Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'house rules'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • The Chaosium Forums
    • Basic Roleplaying
    • Glorantha
    • RuneQuest
    • Call of Cthulhu
    • Rivers of London
    • Pendragon & Prince Valiant
    • QuestWorlds
    • Mythic Worlds
    • Cult of Chaos
  • The D100 Family
    • Mythras
    • D101 Games
    • Renaissance
    • Revolution D100
    • Legend
    • Quest21
    • Delta Green
  • Other Stuff
    • Alastor's Skull Inn
    • Inactive forums


  • Blog Trifletraxor
  • Notes from Underground
  • Blog Chaot
  • Blog soltakss
  • Blog RosenMcStern
  • Blog threedeesix
  • Blog Triff
  • Blog Aycorn
  • Blog tzunder
  • Blog PZiviani
  • Blog Conrad
  • Mos Eisley Cantina
  • Blog alexraccoon
  • Blog raymond_turney
  • Blog Merak Gren
  • Blog rleduc
  • Dark moon Chronicles- setting and info
  • Blog threshold
  • Blog skull
  • Blog rpgstarwizard
  • Blog Vorax Transtellaris
  • Blog travellingbeetle
  • Blog Bleddyn
  • Blog kevinhun
  • Blog jagerfury
  • Blog coyote
  • Blog Dryhad
  • Blog Peter K.
  • Blog Robar
  • Blog Tester
  • Blog ptingler
  • Blog nerdvana
  • Blog Old Timer
  • Blog smjn
  • Blog Stoatbringer
  • Blog Target
  • Blog Moonowol67
  • Sunwolfe's Blog of Holding
  • The Reign of Dragons
  • Sparrowhawk's Roost
  • RPG Imaginings
  • The Bardori Saga
  • Amusing Musings
  • Red Cows in the Borderlands
  • Dethstrok9 YouTube Channel
  • Three go mad in Santos
  • Þáttr
  • An Anglo Saxon Chronicle
  • Things Go Off The Rails
  • "Genetic Defects" Short Science Fiction Story
  • Runequest Campaign Log
  • How one man became a king
  • Atalan: Before the Fall
  • Confessions of A Hypnotic Game Author
  • West of Arkham
  • Mad Gaming Madness (BRP Edition)
  • Just Some Writing


  • RuneQuest in Glorantha
  • Generic
    • GORE
    • Alternate rules
    • GM Resources
    • Character sheets
  • Fantasy/Historic
    • Magic World
    • Mongoose RuneQuest
    • Middle Earth
    • Vhraeden
    • Warlords of Alexander
    • Classic RuneQuest
    • Ancient Rome
    • Fire and Sword
    • The Green
    • Other
  • Modern
    • Old West
    • Call of Cthulhu
    • Other
  • Science Fiction
    • Star Wars
    • Terminator
    • Halo
    • Other
  • Super Hero
    • City of Heroes
    • Superhero Characters
    • Other
  • Mythras
    • Classic Fantasy
  • Revolution D100

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Member Title

RPG Biography

Current games



Website URL

Found 12 results

  1. I find the economic rules in RQG a bit... under playtested. I keep having questions from my players and it seems hostile to easy book-keeping. I'm planning on replacing them with something more like the Credit Rating rules from CoC 7th edition which allow for both handwaved background economic management and for particular expenses and financial crises when the GM wants to make that a focus of the story. Has anyone already done this?
