Mankcam

lol

I very much doubt I will play it as written, as the skill mod mechanics seem more clumsy than the current rules, and it is a core feature that doesn't feel 'BRP' to me. However there are likely some elements of the new mechanics I may use, such as the increased focus on Luck in the new rules. I tend to run a low-pulp Cthulhu game, and these rules may go a lot way to emulate some of that flavour. I certainly won't be recording skills in the xx/xx/xx fashion though, that looks cumbersome and plain ugly on the character sheet. The atmosphere projected in the quickstart was pretty good though, so narratively it still should be a good game. Yes, I do find it odd though that the flagship game deviates so much from the BGB, I don't see how this won't create divisions amongst current BRP fans, I suspect many of us old fans will soon be Old School BRPers as well by the looks...

I haven't got Aces High with me here to check, but RQ3 used to have AP for Armour Points, and maybe items had these instead of item HP, which is probably the same for Aces High I reckon. I think the author probably liked the RQ3 build of BRP as he also included Hit Locations, which I thought was pretty cool. I can't remember if the weapons also had a SR value, and if so that Strike Rank option was also from RQ3. If I was a betting man, I would put my money on betting that AP stands for Armour Points...

I give all characters Own Language (INTx5%) which assumes literacy as well as spoken skills. I limit all Communication skills by this as a ceiling score, unless the player characters provide an explanation otherwise. For ancient/medieval/fantasy settings I have Literacy as a separate skill, usually starting at Literacy, Own (INT x1%) for Middle Class characters, increasing by a step (x1%) for each social class above, and anything below Middle Class doesn't start with Literacy at all (although I often allow a INTx5% roll for basic symbols, such signage, often pictorial). In these settings I tend to like Literacy to be a specialised skill, but in modern settings the focus is different.

Firstly, its a hard call for me to decide on which BRP related system to use. I tend to like most variations of the BRP D100 system, and have been using it since the mid 80s. I go through stages GMing other systems (in particular, I love FATE Core at present, hats off to Fred Hicks), but considering how intuitive the BRP system is I always tend to come back to it, and consider it my 'home' system. All of the BRP family of games are quite good, and more or less compatible with each other, so it gets down to a matter of flavour and personal taste. You are after a BRP/D100 system that focuses on Fantasy, so this obviously excludes Call of Cthulhu and the BRP BGB. You could use the later of course, but it is a bunch of generic rules designed as a toolkit for GMs to use over a broad range of genres. It can be used for Fantasy, of course, but it certainly is not specialised in any way. OpenQuest is not a bad option from D101 Games, but its a bit indie for some. Renaissance is also a good BRP variant, although hardly for stock fantasy fare, given its early gun powder era focus. BRP Classic Fantasy is a great monograph is you want to have a very D&D flavour to your games. Its not to my taste in its entirety, although I have used it for many good optional rules contained within it. However you do need the BRP BGB for it, so it is not a single volume purchase. I think your query basically comes down to LEGEND/RuneQuest vs MagicWorld. Both have classic fantasy races, lots of spells, genre specific character creation, equipment tailored for the fantasy setting etc, you will not be lacking for great fantasy resources with any of these books. So any of them will suit your needs. However in my personal opinion, I prefer the Hit Location system for my fantasy games as opposed to the Major Wound table. This would be the main reason I would choose RuneQuest over Magic World. Having this as well as the excellent combat manuevers of RuneQuest really emulates the feel of hand-to-hand combat quite well. It adds a bit of 'crunch' to the system, but from I gleaned from your posts this would be a good thing. Combat is slightly quicker in Magic World, but I prefer combat to be centre stage for my fantasy games, rather than resolved quickly. It really adds to the fun, from my point of view. I would suggest that you buy the LEGEND pdf from Mongoose, available for a dollar or so on DrivethruRPG, and check it out. If you think its the kind of thing your troupe would like, then I'ld suggest you upgrade to the RuneQuest sixth edition rulebook as it is a more progressed version of the LEGEND rules, developed by the same authors. As far as resources go, you could use any supplements for RQ6, LEGEND, or even MRQ2 as they would be quite compatible. Having said that, you could use almost any BRP supplement with minor tweaking and it will be compatible. RuneQuest certainly has an ancient world flavour to it, but it can quite easily fit a dark ages setting or standard high fantasy setting as well. I think the current edition of the RQ rules is pretty much what you are after, and it's certainly worth the price. I believe you won't be disappointed.

In your particular situation, I'ld prioritise RuneQuest 6th edition over the others

I couldn't of said it better! Three cheers for RQ!

I ordered mine through the KS, so I should be seeing it in the flesh within the next week or so hopefully. I love the new cover art, it reminds me of the Elric series or the artwork from the Dragonriders of Pern series, very nice!

