Jump to content

Mankcam

Member
  • Posts

    2,495
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

Everything posted by Mankcam

  1. Looks quite handy - I'll be using this for an NPC Ally that I'm introducing for next month's session
  2. Was this a large book with dragons or other denziens on the cover. An orange-red background? I'm sure I had this book...
  3. Locational Order is much better I reckon
  4. Yes, I currently have that situation in my Glorantha game in regards to relics/holy items being able to have their PP accessed for purposes of Fate use, just as long as the characters can tie the explanation to their deity. Seems fun so far, like a minor form of divine intervention. I wouldn't allow any 'neutral' sources of PP to be used in this way, such as Power Crystal etc. I was considering having the re-roll taken out in favour for Fate increasing the success level instead (like HeroQuest's 'bump' rules as previously pointed out, which I quite like). It does have it's merits, but I think as a GM still I enjoy the random whims of the dice roll - a Fumble followed by a rerolled Fumble makes for a great night's entertainment! Not sure players would agree though heh heh
  5. I think I would agree with Fate not being used for Fumble re-rolls (or make them double usual PP cost at least). Fumbles are such a great part of this combat system, I wouldn't want to see them hitched by the Fate option that's for sure.
  6. I like BRP's Fate option, mainly because the players I play with ask for re-rolls, and I don't want to be an old Grouch to deny them every time, as the session has to remain fun. In my experience, having to pay for the Fate option toned down the re-roll requests as the players know that although I'll usually grant their request, they certainly have to pay PP for it. So it settles arguements when playing with my current troupe. The fact that it's a depleting resource actually let's the pcs monitor their own powergaming a bit. Previously we played more pulpy systems which sometimes rewarded characters with Hero Points instead of EXP pts, and the problem was that the pcs stockpiled all the Hero Pts up for a rainy day, which basically thwarted any of my GM plans for tension etc. The Fate option is BRP BGB seems a good compromise between meta-gaming and GM control in this respect. I agree that Priests/Sorcerers have issues with it though, because of their prominent PP depletion for their magical skills. I get around this by letting Priests use Fate cheaply for requests that are in keeping with their deity, a little like a diluted Divine Intervention. Sorcerers could do something similar if you could tie some requests in with an estoric or occult explanation (nothing springs to mind). The best way I found to make the BRP Fate option work, in my opinion, was to give all Fate options a flat rate of 5PP (tweaking options here and there to keep it balanced). Players get confused with all the options, but if they know a flat cost them they tend to come up with explanations for Fate use in a particular situation (at GM descretion). It has worked well in my fantasy setting, and was one of the new options I was happy to see included in the new BRP BGB.
  7. I think it should be similar to RQ3 rules where Enchanting was 1 POW per Spell Level enchanted in into the item, otherwise it is just as easy for a Sorcerer to create a permanent 1pt Magic Item as it would be to create a permanent 6 pt Magic Item, so I haven't moved on from RQ3 in that respect. I actually thought the BRP version was a typo.
  8. I actually prefer the Fate option in BRP BGB over a set number of Hero Points like MRQ2, SW, GURPS etc. It seems to work well with my fantasy troupe, although I doubt I'ld use it for a Horror setting, it would take the 'terror' out of the game. I think I really like the idea that the pc has to invest themselves into the universe, so to speak, in order for the universe to respond to them. I didn't really like BRP's variable PP costing though, it was a little fiddly, so I made all Fate options a flat 5 PP cost. This seems to work well, as it limits it's use somewhat. My players like having a 'flat rate' for it as well, it is less confusing. Despite having the Fate option in my fantasy setting, it isn't over used as people want to have PP stocked up for magic use etc. I also like the way the BRP Fate option uses PP, as it gives a non-magic using character an actual use for their PP Tally. I also allowed for certain backgrounds to have advantages with it. For example, I had ported over a Savage Worlds character to BRP who previously had the McGwvyer Edge from SW (allows the character to come up with a single one-use invention to get out of a scrape). I allowed this character to do the same thing in BRP for a reduced Fate option cost (2PP instead of my setting's usual 5PP). He still had to make an Idea roll however (although he could spend more Fate PP to get a re-roll if desired). Seems to work okay so far. I feel that having a PP investiture in Fate is more BRP'ish than Mongoose's Hero Points, which feel a little too much like a rule 'add-on' to me. It feels like Mongoose saw all these other games that had 'floating' MGPs and hitched their rule from them, whereas the BRP Fate option is much more consistent with the BRP system mechanics. But as far as having MGPs in the system, I think it's a good option, but the GM must be careful for it not to ruin the setting flavour. I'ld use the BRP Fate option even for a gritty fantasy at a flat 5PP cost . C'mon, players are always requesting re-rollsl! Just make them pay PP each time, and they'll tone it down, it actually made some of my sessions less pulpy in that respect. I certainly wouldn't use it for a harsh setting, such as Modern Horror or Grim Dark Ages etc. I'ld use it for a fun Pulp setting (eg: 1930s Adventure), and I'ld perhaps make it cheaper, maybe 3 PP or so. In any case, they're a good option for some, but not to everyone's tastes.
