icebrand

I have re-read RetroQuest over ten times, and I still can't find this stuff anywhere in the rules!

That's cause you need to buy the new supplement (or we'll sacrifice your dog!)

Generated by a quick google search.

http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/a-nation-of-givers

Q. We often hear that religious people give more to charity than secularists. Is this true?

A. In the year 2000, “religious” people (the 33 percent of the population who attend their houses of worship at least once per week) were 25 percentage points more likely to give charitably than “secularists” (the 27 percent who attend less than a few times per year, or have no religion). They were also 23 percentage points more likely to volunteer. When considering the average dollar amounts of money donated and time volunteered, the gap between the groups increases even further: religious people gave nearly four times more dollars per year, on average, than secularists ($2,210 versus $642). They also volunteered more than twice as often (12 times per year, versus 5.8 times).

Very little of this gap is due to personal differences between religious and secular people with respect to income, age, family, or anything else. For instance, imagine two people who are identical in income, education, age, race, and marital status. The one difference between them is that, while one goes to church every week, the other never does. Knowing this, we can predict that the churchgoer will be 21 percentage points more likely to make a charitable gift of money during the year than the nonchurchgoer, and will also be 26 points more likely to volunteer.

Ok, this is for the US (so it may not hold true on other countries), and also, it doesn't discriminate between faiths, so all that money could be coming from jews, catholics or neo-pagans.

As a non-christian myself, my objection is more to the tone of contempt with which you seem to treat the subject and Christians in general. Which I find objectionable in and of itself.

I don't really. Christians (as an institution) openly discriminate against people that "offend" their god (i.e: gays) and shamelessly rally to limit individual freedoms (read: whatever they're campaigning against at any given time). They also historically go against knowledge (see "intelligent design" bs)

So, I'm only allowed to use arguments or positions that you consider valid in premise? That isn't usually how this works.

Free Will most certainly is a rather cogent argument. That the vast majority of evils in the world come directly from decisions made by people. And therefore are acts of Free Will.

No, you may use any argument you like, the same as i am. But i find... weird at the very least, than an allmighty god willingly creates something he despises, knowing the result beforehand. Also, he is EXTRA cruel (adam, eve, the apple, original sin... He knew all of this would happen, it is unfair to punish they creations when he made them that way). Also, i can -will- burn in hell for ALL ETERNITY for... 2? 3? 20? years of sinful behaviour... If anyone finds that fair, he or she deserves someone beating some sense into them.

There are also a variety of interpretations of the Devil and Satan, that are much more in-depth as to the existence of hardship and want in the world. Suffice it to say that Christian Theology and Doctrine rather adequately explain these things from a variety of different angles.

Not adequately. They rely on the bible as basis for their doctrine, and the bible contradicts itself on several points. Also, it was not written by god, it was written by man, so i see no point to it. If the bible was written by god (possible, though i don't deem it probable) then god really is twisted.

The question is whether you find the explanations believable, on a personal level, and choose to have Faith in them.

You quite plainly do not. Neither do I. But I do /not/ choose to have contempt for those who do. You seem to quite readily do so, and that I rather strongly dislike.

Lets agree to disagree then. I find the christian faith (on several guises over the years) quite troublesome. After all, they killed and tortured A LOT of people (crusades, colonization of the americas, inquisition, witch-hunting, etc, etc). Jews and muslims are no better though.

To honor godwin's law... "I do not like hitler's ideals, but i chose not to have contempt for those who do". Of course, NO, I DO NOT CONSIDER MODERN CHRISTIANS ON EQUAL FOOTING THAN NAZIS (maybe catholics a few centuries ago were as bad or even worse), but my argument has the same logic as yours.

I find the doctrine *NOT* the people, objectionable (for some stuff i said and way more theres no point debating even on an off-topic topic), and thus, quite worthy of my contempt.

Which is a personal value judgement based on your concious decision to consider someone else's religion hopeless make-believe, rather than respecting the fact they chose differently in that decision making process.

Yours is also a personal value judgement; i do not (and will not, ever, at least while i'm able to without too much repercussions) respect a belief system that does not respect others. You may if you like, though!

PS: I think the level of this discussion is going way above and beyond my english fluency

Not that I have figures on-hand to quote, yet, all statistical information about this subject that I have ever seen shows consistently that Christians donate far more often and far larger proportional to their income than any other area of society. And they do it willingly, out of genuine charity, rather than from being compelled by some tyrannical government seeking to 'redistribute' their wealth.

