Nikoli

Here’s a nice map. I can’t comment on its accuracy. https://forum.profantasy.com/profile/gallery/6719/jmabbott/176 What do you think?

I’d be very interested in a Star Trek, and Traveller, BRP game. And you might have scope to update Superworld’s mechanics! Someone needs to do it!

Or, a related game without the flaws. Inspired by MW’s aims. One might call it ‘Old Kingdoms’… 😉 A nod to the Young Kingdoms…

Hi All, Given the release of the UGE, how possible might it be to create a Magic World 2.0, or similar, with a better layout and art? Using the generic UGE, what is lost, bar the setting? Perhaps someone could create an Elric! inspired version that is lean, direct, and geared for fantasy, minus the setting, but with a bestiary. I’d definitely buy such a system with a more appealing aesthetic. Since many love Elric!’s lean approach, one could do likewise for Magic World. Just a thought… 🙂

I found it excellent when I got it to generate a ‘Technoir’-type transmission, focused on locations like Middenheim. Basically, in Technoir, you get a 6x6 matrix covering the following labels: NPCs; Events; Factions; Locations; Objects; Threats. Then Technoir uses the first 3 randomly to be a ‘mission seed’. Basically, it’s a sandbox, and you develop the plot as you go. What I did was instruct ChatGPT to give me a 6x6 matrix, using these labels, and set in or around a city. It did it perfectly. You can then ask it to further detail the NPCs, or other columns. Here’s an example that it generated for me. I can’t seem to make the text clearer, but hopefully you can see it well enough. Pretty impressive, I think. Sure! Here's a more detailed version of the 6x6 matrix with some content ideas based on the headings: NPCs Events Factions Locations Objects Threats 1 Wymund the Anchorite The Curse of the Black Stone The Order of the Silver Hammer The Temple of Ulric The Black Stone Beastmen 2 Johann Esmer The Middenheim Fencing Tournament The Middenheim City Watch The Road to Altdorf The Serpent Ring Cultists of the Dark Gods 3 Ulrika Magdova The Carnival of Chaos The Cult of Sigmar The Sewers beneath Middenheim The Grimoire of Heinrich Kemmler Skaven 4 Gregor Mattern The Siege of Middenheim The Cult of Ulric The Silver Hammer Guildhall The Crown of Sorcery Cultists of the Undying 5 Heinrich von Jungfreud The Murder at the Garden Party The Cult of the Possessed The Middenheim Catacombs The Staff of Light Chaos Warriors 6 Franziska von Sturm The Comet of Sigmar The Middenheim Merchant's Guild The Middenheim Bazaar The Crystal Skull The Undead Here are some additional details about the NPCs: Wymund the Anchorite: A mysterious monk who lives in a secluded chapel on the outskirts of Middenheim. He is rumored to be able to divine the future and speak with spirits. Johann Esmer: A retired swordsman who runs a fencing school in the city. He is well-respected by the nobility and is often called upon to referee duels. Ulrika Magdova: A beautiful noblewoman who has become a folk hero for leading a successful defense against a band of Chaos Raiders. She is skilled with a sword and has become a symbol of hope for the people of Middenheim. Gregor Mattern: The captain of the Silver Hammer, an order of warrior-priests who serve the god Ulric. He is a fierce warrior and a devout follower of his faith. Heinrich von Jungfreud: A wealthy merchant who throws lavish parties for the nobility. He is rumored to be involved in shady dealings and has many enemies. Franziska von Sturm: A powerful wizard who has taken up residence in Middenheim. She is known for her fiery temper and her ability to control the weather.

I think it will provide a great tool for GMs who want to use it to come up with ideas; these can then be further refined. You can also get it to come up with interesting locations and even to generate random tables. It’s kind of mind-boggling what it can do, to be honest.

