Search the Community

Just bought the OQ3 pdf from DTRPG and am liking it very much. I have long being looking for a game that is mosly skill-based but does not have an excessively detailed skill list, nor adds long lists of advantages and disadvantages on top. OQ3 seems to do this just right. So thanks to Newt for publishing such an attractive rules-light game! I do have some questions on the rules, though. Regarding skill mastery: The main section on skill mastery (p. 42) states that masters never roll for skill checks and always achieve a critical success. Does this hold also if there are penalties to the roll, i.e., even at -50%, a master gets an automatic critical? It is also spelled out how mastery works in opposed tests - but what about combat and magic? Combat does not use regular opposed tests but the table on p.72: a critical attack vs a critical defense results in a normal damage roll minus armor. This would imply that combat between masters reduces to rolling for damage à la Into the Odd? For magic, a critical success for personal magic or sorcery means that the spell costs 1 POW only, regardless of magnitude. Does that mean a master of either skills pays only 1 POW per spell, ever? And are monsters with skills of 100 % considered masters? E.g., the dragon has 100 % resilience but must make a penalized resilience check to breathe fire more than once per hour. BTW, on p. 20, it states 'Characters with skills at 100% are Masters/Mistresses of their skills, and always succeed. Roll the dice to see if they get critical results. Masters never fumble their skill tests.' This looks like a holdover from OQ 2 since it contradicts p. 42. Regarding surprise attacks: I understand how surprise attacks by NPCs on the PCs are supposed to work. As each PC tests against the best NPC, each PC is either surprised or not during the first round of combat. However, if the PCs try to ambush NPCs, it is also a roll of each PC vs. the best NPC. So how do I determine which NPC is surprised if only some PCs make the roll? Any insights and clarification are very much appreciated.

Hello there, While I've been reading the OpenQuest 3rd Edition core book, I've encountered a really interesting approach on page 220 about the sacred cows of D100 Gaming. In my opinion that's the right approach in order to revolutionise the D100 systems for breadth of audience. Some of the D100 systems remind me of GURPS when it comes to the number of skills a person might not have any incentive to touch (whether the referee or the player). What do you think about the constantly recurring Driving, Riding and Sailing skills? They do seem kind of redundant to me, as despite the fact that there are differences between various transports, I don't think they're a particularly frequent choice of many players around - to the point that my players even frown at the idea of these three skills being separate, thus personally I have merged them into one single Drive skill that handles all kinds of mounts and vehicles akin to how Vampire the Masquerade or some other systems already handle it. A lot of beautiful work has been done on uniting the skills within OpenQuest to avoid having so many smaller skills that practically nobody is decent at. I think rather than being present by default, at most these skills should have been an option to choose, as not every setting might feature ships, or even vehicles, or mounts - for example a setting that's based on floating islands might not find much use for the sailing skill, thus the optionality of the aforementioned three skills in particular, contrasting to the many other generally much more useful ones.

Since I don't know that I can change the name of a topic, here I am. If you wish to chastise me, go ahead. I am going to be releasing a new adventure for OpenQuest and other d100 system games called "The Mirror Tells Her Lies", about saving a village and its leader from a force of "Pure Sin" centered in a haunted church. The project is in Kickstarter mode now and has already reached its funding threshold, but with seven days to go this is a chance to get your hands on it before anyone else does (like if you're a GM who doesn't want your players to know what happens before you do) or if you simply want to encourage people to support d100. Here's the URL: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mhpress/the-mirror-tells-her-lies As of right now, seven days remain to back the KS -- a bargain at $3 US for a copy in preorder. I also have a reward level that puts your name in the book as a Patron, which includes yo0ur copy. Unfortunately, the NPC reward is sold out.

Hi all, As one of the authors of this book I would love to hear any feedback, comments and discuss the book at more length. Has anyone reviewed this yet? People are buying the book, but I don't hear any chatter.... Simon Bray

I'm going to be running a game set in Sartar/Dragon Pass soon. The PCs are going to be the young adult children of members of the clan ring/prominent thanes who get tasked by the ring to be kind of problem solvers in an attempt to make a name for themselves and make them worthy of inheriting their parents prominence.The way I'm currently thinking about doing prep is taking the Dragon Pass board game map (available via google image search), noting where the PCs clan tula is, figuring out where the other clans/tribes are, stocking some hexes they are likely to go through using the Ruins & Relics tables from the old Judges Guild Wilderlands products (ignoring the ones that aren't very Glorantha), and putting 5-10 ruins/dungeons for them to explore because both my group and I like dungeons. Then I would use a random hook generator I have to make up what problem the ring needs dealing with (or what problems they can pick from) in a given session. Does anyone have any advice for this sort of game? What are some things that can be interpreted as dungeons that exist in Dragon Pass/Sartar? What are the best things I can read in a short time to get my head around that area of Glorantha? What would be a good way to introduce my players to being Orlanthi?If it matters I am using OpenQuest with some stuff borrowed from RQ 6.

