SDLeary

5 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

SIZ 10 = 100lbs

SIZ 13 = 134lbs

SIZ 15 = 162lbs

SIZ 18= 216lbs

SI 42 = roughly 1 ton

 

Tis a bit off. While I meet the weight requirement here, there is no way I'm size 18, considering so many more larger than I. The progression is nice though; perhaps I'll fiddle with that a bit.

As for relation to weight/height, I'd just take what the average is for that weight, and extrapolate up and down a bit, but perhaps not with as much overlap as there currently is in the related tables.

SDLeary

21 minutes ago, g33k said:

You may want to look into Pendragon.
It's a d20 mechanic, but roll-under / skills-based & actually works an awful lot like BRP, when you actually dig into it.

Plus, shiny new Starter Set!   https://www.chaosium.com/pendragon-starter-set/

 

And, don't forget, there is a fan conversion out there that may make some things fit better for a fantasy game. PendragonPass!

SDLeary

22 hours ago, Soccercalle said:

They are good. But maybe they should be converted to BRP?

That would be an option, though if this project went forward, it would be good to have a couple of non-Gloranthan supplements, as what's presented in the core rules is a basic Earth-type early Medieval setting. 

Besides, BRP has Mythic Iceland on the way... one of these years. 

SDLeary

I like that list. I would, however, add Vikings and Land of Ninja (argh the 80's title). They were some of the best cultural supplements of the time.

As for the project itself, we would want to gather errata as well, and make sure it was properly integrated into the text. While we know where errata for the main book is, mostly (in the back of the softcover), I'm not sure if there are lists for the other titles that are available. 

SDLeary

Then, of course, there is the eternal Montery Jack!

SDLeary

Quote

 

@radmonger

it's the same table, but RQ2 has human SIZ as 3d6.. RQ:G uses the rq3 values of siz; 2d6+6. This is exactly what i mean by an edition mismatch; rules get copied verbatim from earlier editions, but not adjusted to take account of other rules changes made.

Also, RQ:G also has stat modifiers for elemental runes. Most Orlanthi will be getting the air rune bonus, which includes STR.

As a result, all but one of the starter set pregenerated characters have a damage bonus. 

This means the pacifist healer or the tattoo artist could literally punch someones head off. 1d3 + 1d4 + 4 can easily meet the 3 x hp threshold for a severing blow. 

I don't see where you are getting the +4 in the damage (a crit?). You get +2 STR for Air being primary, or +1 STR for being secondary. Potentially SIZ could be in there too, for a total of +3 to the calculations for damage bonus. This might take you up from no bonus to +1d4, or from +1d4 to +1d6. So it appears on a normal hit on a target with between 7 and 9 HP, not there. A special, yes if dice roll well. A crit (if that is what your calculation shows) then possible with a decent die roll. On a character with between 10-12 HP, you would be one point short if you rolled perfectly.

I wouldn't rule it severed, but maimed, and people do die (rarely) from being punched in the nose.

Note that this could also have happened under RQ2 or RQ3 (though slightly less likely).

SDLeary

12 hours ago, Erol of Backford said:

Would you be able to form-set lightning as a spear tip and if so what damage would it do per intensity? RQ3 Spell Book p.46

I think you might need to find a Hoolar! Had one form/set wind into a sword for me once.

As for Mostali and Adamant? in my Glorantha... YES!

SDLeary

48 minutes ago, davecake said:

I believe Pamaltela was mentioned in a Hero Wars era document about the Chaos metaplot, but I’ve never read that document. I think about the huge Chaos enclave in the Nathan desert?

Yes... complete with Slarge Broo, Dinosaur Broo, other various nasties that crawl out of the desert.

SDLeary

Much is probably not canon, but there are some interesting details and bits in the Campaign Log from Sandy Petersen's campaign from the early '80s.

SDLeary

P.S. I thought it was in the files section here, but I can't seem to find it now. The link is to the PDF hosted on the author's page.

11 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Yeah, welcome to the club on that one. Back when RQ was designed, the emphasis was on lethal combat and little consideration was given to non-lethal combat. IMO if you want to address that then houserule a special case for nonlethal attacks. Something like getting your db as bonus armor might work. 

I would suggest Less Lethal Damage. A skill crit with fists, feet, or a truncheon (or other less lethal weapons) can still take someone out permanently. 

