Quote from: GabrielThat's a really common one I saw among quite a few groups.  It's not rules legal, but it's interesting so many people handled it that way.

Hrmm, I'd never heard of that before? Perhaps that is where Cleave came from.

QuoteMark my curiousity about how that one started in the same column along with wondering how a "natural 20" meant double damage.

In my foggy memory I seem to recall that becoming very common due to a Dragon mag article? Being considerably more succinct than the various random crit tables that circled around from mag articles and such.

Quote from: blakkieHrmm, I'd never heard of that before? Perhaps that is where Cleave came from.

I'm pretty sure Cleave came from the sweep rules Gabriel just mentioned. I only learned about sweep after I discovered it's use in the SSI Gold Box games.

Quote from: GabrielThat's a really common one I saw among quite a few groups.  It's not rules legal, but it's interesting so many people handled it that way.

It really sped up combats which was our primary motivation for doing it.

QuoteMark my curiousity about how that one started in the same column along with wondering how a "natural 20" meant double damage.

We need someone like Old Geezer from TPB over here (or is he?). I want to say that the original rule for a natural 20 being a crit originated in the Blackmoor books.

Quote from: GabrielMark my curiousity about how that one started in the same column along with wondering how a "natural 20" meant double damage.

Isn't that the crit rule from Empire of the Petal Throne?

EPT does have the double damage on natural 20 rule. I played with this one a lot - don't even remember where I got it but it seemed to raise the excitement around die rolls somehow.

Quote from: JamesVI only learned about sweep after I discovered it's use in the SSI Gold Box games.

SSI's Gold Box games were a great way of showing any typical AD&D1 player how little they knew about the rules.

Quote from: GabrielSSI's Gold Box games were a great way of showing any typical AD&D1 player how little they knew about the rules.

Since I didn't buy into AD&D until 2nd edition, there were a few things in those games that simply confused me, like level caps for every demihuman class except Rogue.

Quote from: JamesVSince I didn't buy into AD&D until 2nd edition, there were a few things in those games that simply confused me, like level caps for every demihuman class except Rogue.

Well, you know those thieving demihumans. You let one move in and there goes the neighborhood!

In Mekton Z+ another rule I quickly gave up on was fuel.

Fuel is an optional rule in Mekton.  But, if you want to deal with fuel, the rules are there.  The catch is that the default load of fuel adds 10% extra weight to your mech.  So, if you want your mech to be fuel compliant, you have to add 10% extra weight at the end of construction to cover this OPTIONAL rule.

OK, the rule is OPTIONAL, however, you have to do something extra to account for it even if you aren't using the rule.  I'm hoping that I'm not the only one who sees how stupid this little thing is?

So, I just discarded the rule and declared that all mechs had a default load of fuel as part of their original construction without having to add extra tonnage from the ether.  I remember getting into a mild argument on the MZ mailing list because of it.  My point was that MZ was an effects system and a default fuel load really had no game effect.  The opposing view was that fuel was a real thing and should be modeled in the system regardless of whether it served a game function or not.

Like jrients, I never used any encumberance/where is your stuff rules. It just never added the fun it would have substracted by the constant bookkeeping and the "but in reality" arguments.

Likewise, why Gary Gygax is known to be able to describe the form and contents of a room exactly in a few short sentences, I could never do it right.

Quote from: GabrielFuel is an optional rule in Mekton.  But, if you want to deal with fuel, the rules are there.  The catch is that the default load of fuel adds 10% extra weight to your mech.  So, if you want your mech to be fuel compliant, you have to add 10% extra weight at the end of construction to cover this OPTIONAL rule.

OK, the rule is OPTIONAL, however, you have to do something extra to account for it even if you aren't using the rule. I'm hoping that I'm not the only one who sees how stupid this little thing is?

I agree that it doesn't seem to mesh with the overall system philosophy but it's not as stupid as it seems. I also actually have not seen anywhere that the Fuel rule is optional. EDIT: I found one place, in the design checklist, that states the fuel rules are optional. In the fuel rules themselves there is no indication that they are optional. Considering that propulsion systems add no additional weight, the fuel weight is replacing the Kill value (and subsequent weight increase) of thrusters from Mekton II.

That's why SilCore does it right - each unit has a Deployment Range which is either the kilometers of actual range or (for vehicles that have Space movement or no movement at all) hours of operation. This rarely comes up in tactical combats but is useful for some roleplaying sessions and it does add to the overall value of the vehicle. For space-based units there is a unit of reaction mass called Burn Points. Burn Points, tactically, are very important - if you run out of Burn Points you can no longer make vector changes. Both fuel for deployment range and Burn Points are assumed to be part of the weight of the final design. The equivalent Mekton Zeta solution would be a multiplier system for deployment range and, if needed, and additive system to represent delta-vee during space combat.

Quote from: Wilthe fuel weight is replacing the Kill value (and subsequent weight increase) of thrusters from Mekton II.

Actually, I always saw it as replacing the dead kill value and point cost of the powerplants from M2, which neatly tend to account for 10% of the weight on the old system.

Quote from: GabrielActually, I always saw it as replacing the dead kill value and point cost of the powerplants from M2, which neatly tend to account for 10% of the weight on the old system.

It might more closely approximate that weight, but the purpose of calculating weight for fuel more closely imitates the weight increase from thruster points. MZ+ mecha are already lighter than M2 mecha on average.

More of the same for me, although I would really say very rarely instead of never:

Encumbrance
Food (I have players buy iron rations at chargen; we call them eternal rations)
Training
Weapon vs. Armor type
Weapon speed (in AD&D 1, we used it in AD&D 2)

I don't think I could possibly remember them all.  Probably because I never tended to remember them in the first place.

I tend to be very much a "core mechanic" kinda guy.  Every system has some central mechanics and things that you need to remember and will use all the time, while the rest winds up being a lot of dead weight that largely never comes up and never really hurts the game by it's abscence either.  

I'm reminded of that quote about how Risus isnt' a real RPG because it doesn't have rules for falling damage.  There's a tendency to throw in a lot of stuff and try and cover everything, or at least all this stuff you're just "supposed to have", that is largely a bunch of extra work for something you're never gonna use anyway.

It's interesting to me how many times stuff like falling damage and the like were the first things to people's minds . . .