Lord Sephleon

"I'm a doctor, not a captain!" Sorry... couldn't resist.

I took Darkholme's examples as the, uh, example. Mass Effect would be cool, but I have enough trouble trying to find people to run anything on my list, let alone that; also, my main RPing group generally doesn't look at systems like Savage Worlds without considerably impressive "marketing pitches" by me. Hell, it took me over a decade (well, maybe about half that in actuality since I played a lot of D20 during its early years) to get them off of 3rd Ed/D20 systems for fantasy games and into something like BRP (thank you, ThreeDeeSix and Classic Fantasy).

Honestly, that "balanced" nature is what turned me off of D&D 4E. Yes, 2E and 3E are by no means balanced, but that was the beauty of it, especially with 2E. I loved that wizards who managed to survive their baby (and adolescent and young adult) steps actually became a force to be reckoned with; that fighters outfitted with the right magic gear - especially if they happen to find a "named" legendary magic weapon - were practically unstoppable. Clerics were always a bit too strong in my eyes, but they had strict codes of faith to follow that allowed for some excellent roleplaying, and thieves were extremely versatile despite being rather weak in combat. Each of the divergent classes (Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, Specialist Mages, etc.) bringing additional flavor to the base classes, and the character kits (from 2E) tweaked even those more, all for more roleplaying opportunities. Yes, I agree that some kits weren't really worth playing from a purely mechanical standpoint, but they generally offered ideas - whether directly or indirectly - for bringing the character to life even despite that. To me, it was always about the character's interactivity with the world around him/her, development, and survival - and their becoming stronger as a result of it. 4E just turned everything into a power (including swinging your own weapon) which is all fine and dandy in an MMORPG like World of Warcraft, but not in a tabletop RPG, where diversity is the spice of life. I don't want my wizard having "spell effects" that are pretty much the same as the Fighter's martial/tactical skills, or vice versa. Wizards are supposed to go out and control the battlefield as a whole with magical effects (and potentially be brought low by a couple of dagger stabs, which is why they don't usually go up front), while Fighters should be the ones capable of killing things with a weapon, taking hits, controlling their own immediate battles with tactical maneuvers like tripping, disarming, etc., and even leading troops into combat. Additionally, 4E became much more high-powered than any other edition. What happened to the struggles of low-level and even middle-level play? Becoming a powerful character should be the reward of many sessions of struggle and near-death experiences. Between the transition (degeneration?) of D&D into a tabletop MMORPG and a personal distaste for level-based systems, I found myself going to BRP for everything. As much as I still love a lot of the AD&D settings (which I would still love to play/run), I pretty much don't see myself going back into the game that brought me into roleplaying. Apologies about the chaotic rant. Kinda had a similar discussion with one of my friends. EDIT: Fixed dumb mistakes like missing words.

Just like most of you, I've almost always ended up being the DM, especially in my longest-running group of 18 years. I've generally played in a lot of fantasy, modern-type settings including World of Darkness, and - as the token sci-fi setting - Star Wars, but one thing I always want to do is more exploration in any genre (especially sci-fi). Problem is that I'm a minority running with groups of "must have some epic conflict to handle, whether it be combat, political, or otherwise." I'd love to play in the following settings (the underlined ones are settings I've run, but never got to play in): Call of Cthulhu (My love of Lovecraft is what brought me to love BRP) Ravenloft (favorite campaign setting; probably know more about this than any other setting with the possible exception of the Cthulhu Mythos) Forgotten Realms (all of it, not just Toril. Cut my teeth in roleplaying with the Al-Qadim setting, which is still one of my top 3 AD&D settings) Dark Sun Planescape Greyhawk (more of a curiosity, really) Middle Earth Uresia: Grave of Heaven (from the BESM line of settings. Quite obscure, but a fun setting with a lot of funny parodies, homages and head nods to old school JRPGs) Star Trek (Huge desire to play this, actually. Played it once in college and had tons of fun. It also fits my aforementioned love of exploration) Aliens (Big fan of the franchise due to its Lovecraftian elements. Aliens also seems to have more diversity in its themes compared to Starship Troopers and Starcraft, the latter of which I played a homebrew game or two) Eclipse Phase (had a taste of the setting using the One Roll Engine and I love the idea of Transhuman Sci Fi, but it's hard to convince others that the lack of a fear of "physical" death can be worked around with good roleplaying instead of just being metagaming fools charging forward) Elder Scrolls The setting of the video game Secret of Mana (summoning elementals to cast magic for you? Hell yeah! It's also a great - if a little disjointed - high-fantasy world) The setting of the video game series Suikoden (love the Rune magic and the semi-heavy political intrigue) As much as I'd like to put up the various Final Fantasy settings like Ivalice and the World of Balance, those are ones I'd rather play in with the original magic system and such intact since they are a big part of the settings themselves. Also, the Shining Force series would go here as well, but they're pretty generic high fantasy settings in and of themselves. Just have to make unusual races like centaurs and pegasus knights playable characters. I think that's it for now... might add to it later.