Downplaying that is downplaying the facts. By the numbers, straight up, Christians do more for the disadvantaged than anyone else.

Im sceptic of this, would you be so kind to provide a source please?

Though I will grant perhaps I misunderstand your intent. If you would like I would freely discuss any of the relative merits or flaws of any of these ideas. In full context.

I made a comment about christians, someone thought it wasnt good, i clarified and apologized on my 2nd post, then people wouldnt let them go, so i started trolling. Not that im bitter cause its 1 am on a friday and ive nothing to do but watch tv or anything.

Still, im not a christian so im going to hell, so i guess i can get some entertainment out of the topic!

God, in scripture, has expressed hatred and/or disapproval or wrath over a great many things. This is not unusual. Generally these are things he finds evil and irredeemable. Such as Sodom and Gomorrah. Even still, those that 'could' be redeemed, were, in that instance. Reference 'Lot'.

A god that created the whole universe AND is allmighty and knows it ALL has room for reproval, finds stuff irredeemable? If he doesnt like evil, why did he create it? Free will is not an argument, since we are incapable of great many things, so theoretically we could be incapable of evil.

Also, he hates SHRIMP... C'mon!!!

And really? Seriously? Being ready and willing to accept the costs of faith and belief is to 'put religion over real people'? Your bias is showing again. The teaching isn't telling the believer to cast aside all family bonds, as a tenet of faith. It is saying that you should be ready for any possible or potential strife within your family that such belief and faith might cause. Rather distinct there. And I don't see how that is 'putting your religion before others'. Unless you mean to say that we should all adhere only to beliefs that our families approve of, at all times?

No, im saying that our families are more important than a makebelief about an intollerant god.

The fact that non-Christians also engage in charitable works does not negate my point that your statement was patently untrue and insulting.

The verses cited are meaningless out of context. They are part of larger passages that are not incitements to crime and violence. Jesus' statement in Luke 14, for example, is not a command for Christians to slay their parents. The point is about priorities. A believer's commitment to Christ must be absolute, even above his devotion to his close relatives. Of course Jesus expects his followers to love their families, since he also expects them to even love their enemies. However, he warned Christians that this commitment could cost them the fellowship of family members who choose not to believe, as it continues to do to this present day.

Re: the references from Revelations, 2 Peter 3:9 states that God is not willing that anyone should perish but wants everyone to come to repentance. As a consequence, he hates false teaching (what those verses are about), which prevents people from coming to him.

So basically, you must put religion over real people, and god HATES. Got it!

The statement is not only insulting on its face, but patently untrue. Good Christians do not routinely engage in murder, rape and slavery all the time. Or even part-time. In fact, devoted Christians in 19th century Britain and the United States led the drive to end the global slave trade. Modern Christians oppose slavery's insidious, secretive current form. Parents of murder victims forgive their child's killer and pray for the murderer's salvation. Christians also oppose practices that they consider murder, such as abortion on demand and assisted suicide. Christians open homes and counseling centers for rape victims, unwed mothers and former prostitutes, offering safe haven until they can get their lives back together. Christian doctors travel the globe at their own expense to provide free medical and dental care to children in remote villages. Christian laymen, at their own expense, build orphanages, hospitals, and homes for the homeless. Despite having to recover from their own natural disasters, American Christians dug deep in their pockets to send aid to victims in Indonesia, Japan, and Hati.

If that is hilarious, so be it. Unfamiliar with their own Scriptures? Sounds like they're living them to me.

Non-Christians also do all that stuff.

Just from the new testament, the old one is much much worse:

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household." (Matthew 10:34-37)

"I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?" (Luke 12:49)

"Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law." (Luke 12:51-53)

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes." (Luke 12:47)

"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27)

"But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate." (Revelation 2:6)

"I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan." (Revelation 2:9)

"So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which the thing I hate." (Revelation 2:15)

"Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee." (Revelation 3:9)

As to a counter argument itself it really isn't that difficult, if you actually understand Christianity and know scripture, to pose a variety of different arguments against RPGs with certain thematic elements as being 'Un-Christian' and therefore activities that 'Good Christians' shouldn't engage in. That however is rather not the point. It doesn't sound as if the original article really did this in an intelligent way to begin with.

That's only because most christians are not very familiar with their own scriptures, that have "good christians" engaging in murder, rape and slavery all the time.

Agreed.

Such as commenting that 'U.S. Christians are Hilarious'.

It seems an unfortunate trend.