  2. Hi Guys, I’ve always liked the idea of talents to diversify characters, or the old White Wolf and WEG Star Wars (2e) system of specialisations. For Magic World, this could be easily implemented to further diversity characters and give then more colour. -System When a skill reaches 75%, the player chooses a word to specialise the skill and to denote an area of talent or further focus. E.g., Climb (trees/building/sheer surfaces/wet surfaces); dodge (swords, axes, etc); track (greenskins); Sense (danger, lies, movement, ambush) etc. Anytime a character gets 75%, he chooses a speciality. When the player rolls under the sphere of this speciality, he can ‘flip’ the die, making the units tens and the tens units, in order to succeed. (I would use this instead of a reroll, as I would use fortune points for regular rerolls.) So a roll of 63, whether successful or not, can be flipped to 36 at the player’s choice. Weapon skills might denote the particular weapon being used, such as broadsword, though if you have other suggestions, let me know. Perhaps the type of opponent: broadword (orcs; humans; duels) or bow (long shots; hunting; from cover) etc. Knowledge skills can likewise be specialised, such as Own Language (research/translation/oratorical tone) etc. So, what do you think? It seems a relatively simple and colourful way to add depth to player characters and NPCs. Thanks, N.
  3. About two years ago, I tried to sit down & actually figure out how in the world my group's sorcery rules worked. After all, I'd played a sorcerer using them for two to three years at that point, and had a friend who had been using them for about a year as well (and who I helped teach the system). How hard could it be? Very, very hard, it turned out. Our current group plays mostly-RQG, but we've taken to calling that game's rules "RuneQuest Bastard" for a reason. They were a mishmash of official stuff, house rules, and things my friends & I didn't know were house rules which had accumulated from about a decade of play through our GM friend's teen years. Loads of fun, but very much an "oral" rulebook. I never did finish that project to write up the sorcery system, and recently I've come to the conclusion that I'll never finish the stupid thing despite the amount of work I'd put in. I'd intended to upload it here from the start so others could see how we did things, and since I've accepted I'll never finish it, I figured I may as well go ahead and upload it anyway. I suspect that, to play it, you'll need to be the same certain special breed of masochist my friends and I are, but I hope that it will at least be interesting for someone. Scholastic Sorcery is an awful Frankenstein's Monster mishmash of the sorcery in RQ3's "Magic Book", Sandy Petersen's Western Sorcery, and his Tekumel Sorcery. It overlays the Tsolyanu of Tekumel as Patrons of Sorcery within Glorantha, organized into two general canons: the Saints of Stability, and the Demons of Change. As the introduction notes, most of the mechanics are not my ideas, but a fair bit of the fluff is. A lot of my work was editorial, trying to organize and make sense of multiple rulesets I initially believed were compatible, and later discovered are not. An example of this is that RQ3 (and SS) treats the Duration Art as a skill, whereas Petersen's Western Sorcery, which provides the core ruleset of SS, has no concept of using both Presence and Duration. Scholastic Sorcery works well as a ruleset for adventurers. Our game was pretty murderhobo, and the rules do reflect that. It treats sorcerers as being individualists; they're organized into colleges and schools and whatnot, but are ultimately not as community-minded as other magic systems. For current players of RQG, I think the spell writeups (which are about the last fifty pages of the document) will be of most use. I don't think they'll translate directly into RQG's sorcery, but the Tekumel spells provide a great example of cool flavorful sorcery spells which go beyond what both Rune magic and spirit magic tend to do, both in power and complexity. The spells are incomplete (I got to the start of the P's alphabetically), but what's there should, I hope, be interesting. You can find the rest of Petersen's RuneQuest Tekumel stuff on the tekumel.com site here. For people interested in the rules themselves, I beg forgiveness! This was the first time I attempted writing game rules, and I feel they're still rather haphazard. Having re-skimmed the document, examples use rules found later in the text and the organization of material's kind of a mess. Apart from the writing, the rules themselves really need more chopping at to be cleaned up and tidied. The stitches on my Monster show all over the place. But the rules portion is basically complete, albeit in a first-draft form. I have ideas for a similar sorcery system for RQG, using the Runes and Techniques of RQG's sorcery as the basis, and introducing skill and manipulation because I frankly can't stand Free INT rules. But if I ever do write that up, it'll probably not be soon. If you wanted to play a Scholastic Sorcerer in RQG, I'd loosely suggest starting with the Philosopher occupation, and base the starting point for Arts and Vows on the Student tier, replacing the adventurer's cult. I make no claims that any of that procedure--or use of Scholastic Sorcery in general--will create a Fun and Balanced play environment in an RQG game. My only true regret is that I never got to fumble and TPK my party with a Doomkill. Scholastic Sorcery Spell List.doc Scholastic Sorcery.doc
