frogspawner

Drips acid?

I use a variant system of SIZ/2 for HPs, but death only occurs at -CON. This makes the players feel very vulnerable, and some are always complaining about it, though in effect they have 50% more hps than straight BRP! (I also think it aids survival because it is somehow acceptable for even heroes to run away or play dead when they reach 0hp (which, incidentally, makes a more natural/acceptable Major Wound threshold). I don't use Fate Points, but have a kind of "Super Dodge" which can always be used to avoid damage, in addition to parries (built up by scoring points for good roleplaying).

Rather than introduce separate Complexity, you could allow blast-spells to be 1pp/die but limit their effectiveness by introducing more defences against them. I have players brought up on that 'other RP game', so I use all the old favourite spells from it, including all the mindless-violence magic they love, at roughly 1d6 per MP. But I also allow DEXx5 'saves' to halve the damage, and have 'amulets' that knock-off a few d6 damage from such blasts. Getting the balance right is tricky, though.

Just define the 'absorption' mechanism (stand nearby, give a hug, eat their brain...) and how much SAN Loss each Power gives.

Yes, it does seem to. I'd assumed Time-Aiming was for missiles, and Location-Aiming was for either, though - and I could still argue that, so I'll stick to it!

Never! RW yes - BRP no. >:->

I'm honoured. Thank you!

Six or less, generally. More can drag. (Mind you, less can drag too, unless you're pretty strict and/or well-organized).

Thanks. But now you have one more than me... Glad to hear it. Same here. You're welcome! (Is that "quit" Freudian, perhaps? I will stop houseruling very soon, honest. But first I just need a good Hide/Sneak/Surprise mechanism...)

Sigh. And I was trying to keep the houserules to a minimum, I really was... :ohwell: In my defence, my list of houserules is shorter than the list of BRP options which every GM must give their players - here's mine. Oh, just the one combined skill for each weapon's attack/parry. I like to keep things simple...

A yukky feel! Sorry, that one goes too far! BTW, the point about the "Parry AND Dodge" mechanism I mentioned before is it's another layer of defence for the PCs, but 'Joe Goblin' and his chums simply won't have it (except special ones the GM says should, like arch-villains). But the PCs don't feel safer, like they would as a D&D-style Sack of *HITs. What I've done for this one is change MA to give an extra attack, instead of double damage (although unarmed attacks still get double damage too). And yes, that applies to the extra attack itself as well. But there are limits - and smaller weapons can 'fit' more attacks in the round than larger ones.

How about this: I allow a Dodge in addition to a Parry, and Dodge (aka Defence) skill doesn't increase like normal skills but only by rewards for roleplaying. So heroes have an 'edge' - being able to miraculously dodge getting hit - but everyone else isn't unfairly reduced to being a 'mook'.

I think they're very similar in principle to my preferred mechanism... ATTACK Normal Hit = Normal damage. Special Hit = Special Effect by weapon type (Crush/Impale/etc, like BRP). Critical Hit = Maximum damage, bypass armour. Fumble = Roll on the Combat Fumble table. PARRY Normal Parry = Blocks damage up to weapon HPs*. Special Parry = Blocks damage up to double weapon HPs*. Critical Parry = Blocks all damage. Fumble = No effect. (* Weapon HPs 50% of BRPs, Shields 75%). DEFENCE Normal Dodge = Reduce hit by 10 damage Special Dodge = Reduce hit by 20 damage Critical Dodge = Reduce hit to 0 damage Fumble = No effect ... so I heartily approve! No opposed-rolls complications. And in fact I wonder if your style of Dodge effect may be better (perhaps Normal halves and, for me, Special quarters?) - more scalable in theory, but in practice...? Well, I wonder.

Well I didn't comment because I know nothing about the setting. But I guess if it's the 'feel' of the setting that's drawn you to it, then yes you'd better not do anything to spoil it. Fireballs/Lightning Bolts and standard chimeric-type D&D monsters (although familiar to your probable player-base, right?) could ruin that pronto. Players joining your game may well be looking for something a bit different - so let 'em have it! As for spreading the word about BRP - good idea, and good luck! If they like the game, tell 'em it's BRP (with houserules) - if they don't you can say it's Stormbringer.

