hand Axes where they might originally have opted for Greatswords or Great Axes.  I'm happy that I have managed to curb the "arms race" in my own campaign because I can now use weapons to introduce "color" to my NPCs.

Here are a few examples of my weapons:

• Dagger =  Reach: 1m, SR: 1, Damage: 1D4, AP: 3, HP: 20
• Shortsword =  Reach: 1m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D6, AP: 6, HP: 20
• Hand Axe =  Reach: 1m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D4+2, AP: 3, HP: 15
• Broadsword (1H) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D8, AP: 8, HP: 20
• Battle Axe (1H) = Reach: 2m, SR: 3, Damage: 1D8+2, AP: 6, HP: 15 
• Bastard Sword (1H) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D10, AP: 10, HP: 20
• Greatsword (2H) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D12, AP 10, HP 20 
• Great Axe (2H) = Reach: 2m, SR: 3, Damage: 1D10+2, AP: 8, HP: 15
• Poleaxe (2H) = Reach: 3m, SR 4, Damage: 2D6, AP: 6, HP: 12 
• Light Javelin, (Primitive) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D4, AP: 2, HP: 8 (used HTH)
• Light Javelin, (HTH) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D6+1, AP: 4, HP: 10
• Heavy Javelin, (HTH) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D8+1, AP: 6, HP: 12
• Light Spear (Primitive), Short = Reach: 3m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D4, AP: 3, HP: 8
• Light Spear, Short = Reach: 3m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D6+1, AP: 4, HP: 8
• Light Spear, Long = Reach: 4m, SR: 3, Damage: 1D6+1, AP: 4, HP: 8
• Heavy Spear, (Primitive) = Reach: 3m, SR: 3, Damage: 1D6, AP: 5, HP: 10
• Heavy Spear, Short = Reach: 3m, SR: 3, Damage: 1D8+2, AP: 6, HP: 12  
• Heavy Spear, Long = Reach: 4m, SR: 4, Damage: 1D8+2, AP: 6, HP: 12
• Mace, Single Stick = Reach: 2m, SR: 1, Damage: 1D4, AP: 4, HP: 10
• Mace, (Ball Head) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D6, AP: 6, HP: 15
• Mace, Heavy (flanged) = Reach: 2m, SR: 2, Damage: 1D8, AP: 8, HP: 15  

*Weapon Speed and Strike Ranks are done differently in my game.  I use a randomized SR that counts down to 0.  I determine SR by giving characters a Base Strike Rank determined by dividing DEX and WILL (I added this... See my post in the thread The POW Economy in BRP's forum for more on this) by 5.  To this Base Strike Rank, you add a 1D6 roll and then count down.  This "inverses" SR for weapons with lighter faster weapons having lower SRs and heavier, slower weapons having higher SR's.  Reach takes care of a weapon's length (and characters must often move to get into "range" with a weapon).  Weapon's Strike Ranks range from 1 to 4 based on how much a weapon weighs and how "unbalanced" it is.     

This is just how I keep weapon "balance" in my game.        

COC is one game that would benefit from a Willpower stat for mental strength.  You could use the WILL stat for resistance checks against encounters resulting in horror or even to withstand torture.  The POW stat could become a "derived value" like Hit Points and would no longer affect Skill bonuses.  Sanity would be based on Will and you could modify it by POW if you wanted.  You could even use WILL (perhaps with POW blended in) to do things like turning Vampires... "You have to have faith for one of these to work...."

One thing I considered trying after playing RQ6 was the idea of Classes of Critical.  Each 1/10th under a roll would be broken into a Class by how far under 1/10th the roll it was.  So a 50% skill level would be capable of generating Class 1 through Class 5 Criticals.  An 05 would be a Class 1 Critical while rolling an 01 would generate a Class 5 Critical.   The Special Effects from various D100 games like Bypass Parry or Impale would be rated from Class 1 to Class 10 based on how powerful the Special Effect is.  When a Critical Effect is rolled, the player can pick ANY Special Effect that equals or is less than the Critical Class that was rolled.  Fumbles would also be "Classed" in a similar manner.  This would significantly reduce the "Effect Hunting" one sees in games like RQ6.             

On 5/17/2017 at 2:46 PM, Trifletraxor said:

Damage dealt in combat by natural, melee and thrown weapons are modified by the damage modifier, an attribute derived from a character's strength characteristic:

Strength (STR) : Damage modifier

• 01-06: -1D4
• 07-08: -1
• 09-11:  0
• 12-13: +1
• 14-15: +1D4
• 16-17: +1D6
• 18-19: +1D8
• ≥ 20:  (STR/10)D6
• ≥ 100: (STR/100)D100

* Round all fractions down

I'm partial to smaller bonuses and penalties myself.  I still have my homemade chart for RQ3 from the 90's.

• 1-2:     -1D4
• 3-4:     -1D3
• 5-6:     -1D2
• 7-8:      -1
• 9-12:      0
• 13-14:  +1
• 15-16:  +1D2
• 17-18:  +1D3
• 19-20:  +1D4

I added 1 point to STR for every 10 points of SIZ over 10 that the character had.

