frogspawner

Well, just visiting a site is so much easier than spending actual cash or conspiring to cheat with fellow player, so it would be more of a problem than either of those cases. But you're right, it is a pretty pathetic objection. My excuse is, "I vas only obeying orders...": So what are the other potential problems you foresee?

Yes, I suppose they should. Though my current houserule uses 'roll over skill or 100-INT' (I can't even remember the official rules). One player whinges terribly about it, and I suppose he has a point (but he just likes to play 3 INT characters - typecasting, I say!).

No worries, it happens. I haven't really been following your argument, but it strikes me it's probably more relevant to the "Balance" thread than this one.

Hmm, tricky. If the author doesn't recommend just the core stats, it'd be a bit odd to have them right there in the main text. Maybe no stats in the main body but all in appendices - either core first, recommended second (or vice versa?) and then any extra options felt useful.

Unscrupulous players could find out the stats/abilities of the opposition? Apart from being unsporting, it could seriously blow plot secrets if that 'friendly' innkeeper is revealed to have Brew Pratzim 80%. And just what opposition there was should itself be secret, even if you don't care about the exact stats. (Yes, passwording it might help a little but people would get around that). It needn't be intentional cheating, either - if they were some of the few statted-up NPCs around, GMs might over-use them till they were too familiar. Alternatively, along the same lines as the "Foes Generator" program I mentioned earlier, a utility could allow character/monster stats to be put in for a specified option - and then format-up the stat-block for other options, at the click of a radio button (or twelve...)

I think you've confused your Dragons here. (True) Dragons are the BIG ones, (Dream) Dragons are merely big.

Well, you shouldn't be. Didn't you know? As Rurik implied, this thread was specifically set up to discuss Soltakss's dissatisfaction with BRP (to avoid clogging up the 'glorantha' thread), in answer to direct questions about it (in the full knowledge he hasn't seen Zero). Don't worry, let 'em stat-up for base core only - it's won't be a problem... Yes, having all those options makes it (almost?) unfeasible to print all the possibilities... So the books really should use only the simplest, core options - to be newbie-friendly. Therefore, we old-timers and others who don't want the defaults, could do with a kind of interactive "Foes". A java prog or similar could do the job, I'm sure. Chaosium could stick in on their site. A few radio buttons for options, pop-down the number/type of creatures, some other parameters, press the button - and bingo! Monsters with whatever options you want, ready-to-print...

It's something I've tried but am not quite happy with. Perhaps because it's a double-whammy reward and/or the percentage for 'Observant' is arbitrary and/or it's unnecessary complication. (Although it's still in my current written houserules...)

Thanks. Yes, that's precisely what I meant by +/- modifiers: different for each skill. I'm using a fairly similar system already, but this does seem like it would be neater.

OK, there are problems with existing proprietary worlds. Another problem is editorial control. BUT... If the "QuestWorld" concept allows travel between worlds, then it's easy. Anybody who has their own world, and wants to take part in the project, can publish what they have. (Perhaps in the downloads section of this very site, if Mr.T would be so kind). If you like someone's setting, and develop additions to it, just ask them if they'll include it as "canon" for their world - if they don't like it, you can mark it up as a "parallel of XXX's world" and publish anyway. Some may get popular, and some not. Maybe polls, download counts or ratings could be rigged up, and the download list arranged as a "league table". (Brutal, if your beloved creation languishes at the bottom, but...) That way it could be both QuestWorld and Fantasy Earth, at the same time...

I think I'd prefer skill bases equal to a single stat, perhaps +/- some modifier. Anyone tried that and found problems with it?

Exactly. And the benefit of getting tougher is the glory. You could stay low-level and kill hordes of trollkin in relative safely, but who will tell camp-fire tales about that? If the characters are proper Heroes, not just bullies, they'll get tough and seek out the Big Ugly Monsters - to become immortal! (If only in song...) (BTW, has some glitch cross-threaded this with the "Balance" topic?)

So, can we choose a different homeworld for BRP, and make it the 'New Glorantha'? I'd suggest an already-established setting, if possible. I've seen Jorune praised hereabouts...

Sounds pretty similar to what I've been using recently (have I said this before?): HP = SIZ*/2, roll location (if rqd), 0hp or below disables location, -5 is Serious wound**, -10 is Critical wound**, -CON is dead. * (Or use your favourite method to calculate HPs, and divide that by 2.) ** Each location has a small sub-table of possible Serious/Critical wounds, i.e. one for each sub-location (elbow, forearm, etc). (Edit - Serious: break or similar; Critical: sever/maim).