  4. Hello fellow CoC gamers, What follows is one Keeper's view and discussion on the subjects of Insanity (sanity), Bouts of Madness, Delusions, Hallucinations, Phobias and Manias. Although this discussion is related to the official Call of Cthulhu 7th Edition Keeper's Guide rules, it is not a reflection of them, but an adaptation I have developed and applied in my Call of Cthulhu 7th Edition campaign. Let's start with insanity, or types of insanity as applied in the game. By this I don't mean "temporary", "indefinite" or "permanent insanity". Furthermore, I'm not talking about phobias or manias here either, because these are treated differently and separately to the underlying insanity, for example, it might be possible to cure an investigator of the underlying insanity with psychotherapy while the phobias and manias remain in game effect - so let's just put phobias and manias to the side for a brief moment and address insanity. What I'm discussing here are real world types of mental illness or disorders. When addressing each subject I will begin with a basic definition around which much of this discussion and my house rules are based upon: Insanity: Mental illness or derangement (derangement = disorder). (n.b. the term "insanity" is no longer in scientific use) Keeping in mind the exceptions I made above, the Keeper's Guide does not specify any types of real world metal illness or disorder (i.e. insanity types) that manifest as the underlying insanity when a character "goes insane" - it's simply applied as ... "underlying insanity". To me, that looked like a great opportunity to expand and enhance the in-game possibilities when a character goes insane. Consequently, I developed a table that lists a variety of real-word mental illness and disorder types. When an investigator becomes temporarily or indefinitely insane, I roll on that table to see what category the insanity falls within, then refer to that category table to determine the specific type of mental illness or disorder. The insanity can take many forms and the tables were compiled from real-world online sources. So, for Keepers that wish to add a specific flavour to the underlying insanity they apply in the game, and be capable of providing their players with more direction on how it should be role-played for an afflicted character, it is suggested that they apply a real-world mental illness or disorder type as the underlying insanity. Next, the Call of Cthulhu 7th Edition Keeper's Guide includes content involving "delusions" and "hallucinations", usually as a symptom of insanity. The Keeper's Guide appears to use these terms interchangeably when in fact, these are two distinct phenomena. Again, just to be clear from the outset, here are the definitions: Delusion: A false belief or opinion (in other words, a mistake, based on something that does exist in reality) Hallucination: Perception of visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, or gustatory experiences without an external stimulus and with a compelling sense of their reality, usually resulting from a mental disorder or as a response to a drug (in other words, perceiving something that does not exist in reality) Even the definition of Delusion provided in Ch. 16 Appendix I: Glossary (p.387) of the Keeper's Guide specifically states the investigator will "...be subject to hallucinations...". One body-text example of the merging of these two phenomena can be seen in the Keeper's Guide page 162 - "...an investigator suffering underlying insanity with delusional sensory information. The only way for the player to sure of what his or her insane investigator is seeing, hearing, touching, or smelling is to make a "Reality Check"." with this notion being carried forward in the next paragraph where the provided example delusion is an investigator's late spouse calling on the telephone. Now, if a Keeper chooses to apply a distinction between the two, it would make a big in-game difference. If the telephone call was really taking place, it would be a delusion if the investigator mistakes the voice on the other end of the line for that of his late spouse, but it would be a hallucination if no telephone call was taking place at all. It is easy to see what a difference this would make for other investigators observing the event taking place. Although the game still works great without needing to distinguish between the delusions and hallucinations, and the "Reality Check" rule is equally applicable for both, I believe that a Keeper who acknowledges the distinction has better direction in what game effect they should be relating to the affected investigator, and also has a broader range of possible effects to draw upon, enhancing the game playing experience for their players. Just as a side note - there are a number of