Crap... I forgot about penalizing Agility. Gotta remember to add that to my houserules. Thanks Mankcam. I may actually be kind of picky with which Manipulation skills are affected, though. I don't really see heavy armor being to much of a burden with some of the skills there. Then again, my decision may change after I've gone through and fleshed out the Manipulation skills some more, so it's possible it may be a "thing" later.

For my Classic Fantasy houserules (which I'm still reworking, so this may be different in time), I implemented the following. Not sure how effective it might be in just using the core BRP rules, but maybe it might help at least a little. Armor Penalty Although armor provides excellent protection against arrow, blade, hammer, and even some spells, it is definitely more restrictive than clothing. You must find your Armor Penalty, which then determines all factors affected by your chosen armor. To determine one's Armor Penalty, add up the ENC of all pieces of armor worn (pieces that cover multiple locations are the sum of all the locations). This is the skill penalty for most Physical actions that involve movement (such as Acrobatics, Athletics, and Dodge), as well as casting Arcane spells with Somatic components. For MOV penalties, subtract the higher of either STR or CON from the Armor Penalty. For every 5 points remaining (rounded up), reduce your MOV score by 1, to a minimum of 1. For Speed Factor, divide the Armor Penalty by 3 (rounding up). This total is subtracted from Initiative checks. Remember that some characters have the Armor Proficiency benefit (which halves the ENC of all worn armor), and various materials – as well as permanent magical enchantments – can affect the final ENC of armor. This is an important factor to remember for the purpose of Armor Penalty.

Why not just use them as in the BRP BGB, but not use any resource like MP at all? Just let the PC's skill get penalized the more he/she is trying to do with the power (i.e. trying to use Telepathy on 10 people at once would be a much heftier penalty than just on 1 person, like maybe -5% or -10% per additional person after the first). If you use Fatigue Points (or any Fatigue rule, really), you could substitute that (or even Hit Points) in for MP instead if you still want some resource management, but don't want to rely on MP. Personally, of the three you listed, I'd probably go with Sorcery or Common Magic. It really depends on how exclusive you want Psychic Powers to be and how difficult it is to master them.

I have this same issue. I like the idea of using opposed rolls for Combat Maneuvers as per Legend, but I (and my players, methinks) also like having Specials as it is better than a regular success, which we generally consider a minimal success for whatever action is being done. I'm in the middle of making a full-on AD&D/BRP conversion (not for profit: all credit to Rod Leary as his Classic Fantasy Monograph is what started this whole thing for me), where I could open up an AD&D setting or module and be able to just run things with minimal work, but I find that I'm actually tearing up a lot of the fundamentals of BRP in order to better fit. The Four vs Five Levels of Success/Failure is one of the core mechanics that I've been really analyzing and trying to figure out whether it works or not, so this topic drew me in. I have generally based my work around Legend, but I've deviated quite a bit in a lot of areas. For example, all of my derived statistics (Agility, Effort, Stamina, Idea, etc) are based on a x4 multiplier (making 25 the golden number instead of 20). I also pulled Luck away from POW (which has enough things going for it) and attached it to an eighth Characteristic: FATE. Luck is FATE x5, and unlike other Characteristics, all characters begin with 10 FATE (modifiable at character creation by sacrificing/adding to or from other Characteristics), and FATE is spent throughout the game like Fate Points (albeit at a seriously reduced cost, basically 1 point per use), but only recovers through heroic actions/ideas/whatever, or fully restored at the end of an adventure. I really have to pay attention when I reply on these boards. I write too much... Anyway, short answer: I'm glad someone brought up the Four vs Five levels of Success/Failure thing. Questbird, I like what you did there as it seems pretty intuitive (See a 0, 1, or 2? Passed the skill? Special. Failed the skill? Fumble). I might try it out sometime. When I really got into BRP years back, I houseruled all of my BRP/d100/CoC/whatever games with a scaling Fumble range (to dissuade players from "rollplaying" their characters and instead rely on teachers for really low skills, which I highly encourage): Skill of 01% through 10% = Fumble on 91-100 Skill of 11% through 20% = Fumble on 92-100 Skill of 21% through 30% = Fumble on 93-100 Skill of 31% through 40% = Fumble on 94-100 Skill of 41% through 50% = Fumble on 95-100 Skill of 51% through 60% = Fumble on 96-100 Skill of 61% through 70% = Fumble on 97-100 Skill of 71% through 80% = Fumble on 98-100 Skill of 81% through 90% = Fumble on 99-100 Skill of 91% through 99% = Fumble on 100 only Skill of 100%+ = Failure on 100 only, no fumbles Fumble range DOES scale with circumstance changes (so halving a skill chance would also increase the Fumble range). EDIT: For those of you wondering what POW x4 does now, it's Will(power). Basically a tool for Fear, Horror, and Madness from Ravenloft, or a more heroic Sanity system.

