frogspawner

Too limiting for my purposes, everyone is to be inspired by patron/ancestor spirits in this setting so each "Inspired" individual will be just that, an individual.

Not too limiting at all. Five traits selected from the full list is plenty to define the philosophy of someone's 'family line', if you need such a thing.

I'm talking about FATE 2.0 & Spirit of the Century style FATE points not BRP ones (I don't have the BRP book yet)

BRP Fate Points work in the way I outlined, which isn't compatible with the GM handing them out. I'm sure someone would be happy to tell you the details, so you don't have to make do with some other system :shocked: until your BRP arrives.

I've always thought that the opposite of "Impulsive" should be "Planned" rather than "Cautious".

Stubborn/Receptive bothers me less, but I like Stubborn/Flexible better.

Yes, Cautious should be reserved for the positive-sounding opposite of Brave. Impulsive is a good one, it'll probably replace Dynamic on my "Precise / Dynamic (Fussy/Careless)" scale, but I still prefer Precise to Planned (though I feel there could be something better still out there, and I can't be bothered to fetch the thesaurus... ). And, yes, Flexible is better than Receptive, thanks.

That's rather like the Harn system, isn't it? Can't say I'm keen.

If, for example, two people get Critical Successes, the higher of the two numbers wins.

Nah, don't like that - you were trying to roll low!

If those two rolls are the same number, then the person with the higher skill wins.

Yeah, like that - much better!

...the total must be < their current skill, or 101+%.

I presume that should read roll ">" skill for increase rolls. But then, since everything else is rather non-standard, maybe not...

See, that's why we need a Martial Arts supplement...

I guess you're right, including that sort of rules-tweaking and campaign details like Sandy Petersen's Mysticism mentioned above by TRose - for those who want an oriental flavour, at least.

As for other MA advantages, I see no reason why there couldn't be Martial Arts style specialisms in any skill, not just combat skills.

Although they wouldn't be 'martial', so you'd probably want to call them something like "Ki" skills (as in the Land of Ninja book, I'm reliably informed ). If a normal skill-roll was under the MA/Ki(<anyskill>) percentage, it'd give that skill's Special effect (a bit like MA does for combat skills). For those wanting the more highly magical (wuxia?) style, maybe spending PP could give a Critical effect (or when you really need to guarantee that Special), like the Fate Points mechanism. Some GM's may even allow spending POW (or many PP?) to gain some magic-like "super-critical" effect. Details to follow, in the forthcoming Martial Arts Supplement, perhaps...

I was thinking of using the passions in their normal way but also giving players a fate point per passion that is 18+, I think this gives players even more of a reason to stick to playing their PCs persona.

Nice idea, but BRP Fate Points aren't the GM's to give (they are the Power Points you already have, just called Fate Points when spent in certain ways). See what you think of my mechanism, below, which may bend but hopefully doesn't break the BRP rules...

Purely off the cuff, but how about, rather than using the fate point mechanic and Allegiance (which is in some ways a fre-form variant of Pendragon's Passions rules), define some "ideals" - sets of say five traits that exemplify a particular ideal / philosophy / worldview and if a character who espouses that ideal has trait scores that qualify (16+ if 1-20 scale, 80+ if 1-100 scale, can't remember how BRP 0 does 'em but think it's 1-100) they get a benefit. Or even, for each qualifying trait they get a minor benefit, and for the full set they get an enhabced benefit?

Spookily close to a system I've just adopted! I defined, yes, five traits as "Virtues" for each religion/philosophy/whatever. Priests get minor benefits if they cultivate them; exemplary religious warriors (like RuneLords) get better benefits but have to stick to all of them, and more rigidly. Other characters can have them (one or two player-picked ones, but could be according to culture, if you like) and so are encouraged to play their chosen persona, because Virtues bring their own reward:

Make a "trait-roll" and a relevant skill is doubled for one attempt, in a suitable situation.

I've translated each trait into skill-like terms, and the players seem to understand and like it better. e.g. "Brave/Cowardly 70/30" would become "Brave 20%". That is, the amount above the 50% norm is the 'skill' percentage. The "trait skills" can gain increases as usual, except that when one has a tick (i.e. a skill-check against it) it can't be used until the increase roll is attempted (to stop them being used all the time!).

Some terms are rather 'loaded', so I've tried to come up with pairs that both sound good (and with negative interpretations of each, too):

1. Brave / Cautious (Foolhardy/Cowardly) : Willingness to face danger for the sake of victory / Avoidance and fear of dangers.

2. Chaste / Lusty (Repressed/Lustful) : Faithful to cultural mores in sexual relations / Excess sexual desire and activity without commitment.

3. Diligent / Relaxed (Manic/Lazy) : Works hard and applies to the task at hand / Avoids work or tedium and prefers to sit around.

