frogspawner

Where is the "New Thread" button?

Actually you are not too far off from the Pendragon method already. :shocked: <snip>

Thanks again for the info. Further confirmation I may be on the right track. Nice idea about the Pow usage - ta.

(BTW, how come this thread-snippet moved to here? I nearly missed it...)

FWIW, a Penetration rating for ballistic-type weapons seems sensible, IMO. I don't know anything about the subject, but the admin would be easy.

Hi-jacking the thread back to where it was a few pages ago...

Leaving aside the precise threshholds for minor/major/mortal wounds, I was just thinking that rolling location only when the blow was significant should keep most people happy. Like my own version where you roll a location, then look up the relevant effect. If the Major Wound table always gave a hit location, wouldn't that be good enough for those who want such detail?

I prefer 'No Declaration' over 'Declaration' because... it makes players decide quicker (and spares me the embarrassment, with my extreme age and failing faculties, of not remembering what someone said they'd do 10 seconds ago). Oh, and, it's simpler. Does this mean I agree with anybody?

(Perhaps I haven't been paying enough attention - could someone tell me what the new BRP default system is, please?)

I agree with Koslter.

Who's Koslter?

Chaosium have the new character sheet available for download at their site.

Where did you find it? The only one I can find is the old version.

Yes, the one listed with the new BRP book is an old version. That is a bit misleading, and disappointing. Might the Chaosium guys be persuaded to put the new version up now?

But if there Elephants then can I use flaming pigs. You are a real history buff if you know what I'm talking about.

Or just a twisted old wargamer? Light up those Expendables!

If you want I can get you more info on the Pendragon Passion rules an d how inspiration works. It's not very complicated. Pendragon is, if anything, less complicated than BRP.

Thanks, but don't worry.

I'm not thinking to make traits/passions particularly significant: entirely optional and maybe even simpler than Pendragon. If anyone wants one or a few traits they can set them at 30-70% at character creation (similarly a passion for anything they specify). In suitable situations they can roll (again, optionally) - success doubles a skill for one roll, but failure halves.

Seem ok to you? Problem I can see is how to limit the number of times they get used: "once a day" might cover it, but is a bit arbitrary.

Does the new system have any mechanism to reward roleplay?

(Apart from just having a good game, that is!)

INstead of setting the brackets at -5HP and -10HP in a location, you could use 1/2HP and HP as the brackets.

Thanks for your interest. Yes, could do. I just find using overall HP thresholds of -5/-10 simpler (so I don't have to track individual locations or calculate/remember different brackets for different characters/creatures).

With a mechanism to reward roleplaying, are we talking Hero Points again?

(Having at last found and read the Hero Points thread...) No, not necessarily, though perhaps similar. But I was thinking more of something like RQ2-style Defence, which would lessen the need for anything like Hero Points for fudging/backtracking. Only more generally applicable, like for falling off cliffs as well as combat.

Even to alter it from failure to success?

The whole re-do thing just 'feels' less heroic... to me and mine.

And to me. It detracts from the feeling that your dice-rolls are your character's sword-swipes. And a bit too much like anyone having Divine Intervention available at will merely for (non-permanent) Pow!

At least it's just an (ignorable) option.

But - does anyone think the lethality of combat requires some mechanism like Fate Points?

Wouldn't that mean that someone with more hit points could suffer certain injuries that another person with fewer hit points could not? :confused:

I suspect he means you're more likely to when there's _less_ hit points left. JAGS uses something like that.

I was trying not to clutter this thread with my own (slightly but hopefully not overly) complicated homebrew rules, but...

The system I use gives characters about half the usual RQ/BRP total hit points (but they stay alive until they go below -CON hp). Only roll location if the hit is significant. On +ve hps you're fine; 0hp or less the location hit is disabled (until healed); -5 or less it takes a serious wound (normally a break); -10 or less a critical wound (typically a sever/maim). I have a table of serious/critical wounds for each location (actually sub-locations, for a bit of variation).

