Jump to content

Sunwolfe

Member
  • Posts

    305
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Sunwolfe

  1. Then maybe a fan-conversion of MI is in order! By all the, gods:! Cheers! "We still live!" cried John Carter of MW/BRP
  2. I thought the same thing, so I tinkered a bit with the BGB tool-kit and came up with house rules for special success by weapon type. I also use the difficulty based skill resolution like Nick, I employ a Magic Skill based on POW and a homebrew magical artifact enchantment system and a few other slight arcane modifications. Otherwise, I pretty much use MW as written. Cheers! "We still live!" said John Carter of BRP/MW
  3. This thread is one of the best part of my day :-) Cheers! "We still live!" said John Carter of BRP/MW
  4. Just a cursoury glance and quick fill, but it looks pretty good! Thanks Master Jones :-)
  5. As I don't believe it adds productively to the conversation, but is still something I need to express, I'm posting the following here in isolation. I seek no answers, plainly see the writing on the wall, understand that change is inevitable and am glad that Chaosium will survive. That doesn't mean, however, I don't have strong feelings. I am a child of the great divorce when RQ (BRP) and Glorantha separated and went their own ways 30 years ago. I have never been a Glorantha fan, and though an admirer of Greg and his mythology, I wanted to build my own myths and legends. RQ III’s culture-centric spin offered an amazing sense of “perfect fit” and yet “old comfort” (having come from SB1e). It was exactly what I needed and wanted. I have operated within those parameters for the last thirty five years: SB 1e, RQIII, Monographs, SB 5e, the BGB, (an RQ6 experiment my players sadly found too crunchy) and finally MW. 35 years a faithful fan to Chaosium’s BRP centered products; 35 years spending money despite what I considered poor business practices. 35 years of operating within a BRP sub-culture that, intended or not, Greg and Co.’s business decisions gave birth to. Despite well-intended reassurances, I presently feel like a “fired fan” (as some one put it). I understand that business can have no truck with romance if it wants to survive. Change is a given; adaptation is a must, thus I see my feelings in an honest light. Of the 100% of Chaosium’s present and potential income and sources, my BRP makes up for less than 10% and of that my dollars represent but 1/1000th of a percent. I see this and accept it, but it also represents nearly 75% of my life measured in loyalty and faith which makes Chaosium’s potential new emphasis difficult to consider without concern. Will I remain faithful despite this? I don’t know. I do know that it won't be for a remarried RQ and Glorantha. Though I’m happy for Greg and all those Gloranthaphiles for whom this is an unforeseen fulfillment of dearly held hopes and dreams, and for Loz and Pete and its confirmation of their hard and brilliant work as RQ torch bearers, I on the other hand, as a BRP bastard child, suddenly feel bereft of place and sitting below the salt watching others, the true-born, celebrating.
  6. If you're looking for a published or a bottled home-grown construct that caters to your love of "genricness" and "streamlineyness", you might find it difficult to find a nicely wrapped hybrid beyond that which you already seem to have discovered in using Ren D100 and the BGB to fill in the gaps or needs. I wonder if BRP GMs aren't all by nature hyrid-eers in one sense or another. One uses general hit points, another uses hit locations, another uses wound levels and still another tries to get away with no HP at all ! We love to tinker. That's the beauty of the system; take what you need or want and reserve the rest for later. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. Cheers,
  7. Excellent quesitons, Paolo. 1. While I have much of the material in question, it would be nice to have access to those items just plain too expensive to purchase via ebay, etc. I would do so, however, only to sift from them details that I could add to my own setting and by extension BRP. I would still have concerns and a desire to see ongoing development for BRP. 2. Because I would be looking at these books as a way of adding to my repertoire of BRP rules and mechanics, no, it would not replace the BGB. 3. Like you pointed out, this has an obvious answer: if that’s all the support we’re going to get, well, as Henry I put it in The Lion in Winter, “There’s not much point in complaining about the air when that’s all there is to breath.” That being said and given a choice, no. I would not be satisfied with this level of support. Cheers,
  8. Since the end of the Avalon Hill era in the mid '90s clear until the BGB's advent, Chaosium has ever been more prone to silence than celebration concerning things BRP. I swear, if it wasn't for Trifletraxor's forum here, I wonder if we'd have heard anything even then . Shrug. What's a few weeks longer? When Chaosium is ready, I figure our time will come...for good or ill. I for one have actually appreciated the non-reactionary quiet that's reigned since Monday. The endless speculation simply gave me a headache .