4. Forgiving / Forceful (Apologist/Vengeful) : Ignores insults, injuries and bad comments / Seeks revenge for all slights, real or imagined.

5. Generous / Conservative (Squandering/Selfish) : Shares and frequently gives gifts / Desires to accumulate material wealth for themselves.

6. Honest / Cunning (Unimaginitive/Deceitful) : Truthful and reliable despite negative consequences / Distorts the truth to their advantage.

7. Modest / Proud (Meek/Vain) : Seeks no glory or recognition for their deeds / Boastful and self-satisfied, likes to hear about themselves.

8. Just / Arbitrary (Judgmental/Illogical) : Tells right from wrong, judging impartially / Makes decisions emotionally, using irrelevancies.

9. Trusting / Skeptical (Gullible/Suspicious) : Friendly and believes what they are told / Unfriendly and distrustful of what anyone says.

10. Merciful / Ruthless (Pitiful/Cruel) : Willing to help the weak, poor and even enemies / Unconcerned for feelings or pain of others.

11. Pious / Worldly (Sanctimonious/Blasphemous) : Concerned by spiritual implications / Cares only for the mundane and disrespects gods.

12. Temperate / Indulgent (Restricted/Greedy) : Takes only minimal food and drink / Enjoys excess food, drink and other delights.

13. Cheerful / Earnest (Frivolous/Gloomy) : Happy and generally jocular, given to pranks / Serious and often grim-faced, devoted to causes.

14. Talkative / Taciturn (Verbose/Brusque) : Outgoing and loquacious, talks legs off donkeys / Introverted and tight-lipped, using few words.

15. Optimistic / Pessimistic (Overconfident/Hopeless) : Believes outcomes will be good / Believes outcomes will be bad.

16. Enquiring / Reserved (Prurient/Uncaring) : Takes interest in details, even of others' business / Remains aloof from others, ignores details.

17. Courteous / Candid (Unctuous/Rude) : Polite, considerate and wary of upsetting others / Unafraid to cause offence with words or deeds.

18. Precise / Dynamic (Fussy/Careless) : Makes painstaking and detailed plans / Proceeds quickly without much preparation.

19. Some Other Trait (e.g. Aggressive/Passive, Stubborn/Receptive, Physical/Mental, Emotional/Calm, Leader/Follower, Witty/Dull, Dependable/Unreliable, Innovative/Conservative, etc.)

I also think explanations are needed, or they're prone to misinterpretation.

I haven't tried them but they look interesting, the various animal-named martial arts styles seem quite oriental in flavour. A bit rules-heavy, though - extra-special effects defined for every skill that could be adopted! And some odd things in it - e.g. creating magic items costing skill%-points? Also it seems based on a single MA skill, rather than the BRP version which has specialisms per weapon (i.e. Martial Arts(Fist), Martial Arts(Sword), etc).

Anyway, I'm not convinced an MA supplement is necessary. The existing BRP rules can probably be interpreted to do the job.

Related question: BRP MA skill gives double damage dice when attacking (like an impale), but shouldn't there also be some sort of benefit when parrying?

Sheesh. Looks like MRQ for me

No compromise! Using a system you know to be inferior would take the edge off your enthusiasm for whatever you do, and risk failure. And maybe your conscience would prick you into converting later anyway. It'd be that way for me...

So stick with the best. I heartily recommend you persevere with BRP.

RQ2 didn't have sorcery.

Yes, just my little joke - sorry!

You were warned. Especially the One who Breeds Amphibians. ... (waits for the people with the tar and feathers)

Don't get me wrong. If a system is good, or has good parts, I'll say so. Or bad. Be they BRP or even MRQ...

... How is that the "equivalent" of RQ Divine Magic?

Of course it isn't, you are right. I suspect he just says stuff like this to cause confusion.

As the "Safelstran man" here, I have played with ALL the versions and can give you a nice account of the four variations...<possibly useful run-down snipped>... Mongoose Sorcery: it is by far the best...

That does sound good. I'll give it a proper look, sometime.

You forgot to mention that MRQ sorcery allows you to cast un-Manipulated sorcery spells for ZERO power points. So, after every battle the sorceror can completely heal everybody's wounds, for free! Now that's POWER! >:->

Nice! Oh dear, NOT "The Way it was Meant to Be", I'd say! Still, maybe it can be fixed (simply "minimum 1pp", perhaps?).

Oh, there are many similarities.

Similarities, certainly. I was questioning peterb's assertion that:

... Mongoose was able to reproduce large parts of RQ II and III in MRQ...

The RQ Companion is almost thorough copi... - erm, I mean, paraphrased from the RQ3 Gamemaster Book. It appears someone did not realize they could have made a RuneQuest Ships out of it.