Though on the one hand I can understand the desire to poke fun at and/or cut back at someone who obviously spouts untruths... doing so in such a generic and overly inclusive way doesn't lend any dignity or credence to a counter argument.

Please DO offer a counter argument! I promise i wont laugh nor poke at it's dignity.

I'm missing one spell for cold, ideas anyone?

COLD MASTERY

Ice Shard

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/3 lvls]

One of the first spells a novice of the frigid elements learns is the power to summon crystals of pure freezing energy. When hurled at her enemies, these shards subject their targets to freezing pain.

Ice Shard works like firebolt (to hit roll, +1D4 on special, +2D4 on crit). The piercing cold ignores half armor (round up)

Lv3: 1D4

Lv6: 2D4

Lv9: 3D4

Frozen Armor

[self-Only, Temporal, 1MP/lvl]

This defensive spell is a useful tool for protecting the novice from the dangers of combat. This icy shield both protects the Sorceress and impairs the progress of all who would attack her with blade or club.

This spell gives 1 AP per level; it does not stack with armor (use whatever is higher); lasts for one turn

Frostbite

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/lvl]

The freezing damage of this spell can shatter an opponent into icy shards.

If the sorceress beats the target in a POW vs POW roll, each level does 1 pt of damage per round (up to 9 damage after 9 rounds), starting the round the spell is cast. Frostbite does not stack (a new frostbite will reset the duration).

Shiver Armor

[self-Only, Temporal, 1MP/3 lvls]

A significant upgrade from frozen armor, this defensive shield deals an icy blast to any attackers, numbing them with cold, searing pain.

Effect: any target that successfuly hits the sorceress with a melee attack (causing at least 1 pt. of damage after any armor) suffers 1 pt of damage (no defense possible) for every 3 spell levels; lasts for one turn. Stacks with frozen armor!

Undine

As per salamander.

Ray of Frost

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/lvl]

This is the most effective offensive spell that this discipline has to offer. With the invocation of this spell, entire hordes of enemies are left chilled or dead, drowned in a hail of ice. Wretched survivors of this wintry storm can do little but crawl and lament their fallen kin before they, too, succumb to the cold.

As per Firebolt, but damage is 1 per level (up to 9 damage at lv9). Special adds +3 damage and crit adds +6 damage. Armor protects at half value. Range is 30 mts

Blizzard

[self Only, Temporal, 1MP/lvl]

This spell causes a mass of chilling air to suddenly appear in a small room or small open area (10 mt radius) for the duration of the spell.

Those caught in the howling blizzard must succeed in an STR vs twice the spell level test or are knocked down. If successful, they are hindered (-1 MOV per spell level) while the spell is active.

Blizzard lasts for as long as the sorceress maintains concentration.

Frozen Orb

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/lvl]

An intimidating sight that strikes fear into the hearts of her opponents, the Frozen Orb is an awesome spectacle to behold. The Orb coalesces from the air, unleashing freezing bolts at all nearby, and wreaking havoc, seemingly at random, before bursting into a brilliant explosion of frigid destruction.

Range = 30 mts.

The orb shatters at the impact point; each target in a a radius equal to the spell level (including the sorceress or allies if they are close enough). The target is hit by several (1D6) ice shards, and everyone else is hit by 1D4 shards. Each shard does 1 pt. of damage (without defense other than dodge).

A successful dive halves damage (round up) and a critical dodge ignores all damage. Dodging a frozen orb means the character dives for cover, and thus he ends the round in the ground; a character may try to dodge (or parry with a shield) each shard, by dodging at half chance.

I'm pretty sure there is some kind of Christian version of (ironically) D&D, can't seem to reacll it's name, though.

Only if it has the Devil's infernal trident on it:

AWESOME!!! MY PHONE IS DEVIL-FREE!!!

But... But... I cannot plug it to my pc without the devil's cord... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Using USB is SATAN WORSHIPPING!!!!

Does a phone count as USB? Because theyll have to pry my htc from my cold, dead, satanic clutches (well, unless i get an iphone, in that case a couple of bucks will do)

I bet it was meant in an exaggerated way. Do not take it too serious.

+1!!!

Also, we don't have christians in my country!

Well, we do, but they are so funny it doesn't count!

It MIGHT not! You never know ... The tiger MIGHT just want to play with you, or scare you.

They certainly do Pulling Attacks when fighting over food about the right who gets the first share.

But anyway, these are options to make powerful animal attacks less lethal. Wether the GM is using them or not MIGHT be a situational thing.