Hey folks, I want to play in Glorantha with (customized) OpenQuest. I've got OpenQuest 2nd Deluxe (print version) and tons of Mythras+ Glorantha+RQ2/RQ3 material. My intention is rules-light but I want to capture all the wonderful Glorantha flavors. Any tips and suggestions how this is handled? Thanks for any advice.

Hi all - quick rules question. Can the Aug Activation skill be improved through the regular improvement system, or is it always tied to POWx3? I'm assuming the skill goes up anyway if POW is increased. Sorry if I've missed it somewhere in the book. Thanks in advance!

That would be great news! ...and mr. Newport think about all the people playing pen&paper rpg in my language!! Here in spain there are a lot of people playing with the old books of Stafford´s Glorantha from the 80´s today! We´ve got a very serious yahoo group (the name is Glorantha Hispana) and personally, I know a lot of players (old ones and no so old ones) who play to the Big Old RQ week after week. I´m not a pro of the publishing world but I suppose that a Spanish version in pdf with a link to lulu.com or so can work. Well, thank you very much. And May Harrek the Berserk stay away from your way!

I'm not sure this goes here or not... but I heard the game is based on Openquest rather than CoC... Anyway, Raiders of R'lyeh is finally out for purchase in PDF form. It's huge and looks great. http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/209168/Raiders-of-Rlyeh-Gamemasters-Guide--Core-Rules?affiliate_id=10748 It's aimed at Edwardian era horror adventures. It swings in a more action-adventure mode than old CoC... and has rules more in line with Openquest. It's been a long time coming and I'm kind of excited to finally get the chance to read it.

Hi all, We created a character sheet in excel for our gaming purposes. It is perfectly printed in 2 A4 pages and could be used as is, as an empty sheet (although, admittedly, not very fancy). https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mxuRkrRG7Bhj2l6yY26d5kbwcZrpxJ8t_h_QETQlusY/edit?usp=sharing But if you fill in the characteristics (and e.g. race) you get all the attributes and skills auto-filled in. I have also added weapons and armor and might do ENC when I have some time. I intended to make it a web page but did it in excel to save time at the end but as our game progresses I might work on that too. Let me know what you think. Cheers!

Some more clarifications on the magic systems. Divine magic: Only a single combat action (so movement and reaction are available) Text: "Divine Magic spells always take only a single combat Action to cast and takes place on the INT order of the character casting the spell." Why does divine magic say "single combat action" ? When can you have two combat actions ? Does it mean when a skill is >100% and you split it to 2+ attacks ? Also some Battle magic spells have the "ranged" trait. The description does not say anything that helps on range so the default range of battle magic takes precedence. Why do spells like "Extra defense" and "Vomit" have that trait? Typo? Cheers

How do you rule the following scenarios: 1) Healing skill off-combat. a. Should healing a minor wound (1d6) be automatic (the rules say you shouldn't really roll of combat but it seems quite powerful) b. If the wounded has 2 minor wounds can the healer heal both separately ? I am considering: i. Allow a) but only once ii. Allow all wounds to be treated separately without a skill roll but heal 1hp per wound (or something like that). 2) I see that in the rules, Ready Weapon is a full CR !! This seems to much. Unsheathing a sword seems much easier/faster and one might even do it as part of his movement... no? I am considering: i. Unsheathing requires losing movement ii. Unsheathing requiress movement and action (so you are only left with a reaction) 3) Let's say a troll (size 26) attacks a human (size 11) with its claw. What size is the claw considered? What if it was a dragon attacking? i. I am considering some kind of simple table for specifying natural weapon sizes based on creature size... 4) If one successfully parries a claw attack with a shield will the troll take the shield's bash damage (as it would if the defender was using a weapon) ? i. I am considering no... What do you guys think? Thank you