I did the same thing. It’s quite good at coming up with plots; you can give it an instruction to come up with a 5 scene plot; or a 3 or 5-act structure. And it can refine them. I found it useful to ask it to further elaborate or detail the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd scene, etc. I also got it to act as a GM; at times you have to remind it to not narrate for your PC, such as in fiction, and instead to ask you for your responses. But usually it’s fine; and sometimes I allow the narration if it is fitting and moves the story forward. I’m not entirely sure if it can kill my character. I didn’t tell it it could, or that it couldn’t. But I noticed that you can easily game the story, unlike with a real GM, as it quickly provides you with power. It basically seems like a very elaborate wish-fulfilment engine, rather than a GM with a relatively objective game world. So if using it as a GM, as with solo rpgs, you would need to avoid knowingly gaming it. (For example, my warrior in wfrp accompanied a wizard, and I managed to get him to teach me the basics of magic; it wasn’t long before I had developed my own unique style of as a ‘wizard-warrior’ and seemed to be inordinately powerful and unbound by the colours of magic.) But as far as adventure development and what not, it’s quite good. Even very good. And it really can surprise you with evocative text. But yes, you need to restrain the impulse to game the language model. And maybe you might need to tell it that it can kill you; but it seemingly forgets much earlier text, so it may forget that too. I did notice it making mistakes at times, forgetting earlier details; sometimes fairly recent details. But for what it is, it still impresses me, and is still fun. It even asked me to roll a d100 at one point, which I did, and it interpreted the result relatively accurately. (I still beat the bandit leader, though, so I’m unsure if it is willing to injure me!)

Thanks for the clarification, Newt. And the suggestion to reduce the power. On a separate note, I was wondering if you think it a good idea to adjust the 50/50/50 skill points distribution (ignoring the 75)? I think I’d like to make warriors versus scholars, say, less equal in combat skills. So I was thinking 60/50/40 into those skill categories or even 70/40/40. (Maybe this.) I know OQ wants more rounded characters, but I think less rounded would suit my aims more, and some of the character concepts more. But I’m not experienced with OQ. (It seems it would work fine to adjust the distribution.) Any thoughts?

Interesting! Looking at the quickstart, I noticed the game uses stats from 1 to 5, and a pool of successes for each 6 rolled. In opposed rolls, opponent 6s cancel out your own. The game has cards available, too. https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/336970/CORIOLIS-Combat-and-Space-Combat-Action-Cards Probably just to speed things up. I think a space combat system built around cards, with differential power impacting the number drawn, would be cool. That was kind of the idea I was going for, albeit not with special cards. Maybe something kind of like Robo Rally (a great board game) for space. But likely more narrativist. Robo Rally uses a board, naturally, and movement and fire orders etc. A bit too random, though, for movement in an RPG. But I can imagine buying specific movement cards with a resource each turn, rooted in the ship’s stats. Perhaps cards of each type: attack, defence, manoeuvre, and repairs. Just a dream, though. (I admire game designers who make such dreams a reality!)

I had thought to use character-type stat analogues, where Dex becomes Manoeuvre, but I couldn’t quite figure it out. Recently, I thought the resistance roll table might help somehow, in comparing ship stats, as a resolution mechanic of some kind. But nothing concrete came to my mind. I had bought Worlds Beyond, and it wasn’t a feasible system to me. Especially with ships. M-Space was much better, though it’s not ideal to trial-and-error thrusters etc with a calculator. I ‘could’ slot that ship system into another setting, but I was hoping I might find another way. Recently I’ve been looking at Warpstar! as a ship combat system to slot in to BRP sci-fi games. It seems sufficiently simple to be quick. I like detail on a character level, but less on a ship level. The card idea was part of that ‘quest’. 🙂

I agree. It was a slot-in system idea, such as for Cthulhu Rising. If one didn’t want to use M-Space to calculate speed etc, in ship design, let alone do the combat in a detailed fashion. But I’m not opposed to drawing cards in BRP per se. The theme of poker is, admittedly, not seamless. (Unless one had cosmically-backed cards!)

Hi, Yeah. I can understand that. It’s certainly not ‘on theme’ for space. The mechanic was skinned in Dust Devils for the Spy genre and also Noir. It’s true that here it’s just a mechanic; perhaps there might be a sci-fi themed deck. Even just the back. Mostly, it’s designed to be an abstract system. As I was doing it, I noted it reminded me of Vampire the Masquerade, which I always loved as a system. So perhaps those stats might still be combined and, instead of cards for a poker hand, they might be a pool of D10s, with 6s being a success. Successes might equal damage. One could make it more turn-based with attack and dodge, etc. But for ease, I think opposed is quicker. So both combatants rolled a pool and counted successes. I’m not completely wedded to a card mechanic. I’d love something quite abstract with a sense of a ship, via ship stats, and which is more narrativist. So a pool of D10s might work too.

