frogspawner

(Marvellous! It took a good 10 seconds before I could resolve that into "realistic". Was that one specially for me? Thanks!)

How do you feel about my "parallel plane" idea? When I see The Green on any map, it somehow belittles it. Shouldn't The Green be limitless, a world of it own...? Sounds just the model we need for SharedWorld too! Who does it? A one-man band, or collaborative group?

For new players, it has to be the simplicity and understandability of % skills. So keep it simple. (Then mention the potential to add complexity later...) It's multi-genre. It's dangerous. Dr.Who meets Starship Troopers? PS: I was just wondering this very thing, down in the SharedWorld forum...

Good one. Yes, these are needed! On Chaosium's poll evidence two should be enough for starters: Fantasy and SciFi. Question 1: Should the options be the same in both genres, for common simplicity? Question 2: Would we ever be able to agree what options to use?? Hmm, also a good point, that the "Type 2" people are lost to BRP (Except perhaps for the CoC-ers. Hmm - should we wage a civil war on CoC to grab their supporters for BRP?) Obviously, we have the sensible "Type 1" people here already...

I guess so. But in that light, is Sky Mountain enough to make SharedWorld distinctive? Probably not. Just having deep shadows is a fiddly detail. BRP does multiple genres. So maybe we should play to that. I always liked the Moorcock/Corum plane-shifting idea, but thought not enough was made of it. It's not necessarily counter to the Gates idea - the actual, physical gates are just more formalized instances. Would that make SharedWorld distinctive - having multiple worlds, in those different genres? Harks back to Worlds of Wonder, which wasn't successful (was it?). But was that due to lack of support? Maybe we could enlist various monograph-authors to endorse their creations as a "plane" of SharedWorld... That'd be a way to kick-start it!

Same here, but on reflection we probably don't need a poll, since ultimately they're both right - BRP needs a great system and cool settings. 1) Is the system great enough? Or does it need to be simpler (or more complex)? Or just have a default set of options? (What options does the QuickStart actually use?) 2) Which setting(s) shall we choose to develop? SharedWorld? Fractured Hopes? Classic Fantasy's Realm? All of them?

Well, please come on down to the SharedWorld sub-forum and help make them happen...

I guess I can live with the Sky Mountain. My wanting to avoid it is probably just 'wanton'. Mind you, things like that can have odd effects, that puncture the fantasy unexpectedly. Frex, there'd be no sun-'dials' - they'd be straight. A mate of mine had two suns: nice touch. The moon, though, had a fixed 28-day cycle, corresponding to the 28-day months: neat, except the day-of-the-month supposedly gave the fraction of fullness (in 28ths). Eventually, we twigged that meant it 'pinged' back from full to new in one day! Most amusing, and I liked it, but after toying with ideas about silver-plant-growths and crazy cosmologies, he cracked and reverted to a standard lunar cycle. Shame. The principle remains, though - will the next contribution bring something over-arching and, to me, unacceptable?

Oh certainly. I just like the immediacy of knowing the effect as soon as my dice stop rolling. Whether rolled together or separately. (Besides being too old/addled to cope with anything more complicated...)

That's the ideal attitude to have when contributing, of course. But potential contributors may be put off by the 'absolutes' (like me, by the Sun-Mountain thing). And who knows what other wacky absolutes might come along? Politeness and a natural desire to get contributions might well prevent the SharedWorld Committee from saying "No!" - and then we're stuck with it. (Like Thieves' World - I recall some rubbish story said all Mages had to hide a "secret", or lose their power. Lame and stupid. But it became canon.) Contributors may feel the need to contradict some things, but hopefully not 'wantonly'. Am I, wanting a normal-sun world, exiled beyond the Gates? Are there limits on what I can have there? Am I, liking Akershule/Portal and The Green, allowed to have parallel-world versions of them, otherwise conforming to everything said about them in the official SharedWorld? (And again - will The Green be staying on the official maps?)

...but is replaced by a worse problem! And, since I usually host, let's not go there. Mind you - that could help concentrate people's minds and speed-up combat considerably!

Well, thanks for telling me. <Sigh>. <Sounds of cheque being torn up...>

OK, fair enough, you might not know if you can do an extra combat manoeuvre until the other guy's rolled his parry, but... Can you calculate your damage before he comes back from the loo? Or would that be telling too much?

So, you'll appreciate all the parallel worlds they reached would be in "Dragonewt's World/Multiverse", no matter how much they resembled Rurik's/Soltakss'/Frogspawners/Triff's (unless Rurik/whoever wanted the invasion to be canon for their world, of course.) That's the other face of the same problem - your ideas shouldn't have to compromise, or be approved by a committee, or be so bland no-one cares. Who are we to say that world-dominating events/facts (like a Charnjibber Invasion or a Sun-on-a-Stick) are BadWrongFun and not allowed?

Ah, well - in Dragonewt's World, yes - laser-headed trollkin can stride around laying waste to Portal city. Under the model I'm suggesting, that would be for Rurik to make canon in Rurik's World; or, anyone who GM's a campaign on Rurik's World play it that way (though still non-canon). But, that way, the replicating Charnjibber/Trollkin Invasion idea survives - and some may well like it. With the existing single SharedWorld, I expect this idea would die. Worse yet, if the rest of us said "Yeah, laser-head 'kin!", then Rurik would be obliged to make it canon - and Portal would be destroyed (or at least radically warped). However, I suspect Rurik would just (sensibly) take his creativity elsewhere... That's my point. Associated, yet separate worlds - so all ideas can live. (BTW, what IS the status of The Green? Does it now have to be, legally, written-out of the previous SharedWorld stuff?)

