Gollum

Sure. But from time to time, there is still one combat against some more ordinary foes (cultists for instance). So JBrennan questions are very good ones: in such cases, more precise rules – or, at least, some explanations – are welcome… Having said that, I do agree with you. Combats are not the most important part of the game. This is a game about investigations. But even investigations don't have very precise rules in Cthulhu… Spot hidden, Library use, Fast talk, History or Archeology… And that's just about all. I want to insist on something. Some people tell that Cthulhu rules are neither realistic nor well written for investigations. They especially say that finding a clue is too aleatory – despite of the fact that it can make an investigation succeed or fail (if you don’t find the vital clue, you don’t understand the mystery)… So, they prefer playing with another set of rules, like the Gumshoe system for instance… But even if the Gumshoe system is a very good set of rules, I think that they didn’t really understand Cthulhu system. Of course, Cthulhu rules are very simple. They are almost simplistic… And, of course they don’t insist on anything: neither combats nor investigations… But this is deliberate! They are made to let the game master focus on the story, and the players focus on thinking about the mystery rather than on dice rolls or the choice of strategic maneuvers during combats. So, never forget the rule of easy and difficult actions. Doubled or halved skill. This is one of the most powerful game master tool, the one which will make the difference between a good Cthulhu game master and a bad one. Use it extensively… The character are looking for an important reference in a library? Don’t content yourself of letting the players roll and telling them: “4 hours later, you finally found the book.” To the contrary. Ask them how long they are searching for that book, and how exactly they do it. Then, compare the time they spend to the one written in the adventure and adjust their skills accordingly. Did they spend a lot of time, almost looking every book in the library and even asking some help to the librarians? The success sounds assured… Easy roll. Did they just glance rapidly at the shelves because they are in a hurry? Diffcult roll. Likewise, ask the players to describe what they do exactly during combats. Not to have strategic answers, like in a wargame, but to have good descriptions of their actions in order to adjust the skills accordingly… If a character tries to hit his foe’s groin with the knee just after having successfully grappled him with both hands, this is an easy strike! If he tries a jumping kick at the head in a little room, it is a difficult blow… If you do so, it will make your players think much more before acting… Exaclty like we think in our ordinary life to make our actions easier. Dice roll will become less important than decisions, and the game will become more living (and more “realistic” too: players will at least have the feeling that things depend on what they exactly do rather than dice).

Hi! I'm coming a bit late in this thread, but I'm just discovering it. Indeed, after playing a lot of GURPS Cthulhu games, I'm coming back to the BRP rules. GURPS is a very good game, and it works very well with Cthulhu adventures; but it requires a lot of time and investment from the game master... Furthermore, I've got a job, a family, etc., and since I play quite rarely now, I need easier and faster rules... I have just two things two say. 1) Contrary to GURPS rules, and also to Runequest rules, Cthulhu rules are designed to let a huge freedom to the game master. The story is the most important thing in Lovecraftian adventures. So, because precise combat rules inevitably lead the discussion around strategy, rolls, bonuses and pealties, they often disturb the atmosphere of the game... That is why combat rules are not very precise in Cthulhu. So, just remember something: when an action sounds easy, the skill is doubled; when it sounds difficult, the skill is halved. This very simple principle solves a lot of problems. When a man is down, for instance, all his actions are difficult: attacks and defenses. But if the character comes from behind and strikes a foe who didn't notice him, his attack is easy... So, don't be afraid of taking decisions from yourself. You are the game master! As long as difficult actions are compensed by other actions which are easy (and vice versa), the players will find that you are fair - and that the game is consistent. 2) If you still want some more precisions about several topics, have a look on the big golden book titled Basic RolePlaying. There are a lot of optional rules inside, coming from other chaosium games. You don't have to use all of them. To the contrary, they are optional, which means that you can choose the ones which are nice for your games and the ones that you will drop. Have fun.

Robin Laws wrote somewhere that HQ1 was not professional. There was several problems, he said, and he corrected them by rewriting everything in HQ2. So HQ2 is like HQ1, but without the problems and more professionally written.

