sdavies2720

We use a combination of rules: Roll 3D6 for everything, the assign them to the stats you want. We handle extra dice by allowing the player to roll 1D6 for each stat that is listed as 4D6 and add it on. I haven't had anyone with two stats that are bumped, but if I did I would let them roll the two dice and then assign each one as they wanted. So basically, they roll a pool of 3D6 and a pool of 1D6, assign all the 3D6 rolls where they want, and the 1D6 rolls to the stats that start higher. Hopefully that's clear. Steve

or "Soundless Touch"

Not being as bright as many of the other posters, even 20 unfamiliar terms to memorize is a lot for me. Perhaps having everything in "English (Chinese)" form would allow each of us to pick and choose what ones to learn. E.g. Monk's Spade (yuèyáchǎn) That makes the book accessible on the first read, and rewards subsequent reading with additional insight and recognition. While the lexicon is a good idea, it is another barrier to a first reading & adoption (I can almost hear my brain reeling, "Whoa, lots of words to memorize and I was never very good at languages...maybe this is too complex for me"). I would definitely put the lexicon at the end of the book rather than near the beginning. I think the Tekumel example is a good one. While that looks cool, there were just too many new things for a GM to assimilate before running it competently. Most of us just put it back on the shelf. Steve

I like "Blindfighting" (it's been used before for this, but that's a plus I think) RIbbon Combat: This is exotic enough that you might get away with using the original name (if it's close to pronounceable). One or two skills with the original name can add a lot of flavor (overdo it and the game is unplayable). I like using Ribbon instead of Sleeve (more poetic). "Ribbonspar" "Ribbon Fight" All of these are descriptive but not very cool sounding I'd go with "Missile Dodge." This takes it to the 'skill' category rather than 'spell' I like "Impossible Balance" a lot. I think you need something evocative and poetic for the powerful blow. "Iron Fist" "Killing Blow" "Fist of Thunder" even the old AD&D "Power Attack" is ok. All of these are one guy's opinion. I'll be curious to see others' comments, and what you come up with.

Sorry for the necropost, but we tried these rules out last night, to general happiness. Players loved the flurry of blows, and the reason to not split attacks even if their skill is above 100%. Which brings me to a question: We use the option to allow split attacks above 100%, and it's not clear how split attacks and ripostes should interact. My ruling was: * Character can only Riposte if their next attack is over 91% (players always do an even split on their attacks, so no one could riposte while splitting attacks last night). * If a player does get a Riposte and is splitting attacks, the next attack AFTER the set of ripostes will be back at normal (the cumulative -30% penalties get cleared away). I haven't hit the Split Attack & Riposte situation yet, but it looks over-powered (attacker is back to a full attack while the opponent is severely penalized in Parrying). The problem is applying the penalty to that new attack raises consistency problems. Thoughts? Steve

Clearly the deities are purchasing the spells, repackaging for their followers, and keeping the power difference to support their own extravagant lifestyles.

Woohoo! I'm looking forward to this!

You know that there is a rule set named, "Argh: Guide to Pirates", by Comstar Games right? It's over at DriveThruRPG at: Argh!: The Guide to Pirates - ComStar Games | DriveThruRPG.com . I would think the two names are close enough to cause confusion. Steve

Does anyone have a thorough Cult Writeup Template? I'm detailing some of the Cults of my world, and find I'm constantly going back as I remember other things to add. I'm stealing formatting and structure happily from CHaos Cults (thank-you Charles Green!) but I'm finding I want a little bit from some of the original CHaosium stuff, some mythology, etc. Pointers toward good examples would be appreciated, and if I make a significant change I'll post what I use to the downloads section. Steve

I'd give the Guard a resistance roll, but as GM I might give the Wizard a bonus because he 'surprised' the victim. The guard wasn't planning on the spear being whisked away, so he might be a little slow in resisting. I'd give something like a +15% bonus, enough to make a big difference in the chance of success, but not so much that it sets a bad precedent for future adventures.