So, sort-of, yes, someone with more HPs might sustain nastier wounds than another with fewer HPs - but he'd still be alive, and the weedier guy wouldn't.

I don't know 'JAGS' - is it like that?

The personality traits serve some useful purposes: <snip>

Thanks for that. I'm just introducing traits (and possibly passions) into my homebrew, although I don't know Pendragon that well, and it's useful confirmation of what I thought they'd be good for.

While we these debates do get heated at times, I would like to say that it is a lot more fun disagree with you and the folks here that it is on some other forums.

Sorry, I know it's poor form to post just saying 'Hear, hear!', but "Hear, hear!".

Elves/dwarves are pretty much necessary for sword-and-sorcery settings but, sadly, are most likely to turn out just like humans pretending to be lanky/squat. Because, in an RPG, that's what they are...

The challenge is to make them seem really different.

One man's "Refined" is another man's "Overly Complicated"

My explanation probably made it sound more complicated than it is. Basically, it's a major wound table, but cross-referencing Hit Location with remaining Hit Points.

In effect pretty similar to SB's table, I guess, but without the MERP/RoleMaster overtones (I never liked MERP).

Diceless? We need some way to add that back in though. Is it mainly a fleet against fleet game, or is it for one on ones too? The players will probably sit in only one spaceship, and would want to use some of their skills to influence the outcome.

Yes, diceless. Miss/Hit/Special/Crit is determined by cross-referencing secretly-selected tactics (attack/defend/retreat) and speed difference. If you're interested, see the rules here: WarpWar Rules

Rather like BRP/RQ itself, it's best for one-against-one, or up to about half-a-dozen a side. So the players could have a fighter each, or all-in-one, or whatever. IIRC, it's quite difficult to completely destroy ships - aiding character survivability!

As I said before, adding-in complications (like crew skill-rolls) should still end up with a fairly simple system, as it's so simple to start with.

I did a similar thing a few years ago when adding skill-rolls into an on-line 'EnGarde!' combat program - and that's a similarly diceless combat system.

In Stormbringer, if you take in 1 hit more than 1/2 your total hit point, it is a major wound and you roll on the table to get nasty results.

OK - thanks, Kloster and Badcat, I see the trouble now. Is this what's coming for BRP? And I can see how SB variable armour could exacerbate the problem.

In my homebrew I use a similar, but finer-grained system, with 4 different grades of wounds, the special effects being none/disable/break/sever respectively. That way worse results are reserved for worse hits (which would often have been fatal anyway). The idea being to explain the damage, rather than adding to it.

I had hoped the new BRP would have found a similarly refined method.

Could somebody please explain to me what the SB major wound table is?

As no hit locations is the default, all published material will most probably exclude them as well, making extra work for those who liked it.

So everyone's not happy after all - oh dear. Can't you make do with rolling location for significant hits, instead of every hit? I don't know the 'Stormbringer major damage table', what's wrong with it? And why does it matter?

With a mechanism to reward roleplaying, are we talking Hero Points again?

Possibly - but, sorry, I must have missed where they were talked about before. Could you please direct me tothe nearest Hero Points discussion? (I don't know if the new book even has such a mechanism).

Hit locations and strike ranks were 2 of the 3 things RQ needed to change, IMO (the 3rd being a mechanism to reward roleplaying). And it looks like they have been - good!

And if they're still available as options, everyone's happy - right?

PS I like the font (there, I've said it!).

What are Warp War's good bits?

It's the only one I know! OK, the main virtue is it's SO simple you can bolt on other complications you might want and still end up with something fairly easy. It's boardless and diceless, outcomes being based on comparing speeds/tactics/weapons selections. It's pencil-and-paper - so what the Cyberboard is for, I don't know... (perhaps an unnecessary campaign star-map).

There's an old, interesting and very simple game of spaceship combat called Warp War (see Warp War | BoardGameGeek), which incorporated ship design. If you're going to create a system, you could do worse than making it compatible with that.