QUASAR A science fiction space opera universe

[g33k]

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Would that necessarily hold true in a SciFi setting though. I could see stuff like cyberware, implants and advanced training techniques potentially shorting the improvement curve for characteristics. 

Maybe it's not worth the trouble. As RosenMCStern points out APP/CHA is often a dump stat (looking at you Pendragon). If it doesn't have much of an impact in game then there is no reason to get all that complicated with it ...

An extremely valid point!
Taking aboard my point that interspecies CHA / APP / etc is likely to be less-relevant than more, maybe the "game" (of closely-calibrating this) isn't worth the candle...

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

... I know some RPGs that make Charisma a skill ...

Indeed; since Fate (and hence Fudge) have already been mentioned, I will note that those games urge the GM to pick "characteristics" and "skills" per-campaign, and has no fixed differentiation between them (or even requirement they exist).  Sometimes one would pick an Aspect of "Incredibly Strong" and just get a bonus on the die whenever it comes up, but nobody in the game has a "Strength" characteristic (if nobody builds a character with a Strength-related Aspect, that's a pretty good cue that nobody really cares, and the GM is best-advised to seldom feature such challenges in-game).

[Atgxtg]

41 minutes ago, g33k said:

An extremely valid point!
Taking aboard my point that interspecies CHA / APP / etc is likely to be less-relevant than more, maybe the "game" (of closely-calibrating this) isn't worth the candle...

Yeah, it all comes down to what style of game it will be, how important social interaction will be, and how significant that CHA/APP attribute will be. 

Personally, I'd be fond of having CHA be a pool of points that could be spent to shift the results of social skills. Something like a PC fails their Persuade roll by 5% and so spends 5 CHA points to bump the result to a success. CHA points could recover like POW points do. That would make the stat worth something once play begins, thus offsetting the low CHA PC with fantastic social skill scores. Either that or maybe a CHA x5% cap on social skills. 

41 minutes ago, g33k said:

Indeed; since Fate (and hence Fudge) have already been mentioned, I will note that those games urge the GM to pick "characteristics" and "skills" per-campaign, and has no fixed differentiation between them (or even requirement they exist).  Sometimes one would pick an Aspect of "Incredibly Strong" and just get a bonus on the die whenever it comes up, but nobody in the game has a "Strength" characteristic (if nobody builds a character with a Strength-related Aspect, that's a pretty good cue that nobody really cares, and the GM is best-advised to seldom feature such challenges in-game).

I don't think you are drawing the right conclusion from that. Yeah, FATE dumps attributes but that doesn't mean that all RPGs should or that we should remake the wheel that is BRP by taking them out of it here. It just means that the approach works for FATE. Conversely,games like Year of the Phoenix, Star Frontiers, and WEG's D6 system  used characteristics as the base skill percentages. 

So I don't think that there is one "right" approach to this. 

 

 

 

 

[g33k]

21 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

... 

I don't think you are drawing the right conclusion from that. Yeah, FATE dumps attributes but that doesn't mean that all RPGs should or that we should remake the wheel that is BRP by taking them out of it here. It just means that the approach works for FATE. Conversely,games like Year of the Phoenix, Star Frontiers, and WEG's D6 system  used characteristics as the base skill percentages. 

So I don't think that there is one "right" approach to this. 

I wasn't saying BRP should take Fate's methods wholesale(*), just that it's worth looking at the newer innovations to see if there's anything worthwhile.

The very fact that the whole "APP/CHA" issue exists -- and this conversation -- suggests to me that BRP hasn't provided a broadly-embraced solution to "the social issue," amongst the FrankenBRP crowd.

 

(*)FWIW, however:  Fate itself exists as a "narrative mechanics" layer sitting atop the Fudge game-engine, which is largely a traditional-simulationist  set of mechanics; there is, in one hack, another version known as "Aspect-Only Fate".  In principle, one could adapt Fate-style Aspects into virtually any oldschool RPG... including BRP, D&D, etc.

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, g33k said:

I wasn't saying BRP should take Fate's methods wholesale(*), just that it's worth looking at the newer innovations to see if there's anything worthwhile.

I can't argue with that. I'd add it worth looking at some older innovations as well. I find that a lot of the older RPGs had creative ideas that have mostly beeen forgotten, and that many newer innovations are someone reinventing the wheel. FOr instance the current trent to small rules-light RPGs that that up a few pages harkens back to older games like TWERPS. 

