Sunwolfe

I love :thumb: that it's all in one massive tome! It *might* be a bit overwhelming and unwieldy at first considering what we might be used to, but I feel I'm (finally) getting just the right bang for my buck. Realistically, it won't be long before it will be so marked up, post-it noted and digested by my players, who have purchased scrolls of their own, that it'll sit on the game table more as a reference than a guide :happy: . I can imagine peeps having mixed reactions concerning its size. On one hand, it's a lot to assimilate, but on the other, it's all there...albeit happily with room for extrapolation and addition. Some might miss the Player Guide, GM Guide, Monster Guide paradigm, but I personally always had the sneaking suspicion, particularly in the case of TSR (once upon a time and a long, long time ago ), that I was simply being farmed for more cash. Did there really have to be so many separate guides? That feeling has remained with me to this day and, no offence to anyone here, was reinforced after receiving the first MRQ book and comparing it to the "Companion" my brother bought; they really should have been combined. That BTW, more than anything else sealed MRQ's fate...in my bank book at least. Again...just MHO. That being said, I am glad I went ahead and bought the BRP .pdf version. With its copy/paste capability, I can pick, choose and print if I need something smaller…say a “magician’s handbook” for example. I truly value and appreciate that freedom and flexibility. Thank you Chaosium! But, mighty tome or .pdf, I'd rather have all the info and the ability to streamline it any day over not having enough info and waiting for the next book to glean my wallet . Cheers, Sunwolfe

Hi All: I plan on using hit-locations, but not for hit-points, but rather for armor values so my players can "cobble" together harnesses in much the same manner as ancient soldiers primarily did: from the battle field by scavenging or one piece at a time as they could afford it. Cheers, Sunwolfe

For my people, after I have sacrificed much to the wood pulp god, I come up with a slick, made to order character sheet, specific to class and race using the Microsoft Word program and, via liberal and laborious used of the Tables and Text Box options, add some decorative "ancient" looking fonts, and then the paste-de-resistor...I print it in my own little HP printer using color-specific-to-class parchment paper. Oooo...Ahhhh...Ohhhh...Te-he-he! :cool: Thing that sucks is that most players in my group have lap-tops and one yay-hoo created a Exel spread sheet, shared the wealth and now they all use 'lectronic sheets rather than hard-copy. Bastards! ;-( Cheers, Sunwolfe

Come, run away / With cabbages and kings! Brilliant! Slainte' Sunwolfe

...is to deal with them with a glass or four of 12-year old Bunnahabhain single malt from the Isle of Islay (smacks lips appreciatively). After which I could care less if 'tis illusion or no, as the fine line between reality and illusion begins to blur quite nicely . :focus: As long as the players have no way of knowing is it, in fact, an illusion, and they believe it to be real, it is. Slainte' Sunwolfe

...Friday, June 13th. My brother's arrived on the same day. We both pre-ordered the day Chaosium made such an option available. Two of my other compatriots did the same and have also received their copies. Please note: we all live in California and, as the crow flies, live less than 100 miles from Chaosium HQ in Hayward CA. Cheers, Sunwolfe

Greetings all, from the dark-side of my mind: This "conversation" is quite timely as our group was discussing facets of this issue on Monday. I got to say, it's such a relief that so many players finally have the hard-copy [please, no frenzy; I did not say "hard-cover" ] or the .pdf and we can research and discuss rather than second guess and speculate blindly. I noted that Al. mentioned, but I see that the book does ask for such on page 89: Any time a magic spell affects a living [and unwilling] target the caster must overcome the target’s POW or power points [emphasis and brackets added] in a resistance roll. Each spell description will designate which value is used. I note that the Blast spell on page 94 does mention that, "Under most circumstances, armor (non-magical) or the Armor spell will absorb the damage, and the Blast spell can be dodged. If the Blast spell is parried with a shield, the shield will take the damage, with any remainder carrying over to the target." Thus, at least for this spell, armor is taken into account. Other "Magic" spells do as well: Fire, Frost, and Lightening suggests that non-metallic armor may defend against it. I wonder if the default is general hit points as hit point locations are designated an "optional rule" on page 29. As an aside, when playing RQ, our group's prior BRP version of choice, a blast type spell, say Sunspear or Thunderbolt for example, caused damage to the target's total hit points according to spell description. Lightening in the RQ version damaged a single hit location. As I plan not to use hit point locations but overall general hit points, it's not an issue for me. I DO plan to use armor point location as I like my players being able to scavange various armor types and "cobble" together as much protection as they can as armor is very cost prohibitive in my campaigns. I'm presently going through the book and highlighting each spell's "designat[ed]" resistance roll source value, POW or power points, so as to speed up game play. I've noted that not all spells, Blast being a good example, have such specifically designated in their descriptions :ohwell: , I'm looking for/assuming there is, a default, but regardless, thankfully I'm not completely helpless (at least not after the meds' kick-in) and can decide which is which for myself :happy: . Cheers, Sunwolfe

