SDLeary

Gotcha!

In the scenario that you propose, I would say No. Reasoning here is that once your character is engaged with the Fighter, that their attention is in preventing being skewered or bashed to death. That weapon that is in front of them is much more an issue than the person in the background mumbling to themselves, waving their hands around.

Now, if that person in the background is NOT a person, but a dragon, then that is of concern! I would hope that your character would understand and Fight Defensively, though I could be persuaded to allow the character to split their attention to pay attention to both causes of concern. I would probably say that they do it though at a total -20% to both attack and parry, with a dodge malus tagged on when that is attempted.

Another option might be to allow a DEX roll to get the character out of the way (Diving to the ground, behind a rock, etc), letting the opponent in front of them take the brunt of the flaming breath.

SDLeary

PS – and just for reference, here is the further description of Fighting Defensively on p.130:

Quote

Fighting Defensively

If your character forgoes all attacks in a round to fight defensively, they can substitute one free Dodge attempt for their attack and can continue to make dodge or parry attempts. Normally, each subsequent Dodge or parry attempt is at a cumulative –30% modifier, but while fighting defensively, your character can substitute a Dodge skill attempt for an attack without incurring the –30% penalty. If they have already made Dodge attempts and parries and are at a negative modifier, the modifier does not increase. Essentially, it is a free Dodge attempt that does not incur a penalty on the next dodge or parry attempt.

The only restriction in this case is that your character cannot Dodge and parry within the same DEX rank. If your character can normally make multiple attacks per round (such as having a skill over 100%), they can make a second free Dodge or parry without incurring the cumulative penalty.

Under no circumstances can fighting defensively be combined with any attack or offensive action, even such as the Desperate Action (page 146).

6 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Page 126 "Parries and Dodge", and I quote and underline:

"Parries and Dodges
Parries and dodges cannot be combined in a round unless your character is in a completely defensive state. In this case, the –30% modifiers for successive defensive actions include both parries and dodges."

Correct, and "Fighting Defensively" allows both in the same round. The question was if you were looking for both Parry and Dodge beyond this particular combat maneuver? 🤔

SDLeary

1 minute ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Why can't we both parry and dodge in the same round?

Is it because it's more "realistic" or to be able to game fail save/evade a damage spell? Any other reasons?

The former reasons are not really needed the cumulative -30% to multiple reactions is good enough in my book...

"Fighting Defensively" p.126. Or are you talking in general beyond this?

SDLeary

That would be a different game though, not QuestWorlds, whose lineage is HeroWars and HeroQuest. It would be eliminating the concept of Masteries, whether denoted with an M or a or something else like E (Expertise), which allow you to modify a roll, not simply modify it in your favor (or you should be, it appears that option may have been removed; I'd still allow it).

SDLeary

Opposed Resolution (Book 2, starting p.10), and the Combat Action Resolution Chart (Book 2, p.34) vary in definition. Opposed resolution states that high roll is the Winner, where as the Chart seems to state that it is success level that is what is important. For example, the Chart states that Success vs. Success results in a Tie, without regards to actual die rolls, as discussed in the mentioned section on opposed resolution.

Armor, Shield, and Parry Protection (Book 2, p.35) states a partial success being needed in order for Shield/Parry protection to count.

I'm guessing here that at some point there was a thought at simplifying things for the Starter set, but the above mentioned potential artifacts make actual combat unclear.

Edit 2

Shields on p.52 reinforces the fact that a shield needs a partial success, further calling into question the Combat Action Resolution Chart (Book 2; p.34)

SDLeary

edit 1: spelling

edit 2: additional information on combat/shields

12 hours ago, StevenGEmsley said:

The UK

That would probably be due to the issues that @MOB has mentioned. IIRC, they are actively working on a fix.

SDLeary

1 minute ago, StevenGEmsley said:

Price of item, $29.99

Cost of shipping $55.00

At least Dick Turpin had the good grace to wear a mask when committing robbery!!

 

(I know the reasons why, but sheesh!)

Shopping to where? My shipping was much less than that!

