g33k

First you have to Heroquest to find the secrets of an ancient Hero -- nobody alive knows his origin -- named Vet Ternary Den Tist

Go to Milsim and ask them. In the USA, my nearest FLGS e-mails me a code that lets me d/l the PDF.

Heard an interview, the other day. Guy's an expert in "failure." One of his biggest "products" is to run seminars for large organizations, before they finalize a project. Gather all the managers and engineers into a room. The pitch is this: "It's now 22 months into the future... your project was released a few months ago. It failed... horribly so. Career-ending levels of failure, for sure... possibly even going-out-of-business levels of failure. Your job, here, today, is to figure out: why did it fail? What went wrong, where?" Many places won't even talk to the guy. "Too negative, bad for morale, etc." Also, it's hard to run these seminars right. Even if the organization brings them in, just one senior person with the "this is overly-negative bullshit" attitude can shut down all the effective work... it takes some serious social-skills to get these to be productive. He told about being in a room with a bunch of top military brass & high-end contractors who were working some sort of tactical battlefield computer-assist system. Lots of 2-star & 3-star, lowest-rank in the room was Captain. It was like pulling teeth from a hen, nobody could see any flaws in the project (or was unwilling to voice it). Finally, he started calling on people individually, and Captain Low-Rank offered: "Well, sir, I was wondering... we're developing this thing on top-end supercomputers... but we're deploying it onto commercial-grade tablet CPUs. I don't think it will perform well." Dead silence, as everyone realized he was right.

I honestly wouldn't screw too much with the ransom. It's a feature of the setting, so it should largely work as-described. I mean, if they're stupid (like, "parading their prisoner through Lunar-held territory before negotiating ransom" level stupid) then yeah, that's like hauling a wagon of silver through bandit-held territory. But once the ransom is negotiated... Think of it this way: if the Lunars begin routinely screwing people over ransom, then everyone will just start routinely killing Lunar prisoners and/or not accepting surrender. Even the Humakti will be like, "no... you lot do not honor your surrender..." STAB

*** My own favorite house rule to speed combat isn't a "rule" but an at-the-table behavior. As GM, I make sure to say (each SR where anyone's going) -- "Player X, you're up now, your SOI (Statement of Intent) was <whatever it was> ... Player Y, you're up next, your SOI was ..<whatever that was>; please get ALL your dice ready!" (I've seen surprisingly-many gamers who don't prep their dice until it's "their turn," and then the rest of us all sit around while they pick them out of the 37 gazillion dice they own; now I just prompt everyone; having a player oriented and fully-ready when it's their turn can make a big difference!) Plus, I teach the "all-in-one" roll... rack up everything across the palm of the hand: d100-attack + d20-location + dWhatever-damage and roll it all attempting to preserve that order! Read the resulting roll as a sentence (this is easier when the dice are pre-racked dice & the roll preserves that order): Yes, I *do* verbally-emphasize "special" (or critical) & "hit-location" & "damage." *** This 1-2 punch, above (GM-prepping-players & players-prepping-dice) actually speeds-up combat more than anything else I have seen or tried! *** Pre-calc & record on-sheet crit/special/fumble; re-calc / re-record when Augmenting or spell-boosting. Some people can do these on the fly in their heads; some cannot (particularly up at the Fumble end of the results). This would absolutely be a top time-saver (on-par with the 1-2 punch, above) if it were relevant most rounds, but the relative rarity of these rolls mean you only realize that time-savings... well, relatively-rarely 🥸. *** I'm still fiddling with my "choose hit-location" rule, but it's currently exactly as per @Geoff R Evil's rule, above. *** Change your SOI: I treat INT as if it were DEX for SR purposes, when you're changing your mind in combat. Add your "INT Ranks" to do something different than you had intended. This specifically allows you to pick a new target for your same-spell, same-missile, same in-hand melee weapon, etc -- not doing a different thing, just doing the same thing to a different target. Quicker-witted characters are just quicker about this sort of thing! But if you're doing a different physical thing (changing to a previously-undeclared weapon, mounting/dismounting, moving more than a step or two, etc) then you must also add your DEX ranks +1 (or more), to reflect the fact that our bodies just take time to do physical stuff (the "+1 (or more)" is because even the fastest people still need to physically do the thing; they cannot teleport/etc ! ) If you're doing a different magical thing (other spell than declared) than your SOI, then I treat your POW as a DEX-like source of added SR's. Last but not least -- and actually first! -- before any of the above, make a Battle roll (the skill). If successful, your sense of the ebb & flow of the fight, your situational awareness, etc... were so good that you adjusted everything on the fly, and are ready to go with your new action on your original, unmodified SR (except that a munchkin cannot use their ordinary longspear to "go on an earlier SR" than their "War Maul + Bludgeon 5 Matrix"). NOTE: both the "Chose Hit Location" & "Change SOI" HR's are actually more-complex, and slow down combat, vs. the respective RAW's! (I use them anyhow)