...only to find out, when you finally do get over "hold[ing] back", someone else already did it or did something similar to it It's the voices, I tell you...the voices! Damn them! They tell everyone everything! Lydia, make them stop! Make them...:eek:! Hmmm... :ohwell: Maybe...maybe...I, I'll just listen to them for a change...now what was that again? Lesbians trapped in men's bodies!? Why...yes, yes! Brilliant! :shocked: Fortune favors the bold, Mr. 'Din! :thumb: Cheers, Sunwolfe

Great Merciful Blood-stained Gods...I'm so completely over the moon on how BRP1 will play 'juiced up' hardly describes how I feel ! Mad, I tell you, simply mad with excitement! Damn the juice...full steam ahead! Let the nay-sayers and doom-ists wallow in their self-pity and remorse, their fear of the WotC juggernaut! We may be but a grain of sand in a machine, but we all know what happens when enough grit and grind accumulate therein! Huh?! Huh?! Shall I tell you?! Shall I say it? >:->CHAOS!>:-> As in CHAOSium! Let the DnDers go weep in their YET AGAIN tweaked tweakedness ...while we few, we happy few, we band of brothers, sisters and other varieties, For they today that shed thier dollars with me Shall be my "brothah and sistah and whatevah" be they ne'er so vile...er, ugly...er, strange--yeah, strange. Ehem... This era shall gentle their condition. And DnDers the world or', now abed, Shall think themselves accursed they were not "here"; And hold their manhoods and other naughtiness cheap whiles any speaks That bought with us upon St. (fill in name of appropriate saint here) 's Day! Muuhaha-haha-haha...argh--cough--choke--gasp:eek:! Blood and Glory be for the bold and brave! Mount up o' rider and enter the fray! Boing-boing, bububu-BUH-YAH-ING! Sunwolfe :innocent: P.S. Thanks to Bill S. for resting easy in his grave whiles I mangled his most poetic prose!

Hi, all: I'm so excited and pumped! Based on posts here, I D/L-ed mine np. I think it would help if Chaosium put some sort of link in their "Order Process" email, or posted a very prominent and visible notice during check-out that one needs to return to "such and such" a page after payment confirmation and click the d/l link. Though I pre-ordered from Chaosium only a few days after they posted the option, I feel the additional purchase of a .pdf will greatly enhance my enjoyment of the hard-copy when it arrives. There are just too many convenient uses of a .pdf copy for game purposes. Wonderful, Jason; you and Sam have done a great job:thumb:! Game on :happy:! Cheers, Sunwolfe

Neorxnawang: Your setting sounds, philosophically, very similar to the homegrown one I myself employ: low magic, strong religious motivation and metamorphosis, areas of intense physical struggle as various societies try to rise above a moral, "technological" and spiritual collapse of a previously "Golden-Age" that wasn't all that golden. I am rarely interested in a supplement beyond its collection value (not future monetary value but simply collection "I've-got-them-all" value); yours however, has piqued my content interest. I most enjoy my players role-playing and dealing with such situations in game-play that go beyond the common encounter and dice resolution. Not everyone's cuppa tea, I know, but one my players have been willing to come to the table for (...at least until the advent of WoW and AoC--but that's another story :ohwell:...). I must confess, I look forward to reading how you handle both the theme and philosophical bent of your work as much as I look forward to BRP itself. Hack and slash, sword and sorcery I love but a mind bending, debate inspiring dilemma or two never hurt Cheers! Sunwolfe