real-world mental illnesses or disorders that only exhibit delusions. The only mental illness type that may exhibit both delusions and hallucinations is schizophrenia. Now, back to phobias and manias. Again, let's start with some definitions: Phobia: A persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a specific thing or situation that compels one to avoid it, despite the awareness and reassurance that it is not dangerous. (i.e. a phobia is a type of delusion - discussed above) Mania: An excessively intense enthusiasm, interest, or desire. Phobias usually only have an in-game effect when the afflicted investigator is confronted with the real (in-game) object of their phobia, or they hallucinate that object (in which case the investigator would need to have an underlying insanity type, and further, being a type of schizophrenia that exhibits both delusions and hallucinations - in other words, comparatively rare). The in-game effect of manias on the other hand tend to be more perpetual. And just briefly on Bouts of Madness, I just thought a little expansion and re-jigging of the table would help avoid repetition in in-game effects. Some effects I dropped from the table because I didn't think they played too well in a pre-combat situation (for example, amnesia - the investigator might have forgotten how they got where they are, but when confronted by a monster they will still try to run, fight or defend them self, so it might usually be inconsequential to game play) or merged into a similar effect under a different name. With those foundations for the house rules out of the way, how can a Keeper introduce these considerations into Call of Cthulhu 7th Edition without rewriting the Keeper's Guide? With some new tables of course! Minor changes to interpreting the Keeper's Guide: All the Keeper's Guide content remains valid, with these exceptions: when the Keeper reads "delusion" in the Keeper's Guide, it should be interpreted as delusion or hallucination, or possibly both in the case of a relevant type of schizophrenia. And the Keeper's Guide-defined "Delusions" shouldn't be universally applied whenever a character has underlying insanity, rather, the game effects of "Delusions" are only applied when the character has an underlying insanity of a type that includes the word 'delusions' in it's description (refer to the tables in the attachment). Phobias and Manias remain largely unchanged; however, you will note that on the new tables (attachment), if a phobia or mania is stated (in brackets), then it is an integral component of the underlying insanity type - it is one and the same with that underlying insanity - curing the underlying insanity also cures the integral phobia or mania associated with it. Note: Some phobias, mania, or other mental illnesses (only a few) don't appear in the Keeper's Guide - if this is the case for one that pops up for you, just look it up online for a definition. But all the new underlying insanity types are defined within the tables. Each underlying insanity type has its own unique 3 or 4 letter code that the Keeper should have the players record on their character sheet - a simple electronic search using that code will bring you straight to where you need to go (for future referencing). So, I've compiled an alternative Table VII - Bouts of Madness, a new table for Underlying Insanity types, and 11 new category tables each listing the specific types of real-world insanity within that category. P.S. I realise core rule game expansions like this are not for everyone so please - no hater comments! Otherwise, remark, adopt or ignore this post at your pleasure. For anyone that uses these adaptations in their game, please return and post some feedback. The tables are a work in progress but I think have been developed far enough to share - make any alterations as you see fit. However, any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! And as a final disclaimer, I'm not a mental health professional or anything like that, what I have compiled is the result of 2 days internet searching/reading. This content is only intended as an optional gaming aid. I intend on writing some more in the tables, e.g. on the in-game related effects (duration of drug effects, effects on die rolls, credit rating, if any, etc) and will post an update in the future depending on the response. Thanks. Bouts of Madness & Underlying Insanity Tables.docx
  5. Is there a case to be made for more frequent experience rolls? Would it help prevent swapping weapons frequently if you could roll a chance increase every round instead of every adventure? Would it slow combat down too much? What if instead of one experience box you had 10? Would characters grow too quickly? I'm looking for a solution to the somewhat illogical mechanic that you can only improve at something once per adventure. It doesn't make sense to me that once you successfully strike with your sword that's it, you either improved or didn't for this adventure. I think using your sword more should increase your chances, and I'm looking for a smooth mechanic that can reflect that thought. Or maybe I can be shown the logic from the by-the-books point of view.