  9. Brilliant, Lammomedes, simply brilliant! Cheers, "We still live!" --John Carter
  10. Seneschal, Help me understand the "...3D6/2 meters..." reference. I get the 3D6, but not the "/2 meters" :-) Cheers,
  11. "Act Ornery 90%" Priceless .
  12. As I understand it, the re-version of RQ6 into RQ7 (using Vile's RQ7 designation for clarity) is a condition of the licensing contract as outlined by Loz in the “Chaosium, Design Mechanism and RuneQuest: A Statement” thread. While I agree that it is a shame that RQ6’s setting neutrality will no longer be in print as its own title, all wishes aside, does DM have much choice in the matter? Do I understand that right…that this is a condition of the licensing agreement and therefore a nonnegotiable?
  13. Absolutely! An excellent addition, Seneschal. I'm reading as fast as I can in hopes of adding to your growing list!
  14. Just wanted to thank all you who chimed in and offered advice or resources...some of you were hiding your light under a bushel and I found more of your stuff tucked away in hidden corners of the forum :-). I'm presently working my way through the John Carter series again, taking notes and paying particular attention to descriptions of Barsoomian people, places and things. Like most of our fan stuff, translating it all into MW/BRP speak is a labor of love and slow going, but as I get somethings organized I'll post 'em for your perusal, comment and constructive criticisms. The campaign plan at present is for players to assume roles as red-martians from one of the lesser city-states (John Carter will be present on Barsoom but the characters will only have heard the unbelievable tales told of him from merchants, etc. who have visited Helium--none of the player characters will be from earth). They will have been brought together by the son of an influential Jed who has had a family heirloom stolen from him--a set of radium pistols--but needs their loss...and recovery...kept on the down-low. To complicate matters there may be a team of panthan sell-swords who have somehow gotten wind of the loss and are endeavoring to recover the weapons themselves...but not for the prince... Cheers, mates!
  15. Aelwyn, "...wasted..." is a relative term--as far as Chaosium's blessing and marginal profits are concerned, you might be right, but I can think of a whole forum of discerning and appreciative BRP/MW fans who wouldn't call your time wasted
  16. The dude abides and that which does not kill us...
  17. You go, dude. It's been a long haul for you to complete this beast. Congratulations!
  18. Guys, I don't see BRP (or MW) mentioned anywhere in the...what was that, a report?...that Loz linked. I think it's a bit too early to start doomsaying. I mean, really, if peeps like Moon Design and Co., and the old crew hadn't stepped in, BRP would be heading for oblivion anyway just like Chaosium was. Don't get me wrong; I'm a bit nervous too, but I'm not quite ready to call the patient dead until we hear something official and to the point: "Our analysis leads us to conclude that it is not in the financial interests of the Co. to sustain the BRP line." Nor does it say in the report that Moon Design will run Chaosium, only that they are now part of "...the Chaosium ownership...". Yes, the management team will be made up of Mood Design execs and that makes me "fearful and afraid" but also a bit hopeful that a successful company with a good track record is getting involved. Besides Greg and Sandy are still part of the governing board and we were all pretty hopeful when we first heard the news that the "band was getting back together." Will I be disappointed if the coroner is called in to pronounce BRP dead? Hell. yes! I'll feel a bit betrayed too. When others shout and pop the corks toasting their good fortune with cries of "Glorantha and RQ reunited at last! Heroquesting forever! Cthulhu reigns supreme!, I'll be in the corner growling in my bitterness trying conjure a disease spirit to inflict their arm-pits with lice. But like I said, I don't see BRP's demise predicted in the report posted above. I mean I suppose it could be read that