The topic was comparing animal characteristics and conclusion was the main concern is the Damage Bonus huge animals do in different settings/editions.

The characteristics are not really the problem, but the DB is. So I mentioned some methods to make these animals less lethal in the beginning.

Personally I seldom need the characteristics of animals or foes - their skills, DB and Damage is more often referenced, though. I do not see a hughe difference between a STR of 23 and 25. If that 'thing' is trampling on a human, the character is toast anyway. Depending on situation there won't even be the necessity of a characteristics roll. Even a 'harmless' horse will kill a human easily. No die roll needed when the situation is bad enough (the stars are right).

OK, in a Supers game, all this would look different. But that is a different situation - again!

A tiger clawing a human will either outright maim or kill, unless you are VERY lucky!

So, hit locations, and 2-3D6+1D8. It *MAY* get a 4!

It's more than a little ignorant to ascribe the views of one dufus to millions of people who do not share his beliefs.

"u.s. fanatical christians as depicted by their own media".

There! Now be good or ill summon nyarlathotep!!

Maybe I put the White Shark in the wrong topic. I wanted to say that even a white shark might not use all its Damage Bonus for the first attack.

A tiger sure does!

I just sent an email to them!!! Well, Ned Diggler did!

"I just found your website, and i'm sincerely worried im an occultist. I read all harry potter books, and even liked them; i had several dreams about me flying with harry on his magic broom, and even more lustful endeavors, but i never thought it would be sinful to do so.

In addition, all my friends always do that rollplaying stuff, but i never went, and i felt relieved when i saw your article today. It enraged me, i even thought i should hit them for trying to take me to a satan worship. But then i realized they probably have knifes and stuff, so i refrained.

Also, wasnt king solomon a practicer of witchcraft too? i mean, he saw the future and stuff?

I hope you can guide me back to the light of the lord.

Yours truly,

Ned"

Lets see what they come up with ^^

1- isn't this from the 80's or something?

2- u.s. christians are hilarious!

3- i made retroquest... THIS MEANS IM A WARLOCK!!!

4- just let me cast those spells to curse, kill and maim whoever slightly wronged me and ill be back to fill #4!!! (may take a while!)

5- REALLY!!! I've dark powers!!!! ANCIENT OLD ONES, RAISE, RAISE AND OBEY MY COMMANDS!!!

Update: Just tweeted them:

@ESPMinistries i your D&D article! HILARIOUS! Can i get an email or something when you update so i laugh more? BTW, still cant cast hexes

You can follow me at twitter at http://twitter.com/#!/ale_hart . I have *DINOSAURS* as background!!!

I would not make a rule out of this as it is more a gamemasters decision wether or not the animal uses its full strength for an attack. So yes, why not use a lower Damage Bonus until the animal gets hurt.

Animals would pull blows only as warning attacks. Several species do not even try that (i.e: a crocodile!).

Some other animals are so easily pissed off (badgers!) that don't pull blows either. If i had to go with a fixed scheme it would be:

Flee or Intimidate

if it fails, warning attack

if the warning attack works, the opponent flees. If the animal is still distressed, may try again, but if the opponent keeps pressing, all out attack.

Again, this fails on many animals (like elephants) that go from "im just chillin'" to "LOLNUBWTFTRAMPLED".

That is just it. In BRP (as in most RPGs) animals (and people) are almost always hitting at full STR. Maybe it would be more realistic to have animals use half thier damage bonus until they get hurt or aggravated?

You friggin carebear!!! Animals do full str damage, and HALF AGAIN when hurt, unless they have the "berserk" skill, then its 2x and +50% to hit!!!

FWIW RetroQuest is by far my favourite third party d100 game name (sorry Newt!)

The website is always worth a look, in fact my only whinge is that you overhaul it so frequently that some things are gone before I have a chance to properly nick them. Any chance of an archive? Or even at a minimum put your groovy weapons and armour page up again for a week?

If you are going to slim down the weapons skills (a move which I fully support) could I suggest a bit of flavour to the names. Inspired by aconvention game of PenDragon I played in where the GM CNBA with PD's huge list of combat skills and didn't want to write a new character sheet so Sword covered all individual weapons, Spear all weapons used in formation and so on.

Add another vote to folding Dodge into Parry (so weapon skill) in melee and as a DEXx5/Dexterity/Agility roll for throwing onself out of the way

As soon as im done with work (ive to finish a tournament and then go have dinner with my boss...) ill see what i can do.