Hi, So, following on from the above, the following are some tentative rules for ship combat, built around cards, and heavily based on the western rpg game Dust Devils, which uses a similar mechanic. (I discovered it after researching card-based mechanics. I quickly applied it, so this is just a first and rough draft.) Ships have 4 stats based around the suits from a deck of playing cards: Spades (Defence Systems: Armour; countermeasures; the symbolism here reflects avoiding death and the grave!) Diamonds (Intelligence Systems: computers; scanners; manoeuvrability; the diamond mind of Buddhism, perhaps…) Clubs (Attack Systems: Weaponry and targetting; ever get hit by a club?) Hearts (Power/Energy Systems and Construction: Engines and Hull. Not for manoeuvres, which is Diamonds, but could determine warp speed/jump drive; self-explanatory symbol) Systems are rated from 1 to 5 relative to the standard tech level: 1: poor/minor; 2: fair/moderate; 3: good/intermediate; 4: very good/advanced; 5: excellent/flag ship level. Vastly superior alien vessels might exceed these values by 1 to 3 points (e.g., Borg). Only capital ships can naturally rate as 4+ in any system. (Not including modifiers or crew rolls.) Fighters can be fast at 3 in Diamonds, but they lack other tech. Whereas a larger vessel might be slow, in some ways, but it has vast computing and countermeasures, etc. So it might be a 4 or even a 5. Each category of suit represents a possible category of ship system that players can contribute to, via PC skill rolls, with a maximum of one roll per category. For example, a piloting roll might contribute to defences or manoeuvres, a gunnery roll to attack, a repair to energy, etc. The GM and player should decide narratively what each player will do during the round, relative broadly to helping the ship systems, and what category best fits their investment and what skill to roll. This will still require successful skill rolls. The categories thus reflect crew stations or similar. E.g., a player might say they want to reinforce the Hull, roll a relevant skill, and then increase Hearts by 1. (Or, if damage is taken, they may effect repairs of 1.) If initiative is needed, draw a number of playing cards equal to both ships Diamonds ratings. Highest card goes first. In a tie, use the following from highest to lowest: Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, and Clubs. (If you wish something more memorable, you can use CHaSeD as a mnemonic to compare suits: Clubs goes first, Hearts second, Spades third, Diamonds last.) In a tie, it is simultaneous. However, combat is opposed, so initiative is likely not needed. Ship combatants choose two stats and narrate their relevance. E.g., if attacking and strafing, combine attack systems (Clubs) and intelligence systems (Diamonds). Alternatively, using Hearts might reflect power being rerouted to shields. Basically, apply the ship stats narratively. The result is the number of cards drawn PLUS any relevant increases from PC crew skill rolls determined previously. Stats that are not used in the attack, to which PCs increased for that round, will still be relevant when determining Damage, so be sure to track the ship’s CURRENT stat levels after all modifiers. (PC increases are per round, for one round, and so require consistent rolls. Boosts return to normal after the round. Boosts will impact Damage taken. For example, if Defenses were increased to 4, and a ship takes 2 damage to Defenses, then the new level is 2. Even for the next round when the increase is no longer operative. This reflects the momentary boost via the skill roll that provides a kind of buffer to that ship system against damage.) Players and the GM can easily design ships in this system, using the ship stats and ratings to reflect their ship concept and power level. Example Combatant Ships: The Spectre (a slow but aggressive, intermediate-sized vessel) Spades 3 (good shields) Diamonds 2 (not agile) Clubs 3 (respectable weaponry) Hearts 3 (tough; reinforced hull) The Millennial Sparrow (A fast but temperamental freighter, modified for weaponry and respectable defences. Has seen better days, though.) Spades 3 (upgraded shields) Diamonds 3 (agile) Clubs 3 (upgraded, but illegal, weaponry) Hearts 2 (old and temperamental) At the start of combat, Combatant PCs/NPCs decide on the categories to influence that round when stating intentions. We shall assume the PCs roll and increase Spades to 4 (reinforce shields) and increase manoeuvres (piloting for flashy flying) by preparing to fly an attack formation that strafes near and pass the target vessel (in total, Spades to 4 and Diamonds to 4). The current totals are noted for the round. Opposing sides then pick two stats, apply them narratively on a ship scale with their intention, and then draw a poker hand of cards, one card per number. E.g., The Millennial Sparrow uses Defences 4 and Clubs 4, thus drawing 8 cards. The Spectre does likewise (defences and clubs), staying put to lock-on, for a total of 6. (We shall assume NPCs will not roll here, for ease or heroic play. You might choose to roll for their crew skills.) Both sides now attempt to create the best poker hand (from 8 versus 6 cards, respectively). Based on the resulting best poker hand, damage is determined. Poker Hands and Damage Values The hands below are ranked from highest at the top to lowest at the bottom. When comparing “tied” hands of the same rank (not damage value), the highest card among the hands wins. If the high card ties, compare suits. Suits rank from highest to lowest as follows: Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, and Clubs. (Same as initiative; you might change this to CHaSeD.) The highest rank, not damage, wins that round. ROYAL FLUSH—5 highest cards in sequence, all same suit (5 damage) STRAIGHT FLUSH—5 cards in sequence, same suit (5 damage) FOUR OF A KIND—4 cards with identical rank (4 damage) FULL HOUSE—3 cards with identical rank and 2 cards with identical rank (4 damage) FLUSH—5 cards all same suit (3 damage) STRAIGHT—Any 5 cards in sequence (3 