That makes mystical sense, as they are part of the Red Moon, which in turn is part of the Red Moon Goddess.

Huh. The Bestiary?!? That wasn't going to be a place I searched for this ... TYVM! I recall this from prior sources (tho I admit I'm not sure of citations at the moment); but is there any RQG treatment of this?

No argument from me vs. any of that! I myself have made & distributed some gaming materials (though I'm not nearly so prolific as you), and currently have a BRP:UGE driven RPG in development. But these community-content & fannish productions are a very different thing than professional publishing. I just want us all to be clear that Chaosium absolutely needs to be putting in real attention (as they do) to making sure that there's a market for books that they publish. It's the company's lifeblood -- it's the salaries of MOB, Jeff, Rick, and others. It's a big part of the income-stream for a bunch of the freelance creators (authors & artists) that Chaosium hires. Remember that back in 2015, Chaosium was on the verge of collapse. They had Kickstarted themselves to death, with financial obligations far beyond their combined revenue + savings. The company only survived because of "The Return of the Great Old Ones" (Greg & Sandy) and their choice to merge with Moon Design; key to Chaosium's revitalization & ongoing success is that they (the MD crew) keep a keen eye on the realities of being a business... needing to pay those salaries & overhead costs. The new BRP:UGE is a somewhat-risky investment on Chaosium's part. The "Big Gold Book" edition was selling so slowly that (before WotC's self-pwn OGLpocalypse) Chaosium had no imminent plans for such a revision (it was strictly a "one day.. (probably!)" wish-list project). So the new edition really needs to hit the ground running (that is, we customers need to buy it!), if it's to see ongoing Chaosium support.

And yet it's remarkable how often the best recommendation from the fandom to a newbie is, "get Magic World, and <minor tweak/add/etc> in such-and-such a way" Looks like an ORCish opportunity, tbh...

Hey Alastor... Welcome! I see you've been lurking for a bit, glad you've jumped in, and that you're finding the forum useful! I will throw my +1 onto the suggestion of Magic World -- or one of the Quickstart's -- for your basic game-engine chassis, tweaked a little bit with other BRP options.

... or if the "fake tourist bait" actually draws the attention of some fae entity/s, looking to engage with the mortals and their monster stories ...

Is there a current/canonical (RQG) reference as to what Moon Rock does, how it can be used?

Oh, you %@$!& tease, you! (well marketed, sir! well marketed!) 😉

A critical question for the designer!