 

As far a FATE specifically, it has it's own issues. THere been crticisms of it's lack of attributes. In some cases they just turn them into skills (i.e. MIGHT). Aspects are a mixed bag, lots of people have complained that games often go askwe as players focus almost entirely on ways to invoke thier aspects for the points, thier oppoents apewcts for the advatages and so on. And if something provides a benefit or not ends up depending on if someone remembers to involke it or can find a convincing way to do so. It';s like your character only has an 18 STR if you remember to tell everyone about it before you roll. 

 

2 hours ago, g33k said:

The very fact that the whole "APP/CHA" issue exists -- and this conversation -- suggests to me that BRP hasn't provided a broadly-embraced solution to "the social issue," amongst the FrankenBRP crowd.

Yes, and there are several reasons why.

First off there is the characteristics vs. skills issue. Namely most tasks in BRP are skills so characteristics aren't that important, unless they provide some other benefit (hit points, damage bonus , etc.). Which is one reason why I like category modifiers, and possible soft skill caps based on characteristics. 

Secondly there is the roleplay vs rollplay argument. Some people think players should roleplay social situations insteadof resorting to due rolls. The problem with that though is that is limits the characters social interaction based on the social skills of the player and thier realtionship with the GM, which makes the character;''s abilities meaninless, and begs the question why don't we just roleplay combat too?. For instance, if I'm playing James Bond, and I hit on the Major Villian's girlfriend, I should have the same chance of success as Bond would, not as I would.

2 hours ago, g33k said:

(*)FWIW, however:  Fate itself exists as a "narrative mechanics" layer sitting atop the Fudge game-engine, which is largely a traditional-simulationist  set of mechanics; there is, in one hack, another version known as "Aspect-Only Fate".  In principle, one could adapt Fate-style Aspects into virtually any oldschool RPG... including BRP, D&D, etc.

Yup, although FUDGE does break from the traditional mold in a few ways. For instance FUDGE has attributes but they don't generally affect skills, which I consider to be a serious flaw for FUDGE and would be a a fatal one if ported over to BRP.  In FUDGE you can have a terrible DEX yet be a great locksmith and jeweler. 

I think the issue here is that CHA tends to get the short end as far as characteristics go, and probably needs a boost of some kind. Category modifiers help, although I think the CHA mod should probably be factored in twice for social skills. People can make careers in acting and politics off of Charisma. 

I kinda had this debate years ago with Pendragon. APP Is pretty much a dump stat there (maybe not so much in KAP6). Some people tried to defend it but game mechanics wise it's biggest advantage was to act as a buffer against the effects of aging. It had no game effect as far as social skills went. Some of us were taking about having social skills default/start at APP to make it more useful. The idea being that someone with a 18 APP is probably going to find people a bit more forgiving anyway. For instance most guys won't mind as much if Gal Gadot stepped on their foot than if I did it. 

[tooley1chris]

On 7/16/2023 at 8:48 AM, Atgxtg said:

I suppose it will come down to how useful/important CHA/APP/COS/SOC/LUV whatever will be in the game. If the game is more Star Trek-ish with lots of displomacy and efforts to reach out and form a rapport with aliens then yeah this is worth it. If it is more like Aliens, with bug hunts then not so much.

 

Everyone runs their games differently. I do appreciate a lot of PC / NPC interaction in my games but....not for everyone.

 

[tooley1chris]

 Approaching the event horizon on Starship Construction and Identification Book. Taking awhile to spec out all the ship's from various races.

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, tooley1chris said:

Everyone runs their games differently. I do appreciate a lot of PC / NPC interaction in my games but....not for everyone.

 

I know what you mean. Some GMs and Players love lots of NPC interaction while others just treat NPCs as targets.

[Rich Tom]

Chris please charge us money for these products. If you charge, it changes the dynamic. You get to really do a professional job and get a reward. This allows you to proofread more, get better art work etc. The whole thing spirals upwards. From what I've seen, this game deserves you best shot and it could well be something special.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Rich Tom

[g33k]

1 hour ago, Rich Tom said:

Chris please charge us money for these products. If you charge, it changes the dynamic. You get to really do a professional job and get a reward. This allows you to proofread more, get better art work etc. The whole thing spirals upwards. From what I've seen, this game deserves you best shot and it could well be something special.

+1

I'm as much of a cheapskate as the next guy... I like me some free stuff!

But honestly, there's more free gaming stuff than I will *EVER* play...
I would rather spend a few  bucks  so I can then spend my  time  on the Good Stuff !

And decent editing/proofreading, a good index, &c ... that can really make the difference between a diamond in the rough vs. a  diamond of the first water!

Edited September 16, 2023 by g33k
but honestly, "Rich Tom" -- your name suggests "cost is not an issue" :-)

[tooley1chris]

Character sheet 1

I also include a printer friendly version.