damage) THREE OF A KIND—3 cards with identical rank (2 damage) TWO PAIR—2 cards with identical rank (2 damage) PAIR—2 cards with identical rank (1 damage) HIGH CARD—Highest available card (1 damage) WILD CARDS—Jokers are Wild Cards. They count as any card necessary to complete any hand. The holder can also determine their suit in this system. The winning hand deals the indicated damage which is then assigned by the LOSER among the ships systems, as determined by the winning hand’s SUITS. If the loser’s hand was within 2 steps of the winner (e.g., two pair versus a high card; full house versus a straight), the loser deals a maximum of 1 damage in return fire. If the loser is not within this loss range they deal no return damage. The suits of the winning hand, using only the relevant valued cards (so all 3 of a three of a kind; all 5 of a full house; but only 2 of a pair), are used to indicate the ship categories which are possibly damaged. The loser then assigns the damage total to one or more of those categories as determined by the suits involved in the winning hand. For example, if The Millennial Sparrow got a straight, while The Spectre got a pair (outside of two ranks in difference), then the Sparrow does 3 damage (no return damage in this case). If the suits of all 5 cards in the straight (all matter for this particular hand) consisted of a Spade, Spade, Diamond, Club, Heart, then the Spectre can assign 3 damage to any one or more among these systems (Defences, Attacks, or Energy; repeat suits are ignored). The GM wishes to avoid Hearts taking too much damage, but needs weapons, and so deducts 1 from the ships Clubs, Hearts, and Spades. Damage is narrated based on the systems damaged in the attack. The battle continues next round. Note: A ship with 0 Hearts is destroyed if it goes to -1. A ship with 0 Spades has no defences. A ship with 0 Diamonds is dead in space, has no main sensors, etc, but can fire if it has Clubs. A ship with 0 Clubs cannot fire at all, and will only draw any cards to outmanoeuvre or defend against poker hands, but will NOT do any damage as a winner or loser. Damage cannot be allocated to systems that have 0 rating, with the exception of Hearts to -1. Damage is narrated as weapons being destroyed, thrusters blasted, hulls breached, etc., as appropriate to the categories. Advanced Rules Maximum Damage by Attack System (implies scale, too) The Clubs rating of the vessel (remember, only capital ships can go to 4+ in any stat naturally), also determines the maximum damage value from the poker hand. So a ship with Clubs of 3, which gets a Royal Flush, and with no other modifiers operating, will still only deal 3 damage maximum. Luck in poker will not mean that a starfighter can just blast a capital ship for 5 damage. The Clubs rating also determines the number of ships that can be simultaneously engaged. So a ship with 5 Clubs can deal damage to as many as 5 ships (1 main plus 4 others) on the basis of one poker hand, but each additional ship reduces the damage by 1. So perhaps the first ship is damaged for 5, the second for 4, the third for 3, etc., to a minimum of 1. This reflects its superior firepower and capability to engage multiple vessels if needed. Traits Each ship has two traits. These are narrative descriptions, similar to ‘tough as nails’. You might apply a simile or adjective as fitting. So The Millennial Sparrow above might be ‘Tough’ and ‘Fast’. If the player argues that these traits relate to the situation, they can draw an extra card per relevant trait. This adds character to a ship. Most ships also have a Disadvantage (not the Enterprise!): So above The Sparrow might have ‘unreliable power systems’. If the Black Joker turns up in the the opponent’s hand, the Disadvantage takes effect and reduces the player’s poker hand by 1D3 ranks on the poker table. This is in addition to being a Wild Card. (The suit can also be chosen.) Note, these are ranks, not Damage values. The minimum hand still applies. Perhaps the ships power suddenly drops and shields deplete as it sits momentarily dead in space… Both Jokers are included in a deck and count as Wild. A Red Joker in the player’s hand reflects some brilliancy among the crew, or some narrative advantage that shifts the battle momentarily but significantly. The opponent’s hand is reduced by 1D3 ranks. (Red Jokers do not have such an effect for the GM; only the Black Joker does, and only if the ship has a disadvantage.) The Red Joker might also reflect the turning up of reinforcements who lend friendly fire. However, a crew may use a Red Joker to also disengage due to [technobabble] and going to warp, etc. The Black Joker can also do likewise for the GM ship. GM’s may rule that Combats are not escaped unless this occurs. Alternatively, they may rule that this joker effect occurs without a skill roll. So it’s a lucky escape. But they may be pursued. Scale: if one ship vastly outmatches another, such as a Destroyer versus The Millennial Sparrow, or the Enterprise versus a Runabout, the bigger ship can make a hand from 3 stats, not just 2. This will likely result in a much better poker hand, as the larger ship might naturally draw as many as 15 cards. This is of course in addition to capital ships being able to have ratings of 4+ in a ship stat. (A capital ship will always have at least one 4 in ship stats, due to it being a capital ship. And often more.) At the GM’s choice, a ship stat scale of 1 to 6 might better reflect some variability between larger ships (so 4 to 6 per stat). (Using this ship combat system, ships may come to need their own deck of cards. So one deck of cards per ship, due to the amount of cards being used. Reshuffle after each hand.) Any thoughts would be appreciated. 🙂 It’s mostly a bit of fun. Here’s the Enterprise: Spades 5 Diamonds 5 Clubs 5 Hearts 5 Traits: Pride of the Fleet; Resourceful Crew (note: key crew skills are often 90% plus, for rolls to boost stats). Disadvantages: None. (Scale: Against other capital ships, the Enterprise draws with two stats. Against smaller ships, it draws with 3.)

