frogspawner

Melee combat had things like armor, shields and parries to mitigate the weapon damages.

Yes, I also worry about the lethality of BRP/RQ outside fantasy settings - i.e. without Divine Intervention, magical Healing/Resurrection etc.

So I have tried a sort-of Fate Points system, giving characters 1% Dodge per FP (that's all - they can't spend 'em on anything, so no re-rolls, resurrections or story-fiddling). I'm not entirely happy with it, but some mechanism like that (which doesn't refer to Holy/Magic powers - just "Luck") might help make such settings playable. Something like RQ2 Defence, perhaps?

Depends on the system: From my brief experience of Traveller, chargen was the fun part...

And a flat value favors any nonhumans who roll higher than normal Power, such as elves.

But even elves still have a rollable maximum of only 18, so they don't get much advantage.

I agree that POW gaining can seem to be a bit too fast, though (and I hadn't even considered shamans yet...)

There's probably a good case to be made for a "Epic Level" sourcebook for BRP at some point. (Sorry to use the "E" word, but you get my meaning - maybe we call it "Hero Level" :innocent:)

Hear, hear. And anyone doing such a sourcebook could do a lot worse than using Mr. Phipp's excellent HeroQuest stuff as a basis (Simon Phipp - RuneQuest/D100/Glorantha Home Page).

The old RQ2 Defence ability seemed to be something characters could use to transcend human limits, and get on the way to Herodom. Similarly, my original RQ2 GM gave our high-powered Rune-levellers a "Magic Manipulation" or some such ability, which could have eventually led to their being immune to enemy spells, like the SuperHeroes of Dragon Pass (Harrek/Jareel). I thought that was a logical way to go (though the campaign ended when we'd only got our first 5% - probably just as well!).

Well, you could simply make them _sacrifice_ X amount of Power to become a priest for all of that...

Ah, but by actually using spells the character might 'learn how to be a better priest', proving their worth to the examiner. It's not (just) an artificial barrier to character advancement.

But what I was suggesting was that even after becoming priests, they often seem to accumulate Power (and thus divine magic) rather too fast.

Then by all means try (18-Current)x5% for POW Gain rolls (and maybe only give +1's, too).

Again, it might be nice to hear what the new BRP says about this: as RQ2, RQ3 (printed), GoG, something else or nothing at all. Anyone know?

So, personally, I'm with Simon - I've got no problem with the BRP POW gain system as it stands...

Fair enough. I think we were only trying to satisfy your stinginess in the first place!

BTW, can someone please tell us what the new BRP mechanism is?

Again going to the multiple checks idea, if it took 1 check per 5 POW to earn an improvement roll, you would slow down the advancement to about half or a third of the current rate with no other changes in mechanics.

But requiring multiple checks would be quite a big change in mechanics. How about using 18 as the 'racial maximum' for determining chance of a POW increase (instead of 20/21)?

In my game, we use Runes...

P.S.: Burn Him!

So, why restrict POW Gain rolls? I don't understand.

Because some people already see the progress from Initiate- to Priest-levels of POW as too swift, and now we are proposing to give POW-gain rolls for resisting magic too - possibly making it worse.

Once they become priests its not going to matter anyway, and that wasn't a long trip, at least in RQ3.

I meant, maybe the trip to priesthood should be made longer, with a requirement that the Initiate gained (and used?) at least 30 points (or whatever) of Rune Magic. IIRC, it's been noted elsewhere that Initiates single-use Rune spells (often) aren't worth the POW loss - but this could explain why they'd do it...

Or maybe the amount of POW gained is fine, but Initiates should be getting and using more Rune spells? (Though I guess that's a bit campaign-specific).

In an attempt to limit 'skill hunting', I apply a maximum limit of INT ticks (skill checks) at any one time.

Exactly. But if someone prefers stinginess to symmetry in their house rules, that's up to them. (Though if the characters are getting one POW gain roll per session anyway, I wouldn't have thought the GM Prime Directive of Stinginess would be compromised by a 95% limit...)

So, in addition to weapons and spaceships will it have star system creation rules?

I guess not, but there are plenty of such things out there - google it (here's just one Star Map Generation). Some even give you pictures of the planets/systems. I found plenty when looking for a backdrop for a 40K campaign (oops, did I say that out loud?) but in the end knocked up my own tables for it, which were a laugh (I ended up generating far more star-systems than I needed, just for fun).

I fear the new version of Traveller will make my potential players recoil in horror. They are used to CoC rules and other systems are not viewed favourably.

What discerning potential players you have! Go BRP!

I think giving a POW gain roll for resisting enemy magic is definitely the ticket - though I'd only give one if the enemy had a higher POW.

Don't let natural stinginess spoil the system, though - wouldn't it be more consistent/elegant to allow 'em for any except 'automatic' (95%) resistance rolls?

For the chain harmonizing, IIRC, it implies harmonizing the harmonizer.

I hadn't thought of that! But more than one target per caster is specifically excluded (whether via Multispell or not, I'd say). Having checked, I'm surprised to find it is/was not Active, but Passive! Maybe making Harmonize an Active spell would be the way to save it from overpowered oblivion - 'cos it's such fun!

Yes, now you mention it, I too have always felt the RQ POW-gain method was a bit lacking.

But the idea of giving a POW gain roll for resisting enemy magic attacks seems to cover it neatly.

I wouldn't like to give it for Luck rolls, though - that'd make them too formal to do on a GM whim. Similarly, making POW trainable would seem to undermine the limited-POW basis of the magic system.

It's been so long, I don't even remeber what the spell does. Can anyone refresh my memory? I do recall that I'd tossed it before getting RQIII, so it's problems must have been pretty obvious. I only have it for Jack-o-bears now, but using one of those has been a long time in the past too...

Harmonize from a Jack-o-Bear is a bit different, I believe: stand there till it eats you. Less powerful - but it could get more than one victim at once (I don't think chain-harmonizing was legal with the spell).

An allied spirit is in mind-link with its master, so can see through its master's eyes. So, unless the Runemaster is unconscious, the allied spirit can cast spells quite happily. It can also cast spells on its master with range touch as it is effectively touching its master at all times.

I thought it was a special Runemaser-Allied Spirit thing that gave the ability to see through the master's eyes, and a normal Mind Link spell wouldn't. I didn't know about the touch-range thing either. Is that RQ2 or RQ3? But I'd have said the Spirit could cast even when it's master was unconscious/blinded, just that focussed spells would take longer.

Right. It can use it's own eyesight or it's master's. A particularly nasty tactical application of this that one of my player's Wind Lord has used is as follows: <snip>

Also, I'd always assumed that it was spirits in objects that used their master's senses, and animal familiars would be limited to their own. But maybe you're right - nasty!

Q: What's worse, Ignorance or Apathy?

A: I don't know and I don't care.

Very nice - thank you. Now :focus: ?

Is it possible to have one at the bottom?

I just found it, top of the thread list. >:->

Thanks. So it's not on the screen when you're reading other posts and have that (perhaps tangential) thought. Making it much easier for you just to hit Post Reply or Quote - and while you're probably thinking it's so on-topic, too... :ohwell:

HTM/HTML files?