Or even if the ersatz-Glorantha was 'system agnostic', presumably. But I was hoping more to elicit opinions as to what essential elements (without infringing IP) would be needed for a Glorantha 'tribute' world (or even a take-off, 'Bored of the Rings' style...). But it's difficult, just like identifying the "RQ-ishness" of RQ2/3 which holds them apart from, and superior to, MRQ.

Brilliant! :thumb: (I propose that the cult of Kigur Littor should be a "Blank Religion" - that there will never be an officially published write-up for it ). And this new homeworld for BRP needs a name. Anyone? (Time to shift to the 'BRP worlds you'd like to see' thread?)

Rightly upset. I think you've hit the nail on the head. Just like tomatoes. I hate tomatoes. It's the... the... pretence. The lies, the deception. They sit there, pretending they're a vegetable - but they're not! They'e a... ...a fruit! I don't like tomatoes. Since you ask for opinions, I'll say I still can't get rid of the thought that GS has deliberately let Mongoose cobble-together a d100-based version of D&D using the RuneQuest name, in the hope of air-brushing real RQ from history - while probably also hoping BRP and MRQ, too, will fail - leaving only HQ... :eek:

(emphasis mine) Produce settings like/for Glorantha? Really? Somehow I doubt it. I've included a sort of mini-Glorantha in my campaign world (of Sartar/Prax exiles), but I presume Mr Stafford would sue if it made any money. Or do you think a world that captured enough of the essence of Glorantha could be sufficiently un-like it to avoid legal problems?

(Re.: Observant/Unobservant) Very sensible. Just wondered if you were thinking of tying it to a particular % of Spot/Listen skill - but that's probably not a good idea...

Mmmm, yes. I like it! I'd probably add-in extra stages ("closer... closer...") for particularly dramatic sneakings/spottings. How do you define observant/unobservant? Too right. I'm sure the good ol' "1/5th Special, 1/20th Critical" is too ingrained for you to get many (any?) takers for that one...

With all due respect, my Lord, but you can keep yer 'time honoured tool'! Maybe it's lack of fudging confidence, but as GM I want the support of a system I can trust - then I can sit back and enjoy the unfolding story, like the rest of 'em...

Aha! Buried in "Old West Spot Rules" - no wonder I missed 'em (soz, not a western fan). They're good: clean and simple. Pretty close in essence to the system I'm trying. Having to make a Luck Roll before you get the benefit seems a bit too chancy, though. (Some risk is all you need to be a Hero - too much and you're just some other dead guy, before long). Mine's a bit clunkier but should let you escape/survive at least one Killer Blow, up to 95% of the time - if you care to spend the PP, that is...

I still hope to devise a system that buffers it better (without massive PP expenditure in Round 1 by both sides, farcically attempting to out-Hero each other). Currently I'm trying a "Defence x PP spent" % chance to avoid 10/20/All damage ('Defence' starting low, 0-ish, but increasing for good RP). Hopefully, it should reduce thos Bad Rolls by nearly a factor of 20. We'll see how it goes. Understood. I was assuming the 'grand denouement' with the villains - the encounter that you least want to degenerate into farce. I meant the array of different BRP options makes it too complicated. OK, the GM may only use one or none, but he may allow any, or any combination... too much! Ooo, nasty! I do get the purpose - but I think Fate/Luck/Hero points can be used for that in some way that also doesn't detract from the excitement too much. Having a totally reliable way to escape killing blows would spoil it, for me. I reckon the system I'm now trying would have saved most of your unfortunately criticalled PCs (but just cost them some/all of their power points...) To be Heroic, you need to be taking a risk. If your Fate Points options guarantee you a way out - there's no risk. Totting up points to buy your way out of danger makes you an Accountant, not a Hero. I hope combining an earned "Luck" (Defence) skill with having to pay PP to use it will do the trick. (BTW, I'll be checking out your spot rules straight away. Sorry for not spotting them sooner! )

There certainly ain't no justice! You could try giving them out as rewards for good roleplaying, like I do...

Suggested the 'spending PP' part. Upthread, I thought, but can't find it now - maybe in another one. Ta, anyway. It's currently under playtest...