Darkholme

Heh. I was referring more to the different character creation rules for characters of differing ages. I'm inclined to agree with you about the Improvement Roll Modifier, but if you remove it, Charisma isn't very good. My biggest gripe with this game (and many others) is that the characteristics (attributes in other games) are assigned the same "Price", but some of them are much more useful than others.

Updated. Some layout/design stuff, and added the Gunderman culture. Still a ton of cultures to go, let alone new features/hourserules. I also posted in the RQ6 Board, with a link pointing here. It seemed like a good idea due to the overlapping relevance. Let me know what you think.

A borderer is a profession, similar to a Ranger or scout, in that they are in the wilderness alot, however its a bit different; A borderer guards the border to the wilderness, and when ordered, expands the border into the wilderness more, driving back the Picts in the process. So somewhere between a hunter/ranger type and a soldier. Kindof like a Wilderness Specialist Soldier. They're mentioned a few times off-hand by conan, but I have yet to see him actually come across a borderer. It seemed different enough to actually warrant its own profession entry. But yes, not all classes in the mongoose RPG would map well to Legend/RQ6 Professions, as some are things like Barbarian (which is really a raging warrior with special abilities), and some may be adequately covered in Legend/RQ6, like perhaps Noble, and Thief. I imagine there will only be a handful of Professions needed. The bulk of the work will come from doing up all of the cultures, and then all of the races (for a Cimmerian raised in Aquilonia, for example). A few houserules may be suitable as well. I probably would recommend no magic for player characters, at least for Legend. RQ6 apparently has substantially different magic, and I haven't read its magic rules yet. I have a feeling RQ Magic would be unsuitable for a Conan-esque game. Perhaps some of the systems from Conan d20 could inspire something in the RQ Games, such as the Honor & Corruption systems, and maybe Reputation. But people are interested enough that I should continue to share what I come up with? As for the "7 common, 7 professional" limit in RQ6, yeah, I think I went over that a tad, but you're not getting more points to work with, so it shouldn't be a big deal if you have 8 instead. I couldn't figure out what else to cut out of the list.

I know it's just a start, but any thoughts on this? Is it worth continuing for more than my own use? Does anyone have any suggestions?

Whoops Sorry guys. Forgot the default setting for google docs is private. Anyone can see it now.

I've been throwing together some Hyborian RuneQuest 6 & Legend character options, Just for fun (Been reading the ongoing Dark Horse Conan Series in TPB). It's a Work in Progress, as there are many more Races and Cultures and Maybe even more Professions that I could do. So far I have Cimmerian (Culture) and Profession (Borderer) finished. Feel free to comment. We'll see what else I add to it.

Oh? The people I know run both of those as written; though there has been some contention as to whether using the aging rules is a good idea, given the widely varying power levels it yields.

Hmm. I was thinking keep hit locations, hit points, and damage, and just assign point costs to "hit point chunks" and damage modifiers; and then let the players buy with their starting pool of points. But yes, so far I'm liking this idea. It sounds useful and modular, and so far I'm not seeing any drawbacks.

Hmm. Okay. So there are a few. The Improvement Roll Modifier is calculated by CHA though, it's not just your CHA score, or it would be ridiculous. Its one of the things I was proposing be bought up separately with points. I forgot about Ageing, Asphyxiation, Death, Falling, and Falling Objects. Asphyxiation and Death could likely be adjusted to be bought up independently as well. Though Ageing and Falling would be more difficult. Hmm. I was thinking it might be good to take a more mutants and masterminds approach to character creation or having everything be bought with points, and maybe drop the characteristics and instead allow everyone to buy up each of the things the characteristics affect separately; so you could for example have a high rating for the death section, but a low rating for asphyxiation (or what have you) Perhaps simply make the buying of Characteristics be done like with your 250 point pool, but add a separate pool where so much has to go into attributes and a small amount of leftovers can go into skills if there are any. In this second case it would simply be replacing the die rolls with an equivalent point-buy system. Just tossing around a couple ideas.

