Magic World 7E: Anyone, anyone? Bueller?...

[Lloyd Dupont]

You are definitely a funny guy, after a bit of distraction you want me (again?) to defend location HP (after all!) which, again ( 😮 !) I am not using myself either! 😮 I mean I was.. but I decided to drop them..

I already explained it!

short summary:
There might be cases where the PCs like it better. It's a popular and (explicitly) optional rule.
Should you use it? It depends 
It depends on what? I gave you a few food for thoughts already.

You still don't want to use it? welcome to the club, neither do I (at the moment)! 😛 
 

 

 

Edited February 12, 2021 by Lloyd Dupont

[soltakss]

8 hours ago, Chaot said:

Doesn't matter the system, RQ2, RQ3, Elfquest, the BGB (which I'm listed as a play tester), Mythras, whatever. I've never liked Hit Locations. As I said, it may be an allergy.

 

7 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

You are definitely a funny guy, after a bit of distraction you want me (again?) to defend location HP (after all!) which, again ( 😮 !) I am not using myself either! 😮 I mean I was.. but I decided to drop them..

Different people have different playstyles.

I love hit locations, Chaot doesn't. That doesn't make either of us right or wrong, just that we prefer different things.

Not everything has to be an argument.

[GothmogIV]

Yeah, I like the 7e push rolls, and bonus/penalty die, etc. They are a clean rule set. Like many have said (well...some) I find RQ rules a bit too crunchy, but that's a style thing. I wish MW had more products and support, but I really do like it. BPR is infinitely user-friendly, so we can all do what we like and just enjoy playing. 

[RogerDee]

On 2/9/2021 at 11:19 PM, Nick J. said:

. . . said no combatant ever.

Yeah they did.

At no point in 30 years of budo, and numerous real fights have I ever aimed at someone's head and hit their knee, nor their stomach.

So yeah, hit locations are garbage.

It is absolutely possible for someone to mis-read a strike and then move into the strike instead of away from. Hit locations are only okay to use with say weapons if it bounces off it slides along it into another body part.

For instance I blocked a mid level bokken strike poorly such that it rebounded off it hitting me in the eyebrow. But for fist fights, hit locations are plainly false.

Edited February 13, 2021 by RogerDee

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

1 hour ago, RogerDee said:

It is absolutely possible for someone to mis-read a strike and then move into the strike instead of away from.

A friend of mine, when we were competing in tournaments, went to deliver a spinning back kick, in retrospect we assume her opponent thought she was going for a spinning hook kick, and ducked causing her to lean right into the blow and was KOed on the spot.

Ultimately there aren't a lot of "random" shots in a melee. I dislike random hit locations for non-missile fire.

BE HEROIC!

[Nick J.]

5 hours ago, RogerDee said:

Yeah they did.

At no point in 30 years of budo, and numerous real fights have I ever aimed at someone's head and hit their knee, nor their stomach.

So yeah, hit locations are garbage.

It is absolutely possible for someone to mis-read a strike and then move into the strike instead of away from. Hit locations are only okay to use with say weapons if it bounces off it slides along it into another body part.

For instance I blocked a mid level bokken strike poorly such that it rebounded off it hitting me in the eyebrow. But for fist fights, hit locations are plainly false.

"Choose location" special effect in Mythras is pretty neat-o. 

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

4 minutes ago, Nick J. said:

"Choose location" special effect in Mythras is pretty neat-o. 

Can you elaborate? Pretty please? 🙂

[SDLeary]

6 hours ago, RogerDee said:

Yeah they did.

At no point in 30 years of budo, and numerous real fights have I ever aimed at someone's head and hit their knee, nor their stomach.

So yeah, hit locations are garbage.

It is absolutely possible for someone to mis-read a strike and then move into the strike instead of away from. Hit locations are only okay to use with say weapons if it bounces off it slides along it into another body part.

For instance I blocked a mid level bokken strike poorly such that it rebounded off it hitting me in the eyebrow. But for fist fights, hit locations are plainly false.

In melee, when punching, use 1d10+10. When kicking, choose high or low (actual kicks or sweeps), and use either the former for high, or 1d10 for low. Still random, but will account for the fact that both parties are actually moving during the whole thing, and footwork, parries, blocks can cause blows to land in unintended locations. This method should probably be used for smaller weapons such as blackjacks and knives/daggers as well.

Longer weapons, it could be argued, should use the method I outline above, though I would still use the melee table for these: swords, hafted swingy weapons, and so on. 