Like most of you here, I enjoyed the "canon": Tolkien, Leiber, Lewis, Moorcock, Howard, Lovecraft, Burroughs, Cherryh, LeGuin, Herbert, etc. (too many to mention). In the fantasy genre, I have to admit I burnt out quickly long ago. Pop-fantasy authors seem to have a tough time breaking the mold and either creating a unique story or telling an old story uniquely. Some have even blatantly admitted that they were trying to write a story that was, say, Tolkienesque right down to the race, character and storyline archetypes :mad:. Worst of all sinners (IMHO), is Terry Brooks' Sword of Shannara. Yes, yes, I know he went on the write better stuff and has become a mainstay of the genre, but I just can't quite forgive him for that first miserable tome. I also make it my personal policy to avoid any book that refers to dragons anywhere in the title or has a dragon depicted on the cover. Eregon comes to mind (retch). I don't mean to diss anyone's favorite author; it's just my take on things. I heartily enjoy reading, but get tired of having drivel propagated via pop-culture when there are really richer pickings out there should anyone take the time to dig. Unfortunately most want to be served rather than serve and thus Christopher Paolini has yet another movie coming out based on his second book to serve-up and stupefy the young reader crowd into believing his ho-hum betcha-I-can-guess-what's-gonna-happen-next storylines are "...so good". A few notable exceptions come to mind, however (Again, MHO only). I really enjoyed Steven Burst's work in the Vlad Taltos series: Jhereg, Yendi, Teckla, Taltos, etc. The humor in these always made me chuckle. His Pheonix Guard series was fun too; an "old story told uniquely". Patricia A. McKillip's Riddle Master series: The Riddle Master of Hed, Heir of Sea and Fire and Harpist in the Wind, were a whole lot of fun. Roger Zelanzny's Amber series really helped me out with plane-ular travel and the quest mono-myth for my games. Barbara Hambly's The Ladies of Mandrigyn series (at least the first two)was great for believable (I.E. no chain mail bikinis) women warriors. I also liked Katherine Kurtz' Deryni novels...at least the first half dozen. They gave me ideas on medieval puzzles and intrigue and politics that were deep enough to employ in game play, but not so deep as to lose players. The series I have enjoyed the most as of late are Jack Whyte's retelling of the Arthurian legend: The Camulod Chronicles. Usually I stay away from Arthurian-rehashes, but this one tells the tale from a distinctly pseudo-historical perspective describing how Britian's Roman population tried to keep the light of civilization burning. A unique telling of an old story, it has the feel of Rosemary Sutcliff's The Sword At Sunset sans the sentimentality for the legend. Presently I'm reading Simon Scarrow's Eagle series: Under the Eagle, The Eagle's Conquest, etc. I'm enjoying great descriptions of how the Roman army operated during the Britain campaign of Claudius through the eyes of a couple of earthy and interesting characters. I am presently working up a rather grand war in my RP world and these books have given me plenty of ideas. Some one mentioned the Thieves World novels earlier. I found another city-centered series with a distinct Middle Eastern flavor by a cadre of authors and edited by Will Shetterly and Emma Bull: Liavek and Liavek: The Players of Luck, Liavek: Wizard’s Row, etc. These have great gaming ideas as well as a great essay in the back of the first anthology explaining the magic and traditions of the city that many a GM would do well to emulate when working up a major city from which they plan their players to launch their heroic endeavors. And then...LOL...so many books, so little time

"Any you boy's seen a big chicken!?" :shocked:

Just an FYI for those interested in such things. My brother recieved his Edition Zero on Saturday (02/18/08 or 18/02/08)...number 245/420. They're just beyond the half way mark in sales . Cheers, Sunwolfe

