|
Post by Mike on Apr 27, 2011 20:28:45 GMT -6
The Cook/Marsh Expert Set suggests a scale of 6 miles per hex (p. X19). I've never had a problem with it. But the 5 mile hex comes straight from OD&D. Well that answers that then! I'll have to get out OD&D and check it out again. Many thanks
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 27, 2011 3:15:49 GMT -6
Just about every wilderness map I look at these days has a scale of 5 miles per hex.
Why so?
Movement rates tend to be divisible by 3 (3, 6, 9, 12) which makes the 5-mile hex redundant for gauging movement.
I have a radical proposal... The 6-mile hex!
Who's with me?
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 26, 2011 20:21:47 GMT -6
This is brilliant stuff and free... Gotta love OSR.
I'm adopting this baby as my own.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 26, 2011 6:54:37 GMT -6
When I'm playing T&T and my own system I award XP for time spent in the session; each hour of play is worth 'x' points.
I do like the idea of knocking a few zeros off the XP scale though, as suggested by Waysoftheearth and as put into practice by Simon in his Woodland Warriors series.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 25, 2011 1:32:10 GMT -6
Thanks heaps. I'm very happy with there being lots of rule sets out there. The more the merrier I say! However, I do like them to be compatible and interchangeable. So I'm fine with fighters getting d6+2 or d8 hp per level. But d12 would phase me.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 24, 2011 10:33:13 GMT -6
Um... What's DCC?
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 24, 2011 9:12:53 GMT -6
Thanks Fox. The idea was just to go with the ST for first level spells and the MU would have to find more powerful spells themselves.
I think I'm going to go with 4 random spells at first level with the proviso that one must be Read Magic. If that spell doesn't come up in the random 4, the player gets to choose which one to swap for Read Magic.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 23, 2011 8:32:34 GMT -6
When using this system, do you use the Base To Hit Bonus from the rule book or something else? Cheers I use number of Hit Dice instead. HD are universal for PCs and monsters, and are front and center in every D&D edition/clone/variant I've seen. If you have a high level game, you might want to limit it to HD attained up to (and including) level 9. Beyond that point magic-users start catching up to your fighters in terms of HD. For me, I can only recall one PC who made it past level 9 in 25+ years of gaming, so it isn't an issue. Incidentally, this method easily allows for injuries to be debilitating by (temporarily?) striking off HD (along with hit points). FWIW -- my "smoothed" HD progression for PCs is at the bottom of my original post here . Enjoy Love it! Have downloaded the very nice PDF. I played in a 3E game which lasted about 2 years and all the characters made it to Level 9 but getting further seemed a little unlikely. Plus, the GM was rather generous.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 23, 2011 3:46:05 GMT -6
I use the tables. I'm ok with AAC, but prefer DAC. So why do you go with DAC and tables? Does it not slow down proceedings? I used this al the time back in the day but I can't make up my mind whether I want to go back to it. Target 20 is calling me...
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 23, 2011 3:44:17 GMT -6
I use descending AC with a no tables target 20 system. If 1d20 + your mods + target's AC is 20 or more, it's a hit. I don't tell the players the target's AC. They roll, add their mods and tell the what they've got. I'll tell them if it's enough or not. It works great, and never stopping to consult attack matrices is a big time saver at the table. When using this system, do you use the Base To Hit Bonus from the rule book or something else? Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 23, 2011 2:33:19 GMT -6
I'm definitely leaning towards Target 20 at this stage.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 22, 2011 20:29:00 GMT -6
So... Which combat mechanic?
Ascending AC doesn't require the use of a table; Target 20 keeps the numbers small but both force the referee to reveal the AC of the opponent, which I don't always like to do.
Descending AC has more of an old school feel and the ref can keep quiet about the enemy AC but you do need to refer to a table. 15 or so years ago I had no issues with the table, today it's seems unnecessarily slow.
Do you use one of these or something else?
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 22, 2011 20:18:58 GMT -6
Thanks for the Trade Out examples folks - that now makes perfect sense. Much appreciated.
As for the MU spells, the only comment in the rules is that the MU starts with a spell book that 'may not' contain all of the listed spells (or something similar).
In Simon's excellent Woodland Warriors, MUs make a Lore roll for each first level spell to see if it's in the book... I might do similar with a Saving Throw for each spell?
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 22, 2011 9:29:06 GMT -6
Hey, people keep reading but no one's responding...sob...
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 22, 2011 2:55:17 GMT -6
Had a play-test on Wednesday. Will post on that shortly.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 21, 2011 20:49:34 GMT -6
Hi folks,
I wonder if I could request a little help on two fronts?
1. Magic-user spells books - how many spells does a first-level MU begin with?
2. I'm not sure I understand how 'trading out' a treasure really works. Would some kind soul offer an example please? If I was to place a treasure of 6,723 GP, how would I 'trade out' to generate gems and magic items?
Many thanks in advance.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 21, 2011 20:29:25 GMT -6
I've now picked up Knockspell #2 (thanks for the tip). It's so good I'll have to grab the others too!
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 18, 2011 23:50:53 GMT -6
It's a beautiful piece of work Simon. Love the colour map.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 17, 2011 2:38:08 GMT -6
Hi folks,
I'm looking for a Core or WB thief/rogue type character that I can bolt on to my game.
Can you point me in the right direction?
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 16, 2011 0:52:48 GMT -6
Hurray. Bring on those furry fighters!
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 2, 2011 8:48:36 GMT -6
That Ghoul-Rat is the best so far. Awesome!
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 1, 2011 18:35:32 GMT -6
I've found something I really liked, elegant and simple.
Initiative is base on the DEX scores of combatants - nothing new there and entries in the Beasts section include average DEX ratings for all critters. The bit I like is that initiative ties are settled by class; Warriors first, then Scouts, Friars and Wizards. excellent.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 30, 2011 7:02:36 GMT -6
Hey, where can I get the latest draft (1.04)? I only have 1.02 which is brilliant!
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 29, 2011 7:54:55 GMT -6
Just received my print copy of the game... Soooooo sweeeeet.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 13, 2011 3:41:57 GMT -6
Hugely impressed!
Any chance of a printer-friendly version?
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 13, 2011 3:26:36 GMT -6
OK, here is my very amateurish first crack at a character sheet. Are you kidding? It's a beautiful work of art! Thank you so much. Just wait until I find my +1 Exalting Sword...
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 9, 2011 3:58:12 GMT -6
At first glance it looks choc-full of old school sci-fi goodness!
|
|
|
Firefly
Feb 26, 2011 12:48:04 GMT -6
Post by Mike on Feb 26, 2011 12:48:04 GMT -6
The Firefly team are very much a bunch of 'Traveller' characters. But I wouldn't use Traveller to represent the game world, I'd probably go for Stars Without Number (all the good things about Traveller and none of the ordinary).
I wouldn't use the Serenity RPG. I find the Cortex system to by a little on the lame side and the setting specific rules (such as space ships and trade) are broken, plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 15, 2011 11:58:00 GMT -6
Thanks for the comments about trading - I did find that section (not right away though, it seems that every time I open the book I find another gem, or three).
At first blush it seemed too cursory, given the detail lavished on every other aspect of the game (and of course, the sandbox nature of the default play style) but I can cope until another archive surfaces (maybe)... ;D
Hey, any chance of a dedicated forum at your site or even here?
I know I keep repeating myself but... this game is incredible!
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 11, 2011 20:16:04 GMT -6
Hey, I've just realised that it feels like there's just one tiny thing missing from SWN... Trading rules. There's a nice page explaining starship expenses but no details on making cash. Any chance of seeing an addendum in the near future?
|
|