Jump to content

Hteph

Regulars
  • Content Count

    89
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

66 Excellent

About Hteph

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Been rpging since anno dazumal
  • Current games
    Some 5e, but really no time currently to-be-changed soon I hope
  • Location
    Sweden
  • Blurb
    Something, something ...

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In the Swedish (old,old,old) version of BRP - Drakar och Demoner, they did this between 1st and 2nd edition, so this was the how I learned to play it from the start. The two reason for keeping the % scale is better granularity for skill increase, and that people coming new to the hobby have it a bit easier to start with with percentage skill it seems. Aside for that I saw little differences in actual play.
  2. I have also been thinking of this, as I have more and more been sliding into the GM should not roll dice camp, but I haven’t found any solution yet that don’t make a mess of the rest of the elegant system .... However, with Ian’s latest iteration of, I can actually can disconnect the generation of successes and use any system for generating successes. The thing I’m not sure about yet is how to deal with skill level and Masteries in an elegant way ... the fixed 5 unit have given me some ideas, but I really need to crunch some numbers to be sure the probabilities are not completely bonkers
  3. Also remember that they are written a while ago. There is a sligth fixation about malehood which i found annoying. Apparently every story comes from the male fear of women (and apperntly only males produces stories worth talking about). But it is a foundation and after that theere are plenty of more modern writing to fill up with.
  4. I was playing with a limit ages ago, a bit inspired by Talislanta I guess. The rationale was that a magic item had to be attuned to a chakra-equvalent with some rules around it. Think I found five or seven a good number as there is a high magic world where I like the players to have a fair amount of trinkets to play with.
  5. I do understand the “need” for the M2, it is just the hockeystick shape thats jars me a bit, I mean it is not difficult to memorize, but it is another one, and a more natural progression would make that easier. And as you say the diminishing return in probability is really glaring. I have been shopping around for a system to use for a superpower-centric campaign with scalability, crunch and freeform at the same time and your work on the SRD has really made me root for QuestWorld.
  6. I didn’t like them at all, but to each their own 😜
  7. While I admit it is his prerogative to ignore the in-house discussion boards, I still wont touch FB with a stick so if this is screaming into the void, so be it.
  8. So far the only thing I found is that I would really really change “Bat Wing” into “Wings of the Bat” as it is a very specific pair of wings and not to be mixed with any bat hsunchen and similar...
  9. Yeah I must have misunderstood something, because it looks fine when I get further in to the book, so pay no attention to me, I sit here in the corner wearing a “dumstrut” (whatever that is called in english)...
  10. Got the same frakked font on my iPad which I hardly can install a font to ... I believe ...
  11. At first I thought it was a typo and it should be 2M instead, but that made even less sense...
  12. Can we talk a bit about degrees? 5, 10, 15, M, M^2… The thing that itch is that 0-3 is a linear progression and then there is a exponential jump. Is that really a good model? For practical reasons I’m in favour of the resent rounding to nearest 5 (although I found the base 3 model more mathematically sound). But I think this is the reason for the “corner” in this function. Perhaps a 5, 10, M, M^2, M^4 is to powerful and 5, 10, 15, M, 5M is lacking in ooomph. Perhaps a modified fibonacci of 5, 10, 15, 5M, M^2 ? It certainly would make my brain itch a little bit less, and it is a natural
  13. I would go for the RQG as it has some improvements over RQ2 (there still are warts, but fewer) and all the old material is compatible (the conversions needed are so small I don’t think they matter in actual play) sometimes it needs additions of the new stuff around Runes and Passions, but only for VIP NPC.
  14. I think that makes a much better story and has the advantage that it highlights the difference between our “scientific” powered world and the “mythic” powered Gloranthan. In general I like answers that is as un-science as possible, because it breaks the all-to-common way to extrapolate like “if a spell do THIS, then LoGICaLLy it be like this” among a certain sub-set of gamers. Glorantha is logical, but not your mundane world logical! When players let loose of their everyday fluid mechanics and newtonian movements and starts to talk about interaction with the water spirits and appease
  15. I’m not an fond of the Trickster as a source random Evil stuff without context, that is what has polluted the Loki myth. To me the Trickster is a role of dissolving fixations, balancing, and unexpected revelation (pain is an excellent teacher). That Trickster stuff may seem evil and senseless for those who are at the receiving end and get none of the benefits is true, but here I think we should take a more ... holistic view and try to discern why and how on a higher level. I would also say that saying Trickster is one step from (Gloranthan) Chaos is fundamentally wrong (and tell that abou
×
×
  • Create New...