This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Vile

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31
I like hit locations and HPs per location.
If this is a must, your options are narrowed down to RuneQuest or Mythras. OpenQuest and Magic World both use general hit points and not hit locations.

If restricted to just the RuneQuests, my favourite flavour lies somewhere between RQ2 and RQ3. That's probably mostly down to familiarity, but I do find the complexity just about right (well, these days it's a bit too much). The percentile and hit location systems also simulate reality reasonably easily without adding in a lot of special cases or rules, so it's very easy to port into any setting you choose.

Out of the whole family of game systems, though, I find Magic World hits the spot for crunch vs. playability. I'd say it may be a little less "realistic" than RQ but that's quite a loaded term anyway - mostly it just measures realism as perceived by the players. Magic Worls is a bit simpler, faster, and less predictable than RQ, which makes for more exciting play in my opinion.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1140169
[...] and Chaosium seems to be trending such.

"Seems" to be.

I love to use prehistoric beasts, whether dinosaurs or extinct animals. ERB's Pellucidar stories are a great inspiration for these, and various "lost world" stories from books and movies. Not everything has to be magical or supernatural - in fact most things should not be, so as to avoid cheapening the "fantastic".

I didn't like hobbits in Tolkien (no more than I liked ewoks in Star Wars), and I have no need for halflings or gnomes in my games. Well, I do have one game world with halflings, but they are nasty half-animal humanoid hybrids. I have never played with a demographic that likes cute, and if I did I'd probably go more Miyazaki than Tolkien.

These days I generally don't have non-human player characters in my games, either, because nobody really plays them well unless they are pastiches. Having alien species in the party also removes some of their mystique and thus makes the fantasy less fantastic, IMO.

Aftermath! Or maybe Delta Force.

I prefer Holmes initiative in Dex order, with ties either resulting in simultaneous action or broken by rolling 1d6.

Cloning is the most sincere form of flattery - if a clone starts outselling the original, it still shows there must be something good about the original. The best way for publishers to "fight back" is to make sure their product stays ahead of the clones. If they can't do that, their business model is flawed.

Quote from: S'mon;1127398
OGL lets you use the D&D IP - game mechanics/formulae aren't protectable, but there is a ton of copyright protected content in the 3e & 5e SRDs.
That's the single biggest draw of the WotC SRDs - you could probably write your own close-enough D&D clone but it would be a craptonne of work, not to mention the risk of a C&D from WotC that you couldn't afford to fight.

The Mongoose RQ and Traveller SDRs were less valuable in that they had very little IP in them - almost none in the case of Traveller - but they were still useful because they had a lot of mechanical text which meant 3PPs wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel.

An SRD with no IP and almost no rules text makes no sense at all, because you're doing all the work of writing and creating original background in exchange for a whole raft of prohibitions and controls. Giving you access to a trademark might be worth all that - if it was a valuable trademark rather than one that the parent company had already abandoned years ago and just now made up a logo for.

Quote from: Mjollnir;1126864
Keep making Call of Cthulhu (no one can take Glorantha from you) and you'll be fine.
This is the key underlying assumption when you release a real OGL - that you are confident a 3rd party isn't going to steal your thunder. CoC has such a vast volume of material that they could keep going forever just by updating and re-issuing old books. Glorantha is their thing, especially now that Greg is gone and Jeff can go crazy with the pseudo-anthropolgy stuff, but honestly it's never going to be attractive enough for anyone to even attempt to clone - it's just become way to impenetrable for much of the market. Pendragon seems to be the go-to game for Arthurian fantasy, which is much better protection than disallowing anything even vaguely related under their NOGL.

That said, there are contenders - Delta Green is a very good take on the Mythos, and Osprey is about to release their own Bronze Age game powered by OpenQuest (which I'm sure will be much more accessible than Glorantha). So nuChaosium have some cause not to get complacent, as their main cash-cow lines are mostly public domain, while Glorantha is at its core a historical bronze age setting that could easily be re-skinned with little effort.

In the meantime, Jeff gets it. Not:

And this really displays why I am tempted to give up answering questions on this forum. Do you really plan to publish something using BRP based on Dunsany's "Idle Days on the Yann"? Really? Or is this just an exercise trying to dance around boundaries you don't really have any interest in actually doing anything with at all?

How hard is it for him to grok that an OGL is supposed to be clear on general cases so potential publishers don't have to ask about every little specific detail?

Waitaminnit ... did MOB jump the gun and post the BRP NOGL a few days early? Is this whole thing just an elaborate April Fool's joke? :eek:

Everyone knows half-orcs are delivered by half-storks.

Well, conversation has pretty much died down everywhere except for a few posters on BRP Central talking about using the NOGL to re-invent wheels already built into games under other companies' later versions of the rules. Time will tell whether anyone actually produces any meaningful content as a result of this debacle, or whether it satisfies nuChaosium's actual intent of offending 3rd party publishers enough to put forever them off the idea of writing their own D100 games.

The irony is, until their inclusion of Le Morte d'Arthur in the NOGL, it had never occurred to anyone to clone Pendragon - from what I hear it's near perfect as a Malory RPG adaption. You'd also have to squint really hard to think it's BRP.

Dammit, Genie, get back in the bottle!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31