SDLeary

9 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Could you post a link please?
Went to download and search for both MERP and LOTR and didnt find  it! 😞

But good to know, thanks! 🙂

Here you go! Listed as Middle Earth.

SDLeary

10 hours ago, Barak Shathur said:

It was created by Fergo113 and used to be available in the downloads section here. Apparently it’s been taken down. It is an adaptation to BRP of MERP and Decipher’s LOTR, as I understand it. The magic system and character background stuff are the best parts IMO (except that Elves are ridiculously overpowered, hobbits strangely undexterous, and dwarves too small (as in most BRP games)). The creatures tend to be overpowered in terms of stats but quite good with regard to skills and special abilities. He must have played with really powerful PCs, or else his groups got totalled a lot (as did mine when I didn’t scale down the monsters a bit). 

Much of it is still in the downloads section. Magic is still there for example, though images have been removed. About 20 files in all.

SDLeary

@Lloyd Dupont

7 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

... You don't see anyone in LotR throwing around fire ball spells, ...

Unless there is a spell fetish to hand, such as pine cones. 😉

SDLeary

One thing I think that might help, and someone in our group figured out quickly...

Your Ability chance is the number to the Left; the number you roll equal or under. The M and number you have on the right are the number of "Bumps" you have; the number of adjustments to your level of success you can make. No real need to consider an absolute ability level. 

Only other thing you need to remember is that Masteries off opponents cancel out, still something that doesn't affect the number to the left.

SDLeary

1 hour ago, Barak Shathur said:

So I have this campaign where I’m converting old MERP modules to my RQ3/BRP hack. I’m trying to come up with a good way to adapt the MERP magic system for BRP, with a minimum of headaches for me as GM when converting NPCs. I have this idea and am looking for comments:

Magic using characters learn spell lists as skills. You can cast spells at levels up to half INT for Essence users and half POW for Channeling. Each spell level costs 1 PP (Essence users use INT for PP instead of POW). Question: does this make magic using PCs too powerful from the start? I’m thinking of adding a penalty of 5% for every spell level above 1 to mitigate this (also to make a meaningful difference between magic users of higher and lower MERP levels).

I want to keep as close to MERP as Thoughts?

Take a look HERE, in the downloads section of this site. You might want to expand your search a bit further, it appears that only about half the files were there. At one point they were taken down, IIRC because of imagery.

SDLeary

42 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

No idea about MERP, what is that?

Middle-Earth Role-Playing, and ICE game from the 80's and 90's, based on a simplified version of their RoleMaster system. Somewhat popular with collectors as many of the covers for supplements were painted by Angus McBride. The spiritual successor to this game would be Against the Dark Master by Open Ended Games.

SDLeary

15 hours ago, NickMiddleton said:

Was more thinking of the approach and nature of Spirits in RQG, as that’s the RQ version I’ve read most recently and which is easily available. The RQ3 take was more generic iirc, but is out of print. My vague recollection is that the MW rules are based on the RQ3 rules, but Id have to double check to be sure.

There are spirit types that were pulled from RQ3, but the base Sorcery rules are all from Elric and Bronze Grimoire. AFAICT, there are no rules specifically for exorcism. Exorcism, as a spell, appears in Advanced Sorcery under Necromancy.

Specifically:

• Requires two hours to cast
• POW vs POW roll on the resistance table at the end, the spirits POW being the passive value
• Concentration must be maintained
• If roll fails, a strong spirit may then try to possess the caster

SDLeary

Considering that the only die that you need at the table for each player is 1d20, I'm not really sure how you could forget how things are numbered. I mean, I learned the notation when HeroWars came out, have played the game off and on (ie. VERY sporadically) over the years, and never really had any issues.

I can see some situations where someone new to the game might have issue, especially if they have all their dice on the table. My solution to that though would be to advise them to put away all but the d20.

SDLeary

P.S. – I had more issues with Pendragon, being a d20 game, and having notations OVER 20. Remembering how to apply the overage in that game was really more of an issue than the notation here.

