SDLeary

Yes.... Basically, you figure hit locations as normal, but rather than us these values as points in the location, they are threshold values. Anything under the threshold in a single blow is a minor wound, over a major wound, 2x the value or above, a critical wound... effects to be as per RQ 3. Now, at this point there were two suggestions... Just track wounds, which is very quick and light, or... Apply points to general hit points, thus still giving a way to track overall health, and a way to apply poisons and other things that track on the general HP list now. SDLeary

Now thats vera vera purdy! SDLeary

Even with Jason's clarification, I still don't read it that way. You would still add in the MA damage. Or, perhaps the MA damage should be rolled, as with the characters Damage Bonus. SDLeary

Not quite a generic BRP generator, but I just noticed on Yog that a gent has created an add in for Byakhee that brings CDA goodness to the program. Linkage below. SDLeary Pacman's WonderPage!

Something you might want to look at is that Edu is NOT necessarily book learning. Its a stat that could easily be renamed Wisdom. Its accumulated knowledge, and thus really doesn't need a formalized structure to reflect how much someone has "learned". Using your Roman example, who would have "learned" more about farming? The child of the Roman noble, or the child of the freeholder or farm slave? SDLeary

Honestly, I'm not sure that you would need it for every creature. Dragons, yes, they are "sentient"; a dog or lion on the other hand are not and probably shouldn't have Edu at all. SDLeary

This would be good for a new game, or for those of us that like to experiment a lot with different rules, but somehow it strikes me as MORE difficult for a noob to grok. I think this feeling comes from the fact that you are adding in layers... or seem to be adding in layers... to rules that really don't need them. SDLeary EDIT: And, as has been pointed out above, it doesn't really work unless you restrict to an absolute scale of 0-99 or 1-100.

Nope... look carefully. And not just at the tables, the way Jason mentioned. The overall book is about 15 pages longer. SDLeary

Not seeing anything here. Running on a G5 with OS X 10.5.3. Preview doesn't like the PDF, but Acrobat seems fine... haven't seen any anomalies on the pages yet. SDLeary

I noticed that. Its probably encoded using a newer Acrobat version... it looks good in Acrobat Reader though. I'll shoot off a message to the Chaosium Crew about it. SDLeary

Check Six and stay safe. SDLeary

Perhaps, but even in the genres you mention they could be fun. Think Mummy (a Cthulhu game) or Flash Gordon (Sci Fi/Sci Fan). You might have cool headed types next to mercenaries and shady slick willy types. But you are right, the game concept of the GM does dictate which mechanics/options are used. SDLeary

When playing out social situations, you might not make the roll, but that doesn't mean that you fail. The GM might impose a social penalty. Perhaps in your rebuff (or what ever the situation is), you angered one of the persons relatives, and they confront you in public. Perhaps in order to effect your course of action, the GM states that you have to remove yourself from the scene, annoying your lord. Its not that your succumbed to their lusty nature (to continue the example), but that by not acting within their nature, they are more conspicuous to those around them, and may garner additional attention that might initiate other situations in the future. Is this more work for the GM? Not necessarily more. Mechanically its not much different than combat (roll, succeed, fail, etc), but the results are different, and they do need to think about that. I would assume though, that if they are playing in a game that has social mechanics, or are using the optional rule, that they already understand this. Having been in a long running Pendragon campaign in the past, I can say that no one playing ever thought (to my recollection) that the mechanics were bad, or the GM think they were hindering. SDLeary

emphasis mine You mean such as when you have to use your sword, or when you have to make a spot roll? The GM sets up ALL situations, either through planning or pulling it out of their ass on the spot. Why should using the personality, allegiances, or any other social traits be different? :cool: But to clarify my previous post. If you are going against your nature, you will probably be required to make a roll, modified by passions/allegiances. If you are the majority who have opposed values that are more middling, you may or may not, GMs call. SDLeary