Hi, all: Strike ranks have been a concern of my players lately. We're thinking about rolling over into BRP from RQ. This possible switch has its origins in a strong dislike (notice I didn't say "hate" ) for the RQIII magic system and a desire to try something different, but not too different. On page 200 of Edition Zero missile weapons are referred to as having “…a strike rank of 0, with their rate of fire being the number of times they can be used to attack in a round.” On page 201 it says under the optional strike rank system concerning Multiple Attacks and Strike Ranks: "If an attack strike rank is 5 or lower, your character can make additional attacks in a round on each multiple of his or her attack strike rank. If your character has an attack strike rank of 1 (not normally achievable) he or she will be able to go every round; with an attack strike rank of 2, your characters goes every other strike rank (2, 4, 6, 8, 10); an attack strike rank 3 equals movements on strike ranks 3, 6, and 9, etc." Over on page 248 under the Weapons section in the explanation of the weapons table SR column it says, "1/SR means that the weapon can be used on your character’s initial DEX strike rank, then again on his or her DEX strike rank +3. For example, if your character has a DEX strike rank of 2 and is firing a composite bow, he or she can fire once on SR 2, than must nock an arrow and draw the bow (taking 3 SR), then adds his or her SR2, and can then fire again on SR 7.” Okay…the questions: Are the “attack strike rank” of page 201 the same as the “DEX strike rank” of page 248? If not, what is the difference? If so, then why is the +3 SR spacer between attacks on page 248 missing from the description on 201 when they seem to be talking about the same thing? Typo or a rule I’m just too thick to get? Give a GM a hand :happy: Cheers, Sunwolfe P.S. for those of you in the know, RQIII is a bit oblique on this topic even though some of the same verbiage is being used in both. I know final BRP is yet to come, but I've got players yapping like hounds at the gate, so I thought I’d take a chance to get some answers here. I've been trying to allow RQ to inform BRP to little avail...not due to any short comings in BRP but because RQ seems hard to pin down on the issue. P.S.S. Yo, Simon, if you addressed this one on the RQ-rules-request version I sent, you’re excused

...that it also has something to do with forum experience, how much a body posts, where one happens to be emotionally at the moment and what our expectations are in coming here. I know in my case, I'm used to posting and lurking on Bob Dunsire's Bagpipe Web forums with 11,453 registered members and 1000s of posts each week. Those boards are seriously organized and controlled. There are a couple of dozen "rooms" catering to various Great Highland bagpipe subjects. Each room has one or more very “present” moderators. Posters getting off-topic, which happens, are quickly and decisively returned to the subject at hand and encouraged to start a new thread in an appropriate room. Those who want to talk about subjects other than bagpipe-focused, there's a room called "The Beer Tent" where the fur, and occasionally an empty bottle of Scotch, flies. Personal attacks, political diatribes, racial slurs, gender bias and religious intolerance are dealt with swiftly and decisively with a ban. Some people bristle when they hear about this kind of forum, feeling that their right to express themselves will be curtailed unjustly or that it must be impossible to argue or debate. Nothing could be further from the truth. For those who don't know, pipers are some of the most opinionated and stubborn folk that planet Earth has ever known. Sure, you have to think about what you're gonna say and how to say it, but with all parties acknowledging and agreeing to operate under the clearly established parameters, the discussions are passionate and articulate, the subjects wide ranging and interesting. The up shot of such behavior is a lot of constructive criticism is given as well as insightful advice, alternate views acknowledged and new perspectives uncovered. Now before you write my example off as inconsequential, (auk, we're no silly pipers, laddie, we're Rrrrrpgerrz!), I don't bring this place up as a suggestion, though I think when it comes to posting off-topic (something I'm guilty of), there's something useful here. I'm only using it as an example of how our collective forum experience is as vastly different as is our reaction to it. The noise level can be intimidating too and a reason, I have to admit--much to my shame--;-(, I post so seldom:). I feel like the chances of saying something "wrong" is very high and that such gaffs won't be treated with tolerance or good grace, rather with, at best light condescension, at the worst flat out derision. I know, I know, I know, that wouldn’t be the case here...er...right? :oh well: but I mean, wow, the level of detail argued on some of these threads is amazing and intimidating. A body doesn’t want to drop in a word in edge-wise. I feel safer stepping between my brother's Rot and her food dish. Personally, between you, me and the duck, I worry for the health of some of these folk... And of course, if I'm having a bad day, been dumped on by the boss, don't have a date for the prom or feeling like I'm takin' more than what I consider to be my fair share of the flak, I'd be a liar if I claim it's not going to influence whether or not or how or what I post. The whys and wherefores of posting etiquette are pretty complex, unspoken and unwritten mysteries. It's easy to get lost and feel frustrated (I got to learn to type faster; when I started writing, the thread was about artist names for by TMNT npc’s and now it's about whether or not the Chaosium dragon is male, female or other. What the hell?). Expectation plays a part as well. I think there's something unique to be had here at BRP Central—something forming out-of-the-norm: players who are emotionally invested, predominantly older (for now), very experienced, some articulate and prolific, sharing ideas, inspiring each other, talking with the author of the next phase, beginning to think and consider how influential they can be on the future of the next incarnation, revising, reconsidering and reevaluating their perspectives and long cherished hopes. I think we're on the cusp of something new and cool evolving into something newer and cooler, played and influenced by dudes and dudettes who are old and cool :cool: based on something older and cooler...what?...yeah! Or...maybe not...sigh. I wonder if that's why it can be so frustrating. The potential is almost palpable...but...at...times...seems...just...out...of...reach just ready to slip off the edge. Anyway...I think it's cool when we consider that everyone's ideas about a forum are different and we make allowances for 'em. To do so may require a little adjustment here and there or giving up a degree or two of what some consider to be their god-given right of expression (note I did NOT say opinion), but I wonder if the rewards wouldn't be worth it. Cheers, Sunwolfe