Spears and missile weapons, normal location table, though my preference for these is the RQ3 missile location table (it favors the core over the limbs).

SDLeary

 

[Lloyd Dupont]

7 hours ago, RogerDee said:

Yeah they did.

At no point in 30 years of budo, and numerous real fights have I ever aimed at someone's head and hit their knee, nor their stomach.

So yeah, hit locations are garbage.

It is absolutely possible for someone to mis-read a strike and then move into the strike instead of away from. Hit locations are only okay to use with say weapons if it bounces off it slides along it into another body part.

For instance I blocked a mid level bokken strike poorly such that it rebounded off it hitting me in the eyebrow. But for fist fights, hit locations are plainly false.

Good points.
However, while I don't like to have guns and localized HP together for other reason, one could argue that with sniper rifle, aiming for the head is a sensible and common strategy

[SDLeary]

3 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Good points.
However, while I don't like to have guns and localized HP together for other reason, one could argue that with sniper rifle, aiming for the head is a sensible and common strategy

For this situation, or just aimed missile blows in general, you can import an-oldie-but-goodie from RQ2:

Quote

1. For each strike rank a player delays attacking after his normal strike rank, the player can adjust the die roll for hit location by one.

   Thus a character with a normal strike rank of 4 can delay to strike rank 9 and be able to add or subtract up to 5 points to the hit location he rolls on D20. If the roll is 15, the character can hit anything from hit location 20 (Head) to 10 (Abdomen). He must, however, state the hit location before rolling damage dice.

SDLeary

[Nick J.]

2 hours ago, Zenith Comics Presents... said:

Can you elaborate? Pretty please? 🙂

Sure

[quote]When using hand-to-hand melee weapons the attacker may freely select the location where the blow lands, as long as that location is normally within reach.

If using ranged weapons Choose Location is a Critical Success only, unless the target is within close range and is either stationary or unaware of 
the attacker.[/quote]

So in a nutshell, a higher level of success let's a character aim where they wish, which is exactly what you'd expect in a fight (unarmed or otherwise).

Edited February 14, 2021 by Nick J.

[Simlasa]

I've always liked the idea of hit locations, but not always how they're implemented... depending on the nature of the attack.

 

[Nick J.]

7 hours ago, Simlasa said:

I've always liked the idea of hit locations, but not always how they're implemented... depending on the nature of the attack.

 

Yep, I'm perfectly content with simulating it with variable armor and major wound tables (ala Magic World, Elric!, etc.). Locations do matter, and there's more than one way to get there.

[Jaeger]

On 1/26/2021 at 9:44 AM, GothmogIV said:

Any general thoughts on updating MU to the 7e rules? 

 

If Chaosium is ever going to do a not RQ or Pendragon Fantasy RPG they need a reason to get behind it.

One based off of the successful CoC 7e is one of the few reasons to do so.

 

I think that there are two ways to go here:

First:

From this thread: https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/13532-why-magic-world-failed/

"Mankcam
I'm thinking of a setting like Dolemwood, WFRP's Old World, and The Witcher. I would prefer it a bit whimsical, fable-like, with dark woods, supernatural threats, kind of a dark Red Riding Hood kind of place. Full of evil child-eating hags, shadowy villains off the roads etc. Grimm Tales meets The Witcher sounds cool to me."

 

Have something that has a different take on things than typical high fantasy Forgotten Realms D&D. But is still a very relatable Fantasy setting. 

 

The second would be a whole lotta pie in the sky...

Second: CoC7e is huge in Japan. Sword World is Japan's #1 Fantasy RPG.

Sword World powered by CoC7e!

How they could get that license, or if they would come to a deal with the Sword World guys - I have no Idea. Probably totally unviable.

But with a good English translation of the Lore, it would be a unique hook to get attention for the game stateside. (Japan's #1 Fantasy RPG setting brought to you by Chaosium!)

Either way, a Japanese translation should be made immediately available as possible for either version to leverage CoC7e's market leader position in that country.

 

But the truth is that both of those are highly unlikely because of the investment required to grab Fantasy RPG market share. 

 A CoC7e powered "Eldritch Fantasy" Rpg in the US would be effectively "competing" against D&D twice. 5e and PF2e.

It is not just enough to release a good game – it will need to be supported; I.e. Modules, Adventure Paths, the periodic “Tome of everything equivalent”, VTT support, oh and a setting that doesn’t suck to go with it all.

A minimum of four quality releases a year, every year. With production values equal to the big two to boot.

The cost of real competition is high.

