Jump to content

MonSTeR

Moderators
  • Content Count

    994
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MonSTeR

  1. Well I saw what could be construed as a near-as-dammit D20 CP on sale in my local games store this weekeknd. I think it was called "modern D20" and from a cursory flip through, it was cyberpunk D20. The character classes included one actually called "Techie" then there were "Bodyguards", "Gundslingers" and the like. It was a big professional jobbie, with great full colour artwork etc, so we couldn't compete there. As far as typing goes, I'm never sure of the spare time I get, but I've got a fairly good grasp of the English language including "correct" grammar. As for f
  2. MonSTeR

    Roles

    That's the sort of think I'm on about Thumper I’m going to suggest 5 skills including the special ability for each “Special ability package”/”Archetype” this way it’d no longer be a role. Rockerboys/Charismatic Leadership I don't quite know if Rockerboys would need awareness though to get the charismatic leadership skill. Most Rockers I know are completely self involved I'd substitute awareness for Human Perception in their career skill list, letting them see how to work a crowd, whether the crown needs a ballad or a rocking number or whatever, rather than noticing the fact that
  3. I'm afraid I come down on the side of the "no" You thought BTM was bad, wait till you get a load of a level 42 solo with a +3 magical Uzi I've only really glanced at the D20 system in all truth, but that glance was enough to put me off buying the latest edition of the Star Wars rpg. Yes I know most new roleplayers see nothing wrong with the D20 system, but converting the game to that system is about the LEAST cyberpunk thing that could happen So I say, if we're doing this to make a marketable product that might even make a little money, then yes, we need to go D20. If we'
  4. MonSTeR