 

Edited October 1, 2023 by tooley1chris

[Ian Absentia]

15 hours ago, tooley1chris said:

.

Gender:
(M) = Male?
(FM) = Fee-Male?
(O) = Optional?

You might neatly avoid a minefield of assumptions by simply placing a blank space after "Gender:" as you did with all of the other Identity qualifiers.

!i!

[tooley1chris]

On 10/1/2023 at 12:24 PM, Ian Absentia said:

You might neatly avoid a minefield of assumptions by simply placing a blank space after "Gender:" as you did with all of the other Identity qualifiers.

!i!

Good catch! Thanks

Edited October 3, 2023 by tooley1chris

[g33k]

Hmmm...

Psi includes both "Sciences" & "Disciplines" I take it, with the color-matched charts/diagrams (below the blank lists) giving details?

How do these interact?

Edited October 3, 2023 by g33k

[tooley1chris]

On 10/2/2023 at 11:39 PM, g33k said:

Hmmm...

Psi includes both "Sciences" & "Disciplines" I take it, with the color-matched charts/diagrams (below the blank lists) giving details?

How do these interact?

It's similar to Deep Magic from Magic Worlds Advanced Sorcery. The Science is the type of mental capability the character knows (Telepathy, Empathy, psychokinises, etc) and the Discipline represents the characters control of the Science (Creation, Destruction, Enhancing. Etc)

Then the chapter also includes special effects for combining two or more  Sciences (High Science) for advanced users

[Tolemykus]

Anything about the narrative available yet? Such as the 'galactic politics' and 'why they act?' type of thing? 👾😎

[svensson]

And any word on the availability of the Core Rulebook?

[tooley1chris]

20 hours ago, svensson said:

And any word on the availability of the Core Rulebook?

Doing some proofreading and small edits but it will be very soon. Within a week or 2 with other 2 books following a couple weeks apart after that.

 

[svensson]

21 minutes ago, tooley1chris said:

Doing some proofreading and small edits but it will be very soon. Within a week or 2 with other 2 books following a couple weeks apart after that.

Great! I'll keep an eye out for it!

[tooley1chris]

On 10/28/2023 at 6:52 PM, svensson said:

And any word on the availability of the Core Rulebook?

Looking at releasing Core book on November 10th!

(Fingers crossed)

[tooley1chris]

On 10/28/2023 at 6:45 PM, Tolemykus said:

Anything about the narrative available yet? Such as the 'galactic politics' and 'why they act?' type of thing? 👾😎

There's over 40 races and dozens more "mapped" systems, some with individual governments and their own political structures. I'm leaving that VERY open the the Chronicler. I have however included a few political powers (large and small) to get the juices bubbling. 

[AndreJarosch]

On 10/1/2023 at 7:24 PM, Ian Absentia said:

Gender:
(M) = Male?
(FM) = Fee-Male?
(O) = Optional?

You might neatly avoid a minefield of assumptions by simply placing a blank space after "Gender:" as you did with all of the other Identity qualifiers.

Could we have a neutral blank space after Height and Weight, too. 
I have no clue how many foot and inches some hight is. I use meters and centimeters. 
Same for lbs. I use kg. 

Edited November 6, 2023 by AndreJarosch

[g33k]

7 hours ago, AndreJarosch said:

Could we have a neutral blank space after Height and Weight, too. 
I have no clue how many foot and inches some hight is. I use meters and centimeters. 
Same for lbs. I use kg. 

Or just a slightly larger space.  Some use "#" for lbs; and as long as we're writing our units anyhow, I don't see a separate whole field is all that useful...

[AndreJarosch]

35 minutes ago, g33k said:

Or just a slightly larger space.  Some use "#" for lbs; and as long as we're writing our units anyhow, I don't see a separate whole field is all that useful...

I don´t know what you suggest. I am thinking: 

[g33k]

8 hours ago, AndreJarosch said:

I don´t know what you suggest. I am thinking: 

Yes; but while we're at it, take off "yrs" -- a very humanocentric timeframe!
"Thar be aliens here, matey!"

There are a *bunch* of red-dwarf stars with planets in their so-called "Goldilocks zone," whose "year" is incredibly short... I picked one at random (Trappist-1b) to check, and the year (one revolution around its star) is only 1.5 Terran days long!

[Atgxtg]

16 minutes ago, g33k said:

Yes; but while we're at it, take off "yrs" -- a very humanocentric timeframe!

Why do I get the feeling we are going to end up with a blank piece of paper?

 

P.S. "Species" would probably be more accurate than "Race", unless all the sentient beings are all part of the same species, as race is a subset of a given species. 

Edited November 7, 2023 by Atgxtg