Conrad

Yeah, but it isn't just oxygen you have to worry about. As the gravity increases the planet is able to retain lighter elements, not just oxygen. So Nitrogen-CO2 becomes less likely. Eventually you reach a point where the planet is mostly hydrogen.

If a world can hold hydrogen to some extent and there is some oxygen present then you've got water. This doesn't stop a nitrogen and carbon dioxide atmosphere forming as Mars had, and probably still has, plenty of water locked up in permafrost. Nitrogen is fairly unreactive and CO2 is produced by vulcanism so the rationale for having such an atmosphere isn't too improbable.Higher planetary gravities and higher minimum molecular weights retained doesn't stop elements like oxygen from combining with other elements, and being taken out of the atmosphere. In fact the more elements retained the more chance that these elements may react with any free oxygen (apart from the noble gases).

My new science fiction setting needs a rule for suffocation, because the air on

the planet at the center of the setting is not breathable. The house rule I used

for previous settings is a bit too complex, and so I tried to find the relevant ru-

le in the BGB.

Any help with the rules or, if such a rule really does not exist, any idea for the

amount of damage taken in such a situation would be welcome.

If anyone wants some rules on atmospheric damages I've just posted some in my blog on this site.

http://basicroleplaying.com/entry.php/66-Atmospheric-damage-rules.

BTW, Be careful how big you makeyou planet. Since you prefer a hard SF setting, you should be aware that as the size/gavitiy increases, the minimum molecular weight retained is lowered. So a big planet could hold oxygen or other lighter gases. A ntrogen-carbon atmosphere would suggest a low gravity.

Not necessarily. Remember that oxygen is a highly reactive gas, so if there are no indigenous lifeforms that are producing it, then it will combine with other elements such as iron, as it has done on Mars to form....rust!

As for Rust's atmosphere I'd use 1d8 for damage and use the asphyxiation rules (CON X 10 if not surprized by the event of the exposure to the atmosphere) and since there is no oxygen to be had CON X 3 if a failure occurs on the earlier roll or if surprized by exposure to the atmosphere.

In fact, there are some roleplaying "sages" who claim

that Runequest, all in all, was the most influential system ever published.

Edit.:

To give an example, this is what Ron Edwards, the author who came up with the

GNS Model of roleplaying, wrote about BRP/Runequest in his essay on simulatio-

nism:

Ron Edwards is less of a sage and more of a pretentious clown. I mean an "abashed synecdoche" of a clown. For anyone that wants to know why, and have a laugh while doing so take a look at Jim bob's rebuttal of Edward's crank theories.

http://jimboboz.livejournal.com/7305.html

Good luck trying to prove how drooping specials is better.

Surely tumescent specials are better?

Nothing in the sourcebook mentions the Lovecraftian mythos or the CoC game.

Page nine under the Hex Master title makes reference to " the dread Necronomicon". And there is an obvious Elder sign on the guns on the cover. So chaosium were trying to show that it could be used for a CoC setting. Though it would make for a much more enjoyable CoC scenario, as the PCs would have much more kick ass characters to play.

I don't have SuperWorld or WoW. And the idea of this super suffering damage from his own attack is perfect as far as I'm concerned

LT, you can get the WOW (including the original Superworld) from the link below my "Being cheeky" sig.

Sorry! I always hate coming off harsh....

I'm glad that I'm not the only opinionated reptile on this site. But dissing Classic Fantasy is going to get you Prismatic Sprayed!

Deda, you might find this useful:

http://www.rpg.net/realm/cyber/

If you are determined to go for the old school style of rules for armour wearing mages why not just go for having all spell skill rolls being difficult (halved) while in armour. This has the advantage of being an incentive for not wearing armour even at high skill levels. You may even require mages to wear only magical robes to be able to cast any spells.

By the way, Classic Fantasy has a lot of neat D&D spells adapted for BRP. Now that is

River Kingdoms--this scenario book struck me as a mixed bag, but there are a few gems in here; other players in my group liked it less, though.

Don't you mean The River Terror? River Kingdoms is for Paizo's Pathfinder isn't it?

This simply takes me back to my own personal rule: only play with mature friends who you know aren't going to be bozos. Period.

And thereby hangs a problem. Unless other trusted people have witnessed immature behaviour from this kind of player and warned you, you may inadvertantly let such a creature into your game.

If the player is unable to understand and accept this, I will explain it to him, but

only the first time it happens. If he does it again, I will tell him to search for ano-

ther game to join - my Rule 1 of gaming is never to do it with people who cannot

distinguish clearly between game reality and the real world.

I agree with you Rust. Let the guy know that he is being stupid with his vendetta, and if he can't handle that, then oust him. I'm glad that such players as "Vincent" are rare, and that most players that I've met are mature and good humoured about what happens in a game. Even if they occasionally try to take on a Phung with only a pen knife, and have a perverse love of juggling antimatter grenades!

Wow, in 30 + years of roleplaying I don't think I've ever come across anyone that has taken a vendetta outside of a game. Seems to me that Vincent is deliberately trying to cause trouble, or he is just acting very immature.

Approximately how old is he?.

I met the guy once, he is about mid forties in age. I think his behaviour is a mixture of immaturity and either ignorance, or stupidity. From what I've been told of his behaviour he seems to have an inability to learn from his mistakes. I was wondering if just kicking him out of a game without first trying to show him the error of his ways was too harsh. But then again my own players are never as petty as this guy appears to be, so maybe I'm more willing to show some tolerance of such behaviour because it is uncommon in my experience as a player and GM.

We've had people play evil guys in a group of good guys, and on occasion they have been found out with the inevitable consequences. But I think my group is quite mature in outlook, so there wouldn't be any obvious evilness on the part of their character, and if they were caught I believe it would be more of a 'fair cop guv' rather than 'I will get you with my next character'.