Yes, beyond char gen, I certainly agree on not capping skills as this will just discourage players. The setting itself should be challenge enough. Martin doesnt display any sense of fairness to his characters in the stories, in fact being harsh with them is what hes brilliant at. So a GM for this setting just needs to do likewise to capture that feel. This doesnt mean that the GM has to be cruel or be on a mission to persecute the PCs. Just by not cutting any slack should be enough, no pulp mechanics, no re-rolls etc. I think if the setting reacts how you think Martin would write it then you'll capture the callous flavour of Westeros. Your master swordsman may take out the local rogue with ease and flair, but if that rogue was a favoured squire of a local lord, then discover retribution in the form of soldiers returning to apprehend. This would make use of the modifiers associated with multiple opponents, which can easily overpower the greatest single swordsman. I think if you allow setting responses to be harsh then you will capture the feel of the campaign, and it wont make too much difference how high individual skill levels are.

That perhaps would be some variation of the Status skill, but used to do more than a Credit Rating style roll. You could calculate it differently perhaps, based on social class, house standing, and personal deeds. Circumstantial bonuses or penalties for cross House interaction perhaps, or particular House reputations /alliances, ie " A Lannister Always Pays His Debts" , or " Starks Are True Northmen" etc I would probably not allow any beginning skill over 65% or 70% for the sake of giving the characters something to advance in. Having said that, in the setting itself I would allow skills to be developed over 100%, and maintain that Experts are 75%+. It won't unbalance the game as it is pretty difficult to learn from skill checks at that level. It will mainly be prominent NPCs that have skills at this level, and possibly the PCs by the end of the campaign. Jaime Lannister, should have Sword over 100%, for instance, although perhaps his blade reputation outmatched his skill. Main thing is to keep combat gritty, and healing arduous. Many combatants die from infections weeks after the actual blade strike, so no bountiful ways to heal, combat needs to be feared. As do a good many things in this setting. I would probably use Hit Locations, they do tend to make melee combat more tactile, and suit ancient/medieval settings quite well. Whether you use RQ or BRP it will be the flavour you give to the setting that make it feel like Westeros, not so much about the mechanics, although having said that, some mechanics could detract. Just stay clear of any pulp style mechanics like Luck Pts in RQ, or Fate rules in BRP. No way out of fumbles here. The luck of the dice roll should be enough, I don't think there should be any way for players to change that in a campaign like this. You may need to upline NPCs to PCs as the original PCs end up with grisly fates, much like what happens to a considerable proportion of characters in the novels. That might not sound like rollicking fun, but its sure closer to Martin's grim setting.

This is an excellent mature gaming forum. I'm sure you'll find plenty of advice for your BRP related games, including advice from game designers and publishers whom are regulars here. Its a great resource to link in with.

Well, it depends upon the setting for me, but I tend to like the 'Magic' system with individual spell skills and MP cost as a basis for magic. I'm not sure what you mean by 'magic resistance' - like do you mean a 'Saving Throw vs Spells', or something like that? I don't think thats part of BRP magic. Basically the spells work if the caster can perform them, and if there are any rolls on the part of the opponent it will be rolls such as Dodge or in some cases, a POWx5% roll, etc trying to get out of the way of the spell effects or otherwise resist the result of the spell. As far as game balance goes, its an arbitrary thing. In combat. a warrior often has an edge over a caster as they can act whilst the caster is preparing magic, although once the magic is successfully performed then the caster often has the advantage. Also, some spells (ie as in Mythos magic in Call of Cthulhu) are no good in combat, but the outcome of spell casting is advantageous, and also often a plot device (ie summoning a Servitor, for example).

I love the article on the role of spies in the psuedo-fantasy-historical setting. Great stuff!