Weapon Based Damage Bonuses:

I have recently been playing around with "Surplus STR bonuses" for weapons.   I use STR, DEX, and SIZ requirements for weapons just like RQ2 & RQ3 did.  This Stat based system prevents the "Halfling with a greatsword" that has already been brought up in this thread.   My one issue with the Damage Bonus was that a fighter would get the same bonus for using a greatsword (15 STR required in my game) as he did for using a shortsword (6 STR required in my game).  I have been kicking around using a "Surplus STR System" for weapon damage bonuses.  Under this system, any STR over the number needed to wield the weapon will net the user a damage bonus when using that weapon.  The number of Surplus STR points needed for each +1 to Damage would vary by weapon type (weight).  A greatsword might net a +1 per 2 points of STR while a dagger might require 6 points of Surplus STR for each +1 bonus.  This is a "work in progress" as I just started considering it.  For those still using SIZ, I add 1 to STR for every 10 full points of SIZ over the SIZ required to wield the weapon.  

On 5/16/2017 at 5:56 AM, Joerg said:

spielmaterial.de offers round plastic bases for cardboard pieces just like you describe - suitable for 25 mm and probably 15 mm, although not for 6mm, and if you want a hex base, they have hex-shaped cardboard counters in various sizes, too. They have an English language version of their website and do international delivery. I suppose other companies across the pond offer similar material.

As far as I am concerned, the hardest part in this process would be to get the picture of my adventurer, but I guess that's what software like Poser is for.

But when we're talking this kind of preparation, why not have the character 3D color-printed in the scale you want?

3D Printing is almost as expensive as buying miniatures here at the moment.  I was thinking of something where you could print the counters right from an "everyday" inkjet or laser printer (either using "pre-generated" images or uploaded custom ones).  I think 3D on demand isn't too far in the future, though.  All that's needed is a reduction in the cost of the printers (which are too costly right now).     

On 5/12/2017 at 11:26 AM, styopa said:

Agreed.

AFAIK the minifig mfg biz is at best a middle-small corporate enterprise (maybe whoever is the shop for GW is large) where companies flourish for a few years and then fade out.

It only makes sense that Chaosium license this out broadly to actually generate a sustainable marketplace of products.  Worst possible choice would be to hand something exclusive out, and then watch it vanish as the "exclusive partner" either folds or is consumed by another.

I generally hope that Chaosium might sometime support free downloadable pdfs or 2d printables...I'm old; the prices these companies want for figures is pretty crazy.

 

Imagine if you could "upload" a picture of your character (front and back) to a program that would "shrink" it to whatever size you chose (6mm, 15mm, or 25mm) and allow you to print that out on precut foldable cardboard sheets. Instant custom figurines.  The company could also sell cheap plastic bases with clip holders for those cardboard figurines.  You'd just buy a package of say a couple of dozen bases and half a dozen blank, precut cardboard sheets.  I'll take my bases as a 25mm Hex Base, please!    

On 5/9/2017 at 9:29 PM, Richard S. said:

I would suggest using the Mineral rune from HW/HQ1. I actually liked that rune set.

I'm not familiar with HW/HQ1 or their Runes.  If they are anything like RQ2's, I'd use them gladly.

On 5/9/2017 at 11:10 PM, styopa said:

Even more than you already recognized....

We also randomize, and count down.

We use different variable initiative dice, depending on the openness of the conflict space; normally a d10, it might shrink down to a d6 for initiative (making the nimbleness of a player and/or weapon weight much heavier), or a d20 in a flat, open field.

 

 

I use WILL (the stat I added) and DEX to determine the character's base SR.  Every 5 full points of characteristic equal one SR.  This total is known as your Base Strike Rank.  I then add a 1D6 roll to this total (known as Total SR).  This Total SR was reduced by surprise, wounds, and also by fear/befuddle effects.  Once you have your (modified) Total SR, declaration occurs from highest to lowest scores.  I would give out poker chips to represent SRs and my players would give them back as they declared their actions.  Each SR was equal to 1 second's worth of action in my game.  It was pretty efficient at determining who was doing what and when it happened in a combat round.

On 5/6/2017 at 1:44 PM, Richard S. said:

The "core" runes are like the Guide. A view from a thousand feet away. Trying to understand a god simply by their core runes is like trying to understand someone by the fact that they're an American. You may get a general idea, but in the end there are parts you will never understand by that model and things which are not true. For instance, looking at Urox through his runes could lead to the conclusion that he is a god of rain and storms, yet if you then attempt to control him with that understanding, you will be trampled beneath the hooves of his desert sandstorms.