Greetings Newt and sundry: I'd like to ask for some clarification concerning the process of Unarmed Combat and Grappling. The issue concerns the proscribed "...one Combat Action...and one Combat Reaction...per combat round." I offer four scenarios, and while I'm not necessarily seeking comment on all four, I do hope some one can explain step-by-step how a grappling round proceeds. Is it an exception to normal combat procedure? Thanks in advance, Scenario one: Wherein Bob the Samurai gets two chances "...to dish out the damage!" Gary the Ninja declares he's making a single Unarmed Combat Attack (UCA) with an intention to grapple. Turns out he has DEX-rank on Bob the Samurai, so Gary takes his ACTION, rolls his attack and hits. Bob the Samurai then makes his REACTION and tries to parry or dodge Gary's attack. Bob too succeeds and with his parry inflicts 1d8 worth of damage because Bob's katana is a "...crafted weapon..." Bummer, Gary. To add insult to injury Bob now takes his ACTION and swipes at Gary with his katana. Ninja Gary, however, fast guy that he is, takes his REACTION in the form of a successful dodge. End of scenario one: all parties got one A & R each and Gary is wondering why he chose to grapple with an unsympathetic samurai in the first place. Scenario two: Wherein Bob the Samurai objects to the "...injustice of it all!" Gary the Ninja declares he's making a single Unarmed Combat Attack (UCA) with an intention to grapple. Turns out he has DEX-rank on Bob the Samurai, so Gary takes his ACTION, rolls his attack and hits. Bob the Samurai then makes his REACTION and tries to parry or dodge Gary's attack. Bob FAILS. Gary does not do any damage at this point: "Instead [Gary the Ninja] opposes his UCS to [Bob the Samurai's] UCS, in a roll similar to an opposed skill test" (58). Gary succeeds, "...and immediately follows up on this success by Throwing, Inflicting pain or immobilis[ing] the target"(58). Gary scratches his head, "So I have to roll my Unarmed skill again? Didn't I win?" "Yeah! It's like he gets another ACTION...where's my ACTION?" demands Bob. "Right. Sorry" mumbles the GM once again and turning back to his reference sees that Bob may "...attempt to break free or may attempt to turn the tables on..." Gary. "Go ahead and try to Break Free with a UCS. If you succeed and Gary fails then you will have "...succeeded in breaking free--" "Wait a bloody minute," Gary interjects. "Didn't I win earlier and he fail? Didn't I grapple him?!" Gary and Bob rise from the table and, on the living room floor, begin acting out the now stalled round while the GM mumbling curses frantically re-reads the grappling rules. End of scenario two...and the game. All parties didn't seem to get an A & R each. Scenario three: Wherein Bob the Samurai accepts the situation but thinks "...it were crap." Gary the Ninja declares he's making a single Unarmed Combat Attack (UCA) with an intention to grapple. Turns out he has DEX-rank on Bob the Samurai, so Gary takes his ACTION, rolls his attack and hits. Bob the Samurai then makes his REACTION and tries to parry or dodge Gary's attack. Bob FAILS. Bob and Gary now oppose each other with UCAs; Gary succeeds and Bob again fails. Gary applies the Inflict Pain option, and Bob takes damage. Bob asks when he can take his ACTION, and the GM explains he already did in his opposed roll. With a raised eye-brow, Bob nods and asks politely what he can do to break Gary's hold? The GM explains politely in return that he may attempt to Break Free once per round, which he already did just after he failed to counter Gary's attack. "Hmmm..." says Bob as he checks off hit-points. He then turns to his smart-phone and begins checking his messages. End of scenario three...and Bob's interest. Gary of course, can't wait until next round. Did all parties get an A & R each? Scenario Four: Wherein Bob the Samurai accepts but makes an observation Gary the Ninja declares he's making a single Unarmed Combat Attack (UCA) with an intention to grapple. Turns out he has DEX-rank on Bob the Samurai, so Gary takes his ACTION, rolls his attack and hits. Bob the Samurai then makes his REACTION and tries to parry or dodge Gary's attack. Bob FAILS. Bob and Gary now oppose each other with UCAs; Gary succeeds and Bob again fails. Gary applies the Inflict Pain option, and Bob takes damage. As Bob checks off the damage, the GM offers that, "...you'll be able to attempt to Break Free next round..." Bob nods, "This grapple thing...it sure isn't like Close Combat: he acts; I react; I act; he reacts..." End of scenario four. All parties did not get an A & R each nor will they get them next round...Gary still has control, he will inflict damage (an action); Bob will try to Break Free (a reaction) and the round will end free or not.