I've played evil characters before, and they usually got what they deserved at the hands of other player characters. But I never felt inclined to blame them for the actions of a character I knowingly played as nasty.

There has to be a certain amount of flexibility, or compromise in players characters or you'd never get a decent mix of alignments and characters. So evil characters do turn up in our good parties from time to time, but the player knows the risks. I've done it, its fun literally getting away with murder..

I agree that it makes for a more interesting game, but the player only temporarily gets away with murder. The other PCs always end up administering justice, at least in the games I've played in!

Would I have allowed Vincent to take his vendetta into my game? No. I probably wouldn't invite him into any of my games.

But then I frequently run harsh games and punish the players on a regular basis, before giving them a carrot and moving on. I wouldn't expect any of my players to hold a grudge because of that.

Gianni and Mr Jealousy thanks for replying.

I'm not sure I understand your question. If, however, Vincent insisted, I'd let him play a weaponless character. That would maybe calm him down.

It looks like you understand my question perfectly Gianni. How would you stop his character obtaining weapons during a game and trying to further his vendetta without more enmity from Vincent?

This question is more about GMing than any set game system.

One of my friends recently told me about a problem he and his group had with a player, who we’ll call Vincent (which is not his real name), and asked me what I’d do in the same situation. Vincent was part of a game with an ancient Japanese setting, and chose to play a ninja (disguised as a concubine) in a group of samurai, shugenja and priests. The GM explained to him that if the other players found out that he was a ninja, then according to the rules of the setting, he’d get his character killed. Vincent then went and acted very blatantly, killing an npc and wearing his bloodied armour while waving a bloody katana about for all to see. The outcome of Vincent’s actions was a humiliating death for his character. Which he blamed on the rest of the players. But the GM had told him, in no uncertain terms what would happen should his character blow his cover. It seemed that Vincent wouldn’t accept that he’d been stupid, and wouldn’t learn from his mistake.

This also happened again, in a game with an ancient Chinese background. After being told that Daoists were considered evil in the setting, and if his character was ever found out it meant death, Vincent chose to play one.

Again Vincent played his character so blatantly that the outcome was a humiliating trial and execution.

My friend then told me that Vincent wanted to get back at the Chinese setting GM in my friend’s game.

I asked my friend what he planned to do about this vendetta blurring into his game. My friend said he’d thrown Vincent out of his game without even telling to him why. I thought that was a little harsh, but when my friend said “What would you do with Vincent?” I was at a loss. My rules of “Give the players what they want, but make them work hard for it” didn’t seem to cover this dilemma. On reflection , and a couple of pints, I said that I’d try to talk the player out of the vendetta before throwing them out of the game.

What would you have done with Vincent? Would you have allowed him to take his vendetta into your game?

Disney BRP, anyone?

Isn't that Other Suns rpg? At least in the artwork....

Ok, if someone doesn't jump in here any second and say April Fools, I'm gonna blow a gasket.

Sorry, I was too busy laughing.

Oh, and there are already rumours that WotC representatives are secretly con-

tacting Alephtar Games shareholders to prepare for a hostile takeover.

They've already infiltrated Mongoose!

My only hope, Rosen, is that they convert the giant sturgeon from The Lady of the Daugava scenario into a character class. It will offset the bad news that we're losing Chaosium.

Anybody heard the shocking recent news from Charlie Krank that Chaosium has been sold to Wizards of the Coast? Its on Chaosium's website; link added below.

Apparently Charlie says " We have been having financial problems for some time, despite the upsurge in sales due to BRP, and have decided to take advantage of a very generous offer by Wizards of the Coast."

WotC's spokeperson, Avril Poisson, says " We have recently purchased Chaosium, and plan to convert their games into the 4th edition D&D rule system, so that they will be accessable to a much larger group of players."

The shocking news is here on the Chaosium website.

http://www.chaosium.com/index.php?section_id=114

ORtrail said:

Rust, Nick, and Conrad, thanks guys. I don't care what the others say about you, you're okay in my book!

That rumour about the goats, and the wellington boot, was really about Soltakss! Not me...honestly!

Okay, thanks for the responses. I was mainly interested in the DW article details about the, uh, Gwaefir. I'm remembering a smaller race, light frames, no heavy armor (leather at most) and missle weapons. Hmm, homes built on high ground/cliffs?

Your memory of the Gwaefir article is correct. They live above the tree line on mountain tops. They live in caves dug into the sides of the mountains, with only a curtain across the front to stop the worst of the elements. They also have towers that are built to mimic their mountain caves.

They are claustrophobic, and cannot go into houses or deep underground without losing SAN.

Gwaefir use bows, spears and rapiers, and either wear light leather armour, if they're strong, or carry a small buckler. They use lassoos to grab the weapons from ground based enemies, or even strangle them.

They worship a storm god and do not light fires in their homes (I'd give them the minor mutation power Hardy to cold), and they cook meat near to the place they killed it.

They're pretty much flying elves, even having pointed ears.

The article was about the Gwaefir, and had stats for AD&D, Chivalry & Sorcery, TFT, T&T, and Stormbringer. It suggests using the stats for the Myrrhn from that game (I'd use the stats from Stormbringer 5th edition, as they're the most balanced), with details of lasso attacks by them. The article also suggests using Runequest Wind Children stats too.

Lewis has come in for some stick from folks like Phillip Pullman, but Pullman's criticism is both ignorant and false:

http://www.narniaweb.com/resources-links/are-the-chronicles-of-narnia-sexist-and-racist/

Don't forget to put a marsh-wiggle in your scenarios, they're the best!