  9. I'ld probably go with the Cover & Fortified Position rules, yep it does give the Shieldwall formation a big protective advantage (opponents attacks at Difficult), but I guess the soldiers within may probably have the Enclosed Environment modifier which puts them at Difficult as well (although I'm not sure I like that - I'ld probably say because they are trained to fight in formation they only receive -20% to their attacks whilst in formation with other trained soldiers in a shieldwall). They'ld still have other benefits, such as fighting with superior numbers, and of course, the AP provided from their shields. Yes, you'ld have to adjust the advantage according to any incapacitated warriors who have broken the wall, like you said. I'm not sure if the BRP ROME book has anything on Shieldwall, I don't have it with me to check. I remember that it does have some additional spot rules to illustrate some facets of ancient combat, such as a variant Shield rule, but I'm not sure if there is anything in there regarding combat formation. In any case, I think you're looking in the right area for making a fair ruling on it.
  10. Well quickly skimming through my rulebook which is laying here, it looks like there are combat rules for Big/Small Opponents, and also rules for Superior/Inferior Position. They're not exactly what you're after, but they could provide an idea on how to tweak height and flanking (Ch7: Spot Rules p211, BRP BGB).
  11. I'm no writer by vocation, just a plain-joe roleplayer, but just letting you know this is the kind of creativity that has renewed my interest in this hobby, especially using the BRP rules. I wish you well in your endevours, and will certainly support this product once you get it out there.
  12. I'ld certainly support a Heroic Greece setting, walking the line between Mythical and Classical periods
  13. I actually had put this on that Setting Wishlist thread that was doing the rounds a few weeks ago, so I'm totally STOKED with this news!
  14. There's many more people in this forum who know the rules much better than me (many of them are game designers/publishers), and they'll certainly clarify any rules questions with a fair degree of accuracy. I recommend you copy/print the Appendices section of BRP so you can have most of the tables at your fingertips, but they're only for occasional reference. Initially you'll be checking the Skill Matrix and the Skill Results tables a little bit, but after a session or two you probably won't need to check them, as the game can practically run itself without constant references. The main reason I replied to your thread was that SW was the last system I played before returning to BRP, so I'm aware of what your concerns are in regards to slowing combat down with an older system such as BRP. Actually after returning to BRP from SW I have found BRP to be just as cinematic at times. The Tricks rules in SW highlights certainly the use of using your wits to find advantages in combat, particularly environmental advantages. Check out BRP situational modifiers (sorry, I don't have the book with me to direct you to the page number), and decide whether the PCs can cause any of these as a free, partial or full action, and you've pretty much got a version of SW Tricks. You can do all the same things in combat really, such as Ganging Up, Fighting From Behind, Ambush, etc so the PCs should approach combat the same way as they did in SW, but with a little more caution: they are more likely to get seriously hurt. Combat won't drag for long if you are doing this, and if you are using the standard rules of Total Body Hit Points. If you want to emulate 'fodder' opponents, so the PCs feel they are like SW Wild Cards then there's some good rules on this in MRQ2. Without having MRQ2 a quick house rule would be to make less important opponents make Stamina rolls if they receive a Major Wound, and simply deem them as incapacitated at that point, unable to take any more offensive actions (which is often the case). I'm not sure if I would push this all that strongly, only if your troupe wants to port over characters from a SW setting to use with BRP. There may be an official option for something like this in BRP, but again, I haven't got my book with me to check. I actually prefer a more 'crunchy' combat scene, so my troupe plays using concepts from the old RQ3; these are presented as options in BRP (Strike Ranks, Limb Hit Locations). There's something fun about rolling the d20 hit location to see where you get your opponent, it feels much more 'visceral', and lends itself for a very tactile and brutal game, perfect for an ancient or dark ages setting. It runs a little slower, but it's certainly not slow like other old-school systems (eg D&D, Rolemaster etc), as characters do not have seemingly unlimited Hit Points, and combat can be quite devastating to even experienced characters. It forces the players to think of ways to get the advantage in every combat scene, although you can create 'Tanks' just like in any game (but they too need to be wary...). In any case, this system can be fun to play for either pulp action, investigation, or gritty combat settings, it is quite versatile. I have explored other systems over the years, but often find myself back in the BRP rules at some stage as it's core rules are very logical and simple. I hope your one-shot goes down well, make sure it's full of action and you can't go wrong
  15. "The Complementary Skill rule in BRP is already using the Special success percentile. It is a Critical in RuneQuest II." Umm... getting my rules mixed up again. Never knew it was different actually, and I may have read it first in MRQ2 anyway - well I like the BRP version better in any case. Looks like you've got heaps of room to move with this one, as I view Seduction being linked to Fast Talk if you're describing a "chatting up" context; but on the other hnd, it would be more linked to Perform if it's used in a Courtier context, and it probably could merit it's own separate skill as well.