Greetings, OQ2 explorers I thought you all might find a House Rule mod my players and I cooked up concerning shields interesting. Trying to be mindful of OQ2's simplicity, we still felt our game needed some shield tweaks. Weapons including shields are designated light, medium, heavy, and huge in the Close Combat Weapons table on page 45. The term “huge,” however, is only used in relation to shields and can be problematic as it is truly a size designation, in contrast to the light, medium, and heavy designations which seem to describe weight. This dichotomy is further exacerbated by use of the term “Large” in the passage on page 60 which reads: Shields with a size of Large or Huge (i.e. Medium and Large Shields) provide a cover modifier to the ranged attack of the attacker -25% and -50% respectively against arrows, sling shot and cross bow bolts. As there is no “Large” size designation in the table's Size column, “Heavy” is what was obviously meant, which is again more a reference to weight than size. After discussing further shield category concerns and rather than rename the column Weight, my players and I felt a re-designation of shield size was in order. Thus it was decided that, small shields (buckler, targe, etc.) would be sized “Light” rather than Medium; medium shields (heater, round, etc.) sized “Medium” rather than Heavy; large shields (scutum, hoplon, etc.) should be sized “Heavy” rather than Huge; and truly enormous shields, such as the pavise, should be termed “Huge.” Thus the above excerpt was revised in our game version to read: “Medium, Heavy, and Huge shields provide extra protection from arrows, sling shot and crossbow bolts. Archers, crossbowmen and slingers suffer a -25%, -50%, and/or -75% modifier to their attacks against targets armed with Medium, Heavy, or Huge shields respectively.” In addition to the above, it was decided to modify the Ranged Attack Situational Modifiers table and “Cover” section on page 59 to better reflect the House Rule addition and modification. The RAW passage reads: “For missile attacks the defender benefits from the best of the shield modifier in the table above and the cover modifier below,” but there is no “...table above.” Our version reads: “Against missile attacks, the defender benefits from the best of the shield modifiers in the table below...” To the “Target Visibility” section, we then added three rows: Target is armed with a Medium sized shield -25% Target is armed with a Heavy sized shield -50% Target is armed with a Huge sized shield -75% Sorry about the huge table there...something exploded in the translation from word processor to forum :-( A reminder of these penalties was suggested as an additional note under “Range” in the “Ranged Weapon” section on page 47. We also decided an addendum to Newt's excellent “Taking out Life Insurance” advice on page 54 would be in order: On Shields “Your shield is your friend. Regardless of character concept, get a shield and use it. It will prolong your character's life.” For new players, we wrote the following House Rule summary: Small shields sized Light, such as bucklers and targes, will block all incoming damage from Light weapons with a successful parry. Small shields will only block half the incoming damage from a Medium sized weapon and no incoming damage from a Heavy sized weapon.They offer no protection against archers, crossbowmen and slingers. Medium shields sized Medium, such as heater or round shields, will block all incoming damage from Light and Medium sized weapons with a successful parry but only half the incoming damage from Heavy sized weapons. Luckily, there are no Huge sized offensive weapons. Medium shields offer greater protection from arrows, bolts and sling-stones, levying a -25% modification against such missile attacks. Large shields, such as scutum and hoplon shields, sized Heavy will block all incoming damage from Light, Medium and Heavy weapons with a successful parry. They offer even greater protection from arrows, bolts and sling-stones, levying a -50% modification against such missile attacks. Huge shields, such as the pavise, levy a -75% modification against missile attacks. Nearly stationary and deployed for siege or large scale battle purposes (both offense and defense), they cannot be used in the quick of Close Combat situations like the above sized shields can. And don't forget: "Shield-carrying characters may attempt to Parry hand thrown missile weapons (daggers, darts, hatchets, rocks, etc.) if the target is aware of the attack" (58). Cheers!

Dear Newt and sundry, I'd appreciate some clarification on the Create Charms spell. I may have simply thought myself into a stupor and apologize if what follows seems a dense question, but the term "reusable" in the passage... "If the caster spends one Improvement Point at the time of creation the spell within the Charm is reusable. Other wise once the spell is cast the Charm is dispelled" (106). ...does it mean "reusable" as in a never-ending lighter versus a single-strike match? In other words, does it mean that once it is made reusable, the charm may be used over and over without limit? Thanks in advance, Sunwolfe

I wonder if someone tried to make a Super Power option for OpenQuest, maybe something close to Elder Godlike or SuperWorld?