Those are amazing! They say a picture is worth a thousand words...it'll be cool to tell my PCs, "The day has been unsettling, you feel a little off, as if someone were whispering just out of earshot and you keep looking for the source, but it's just not there. The sky has a heavy feeling too...its clouds look like this..." Then left click the minimized pic! :shocked: Wonderful >:-> Cheers, Sunwolfe

...of roleplaying goodness at my house I'm presently reading over the Zero Edition in a leisurely glass-of-wine-in-hand fashion, enjoying myself immensely and day-dreaming...ah, so many possibilities, so little time. I'm also reading the RQIVAiG, the game-that-wasn't, and imagining the possibilities there. I'm working on a version of the BRP character sheet, information, font, set-up, for our games here in wet and rainy Riverbank, California After a heartbreaking theft (never, ever, even accidentally, and "...only for a minute..." leave your lap-top w/external hard drive and jump drives in your car…even in your own driveway), I've devoted most of the time I reserve for gaming to organizing my game world: all the notes, manuscripts, diagrams, drawings, stories, maps and information pertaining to my game setting from the last 30 plus years and prepping them for a mass delivery to the Library of Congress for a copyright. I know it won't bring back all that I have lost, but it makes me feel better. I have seen the light Hmmm, what else...ah, oh yes, reading what you fonts-of-wisdom have to post and enjoying myself heartily :thumb: Cheers, Sunwolfe

I plan to use BRP in its entirety for my next game and to gather my players prior to rework their characters or roll-up new ones. We have used RQIII exclusively up to this point, but I think it will be fun to experiment with a different flavor…something “new”. If the response is positive, I’ll adopt BRP as my foundational system to houserule and adapt when needed or warranted. I sometimes wonder if this willingness isn’t more a matter of personality, expectations, and experience than it is mechanics. For example, I am not a Glorantha fan (LOL…sacrilege for some of you here…I know). I acknowledge Mr. Stafford’s fascinating milieu as an amazing feat of imagination and admire his creativity, but prefer to host games using my own 30+year old setting. To use ideas contained in various Glorantha-based supplements and fan-generated materials, however, (some of which you folk here have written—thank you very much), I have always had to remove or remodel Glorantha references, background materials or mechanics to make the ideas/concepts compatible with my own setting. As I have read through 0E, I have been comparing and asking myself what I and my players might want from RQIII or how would they react to BRP’s “X”? (On that score, I don’t think most of them would care what system I used, as long as it was conducive to role-playing and that the game-world maintained its unique feel and flavor). I had few, if any, moments that gave me pause concerning RQIII/BRP compatibility or the effort to do so. HP location is a good example. I didn’t find myself too dismayed that is was optional or that BRP supplements may or may not cater to this beloved construct, especially since RQIII publications had conveniently provided me with plenty of archetypes to use as templates or models. As some of my players are time-invested sorcerers and shaman, the absence of RQIII “power” systems gave me pause, but only briefly, as to my mind, the adjustments seem simple. In fact, one of the first BRP-oriented projects I have undertaken is devising my own particular BRP sheet that includes RQIII features I consider important. I sympathize with the hopes and expectations of the RQ faithful who have had to “roll their own” for so long and suffer being jerked around as companies and copyrights shuck and jive. I understand their desire for a new RQ age. Every time I look through the Barnes and Noble RPG section with its plethora of DnD supplements, I sigh heavily wishing the same for RQ. Hell, try being a non-Gloranthan RQ fan scouring the net for materials and I’ll tell you what a “dry season” is all about :happy:! I hope all may find something useful in this rule-set, to one degree or another, and be thankful there is some movement on that front. I’ve heard it said, “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure” and that such an observation is based on one man, or woman’s, experience verses another. As I have always had to adjust RPG materials to suit, I guess I’m used to the work and by virtue of this experience feel it’s pretty much part and parcel of gaming and why the thought of tweaking BRP isn’t too much of an issue for me. Considering the present discussion, I’m lucky in that regard. I hope BRP will be well supported and cater to as many tastes as possible; if not, I can handle it—I always have. I am looking even more forward, however, to the new constructs and ideas that, I hope, will spring from the BRP endeavor. If peeps stay open minded to the new and take BRP for what it is, who knows, maybe some of that DnD supplement laden shelf at BnN will finally have to give up a little space to gamers with taste :thumb:! Cheers, Sunwolfe