Sorry, I meant Characteristics. In many other games the same things have different terms; Attributes, Ability Scores, etc. Our Personal games are no-magic, as the players decided that it was impossible to keep up as a non-magic character (They universally decided they didn't like how powerful the MRQII magic system was, and how hard it was for non-mages to keep up, and as a result we have been playing without any magic being available, just poisons and the occasional alchemical potion of some kind that I introduce as a consumeable); so the spells complication wasn't something I had even thought of. I don't have the book in front of me right now; can you remind me, when do characteristics get used directly, as opposed to aiding in the calculation of something else?

My players wanted to build custom races for a setting we came up with, so we've been working on a pricing scheme that calculates the value of various options in Legend; and then I give them so many points to build a race with. This involved a combination of rating the power of various options & calculating the power of others, which in turn calculates the value of attributes. Of course, this approach throws out the assumption that attributes are equal, and skills are equal; as some attributes do much more than others, and some skills are useful far more often than others; or useful to a much greater degree. This makes me wonder; What if I eliminated the attributes and dice rolls completely? We have price values on the various parts that the attributes are made up of, that gives them point-costs, and extra points at character creation could be given out based on average attribute rolls. Then raising things like HP & Strike Rank and Combat Actions could all be done independently just by spending points (with maximums imposed so it should be equivalent in power to what you can get with attributes). Maximum points per skill would be bumped up to 66 (30+18+18). In theory it would be harder to minmax, based on the more valuable things having a steeper pricetag; Maxing out Dex and Int (or the things that dex & int do) would be trickier (more expensive) than maxing out Cha & Con, as dex and int do more things, and more important things. It would basically be a small collection of houserules on how things are calculated, and it would involve/include an alternative character creation system. I imagine this would make starting characters with more comparable power levels. Attributes aren't strictly speaking necessary, right? Just an idea that came to me a few minutes ago. I've yet to do anything with it yet. Does anyone think it would be worth the effort? In case anyone was wondering, my Race Creation system is still a work in progress, and a few things would have to change to be priced for regular Legend (we are playing with no magic whatsoever, only the alchemy ebook, which makes willpower less useful than it would otherwise be).

Wow. That sounds quite good. Small improvement tweaks in lots of places, and the process behind the rules is clarified? The fact that Hero Points are the big part of MRQII I disliked is another thing in favor of RQ6 for me. I'm sold. I think I will pick up a copy afterall. Thanks

Yeah, I've got the d20 conan setting book (Road of Kings) and it is quite nice. RQ seems like a system that would be a good fit for an official conan game, it would be cool if one were to come out. As for SIF, I've got the GoT edition SIF RPG core book, but my players are really enjoying Legend. I think there's a setting book for that I may be able to hunt down for that one too. I was mostly thinking about the mechanical changes (read: houserules) that might make the RQ system a better fit. That's all. I figured people won't have done much with RQ6 yet, but I hear alot of it is the same as MRQII, so I thought maybe people had tried it with MRQ II or MRQ I or OpenQuest or RQIII or something and might have pointers.

Is there any kind of official book(out of print or in print) or fan document that has been made to do these? What sorts of changes should be made to make a Westeros or Hyboria game out of RQ6/Legend? I would think RQ could do both of these pretty well due to it's brutal combat system.

I've been playing/running Mongoose' Legend since early spring. Now that RQ6 is out, I'm contemplating getting a copy, but I guess I want to know in what way it will benefit my gaming group. What sorts of improvements does it include? What kinds of major changes to game mechanics are there? What are the differences in the designs and contents and organization of the book itself? How compatible will it be with my existing material? How hard would it be to switch to RQ6 mid-campaign? The cover looks pretty neat, and the reviews are sounding good, but its seemed that many of the good things I've read about the system equally apply to the last edition of the game. So aside from the new snazzy cover, what are my motivations to 'upgrade', as it were? I'm looking forward to hearing about the new features. [As A side note, the tag system seems to be broken - These are the tags I tried to attach ("RuneQuest 6, Legend, RuneQuest, RuneQuest II, Compatibility, Upgrade"), it's telling me "You specified a tag that was too short. A tag must be at least 3 characters." Clearly I included no such tag.]