I can live with that - but with the assumption these 'Combat Manoeuvres' are extras, not alterations to the hit just scored. So, we shall see...

Basically, every contributor should be GM of their own universe. But universes could be virtually identical, by incorporating other people's ideas - or not, as they see fit. Anything goes. No idea would be lost because it didn't gain general approval (or their potential contributor didn't even mention it because they feared it wouldn't). Nothing would be stifled. Say, for example: Rurik's World has the city of Akershule/Portal, and a Sky Mountain somewhere near the edge, and no trollkin. Soltakss's World has Akershule too, but Sky Mountain is central and taller, with plenty of trolls & trollkin. Dragonewt's World has Akershule (but heavily influenced with hi-tech), Sky Mountain (either central or marginal, opinions vary), plus laser-headed charnjibbers (which don't appear in Rurik's but do in Soltakss's). Frogspawner's World has Akershule, surrounding plains dominated by demi-bird-riding nomadic lizard-folk, a normal sun but a symbolic holy-place called Sky Mountain, charnjibbers/tech-items found only rarely, and a desert area known as The Green - where once was a huge fertile jungle stolen away by Chaos - now haunted by sentient clouds which hunt living things to suck out their souls and warp their bodies into vile monstrosities. Triff's World is identical to Rurik's, but does have trollkin - one of whom is an immortal, unkillable (albeit puny) hero. You get the picture? A Shared Setting - but of individual 'worlds', separated perhaps only by a 'thin fabric between the planes', or sometimes not separated at all.

Ah, the Classic! Yours are much more original - I look forward to your posts. If I've now spoilt that by mentioning it, then that is my deep regret. Sorry. Please, type on fearlessly! PS: Back in the Old Days, a mate of mine would refer to stuff like his "+1 Halibut" and "Vaporal Sword". Entirely unintentional, and endearing. Immensely clever guy, his brain just didn't spare the time to bother much with trivial stuff like words.

Well, that was just my illustration of the principles of Opposed versus 'standard' rolling. The details were BRP-style, which I appreciate will be different in MRQ (e.g. it hasn't got specials/impales, has it?). But if the rolls are independent, so you immediately know your hit's (potential) effect before the other guy rolls, I shall be happy. Is it like that, d'y'know?

To help jump-start/re-start the project, I think the dilemma I mentioned at the outset needs fixing: Every author needs final authority over what goes into his/her creation. BUT A truly "shared" world can't have a final authority (or it is theirs, not shared). My proposed solution: Each author has a world (universe!) of their own. Others can contribute to it, but always subject to that World-Author's agreement. AND Travel between the worlds is quite easy (for adventurers, at least*) but not automatic, and always subject to Game-Masters' agreement. * This is the "Gate" idea again. Though now I'm thinking maybe more like a (very unreliable) spell, or ritual - rather like Corum passing between planes, it often/usually wouldn't work. But the normal mechanism(s) would be up to individual World-Authors, of course!

Yeah, I know. You're right - so now I'll have to tear up that cheque already made out to "Evil Empire of Mongoose". :ohwell: Whereas they did mention 'Strike Ranks' (the fake ones: rolled initiative, is it?). My sympathies, but that's not an issue for me. However, they also actually mentioned the toolkit principle - so at least patching-in real SRs would be 'legal'... Aha! You are probably right. I'd just presumed it was a tyop...

Nope. Here's the difference... I roll a critical hit. With ORs, I don't know how good a hit it is until you come back from the loo and roll your parry, because your roll's Degree of Success will be subtracted from mine (e.g. a normal parry 'downgrading' my max-damage crit to a double-damage impale). With 'standard rolls' [oh, Loz/Pete, I love that name, and all the more non-capitalized!], I immediately know what I've done (i.e. max damage by-passing armour); how well you parry it is your business, not mine.

Heck, one lousy split-infinitive and I'm declared incomprehensible! It's not like I'm challenging Atgxtg for his "Most Amusing Typo's" Crown, or anything. (Still not figured out what his name was supposed to be, btw. ) OK, I guess it doesn't make much sense until you've followed that link, downloaded the magazine, and read the preview article. But I recommend doing so. "Combat does not use Opposed Rolls for resolution, as introduced in the Players’ Guide PDF and reverts to standard rolls for each party in the fight. This removes the ‘Downgrade’ situation which caused a great deal of consternation when introduced! However, neither are there tables for combat resolution. It has been simplified – as an attacker you either hit or miss and as a defender you parry or you don’t. Whether damage penetrates your parry depends on the comparative sizes of the weapons used." - Loz/Pete, Signs & Portents 75 You tell me, but it seems clear. Of course, we could be being deceived - a mongoose is pretty nearly a weasel, after all... Aiee! Aiee! The stars are Right! Early.

Well, my rip-off version of the original BRP Intro Guide (attached 9 posts up-thread) is 4 pages, and includes narrative, mechanics, examples and the mini-scenario. How good (or bad) is that? It'd be interesting to compare it with the Pendragon one.

From the Systems & Settings sub-forum. Worthy of more prominence, I thought...