The issue there is a question of how you want your game to model the setting, the real-world, etc. If "gear" is dominant, how do you model that in skill-centric BRP? Would a Panther tank be a +40% vehicle? But that's vs. a Sherman... what if it was going against an Abrams, a Leopard-2, etc? Do the Abrams &c become +80% vehicles??!? And what then with a Bolo/Ogre style tank, or a battlemech??!? Particularly with regards to our d100 rolls, a massive "bonus" for better weapon/system/platform begins to look like a bad design-strategy; or that you need to "zero" your setting to a given standard and declare better/worse than average gear gets bonus/penalty as per how good it is, in-setting, rather than try to cross-compare all gear from all settings. This, I think, is the crux of the problem in trying to scale up BRP's model of 1:1 personal combat, to the level of the 120mm canon of a MBT and its relevance to personal combat, vehicle armor, &c. Note FWIW that the biggest artillery guns in service have been scaling downward since about just after WWI ! The "Heavy Gustav" (1930's, 31.5") was the biggest gun ever fired in battle. 18" guns on WWII battleships were supplanted by 16" guns, 12" guns, etc... the "big guns" on most US Navy ships today are mostly 5" (the 155mm / 6.1" AGS on the Zumwalt is being decommissioned because the ammo cost up to $1M per round)... but none of these, really, are relevant to swordsmen, riflemen, etc. Even a guy with a Javelin or other MANPAT is still just a threat to a tank, whereas he's a casualty if hit with the main gun! I'm not criticizing your project or goals, just looking at some of the issues involved. Roman Legions vs. modern infantry is a perennial favorite -- I've used it myself -- but a bit of a strawman, really. Multiple major technological innovations (and 2000 years of overall progress) mean we're very apple-and-orange with this example (vs the comparison of Panthers & Tigers facing Shermans, which actually happened). Unless -- going back to your OP & the media inspiring you -- this discrepant tech is a feature you intend to explore. But is 1940's USA productivity (vs. the Axis powers) a lesson of relevance to your setting? Is one side vs. another side going to be a Shermans vs. Panthers situation? Maybe so! But if not... is this an issue you even need to address? I can see how you might need to address a tank-squadron being down a unit (or more). I don't think you want to model infrastructure and logistics & the national industrial base...?

I believe Chaosium has said they have a Bestiary in the works, intended to serve a wide array of settings. But if you're gonna "call out" the "third party creators" ... well Mr. Hippy, Imma call out you : become a creator yourself! Mostly, I think Chaosium is in wait-and-see mode. The BGB edition wasn't a huge success in the market... not just judged against other generic systems (like GURPS and Hero), but judged (internally by Chaosium) on a dollars-and-sense basis of ROI / cost-benefit. CoC is a bread-and-butter line for them, and the RQG release produced Chaosium's single largest day of sales in the company's history. BRP-core has always struggled even to justify its own existence by turning a profit (let alone be worth taking the core dev-team off-track from working on profitable products). nuBRP, released under the ORC license, is beginning to generate some 3rd-party products. Chaosium is looking I think both at their own sales of the BRP:UGE core, but also looking at those other products, to see how soon they go Copper / Silver / Electrum / etc on DTRPG. People bemoan the "lack of support" Chaosium has given to BRP (and Magic World). I myself have "what if..." wonderings. But industry-wide it's widely acknowledged that supplements sell MUCH worse than corebooks... so if a corebook isn't generating many sales, why on earth would the publisher write supplements for it??!? So, I think, Chaosium sees BRP:UGE as needing a degree of "market truth" applied, before they devote any more resources to it.

This looks like a great ORC product / product-line! Rather than a bunch of "mini-settings" as such, I think a better target would be a collection of "Quickstart" modules: an adventure with pre-gen PC's and *just* the relevant BRP rules to play that specific adventure and those specific pre-gen's. Each in a particular genre, showing off the adaptability of BRP to the genre. A fantasy-medieval game needs no guns or tech; a sci-fi game likely needs both tech & guns (but no magic); a superhero game needs Powers, etc etc etc. Someone could leverage a substantive chunk of rules-writing several times -- the same minimalist core -- in all versions. The adventure & pre-gens would be unique, and that extra portion of the rules (at a rough guess, about 1/3 of the product would be the same across all versions). Another option might be to use such a suite of QS modules to showcase variants within the system -- do a swords-and-sandals QS with hit-locations, and a WWII "behind enemy lines" QS with Major Wounds, etc.

Certainly relevant to the war as fought in the real world, with logistics & supply-chains &c impacting the battlefield! But is it germane to the "blowing up vehicles" OP?