Okay. No Worries. Did not realize about the move.

Hmm. I gave a response to your post yesterday, but its now gone. If it was deleted, I dont have the slightest idea why. In it I said that I did use the legend system, but did add a few more details to it, and the only parts I really changed were different potential effects for different sized or multiple doses, and the layout was changed so that many drinks of different strengths could be presented as a single poison, since they are all in fact the same poison at different concentrations. I said I wouldn't mind seeing something similar for your example with the cobra wither - a chart showing several varieties of cobra, and if applicable, different effects for different dose sizes/concentrations in the same way. I suppose the fact that in a few places I used a character sheet statistic as part of the effect instead of just numbers and dice is unusual too, in that larger tougher characters can hold more liquor before it affects them, without even taking resilience into the question. Perhaps it mutes the role of the resilience skill too much or something. If thats the case, then that's a complaint I can see needing to be addressed. If not, the use of Chest HP was a good single number to represent both size and toughness. But Perhaps I should have tied it to the resilience skill or tied it directly to Con+Siz instead, they were the other possibilities I saw there. So while I do see that I made a couple small departures from the sample poisons, I don't think its a bad thing (though I suppose it is a slightly more expanded/robust poison system), but I do think my original post was unwieldly and involved too much math, and the same effect could (and should) be presented in a way thats easier to use at the table - and potentially a slightly simplified version of the same would be worth doing with duration and the amount you can drink for the effects to hit you being standardized across creature sizes and constitutions. I prefer the added realism of it taking more poison to drop an elephant than a housecat, but maybe others dont like that it adds the extra steps.

Hmm. Your approach seems to be along the same lines as the S&P Article. I was hoping to get something more with more believable effects, that could Ideally be generalized to be able to add more drinks of varying strengths on the fly. I can see mine needing some revision to make it more easily usable, but I'm not confident in this approach. I feel that while it's simplistic enough to be more easily usable than what I originally put up, its simplistic to the point of not being realistic enough for me. The effects in particular. The ones I mentioned match up well with the actual effects of alcohol, and include the potential for coma or death. Now that I've seen the S&P Article, this approach, and what I started with, I'm more convinced I have the right idea, Though the presentation needs work and I need to make it so less calculation is needed. I'll try to take the comments in this thread into consideration, and I'll make a revision and put it up when I get the chance.

Hmm. alright, this is true to some extent or another, there are other factors to consider, but a simple formula can give a decent approximation, if well tailored to the task. Certainly more accurate than just handing it over to DM fiat. Also True. Perhaps modifiers in onset time based on food eaten? Well, currently it factors in CON+SIZ. However you're right, there is also the specific genetic traits that determine how a single person handles alcohol, like how effective their liver is. I'm not sure it's impossible to handle, but perhaps saying that's represented as part of CON is insufficient? I can recall a time a few years ago that I got really drunk(I usually don't drink that much in a night). According to the app I mentioned, my BAC had me in the "Danger of Coma" range (.37%), but I only had the effects of the "gross motor impairment" stage (.13%-.15%). I'm not a big guy; I'd probably only have a 9 or so in SIZ, but with this representation, I'd have to be making up for that with a high CON, which is more abstract. At the end of the day it doesn't need to be 100% perfect for a tabletop RPG, it just needs to be close enough to be believable. A formula is going to help the referee make more consistent and better informed decisions - particularly if it somehow considers the specific situation. And that's kindof the point, right? If this were a computer-aided game, making it substantially more complicated and trying to include more variables might be more important, because you never need to worry about the time it takes to add stuff together or multiply some numbers; the machine does those things just fine. But with people and dice, I can see that it should be simplified down if you dont want the game to go really slow. For me a pet peeve is inconsistent GMing, and I always prefer when the GM has guidelines to show him what the right call to make is about how something works. "Just make a ruling on the fly" is almost never satisfactory to me unless the GM is somehow internally consistent, in which case he's likely keeping track of previous rulings for comparisons. I try to be accomodating of it as a player even though it bugs me, but as a GM, I want a bit more consistency. If I want something to be a part of the game, I want some mechanics to represent it. Otherwise I would be willing to play in online forum games without rules & woulndt need a game system. So with that out of the way, what I'm trying to say is: As far as I'm concerned, any halfway decent mechanical system is going to represent something better than GM Fiat, simply by being more consistent between occasions.

