SDLeary

It really depends on what you are defining as Japan, or Japanese.... Yayoi infantry used shields; and its less clear, but so may Asuka and Nara. Even once we get to what we consider the traditional samurai, the main form of defense still seems to be parrying. SDLeary

Just an FYI for all those that plan to print the PDF; and who, like me, develop a nervous tick when page one is not on the right... You are going to have to pad one page just behind the front cover, and one more just in front of the back cover. SDLeary

Did you try to factor in Critical/Fumble chances? Using the resistance table, this would only apply to the active roller. In an opposed roll you have much more "interesting" possibilities should one participant critical and one fumble. SDLeary

Bwa ha ha ha ha! Good luck!

Fair enough. I've been one of those that in the past has forgotten such bonuses. The thing with Shields just feels wrong though. Perhaps on a Critical parry with a shield only. Seems like my first house rule, and I don't have the QS rules yet! ;-) SDLeary

This seems odd for shields, and for parrying weapons other than swords, shod-shafted, or metal weapons (though it might be difficult to define these in-game, I will admit). Might I suggest a simple bonus on the next action for situations like these; i.e.. the Special or Critical parry over a Normal Attack puts the "defender" in a better "attack" position during their next action. I would suggest this for a "better than attack level success" for dodge as well. SDLeary

Well, they carried multiple weapons. Some were designed to go after peers with the same level of protection, such as pollaxe and hammers, and something more anti-personnel (for lesser armored opponents) such as swords and axes. No, but you could allow a parry for thrown weapons, and a "defensive bonus" for missiles. For example, a medium shield perhaps a 15% "defense", in the sense of the term from RQ2. If the missile would have hit, save for the bonus, then the missile hits the shield. Perhaps. Its also possible that I'm remembering previous discussions from here. SDLeary

Or RQ3 where weapons and shields got damaged as well, but it took time. It wasn't that it would get through the shield too... more along the lines of "it can't get thru the armor, so why worry AND I can carry this big ass weapon that will deal more damage to my opponents men-at-arms." In other words, it became something of a nuisance. I would go more for parry thrown weapons and block missiles, ala RQ3. Wasn't there errata that said you could, as a Shield is a weapon? Yes, and this is a big advantage against multiple opponents. SDLeary

So, you are saying that Peter is actually Vadeli. SDLeary

Don't feel so bad. AFAICT, it wasn't announced here. The web site and G+ only apparently. SDLeary

.net. .com is a budding biotech site apparently. SDLeary

Yeah, I remember. I was hoping that you had it though, because I missed most of that exchange before things vanished! SDLeary

... SDLeary

You didn't archive the whole forum did you? SDLeary

Um... Trif... Looks like a spammer got in again. Unless of course you are learning Korean, and just needed reading material. In the Basic Roleplaying forum. SDLeary

For my group it really wasn't a matter of skills; we all had characters at various points throughout our campaign that could have become Rune Masters or Priests (though I might be the exception to that, I'd have to consult records). The issue was really the campaign itself. It took the characters way out of their home districts, and over time created an extremely diverse group who's only binding factor was the mission of the campaign. Everyones character had so much invested in this at different times that no one wanted to retire their characters to have the become something more. That was always something that was to be done "once we completed the mission", which in grand BRP fashion became "if" for many characters. The other issue, iirc, was POW. We had no trouble using our magic when we damn well needed to! SDLeary

A small suggestion on terminology. Kill the term Minor completely (or kill Marginal and use Minor). It diminishes the thought of Victory, and turns the mind negative. Thus we would have the following: Complete (or Major) Victory [Yes, and...] Victory [Yes] Marginal (Minor) Victory [Yes, but...] Marginal (Minor) Defeat [No, but...] Defeat [No] Complete Defeat [No, and...] This way the perception of Victory and Defeat is much more solid. SDLeary

I think this is really really important as it appears from Ricks comments that there will be heroquesting in the new RQ rules. Chaosium can always publish Glorantha material with multiple stats, or systemless (as the Guide), which will allow play across the two or three "Gloranthan" games. Please seriously consider things outside Glorantha. HQ would be a good core for Superworld; find a replacement for Nameless Streets; utilize the Gateway process. HQ:G should become the Heroquest book on how to play in Glorantha, not the core book. Revise and expand the third edition book. HQ and RQ are different games, but what is Chaosium trying to achieve with them? SDLeary

Seeing as you asked about settings, and essentially had an "other" category (More "exotic" locations), I'm going to take this in another direction... Superworld A Nameless Streets replacement More along these lines For all intents and purposes, you guys have two competing game systems at this point. If you want to grow things more quickly (beyond the Glorantha Guard, or nostalgia purchases) you have to also expand your setting portfolio. Now this is true of either system really, but Heroquest would be a seriously good fit for the first example above. We have had discussions on this board about Worlds of Wonder... perhaps this time around, WoW uses HQ at its core, to show its play diversity. In sort, think Heroquest, not just HQ:G (imo, this is simply a bridge-book for those that want to use the system in Glorantha). As for power levels, I'd love to see more examples of low powered play. Not that I don't like high powered stuff, but I'd like to see characters start from humble beginnings and become high powered. HQ has the ability to scale in this fashion, but tends to focus on those that are already heroes. SDLeary

What about simply giving the opponent a penalty to their next action? They have been placed at a disadvantage (tripped, bad footing, poor positioning, etc) by the action of the attacker. Say –25%? This, combined with the damage of the lucky hit, might yield interesting results. SDLeary

Yes! That fits much better. SDLeary

I would say Spot more than Search. Search is much more looking in drawers, turning over furniture; much more an action than something sensory based. I would say Jump, Run, Wrestle, just because I'm a contrarian. Engineer should really be a different skill. Someone who knows how to set traps, repair a barrel, doesn't know how to build a tower, or design a siege engine. An Engineer is unlikely to know how to properly build a trap (I envision Trap as including the ability to camouflage or conceal the existence of a trap). Its like the difference between First Aid and Surgery in other games. Manipulation implies the use of hands, which Move Quietly probably doesn't do often, other than to gently move branches or impediments out of the way. I would shunt this into Physical, perhaps even combining it with Hide and simply calling the resulting skill Stealth (moving quietly often also includes hiding; and hiding often includes getting to your hiding point without being detected). I have issues with a universal "Medicine" skill to, but this has been around for a while, so I'd keep it. SDLeary

I would keep Cultures and Professions. IMO lifepaths can be too fiddly. You could ways keep options around for a change of profession at some point, or even just a simple point buy. Point allocation, with die rolling as an option. Two different point totals; one for "normals" and one for "heroes". Same with die rolls, 3d6 for "normals" and 2d6+6 for "heroes". This gives a bit more variability for both characters and game type. I would be inclined to keep the modifiers, but I'm willing to take a look at what a new Aptitude system might look like. I would also keep MWs allotments, with Allocated points as an option. (Lots of sidebars in my version!) Swim and Climb do not belong in Athletics, though combining others would work. Being a good runner doesn't mean you know how to swim. Being a big and burly football player doesn't mean you can climb well. In fact, I would be inclined to allow this version to function as a Grapple/Wrestling replacement. Do not go overboard with skill renaming. Repair/Devise is much more focused; if you rename it Engineer, then you might have a hunter trying to build a ballista. Yes, agreed. SDLeary

Last weeks score...

Sorry, Eclipse Phase. SDLeary