BTW, RetroQuest uses the OGL licence because my engrish sux (so i picked up gore which i like a lot), but if i could, it would be Free Art.

The website needs some love, but im trying to lobby the diablo 2 magic into RQ Magic (problem is, its not gritty at all), and also work on the creatures

https://sites.google.com/site/rqadventures/equipment

There you have the old equipment page; some images are missing since they were not open source!

But but but Polar Bears can punch though ice to get to the yummy aquatic mammals beneath (can't remember if the ballpark figure is 7x or 10x a human's strength but its lots).

I agree with all the other points though.

Polar bears PUNCH seals and the seal FLIES THOUGH THE AIR 20+ ft; the bear kills it while its stunned from the hit/fall. Its the closest thing to a marvel vs. capcom air combo in nature!

This is my favorite spell tree, so it may be a tad better than the rest! It is probably the most offensive tree of them all (don't panic the cool RQ spells like shapeshift are coming soon!)

All spells are rolled with Lightning Mastery advanced skill

Charged Bolt

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/lvl]

By charging the ions in the air surrounding her, the Sorceress discharges bursts of electrical energy. These missiles flit about randomly, chasing down her opponents and shocking them to the core.

Effect: Fires multiple, jumping bolts of electricity that seek their targets, up to 10 meters.

Each level casts one bolt, that does 1 damage (ignoring armor, there is no defense). The sorceress may attack whomever she wishes (but only one bolt per target)

Telekinesis

[Ranged, Temporal, 1MP/lvl]

With this skill a Sorceress can reach out with her mind and manipulate distant objects. By manipulating the Ether that permeates the world, she is even able to retrieve items out of her reach, or send her attacks to distant enemies. Useful to a cunning Sorceress, this spell rewards quick thinking to make the most of opportunities when they present themselves.

Effect: moves 3 SIZ (or about 15kg) at MOV 1. Each extra level adds +1 MOV or +3 SIZ. This spell lasts for as long the sorceress concentrates, but cannot be used on living beings (or stuff in direct contact with them; you cannot pull someone's sword from their hand or levitate their boots / cape). The sorceress may lift herself (hovering over the ground, and being able to cross obstacles like a river), but it doesn't grant "true" flight.

As an offensive spell, it may be used to knockback other characters (POW vs POW, if successful, lvl*3 vs. SIZ).

Telekinesis does not grant fine control over levitated items; the sorceress may move it in a straight line, and that's it. Objects hurled with TK usually move too slow to do significant damage; level 3 does 1 point, level 6 does 1D4 and level 9 does 1D6; attack with lightning mastery at half chance (pointy and bladed objects add +1 damage).

Static Field

[self Only, Temporal, 1MP/level]

A devastating spell of limited range, Static Field instantly removes a portion of the health of nearby enemies. Thusly injured, enemies are easy prey to the follow-up attacks of the Sorceress or her party members.

Effect: the sorceress charges the air around her. This spell lasts for one round per spell level. Each round, the sorceress can blast a foe inside the field for 1 pt. of damage in her DEX rank (there's no defense, and this is a free action). This spell affects a range of 10 meters in all directions, centered on the sorceress

Lightning

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/3 lvls]

This spell allows a Sorceress to summon the very power of the heavens and emit a tremendous surge of electrical energy. Creating a channel of lightning directed at her target, she cuts a swath through her opponents with pinpoint accuracy.

Effect: Casts a bolt of lightning. (POW vs. POW, ignores armor)

Lv3 = 1D6

Lv6 = 1D8

Lv9 = 1D10

Nova

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/3 lvls]

With this spell the Sorceress creates a wave of electrical energy radiating from her fingertips, bathing herself with its destructive force. This spell is ideal for extended spellcasting.

Effect: The sorceress' lightning spells cost 1/2 MP (round up). The MP reduction lasts one round per level, starting the next round after casting.

Chain Lightning

[Ranged, Instant, 1MP/3 lvls]

An improved and more complicated version of the Lightning spell, Chain Lightning arcs from foe to foe, branching out until all of its energy is dissipated. The stench of burnt flesh and ozone is often all that remains after this spell is cast.

Effect: Casts a lightning bolt that jumps through multiple targets. The first target gets full damage; after that, the lightning jumps between targets (as per charged bolt), up to a number of times equal to rolled damage minus one. Chain lightning will not jump if the original target resists the spell.