I fully do agree with you. Because, precisely, I’m not learning the martial art sport. I’m learning a traditional karate. The gojuryu shoreikan. We use every possible technique: blows with open or close hands, feet, knees or elbows, shoulder, ankle and even the head... Strikes at the throat, the eyes, the groin, the joints… A lot of throw and grapple techniques, techniques to twist and break wrists or arms… Etc. That makes our karate very hard and long to learn, but very interesting. Of course, when we fight together, we do it carefully. But more we are skilled, more we can do it fast and strongly. Sure, it's not exactly like a true combat… No training fight is exactly like a true combat. Even in full contact competitions, K1 or the likes. If it was true combat, about one fighter in two would die… And most others will be disabled for life… There are always rules to avoid accidents. Having said that, I learnt a lot of techniques to attack and to parry or dodge every possible attack… Of course, I'm not one the best warrior in the world. Not at all. I'm just a nidan practicer (second dan). Which means that I’m still a beginner. Something like 40 to 50% in my combat skills (Brawl, Grapple and Martial art) in BRP terms… But I already know how combat is unpredictable. No technique can be absolutely sure to succeed and things never happen like you want… Both RQ and GURPS simulate that fact very well. GURPS with its 1 second turn. You plan what you want to do very precisely, of course, but only for the next second and without knowing in advance what will do your foe: there is no statement phase in GURPS, so, even if you act first, you act without knowing what others will do… Furthermore you are never sure to succeed. You can even score a critical failure which will make you fall down or lose your weapon… And RQ, with its maneuvers chosen after the roll, which make each warrior change his mind during the 12 second turn. Combats are a mixture of strategy and chaos. Both GURPS and RQ simulate it well. Now, to come back to this thread, I would say that RQ uses special effect to do it, that is things which are added after the roll to give the fight more variety. Exactly like special effects are added after the shooting in a movie. GURPS, to the contrary, introduce this variety before the roll, which makes it more simulationist. You have to choose a precise maneuver for each turn, while RQ make you choose it only if your roll is higher than your opponent’s one. Which is better? None. GURPS may sound more detailed and precise (which is certainly true: combats rules, with the Martial Arts book, spread on more than 300 pages). But it is sometimes boring to use all these modifiers for every contingency.

I do agree with you for most part. I would just add, as I tried to explain it above, that it also depends on the length of the combat turn. Changing your mind in 1 second doesn't sound realistic. Neither does not having the possibility to do it in 12 seconds.

I can’t say how it works in a lot of other role playing games, but it is not the case in GURPS. If you make a normal attack, then, you will just do normal damage. Specific maneuvers which are harder to make always give you an edge: they do more damage, knock your foe down or out, etc. Brief, just hitting someone for damage is not at all superior. To the contrary. More difficult maneuvers are superior… But they are more difficult… I’m not a fencer. Just a black belt karateka. And I’ve always notice how GURPS was very close to what I feel during fight… Easier attacks are the easiest to parry. If you want to make the defender’s job more difficult, then you have to choose a more difficult technique… This is exactly what you said: if you just do a normal attack in GURPS, then your opponent will often parry it. Now, if you want to pass your foe’s defenses, you better choose something else… Which is something more difficult to do. That is why beginners are less effective. They are not skilled enough to try more difficult maneuvers and so, all what they do is quite easy to parry or dodge. Which is exactly what GURPS do. Telegraphic attacks are easier to do, but easier to parry. Yes. But here is the main difference between RQ and GURPS. GURPS work with 1 second turn… It means that when you try a maneuver and can’t do it, the next turn already begins when you change your mind and try something else… RQ, with its 12 seconds combat turn works differently. You have a lot of time to do several attacks and defense during one turn… So, finally, both of these games are realistic. In one second, you can’t change your mind and try something else. When you try to hit your foe at the head, for instance, and can’t do it because your foe suddenly moved, it just means that you missed your attack for that turn, or that your foe dodged it… In both cases, you will have to try something else… On your next turn only. Brief, things are not really planned in GURPS, because they are only planed for one second. And they don’t always work as you wanted… In 12 seconds, to the contrary, you have a lot of opportunities to change your mind and to do something that you didn’t plan during the very first second … So rules have to take that into account. Things change a lot during only one turn… Just imagine the reverse: a 12 second turn without the possibility to change your mind, or a 1 second turn with the possibility to try two different maneuvers… Both would be totally unrealistic. But precisely! If a GURPS character wants to kill his foe, he will have to choose the right maneuvers to do so. Otherwise, his foe will easily parry or dodge all his attacks… And the fight will be very, very long. _____ That is why I wrote in the other thread that GURPS is more simulationist than BRP. In GURPS, you have to precise everything you do, and how exactly you try to do it, second after second… With RQ, to the contrary, you content yourself to roll; and you only choose a specific maneuver if you have a good roll. Note that I don’t criticize RQ at all. And that I don’t say that more simulationist means more realistic. As I wrote it above, RQ is more realistic for a 12 seconds combat turn, while GURPS is more for a 1 second turn. Brief both of these games have a very good consistency.