A third way might be for Chaosium to team up with a trusted partner in Japan to make the game as part of leveraging their market position over there. That might be a way to spread the risk/cost to make it a more viable option. But I have no idea how that would work, and I am not privy to Chaosium financials; so this is all just hot air with other people's money.

Edited April 28, 2021 by Jaeger

[Simlasa]

On 4/27/2021 at 9:56 PM, Jaeger said:

Second: CoC7e is huge in Japan.

Wasn't Call of Cthulhu big in Japan before 7e came along?
IMO a big chunk of why people go on about 7e is the improved graphics... people like pretty pictures and CoC 6e was particularly fugly. So often these days when I hear people gushing about a new game, it ends up being about the look of the thing... not the system.
Treat Magic World like CoC for a year... graphics, support, adventures... and see if it doesn't grab a lot more attention and online chatter.

[Mankcam]

On 4/28/2021 at 2:56 PM, Jaeger said:

 

If Chaosium is ever going to do a not RQ or Pendragon Fantasy RPG they need a reason to get behind it.

One based off of the successful CoC 7e is one of the few reasons to do so.

I think that there are two ways to go here:

First:

From this thread: https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/13532-why-magic-world-failed/

"Mankcam
I'm thinking of a setting like Dolemwood, WFRP's Old World, and The Witcher. I would prefer it a bit whimsical, fable-like, with dark woods, supernatural threats, kind of a dark Red Riding Hood kind of place. Full of evil child-eating hags, shadowy villains off the roads etc. Grimm Tales meets The Witcher sounds cool to me."

Have something that has a different take on things than typical high fantasy Forgotten Realms D&D. But is still a very relatable Fantasy setting. 

I'm glad that someone else thought I was onto something here 😀

[Jaeger]

16 hours ago, Simlasa said:

Wasn't Call of Cthulhu big in Japan before 7e came along?
...

CoC in general had a decent presence in Japan. I believe it was with 6th edition that it started to really take off and put fantasy games like Sword World firmly in the rear view.

I am no expert as I have never been to Japan or speak the language - but I found a few place that track things over there, and I Like to read up on it because I find it fascinating how some RPG's can sometimes beat out D&D in different countries.

FWIW - Evidently in Japan they play CoC a bit differently than is common in the US. A strong bombastic Anime-esqe vibe with black humor seem to be the norm. But that is natural as their frame of references for certain things is different than ours.

 

 

16 hours ago, Simlasa said:

...Treat Magic World like CoC for a year... graphics, support, adventures... and see if it doesn't grab a lot more attention and online chatter.

In my opinion:

I don't think Chaosium really wants to do a fantasy RPG that could compete with RQ or PD for sales and fans. (I have an opinion on that, but I don't want to derail the whole thread just yet...)

Aligning the game rules with the popular C7e to promote seamless player transition is the only reason to make a non RQ or PD Fantasy RPG and treat it like CoC.

Yes, MW would still be close system wise, but as we have seen recently with 5e conversions of other game systems - the closer to the marquee IP, the better it is for sales.

 

13 hours ago, Mankcam said:

I'm glad that someone else thought I was onto something here 😀

Well, it is a bit of common sense IMHO.

The RPG and fantasy novel world is rife with utterly fantastical settings with magic everywhere and the mystical around every corner. Even the D&D mainstay Forgotten Realms has gotten more and more fantastical with every new edition. And it started out High Fantasy!

So what to do to have a relatable setting that is not just a clone of the typical kitchen-sink high fantasy D&D world?

IMHO we look at what works on the non RPG playing, non fantasy book reading normies.

So we have Three* fantasy settings that within recent years reached a decent degree of mainstream popularity. (Film/Tv)

The Lord of the Rings, A Game of Thrones, The Witcher.

All of which are very toned-down fantasy compared to any current D&D setting.

It just seems natural to me to go in that direction if you still want to retain all the relatable bits that come with a medieval western Fantasy setting, and yet be different in tone to how people typically play D&D.

 

* But, but, but... Harry Potter!!!    LOLZ yeah. That was targeted at Kids from the beginning and plays by different rules.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Jaeger

[Simlasa]

1 hour ago, Jaeger said:

Aligning the game rules with the popular C7e to promote seamless player transition is the only reason to make a non RQ or PD Fantasy RPG and treat it like CoC.

How big a seam is it anyway? I hear CoC 7e fans speaking out of both sides of their mouths... praising the changes but also claiming the changes aren't that significant... clamoring for conversions of old content to the new system but also claiming it's totally backward compatible. Which is it?