  6. Version 1.0.0


    Ideas for Supernatural Powers, Character Qualities (Advantage system) and Character Death in Basic/Narrative Conflicts. No core rules are changed, all rules simply show how to use the flexibility of the RD100 system.
  7. As an idea for my house rules, I'd like a rough mechanic of somekind to track relationships between individual NPCs and groups/guilds/etc. My rough idea so far is that every new relationship starts at 50% (neutral). "Any time you use a skill and score a special success working towards something that can reasonably be considered for that individual or group and/or are wearing an insignia or tabard clearly displaying your affiliation, those relationships increase by 1% and any faction or individual you are reasonably considered to be working against goes down by 1%." Relationships would have different levels, like skills (maybe <30% hated, 30-40% hostile, 40-60% neutral, 60-70% friendly, 70-80% honored, 80%+ revered) that would have different meanings and benefits/consequences. This makes sense in my head because as you become more skillful, your chance of scoring criticals increases, so the more legendary your skills, the more quickly your reputation grows. Also criticals are supposed to represent some sort of memorable use of the skill, and memorable events in the name of some relationship or organization would impact your reputation with that person/organization, and with their enemies. This would need to be used in tandem with some sort of skill decay. I would like to avoid the no stat atrophy trope, but also want something that's simple and doesn't require any more notes. So I'm thinking something like: "every month in game time every skill decreases by 1%" and "every year in game time your primary characteristics decrease by 1." At first I thought of something like "every skill that hasn't been used for x-time decreases", but that seemed very difficult to track. This way you simply always have to increase your skills by at least 1 point once a month in game time, and no tracking of when the last time you increased your skill would be necessary. Relationships would be a special case. Any relationship score over 50% decreases as normal 1% per month. Any relationship less than 50% increases 1% per month. This is because neutral feelings is 50%. I should also note that my current house rules allow multiple skill ups per session, not only at the end of the adventure. Thoughts?
  8. Found this in an old backup folder from when I was first messing about with some 3D modeling softwares. Forgot I had made and saved a copy. Glorantha Tours.pdf
  9. I'm toying with revisiting and updating a house rule from my RQ3 campaign and thought I would share. This rule is suitable for high-octane action oriented adventures, where there are many opportunities for combat. Verve represents spiritual vigor and luck. It fuels magic and also represents temporary injury that is "shrugged off" after a short rest. It replaces the derived attribute: Magic Points. A player may choose to reduce an injury received in combat by a number of points equal to the amount of Verve spent. Spending Verve this way reduces the available pool for powering Magic. Verve spent to reduce injuries or power magic should be tracked separately. Verve reduced by injuries is regained after a short rest. I haven't yet settled on how much is regained or the limit to how many rest periods can be had per day. This will very much be determined by how over-the-top action oriented of a campaign I intend to run. I'm thinking of using the Endurance skill on the Spirit Magic Table found on page 201. So a character with a 65% Endurance would recover 1d8 Verve after a short rest following combat. Incidentally, if I want magic use to be as common and prevalent as found in many d20 campaigns, I may introduce a meditation mechanic. Using the same Spirit Magic Table, the spell caster would compare their Trance, Shaping, or Invocation skill to determine how much Verve spent on powering spells is recovered after meditation ... this is essentially the rest mechanic for spell casters. I need to think about which of the two skills for each tradition should reflect the character's ability to refocus and draw depleted energy back into their bodies. That leaves the raw Luck mechanic. I'm thinking I will simply remove the wound reduction usage for what one can do with Luck points if I implement Verve. Keeping in mind that this is intended for heroic adventure, what do you think?