way but only between the lines. There's nothing explicit there. If there is, my brothers, well, we'll just do what others before us have done when their favorite RPG went the way of the Do-Do: keep right on playing BRP, refining BRP and creating our own BRP stuff. I hang on Google+ with the D6 community where I lurk, read and drool. I love Star Wars and in particular WEG 1st edition Star Wars...talk about out of print...which these gamers just won't let die. I would argue that despite the game's official status, the D6 community as represented there is vibrant, creative and inventive producing more cool stuff for their beloved game, (both 1st and 2nd editions) than WEG ever produced officially. We can do the same. Still, I'm not ready to stand over my fallen BRP just yet, because as far as we REALLY know, BRP is not dead. It's all conjecture at this point. It could be that a gloriously awesome golden age of killer BRP alternate earth or scifi settings are just around the corner, waiting in the wings for a strong business plan and the right support to come to come along. I mean look at Moon Design's stuff! With the old guard standing watch and those kind of resources, can you imagine what BRP goodness might come about? I counsel (like it really matters what I counsel...LOL!) patience. We wait and listen and if we don't hear anything soon, we ask. And if we get no answer or a halfhearted one...well, then that'll say it all. Until Ben says done...I'm not giving up hope. Yours in nervous optimism, P.S. these are simply my own opinions written in a flush...if I've pissed anyone off, please believe I didn't mean to. Cheers.
  19. Chrikkies! I clicked on your link, Conrad, and realized I had that toy too! Wow! I'd forgotten all about it. It's been what...oh, damn...nearly 45 years+ ago! As I remember now mashing them back together didn't work out as well as the commercial suggested it would...LOL! I wonder what ever happened to that toy .
  20. When I got a room full of chatty players--six and myself--all loud and eager to be heard at the same time, Statements help focus players and alert them that it's time to set aside the levity and get serious for a moment--a brief moment :-T, but otherwise I'm like Nick, I only use them when I feel the need :-).
  21. Heya, Chaot, I found the MW rule for using INT-ranks for casting magic during the combat round (65), as I remembered, but I can't seem to find the section about using INT ranks for declaring actions. Could you help me out there with a page reference? Cheers,
  22. My pleasure While I would not describe Stormbringer 5E (SB 5E) as easier to read than MW, I will say that SB was edited much more thoroughly and thus its euphany makes SB a more pleasant read than MW. I agree with rsanford that you don't need SB to play MW. Not at all. MW stands alone. If you purchased SB 5E and compared the two, you would find that MW is not simply a carbon copy of SB. Other sources contributed their rules as well, such as the Creature and GM sections from Runequest 3E and the ship rules from SB's Sailing on the Seas of Fate. If you bought SB 5E to use as SB 5E or to simply expand your library that would be one thing but to get a better read on MW--no, no I don't think so. And while the BGB is nice to have for research, rule additions, changes or tweaks, or an honored place on your library shelf, I don't believe it is necessary either. I happen to think that every BRP adherent should have the BGB in one form or another and that they can only benefit from reading it, but it is not necessary to play MW well and satisfactorily. As for giving RQ6 (one of the most well written and polished games I have ever read) another shake, it is always worthy of another chance, but it is simulation oriented and therefore more "crunchy" than MW which is "squishy" and therefore more abstract in mechanics by comparison. Though RQ6 is modular as the best of BRP-inspired games are and can be adjusted to require less or more of one or the other. I know next to nothing about Legacy. I wish you luck in your quest. MW rocks and I hope you get a chance to play it soon.