Hi, I recently bought the Openquest Companion. Regarding the one magic system, I’m a bit confused about the spell Absorption in those rules. Does it really absorb ANY spell, no matter how powerful? As it does away with magnitude comparisons. Is there no resistance roll? It seems to mean immunity from magic for 10 minutes. Does it also only absorb if the casting roll succeeds? Can the person who absorbs the spell cast it back, or just release it? Any guidance would be appreciated! 🙂 I’ve never used the classic RQ magic system, so maybe I’m missing something. I understand the previous version with magnitude, though.

Hi, Warlock! from Fire Ruby Designs has a D20 system, specifically designed to play The Enemy Within. It might be what you are looking for. But converting a D100 to a D20 won’t really change the basic probabilities; it will just reduce granularity. So the whiff factor will remain, whether 64% or 12 out of 20. (64% is quite high in WFRP. As is 50+.) I personally really like D100, and think Openquest or Magic World can do WFRP very well. If I ever play in the Old World again, as I hope to, I would use either MW or OQ, or a mix of both (because OQ can do cults). My one issue with OQ is it doesn’t really distinguish a warrior from a scholar in terms of how many points are distributed to combat skills. So I might change the 50/50/50 distribution to 70/40/40 or 70/50/30 (with 75 to practical remaining). That way there is less equality of skills in certain categories. A warrior would then put 70 in combat, 50 in reactions (or resistances?), 30 in knowledge. I’d use personal magic as heroic feats and/or allow them to spent as 6 growth points. As heroic feats, I imagine they might need instant activation, and not a turn as per regular magic. But check out Warlock! It’s basically what you are seemingly looking for. D20 from a D100 system. The compendiums add a lot of other options. There’s also another book of careers. It specifically models the WFRP career system.

I’d keep the jokers in, as wild, and also as an escape. ‘You do [technobabble] and go to warp.’