Definitely a crazy idea! But if you want to destroy friendships, why not just play Diplomacy?

OK, thanks for clarifying that. As it happens, I don't use exactly the RQ3 Dodge or RQ2 Defence either - more a cross between the two (an 'always-on' Dodge, but damage-limited). While we're on the subject, please could you spell out the RQ3 "Dodge Problem" that so bothered you, and the other flaws/problems you mention, so I can see how well my favoured mechanism deals with them?

Obviously, I'd recommend the old RQ-style independent rolls. (And it seems to me from his posting above that NickM does too (Mr M?)). To me it seems best for simplicity and immediacy - i.e as soon as you roll, you know how good your hit is (you don't have to wait for the other guys roll, and then look it up on some table...). If you prefer to go "by the book", then I'd say use the published Attack/Defence Matrix - but from what you say above, I reckon you're not averse to house-ruling.

Not me. I don't like 'opposed rolls' and the new Attack/Defence Matrix is too similar to ORs for my taste. I prefer to use the traditional RQ2/3-style independent rolls for attacks and parries (and dodges). BTW 'That Other Forum' is probably the Mongoose "RuneQuest" one - hopefully I can mention it here without getting banned! But I wouldn't bother going there (and don't), now Mr. Trifletraxor has kindly set up this one...

But if there's even the slightest chink in the (D&)Dragon's armour, we BRP fans really should think positive and aim for it - and maybe score that critical hit... And by way of being positive, can we please change this thread's title to "Why is BRP only popular with the Discerning Few?"

It certainly is germane and I'm not laughing. I think I raised this very point a number of months ago - but it was said (by Mr Durrall himself, perhaps?) that the text is in error. However, I prefer that "armour values for both shield and armour are subtracted" mechanism from good old RQ, and dislike the 'opposed roll' style of the new Attack/Defence Matrix (which is related, of course - and that you were asking about in another thread). So I still use the traditional 'Independent Rolls' mechanic - and I'll bet I'm not the only one round here who does.

Thanks, I'm glad to hear it! Best of luck with the conversions. BRP is as much your system as mine, I'd say. We seem to be pretty much in the same boat. I've had a long-running campaign that started as AD&D (1st ed) which I've houseruled/converted piecemeal to RQ2/3 (i.e. near enough BRP) over many, many years... And now to BRP proper (ok, still with plenty of houserules!). You'll get plenty of help from the guys (and gal/s?) hereabouts, and if you find any of my campaign/rules stuff useful, please feel free...

Surely we can rule out 'wishful thinking' from a D&Der of 30+ years standing. To say "D&D4 has failed" may be overstatement, but if we can read between the lines and see a group of 7 experienced D&D GM's each with their own groups giving D&D4 the Thumbs Down and looking for something else... ...what better evidence do you need that it's simply the truth? Bygoneyrs, are you and your cohorts intending to stick with AD&D/GW/Traveller or are you all intending to change to a new system? BRP (with some houserules) should be good for all those genres...

Find yourself a copy of RQ2 then, and enjoy! There's a lot of good stuff packed into those 120 pages. Certainly. Mine's not very different (the original is pretty good, after all). Instead of just adding the points for each 25% attack in step 2, I multiply the total by it at the end. (That's it - I thought I'd made more changes, but they're mostly in the Treasure Tables). The MonsterMark system was a highly maths-based method, derived for D&D in the Old Days, which calculated various values: D = the amount of damage the monster would do to an average opponent each round; A = the number of rounds it would last against an average (immortal!) opponent; and finally M (the "MonsterMark" rating) = D x A x Fiddle Factor (for special abilities etc). Far too longwinded and complex but the principle's sound. PS: I hope you appreciate this posting - now I've lost my "666" count...

I use it too, but the other way around: If Roll x 5 is under Skill: Special If Roll x 20 is under Skill: Critical No worries about rounding, and multiplying is a smidgin faster than dividing.

I just use the Easy (x2) or Difficult (/2) modifers for the same reason (ok, and some non-standard x10 & /10 ones too, sometimes). Oh, and I have electronic character sheets that calculate/print the crit/spec/fumble chances automatically... So, do I qualify?