  23. Hi, Silver: One thing about BRB, for as many GMs and players as there are, you will have as many interpretations and opinions of the rules . That’s what makes the system so strong, but it can also be frustrating for neophytes …LOL! As you posted in the Magic World (MW) thread, I’m going to answer from a MW perspective using the core rule book as my base. While in my opinion, it might be helpful to have MW's foundation Stormbringer 5th ed. to look for typos (you shouldn't have to worry about it now that the updated MW pdf. is out) and BRPs Big Gold Book is nice to have for ideas and modifications, I don't feel either are needed to play MW. I apologize to you, and the rest of you, for the length of my response, but for the sake of clarity, I’m doing my best to be thorough. To the experts, don’t hesitate to correct me where I’m wrong. I’d appreciate it. Dex-ranks - I had assumed this was initiative with highest dex going first. Yeppers, that is true (65). However, I see the actions on page 62 says some actions forfeit dex ranks. So I am confused as to what happens when. Could someone provide an example for two combatants moving up to each other and attacking? Because MW is less crunchy than other systems, it does not require exact measurements with miniatures, hexed battle/encounter mats/boards as some RPGs do. Logic, flexibility and fairness rule the day. I’ll outline an encounter below, but I’ll do it in first-person player rather than third-person character. Actions - p62 says that participants have enough time to complete at least one action. This is the norm. Does this mean they can perform more than one? There are situations wherein a player can perform more than one action, however, this is usually very specific and each action is separated by 5 DEX-ranks (67). Is there only one attack allowed per turn? Yes. This again is the norm. The only exception is a Riposte (63) and splitting an attack skill at 101% or higher into two separate attacks (68; left-hand column). I see that I can move and attack (within restrictions and a dex rank forfeit). Can I do a disengage, move 2, engage a new target, and attacking? Some sort of action in a round economy would be helpful. This how I would interpret the rules as I read them—the rest of you, don’t hesitate to chime in here and set me straight. No; you may not. If your player’s DEX is 17 and engaged [as in: that’s my enemy; I’m his foe; we’re locked, cocked and ready to rock], I can declare at the beginning of the round that I intend to disengage (62). To do so, I must make a successful Dodge skill (62). Dodges are free actions so no cost there. If my Dodge is successful, I have disengaged and I may “…move up to maximum movement by the end of the round…” , BUT, the disengagement IS my Action that round and is listed as such under “Actions In A Round”. Technically as a disengaged player, I may now Move during the round in which I am disengaged up to my “…maximum movement…” (which is 8). As I do so, time is eating up DEX-ranks. If I move half my allowable movement, which as a human would be 4, I must wait to attack someone next round. If I move only 2 (I have a DEX of 17), I forfeit 5 DEX-Ranks and my working DEX-rank is now 12. If I move 3-4, I forfeit 10 DEX-ranks reducing my working DEX-rank to 7 (62). If I decide to reengage in combat or someone engages me, I must work within these parameters. In all practicality, however, I’m going to be the low man on the DEX-rank totem pole and if no one has zeroed in on me, I may be unengaged the whole round as I bob and weave my way through the melee. A MOV of 8, is a crap-load of movement and the MW standard for humans. A unit of movement is “…several to ten meters…” (54). Those GMs who want an exact amount for each movement unit are encouraged to call a unit “…five meters…”, but the spirit of the ruling is that a unit is relative to circumstance, situation and GM discretion. So to answer your question according to how I interpret the rules, if I disengage from combat (my combat action) and move 2 (reducing my DEX-Rank by 5) I would not be able to engage a new target until the beginning of next round. Remember, you can only disengage if your are already engaged, nor can you reengage unless you’ve been engaged (wow). If at