  10. I've played a bit of both systems recently - trying to decide on what system to use. While there is much I love about Heroquest i am still very much attached to the old-school system of combat simulation and gearing up *to things HQ does not do that well). I'm considering introducing some of the elements of the Heroquest system into Runequest to see how it goes. Has anyone had a go at this before? Or even had thoughts about it? My thoughts: Utilise HQ 1-20 + masteries instead of RQ %ile. Should make for more seamless, higher level campaigns. Experience gain would be faster (1 point HQ gain is equivelent to 5% RQ) but not by a lot when you consider an optional suggestion was to use 1d6+1 for % gains in RQ. This would not be too dissimilar to Pendragon or PendragonPass. Use of Augments when appropriate. An expansion on the Passions set of abilities. Replacing RQ experience rolls + luck points with HQ Hero Points in some way. Unfortunately integrating HQ smooth "you name it - it goes" ability system isn't really practical in RQ as RQ has a similar framework to so many RPGs; Two system tacked together. One for resolving success or failures of abilities. Another for dealing and measuring damage. The two don't automatically co-relate. Whereas HQ has only the one system. Does anyone have anything they can add to this? Ideas or experience in trying something similar?
  11. Normally I skulk about and offer help and advice to others on here, but I'm curious about what other d100 gamers think of this houserule that I first came up with almost a year ago for my d100 AD&D PHB thing (heavily influenced by Rod's Classic Fantasy). Apologies in advance for the massive infodump I just threw out here, but I'd rather try to get everything out there now instead of leaving any ambiguity. Aside from the FATE writeup at the end, I wrote this up pretty much on-the-spot, working off of my notes. Hopefully my ramblings make sense. Please keep in mind that while this originated in my d100 AD&D thing, it's something that I figure could be useful in all d100 games, such as (a slightly pulpier) Call of Cthulhu, Legend, Runequest, Magic World, Renaissance, and others. Hope to hear from you guys on it. Thanks for your time! -Chris aka "Lord Sephleon" FATE is an additional Characteristic which, unlike other Characteristics, is never randomly rolled for. Instead, characters begin character creation with a standardized maximum FATE score; although the standard is usually 10, different races may have a higher or lower starting amount based on the campaign; for example, Elves begin with 7, Dwarves, Gnomes, and Halflings have 8, Half-Orcs, and Half-Elves have 9, and Humans have 10. This maximum FATE score may be further tweaked inversely with various other aspects of the character (only during creation) via the following methods*: 1 Max FATE = 1 Characteristic point 1 Max FATE = 2 Derived Attribute points (HP, FP, MP, Initiative) 1 Max FATE = 10 points in a single skill of choice. No skill may be altered more than once 1 Max FATE = 1 Trait/Perk/Flaw/Stunt (as per GM's decision or campaign style) 1 Max FATE = 100 gp/USD in additional gear 1 Max FATE = 50 gp/USD in cash on hand *NOTE: numbers may be altered as per GM if desired After the character is completed, the player then marks down Luck (multiplier dependent on campaign, but tied to FATE instead of POW) and, if used, Heroic Vitality (multiplier dependent on profession/class, though GM has final say). Luck is based on current FATE, not Maximum, so the more FATE you spend, the worse your luck gets. (To add to the above race example, Halflings have an innate +20 bonus to their Luck score, so a Halfling with 0 FATE still has a Luck of 20). In my d100 thing, Luck = 20 + [current FATE x4] Heroic Vitality is something like what Hit Points represents in high fantasy systems like D&D: a bit of skill, luck and endurance throughout a battle that turns what should be direct hits into near misses and lucky dodges. I've been considering that characters get a number of Heroic Vitality based on class; the "warrior" types get FATE x5, the "priest" types get FATE x4, the "rogue" types get FATE x3, and the "wizard" types get FATE x2. These act like a single, additional pool of extra hit points that function much the same way as normal hit points in most respects (such as AP reduction), but they do not factor at all into location hit points. When the character reaches 0 HV, future hits deal damage to HP. All HV recovers after a good night's sleep. Healing magic/skills always affect lost HP first, then HV. I copied/pasted the information I wrote up in my d100 thingy about FATE, FATE use, and FATE Recovery for convenience, below. FATE All characters begin with a default maximum of 10 FATE that can be spent throughout the game session for various reasons: rerolling, automatic successes, resisting