Quote from: gleichman;644366:eek:

I've try to warn people away from that. It's drier than the Sierra and since it was intended for people who already played the game- explains nothing. But as you have a interest in pure rules there may be some fun stuff in there for you, if not in combat than in some of the subsections.

In any case, PM me if you have any questions and I'll try to help.

The price was just a little over cost, since it only uses public domain art and again was targeted for my groups- I didn't price it to make money. More like a night's pizza fund to celebrate it being done.

Cheers. Yep, I'm easy to please. Never know what will have a new idea in it, or if reading something will cast a new light on old things.

Quote from: gleichman;640994That's just off the top of my head (examples too).

What mechanical systems do you approve of?

Quote from: GrumpyReviews;644609What mechanical systems do you approve of?

I've used HERO System since the 1st edition of Champions. It's faults are actually rather few and mostly not the rules but rather how they constructed things.

For example the low damage for firearms combined with high Body values produce a very safe (and almost D&D like) combat especially after armor is factored in. The cool thing about HERO however is that it's designed to allow you to build to a different standard for a completely different result.

I of course have my own homegrown systems which perfectly fits my groups (and no others).

Those two systems handle all our normal long term RPG needs and have since 1980.

But I've actually played everything on that list and more, and any without a escalating HP mechanic can work well for a short term game or within a narrow windows of play.

Quote from: gleichman;644660...escalating HP mechanic...

I've been pondering this term.

I completely understand why you don't care for it. In hindsight it sort of partially explains why I got to where I am in terms of combat system for my own project.

However, we sorta-kinda retain escalating HP. In essence, its treated as a skill, like anything else, and can theoretically be improved over time. At the same time, though, our HP is more concretely tied to the idea of minor injuries - while you can die through HP loss, it takes awhile. Severe injuries are what kill, and are tracked separately.

We kept the potential for HP increases around because it does make sense in a way. The guy who takes punches to the face for a living should be more resilient than the mage who can't carry his own pack of books, or should at least have the potential to be more resilient. Obviously D&D takes it significantly farther than is sensible, but surely some measure of increase isn't bad?

Quote from: GnomeWorks;644701We kept the potential for HP increases around because it does make sense in a way. The guy who takes punches to the face for a living should be more resilient than the mage who can't carry his own pack of books, or should at least have the potential to be more resilient. Obviously D&D takes it significantly farther than is sensible, but surely some measure of increase isn't bad?

In some measure and for some methods, but I wouldn't call the result escalating HP for those that I favor as they remain fixed values for the most part.

In HERO for example you can buy up (or down) Body and Stun to represent the difference between Beowulf and a nerd. This is part of the original character generation. And such values could change over the life of the character, but I run HERO (every GM has different contruction standards), those values won't change much if at all over the character's lifetime.

My homegrown rules are much the same, the difference is shown when the character is first created. There after things will generally only get worse (unless the character starts very young) with a bit of exception for high level characters who buy a very expensive talent that allows them to function with wounds a bit better than normal.

Hmm... fair enough.

I came to the conclusion that I didn't care for escalating hit points, myself, but couldn't part with the concept that some folks should have more, and that - over time - an adventurer could theoretically become more resilient over time.

In general, more robust combat mechanics with higher points-of-contact than D&D combined with more sensible hit point totals seemed a solid solution to the "whittling down hps" thing in D&D combat...

Quote from: GnomeWorks;644752I came to the conclusion that I didn't care for escalating hit points, myself, but couldn't part with the concept that some folks should have more, and that - over time - an adventurer could theoretically become more resilient over time.

If you can't part with the concept, than you can't part with the concept.

I haven't missed it myself and now days react badly if it should show itself even in minor ways. To me, injuries are injuries.

Quote from: gleichman;644757To me, injuries are injuries.

And to that I say, "insufficiently granular."

Quote from: GnomeWorks;644868And to that I say, "insufficiently granular."

I don't think that word means what you think it means. I have lots of nicks and cuts too you know.

Quote from: gleichman;644757If you can't part with the concept, than you can't part with the concept.

I haven't missed it myself and now days react badly if it should show itself even in minor ways. To me, injuries are injuries.

From a design perspective I prefer not to have escalating hp.

I would rather have increased mitigation from 'evasion' 'armor' or even 'will power'.

However, the dnd style 'bucket of hp' is technically the same thing, but without the clarity of exactly how the damage was avoided.

Here is a question for people good at math;
What is the fundemental difference between a bucket of hp, and damage resistance, or being harder to hit, for example?

Quote from: gleichman;644757If you can't part with the concept, than you can't part with the concept.

I haven't missed it myself and now days react badly if it should show itself even in minor ways. To me, injuries are injuries.

I once experimented in a 1E dnd game with tracking each wound, and requiring the players to tend each wound seperately. It created a certain aesthetic appeal.

Quote from: Bill;644932However, the dnd style 'bucket of hp' is technically the same thing, but without the clarity of exactly how the damage was avoided.

And a whole bunch of other problems that John Morrow did a great job defining in addition. They are only technically the same for those that blind themselves to the huge differences.

what is the correct, flag free, way to handle difficulty for undertaking actions? Difficulty levels? Fixed target number and modifiers? Something else?

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;645150what is the correct, flag free, way to handle difficulty for undertaking actions? Difficulty levels? Fixed target number and modifiers? Something else?

I'm not as focused on that as one might expect and will accept a number of ways of doing it as long as the mechanic is clear about your chances and how works.

So no dice pools.

For the games I currently play- HERO System used 3d6, roll under your skill after applying modifiers. My homegrown is the same with d100 but has some other nice details.

Unlike many I don't think skills are worth a great deal of work and effort in game design, as they are mostly just a given in the genre sources. Thus for RPGs I think the main use is to individualize characters.

I do however think they should be dependable in producing the results they should. So while Dark Heresy is a d100 roll under- the skill levels you get in the game are so puny that even masters of them come off acting like the keystone cops.

Amusing to see someone with such a nerd-on for 'reality' who uses one of the worst dice mechanics to simulate 'reality'.