the beginning of the round I was Unengaged, however, I could move about, choose my target—if they hadn’t yet chosen me—and attack on my modified DEX-Rank. Drawing or picking up weapon says "his first attack or parry with the weapon comes five dex-ranks later, on the sixth elapsed. I searched the PDF for the word elapse, this is the only place that is used. Terminology from a different rule set? MW’s combat system is lifted directly from Stormbringer 5th edition (SB). The passage in SB reads, “….his first attack or parry with the weapon comes five dex-ranks later on the sixth elapsed” (112). It lacks the comma between “later” and “on”. What the passage in MW is trying to say is that five-ranks have elapsed and on the sixth, you may attack or parry. In the above example, with a DEX-Rank of 17, you’d attack or parry on 12. What follows below is a combat wherein I’ve tried to address most of your questions. Situation Two human adventurers are camping for the night on the portico of a ruined temple. It’s the pre-dawn morning watch and Player A is on guard. Player B is snoozing away nice and toasty having won both first watch privileges and Player A’s blanket for his bed in a dice-game earlier. Unbeknownst to the twain, they are being stalked by two human ruffians: Bandit C and Bandit D. Human MOV is 8. The GM rules that the bandits and their prey are far within the distance allowable for human movement so no adjustments to DEX-Ranks will need to be made in that regard—no rulers, battle boards, hex papers or miniatures needed. Nice, but not needed. Pre-combat Player A describes to the Chronicler (GM) that she is on the alert and moving cautiously around the fire and her sleeping companion. The GM makes a show of rolling dice behind the screen and confirms that she does exactly that although she’s a bit tired after the long watch. Near the end of her watch the GM describes that she thinks she hears something suspicious and asks her to make a Listen skill roll. She has a 75% Listen. She rolls a 14, a Special Success. The GM rolls his bandits’ Move Quietly skills in an Opposed Skills Roll test (49). Bandit C has a 60% and rolls a 10. Like Player A, he too has rolled a Special Success. A Special Success VS a Special Success results in a stand-off and Player A does not hear Bandit C. Bandit D, however, is not so lucky. He too has a 60% Move Quietly but rolls a 68 and blows his covert approach by stepping on a pebble that shoots out from under his sandal and skitters across the cobbles. The GM tells Player A that she is sure someone is out beyond the fire light. GM: “It almost sounds like someone threw a small stone across the porch from beyond the broken columns to your left. What do you do?” Player A: “I draw my sword and wake up Player B while watching the area, but this could be a detraction, so I’m on the alert for attack from another direction.” GM: “Hmmm…” The GM rolls against the Bandit’s INT in an Idea Roll to see if they pick up on the fact that their prey has been alerted by the errant stone. Being the one who made the noise, Bandit D rolls a 45 against INT x5 and realizing they’ve lost their Ambush surprise and rushes out of hiding. Bandit C, on the other hand, who didn’t make that noise must roll against INT x3 to realize the jig’s up. He fails his roll and is oblivious, so he’s a bit behind his fellow on the attack. “…okay. You draw your sword, but before you can wake Player B, a figure rushes you from behind the column you were watching. What is your DEX-Rank…?” Player A: “Can I at least call out to wake Player B?!” GM: “Sure.” Player A: “Player B! Fire! Foes! Awake!” The GM decides that Player B (PB) was sleeping lightly enough he wakes at PA’s call but must clear his bed roll. Bandit C, seeing his mate’s attack, leaves his hiding place to engage PB. NOW…at this point much depends on you as the GM—style, rules interp, circumstances and situation—to determine who is engaged and who is not. As a GM I would rule that Player A and Bandit D are for all intents and purposes “engaged in hand-to-hand combat” and Player B and Bandit C, while not yet engaged, soon will be—once B gets up. Even though I would normally deal with both Players and their perspective combats according to DEX-ranks, for the sake of this