Yeah, I have mixed views on CoC 7E as well. I want to like it, but there are some quibbles with the departures from previous editions. Firstly, I do like the fact that they are pitching two play styles, Purist and Pulp. I remember CoC 3E had a distinctly pulpish character, even if it wasn't overly supported mechanically by the rules. Subsequent editions became more grim in tone, closer to the Lovecraftian flavour as a source. Several of the earlier grand campaigns also fitted well with a low-pulp tone rather than a pure investigative horror tone, campaigns such as Masks Of Nylarthotep, Horror On The Orient Express, etc. In the wake of other companies publishing Lovecraftian games with a more pulpish flavour (ie: Trail of Cthulhu, Realms of Cthulhu, Elderitch Skies etc), I think it was time for Chaosium to bring some rules to support a low-pulp tone. Hopefully the new Luck rules should cover this nicely, although I will have to have a good look at them. The overall tone of the kickstarter seems to support purist and pulp settings quite well, so kudos from me on that point. In my games I always have written characteristics like thus ie: DEX 12/60%, and it seems to work fine. If The player-characters make a Difficult roll they just halve the %, not much math required for that. However with CoC 7E writing them as DEX 12/30/60, it does seem a tad cumbersome, very not BRP. Doing this for all the skills as well tends to make the character sheet look a bit cluttered, and I prefer my sheets to look clear and simple these days. There also appears to be some other rules that cover the same ground as the current CoC/BRP rules, and they appear to be no better or worse than the current rules. I'm mainly describing the bonus/penalty rules here. This is surprising as now it just seems that they are in there for the sake of difference rather than progress, especially considering the current method is very simple and already works well across the BRP system. I guess the new rules also work well, but for the current fan base of earlier editions it is confusing replacing rules just for the sake of it. Having a 'bonus die' doesn't feel very BRP; it feels more like a concept ported in from White Wolf Storyteller or a system like that. I would have taken the opportunity to divorce Sanity from POW as well. In fact, I would have suggested a core characteristic called Rationality (RAT). Then I would have 'Sanity Points' equal to RAT x 5%, which could work in line with the current SAN rules. Or you could go vice versa, have the characteristic called Sanity (SAN), and have 'Rationality Points' equal to SAN x 5%. In any case, not a big change, just a tweak that would make more sense. Overall I think the production and atmosphere looks great, and I hope it sells well on the shelves. I don't mind having several books, we had a separate 'Monster' book previously anyway. Although I'm not sure if I would be rushing out to replace the Malleus Monstrorum just for the sake of having stats written in the new format, as they should be pretty compatible as is. If it came out with a hardcover and full colour panels then I would upgrade, but not just for a few minor changes in the way stats are presented. Which is a good thing, as I think this edition will be about 85-90%% compatible with previous CoC resources (which is better than most rpgs). That, however, is quite dramatic for BRP CoC I guess, as most previous editions have been about 99% compatible, so I can understand the concern. I am also concerned that if the rules are too much a departure from the BRP BGB then this may have implications on the entire BRP system. Have to wait and see how it goes when released I guess.

... And you now have my money, yet again!

Hardcover? Now you're talkin'!

For the past few years, if I haven't advised PCs to use the point build method of character creation, then I've been using 2D6+6 for rolling all their Characteristics as a random generation method. Seems to work better in my opinion, as I was always telling them to ignore rolls of less than 7 anyway...

I think it takes a full combat round to prepare/cast most spells (possibly longer for more complex ones, I'm unsure), and the spell takes effect during the magic phase of the following combat round. No skill roll required is the default, although I don't really dig that. I tend to prefer the BRP Sorcery system with the optional suggestion of having casters making an INTx5%, and I always stipulate at least three components or environmental/circumstantial/sympathetic requirements (also relevant Knowledge skill mimumums etc) to be present otherwise I make it a Difficult roll. Just makes it feel more 'sorcerous' that way. But to answer your query, it takes a round of prep beforehand, otherwise it would feel more like a superpower rather than spellcasting I reckon.

The D100 system looks like a nice homebrew, with racial advantages etc good for fantasy. Certainly food for thought and good for a GM to pillage. I also kinda like the simplicity of one of the other systems, the Statless D100 system; it's almost a bit like HeroQuest using a D100. I wouldn't complicate the character sheet by listing every trait or ability available though, only the ones the character is using. Everything else could either not be available, or have a default of 10%, which could have situational modifiers applied to it. Anyway I thought the statless idea was a nice way to go

Yes it looks great. The hard cover copy will look really nice. Kinda cool seeing my name on the backers page

Looks pretty good!

Just an idea. I love the Mythos stuff, but yeah, it'ld lose impact if it was with every setting. History has its far share of real human monsters anyway, no need to go looking into the Mythos to find adversaries...

This looked good the first time around, although I'm mostly over the HeroQuest game mechanics these days so I gave it a pass. (I'll buy Gloranthan supplements in HQ for the narrative, and convert it to BRP/RQ, but won't cross the road for other settings...possibly Mythic Russia, but that's about it!) However, I have heard a few good reports about Empires Rising, and it does look interesting. I also like that you've got some scenarios lined up, as well as a major campaign. The later sounds great, and the kind of thing I'm after as a GM these days. If this setting is re-released using BRP-related mechanics, then you've probably sold me!

This would definitely be a great setting for intrigue, and it would make good use of the Factions rules too I suspect. You could even throw in the Mythos on top of it to jazz it up perhaps

Pretty clear, like Nick said. None of us like this rule the older we get heh heh.