Actually, both are true. Sure, what you do depends on what exactly does the defender... But ones you choose to do something, you don't really have the time to change your mind... If you decide to aim at an arm, for instance, you don't have the time to suddenly aim at the leg just because the enemy moved his arm off during your attack. You simply missed his arm and have to make another attack if you want to aim at his leg after that. This is how I interpret a missed attack roll. The defender doesn't have to defend himself... Not because the attack was too clumsy, but because what the defender did without defending himself was enough to avoid it: he moved away without necessarily wanting it. Of course, games which make the player choose his precise maneuver before rolling (and which don't let him change it no matter how well he succeeded), work with bonuses and penalties... But that is quite realistic. Some attacks are really harder than some others. Telegraphic attacks are, for instance, much easier to do than a normal attack. That's why beginner choose them... But they are much easier to parry too... Likewise, secret thrust like Lagardère one, in fencing, are harder to do than a normal attack. This is why only a very well trained fencer can do it and will find it difficult, despite of his training. GURPS has critical successes and failures that can change the result of the attack, of course... But not the maneuver you chose. If you chose a mere swing attack to the torso, for instance, a critical success may make you dish out more damage, and this damage bonus may even make your foe step back, fall down, or collapse. Likewise, a critical failure can make you fall down, drop your weapon, or do anything else which will give your foe an edge during his next attack... But you won't ever hit the weapon arm or the head... You aimed at the torso and will hit the torso. Finally, I think that the main difference between GURPS and RQ is the length of the turn. GURPS combat turns last only one second. In such a short time, you absolutely don't have the time to change your mind. You do something, see whether it works, and then try something else on the next turn... RQ combat turns last 12 seconds (or maybe 10; I don't know, I only use BRP)... A lot of things can happen in 12 seconds. Usually several attacks and defenses. That is why, in my humble opinion, RQ allow to choose the maneuver after the roll result and GURPS absolutely doesn't... Both are consistent. And that is why, in my humble opinion, the expression "special effect" is better for RQ than for GURPS. Special effects are something that you add to enhance the movie... Often after the shooting. In GURPS, there is no really special effects. Results are just the direct consequences of player's choices.

Thank you for the hint. I will glance at it.

Hi everybody! I am the one who was speaking about special effects with Silent_Bob in the Basic Roleplaying subforum. I liked this expression and wanted to know more about its meaning. Here is a huge difference between GURPS and RQ. In GURPS, you choose your maneuver before rolling, as you would do in real life. You try to do something precise and then, you see whether you succeed.

Yes. This is often often the problem when one cut out a vast subject into different parts. Some questions fall inevitably between two or more parts...

Very good idea.

This is exactly what I thing. Most training situations are easy: a non moving target, no stress at all, all the times you want to aim... So in training situations archers double their skill. Likewise, most of what we do in our ordinary life is easy actions. Who among us would try to do something very dangerous or something very important without being sure to have a very good chance to succeed? Unless being very well trained, we don't try to climb a dangerous cliff just for fun... Finally, if murderer can kill someone with a sword an axe or a knife without a good medieval training, this is due to the fact that their victims doesn't move. their either attacked by surprise or chocked by the fact of being attacked.

I don't have RQ6. But I'm very interested to know what you mean by "special effect system". Now, since it is of topic, we may carry on this discussion with private message if you do agree.

I still found it works very well. Especially with this very lite version of the BRP system. It lets the GM focuse on the storytelling, which is the most important for a Lovecraftian atmosphere. Rules have to be completely forgotten by players... But as you said it, it is off topic. We should carry on this discussion with private mails if you want to.

You're perfectly right here. Yes. It also depends on how the GM handles things. A rule-lite game is good for someone who can quickly improvize and adapt the system to what the player characters are exaclty doing... Contrary to what most people think, too light sets of rules are not good for beginners. Yes, that's right. My approach of BRP is too "generic and universal" centered. The only BRP game I really know is Call of Cthulhu. After that, I directly jump to the golden book.

Yes. It makes it more clear. Intuitively, I would say that HQ, since it is a universal and narrative game, allows the GM to choose exactly what kind of heroes he wants: almost ordinary people, like Frodo, experimented heroes, like Aragorn, or demi-god, like Heracles... RQ, on the other side, says how to roll each characteristic and how to assess skill levels. So he doesn't have such a versatility. Now, I don't know these two games enough to be sure. So, I prefer letting the others answering to this question.

Just speaking about dice, the D100 has much more granuality than the D20, of course. 5 times more. Now, a D1000 wouldn't really add something to the game. Having a bonus (or an ability improve) of +1% is almost nothing... So having a +0.1% would be ridiculous... Too much granuality kills granuality.