As for normal LL Damage, you could match the inflicted damage against the Location HP by opposed roll or Resistance Table:

• If the roll overcomes the location, a stun effect
• If the roll criticals the the location then a KO (an actual KO, someone keeling over in pain, joint lock...)
• Or other effects that you might come up with

SDLeary

23 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Probably, It got brought up in the Pendragon forums awhile back too, because it would have a significant effect on Pendragon combat. It was mostly dismissed not because people didn't believe the spear had an advantage, but because they believed that it did, and that just didn't fit the knightly paradigm. Pendragon being a knight-centric RPG. Much the same reason why commoners aren't even counted in the troop strengths of some battles. 

 

In fact, I I just discovered the spreadsheet I did for Pendragon at that (2019) time with Reflexive Modifiers for Pendragon based on the results of the Lindybeige video. Speaking of which here is the full Lindybeige video  with all 65 match results at the end.

 

Results and Pendragon Reflexive Modifiers were: 

Match	Results	Modifier
1 H Weapons vs. Spears	3 vs. 9	-5/+5
Swd & Buckler vs. Spears	2 vs. 4	-3/+3
Longswords vs. Spears	2 vs. 4	-3/+3
Greatswords vs. Spears	0 vs 4	-10/+10
Half-Swords vs. Spears	3 vs. 3	0/0
Swd & Shield vs. Spears	6 vs 7	-1/+1
Swd & Shield vs. Spears & Shld	6 vs 0	+10/-10

I'm re-watching the video, but based on the comments by Lindy and Matt, this was with people who were all experienced with swords (HEMA) but who had little to no experience with spears. Apparently most weren't all that experienced with shields either.

 

 

Yeah, most HEMA folks work with Longswords. Which makes me wonder how it would have gone if they were facing off against people well versed in 2H Spear, and Spear and Shield.

SDLeary

@Barak Shathur

It was further back than I thought. Here it is:

SDLeary

Show on a Saxon graveyard find in Wendover, Buckinghamshire. 141 burials, 138? graves. Lots of spears, seax, and one sword. Rings, broaches, beads, glassware, pottery, and buckets.

SDLeary

For Spear vs Sword, and variations with and without shields, check out YouTube. Either Lindybeige or Scholagladiatoria did a video looking at this. 

In fact, I seem to remember the vids and a discussion down in Alistor’s. It might be buried a couple of years back.

SDLeary

5 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

It should be for everyone, right? PC, NPC, Monsters?

Perhaps? I've aged much as I have considered this. 🙂 Sometimes I go one way, sometimes the other.

For NPCs, if I want "Ultra Realism", then I would apply to all equally. Something a bit more "Cinematic", Heroic HP for PCs, and regular for opponents who are not Captains or the Boss, who would also have Heroic HP. A bit more down the hole into "Comic" territory, Mook type rules where they are removed from play after a single hit, with higher caliber foes with regular HP and Heroic HP.

Monsters are a bit tougher to give a single answer, as the conception of the monster can vary dramatically depending on vision of the world. Is a dragon the large hulking beast of Game Of Thrones; or are they the size of a Komodo Dragon with wings, as is oft depicted fighting St. George? If the former, I might go the other direction and say that short of a critical hit, there isn't much you can do without large siege weaponry. If your concept of a dragon is the True Dragons of Glorantha, then not even those will do more than tickle it at best. So for Monsters, think about it a lot. If they are supposed to be the culmination of the adventure or campaign, I would go with Heroic HP, unless they are so powerful that it could cause a TPK. Then, I might take them down a notch.

SDLeary

4 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Do you mean that, say chest, is 4/10 of (CON+SIZ)/2 or (CON+SIZ) when using heroic HP?
Perhaps I should use heoric HP.. dying from just a short fist fight is way too easy in BRP ^^

Using Heroic HP. Raises Core thresholds (Chest, Abdomen) just enough to mitigate things a bit, while leaving limbs and head vulnerable.

4 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Anyway, with the suggestion outlined.. it seemed to me to go with the latest idea I had but was unsure about, i.e.

Similar. I took your quote to state that you were also still tracking the location points as well. Here, they are just values to be exceeded, with multiples of that value causing progressively more serious results. Only point track involved here is General HP.