Elder Things. And I'm loving this talk of Space Ducky-power going on!

This is a bit of a curious scenario since I personally rarely play characters with less than average intelligence because I love (and prefer) to be tactical, perceptive, and adaptable to situations. A good way to play this (at least, in my experience) is to assume that your actual intelligence is somewhere in the average range (like maybe 8-13 on a 3-18 scale, though your mileage may vary). Now let's assume you're playing a "genius" character (somewhere above your range). One thing you could do to roleplay "genius" intelligence is allow the other players to help you in decision-making and tactics out-of-character (as in, your character's mind has a complex thought structure that might be viewed as "other voices in my head"). Of course, the GM has to be okay with this as it IS sort of meta-gaming, but it's a viable option as a group of people are more likely to see multiple flaws in a plan or thought (or whatever the situation warrants) than a single person. Additionally, you could request more information from your GM than he already gave in a given situation, especially if your character might have some knowledge that could help. In this case, you'll want to ask specific questions leading toward those strengths. Now, if you're playing someone with less intelligence than your given range, try to be more direct in your thoughts and actions, and don't think too much about things. For example, if the party comes upon a puzzle involving three statues, while the smarter people read the strange symbols and discuss how to solve the puzzle, you might poke, push, or move a statue out of impulse or impatience; the locked door could also be your target, if it's clearly where you're supposed to be going. If you're more of a smashy-type, you might start beating on objects (either chosen at random or maybe because you don't like the statue's face or some other detail about the object). If you (the player) have a great idea that you don't feel your character would think of, just don't say anything and come up with a less-intelligent solution (or, better yet, share the idea with the party's "genius" out-of-character.) This is really all I can offer as it's the only solution my groups ever came up with. Some GMs are okay with the idea that you think normally even if your character clearly has a non-average intelligence as, honestly, it can be a pain to roleplay anyway. Hope I at least helped spark some ideas.

Honestly, I don't really have a true answer. You've looked on Roll20, which is the best place to look for online real-time games (as opposed to play-by-post sites). If I wasn't so busy already running a rather ambitious BRP Classic Fantasy/Runequest/AD&D hybrid for my long-time friends while still working full-time, I'd offer to run an adventure or two, especially since I'm trying really hard to get away from level-based RPGs (especially the D20 scene, which my friends really love). As it is, though, I'm constantly reworking things in our game to make things more comfortable/more agreeable for my group. Out of curiosity, which edition of RQ are you looking to play?

Oh, you also know the Rule of PIE?

Page 350 in the BGB (hard-copy page number, not PDF page number). It's what I used as a base for my werewolf, altered a little with 2nd Ed. Ravenloft "Van Richten's Guide to Werebeasts."

Bronze can change shape too, but I think they prefer animals shapes over humanoids.

Tell me about it. I practically cried when I tried out a Bard in 4th Edition. Fighters can still be meatshields, though, given strong enough armor and good all-around defensive skills. The thing about BRP is that it reminds players that there is more than just "Succeed at hitting target;" the target doesn't just have a passive Target Number/DC/AC/whatever anymore. But yeah, clerics and healers have to be tactical in their healing, not just throw Cures around for paper cuts and grazes. I will say, however, that PCs can be pretty durable; the group's ranger took a total of 8 specials from crossbows in one battle (I rolled way too well that battle, but it WAS an ambush, so it made sense). The cleric managed to keep him up until another PC (the ranger's own younger brother) managed to Botch so badly he Criticaled him in the back, dropping him to -1 General HP. If not for the party's non-combat First Aid NPC pulling him out of harms way and healing him 3 points, he would definitely have died that battle. Nah, this meeting is sort of "destined." Fate and prophecy play a huge role in my campaign (with the PCs having special "marks" that actually removes them somewhat from Fate's threads). There's a bit of prophecy they will learn after the skirmish that mentions their meeting with the Black (among other things). It's the main clue that they have the opportunity to fulfill the prophecy as its main players... or to avoid it due to their marks. One path definitely makes things easier when dealing with the real bad guys, whereas the other... Bargaining with the dragon isn't always a bad idea so long as one is careful. And they're great enough roleplayers that, at the very worst, I suspect they'll only have to sacrifice ONE person to escape. Whoa... Massive deja-vu with Lodoss War flashbacks for some reason. Not even a direct quote from it, but it just kinda hit me. Well, a party that prepares like Batman and gets the jump on a dragon may be able to take it down. "Red dragon, you say? Fire Resist EVERYTHING, please. And gear up with heavy protective armor/jewelry. Thanks."