Yes. That's right. Now, it is quite easy to explain that the percentages on the character sheet are the percentages in a stressful situation, like a combat to the death... Then, the GM just has to add that in easier situations (most of the ones we meet in our ordinary life), percentages are doubled. Likewise, for percentages above 100, it is easy to say that some actions are difficult and, then, percentages are halved.

Sure. Special and critical successes are rare enough... But when you explain the game to a beginner, you still tell him that you have to roll under your skill to succeed and that when you roll very low, it is even better. In a game like D&D, to the contrary, you say that higher is the result, better is the success. Now, another difference came to my mind. Games which are using a D100 under the ability have an edge over the D20 (no matter if you have to roll over a difficulty or under a stat). Abilities become percentages. And everybody understand percentages because a lot of things in our culture is described via percentages.

You may be right. I don't know Runquest enough to make a very good comparison. All what I can say is that GURPS gives a lot of very precise modifiers for almost every combat situation and BRP - as it is written in the big gold book - doesn't. And I am very happy of that. Having more freedom (and much less rules to memorize) is what I want now.

Here is what I wrote in the thread about knockback attacks... Hoping this can help... ____ After reading the HQ vs RQ thread, I would add that BRP is between GURPS and HQ. To explain what I mean... GURPS is very simulationist. Of course, you can use it in a simplier manner, by getting read of all optional rules... But when you bought a 500-page book of dense and detail rules, you rarely do that. HQ, tp the contrary, is very narrativist. It lets the GM decide freely what is a success or a victory, etc., depending on the situation and the genre. Then, BRP falls somewhere in between. It offers simulationist rules... But they are much more simple than GUPRS ones and they give a lot of freedom to the GM. Our discussion about what can or cannot do a character with the Spear skill only is one example of that. _____ So, I would say that your choice will depend of the degree of simultaionism that you want in your game. If you love playing in a purely narrative way, where the most important thing is the story, HQ is the best choice. Without any contest! But if you like having some rules that "simulate the reality", BRP is better. Now, if you want rules for every contingency, with precise maneuvers and combat techniques for your combats, have a look on GURPS.

After reading the HQ vs RQ thread, I would add that BRP is between GURPS and HQ. To explain what I mean... GURPS is very simulationist. Of course, you can use it in a simplier manner, by getting read of all optional rules... But when you bought a 500-page book of dense and detail rules, you rarely do that. HQ, tp the contrary, is very narrativist. It lets the GM decide freely what is a success or a victory, etc., depending on the situation and the genre. Then, BRP falls somewhere in between. It offers simulationist rules... But they are much more simple than GUPRS ones and they give a lot of freedom to the GM. Our discussion about what can or cannot do a character with the Spear skill only is one example of that.

It would be nice, of course... But the risk would be to make another game like GURPS. Before coming to the BRP system, I was playing GURPS, which was even my favorite system. GURPS gives a lot of options like the ones you describe. The problem is that it makes a lot of rules... Several hundreds pages, just for combat! So, eventually, I get bored of all those rules with precise modifer to know for each maneuver... What I love with BRP is that it let the GM decide how to handle such things. In a very simple way or with a little more detail... No more very specific bonus or penalty and option to remember for every contingency!

You're right for opposed skill rolls. But not for ordinary actions and combats. And even for opposed rolls, very low roll (special or critical successes) are far much better than higher ones.

All weapons are not really the same. You can't use a sword like a staff, for instance. And the handle of the sword is too small to be used for knocking back a foe. The best that you can do with a sword handle is punching your adversary exactly as you would with a bare hand... Furthermore, it's part of the nunti* training and of the yari* training to use the shaft of the weapon as well as the impaling point, while it is not part of the sword training to use it like a mace or a warhammer... But I still understand what you mean. And I do agree with you on the fact that it is a matter of interpretation... I even suppose that this difference of interpretation comes from the fact that your main reference is Runequest while mine is Call of Cthulhu. Call of Cthulhu is more versatile with skill use, because combats are not as important as in Runequest. So, for the purpose of this thread, you are the one to follow. This is a thread about a combat technique! Yes. And in Call of Cthulhu, even if there is no specific rule to cover skill crossover, nothing prevent a character to have both Spear and Staff in order to use his spear in different manners. Exactly. In my mind, this is like the difference between punching someone (with the Brawl skill) or making him fall (with the Grapple skill). Either you do damage, either you do something special. You're perfectly right here. My interpretation of the rules was too "Call of Cthulhu" centered. In a campaign that requires more combat precision, your manner of doing things is much better. _____ * the nunti is a boot hoak, very similar to a spear. The yari is the japanese spear.