4 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

Maybe, but my poor broken anglophone dragonewt brain, cannot get over the idea that the most significant digits should go on the left and the least significant on the right. Other people are just smarter and more flexible than I am. It is why I am going extinct.

Really, it kind of is already. The most significant digit is the one that you use constantly, the least significant is the one that you only use in situations where needed.

SDLeary

A short analysis of relevance of The Hero's Journey to Myth

SDLeary

3 hours ago, TrippyHippy said:

Is there any hint, as of yet, as to how Chaosium are seeking to support BRUGE? Will there be some move on Superworld or other supplements?  

I have no inside information, but my hope is that this needed to drop before the new (-ish?) Mythic Iceland comes out. 

SDLeary

3 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Yeah, it depends on what sources the OP wants to use and what take he wants to have on it- after all it is his homebrew, so even if something was positively "X" in Star Wars, it doesn't have to be "X" in his campaign. 

Hmm, I wonder if we should mention Force Points?

Just spend PP

SDLeary

10 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

That's not how George envisioned it though. It's not a good-balance-evil thing ala the Eternal Champion series or D&D alignment, but more of an eastern view of being in balance and harmony with the universe or not. So being in balance is the light side. At least that's what George intended. 

 

 

True, just really opens up options. And there are copious sources of this semi-Canon to pull from.

SDLeary

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Oh, I asked because in earlier Star Wars RPGs characters who went to the Dark Side were turned over to the GM, who ran them as NPC Villians from then on. ITHat not only kept the "heroic good guys" vibe but also gave players a strong incentive to stay on the light side.

It's mostly adapted from D6 and D20 Star Wars, but tweaked a bit to fit BRP and the SAN point scale.

Yes. The way I see it anytime some did something dark they would increase their DSP and their Allegiance. Basically the Dark Side wants you to do bad things. It would explain why Sidious had Vader kill off the younglings at the Jedi Temple. Not only would it give Vader a lot of DSPs, making it harder for him to backslide, but it would also give him some allegiance points. 

Speaking of Allegiance, in Star Wars terms there are only two sides, Light and Dark, with Light being balance and harmony, not three as in the Eternal Champion series. 

 

Though, in the semi-Canon, there is the concept of The Balance. There are Force creatures and beings that not only represent, but live to maintain balance. Three could still be the way to go.

SDLeary

If this follows other releases, there will be a big push on release day. Probably with media being released on YouTube with full walk throughs of the books, possibly with new campaigns being run using the new cults and rules.

SDLeary

Announced Other Places ... June 29th.

SDLeary

1 hour ago, NickMiddleton said:

I’d guess it’s supposed to be +10 / -10… and house ruling it as such would do little harm imo. Weirdly, seems to be an artefact from the BGB.

That was my thought; makes much more sense based on the progression. I hadn't noticed that it was a BGB artifact, and dumped it in the Corrections thread when the v2 file came out.

Oh well, a new house rule! 

SDLeary

Would anyone have an idea as to why the progression for additional years of age is the way it is?

Quote

Step Three: Age

The default age for characters is 17+1D6 years old. Your gamemaster may choose to alter this based on the requirements of the game setting. If you wish to begin play with a character younger or older, choose an age that seems appropriate and meets your gamemaster’s approval.

• For every full 10 years added to the rolled starting age, based on the level of the campaign, modify professional skill points by +0 (Normal), +20 (Heroic), +30 (Epic), or +40 (Superhuman) (see Step Seven).
• Any fraction of years below 10 does not qualify for this skill bonus. Based on level of campaign, for every year below the minimum age (18) described above, subtract 0 (Normal), 20 (Heroic), 30 (Epic), or 40 skill points (Superhuman) from your character’s professional skill points.

For additional starting age, it seems a bit odd that characters in Normal campaigns gain nothing for a 10 year interval. 

The progression for those with fewer years than starting also seems a bit odd. Again we see characters in a Normal campaign with no change, in this case what is a substantial malus for other campaign types. I suppose this could be justified by the fact that the other campaign types get larger skill point pools to offset?

None of this is game breaking or unchangeable, just a bit odd.

SDLeary