Hi Guys, So this is an odd post. I had a mini brain-wave (or hair-brained scheme) the other night while thinking about various BRP games and how most, bar M-Space, lack space combat for ships. I quite like the idea of a system that is simple and abstract, yet can get the feel of scale with differently sized and powered ships. That’s when I had the logical idea: Poker! 😉 What if space combat was determined by the respective poker hand values of combatants? A battle of Fate, if you will. (Texas Hold’em has a River…like a River of Heaven? 😉 ) And what if the difference in poker hand ranks meant more damage to ship Structure (hit points)? If we used a ship scale, and maybe saw a dreadnought as a Cthulhu-sized beast, perhaps the ship weapon die type depends on scale (d6, d8, d10 etc), and also receives a number dice based on the degrees of success in the opposed poker hands. From a High Card all the way up to a Royal Flush, there are 10 ranks or steps in poker, so a possible 9 degrees of difference in opposed rolls. Perhaps ships get 5 cards each and then size and piloting contribute extra cards, from which the best poker hand is made. The degrees then determine damage. We would have criticals then for beyond 0 hits. Or maybe if the poker hand beats the others by 5 or more steps/ranks. Perhaps you guys could help flesh this out. Maybe ships only get 2 cards each, by default, to have a chance of a pair, then a successful piloting roll, scan roll, etc., based on key crew stations, gives an additional card, up to maybe 5, and then the scale of the ship might contribute as much as 5 extra cards. So an Enterprise fighting a smaller ship would likely get a better hand each round due to a larger pool of cards. Chiefly the main difference mechanically will be Structure (hits), and armour/shields, and all the rest will be abstracted based on size. Crew rolls add cards. (This may require two combined decks for larger battles.) Imagine the hands of poker played out among each ship in a battle. Against multiple opponents, a high hand could work against all other combatants within range. (Perhaps each scale of the ship gives not just an extra card but one extra target/attack if against multiple ships. So again, abstracting the number of attacks and tech into the size and power of the ship. E.g., an Enterprise can get +5 cards and attack +5 opponents. It is then just narrated as phasers and torpedoes.) So this is just an outline. In brief, opposed poker hands give damage based on the number of die rolled. The die type might vary based on ship size. (Starfighter; freighter; cruiser; etc.) Crew rolls add to the cards drawn. (One could play this out with a river too, as in Hold’em, a shared set of cards between all ships, rather than 5-card draw. But maybe 5-card draw is easier.) What do you guys think? Is it perhaps workable? Characters contribute to the battle with crew skill rolls. It might just be a brain blip, but I think there is something here. Reminds me of Deadland’s method to cast spells with Hucksters. You’d roll a skill and then it would add cards, if I recall, and the value of the hand would determine the power and effect. Same idea here in principle. Feel free to chip in and flesh it out if you like the idea of such a system. Here’s a list of poker hands, from highest to lowest: https://www.cardschat.com/poker-hands/ 🙂

In the meantime, we could perhaps let players do the heavy lifting. Perhaps allow 3 characteristics (Int, Str, Dex, etc.,) to equal a one-time bonus talent to a relevant skill related to that stat. The player must name it as a talent, too. For example, someone with Dex of 15 could then get +15% to dodge, which they call ‘Lightning Reflexes’. Perhaps every 5 is 1 (round down), so they can use this bonus 3 times in an adventure. Likewise, 15 Int might be +15% to a knowledge test, which they call ‘Forbidden Books’. One might allow Str of 15 to equal 3 extra points in damage (5 = 1), and call it ‘Mighty Strike’. But useable just 3 times, as noted earlier. If it was Str 14, it would be 2 extra damage, and just two uses (14/5 round down). This might be a way to take the skill modifier idea, to focus them in a new way, and to reskin them as player-defined talents. Con of 15, heal or gain 3 extra hits: ‘Tough as Nails’. Pow of 18, gain +18% to persuasion: ‘Hypnotic Eyes’. Etc. I think I quite like this! Simple, and it does what it needs to. Edit: It does just revert back to skills, but perhaps it is how it is packaged and rolled as a resource that makes the difference. A player experienced with D&D perhaps wouldn’t think ‘I have a slightly higher dodge than the other player, but we are mostly the same’. They’d perhaps think ‘I have lightning reflexes and THEY have mighty strike’.