I don't know the (M?)RQ Companion, is it just Ship rules that are 'paraphrased'? I wouldn't call that 'large parts' - so is there anything else?

In any case, I am pleased with the situation as is. I have seen the RQ Slayers PDF and the thought of the trademark being owedy by WotC makes me shiver (RuneQuest D20?).

Um, I must say I'd much have preferred Chaosium to keep RQ. But better Mongoose than Wizards, agreed!

BRP0's sample Galactic Knight has Energy Sword 150%, Martial Arts (in Energy Sword, presumably) 80%, and various psychic abilities you might expect. The rules say a "cinematic" campaign can allow missile-weapon parries, as "extraordinarily rare combat feats", at full skill if they first make an Agility roll.

There's no mechanic I can see for targeting parried laser-bolts, though... So I'd suggest allowing further "special abilities" to be chosen for every, say, 50% of Martial Arts - and that sort of fancy parrying could be one such special ability. Would that do?

Sorry, I only use the RQ2 version...

...Mongoose was able to reproduce large parts of RQ II and III in MRQ, which is why the games are so similar.

Really? I've only seen the MRQ SRD, but that differs significantly from good old RQ2/3.

I would, for example, downgrade Magic Missile to 1d3 damage (but ignoring armour, needing a POW v POW win). Essentially it would become an improved Disruption spell.

Yes, same here! One d3 per increment is so much nicer than d4+1 every other... and it would be a bit too vicious without a 'saving throw' of some kind.

But this is unrepresentative. Most spells need virtually no changes and the conversion is not too much of a problem.

In good old RuneQuest it was a kind of spiritual thing - through adventuring (questing) you strove to improve yourself, in skill and holiness, in order to emulate your god and thus attune yourself with the Runes (primal natural principles) they embodied.

Mongoose failed to see that, and insensitively turned Runes into just another magic treasure to be looted off the dead bodies of the monsters/victims, D&D-style. Pah.

On the face of it, this is clearly silly - a brontosaurus is like the Mother of Monsters in RQ and it's stomp is an area effect in that it can affect more than one person and an area effect can't be parried (can it?)

Perhaps a Bronto Stomp could be interpreted as a "Sweep" attack, just in a different direction from normal. BRP0 would then say parrying it was possible, if a STRvDamage roll was made, which, if successful, would stop the blow and save any further (shorter?) people in the area. Seems about right to me...

But AikiGhost's "d100 Rules System" (linked upthread) uses characteristics in the 1-100 range. It doesn't seem right that a system even more d100 than usual would be excluded.

Instead of drawing up regulations dividing (perhaps only slightly different) rules-sets, I'd rather efforts were spent uniting them. Devising mechanisms as easy as possible to convert between systems would be a better use of our time.

Obviously starting with conversions to BRP, because they should be the most used...

Most battles take place between opponents in the 80%-90% skill range.

Cobblers, as usual, Rosie.

PS: I bet you can't resist having the last word...

Different perhaps, better at some things certainly, better overall?

:eek: Good God, man! Listen to yourself - you're arguing in favour of D&D! Snap out of it! Snap out of it!

• Skills resolved by rolling lowest on a D100

Oh, not including Mongoose after all, then?

So, BRP is no worse a system for building characters than D&D/D20.

I thought badcat's point was he didn't want players to have such fine control over character generation. From that pov, you're saying "BRP is no better a system for building characters than D&D/D20" - which doesn't sound nearly so good. And surely some mistake? BRP is always better!

To clarify, a 15fp Magic Missile (i.e. expanded twice) would do 3 dice of damage, but a 15fp Fireball (not expanded) would do 1 die?

Also, I'd suggest that school-skills should all contribute individually to the Spell Buffer, so you don't have to worry about the odd %'s, only when any skill crosses a 10% barrier.

Especially as it allows people to use those parts of the system they like*, and exchange the ones they don't** with their own houserules***.

* The name ("RuneQuest"- mmm, like it...)

** The rules (bleuch - they're trash!)

*** Or BRP - so much better than MRQ!

Isn't the new BRP rule that normal parries block all damage too?

Frogspawner: In a fencing or kendo contest, it works exactly that way - either you hit or you miss, no "amount of damage to be blocked". And this is better portrayed by an opposed roll than by checking if the blow overcomes the APs. However, in a real battle you will see a lot of blows clumsily blocked with shields and wapons just to avod being killed, so I just allow both options - opposed and unopposed rolls.

From what you say, both real battles and stylised duels would be best portrayed by normal rolls (non-opposed), with a special ability for more highly skilled combatants (such as the over 100% reduce-the-opponent's-skill effect).

Opposed rolls just add game-mechanic confusion, not realism.