MythQuest - Announcement Thread and Help Request

[foolcat]

1 hour ago, Zenith Comics Presents... said:

With a well made character sheet, everything would be pre-calculated, making everything easy-peasy 🙂

I know some people balk at charts & tables, but I am Gen-X 😉

Me too, but a brief stint with Rolemaster (“Rollmaster”) back in the 90s proved to be a tad too much on the table side, and I wouldn’t want to touch it again, even with an 11 foot pole. Yet I do love me some well designed tables (in moderation). 😄

I’m all for pre-calculating everything that’s possible and viable, and if the character sheet supports finding the values you need in a jiffy, all the better.

Do you plan on having additional skill modifiers? Difficulty of the task at hand surly is the one with the largest impact, and that’s handled, but what about temporary/situational modifiers, e.g. a buff to weapon skills though magical spells, magic items, or plain old weapon qualities?

I guess one could always argue that these might as well be added to the skill value that has already been modified by difficulty, because they exist independently from the latter.

Edited September 11 by foolcat

[Atgxtg]

3 hours ago, foolcat said:

Me too, but a brief stint with Rolemaster (“Rollmaster”) back in the 90s proved to be a tad too much on the table side, and I wouldn’t want to touch it again, even with an 11 foot pole. Yet I do love me some well designed tables (in moderation). 😄

LOL! Reminds me of the 10 page GM screen I made for MERP by stapling manila folders together. I managed to get all they key tables together. I shudder to think of full Rolemaster, especially Arms Law with it's 30 weapons tables, 13 unarmed and natural weapon tables, and 12 pages of critical and fumble tables. Not to mention the various companions and add ons. 

It seems you'd constantly be looking something up. 

 

3 hours ago, foolcat said:

I’m all for pre-calculating everything that’s possible and viable, and if the character sheet supports finding the values you need in a jiffy, all the better.

I agree. The more someone can "pre-load" the math the less of an issue it is in game. Skill category modifiers being a great example. They show up in chargen and only need to be recalculated when characteristics change, which is pretty rare (save for POW).

3 hours ago, foolcat said:

Do you plan on having additional skill modifiers? Difficulty of the task at hand surly is the one with the largest impact, and that’s handled, but what about temporary/situational modifiers, e.g. a buff to weapon skills though magical spells, magic items, or plain old weapon qualities?

I guess one could always argue that these might as well be added to the skill value that has already been modified by difficulty, because they exist independently from the latter.

With the tables presented uses the tables then someone could just add the modifiers to the skill to get a modified value to use. So someone with Pistol 50% who gets a 10% aiming bonus could read across from the 60% row. But personally I think if one  uses CoC7 difficulties then they probably don't want to use flat modifiers, and would be better off shifting the difficulty or using bonus/penalty dice.I mean they have already bought into the CoC7 ecosystem for doing things. 

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

I played a lot of ChartMaster back in the day, and even dived into Against the Darkmaster last year. Sadly the crit-tables slowed everything down too much for us.

As for modifiers, they would apply to the dice rolls, rather than the base difficulty, or bonus dice like in CoC 7e, but ultimately the idea of having these difficulties is to reduce the amount of modifiers, allowing things to flow more smoothly and swiftly in play.

Naturally playtesting will reveal truths to us, so I am looking forward to that a lot.

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

I mean they have already bought into the CoC7 ecosystem for doing things. 

I swear, there's only one of me ;) 

Peace, love, geek!

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

Also, put up the new Teaser today, now with narration!

BE HEROIC!

[Atgxtg]

41 minutes ago, Zenith Comics Presents... said:

I played a lot of ChartMaster back in the day, and even dived into Against the Darkmaster last year. Sadly the crit-tables slowed everything down too much for us.

MERP wasn't bad with my huge GM screen. But then it didn't have a gazillion combat tables.

41 minutes ago, Zenith Comics Presents... said:

As for modifiers, they would apply to the dice rolls, rather than the base difficulty, or bonus dice like in CoC 7e, but ultimately the idea of having these difficulties is to reduce the amount of modifiers, allowing things to flow more smoothly and swiftly in play.

I'd advise ditching modifiers entirely with that sort of system, and just rely of difficulties and bonus/penalty dice. That way you could write all the skill values down once and not change them.

41 minutes ago, Zenith Comics Presents... said:

Naturally playtesting will reveal truths to us, so I am looking forward to that a lot.

Yeah. No plan survives contact with the enemy. 