I have a copy of Mongoose Runequest legend City of Sheoloth and was wondering how easy is it to convert the rules to Open Quest?

Hello everyone! I'm just starting out on BRP gaming so please excuse any stupid questions from my part. I've got the original RQ2e + Cults Compendium but I'm finding the combat system a little bit too fiddly (strike ranks mostly) so I was thinking of porting the whole thing over to Openquest. I've noticed though that when it comes to combat sample characters and creatures seem underpowered in RQ2e when compared to OQ. For example let's compare an entry from both books; DUCK (OQ) Characteristics STR 2D6+3 (10) INT 2D6+6 (13) CON 2D6+6 (13) POW 3D6 (10) DEX 2D6+6 (13) CHA 2D6 (7) SIZ 1D6+6 (9) Attributes Hit Points 11 Major Wound 6 Damage Modifier Magic Points 10 Movement Rate 12m Armour Leather armour (AP 2) Plunder Rating 2 Skills Resistances Dodge 60%, Persistence 50%, Resilience 50% Knowledge Nature Lore 70% Practical Deception 50% Combat Close Combat 50% Short Sword (1D6) Buckler (1D4) Ranged Combat 60% Sling (1D4) DUCK (RQ2e) Their close combat skill in OQ is 50% and ranged 60% where as in RQ2e it's almost half that (30% for short sword and 30% for sling). I guess the differences in Characteristics is really small so I don't mind them at all. But what about their weapon skills? Is there a reason for this difference? Is there a formula to convert a RQ2e creature to OQ? thanks in advance!

If you are going to Furnace, I'm running the following game on Saturday Evening. "Star Shine Chapter 1: Darius’ Seven Slot 3 Saturday Evening System: River of Heaven GM: Newt Number of Players: 4 You are on the run. If they catch you they will kill you. So you hid on the last planet that anyone in the whole Universe would want to find you – Earth. Burnt out Earth, Abandoned Earth, Lawless Earth. Where you hide in Kill City, beneath the Skyscrapers where the elites look down on the huddled masses of poor. Where the pollution is so bad, if you didn’t have a working mask you’d be drowning in it. Then a woman called Carla in a bar tells you that legendary Lord Darius, captain of the renegade Step Ship “Star Shine”, is looking for a crew. That he’s looking for people like you to offer a ticket off this hell planet to a life of freedom amongst the stars. All you need to do reach the orbital elevator on the other side of the city, while playing a deadly game of hide and seek with the Hunter-Killers of his rival Lord Algernon. River of Heaven is a D100 Science Fiction game set in the 28th Century. This adventure is the beginning of an epic series of con-adventures which will span the game’s setting. As well as the fiction of writers such as Alastair Reynolds, this adventure pulls heavily from TV series such as Firefly and Blakes 7." I'm very much running this as a 'Pilot' that if its successful will be an ongoing Convention Campaign, supported by myself and other D101 writers. Further details on that when it happens

Hi, I'm creating a new thread in order to not jeopardize the previous one with multiple questions. Let me know if I'm not following the forums rules and accept my apologies in advance. So I have a question about time to produce formula page 71 (hum, you can noticed I’m not able to progress very fast in my reading ): Time to produce = Object SIZ x TL / Manufactory output/hr First, I’m finding strange that the more the technology level is high, the more it will take time to produce. I would have expected the exact opposite. Mor over, if you consider also the Max production output/hr formula: Max production output/hr = Manufactory SIZ x Tech Level Then the minimum time to produce is independent from the tech level: Time to produce = Object SIZ x TL / Manufactory SIZ x Tech Level = Object SIZ / Manufactory SIZ So basically, there was no productivity gain thanks to technology advances? Usually, the product cost reduction is performed by reducing the BOM, but also the reducing the time spent on the production and assembly lines, isn’t it? So did I miss something or is there a typo, and the right formula is indeed: Time to produce = Object SIZ / TL x Manufactory output/hr Thanks for your comments!

So I realize how much work goes into a game and I have to be patient. I want to be there RIGHT NOW lol. Progress is going well though and finding and participating here is helping me greatly just through osmosis. At least now everything seems to be falling into place.