Not at all a bad example, just based upon "dueling armor" (tank v tank battles) -- the conventional wisdom (IIRC) was that the Shermans needed a 3:1 advantage vs. Panthers, just to have a "decent chance," and 4:1 to be the likely "victors" (by which is meant at least 1 combat-capable Sherman advances, leaving a dead Panther behind.

So, your goal is evidently emulating a specific media property (which property is likely (dunno which one) a better match for tank-v-tank combat than BRP is). I'd prioritize faithfulness to the setting over faithfulness to the BRP ruleset (or any other consideration, really... other than fun / playable rules). But then ... So it seems like real-world "accuracy" (realism vs. modern battlefields) is also a priority (maybe your media of choice features this?). I think it's worth clarifying this issue, both for us (so we can give better discussion); and for you (so your own project is closer to your wants & needs)! Honestly, I'm inclined to largely abandon BRP's model of "combat" here, with HP's and AP's and such. These "points" aren't the same thing; they aren't on the same scale. In traditional BRP combat, the same HP's that damage your foe are used to penetrate armor. But tank armor is so overpowered that hurting the people inside the tank is just automatic, if you've blown through the armor and reached the squishy. Anything that gets through modern tank armor destroys the system it hits... engine, main gun, crew-cabin, etc. If what it hits is the ammo-chamber, then an internal explosion destroys EVERYTHING inside the tank (some of the more-damaging anti-tank rounds are themselves damaging-enough to also have that "destroys everything" effect). This looks to me like a modification of your "all or nothing" result, above. I'd focus your system on this feature. Honestly, modern armored-warfare a lot more about having the better gear, and less about the "skill" of the "combatants..." the skill-centric BRP game-engine isn't your best mechanical approach. Just look at WWII & the German Panther & Tiger results vs. America's best, the Sherman.

Most BRP grognards can run such content with their preferred BRP engine, adjusting on the fly as-needed. For someone new to the family of games, I'd probably suggest using one of the game-engines from that branch of the family tree... MRQii / Legend (from Mongoose) or RQ6 / Mythras (from The Design Mechanism). Paging @soltakss for further insights...

Pinging @Chaosium to this thread... @Scotty @Nick Brooke @Symphony Entertainment and... um, whoever else there... Also @Trifletraxor because he's our favorite Beetle-breeder!

Three general notes, as you approach the BRP:UGE rulebook: #1 - as noted by @Dangermouse, above, the game is descended from a rather-large suite of games in the "BRP family" and often has holdovers from those games included accidentally. #2 - The BRP rulebook is really NOT a "role-playing game;" it is a suite of rules-options from which you can assemble a role-playing game. As such, some of the options are mutually-incompatible (either/or choices) while others are "pick as many or as few as desired" choices. (in your specific case, it looks to me like the "weapon classes" and "specialty" rules are mis-matched, and mistakenly linked together when they should be "either/or" choice here; the old Ringworld BRP game used a "Skill Tree" approach to skills, where "Combat / Melee / Sword / Greatsword" each represented successive specialties of one another; so with NO ranged-combat skill at all, you could still grab a crossbow and use your "Combat" skill + DEX to do a much better job than the wizard without any combat-skills) #3 - Despite the two points above -- or maybe because of the two points above -- it doesn't really matter! The BRP rules are largely intercompatible, robust, and forgiving. Pick any reasonable interpretation (as best suits your own preference)... and it'll work.

Mark's work is wonderful, and the award so VERY well-deserved! 🙌 👍

Also, a great many Gloranthans already know of Chaos. It's a central feature of their myth-cycles, a common adventuring-foe, a common heroquest-obstacle & foe, etc. Many experience Chaos directly, re-living IFWW during an Initiation. Not like those poor modern fans of HPL, who think they have Science! to protect them, to answer all their questions; who grew up the metaphysical center of the universe, and pinnacle of Creation. Chaos will quickly break them, but Gloranthans are made of sterner stuff!