Yeah, Hexblades were a great concept, but I felt like they fell short (compared to the other base classes) after around 9th or 10th level. They didn't scale all that well, especially after the release of the stupid PHB2 and the Duskblade. Hell, even an Eldritch Knight built from a Ftr/Wiz combo that focused on debuffs was a technically stronger build once you got started on the prestige class. Aaaaaaaand I gotta start thinking about that stuff... I don't want to go back to the level-based build mentality. Ugh. What I've been doing with my PCs who decide to change characters for whatever reason (retirement, death, bored of the character, etc.) is having new characters created as normal, then they get 8 Experience Checks per past session that they can place on any skill they'd like. Obviously, they couldn't "double up" checks from the same set, but if, for example, a character came in on the seventh session, he would have 6 sets of eight checks, so any skill could feasibly end up with 6 rolls. Doesn't help if you don't have any sessions behind you and want to start with more advanced characters, but maybe it could help brainstorm something. Exactly why I love BRP. I love my players and have gamed with them for almost 20 years, but D&D and its scaling hit points really did change how people think in combat (even subconsciously). With BRP, all it takes is one good hit from a giant's club to squish Mr. Fighter. That's why Mr. Fighter's Dodge skill (or Parry skill, if he carries a nigh-unbreakable weapon/shield or just carries THAT many of them) should be up to par. Also, BRP does reward those who bother with high stats and/or skills; the way Area Effect spells are handled is awesome with the use of armor to take some damage, Agility rolls for half damage or Dodge rolls for no damage. No more of that "only rogues and monks can get truly avoid AoE blasts; all others are S-O-L." Speaking of dragonbreath: my players are about to have a skirmish with an old black dragon who just woke from a century-long nap due to plot. They're not ready for it yet, so they'll have a few escape options, but it's going to be interesting to see how confident they might get...

Really? My players keep begging for ways to make it easier to not only succeed at lower skills, but also to make it easier to roll over their higher skills during EXP rolls. I already made a house rule (from my CoC days) giving each category relevant stats for EXP bonuses (like INT + POW for Manipulation skills, and STR + CON for Physical skills), along with a "Category Specialization" chosen at character creation where the character gets additional skill points for the category based on "(Stat 1 + Stat 2) x5" AND all skills in the category get a +1 to increases (minimum of 1, even if the roll to increase is failed). I actually liked the Prime Requisite rule, though I'm thinking of a slight variation: All class skills have a 5% bonus to the EXP roll vs the skill. If the majority of the character's Prime Requisites are 15 (or 16) or higher, they get an additional 5% bonus. Why did your playtesters think the rule was "yuk"?