41 minutes ago, Zenith Comics Presents... said:

I swear, there's only one of me 😉

"They" as in anyone who "buys into the CoC7 type game mechanics". Just like if someone were big into Traveller/Cepehus Engine they would do things by rolling 2D6+modifiers against a target difficulty number. If someone is going to go that far into the CoC7 mechanics, why not go all the way?

Although, if you wish to publish something you will need to be careful what you use and how you use it since CoC is not under OGL, and CoC7 unique terms and game mechanics are not under the UGE.

 

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

6 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

I'd advise ditching modifiers entirely with that sort of system, and just rely of difficulties and bonus/penalty dice. That way you could write all the skill values down once and not change them.

Yeah this is the way I am leaning, 100% :) 

[g33k]

22 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

LOL! Reminds me of the 10 page GM screen I made for MERP by stapling manila folders together. I managed to get all they key tables together. I shudder to think of full Rolemaster, especially Arms Law with it's 30 weapons tables, 13 unarmed and natural weapon tables, and 12 pages of critical and fumble tables. Not to mention the various companions and add ons. 

It seems you'd constantly be looking something up. 

...

I got the RM game-system, back in the day (still have it, in fact!) but have never run it.

My tentative plan was for each player to have a photocopy of the relevant weapon-table(s), & for my own per-session prep to include writing names/creatures onto Post-It  notes & bookmark the relevant pages/tables.

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

I got the RM game-system, back in the day (still have it, in fact!) but have never run it.

IMO there isn't much reason to. I think Rolemaster was another one of those late 70s-mid80s attempts to make a better version of D&D, and it reason to be has mostly been superseded by better versions of D&D.

When it first came out, Arms Law was interesting because it gave a lot of variation between weapons. But in retrospect much that variation is questionable, and probably exist more as an excuse to have more table than to any actual difference between weapons.

IMO Spell Law is a bit of a disappointment, and most of what Character Law, and the various Companions added was done better and simpler in skill based RPGs.

 

I think Iron Crown succeeded in the early days due to having Middle Earth stuff and for their setting specific RM/HERO supplements, most of which was excellent or at least covered stuff that no one else covered at the time. I think Iron Crown's later decline was due mostly to RoleMaster. Even their Middle Earth supplements and adventures had to be written to be compatible with RoleMaster. So their products tended to feel shoehorned into their game system rather than belong to it.

 

1 hour ago, g33k said:

My tentative plan was for each player to have a photocopy of the relevant weapon-table(s), & for my own per-session prep to include writing names/creatures onto Post-It  notes & bookmark the relevant pages/tables.

And then hope someone's weapon doesn't break and you have to pull out another table.  You also need multiple copies of Arms Law just in case.

 

 

 

Edited September 12 by Atgxtg

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

Just a fun little cover for a Sword & Sorcery setting I am creating to along with this project.

:)

[Barak Shathur]

MythQuest! That was the working name for my Mythras/RuneQuest hack that I never made. Love it!

Fun videos, the Shakespearean tone is great. I personally like where you're going with the project thus far. If you're going the SR route, I would take a look at RQ3's weapon table. In my opinion it's the best iteration of the classic BRP weapon list. Weapon HP is well calibrated to the HP as AP parry system, which IMO is the best for BRP systems, much more nuanced and believable than the binary all or nothing of BGB/UGE, and also simpler than the all, half or nothing of Mythras (since subtraction is slightly less taxing than division if you have to do it repeatedly). The weapon damages in RQ3 are really well balanced against each other, especially with the way the specials work, where some pure slashing or crushing weapons may do slightly more damage on a regular hit, while impaling weapons are devastating on a special/crit. Speaking of which, what will be your critical system? I feel that if you have a max or double damage crit system, weapon damages need to be quite similar for equivalent weapons, as in Mythras and OpenQuest. With special effects as implemented in BRP/RQ3, you can afford more variety as I see it. 

What are your thoughts about character creation? Personally I like the RQ3 system, which is a bit similar in feel to HarnMaster, in that characters get a rather granular skill structure based on their family and professional background, which makes them feel unique and personalised. One problem here was that the higher the players rolled for age, the more skill points they got, so a bit unfair from the get go.

Once more unto the geek!