illustration, I’m going to deal with PA and BC first. GM: “PA what’s your DEX-rank, again?” PA: “16” GM: “Nice! You’ll go first [Bandit D has a 13 DEX-rank]. Do you want to anything special? Let’s hear your Statement.” PA: “How close is the approaching bandit?” GM: “Close enough that if you’re not careful you’ll lose your advantage; maybe four meters and closing on a run.” PA: “Well in that case, I’ll simply meet his attack with my own.” GM: “Good call, but I wanted to give you a chance to do something else if you wanted to…” PA: “Like what?!” GM: “Oh, well, I don’t know…kick sand in the bandit’s face… PA: “We’re on a marble flagged porch! GM: “…run away…” PA: “Fat chance! I’m not PB.” PB: “Hey, I resemble that statement!” GM: “…or use a ring of invisibility…” PA: “I don’t have a ring of invisibility!” GM: “Oh. Right. Bad, GM. Bad.” PA: “Like I said, I attack.” GM: “Okay, no magic items then. We enter the Action Phase. Roll your attack…” Combat follows as per normal and described on pages 62 through 67. Let’s deal with Player B now. GM: “Okay, PB, you awaken at PA’s cry.” PB: “I jump up and attack whoever is attacking me with my broadsw--” GM: “Hold on there, cowboy. That’s cool, but let’s do this by the numbers. What’s your DEX-rank?” PB: “Ha! 17!” GM: “Excellent, so let’s hear your Statement.” PB: “I’m going to get up, draw my sword and look for enemies. If there are none, I’ll help PA with her’s.” GM: “Any magic?” PB: “Nope. Let’s do this!” GM: “Okay, Speedy, but before you ‘do this’ you’ll need to make an Agility roll at DEX x3 to get clear of those cuddly warm blankies you cheated PA out of earlier without making a mess of things.” PB: “What!?” PA: “You cheated!? I knew it!” PB: “Oww…no I didn’t--! Come on, GM; I’m…” GM: “You roll it or I’ll rule it…” (one of my favorite sayings). PB: “Fine!” Dice chatters across the table. “Damn, a 52! I failed!” GM: “Well, while that’s not a good thing, and it’ll cost you a DEX-rank (17 minus 1: DEX-Rank 16), you didn’t Fumble, so you were able to clear the blankets with a bit of effort, but as you rise, before you can do anything else the enemy is upon you and you’re engaged. Action phase!” PB: “What?!” GM: “Yeppers. Clearing the extra blanket cost you precious nano-seconds and a foe with a sword in hand is nearly upon you [Bandit C has a 15 DEX-rank] PB: “Fine! I attack…” GM: “ ‘You gonna skin that smoke wagon, pilgrim…’ ?” PB: “What?” GM: “Are you going to draw your sword?” PB: “Well, I mean, I had it out. Laying beside me while I slept…” GM: “I let you have it out, ‘…laying beside…” you while you slept, but even you said in your statement of intent that you were going to ‘…draw [your] sword…’ so it must have been in a scabbard and you’re going to lose some more of that DEX advantage of yours drawing it out. It costs you five-DEX ranks to do draw that weapon. You’ll be able to attack on the next DEX-rank.” PB: “What was that, Willis?!” PA: “In other words as your DEX-Rank is 17, you lose 5 Ranks.” PA counts on her fingers backwards, “ …17, 16, 15, 14, and 13, for drawing your sword and you’ll be able to attack on DEX-Rank 12 [“…the sixth elapsed.”]. Oh wait, and minus one more for failing to disentangle yourself from the blanket you cheated to get, so that’s DEX-Rank 11. PB: “But that means the bad-guy has the drop on me!” PA: “That’s what you get for cheating at dice.” PB: “What? I didn’t cheat. Bad GM! Bad!” GM: “You’re lucky I don’t make you roll for it! You draw it, no problem, and good thing too because, as PA pointed our so nicely, your loss of 5 DEX-ranks allows your foe to attack first.” PB: “Can I disengage, instead of drawing my weapon?” PA: “Hey! You can’t leave me here to face two of these guys alone. You suck!” GM: “Sorry pard, but the time for declaring a disengagement was during the Statements phase. It’s Actions time. PB: “Okay, I draw my weapon and attempt to parry.” Combat follows as per normal and described on pages 62 through 67. Let’s pretend, however, that during the Statements Phase PB did declare he wanted to disengage from the round—his sheathed sword in hand. GM: “Sure, but that’s your action for the round. You’ll have to make a successful Dodge roll first.” PB: “Okay, I’ll do that. My Dodge is killer at 70%. 