Of course there would be occasion for rolls. Whenever the GM calls for it! If the GM has a particular situation, then they know the intensity of the "urge" that they are laying out. They call for the rolls, its not an automatic mechanic, like a roll in combat. As for the spread in the pair values (ie, not a wide spread in some cases), that simply shows that its able to map a wide range of personalities, those that might waffle more in certain situations presented. SDLeary

Spot On! :thumb: SDLeary

Pretty straight forward... add the numbers on both sides together, and they equal 100. The higher the number on that side, the more likely you are to follow that course; that course is your nature (Chaste 25/75 Lustful: the character tends to go for it!). If the character makes a decision that goes against that "nature", the GM might call for a roll to see if your character can curb their natural tendencies. If this is combined with Allegiances/Passions, then perhaps you get a bonus to your roll. SDLeary

Greg fubared the explanation for these; he admits it. The way its supposed to work is that the roll is only supposed to be made if you go AGAINST your nature. Thus, in the example above, you would only have to make the Chaste roll if you were, say, the castle womanizer, thus going against your "natural instincts". I don't have the book in front of me, but IIRC, your Passions also play into this as modifiers. Its always been played that way in games that I've played as well. Its not quite the straightjacket that many think it is, and I look forward to subjecting people to it in BRP! >:-> SDLeary

SotC is a fun game, but its much closer to HeroQuest than BRP in flavor. I'm playing in a game now that is an adaption of DnD... introducing the child of a friend into role playing. Its working very well. If you look at Evil Hats wiki, there is even a fan group that is working on a LotR adaption. Other than the advice given on how to run things, I'm not certain how things could be adapted, even for feats, etc. Unless you want to incorporate fudge dice into your game. I still maintain that Ki skills from LoN are the best bet for "feats". SDLeary

Ki abilities from LoN? They are tied to skills, but the mechanic can give that cool Irish Hero like ability to leap, run fast or forever, and still loose if the opponent is better. SDLeary

If it feels better for you and your group to play it this way, then go ahead and do so. Nothing is really preventing this house rule. Watch out if you do any RQ 3 shaman type characters though. This slight change can make them much more powerful. SDLeary

It can change things up dramatically. Especially if you are in a mixed physical/spiritual combat. The way this was always explained to me is that it was a built in spiritual/mental fatigue. The more of your own MP you use, the more fatigued you become, the less you are able to focus enough to overcome your opponent. One of the major reasons MP matrices were so popular, even for low powered casting. SDLeary

And now that we have these... and "Allegiance"<s>, its time to try and shoehorn the Pendragon magic system in! >:-> SDLeary

As someone earlier stated, this is as much an issue of setting as it is anything else. If you are playing in a High Fantasy (generic DnD) setting, where anything is possible, Elves and Dwarves walk down the town streets of the town along with humans, Elder races accepted as equal or superior, etc., then I can see "balance" becoming an issue. In most fantasy worlds though, at least the ones I've played in, this has not been an issue. There are ways the settings can normally take care of this. In Glorantha, there are elves, and you can play them. If you are out adventuring though, you are broken, an anomaly, shunned by your race. You don't get aid from them. In some extreme cases I've seen, GMs have imposed random illnesses of varying degree as the elf moved away from their forests. Dwarves are much the same; in fact they loose their immortality if they break the tenants of their race. Also, both races numbers pale in comparison to humans, though they have still been able to raise huge armies and march them out in the past. In Pendragon, this isn't so much an issue as you are all playing humans, but the issue of what to do with The Brick is still handled. There is the Winter Phase, where the game turns from adventuring to Court and family. You go to feasts, dances, try to win ladies favors, build your family, and gain grants of land from your lord. This all in an effort to assure that your progeny will have enough to become a proper knight (and to gain Glory). Both of these are cultural based solutions in the setting. Family obligations, Lord, etc should all play a part in the interaction of powerful with non-powerful. This should limit the min-maxing of the races to a certain degree. Other options might be natural predators? SDLeary

You are lucky! Some reports I've heard have people on their third copy! :eek: SDLeary