[Barak Shathur]

I watched the Characteristics video, great stuff! I have one point of feedback regarding SIZ though. I feel that BRP/RQ systems post RQ2 made dwarves and halflings too small in relation to humans. The original value for human vs dwarf was 3d6 vs 2d6, a dwarf was thus about 2/3 the size of a human, which aligns with most generic fantasy takes (6' human vs 4-5' dwarf, roughly). In RQ3 (or was it an addendum to RQ2?) humans SIZ jumped to 2d6+6, ostensibly to avoid Tiny Human Syndrome. Dwarf SIZ stayed the same though, so now dwarves where about half the SIZ of a human (avg SIZ 13 vs SIZ 7, so 6' human vs 3' dwarf, roughly speaking). Halflings being smaller than dwarves then obviously had to be made really petite, where typically it is they that are about half the size of a human. And since SIZ is more a function of mass than height in BRP, except for strike ranks, dwarves would really be even shorter since they are more massive than humans. This relationship, which I find problematic since it makes dwarves (apart from turning them into tiny gnomes) much weaker as warriors than humans, where in most settings they are at least equal, has since been replicated seemingly by rote. BRP/UGE sets it at 1d4+4, as you do, but it again makes them too too small IMO. Legend/Mythras got it right in my book, bumping dwarf SIZ to 1d6+6 which gives an average of 9-10, putting them on equal footing in terms of DB and HP with humans again after all those years. I actually find Legend's creature stats to be the best iteration of all the BRP universe. You do you of course, but that's my 2 gp.

[Mugen]

@Barak Shathurnote that RQ3 dwarves are based on Glorantha Mostali, and not Tolkien Khazâd, just like RQ elves are based on Aldryami. They also have STR 4D6 and CON 1D6+12, which in part counterbalance their low SIZ. They also tend to have better Manipulation (+6 versus +3) and Agility (+6 versus -3) bonus. And their Agility is often positive, which is rare among humans, and imply their Dodge and Parry skills can go over 100%.

Also, mass do not increase linearly with height, and should follow a quadratic formula. Although Khazâdic dwarves are sturdier than humans, and as such deserve higher SIZ than humans of similar height, of course.

Edited Wednesday at 07:02 AM by Mugen

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

18 hours ago, Barak Shathur said:

What are your thoughts about character creation? Personally I like the RQ3 system, which is a bit similar in feel to HarnMaster, in that characters get a rather granular skill structure based on their family and professional background, which makes them feel unique and personalised. One problem here was that the higher the players rolled for age, the more skill points they got, so a bit unfair from the get go.

I am working all that out currently, but haven't locked down a lot of my thoughts 100% yet. I'll video it up when I do. :) 

As for the Size thing, I've been looking at Legend (hate the layout) but it is well done, more food for thought indeed.

[Barak Shathur]

On 9/18/2024 at 8:57 AM, Mugen said:

@Barak Shathurnote that RQ3 dwarves are based on Glorantha Mostali, and not Tolkien Khazâd, just like RQ elves are based on Aldryami. They also have STR 4D6 and CON 1D6+12, which in part counterbalance their low SIZ. They also tend to have better Manipulation (+6 versus +3) and Agility (+6 versus -3) bonus. And their Agility is often positive, which is rare among humans, and imply their Dodge and Parry skills can go over 100%.

True, though one might say that RQ3 took a more generic stance since in its bestiary it included orcs, halflings and other non-Gloranthan creatures. Still, I think my point stands since in the original RQ, which compared to RQ3 is more narrowly Glorantha-focused, dwarf SIZ was not less but greater in relation to human SIZ. Again, what seems to have changed is that for purely technical reasons the designers wanted to avoid PCs with tiny sizes. Which is fine, but they ought to have done the same to dwarves, who could wind up being SIZ 2, incongruously small for a creature who might at the same time have STR 24.

But the problem is more evident in supposedly more mainstream BRP products like the BGB series, which avoids the tiny dwarf syndrome by going with 1d4+4, but keeps the huge size difference vis-à-vis humans the same. Basically half of an average human, and in game technical terms considerably weaker as warriors (while dwarves are generally supposed to be a 'warrior race', among other things). Which has then been replicated in BRP products while being at odds with most major RPG settings such as Middle Earth, the various D&D settings, and WFRP. The Mongoose/TDM/OpenQuest generation thankfully compensated for this.

Sorry for the digression. Looking forward to more updates from the OP!

 

EDIT: I wanted to add that someone (on this forum I think) once quoted Steve Perrin himself as saying one of his regrets looking back was making dwarves too small!

 

Edited Thursday at 09:57 AM by Barak Shathur

[Zit]

On 9/18/2024 at 8:57 AM, Mugen said:

Also, mass do not increase linearly with height, and should follow a quadratic formula. Although Khazâdic dwarves are sturdier than humans, and as such deserve higher SIZ than humans of similar height, of course.

A rough solution may be to consider SIZ as the volume and an average of SIZ + STR as the mass. It won't fit to all cases but gives a number closer than SIZ = size AND mass.

