Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'criticals'.
Found 2 results
Hi, I'm indepted to Questbird, who a while ago posted about combining Spell Law with BRP/Magic World. For example, in my version, spell users get a number of base lists (half INT) at INT% and can cast spells on their lists equal to lvl x 10%. So starting characters can cast lvl 1 spells. In my version, the spells are cast at a POW times 5 casting roll, but the lists are ticked for experience if the roll also goes under the lists %. That way individual lists increase but characters are not unnecessarily whiffy when it comes to using spells. Spells relating to damage, like a shock bolt (lvl 2), do damage based on the demon power list (so a d4 if lvl 2; but in my game I use POW and INT to derive a magic damage bonus, using the same table as STR and SIZ. That way a shock bolt can be fairly offensive). Magic point cost is the lvl of the spell. (Classic Fantasy's Spell Lore can be used to provide extra MPs while being used as an Arcane Knowledge/Lore.) I would suggest allowing characters to have up to half INT in base lists, but the remaining INT is for memorising other spells, with each lvl being a point of INT. This means that characters can also diversify a grimoire and can only hold in memory spells up to half INT in lvl. Thus, a character of INT 18 can only hold non-base spells up to lvl 9 in memory, but can cast base spells up to POW in lvl. (Related to this, I have been thinking of limiting skill levels to a corresponding statistic times ten. This would mean that skill % can max out while being tied to PC stats. It also means a demon with a high STR or DEX can also have a very high skill potential. But I digress.) The aim here (with memorising individual spells, combined with spell lists) is to allow for finding spells as being a motive, and to make sure magic users are not too rigid in relation to starting base lists. However, lists allow for different flavours of magical professions. Casting any spell uses POW times 5 as a casting roll, but for casting non-base spells the maximum lvl one can learn and cast is equal to the lowest base list skill the PC has divided by 10. Thus if out of all PC lists the lowest skill is 23%, the PC can only learn and hold in memory, and cast, a lvl 2 non-base spell. This controls power levels while tying power and diversity strongly to skill in all of one's lists. So lists in general, as a measure of magical skill generally, determine the lvl of non-base spell one can learn and cast. The above system is best if using Spell Law along with the Essence Companion, the Mentalism Companion and the Channeling Companion. The latter is especially great for god-specific clerics, and can model wfrp gods and other dieties. Spell Law on its own fails to do this. (Mentalism might work well as being reserved for elves, but I haven't decided yet.) However, different from the above solely in relation to magic, I would also suggest that Arms Law (or the simpler MERP or A MILLION WAYS TO DIE critical lists) can be used too. One doesn't need to use the attack tables, only the criticals. E.g., anytime a serious wound is done, it is now referred to the critical tables. This is a small change and requires little change to MW as per usual. It is true that such hits might now be fatal, but they also don't inherently lead to the PC passing out after a few rounds. Stunned means parry and dodge at half skill %; unable to parry is self-explanatory, but you can keep dodge at half; and bleeding and extra damage can be converted by the recommended (in an ICE supplement for converting to Runequest) 6 equals 1 (in BRP/MW), perhaps rounding up. Thus an extra 10 hits and bleeding 1 per round can be an extra 2 hits and 1 hit per round. The description also ties in nicely with some healing lists, as nerve damage or whatever may require such specific healing. The sole issue for the above critical lists is what severity column to use: from A to E. This can be answered by skill level. Thus, if the attacker has 40 or fewer percentiles, then use A. 60 or fewer is B; 80 or fewer is C. 100 or fewer is D; and over 100 is an E. This seems to model nicely how skill level makes serious wounds more lethal, and the descriptions model the deadliness of the attacker. This also means that spells can also use the Spell Law critical tables (let the list % determine any severity column), without recourse to the convoluted attack tables which required rolling high. In this system, only the critical tables are used instead of the previous serious wound table in MW. I feel it adds to the flavour of the setting. In a way, the core BRP/MW system simplifies Rolemaster while allowing for the RM spells and gorey detail. In fact, when one considers that RM OB ratings are convertible to MW skill levels, such as creature attack levels, according to RM conversion guidelines, the RM treasures material are also useable. A +20 sword can now be used. (Although you might feel that such a weapon should only increase damage rather than skill rating. But the latter is effectively how RM did it.) In any case, the above provides some suggestions for RM Spell Law and Arms Law to be used with MW. It also suggests how MW can essentially replace the core of RM while still using its other elements. Again, Channeling Companion provides for spell lists based on religious spheres, such as war or fire, or nature/druids, and is essential to give fantasy world clerics the required detail. Wizards, too, are rather elemental in RM, so one might want to allow wizards/mages to pick three elemental base lists (from mage lists) and the rest from closed lists. The GM can decide if closed lists are available for further spell memorisation or not, or if only open lists are. Likewise the place of Mentalism in your world may need consideration. Naturally, dwarves make good alchemists. You might give regular dwarves the Inorganic Skills list as a species trait, which would fit their great crafting abilities. Likewise, elves might get some lists as racial/species abilities. (I would personally use the RM and MERP guidelines that make Hobbits and Dwarves very resistant to magic. Hobbits get effectively +10 to POW and Dwarves +8 for resisting magic. This balances the lack of magic users among these peoples, with the exception of Dwarven alchemists. But that's just me; MERP was my first rpg, so it left a mark!) Any thoughts on the above, let me know. Again, my thanks to Questbird, who started my thinking on the above lines. :-)
So everyone loves criticals and fumbles, I can appreciate this. I wanted to make changes that fit my own philosophy not just make changes for the sake of change. So here is how it looks right now. Skill Use 01-10 is always a success. 01-05 is always a critical success. There is no "special" success. 91-100 is always a failure. 96 - 100 is always a fumble. Critical Success on a non Combat Skill 04-05 - Next Use of this skill has an Easy modifier 02 - 03 - Next use of this skill has a Simple modifier 01 - Next use is Simple and you gain 2% to the skill Fumble on a Non Combat Skill 96-97 Next use of this skill has a Difficult modifier 98-99 Next use of this skill has a Hard Modifier 00 - Next skill use is Hard and Everything You Know is a Lie! Lose 1d3% on this skill For Combat, there are charts to roll on... Critical Success (Attack) Roll d100 01 - 25: Armor is Halved 26 - 50 Armor is Ignored 51 - 75 Add 1d8 to Damage Roll, Armor is halved 76 - 98 Roll damage on second body part, Armor is halved 99 - 100 Armor Ignored, Nicked an artery - target begins to Bleed 1HP per round Fumble (Attack) 01 - 25 Next Attack is Difficult 26 - 50 Weapon Dropped 51 - 75 Target's Next Attack on you is Easy 76 - 98 Damage Self. Roll Hit location and weapon damage, armor is halved 99 - 100 Impaled on Enemy. Target rolls weapon damage and hit location, armor ignored. There is more, but this is a fine taste of it.