So... Comments on the Mechanics?

Oh? I didn't realize needles were that new. Didnt they sometimes use needles to drain puss and whatnot?

Hmm. Havent looked at RQ3 Vikings. I'll look into that though. Injecting Alcohol may be uncommon, but it could happen, and the effects would work. I would also use that table if someone put alcohol in other places its not meant to (the membranous walls there go to the blood stream without the liver filtering anything). 1. Yes. I definitely need to make a list to speed things up. However, it should be fairly easy to convert. as its just percentages. I agree that in a finished product, having more common drinks already figured out would save time. 10 ounces of 100% alcohol is equal to 17 shots of 40% whiskey/rum/vodka, 50 ounces (~1.5L) of 20% port, 100 ounces(~3L) of 10% table wine or very strong 10% beer, 200 ounces(~6L), or 17.5 standard north american size bottles of regular 5% beer, or 300 ounces (~9L), or 26.25 bottles of really weak 3% beer. They should cover any type of alcohol of any strength, but having some pre-done would be a time-saver. 2. That is what the two bottom tables are for. Number of 100% Strength Drinks taken, and Chest HP show you your % in Tolerance Level, which tells you which stages of effects you're making going to suffer; and that % in Tolerance level is the Potency you roll against for your Resilience (1 roll for each stage). While the rolls dont make the effects go away, they let you ignore the strongest one for 30 minutes, in a cumulative fashion. So if your tolerance level is 65%, you'd roll Resilience 5 times. Each time you succeed, you get to ignore the worst effect of the alcohol, in reverse order. So if you got 4 successes, you'd only take exhaustion, and be at a -10 to all actions. If you got 3, you'd have exhaustion and fever, and you'd be at 50% skill, -10, to all actions. If you got 2, You also take the effects of Nausea, and if you got 1, you get confusion as well. If you failed all the tests, you're passed out. I can see how examples would be needed though, now that you mention it. 3. That example above should show how resilience works. As for Duration, the little formula there shows the speed the alcohol leaves your system, and again, you just look at what range you're in on the table and it tells you which effects have worn off after so much time. I think it should be fairly realistic, but at the moment it probably does involve too much math, and some sample drinks and rules examples certainly couldn't hurt. And thinking of it now, an example/explanation on how mixing different drinks of different strengths and waiting a while and then drinking more works, just to make sure its understood, couldn't hurt. With that bit of explanation, do you have any criticisms of how I mean for it to work? I'm not 100% confident in how the implementation of the Resilience rolls should work. Should the action penalties from Exhaustion and Fever apply?

So I've been attempting to put together rules for alcohol in Legend, because it has come up in my current campaign that players are putting people on alcohol IV drips and other such unusual uses of alcohol. I'm hoping for some feedback, and I will try to refine what I've got from there. I have the base mechanics for alcohol overall, but I dont have quick tables for different types of alcohol calculated yet. Let me know what you think. Thanks guys. Alcohol in Legend - Downloads - Basic Roleplaying Central

Cool.

Not unless someone has already written one for their own purposes or there is one in a book somewhere that people can point me to. I'm just saying that a list of examples is something I think you'd need to have next to you when running the game if you want to be consistent, and kindof arguing against the people who say no such list is needed. I understand that I will likely have to start looking stuff up and come up with my own lists of examples.