narsilion

7 hours ago, Cloud64 said:

Though RQG defaults to metres and kilometres, I use feet and miles for Gloranthan distances. I'm perfectly happy to work in either in real life, but to me they just don't fit in a Bronze Age setting. It could have been cubits and leagues, perhaps, but then we face the the same problem as with 28hrs days – we just don't naturally work in them, so they'd only detract from the game experience.  That said, I have overlayed a 3 mile hex grid over the Starter Set Sarter map to give an easy reference for travel times - so we are effectively working on travelling 1 league/hr <shrugs> 

 

Being from Europe, i'd have the same issue with those obsolete measurements, as you have with numeneran 28hr day. So im sure i'll keep metric measurements, tho i know they feel very modern

I have a stupid beginner question. I don't want to start a new topic and this one is related, so I'm posting my question here.

It's the Gloranthan calendar.

A year has 294 days there. So an 18-year-old man has 5292 days. And this is 14.5 our years.

A 20-year-old from Glorantha is 5880 days= 16.1 our years old.

Do people grow up faster there and also age faster? Or maybe the day in Glorantha is longer than ours?

I think all the useful ones will be off with sheriff, hunting the outlaws (somebody noticed them near Apple Lane). This way outlaws will be acknowledged before they enter the story, village will be conveniently calm and empty, and it will be somehow reasonable why Gringle hired players (becouse all the useful ones are hunting outlaws)

I've read Six Seasons on Andrews blog, and i like it. Maybe for the future. Now i need some oneshot to present Runequest to players in Poland. RQ was never published here. And a lot of players im my club are interested in OSR and history of the hobby. So i've choosen Apple Lane, as it was published in '78.

I have another issue with maps of Apple Lane: proximity. Tinn Inn is no more than 70 meters away. If some baboons began to batter the roof in the middle of the night, in a few minutes we would have a rally from the half of the village (screaming "damn, Gringle, stop your f** noises, we can't sleep!") and the problem how to defend the building would resolve itself 🙂

BTW, is really Gringle's Pawnshop this big? On your maps it is longer than 50m. To put it into scale, White House is 26,1 x 51,2 m. Moreover, when you find plans of pawnshop, things inside are really big, like 4m beds etc. Just like on this picture, i think its from finnish edition.
 

I like using doubles as criticals. Especially the version used in WFRP 1ed to resolve fumbles with weapons: the lower fumble digits, worse the effect.

That is very intuitive and funny: only a real ignorant (or muff) can get 11 fumble (needs to have attribute 10 or lower) and even the best of the best could get 99 or 00 fumbles.

So 11 was something like "you cut your leg off with your axe" or "you shot yourself in the back with your bow" and 99 or 00 was something like "slipped, you cannot parry or dodge next round".

Quickly we started to use similar rules for ctritical succeses (11 - very good, but even ignorant can achieve this, 88 - man, everybody can see that you're good).

One little quirk with OP's system is what happens at high and low values. E.g. if your chance of success is 5% then your chance of a critical is actually 1/400 (5%*5%) rather than standard BRP of 1/100. That's not a bad thing but it is a thing.

I know about it. This is exactly what I didn't like in standard BRP and one of the reasons why i have started searching for something diffrent than table.

I use d100+d20 because I mostly play in CoC, and i don't meet skills over 100 so often

IMHO there is enough room between 0 and 100 to mirror differences in PC's abilities. That's why i like d100 mechanics.

But if the chance is bigger than 100%, do you really need to roll?

The only reason I see, is checking "was it good, special or critical?"

I thought a bit how to resolve it - well, there is the way: I propose splitting the percentile chance.

For example, let's say you have skill=143.

First of all, split it into 100% and 43%.

Then roll d20 for first 100%, to check special (20%) and critical (5%).

If you did not achieve it, roll d100+d20 for remaining 43% to check your additional chance for critical or special.

You can even use 00 on d100 as fumble, if you like. (I don't like)

I did not calculate the chances yet, but it seems enough close to the general idea of BRP rules for me.

I've just found some information about Unknown Armies - and it sounds interesting.

In fact, i was using some kind of "flip-floping" during my CoC campaigns:

test is difficult - roll d100, treat bigger digit on the D10 dices as "tens"

test is easy - choose lower digit and treat as "tens"

normal test - normal d100 roll

BTW, according to "alternate method of testing" topic:

Is here anybody who still uses resistance table instead of rolling d20? The probability stays the same, d20 is much faster...

i mean: instead of using resistance table:

1) substract 10 from active characteristic

2) add d20 to it

3) if the total is higher than passive caracteristic = succes

This is faster than finding in the table (and sometimes you must find the table first) and the probability is strictly the same: "Every point the active factor exceeds the passive factor by adds 5% to the chance of succes" etc.

Hi everybody.

Here is my proposal of changing method of testing. It needs rolling three dices instead of two, but allows not to use the tables.

I made an image, just to avoid using to many words - as my english is rather mediocre. I have atached pdf with full version of this infographic.

BRP-test.pdf

P.S. sorry my english - i've been actively using it (not just reading or listening) in school, and it was about 15 years ago...