I agree regarding feats. A purely skills-based approach never quite seemed to give the sense of ‘character’ that talents can. Arguably the latter, plus skills and personality, is a fair description of a human being. The issue with talents/feats is they would need to be more than just adding percentiles, as then it just reverts to skills. One middle-way option might be ‘aptitudes’, where prior to spending skill points the selected aptitudes change how those points cash out into skills, or how experience works, or both. For example, if not using the 1/2 characteristic modifiers for skill categories, one might bring them back in under the guise of talents. But it again reverts to skills. I like many of the class abilities in BRP Classic Fantasy, but Mythras seems more crunch than I want. I’d have loved it if Classic Fantasy had stayed fully with BRP for volume II. I’ve since been wondering how to fit those abilities and classes with Magic World (my favourite version of BRP), if running a more feat-based game, but NOT straight-up classic fantasy. Perhaps one can buy an ability from BRP Classic Fantasy, regardless of class, thus making unusual features. For example, a warrior might take vow of poverty (from the monk) and weapon proficiency (from the fighter); perhaps also lightning reflexes, but fear of magic (from the barbarian). (And that is all. Two of each.) If players are given a chance to take talents and restrictions, one at a time, with no repeats, so the specific talents and restrictions are not just copied by every fighter, etc., then it may end up fairly diverse as a party. You might even get a warrior with a lore proficiency. But I agree. Talents/feats seem an easy addition to add more depth to BRP. It’s one thing D&D does very well. (Perhaps the talents can be lifted from WFRP 2E and plugged straight into BRP with a few adjustments. Not sure.) I loved the way Classic Fantasy tied various abilities to allegiance. Perhaps each allegiance might contain a few paths, like the kinds of philosophies in Vampire, so that as a warrior on the path of ‘Justice’ increases in allegiance, they gain paladin-like abilities, but the warrior on the path of ‘Vengeance’ gets fighter-class abilities, and so on. Thus life motivation gets tied to unlocking a particular kind of progression. The difference here versus BRP Classic Fantasy is you don’t start with them. (I had considered having a relevant class category activate once a professional skill goes over 100%. That doesn’t seem too bad.) Hmmm. Now that I think of it, maybe one can have both allegiance AND a personal path. The former defines apotheosis and such, but the latter relates to the idiosyncratic way the character is a warrior, a thief, etc. Perhaps similar to how WFRP defined careers within categories (Rogue, Academic, etc.), each with many careers, a character might have a category aptitude with a starting level of a characteristic X 1 (Warrior: Str), and the aptitude rolls for increases after each adventure. Only as it increases it unlocks a selection of abilities. So academics can choose academic talents, for example, such as ‘mnemonics’ or ‘speed reading’. I think I like the idea that career categories, each containing many professions, as in WFRP, might also each contain a variety of talents that can be unlocked every 25% or so in the career skill. That creates a neat way to classify the talents and categories while still keeping the BRP professions. A warrior category might have ‘Brawny’ (perhaps players get one at the start, and some, like this one, can only be chosen at the start) whereas a ranger category might have ‘fleet footed’. So we’d have the same BRP system, but we would just need to know the career category as per WFRP and then have the aptitude ‘skill’ (starting at a prime stat x 1) that is really just a metric to unlock/select further career category talents.

Example: If a player wants to put the 3 guards to sleep, well, it simply can’t be done in the moment if the guards have a combined POW of, let’s say, 33. The player will need to spend 33 magic points over 2 or more days, assuming they have a skill higher than 33 (otherwise they must sacrifice POW to double the limit), then they must roll the skill (a failure means all MPs and any POW are lost), and then if successful in the skill roll they must still overcome each guard in a POW vs POW roll. Not easy. This makes such magic more the stuff of rituals. Creating a key for the lock seems much easier, but I would argue they don’t know consciously or unconsciously what the key should be, so without knowledge of the real key, they cannot match it. But if they could view it… Gating from prison would require the SIZ in MP of all who are to be gated. (And if iron metal interfered with magic, a prison might prevent such things anyway.) And of course the caster must have knowledge of where they are going. If one thinks of the magic as a kind of reality-altering dreaming, then there are limits based on the caster’s knowledge or experience. It’s less of a wish made manifest by the world and more of an imposed intention, with all the limits that may imply. For example, if a caster has never tasted a certain dish, they perhaps can create something that looks exactly like it (if they saw it once at the court of the king), but it might taste utterly bizarre. If they haven’t experience to draw one, the magic might be strangely flawed. Even if all rolls were successful. To go beyond a compelling illusion requires true understanding born of experience. So the caster can never gate to a new place; they can only return to the old. And if the old place has changed beyond the caster’s present memory? Well, then, one had better choose a stable landmark, or risk gating into a prison born of memory itself. (Fumble?) Edit: Bending the bars with a force of STR 18 would cost 18. (Assuming one doesn’t make metal or iron a mage’s bugbear, preventing any magic on or beyond the metal itself.) But that still leaves the guards to contend with… For a more high-magic setting, the issue is MPs. So if a PC might store MPs up to their skill in Dreaming/the Art into a staff, which solves that issue. Want a D20 damage fireball? Spend 20 MP. But it still might be dodged… And later you’ll need to replenish the staff. Want to fly 40ft into the air? 40 MPs. I think the watchword is ‘quantify’: not ‘fly’, but ‘fly how high and for how long?’ The effect must be determined concretely. A ‘love spell’ is quantified solely by overcoming POW; it isn’t that true love itself was quantified and created. (‘Tis but a fiction, a dream, imposed.) It would seem the above makes magic flexible AND constrained, yet reflective of the tropes of magic (extended effort etc). You guys have a wealth of experience, so if the above is workable or breakable, you’d know it better than I!