Lv3 = Lightning Bolt, 1D4

Lv6 = Lightning Bolt, 1D6

Lv9 = Lightning Bolt, 1D8

Teleport

[self-Only, Instant, 18 MP]

A Sorceress trained in this arcane skill has the ability to traverse the Ether, instantly rematerializing in another location. Without the aid of waypoints or portals, she may teleport anywhere within her immediate vicinity. Though not suitable for larger distances, a Sorceress can make good use of this spell for evading capture, or to reach otherwise inaccessible areas.

Effect: Instantly transports you between two points (Line of Sight). Each level reduces the MP cost by 1

Sylph

See Salamander.

Energy Shield

[self-Only, 1MP/lvl]

Sheathing herself in pure energy, the Sorceress walks fearlessly into the fray. So long as she can maintain her concentration over this magical buffer, she diverts harmful magical energies and absorbs physical harm into her store of Mana.

Effect: Absorbs magical and some physical damage to Mana instead of Life. Each level adds 1 "hit point". Physical attacks are split (half are taken from the mana shield, half from hit points, if uneven the extra damage goes to MP). Magical attacks go directly to the shield. If the shield is destroyed, remaining damage goes to HP as normal. This energy shield applies AFTER armor (if any). Of course, energy shield is not cummulative; if cast again it will override the first shield.

Got a question about Strike Ranks:

By "situation", do you mean a round? I.e., does each round have a number of SR equal to the highest DEX score of the participants? Why is it not fixed, say at 12SR (as you mention 12 SR in a round earlier in the rules)?

Strike Ranks are equal to DEX; higher dex acts first, as per BRP. If it's too much of a mess to correct leave that out and ill try to fix it.

I thought it was odd that you kept hit locations & the hit locations roll when you cut the skills list down so much.

They only work on major wounds; its actually easier and more RQ-ish to use hit locations than the major wound table!

I'm simply amazed when I stop to think about stone age people hunting an aurochs with bows and spears. Talk about Epic level characters! But that was the equivalent of a normal day at the office.

The problem with fantasy games is that when you have dragons, behemoths, demons, and so forth, the "mundane" creatures start to pale in comparison. It's easy to think "it's just a lion." But historically, people would have thought about killing a lion the way fantasy characters think about killing a dragon. I don't know that there's a good way to balance this out: you probably need to have fantasy monsters at the top of the "pecking order," so to speak, but having normal or even heroic level characters easily dispatching a boar (truly a nasty beast) or lion is just unrealistic.

F**K fantasy creatures!!! Want a dragon? Go to the nile to fight gustav... With a sword...

My thoughts exactly; this rule would also apply to beings with high POW such as Dragons etc.

I'm running a Greyhawk campaign so being hit by iron won't be an issue as a counterbalance. However, I've always run the Elves (or Olve to give them their proper name) as haughty in the extreme and they are universally disliked by pcs who, of course, have to swallow all that antagonism and endure the attitude when forced into co-operating with the pointy eared buggers.

If pc runs an Elf they get all that bad feeling back at them whilst trying to convince everyone that "I'm a nice guy, really".

On a RuneQuest-like set of rules, when POW is probably the most important stat on a character besides combat skills, giving a PC +25% gain roll is something i wouldn't enjoy at all as a gm, and would probably make me assassinate the elf on their-- oh, wait, they probably don't need to sleep either, so maybe fight? or do they come with 100 yrs of previous experience?

IMHO 2D6+6 makes them already more powerful, a 26 species max is completely unfair.

The thing really bothers me is all these Attributes are not worth a dime during play. They are either so high that a player character stands no chance (which one could say is realistic) or the attributes do not influence combat that much.

BRP is more about the skills; and if you are unlucky enough to get hit by a huge beast you are toast anyway (for sure if you use the Hit Locations option).

All in all I found BRP an extremely deadly system where the action should focus on other things than combat. Unfortunately combat plays a big part for many players, so there sometimes is a bit of frustration. But this is a topic for a different thread.

Hopefully you will like RetroQuest Creatures then. Animals come pre-generated (but with stats you may roll on the fly!) and although some have very big stats, they are more mundane. Stats directly influence skills) how good an animal does something depends directly on stats and it has a bonus to certain skills. Of course, certain stuff (6 meter crocs, elephants, etc) is still immune to melee combat!

I LIKE IT!

This will add another path to Classic Fantasy style games!

SDLeary

Coming soon: Cold Mastery, Lightning Mastery, Earth Mastery, Necromancy, Arcane Mastery, and maybe Witchcraft!