[Barak Shathur]

2 hours ago, Zit said:

A rough solution may be to consider SIZ as the volume and an average of SIZ + STR as the mass. It won't fit to all cases but gives a number closer than SIZ = size AND mass.

I like that! In the end though, in this instance it comes down to how the abstraction works out in game technical terms. Should dwarves be constructed as inferior to humans as warriors (which making the threshold for damage bonus on average 3-4 points more distant does). Is it intentional or more of an oversight? In my book, the latter. 

[Zit]

Romans were smaller than Gauls and not better warriors, but much better soldiers and conquered Gaul.

Dwarves in old Germanic tales are more craftmen and sorcerers than warriors. You are not obliged to follow the Tolkien trope and have them instead compensate their small size with technology and magic.

[Joerg]

2 hours ago, Zit said:

Romans were smaller than Gauls and not better warriors, but much better soldiers and conquered Gaul.

Dwarves in old Germanic tales are more craftmen and sorcerers than warriors. You are not obliged to follow the Tolkien trope and have them instead compensate their small size with technology and magic.

Maybe the Mostali are a better parallel for D&D gnomes than they are for Tolkien's khazad.

[Barak Shathur]

2 hours ago, Zit said:

Romans were smaller than Gauls and not better warriors, but much better soldiers and conquered Gaul.

Dwarves in old Germanic tales are more craftmen and sorcerers than warriors. You are not obliged to follow the Tolkien trope and have them instead compensate their small size with technology and magic.

Indeed! But I was referring specifically to MERP, D&D and WFRP which I think represent the mainstream within rpgs, and thus the appropriate equivalent for a game that strives to be generic.

[Barak Shathur]

37 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Maybe the Mostali are a better parallel for D&D gnomes than they are for Tolkien's khazad.

I've begun to think so too, except for the fact that in the original iteration this was not true stat wise. And it should certainly not be true for BGB/UGE and similar games.

BTW, I think we are close to derailing the thread here.

Edited 16 hours ago by Barak Shathur

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

 

33 minutes ago, Barak Shathur said:

BTW, I think we are close to derailing the thread here.

Too late ;) :P :) 

Seems you've been having quite the time about SIZ, no harm no foul.

Peace, love, geek.

[Atgxtg]

On 9/18/2024 at 2:57 AM, Mugen said:

Also, mass do not increase linearly with height, and should follow a quadratic formula. Although Khazâdic dwarves are sturdier than humans, and as such deserve higher SIZ than humans of similar height, of course.

Yeah, it follows the cube-square law. If you double tie size of something proportionally, that is you double the width and depth along with the height, then you multiple the mass (and weight) by a factor of 8. Or if you double the height, you square the area, and cube the mass.

Since SIZ in BRP is logarithmic in the 8-88 range, and x2 mass = +8 SIZ, you can use this to scale up creatures and object. If you cube te difference in height to get the mass multiplier and look up on the table below you can get the proper SIZ.

Mass      SIZ

x1.0905  = +1 SIZ

x1.1892   = +2 SIZ

x1.2968  = +3 SIZ

x1.4142  = +4 SIZ

x1.5422  = +5 SIZ

x1.6818  = +6 SIZ

x1.8340  = +7 SIZ

x2           = +8 SIZ

x4            = +16 SIZ

x8            = +24 SIZ

Etc.

Note that in between SIZ values can be worked out by combining values on the table. SO x3 mass would be x2 (+8) and x1.5 (1.414 is the closes without going over for +4) for +12, x5 mass would be +18, x6 would be +20 and so forth. Number might be off by a point due to rounding, but should be close enough for most game uses.

 

For those that want the math for a spreadsheet it's SIZ= (log(kg/25))/log(2)*8 (round down) and kg= 2^(SIZ/8)*25 (round down).

 

 

As for dwarves being heavier than humans of the same height, this would also work out correctly with the cube-square law. So if an average dwarf was 4 feet tall and SIZ 7 and got magically increased in size to 6 feet then it's weight would increased by (6/4)^3 or 3.375 times or +15 for SIZ 20 (141 kg), heavier that a typical 6 foot tall human. 

 

[Barak Shathur]

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

 

Too late 😉 😛 🙂

Seems you've been having quite the time about SIZ, no harm no foul.

Peace, love, geek.

What’s the next update going to be about?

🙂

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

20 minutes ago, Barak Shathur said:

What’s the next update going to be about?

🙂

I think the next one is going to be a combat one, which will also explain why I will be moving away from Strike Ranks in the final analysis.

But I'm not feeling inspired to make it yet... but it will come.

BE HEROIC!

[Zenith Comics Presents...]

Also... THIS... :) 

Peace, love, geek.