SDLeary

1 hour ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

I am glad you ask. I do prefer location HP but I am becoming increasingly convinced that location HP don't work very well with BRP.
- first there is the ridiculously high weapon damage. even though this could be overlook.
- but all sort of area damage got broken. Dragon does 4D6, it's super deadly. Now with location I divide by 7. 24 becomes 3 or 4, almost but a scratch? and should I subtract armor from that? Classic Fantasy - Mythras is better written for area damage + localized HP in my mind, but I was planning to use BGB monster and the Big Book of Monsters (written for BGB as well)
- what about poison?

All of that to say.. got any advice for smoothly using localized HP?

Not for using localized HP, but for modifying the system for better results:

• Use Heroic Hit Points (SIZ+CON)
• Figure location HP as normal

Use resulting values as Major Wound threshold values for said location and: 

• Any wound under the value in a single blow is a regular wound, no major effects, but it still hurts like hell.
• Any wound at or over the value in a single blow is a Major Wound; suggested to follow guidance from BRP:UGE p.133 "Damage Equal to or More Than the Location's Hit Points"
• Any wound double the value or above in a single blow is a Critical Wound; suggested to follow "Damage Equals or Exceeds Double the Locations Hit Points"
• Any. wound triple the value or above in a single blow is a Mortal Wound; limbs are irrevocably maimed or severed. Head, chest, or abdomen shots result in death

Note that you are still reducing Total HP for these wounds, so you can still die from a thousand cuts.

SDLeary

10 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

The gamebson is an arming doublet/aketon. Its the same thing. 

In the broadest sense, yes they are the same thing. However there are differences. 

An Arming Doublet is specifically designed to be a base layer for a type of armor, primarily designed to pad against chafing of the armor itself, but also able to absorb some force that armor might allow through. In the case of later doublets, also have tassels or buckles to attach voiders, or actually have voiders sewn onto, to cover gaps in the armor. In the case of not being able to fully arm, a doublet can give some minimal protection.

A Gambeson (the way most think about them) was designed primarily as an outer garment, often though not always reaching the knees. There is some evidence that it was worn under armor, starting in the 12c, but has also been used on its own from about the 10c. and is believed to have been used on its own long before that. Some sources state that a Gambeson had padding that made the garment two thumbs thick, and fairly rigid. Not something you really want to wear under armor that will restrict things further. At least in England, the Gambeson was replaced by the Buff Coat.

SDLeary

P.S. – An interesting but lengthily discussion over at MyArmoury HERE.

P.P.S. – And the obligatory (questionable?) quote from Wikipedia.

Quote

There are two distinctive designs of gambeson: those designed to be worn beneath another armour, and those designed to be worn as independent armour. The latter tend to be thicker and higher in the collar, and faced with other materials, such as leather, or heavy canvas. This variant is usually referred to as padded jack and made of several (some say around 18,[7] some even 30[8]) layers of cotton, linen or wool. These jacks were known to stop even heavy arrows[8] and their design of multiple layers bears a striking resemblance to modern day body armour, which substituted at first silk, ballistic nylon and later Kevlar as fabric.

Odd, English is my native language, and I’ve always read it as skill 7 with three levels of mastery.

perhaps, if changed it could be 7M^3 (sorry, on a phone right now, but that should be a superscript).

SDLeary

8 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Semi-realism. Padding is very effective against blunt weapons in real life. I rather be wearing a nice gambeson that curibouilli if hit by a mace. But in the RQ3 errata half of armor protection was the padding.

Padding was only 1 or 2 points. So outer flexible armor (I would really restrict this to Maille, scale is much more resilient in this case) plus padding, halved with clubs, maces, etc. 

AFA a gambeson, now that's a much heavier padded garment; many more layers, more padding in between. Much heftier than an arming doublet/aketon.

SDLeary

Dodge was really designed to allow Thieves (dnd style) to exist in RQ3, and give them something of a chance. 

Today, I might still allow Dodge, but it would be more along the lines of things that were house ruled into existence in the early 2Ks, modified a bit more. 