Very interesting Loz...much appreciate the info :thumb: I'll have to check the Gwenthia material out. Cheers, Sunwolfe

The players in my games have been campaigning in them since the early 90’s. As I mentioned elsewhere on these boards, the two groups I have gamed with since forever ago are a pretty tight circle. In that time there have been some significant PC deaths. Not as many as some who post here have in their games, but enough to be felt. Usually these are dear, well-played and history-laden characters who have had the dice roll against them or made a seriously blunder and reaped the reward. They are an experienced lot and as players are usually very well prepared for both foreseeable encounters and those that surprise them, which they handle most professionally, but once in a while, despite subtle warnings, which they remember later, they end up in overwhelming situations at the wrong end of a spear or spell. It helps to soften the blow that we’re all friends at the gaming table and away from it at the dining room table, around the fire-pit and pool out back (gods, I love being an older gamer). They understand that the last thing I want to do is waste time…theirs as players or mine as a GM. And the investment is considerable. One player has been in one of my campaigns with the same character for almost seventeen years now.:shocked: If he fell, I’d feel pretty bad, I’d still allow it, but I’d feel bad. I wouldn’t feel guilty however, as I’m very careful to follow the rules and apply them fairly. They know this; in fact, they count on it. There is a trust between the players and GM in my games that they appreciate. When their characters do die, it’s accepted as part and parcel of the system and setting Sunwolfe GMs. This goes a long way in making the shift to a “different” character smooth…and to a different “new” character they go, usually in the form of a follower or acquaintance who would logically be able the join the party without having to dump or give up the whole campaign thread—something that would be unfair to the rest of the party as well as the poor sod who after “x” years got himself inadvertently whacked. Though PC death is an ever present possibility and should be accepted by both player and GM alike, I’m not comfortable looking a player in the eye, who has spent literally years with the same PC at my game table, whose said PC has just died and tell him to roll-up a newb warrior/magician/thief/blah-blah. Nope. The game may have killed ‘em, and to be fair I have to let it, but I’m not going to add insult to injury by requiring them to start fresh I.E. all over again from empty pockets and low skills. Unless of course they ask to…that, however, is fodder for a different thread. I, therefore, people my settings with many NPCs just for the purpose of PC replacement. By virtue of “hanging out” with the PCs, these NPCs are usually on par with them skill-wise, as well as in wealth (my world is on a serious silver standard, usually hack-silver; where someone with more than 100 gold pieces to spend could seriously ruin the local economy of a city-state) and knowledge: the elite house guards they made friends with from the mentor’s estate; the experienced paladins of their patron priestess who escort them into her presence after another successful mission; the arcane brother and sister acolytes of their master magician consultant; or their fellow shock-trooper trireme marines from the Savage Wave Legion who sailed them to their destination. Because my players trust in our player/GM relationship, they usually step into the NPC shoes with little protest, retaining present game continuity and utilizing many of the experiences and knowledge of their former character—albeit through the eyes of a “new” one. The protests, as my players have expressed them, have to do with the static and flat nature of these NPCs when compared to their beloved and well-played characters. Again, however, they understand that that is the nature of the beast and accept it. None complain too long as I usually take them aside and fill them in with quick background material that make them feel unique and like PCs again. Don’t get me wrong, my players mourn the loss of their PCs when they die ;-(, but they handle it with good grace because a.) they can follow the thread and see that they died as a result of bad decision making on their part and a fair application of the rules on mine, b.) they trust me to acknowledge their long investment in the campaign, c.) there will be interesting NPCs for them to assume ownership of, and d.) they won’t be required to give up on the campaign entirely and start over from scratch. Just my take and how I handle PC death and experience levels. Cheers, Sunwolfe