I Have purchased RoH and I'm very impressed, but I have queries on the some of the combat rules: 1. Page 112 - Area attacks, does this work? Roll damage, say 3d6, total 14, compare with armour, say 8. 'If the damage overcomes the armour rating' - as it does in this case, (14>8), then damage inflicted is full, less half the armour rating (4) so actually total damage to HP = 14-4 = 10. Ok, 'if the armour succeeds', say damage rolled is 7 vs. armour 8, 'the armour protects fully with any penetrating damage deducted from HP'. However, if the armour 'protects fully' by presumably being rated higher than the total of the damage 9as in 8>7 above), unless the weapon has a PV value there IS no penetrating damage. On page 113 it states that area effect weapons with a PV value only apply to direct hits. So, presumably if damage does not exceed armour rating and PV doesn't count, the damage in that case will always be zero (making the 'with any penetrating damage deducted from HP' statement on page 112 redundant)? 2. Grenades - do these always have a 3m blast radius? What about larger 'artillery' - blast radii for missile etc. these aren't listed. 3. The good old discussion about movement options still isn't clear to me. Are the options listed on page 107 exclusive: i.e. you can either: Change Stance (and presumably react/ attack) OR Fighting Retreat (move from contact up to score plus one attack OR one reaction) OR Move (with one attack and one reaction) OR Sprint (Dodge only, double move) Is Charge also instead of one of these exclusive moves or can it be combined with one of the above?(given that you get an attack and a double move, but forsake your reaction) At the core of the question really is, what is the maximum distance someone can cover in one turn, is it two times their move rate (from Sprint or Charge) or are they allowed to do these AND get a free move? 4. Multifire - VERY confused by this. On page 111 under 'firing bursts' it refers to 'each additional shot fired in a burst'. Given that you can fire one shot OR burst for each ROF point for a weapon, I have taken it that if you have an FA weapon with a ROF of three you can make three attacks in the round, each of which could be a burst. Where does it say how many rounds (shots?) are fired in a burst to inform the calculation for 'each additional shot fired in a burst' increasing the shooting skill by 5%? Also, when it says 'if the attack succeeds, roll to see how many shots hit the target' - roll what? If the assumption is that you can effectively empty a mag in one round, say split between three bursts, you might be adding 20 rounds to each burst, pretty much guaranteeing a doubling of your chance to hit, and then what? Am I then just making a random die roll to see how many rounds hit - say on 1d20. If I roll a 20, am I then rolling the damage 20 times? I assume not else auto weapons would be instant killers every time. The rules must have intended something else, but what? I can house rule this stuff just fine but I'd like to know what the authors actually intended here. A worked example would help! 5. Pump action shotgun. Is pumping the weapon considered a 'load' action, or something you can do as part of your attack (effectively making it a Semi-Auto weapon in rules terms)? 6. Suppressing fire - I declare suppressing fire, my opponents run into it. As written, they are hit automatically - no roll required? I'm assuming this can't be right, else it's harder to hit a target that you are aiming at (normal ranged attack) than it is to hit them with suppressing fire? 7. Panic fire - this isn't very clear. Let's say I'm surprised by gunfire and I panic. Have I read it correctly that this means all my own ranged attacks back are halved in chance until I run out of ammo? What then? How long does it last? do I get a chance to re-assess the situation and get back under control. What if I'm armoured heavily and the incoming fire is so weak as to be almost meaningless other than by Critical. Can I figure this out and check my panic? 8. Critical Hits and ignoring armour. On page 108 it says I do max damage with a crit, and double any PV value, but don't ignore armour. If my opponent attempts to dodge however (page 109), and fails, now armour IS ignored. Are these two rules in conflict? Thanks for any time you can give to answering these queries, Regards, Guy

So, when I last ran a BRP game (Mongoose's Legend), the players wanted to play a wide variety of different species (as is often the case with my group) and I indulged them (as is often the case in games I run). I believe we had an elf, a dwarf, a human, a viking (MRQII Vikings) and something else. Anyways, what came up in play was that races with specific attribute bonuses simply resulted in more powerful characters. IIRC, INT was the best stat long term, because it meant they got higher skill than everyone else when you leveled up. Short term, they wanted Dex (strike rank), followed by Siz for martial characters, and Pow for magic characters. Does this just not show up in other people's games? Are my experiences that elves are just better than humans anomalous? Do mixed-race parties just not come up in other people's campaigns? Does the power disparity exist and just not present itself as problematic? Addage: I came to BRP from a D&D3/3.5/Pathfinder background, wherein multispecies adventuring parties are the norm (and I tend to push it far in D&D, working in erinyes and minotaurs and lizardfolk and satyrs and gnolls as player options if they request them); if that just doesn't really work in BRP, that would be very unfortunate.