damage, and even dealing maximum damage. Each use has a certain cost attributed to it, though note that any skills made successful through the use of FATE does NOT acquire an Experience Check as destiny guided you to your goal. Note that NOTE: Maximum FATE can be modified at character creation to be higher or lower, though it can never rise above 20. Rely on Luck for a single check = Gamble 1 FATE If you must make a skill check and the chances are likely that you will fail, you can choose to gamble 1 FATE to roll a Luck check. Critical: You succeed as per a Special Success, you may check the skill you replaced with Luck, and you keep the point of FATE. Special: You succeed as per a Normal Success and you may keep the point of FATE. Normal: You barely succeed as per a Normal Success, and you lose the point of FATE. Failure: You fail and lose the point of FATE. Botch: You either fail and lose 2 points of FATE, or you botch and lose 1 FATE. While not as good as making the skill itself, it ensures a better chance in some circumstances. You cannot acquire an Experience Check when using this method unless you roll a Critical Success. Reduce Damage from a single attack = 1 FATE per point of damage reduced You can reduce damage taken from a single attack by spending 1 FATE per point of damage that you wish to reduce. You do not have to negate the entire attack. Reroll a single percentile roll = 1 FATE You can reroll a single percentile roll by spending 1 FATE. You may keep either roll, and you do not acquire an Experience Check regardless of Success level. Shift a result up by one step = 2 FATE for first step, +1 for each step thereafter You can shift the results of a check you made by one step for the cost of 2 FATE. You can choose to spend additional FATE to continue shifting the results by an additional step per point of FATE spent (maximum of 6 FATE to shift a Botch to a Critical). Critical > Special > Normal > Failure > Botch You cannot acquire an Experience Check when using this method regardless of Success level. Inflict maximum damage with a single attack = 1 FATE per damage die (without Damage Modifier) You can inflict maximum damage with a single physical attack by spending FATE equal to the number of damage dice that the attack deals without adding Damage Modifier (which must still be rolled afterwards). 2d8 + 1d6 db = 2 FATE for 16 + 1d6 db Avoid a Mishap = 1 FATE In the unfortunate event that you roll a Fumble and risk a Mishap, you may choose to spend 1 FATE to negate it instead, making your check's result a failure instead. However, if combined with shifting the results by one step, you are still considered to have rolled a Fumble. This use is only to prevent a Mishap. FATE Recovery Spent FATE fully recovers to the character's maximum value (determined at character creation) at the end of an adventure. Additionally, you may be rewarded with a point of FATE for outstanding heroism in the face of danger, incredible roleplaying, an ingenious idea, going above and beyond in aiding the GM, or for contributing to the group's overall fun and enjoyment.
  12. I think it best to separate my emergent Magic World campaign idea from the "respect" thread. The campaign concept emerged after some chatting with Ben and Angelo, and shifting our system and setting focus. The setting shift due to the past few sessions (a few months ago) being as bog-standard fantasy as my current non-MW campaign with other players. This creates some challenges for me - working on two campaigns concurrently is no big deal ... having them be very similar in theme and such is where I get demotivated. My players were also tired of zero-to-hero play. That, combined with a side commentary with Ben re: treatment of MW, had me think, well, let's use Magic World then. Setting wise, I've been hankering for something more sword & sorcery, and definitely more pulpy weird. One idea I've had floating around a bit is to use the Dreamlands map, and various bits of the related book(s), as a "straight up" setting for a fantasy game. From there, it quickly became ... The Strange Tales of the Dreamworld. I'm looking forward to it - the session in a week has three (possibly four) players, all of whom are old hands at gaming (general and BRP / MW). I'm super fortunate in that I might have two of the folks behind MW at the table. Having players who have system mastery, are positive contributors, great roleplayers and know the source material is a heck of a gift. I'm thinking the initial spot will be The Six Kingdoms region of the Dreamlands map: "Well and Weirdly Met in Zakarion" sounds like a good and appropriate title for the kickoff. I'll look to post materials, commentary and such to this thread. Comments, encouragement, contributions, etc. welcome. Detractors may take their issues up c/o "Arioch, Dept of Caring ..."
  • Create New...