Either way, I'm happy for Magic World to stay 'dead' in the eyes of the bosses if the only option is to 7e it.
As for new BRP fantasy games... Mythras is now the 400lb ape in that room.

[DreadDomain]

21 hours ago, Simlasa said:

How big a seam is it anyway? I hear CoC 7e fans speaking out of both sides of their mouths... praising the changes but also claiming the changes aren't that significant... clamoring for conversions of old content to the new system but also claiming it's totally backward compatible. Which is it?

Either way, I'm happy for Magic World to stay 'dead' in the eyes of the bosses if the only option is to 7e it.

I didn't want to like CoC 7e. I really didn't. In the end, I love it. It doesn't mean I would like everything to be transitionned to 7e. I could totally see a super game built off 7e but for fantasy, I still prefer vanilla BRP. I'd rather see Magic World updated to the high production value Chaosium is now known from but it is clearly not going to happen (sales of current MW does not warrant it and RQ and KAP have much higher profiles than MW).

Quote

As for new BRP fantasy games... Mythras is now the 400lb ape in that room.

From a rule consistency perspective, no doubt, Mythras is the king of the hill. From a sales figures, not so sure. While I am sure it is quite decent, I suspect RQ does better if only because of Glorantha, name recognition and production value. This assessment is based on all the benefits brought from no data at all.

Edited May 1, 2021 by DreadDomain

[Simlasa]

9 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

From a rule consistency perspective, no doubt, Mythras is the king of the hill. From a sales figures, not so sure. While I am sure it is quite decent, I suspect RQ does matter if only because of Glorantha, name recognition and production value. This assessment is based on all the benefits brought from no data at all.

Of course RQ matters, IF you want to play in Glorantha... but if you don't... if you want some other setting or to build your own, then Mythras (or Magic World) is a much better option.

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

I am the odd man out I am sure, but I vastly prefer MW and CoC 7e to Mythras. Setting aside my old man eyes hate the font they used, I just find it has too many fiddly bits. I prefer a more steam-lined experience 🙂 That said, all power to those who love it, which I know are many 🙂 

[DreadDomain]

4 hours ago, Simlasa said:

Of course RQ matters, IF you want to play in Glorantha... but if you don't... if you want some other setting or to build your own, then Mythras (or Magic World) is a much better option.

Hehe, sorry, I meant "I suspect RQ does better <than Mythras> (from a sales perspective)" I edited my post for clarity.

[DreadDomain]

9 hours ago, Zenith Comics Presents... said:

I am the odd man out I am sure, but I vastly prefer MW and CoC 7e to Mythras. Setting aside my old man eyes hate the font they used, I just find it has too many fiddly bits. I prefer a more steam-lined experience 🙂 That said, all power to those who love it, which I know are many 🙂 

Maybe not the odd man out. I was much more impressed by the rules of CoC 7E than I was by the rules of RQG. I don't like everything but generally CoC 7E feels slick and simple, efficient and easy. And generally well explained.

Edited May 1, 2021 by DreadDomain

[GothmogIV]

So playing online for the past year, I can tell you that a great part of D&D online is how integrated their resources are. Want a monster? Click. Want to roll an attack? Click. Want to see how a spell works? Click. It's so easy, and it is an enormous time saver for the GM. I haven't looked at the BRP stuff on Foundry, but does it have that level of interactivity? Can you roll from the Golden Book?

If Chaosium's BRP system could be supported on Roll20 in the same way that D&D is, it would be a game changer. The BRP system is better than Wizards for sure, but Wizards is easier to run, and easier to design with, in my opinion. 

Edited May 4, 2021 by GothmogIV

[g33k]

On 2/13/2021 at 11:51 AM, RogerDee said:

Yeah they did.

At no point in 30 years of budo, and numerous real fights have I ever aimed at someone's head and hit their knee, nor their stomach.

So yeah, hit locations are garbage.

It is absolutely possible for someone to mis-read a strike and then move into the strike instead of away from. Hit locations are only okay to use with say weapons if it bounces off it slides along it into another body part.

For instance I blocked a mid level bokken strike poorly such that it rebounded off it hitting me in the eyebrow. But for fist fights, hit locations are plainly false.

I always look at random-roll "Hit Locations" not as "throw a punch or kick or swing a weapon... but blindfolded ! " (which, I agree, would be garbage)  so much as it's "the place you intended to hit, because it's where you spotted  (or figured you could best make) an opening."

It's "random" (i.e. outside of your control) because it depends in large part on what the foe is doing.