Jump to content

frogspawner

Regulars
  • Posts

    1,519
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by frogspawner

  1. The nice men who come round with a lorry every week will do it, quite reasonably. They took several boxes of mine a few months back. (Just the post-100 junk - the others are lovingly preserved in their red leather binders, naturally).
  2. Putting extra effort into finding clues isn't really what I'd call 'RP', it's just playing the game. RP is giving their character personality. If they're looking in the wrong place, they should find nothing. The GM should probably tell them so before it takes too much gaming-time.
  3. Hardly ever bother with this. I use just one skill - "Language" - to cover all languages known. Saves clogging up the character-sheet with many (mostly unused) percentages. Languages learned this year give "Very Difficult" rolls (1/10th skill), and ones within 1-2 years are Difficult (x1/2). Similarly for Literacy (which covers the normal scripts of any languages known). [Languages of special significance, such as cult ones, can be listed separately and increased as normal].
  4. Wow. That is a really interesting idea, gents! Good work. Haven't looked at the numbers, but feel that Armour should be rolled into it somehow, to reduce maths even further.
  5. The wording "...the crack’s SIZ is restricting your character’s movement..." is misleading - it is actually allowing. No need to make an exception, I'd say - if a character with smaller SIZ than the hole failed (or rather, the hole failed to allow them), it could represent some of their equipment snagging.
  6. That's 2^(SIZ/8) x 4 stone in real money (and 4st=56lbs, or approx 50lbs).
  7. Ah, so it has! I remember now - it's the scenario that's hard-to-find. That version doesn't have it... Very glad to hear it. Should keep you going until CF2, at least... Now you only have to convert it from evil metric to fine upstanding imperial measure, and you're good to go!
  8. Another possibility, if a bit hard-to-find, would be the *original* BRP/Worlds of Wonder "Magic World" fantasy supplement. It sort-of has classes, but is gorgeously simple: 18 pages, including monsters & scenario (but requires a few pages from the old BRP "Intro to Roleplaying" too). A gem - absolutely perfect for fantasy-fan D100 newbies.
  9. By all means, Classic Fantasy. Tweaked to let fighter-types do some minor magic - that's up to you. But how'd you feel about everybody doing their own magic? That'd be full-on good old RuneQuest.
  10. Gosh, the same old problem we had back in the days of AD&D minute-long rounds! No worries, just say your rounds are 2 seconds (or whatever). Don't get hung-up on the rules - do what's right.
  11. Not bothered about "official", but I will always strive for the best.
  12. Yeah, it's poop. Me, I dump the lot and use a bare-bones variant of D&D 3.x initiative. More fun, less brain-strain. <Cue purists to slam me... Rosen?>
  13. I can't help thinking that mixing d100 rolls for some things with d10 rolls for others, would hinder you & your players getting familiar with BRP's d100 system. Well, whaddya know? Thanks for that! I'm more of an RQ fundamentalist than I ever knew...
  14. Good one. Think I tried something similar, but inferior, once - which didn't earn it's place on the character sheet. This might well. Yeah, a subtle difference. But some may prefer it, at least until they're old BRP hands who know the Table backwards...
  15. Glad to be of service! My thought was it may be less confusing for the OP's newbie players, too. "Roll under Skill or Statx5 (sometimes other/modified)" is easier than "Roll under Skill or Statx5 (sometimes other) or a Magic Number from that Resistance Table thingy" - it seems like just 2 core mechanics rather than 3.
  16. Er... thanks, guys. I still know. And one shows the table's relation to the reassuringly-familiar STATx5.
  17. How very unpleasant.... Nice! (Sorry, can't help with the rules, but thanks for sharing).
  18. (tr. "Evil is always and everywhere...") Tell me about it. How do you do, Orakel.
  19. Nope. STATx5 modified +/-5% per opposed stat point under/over 10 is the same as the Resistance Table. And as your formula. But being based on the very easy and familiar STATx5, some players may be less averse to using it.
  20. I know. But expressing it as just a modifier to the unimpeachably simple "STATx5" might make some people happier to use it.
  21. Yep, I can only agree. Though I don't like too much use of tables (they separate you from the 'being-there' feel), I am ok with the Resistance formula. And D20 mechanics don't belong in the core of a D100 system.
  22. Good call - it's been interesting: 1) To see what less civilized forums might be like; and 2) To hear that MW is Elric! salvaged as tribute to Lynn Willis.
  23. We shouldn't be dogmatic, though. Would it make for a better system...?
  24. If you prefer a formula to the Resistance Table, you could try this instead: STAT x 5% roll (modified +/-5% per point by which the opposed stat is under/over 10).
  25. Nice. The gauntlet is down, Mr P - deny it if you can!
×
×
  • Create New...