I read this (about not being able to parry some attacks) as a GM situational ruling. I think there's a similar clause in Dodge as well. I generally don't take those into account as part of the evaluation of strategy, since the GM can make those calls as they need to adjust the odds. Points about damage are well taken, and I didn't pick up on the "No Parry and Dodge in the same round" rule -- in fact, I thought that whichever you did added to the accumulated 30% penalty. I need to go back an reread this section! I suspect that I'm going to go back to my old houserule (grabbed from somewhere) that Parry reduces the damage of the attack and Dodge reduces the level of success. But I want to run with the RAW for a little while longer before going that route. Steve

I'm not near my rulebook either, but IIRC, assuming skills are the same, both Dodge and Parry are equally effective (stopping all damage from an attack). With the original (on this thread) Riposte rules, if I parry I may get an additional attack or two. So, no downside to Parrying, and a potential upside. There may be an optional rule about Parry reducing the damage and Dodge reducing the level of success, while does differentiate the two. But in the core rules, Dodge has no advantage over Parry. Steve

I like this also because it doesn't make Riposte and Counterattack automatically better than Dodge. In the original formulation of Riposte, everyone has another reason to parry instead of Dodging.

I don't remember that in a previous version. I wrote a house rule for it, but discarded it as too much book keeping and not much fun. My goal was to discourage skill caddies, but it turned out not to be a real problem with my players. My houserule was that once per year each character lost 5% from all skills, but the player needed to keep track of the maximum reached. If a character gets a skill check during the course of play, they automatically succeeded when it came time to check for skill advancement, until they reached the previous maximum. The idea being that when a character started using the skill again, they could recover their old skill pretty quickly. But, it was far more work than anyone wanted to do, and just not fun. Steve

Perhaps you can sneak in your favorite title for the GM book. Name it "Classic Fantasy: Catacombs and Chaos." That should satisfy abbreviators (CF:C&C) and be distinctive. Somehow, calling it the Classic Fantasy GM Book just doesn't do it for me. Steve

Given the starting comment that in space, everyone would have a SIZ of 0, for this discussion it's probably important to use Mass when we're talking about Mass and Weight when we're talking about Weight. I think the original BRP text was being colloquial in using Weight when in fact they meant Mass. Although I'm usually a stickler for precision, I think for the common reader, Mass and Weight mean the same thing. For those who know the difference, making a mental conversion from one to the other shouldn't be a problem. Steve

You know, if you are not happy with the outcome, you might call the guy who sent the email. It might be that he didn't think he had any choice during the game discussion (he may have felt railroaded), or maybe the email came across more strongly worded than he intended--Often email is a less forgiving, and more harsh than verbal communication would be. It may be that you've both misunderstood. On the other hand, this might be the best outcome after all, in which case let sleeping D&D players lie and go forth with your new group. Steve

I don't know if this is applicable or not: We had an intermittent problem in the last 48 hours that COMCAST at first attributed to the HUGE number of downloads of Michael Jackson videos -- apparently they saw a huge spike in bandwidth usage, which caused page loads to timeout. Ultimately our problem turned out to be a recent patch to the Symantec antivirus we run on our server -- making some changes there eliminated all the sporadic access problems. Steve

Great. Anything to help people find more BRP books (and show how much is available). I'm swamped right now, but will pick this up before the end of the summer. Steve

Anyone know why this isn't linked from the BRP menu selection in the Chaosium site? You have to know it's in the Downloadable Books section and go to the last page! Steve

In RQ3, "Counts" means the character takes a 1% penalty against skills. IIRC, BRP doesn't have that rule. I always thought it was a good way to handle ENC, but it's generally too much bookkeeping for my players. Steve

It's too bad that the precendent was for the human range to be 3-18...it makes it really hard to stat anything that is less than human -- there are only a couple of values one can choose. Now, if we'd started with something like humans having stats of 40+3d6, things would be a little easier. Lots of room to grow, and enough room below to differentiate bacteria, slime,slugs, armadillos, racoons, monkeys, and the like. Steve

Your system will allow players more freedom and make characters increase in capability more quickly -- both of which are good for a free-form, let's have fun, game. You might also think about a way to give the players some game mechanism to avoid dying (e.g. use X experience points to avoid an instant death). To my mind, the cost of increasing stats is too low, so I'll be curious how it works for you. Steve

I predict a jungle world next! Steve

I like more random characters -- as GM I tend to roll a bunch of random stuff for major NPCs, and work out a background that works for them and my world -- the results are ALWAYS more interesting than anything I would have developed without the 'prod.' But I know that not all of my players like that approach. While there are a bunch of random generators on the net, I like TableSmith (downloadable for PC, $10 purchase if you like it, Role-Playing Tools: The World of Mythosa and TableSmith). The tables are plain text and easy to modify. Lots of starting tables available as well. I'm not associated with TableSmith other than as a happy user. Steve