I actually think the Dreaming skill from CoC’s Dreamlands would make a great freeform magic system. It limits you to current magic points for immediate uses, so to create a sword that does 1d8+1 would cost 9MPs, as the cost is the most important attribute. You are also limited to the skill level in Dreaming for extended uses (so if you have 50 in the skill, to gate 4 people may require all of their SIZ in MPs; hence an extended attempt over days; and you might not have the skill); and to go beyond that level requires POW to double it. To make an effect permanent requires POW too. As for bringing back the dead, one can create a being, like a beautiful woman of App 18, but to create the living requires double (so such a beautiful woman would be 36), and frankly all you are likely to get is an automaton with little true Int etc. Since only APP is paid for. So a more rounded being may require you to spend 1 MP per 1 stat, doubled, and POW for permanency. Expensive. But to truly bring back the dead? I would argue that the most important attribute, LIFE itself, is beyond a quantitative value. Such is the mystery of life. And so while one might create a semblance of life above, it would not be true life. More of a living, breathing simulacrum…and since it comes from the caster, it will be limited by their own knowledge. A kind of magical projection or fiction born of the caster’s mind. Hence, a mage perhaps cannot truly create a being that would surprise them with insights. (Though you might rule it can, for good or ill, as it comes from the caster’s unconscious.) Perhaps, in fact, they also cannot create a being with more Int and Pow than they themselves have. (Makes sense to me.) Plus to create a being doesn’t guarantee control of that being, it seems to me. That might require an additional effect. So bringing back the true being that was gone? I think this is only for the gods. That semblance of life, that looks like your friend, that you believe is returned, is but the fiction of your friend now reanimating their body. You’ve filled their corpse with the breath of a dream. But it is not them. (There is no PC there; only an NPC.) But for other uses, I think Dreaming could be a remarkably flexible magic system. To put someone to sleep, the MPs might be 1 per round, and a POW vs POW roll. Or maybe it’s the target’s POW, since their will must be overcome in MPs first, prior to the POW vs POW roll. That would make such magic that overcomes wills costly, and more suited to rituals/extended uses rather than in-the-moment. Hurl a fireball, yes. Sway a mind, not easy. To transform someone might require the spending of MPs equal to their POW, and the spending of the new form’s SIZ, plus any POW if permanent, and a POW vs POW roll (clarification: the POW vs POW happens only if the Dreaming skill roll succeeds; you could spend a lot of MPs and POW in order to simply have a chance of affecting someone, and fail…which seems to give the system necessary and costly limits when it comes to impacting a being’s will or true form). So all MP and POW expenditure is done first, then the skill roll, then the POW vs POW if relevant. It would need work as a magic system. But the base idea of Dreaming has always struck me as very neat, built as it is around the most important attribute and POW investments for permanency, as well as a skill that places limits too. One might call it ‘the Art’.

Hi, I’ve also been thinking of math-challenged players, which I think is important now that we understand dyscalculia etc. I wonder if 1/10th of a skill would be good for specials, round down, as it’s easy to eyeball (72% = 7; 77 = 7; so only full tens get the special) AND double rolls under the skill equal criticals (so a 66 would be a critical). Or the reverse (doubles for specials, 1/10th or less for criticals). Judging by comments above on odds, this means both have similar chances of occurring, but they are via different mechanics which are easily seen. So there would be a 2/10 chance of a good result, either special or critical. Now that I think of it, I like the 1/10th as a critical, since it’s low; the double as a special, since it’s kind of special. 🙂 They’d be easy to understand. (Using both specials and criticals is something that Magic World does. Not every game is likely going to need to do that. But I like both of them for added degrees. If one thinks 1/10th is too much for such a critical, one can always make it the chance of a critical, with a Luck roll to see if it’s ACTUALLY a critical; otherwise it’s a regular special. That would bring the odds down a bit, but it would still be easy to understand at the table. Come to think of it, 1/10th as a critical/special could work too. With Luck determining which occurs in game. Make the Luck roll, you get a critical. Fail, it’s a special.) Another way is just to take the tens and double it (70 = 7x2 = 14; 77 = 7x2 = 14), ignoring the units. That’s a special. And for criticals, halve the tens and maybe round down (70 = 7/2 = 3; 77 = 7/2 = 3). I guess that might be easy enough. That would be 1/5th for specials, 1/20th for criticals.

I have that. In fairness, I couldn’t get through the whole book. It’s just huge, and it has an odd and very non-homage wound system, which was a strange decision. I gave up on it. It’s a very complex WFRP in an enormous book. Truly HUGE. It sits on a straining shelf and it shall never be opened again. 🙂 But maybe it would suit some people. Definitely not me.

Thank you! I got hold of Warlock! due to your recommendation, including the gorgeous limited Black Edition, and it’s brilliant. I’ve bought other expansions too. It’s definitely up there with MW for me.