  16. Yes, how did I miss the Dodge skill, that's very important! I didn't think of the Complementary Skills rule, that's certainly the most canon way to go here. My troupe thinks having the same chance as a critical is too small, and opted to for complementary skills bonus to equal the skill's Special Success instead. It gave them a slightly bigger bonus, and as GM I agreed for the sake of keeping the peace. Either way you'ld probably try this approach first rather than my initial idea of taking on a "Knack; if you start doing that earlier you might as well play GURPS instead of BRP!
  17. Well obiviously this character has to have reasonably high DEX and APP. I'ld make sure that she has high Persuade and Fast Talk skills, the latter being a 'trapping' of Seduction as opposed to 'Conning'. For acrobatics, a high Jump would do the trick for most situations, and I'ld cover the performance gymnastics with a Perform (Tumbling) skill, or something like that. Perhaps throw Sleight in there as well, for good measure. If you want to have more 'wow' factor, I'ld possibly house rule that if the character spends 50 pts in character creation you could give the character a 'Knack which allows the character to use her Agility characteristic roll in a much wider scope than other characters can usually do, and perhaps she can spend half Power Points when using using the Fate option to enhance her chances with anything acrobatic. Something along those lines perhaps?
  18. Heath666 It's no biggie to port SW Edges over - I've done it from my old SW fantasy setting game into BRP. Most of the Edges are portrayed by Skills ( eg: a +20% to a certain skill(s) during character creation) or Narrative. However, it's not hard to bring others over. For example, one character had a "Level-Headed" Edge which gave him an Initiative advantage in Sw, so he gained a -1 SR for my BRP setting (which used the Strike Rank Initiative option), this could easily be portrayed as a bonus to DEX for purposes of Initiative in the core BRP initiative session, for instance. Porting over Powers was also no biggie. as many spells in RQ had equivilent in SW. For a quick conversion you could just give a standard mechanic of Magnitude 1 (1 Power Point cost) equals either a +/- 10%, or a +/- 2 modifier, or a +/- 1d6 Attribute/ Damage. It's roughly equivilent to the scale used for BRP Magic or RQ Common Magic. With that you could translate most SW Powers across, but you'll find that most SW Powers have equivilents with BRP/RQ Magic. Combat doesn't drag on much longer than SW, if at all actually. SW says it's FFF, and it sometimes is, but at other times you get stuck due to opponents having high Parry or Toughness scores, so the combat drags until some manuveres or Tricks are used. Not really any different with BRP, using circumstanial modifiers takes the place of Tricks, and can be very cinematic. Actually as BRP is a bit more brutal, I found many combat sessions were over quicker than anticipated. MRQ2 has some NPC and Underling rules to speed up combat as well if you like a more pulpy feel, akin to PCs being Wild Cards in SW. Truthfully I prefer BRP/RQ over SW, but it's a matter of choice. I've had fun with both, it's sometimes up to what your troupe will play really. My troupe liked SW for a while, but the older members really enjoyed returning to BRP again. There is a reason this system has lasted so long, and that's because it's intuitive and just plain fun to play. Hope you get the chance to give it a couple of sessions!