45! Bam!” GM: “So tell me how you disengage—sidestep, dive for cover, jump out of the way—and in which direction?” PB: “I’m going to dive dramatically into a shoulder roll to the left away from the fire and toward any cover I can find.” PA: “What a wuss. You’re a coward.” PB: “No, no; I have a plan!” PA: “Right. You’re a cheater and a chicken.” PB: "No I'm not!" GM: “So! You dodge out of the way, making your dramatic dive and roll. Make you’re Agility roll at DEXx4 rather than x5 (49, 50). PB: “I just made it with a 67!” GM: “You dive out of the way with a smooth shoulder roll, but even as you do, [GM rolls dice for effect] you catch the whistling sound of your opponent’s sword as it slices off a lock of hair.” PB: “What about my helmet?!” PA: “Oh my god.” PA covers her face with her hands. GM: “Really. You sleep with your helm on. PB: “Well…” GM: “Dude, if you did that, we’re backing this round up and you’re going to have to make a Luck roll at POWx1 to even hear her call, and as far as getting out of your ill-gotten blankets…” PB: “Okay, okay. Fine. I get it. I’ll get a hair cut later to even it out.” GM: “Excellent. You successfully disengage. You rise and…what? What do you do? Run, reengage, what?” PA: “Yeah, what? I want to hear your great ‘plan’.” PB: “Well, I draw my weapon, turn and survey the tableau.” GM: “’Tableu’ good word. Well, you see PA engaged in desperate combat with a ruffian of some sort armed with a long sword. You aren’t too sure about armor but you note that few outward plates are showing. It’s probably not heavy armor. Oh, and you see a similar attired foeman—the guy you dodged—sans a buckler, turning around for another go at you.” PB: “What!? I thought I just disengaged him?!” GM: “You did, but, he likes you and wants a place on your dance-card. He thinks you’re graceful.” PB: “But I disengaged!” GM: “You did, but that doesn’t mean the bad guys take a knee. You dodged, drew your sword and turned to survey the scene (the GM rules in his head that it took at least 2 units of Movement and some time) You’re basically still there. If you’re going to hang out, he’s going to try and engage you. Lucky thing too because he might have gone after PA if you’d disappeared.” PA: “Some plan.” GM: “So…?” PB: “Fine. When I know the dude is committed to coming for me, I’ll move further back into the shadows over toward that well we discovered earlier and engage him there. Maybe I can trick him into falling in the hole.” PA: “I hope you fall in.” GM: “Great. Off you go and [GM rolls] our hero, none-too-bright, follows you. You won’t be able to engage in combat until next round however.” PB: “Aww! But--!” GM: “PA, back to you.” PA: “About time. Can I get my blanket back?” GM: “When this is over…” And there you go! Clear as mud, right? LOL! Regardless, I hope some of it helps (I hope some of it's right! Really, though, I do play MW). I'm sure someone else will come and straighten me out. Cheers!
  24. Greetings All! I'm on the up-slope in a Valley-of-Decision concerning whether or not to start a Planetary Romance game. I have yet to fully pull the trigger and commit, but if I do, it is going to be set in Barsoom with all the Burroughsness I can describe. To that end, I've got a few questions I'd like to direct at the community in hopes of getting some hints as to the best way to pursue such a project. 1. I'd really dig on hearing from any of you who presently or in the past have run planetary romance games. Are there any gems of advice you've mined that you think would help me along in running such a game and help in maintaining its particular flavor? 2. Until Jason is afforded a chance to finish his "Interplanetary--A Basic Roleplaying Sourcebook", I'm going to need to raid various publications and games for game-rendered reference materials (the profiles of the red and green martians in "Agents of the Crown" is a good example). Rather than tell you what I have, I'll just leave it open. What titles do/did you guys use and what are their resource strengths? 3. Finally, though I plan to stick fairly close to the BRP engine (simplified) and what resources it offers, what other mechanics can you suggest I might need. Thanks in advance!
  25. Congrates Auly , but I agree with Rosen, this thread belongs in the Legend forum.
×
×
  • Create New...