Dodge – Generally only used by those who have no other option. They are unarmed or underarmed, fighting against or simply trying to not be killed by armed opponent(s). Chance to Dodge is equal to DEX x5. If fighting multiple opponents, it is not diminished, but used equally against all. While Dodging, the character may not attack. Being encumbered reduces chance (1/2 enc as penalty?). Results as follows:

• Critical – You have managed to get out of the way completely, avoided all damage, and placed yourself in an extremely superior position. You may either disengage completely all current opponents, or if you choose, make an attack (riposte) at +20% immediately
• Special – You have avoided the blow from your current opponent completely.
• Normal – Avoided the blow, mostly. Damage reduced to weapon add.
• Failure – You've been hit, but managed to turn at just the right moment, only take 1/2 damage
• Fumble – You've taken the full brunt of the blow

Sounds generous, but in reality, being able to dodge through a normal BRP combat is unrealistic. If the player can roll the dice that way, then the character was fated to make it out. 

If I'm allowing this in a hyper-real setting, then I might still be convinced to allow it, but eliminate the listed result for Critical, and shift all remaining results up one success level; or perhaps reduce the DEX multiple to x4 or x3, or some such.

SDLeary

1 hour ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

But hey, as someone once told me, how do you damage the damn dragon otherwise?

Multiple Ballistae! All bolts enhanced with True Bolt!

SDLeary

True Bolt – Allows missile to home in on target, increases chance of successful attack by 50%

1 minute ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

This makes sense.... But where is it stated within the rules as written?! 😮

Its not, so if used its a house rule, though easily imported considering the lineage of its parent game. Under BRP this would probably simply be a DEX roll, perhaps with a lower characteristic multiple depending on circumstance. 

Evade is an import from Mythras. However, in that game, there is NO Dodge. Dodging is considered part of normal footwork in combat in that game. Evade is to cover most other circumstances, and also replaces DEX rolls. As defined in Mythras:

Quote

Evade (DEX x2)

Evade is used to escape from observed, impending danger, and can be used against ranged weapons (by diving for cover, for example), avoiding traps, changing the engagement distance in combat, and generally getting out of the way of a potential physical hazard. It can also be used as a resistance roll for certain types of magic.

Further, its stated (in the chapter on Combat) that if used as a reactive action for someone in a combat area, say diving out of the way of incoming missile fire, that it often leaves the character prone, requiring that they use their next action to get up.

SDLeary

35 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

I understand your argument, and it makes sense, and I am sure the player could learn to appreciate and game the fine nuance of BRP combat.

What really bothers me here is, as I mentioned in my last paragraph, it really makes Evade the single best defensive option in the game. (Perhaps it was the intention too, you have to develop a separate skill after all, and Shields, the other separate skill have their own advantage, in that light perhaps I should just call it "Defence" and be done with it)

Although, to be fair, I might already have a solution to that. As I am preparing a set of custom BRP rule (long story short, after polling my players, I have to customize the game), I was thinking to add a fatigue cost to Evade. And also add some combat perk costing fatigue. But I was thinking to add a perk to remove the fatigue cost of a simple evade, so back to square one.

Evade is the best defensive option, though it also means that you can't really get in there and reduce the number, or take out opponents, as its sole purpose is to keep you OUT of an engagement. Once you are engaged, you are no longer able to Evade, as your focus is now on your opponent, or opponents.

32 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

So... using Evade could have the other disadvantage that you cannot reduce the distance, or maybe worse, always increase the distance between players?
I am not sure if it's what you suggested, but I have wondered about that sometimes...

Evading is staying our of engagement (at least as defined with a concurring Dodge skill). Evade is what you use when you observe the archer targeting you, the dragon inhaling, that dude over there mumbling to himself and waving his hands around. It is what takes you out of the path of the oncoming car, allowing you to dive out of its path. Its Errol Flynn hopping on and off furniture, staying out of the reach of his opponents; once he is in reach, and he ducks, that is a dodge.

Using this, assuming skills are rolled, you can maintain and possibly increase (special, critical?) distance. I might allow an Evade for someone that is attempting to disengage, but this would be in lieu of a regular Dodge, and would not allow an attack. A Special or Critical would be needed in order to create enough distance, a regular success would indicate a simple dodge, but remaining in engagement distance.

SDLeary

HA! We are editing past each other!

Think of an Evasion as not so much a defensive maneuver. It more simply staying out of engagement distance. If the character is NOT ENGAGED, then it would be more likely that I would allow an additional "dodge" to get out of the way of the Dragon's breath.

SDLeary