Greetings, Nightshade: I’ll give it a go, though I’m sure others who have a better handle on this will chime in and more accurately direct you, as I don't doubt there's more to it than I've been able to surmise--it always seems to be that way :ohwell:. That being said…:happy: The POW characteristic can influence luck rolls as the formula for the luck roll is POW x 5. It stands to reason that the higher the POW a character has, the better the luck roll...I don't see an expenditure of power points as part of that formula though. If it is, I've overlooked it. In relation to Fate Points a character can use power points to influence the fate of a character in two ways according to the book. He/she or it, “…can spend five power points to re-roll any percentile dice when the results are unfavorable” but no re-rolling the ''re-roll'' and no xp check for it either. The second way is an expenditure of, ''…five power points to ignore a skill and trust fate, using your Luck roll as if it were Difficult to determine the chance of success or failure, rather than the relevant skill.'' It’s for skills only—not for a resistance or characteristic roll and no good for gaining xp or POW increases either. An expenditure of three power points per point of damage allows a character to, ''…ignore [said] damage…from a single attack…'' The ''basic system'' can be expanded at GM desire and discretion in various ways: to shift die rolls more favorably, inflict more damage to an opponent, to add more depth to a character’s past: ''you suddenly remember an old tale your grand-father told you as a child that seems key to unlocking the mystery of…'', etc. etc. Though the box containing the rule on page 176 of the 0-Edition does not flag it as optional (as other optionals are) the text describes it as such and that it is a new rule not previously featured in any ''previous editions of the Basic Roleplaying system.'' Hope this helps! Cheers, Sunwolfe

Greetings, all: Indeed...I say (not that it matters what I say ) let Chaosium take all the time they want to get the book as close to ''perfect'' as possible. In fact, I'm pleased as punch that they are willing to take the time to revise and edit, unlike the money-hungry, bait-and-switch, foist-a-tome-of-drivel-on-an-unsuspecting-fan-base, ''...quality control?--Naw!'', company-which-shall-remain-nameless (no angst here...). Though this prolific-roleplaying-publisher has some good authors, it is simply too much in a rush to publish. I'm so happy that even with the modest fan-base for BRP, mighty though we are (que the trumpets), Chaosium seems to be taking the higher path and I appreciate it. It may be possible that with what, less than half a dozen employees?, they've got to take that path, but I read it as concern for the product...and with the disappointments I've felt over my favorite RPG (RQ) and Setting (HA) being treated with such out right disregard, I'm more than willing to kick back and await the arrival of the Grail to the Round Table. That being said, I'm hella happy I've got my Zero Edition :happy:! I say stoke the fires of your campaign, Danbuter! Damn the torpedoes; full steam ahead! We've got the mighty Jason to pilot you back on course when encountering the foggy areas of Zero Edition...and, of course, the rest of this modest-yet-mighty-fan-crew who will be more than willing, I'm sure, to give you, the captain of your campaign...ah...multiple opinions as to what the ''rudder'' might really mean :eek:

Sunwolfe grins...well, wolfishly...and rubbing his hands together glances slyly from side to side. Hmmm...now that gives me an idea >:-> Muuhahaha! Oh...:focus:

I'll be using BRP predominantly, with a few RQIII procedures added for spice and nostalgia , in a low-fantasy home-brew setting where magic is uncommon...as apposed to a "high fantasy" game with everyone and their granny has access to magic. I'd also like to run a BRP sci-fi...something in the DUNE universe possibly. Cheers!