ragr

The skill fail and follow up investigation stall was a problem in some games but not all. I think this really depended almost entirely upon the type of Keeper you had and I have heard some horror stories of sheer bloody mindedness by Keepers/GMs that led to the game stalling completely and them deriving a perverse pleasure from that. Fortunately, my experiences of this are limited to maybe two occasions and for the most part Keepers have facilitated forward movement either through fail forward style options and/or good scenario design with multiple scene entrances. It probably only takes one really bad experience to turn someone off. Gumshoe fixed a problem if you had that problem, for me it's just a good system on its own.

Mechanically the balance is delivered by the SAN cost; the character will be aware that each time they cast these spells they're one step further towards a total collapse of their mind. One is also limited by the box as a conduit - how safe from harm is that box when unattended? Who knows about the box? That should play on the character's mind. Socially, and it's a brilliant touch having only one investigator able to cast these spells, this character could soon draw some unwanted resentment, suspicion and even envy from other pc investigators. Why is is you that can fly to safety on a whim? You left us to face the beast? What are you becoming? This could be the best balancing method of all. On a first glance, those look full of story possibilities.

I think it's just a broad hint that repairing magical things can restore their power. It just puts a concept in place for the investigators/players to recall; probably the latter given long term survival probability.

I would say that it reduces the use of Pushed rolls if there's Luck available, especially when Luck is at a high point; that's certainly been my experience of running MoN with the Pulp Luck rules albeit not in a pulp style. I suspect that when Luck begins to get low then we'll see the emergence of more Pushed rolls, which may mean that when things get desperate it will do so in a more pronounced way.

I've just finished reading it through in preparation to start running in a couple of weeks - I've read previous versions as well - and the guys above have pretty much nailed the differences. The only additional thing I'd throw in is that the writers have cleaned up some of the uglier parts of the campaign in terms of societal attitudes and they've done it in a very light-handed way so as not to eradicate historical context completely if it's something your group is comfortable exploring.

I was certainly guilty of picking up the RQ6 bundle out of curiosity and value; I'm not saying I won't run it or buy anything hardcopy but it wasn't at the top of my limited spending ability. There's been unforeseen consequences, however. A friend I hadn't spoken to in while phoned me up and we chatted about games for a bit before he said he had been looking at getting hold of RQ6; he used to run RQ back in the day. I was able to let him have a look at the core rulebook and he's pretty interested in giving it a go over G+. Interestingly, he said that he won't run it without the hardcopy so there's a fair chance of good money going back into the game and that's exactly how I feel; I very, very rarely run anything without a hard copy of the material.

That's very, very good news. A couple of people have expressed an interest in me running some MI and not having time to get some scenarios together was holding me back; both of those products would be a true blessing. Nice.

Officially off the fence and saddled up. Thunder me to Happysville.

Aahhh! I'm convinced, you evil scamps. No food for a week.

That looks very nice and is a little "different" for me. A good way to preview a product as well. When I get some spare coin you may have it. Will there be a sample adventure in the book? Or, will that follow?

Best of luck with whichever direction you've chosen, Rod. Safe to say that a hell of a lot of your work bolsters my Greyhawk BRP at every session.

They do look good. But....... I've still got the originals. The combat tables page in the DMG is practically gossamer thin.

Rod That is so making an appearance in the next session. My players give you their thanks in advance. Got to add that while I'm not using pure CF as written for my Greyhawk campaign (3 sessions in now) it has proven to be a monumental help in converting over from 3.5/Pathfinder. A massive thanks to you for making my life one hell of a lot easier in the transition. Okay; enough love, on with the writing.

Hi Sarah Having had a look and having my interest piqued, what are the plans for future releases? Are you planning a large combined "campaign book" or is it a case of buying each part as it is released? The Drive Thru listing seems to imply a print version of all the books once they're all "out there". Good luck on the product line by the way.

I've had the same avatar problems myself. Tried 4 different ones all within the parameters and all were "unable to save image". Welcome, by the way.

PDF only as far as I can tell. That might be the one thing that puts me off.

Tried to seek opinions and ended up generating sales. Do let me know your thoughts, guys.

Hi all Has anyone played through this? If so, how do you think it would work as a PBP rather than tabletop? Are there elements that would prove blockers to this?

Sound like common sense to me. Cheers, rust.

Sorry to resurrect an old thread but I've been inspired by this, and Rosen's comments in particular. I'm planning on including Statements of Intent for my game where, in the past I've tended to go with a declare before you act, probably because I've come from a D&D background. I have one question for the experienced BRP'ers. The GM is also bound by SOI for the npcs/bad guys, but when, if ever is it okay for the GM to be evasive or non-comittal about the bad guy's intent?

Thanks, guys. That is pretty much how I've been running it up to now as well. What you've provided me with is a reason as to why.

Hi all I've just stumbled across a line in the BGB that I hadn't previously noticed and I wanted some views; this may well have been covered in an earlier thread so apologies if that's the case. Pg 89 Overcoming POW; "Any time a magic spell affects a living target the caster must overcome the target's POW or power points in a resistance roll. Each spell description will designate which value is used". If a Blast spell is used against a living target does this mean a resistance roll is required? If so, looking at the text the target is also entitled to a Dodge as well. In the description for the spell no mention is made of a resistance roll, either POW or points so does it not apply? That would make a total of three seperate rolls for a Blast which seems a little excessive. The wording of some of the rules is the BGB has given me problems in the past so any clarification is gratefully received.

Like Vile, Bernard Cornwell's Warlord Chronicles are a favourite of mine as well as the non-fiction Age Of Arthur by John Morris; so I'd be very interested in what you come up with. C'mon what's a few years of life against gaming immortality?

Absolutely share. Anything that saves time is a blessing these days.

Get a room;t)