 

This is one of the reasons I kept Runes "vague" in my game.  So you could "mold" its power to help your own "World View."  I also stayed with RQ2's Runes after MRQ came out because MRQ's Runes were a bit too specific (the Communication Rune?) to be "molded" in multiple ways.   This did lead to me making some changes to the Runes, though.  I moved both the Spirit and Chaos Runes OUT of the Forms section and into the Condition Runes section (with Infinity, Magic, and Mastery).  This is because Chaos can "bind" with any other Rune (not just the Form Runes) and "contaminate" it with Chaos (often causing mutation in the other Rune).  This trait speaks more of a Condition Rune than a Form Rune (since Chaos can routinely "mutate" the environment or even Magic).  The Spirit Rune is also more of a Condition Rune to me.  The typical spirit lacks an actual form and spirits can be made from Elements (gnomes or sylphs) or even Powers (Death Spirits, Chaos Spirits).  Additionally, a specific Form (like man) can bind a Spirit Rune and become a Form with an "expanded consciousness" (Shamen or Priests) so I viewed Spirit as more of a Condition than a Form.  Therefore, I moved it to the Conditions List as well.

Looking at the Rune Tree put forth in the initial Designer's Notes, I would have to make one addition.  As I have already posted in another thread, I see the Beast Rune at the bottom of the Tree and the Man Rune at the top of the Tree as representing "Intelligent Being from Beast" (Man also translating as "Intelligent Being").  Thus a Man Rune with a Plant Rune at the bottom of the tree would represent "Intelligent Being from Plant" (Elves) and Man with the Dragonewt Rune would represent not only Dragonewts but also Newtlings, Slargers, and Magisaurs.  One race is not represented by the existing Form Runes... The Mostali.  I would add a Dwarf Rune because they do not cleanly just using the Earth Rune.  I think I'm going to take the Earth Rune and put a Triangle inside it (for the Spire of Law/Great Mountain from GodTime) to represent the Form of the Mostali.   

I know this expands the list to 21 Runes but I see Chaos as an "interloper" that "infected" the Runic System and it is, in my opinion, the renegade 21st Rune. 

5 hours ago, styopa said:

Sure!

Our system is based on accommodating the RQ3 canonical movement rates, ie Humans 3, Horses 10, etc.  We've also synthesized movement into initiative/first strike.  (We have 2 strike rank values per character: quickness and reach.  Former is DEX-based, latter is SIZ based.  Weapons also have both, but it's easy as they almost always add to 5 - ie something with reach 4 has a quickness of 1; something with quickness 3 has a reach of 2.  REACH is used the first round two combatants close, otherwise quickness.

Here's the excerpt from our houserules page:

Initiative/Movement/Closing:

(These rules are predicated on the use of a hex map; not all combats will need to be played out on a hexmap.  If we don’t use the hex grid, it’s simply init+quickness goes first, with the principle that meeting-combats first-strike goes to the longer weapon.)

Starting on your init, you may move freely 1m/SR to a maximum of 2x your species Move Rate (subject to fatigue limits).

    (Moving backwards each hex costs 2x; Moving Prone each hex costs 2x, Moving from enemy ZOC each hex costs 3x; CUMULATIVE - always can move at least 1/turn.)

If there’s a question about who should move “first” in a SR, NPCs move first.

You and all active, aware opponents (i.e. got to roll init this round) have ‘threat zones’ in the frontal ½ arc:  i.e. the area that can be hit with the equipped melee weapon – on a hex map this would be the 3 adjacent frontal hexes for an opponent with a medium-or-smaller weapon.  Larger weapons may reach more.

If you move into a ‘threatened’ zone but your arc doesn’t reach, that opponent MAY spend action for this round to interrupt & attack.  If you suffer a serious/major injury, you must immediately stop moving. 

If you move so that your ‘threat zone’ touches an enemy, you may attack.

If your and an opponent’s threat zones meet at roughly the same time, highest REACH gets the ‘opportunity’ attack first.  If weapons are same length, higher DEX goes first.  If DEX is also the same, attacks are resolved simultaneously.

If you move in a (more or less) straight line you gain your hexes moved this round/2 (until contact) as a +damage modifier for melee.

 

Great minds think alike.  I use Range for my melee weapons as well (I have a differing "Initiative system" that has a randomizer and counts SRs down to 0).  In my system, melee weapons range in size from 1 meter (listed as Short), to 2m (listed as Medium), to 3m (listed as Long), to 4m (listed as Extreme).  Some weapons, like pikes, are even longer (5m or 6m+).  If you cannot reach your opponent with your weapon, you must expend SRs to "move into range."   My Initiative was based on WILL (which I added to make POW a "derived characteristic") and DEX, while Reach was independent (just like in yours).  I also used hex maps with each hex equaling 1 meter.  My weapons had SRs ranging from 1 to 4 with smaller and faster weapons having a 1 and larger more unwieldy ones having a 4.  Parries and Dodges used up 1 SR to enact, sometimes setting back the attacker and occasionally preventing an attack (due to a lack of SRs).  I even used the exact same "attack zones" (not allowing a person to shield parry an attacker on their right or attack a person to their left rear flank without expending SRs to pivot or move.