  19. Welcome to BRP! I'm quite new to this forum myself, but I have been using the BRP system on and off since 1984 (yep!), and it's one of my favourite systems. I've played many other systems, but White Wolf's Storyteller system (World of Darkness, Abberant etc) has been the main competition for me, because it is so different to BRP. Recently I played Savage Worlds (last 2-3 years) but the shine wore off (really, a d4 skill means you have a 25% chance of Fumble each time, that's just wrong!). The BRP system is much more intuitive, and can do most things you can do with SW anyway. My only concern is that Savage World's Edges were really great, I wouldn't mind at least Background Edges for BRP, but it's really a matter of taste. Most of the other Edges can be portrayed with Skills and just plain Background info. Your best bet is to play the BRP system 'as is' before you tinker, but there's heaps of room for tinkering. The basic principle is that everything is expressed as a %, so rolling lower is intuitive, not higher as it's illogical and it also breaks the system. The gritty aspects of combat are a strength I feel, but if you purchase Mongoose's RQ2 there's some ideas on cinematic combat in there for you. If you really want to have static Defence scores then perhaps half of the % for Parry/Shield would do the trick. The main issue for me is that you'ld get that old SW issue where people just can't seem to hurt opponents, which for me sometimes dragged combat on rather than made it quicker. After playing SW and returning to BRP I find the randomness of the Defence actions (Dodge, Parry) to provide alot of uncertainity in battles and make it much more interesting - making them static makes this such a different game, and you may be a little disappointed. RQ3 is an old Chaosium product I love, but I'ld recommend buying the BRP BGB and MRQ2 and have a look at what is common and what is different with them, they have similar mechanics with a couple of noticeable differences here and there. MRQ2 is a great purchase for running a fantasy setting, whereas BRP BGB is great as it's the core rulebook which you can hang different genres from. Someone with a little more 'rules knowledge' will probably answer your questions better, but I'ld recommend not trying to make this system too much like SW, they're like chalk and cheese, and you'll be disappointed in the end. This is a great system, I hope you have fun with it cheers
  20. Yep, some good suggestions, so summing up: I was thinking of making them all 90-95% with an Attribute worth 15 or more; so basically just ignore the Hero Points prerequisite, and make sure the narrative dictates the rest (eg: perform a quest, outstanding cult duties etc), and requires a Experience check granting the Legendary Ability instead of a d6 skill advancement. I was toying with something along these lines, and from your suggestions, it sounds like it's reasonable. Thanks for your prompt replies! cheers
  21. HI everyone, I'm looking through MRQ2, and there's a few things I want to port into BRP, namely 'Legendary Abilities'. The main issue I have is that they incorperate 'Hero Points' as some of their requirements. I don't really like the idea of Hero Points for my setting, I've come off playing pulpy Savage Worlds where the characters throw Bennies around everywhere, and I think that this doesn't really suit the setting I'm using. Hero Points may suit a BRP pulp setting, but not really a gritty fantasy setting, it feels too much like GURPS or Savage Worlds otherwise. I do allow players to 'bend the rules', but I prefer them to use the Fate Rules as presented in BRP where they have to invest their Power Points into the World so to speak, in order to get any good fortune out of it. This pretty much replaces the Bennies or Hero Points concept, and doesn't get overused from what I see. My main issue then is finding another prerequisite to replace Hero Points when it comes to Legendary Abilities? Suggestions appreciated cheers
  22. Yes, you're right, that is an excellent schedule actually. No disrespect intended, I'm pretty interested in the 'Future Earth' setting, and will likely purchase 'Children of the Worm' down the track to show support (and hopefully play). I guess this has all veered a little off topic, originally I just wanted to know if there had been any Greg Stafford involvement with BRP system, just wishful thinking from on old Gloranthan fanboy. Some fool at the local comic shop tried telling me that 3rd Age Glorantha was on the cards with the new BRP system, I guess that sparked my interest to throw the question out there to see if anyone knew about it. Looks like he certainly has got his wires crossed somewhere... I've supported Chaosium since I was a kid in the mid '80s, and I do like the current products - anything Cthuhlu is really cool, I think the 'Cthuhlu Invictus' stuff looks really good. Originally I thought the idea was unusual, but it's pretty cool - I'm considering GMing a Roman setting next, and I'll be using BRP ROME, with a few curl balls thrown in from Cthuhlu Invictus, it should make for a great campaign. I haven't actually read 'Future Earth' yet, but I ordered it online a week ago because it sounds like it has great potential. Anyway, I'm certainly didn't intend to dish the current production schedule, I would love to see Chaosium go from strength to strength with the new settings
  23. I haven't been able to buy 'Stupor Mundi' or 'Merrie England' from Amazon or pdfs from DrivethruRPG, but I found both of them as pdfs at YourGamesNow, so I'll be checking both out pretty soon - I want hard copies!
  24. Well I have 'Chronicles of Future Earth' currently on order from Amazon, so I should be checking it out next week. The setting looks really interesting. If it's going to succeed however, it will need to have support - Chaosium need to fully support another setting outside of CoC (which they have done really good), there needs to be supplements to flesh things out and to keep the punters interested. I have high hopes for Future Earth, but it will only succeed with heaps of support. I do really like what I'm seeing with other settings as well - Chivalry & Chivalry (RQ2) looks good, I would have preferred it to be BRP but that's just pedantic. I love the BRP Rome book, and I wish I had bought 'Stupor Mundi' - I'm eagerly awaiting the release of 'Merrie England', hurry up! :-) Still, I guess I knew my answer about BRP Glorantha, it was just wishful thinking really. As for a 'BRP First Age Glorantha' - well one of you writers should have a chat with Mr Stafford on that one, it's certainly brimmingwith potential...
×
×
  • Create New...