First of all, make sure to keep your Big Gold Book handy, as CF references it quite often. The Alignment system is really a method of tracking the overall moral actions of the PCs, which also happens to serve as a scaling power system for certain character classes (look at Clerics, Rangers, Paladins, and Monks). It's to reinforce that the players' actions DO make a difference to their character's development. However, with that said, the Alignment system only goes as far as the GM wants it to. I'm currently running a CF/RQ hybrid campaign based heavily on AD&D, and my players are really trying to stay Good-aligned (when normally at least half of them prefer Neutral or Evil characters). In some cases, the class is what motivates them: 1 is a Ranger and 1 is a cleric of a Good deity. Overall, however, I'd like to think that they're all motivating themselves to continue performing Good actions and remaining Good characters for the purpose of roleplaying. Of course, they don't know that I plan on doing some special stuff with their Alignments when they start getting past 50... As for the Class Skills, there aren't any "universal" bonuses in this edition. However, some classes increase certain skills (which mostly fall into the class skills list) by 1d8 instead of 1d6 for successful EXP rolls. The Fighter with weapons (that includes a "specialized weapon" that increases by 1d10, chosen at creation) and Thief with... er... various "thiefy-type" skills are two such examples. However, I do know that the author's next edition, due out sometime this year, will have more bonuses and niche-making rules. An example is the idea of Prime Requisite ability scores being at 16 or more granting a +10 to the EXP roll for class skills, making it much easier to increase those overall. I've been house-ruling and discussing a lot of those changes (and more) with my own group to reach a compromise where we all truly enjoy the system. To be honest, you will probably end up house-ruling a lot to better fit your style. I do appreciate how easily AD&D converts into BRP once you look at what Rod has done with CF and start thinking "outside the box." Magic items especially have become much more unique again (after their "standardization" in 3.0/3.5 and 4th Edition, something I still wish never happened). Hope this helps. Oh, and Rod, my players did manage to drop a hill giant, 15 bandits, and a werewolf in one battle. Only the NPC got seriously wounded from the giant's crushing hand after managing to climb its back and wail on it for a couple of rounds, but the battle was quite hectic, especially since the party's cleric and dwarf fighter had split off (leaving the three brothers: a fighter, a mage, and a Ranger; a non-combatant non-cleric healer, and a half-elf Fighter/Mage who rolled TOO well on her buffing spells).

No worries. Upon reading it, I could see how someone could interpret it differently. Just be aware that the more complex an attack/parry system you work with, the longer a single exchange between combatants can be. I find the Attack/Defense matrix to be a huge help (especially since one of my players printed a copy for each of us to keep handy) as it speeds things up a bit. Also, it's easy to fall into a routine. "I attack. I succeed. I defend against his attack. I Specialed. Etc." Depending on how much immersion you like your games to contain, this could easily shatter the fourth wall. Once you find the right flow of combat procedure, however, it should all work out in the end.

In your example, you roll your shield skill, and if you roll a success or better, the attack is blocked. The rules mean to say that if you are armed with a weapon or shield that CAN parry attacks, you would roll that weapon's (or shield's) respective skill to parry. This is the simplest way to do it, and there are options that further detail the system, such as having separate skills for a weapon's attacks and parries (i.e. Sword Attack 75% and Sword Parry 30%). Note the Attack/Defense Matrix that factors in different results (such as a Successful attack vs a Special Parry) on page 193 of the BGB. Hope this helps.

Nakana, If you don't mind that I work nights and generally end up having to work on my hobbies in the wee hours of the morning and the occasional day off (assuming I'm not brain-dead from work), I wouldn't mind helping with the Diablo conversion if you'll have my help. I only own the thin-yet-scrumptious AD&D Diablo 2 book, but I can help out with proof-reading and even some writing, should you need it. sladethesniper, Yeah, like I said, it was an epiphany. I think I was either in the shower or at work when that idea hit me. Unfortunately, it means you REALLY have to dissect your missions and distribute "class points" based on objectives and styles, but otherwise it works out as yet another way to handle a level-based system converted into BRP. The "Department" bonuses I treated sort of like racial templates, with increased skill bases for various skills important to the department and other benefits, so that was easy. The hard part now is writing up the myriad feats and class abilities and giving each requirements (both in class points and skill levels), but once that's done, I wouldn't mind sharing on here.

As much of a fantasy/horror DM as I am, I've been (painstakingly slowly) converting Spycraft Classic into BRP. Unfortunately, a lot of D20's extra junk (i.e. feats, special class abilities based on levels, etc.) are taking me a while to actually work out in my own head. I generally just mull things over as I work/sleep/play/travel and occasionally get an epiphany: "classes" as allegiances was one such epiphany, where completing certain objectives and/or using certain styles in a mission grants a point in one (or more) of the six class types - Faceman, Fixer, Pointman, Snoop, Soldier, Wheelman. These points can then be used to purchase class-specific perks and abilities, assuming certain requirements can be met. An example is Quick Change, a Faceman ability, that would cost maybe 2 Faceman Points to purchase, requires a Disguise skill of 80+, and allows one to disguise themselves within a few seconds so long as no one is looking at them (probably at a small Power Point cost). Or something like that. On the other hand, once Rod (a.k.a. ThreeDeeSix) has completed his Classic Fantasy series, I plan on going all-out in converting Ravenloft books and supplements (both AD&D and D20 versions).

I'd be willing to help, though admittedly I'd only be good for proofreading, editing, and possibly content. Can't draw well at all (unless you want stick figures) and I'm not proficient enough with messing with layouts to be of any actual use.