    Roles

    Ok, blame this particular can of worms on Thumper Basically I know we've hammered out the roles debate before but for old times sake and the Apo-Stasis project, let's do it again OK where to start? My opinion I guess Well basically I'm in favour of roles. BUT I'm not in favour of having character classes. If you can, I suggest you get a hold of a copy of GURPS Cyberpunk. In the roles section of that book it says what character attributes/skills/whatever are useful for that particular role and gives text decriptions of a lot of different types of the same roles. The same goes
  5. Quote (malek77 @ Nov. 13 2002,06:55) I've been scribbling a bit at home and... It seems the Neo-50's Swedish minimalist design I was steeped in while training is taking over. This means an ultra-clean schmick look, very corporate and stylish...but insufficiently punky. I shall be rectifying this with pipes and wires and things dangling out of its overtidy underside... Now. What I want you to do... Links with the appropriate style - if you've seen a webpage that correctly expressed the philosophy as you see it, give us a link...ie: Death Metal pages, Goth pages, Latex Fetish anythin
  6. Quote (psychophipps @ Nov. 06 2002,00:33) Good points acrossed the board. The issue that I have is that in CP 2020, how often do you run into people without armor? The answer to that kids is, "Pretty much never." Your hulk isn't gonna be out doing an op where he's gonna run into a 7.62mm NATO, which isn't even used in ARs anymore, wearing his skiddies. Armed with this knowledge, we take a 5.56mm NATO round at 17.5 points of damage with an average roll. He takes this wound in the chest and hits the "Critical" wound level if he was in his skiddies. Now, the 5.56mm NATO round has a 98% one
  7. Lets look at why BTM doesn’t play such a big part when things really matter, starting with executions. I’ve got my newest copy of the rulebook in the office here with me, so your page numbers might be a little off, as this is the one with the new artwork and some of the rules clarifications. On p105, in the “Making Attacks” section under “Range Definitions” it’s got point blank as “Point Blank: The weapon is very close to, or in actual physical contact with the target. It will almost always hit, doing maximum damage” A couple of pages earlier on p103, the rule for “Special
  8. Quote (psychophipps @ Nov. 04 2002,23:41) Now let's look at the Hulk here. He takes that same 10 from above for a total Stun save of -3, or 13 or less, on a 1d10. Needless to say, I think he has this covered fairly well even without BTM, don't you? It handles an individual hit in a fairly ok fashion, it's ok, but not particularly valid in a game context. Because a single shot with an average roll from a .38 special is just ONE of the attacks that can be made. Without BTM it gets to the point where a low level martial artist (say +2) of average body type (no damage bonus) can break
  9. Exactly and if the Hulk takes the same hit with no BTM rules he's toast too!!! even if he has Body 16 ?!?!?! So there needs to be something to make it more realistic, a decent head shot should still kill anyone much short of a FBC, but allow the bigger tougher guys to take a couple of "flesh wounds" But not 10 rounds of 7.62mm straight in the gut. I think BTM does this job nicely.
  10. Personally I think that they got it pretty much right the first time, If BTM is to go, then the WHOLE damage/hit points system needs a rewrite to stop Aunt May being just as tough as The Hulk. If it stays, then ok, the system works. If we add a strength stat fine, but I've always thought that that was what the "strength feat" skill was for.
  11. I think that the first idea about reducing cyberlimb power is essential The biggest and most interesting thing I'm gettign especially from Malek, is that "Nano" will be god's gift to everything and everyone. Personally I think the extent of it's use is the most important thing to work on. If there's enough nano to rebuild someone's eyes, then is nanotech sufficiently advanced to rebuilt the nervous system, or the brain and so on. And to directly address Malek's part about cyberlinks, yes you'd need just one port for it, but the various co-processors, that are stated in the cp2
  12. I vote yes, it's necessary in a system where ALL characters have 40 "hit points". Do I use it? Bet your ass I do. Can it be unblancing? Yes, but only when abused rather than used. I think that's a GM/character creation.power level issue rather than a rules issue Do I give a rat's ass? Yes, there has to be someway to indicate the physical damage capacities that vary between individuals, whether thats in the form of hit points, damage resistance rolls or BTM.
  13. Quote (Julio Cezar @ Oct. 29 2002,15:49) Thanks Phipps for answering my question. Now, please, bear with me as I take a closer look at these " P H I P P S R U L E S ! " (© Pat Riley) Of course, armors ARE definitely vulnerable with these rules. If a vest is rated to "stop cal. X bullets", it means it can really stop only ONE cal. X bullet in a given location. A second hit would inflict damage to the wearer. (As you can guess, increasing the number of armor locations significally increases armor durability. We already use two locations for torso - upper and lower - in my games.)
  14. I had always thought that with the desktop publishing stuff that's available today the only choice would be to go for an actual book... as in rule"book". Style should easy to print without pushing up the price, simple black words on white paper, the way RPGs have always been. Bright colours on darker backgrounds are very hard to print and very expensive on ink. Even if you have an online version, printing it all out in full colour means that you need more ink than the game is worth. Fonts should again be easy to read and non-confusing in style. "Style over substance" is great un
  15. Ok I definately agree with the impossibilities of class 4 speedos too
  16. Quote This is actually an interesting situation. You see, i've read all of Gibon's stuff, a bunch of Williams, Sterling, etc. and I have yet to see a single instance of "Style over Substance". I've seen plenty of "Style = Substance" and the like, but i've never seen the quote that everyone just loves to toss around. I can't help but wonder where it came from in the first place, Mark(psycho)Phipps( HAHAHA! ) Re-read the opening passage of Stephenson's "Snowcrash" it's a great example of style over substance. I'm not sure where the exact quote comes from either actually ?!?!? The
  17. I'm always very tempted to simply say "here you go" with the skills and keep them all at the same regular IP cost and that rather than try to make the skills more expensive make the difficulty numbers harder for hard tasks, so that only those with a higher skill level can accomplish them, make "brain surgery" a difficulty 25 or so task for med-tech rather than making med-tech harder to learn and having the task be a difficulty 20 roll. I'm of the opinion that if you make skills like SMG harder to acquire it makes them more desirable and newbie players will still make their characters hav
  18. Quote (psychophipps @ Oct. 21 2002,20:16) What "civilian" armors? They are exactly the same thing wether you buy them from a gun shop or direct from the factory as a military/police acquisition. This is why you will never see a kevlar duster or other limited-use armor being mass-produced because setting up a whole assembly line from scratch to make it for that very limited audience would be a waste of time. Sure places will offer them, but each job will basically be a custom one. For the "stylish corporate protection" I think you'd see what you see now. An existing peice of clothing with
  19. Quote (psychophipps @ Oct. 20 2002,21:14) Quote But then we wouldn't NEED that if the armours were just given the die code, and the "real" armours could show where abouts the ficticious (arachnisilk italian suits etc) fell in comparison. Actually, these codes won't be going anywhere soon. They're so standardized and ingrained into the parlance and acquisitions structures of the various security/military structures that they really can't disappear at this point. They furthermore give an easy reference to allow people to match the level of protection they need to the threat level they
  20. So far this is getting no-where. Some folks think BTM is a great idea, some don't. The only way forward on this is something like to simply state that some folks ignore it as they think ignoring it adds realism and some folks include it as they feel including it adds realism.
  21. This is pretty much the old West End Games' Star Wars system, where the armour was rated in the exact same way as the weapons' damage codes. It worked there pretty well so... The only thing I wonder is the class system for the armour ratings. At the moment the armours are all "real" armour classes but I'm just wondering how "future" advancements will cope and whether they'll fit into neat categories like this when they're for civil rather than military/law enforcement usage. But then we wouldn't NEED that if the armours were just given the die code, and the "real" armours could show
  22. As far as I see it, this is geared towards reducing a munchkin problem rather than aiding the game overall. In short I think you've got the skills grouped according to their percieved usefulness in games rather than perhaps the difficulties involved with learning the skills. I've long had issues with the difficulties involved with folks saying one skill is more difficlt to learn/master than another. Is biology or pharmaceuticals really simpler than Medtech? Is Melee really easier to learn than any other martial art? Or howabout "expert," surely it shouldn't only be an "average" task to b
  23. Quote (psychophipps @ Oct. 18 2002,00:04) Quote On this matter (and keeping nearer the existing damage system) I'm of the opinion that some bonus for damage should be given for a very successful "to hit" roll. Another way to reflect the consistency of ballistics but still keep things random would be to average all the dice but one d6 or d10. Example: A 5.56mm round does 5d6. The average roll on a d6 is 3.5 so you'd get a damage of 4 * 3.5 or 14+d6. A 9mm round does 2d6+1 for 3.5(4) + 1 or 5+d6. Just round things nearest for odd numbers and you're good to go. This does, however,
  24. Quote (psychophipps @ Oct. 17 2002,21:37) Or we can accept the simple fact that ballistics are pretty consistent and have a set damage with a random result based on the level of success and the relative size/physiology of the target. If a shooter makes the most amazing roll ever, it's pretty damn annoying to roll that 2 + 3 result (not that this has ever happened to me a lot, of course... ). That's something I'll agree with. Getting a roll of 40 on your "to hit roll" and a roll of "5" for your damage, starts at annoying then turns into weird as you actually realise the implications of each
  25. Quote (malek77 @ Oct. 17 2002,00:29) Generally - a bullet is going to put the same sized hole in our RMC or Gertie. I don't really think it cares that much about its target... Yes the bullet makes the same sized hole. That's equated to the damage stat mechanic attributed to the bullet. BUT it's not making that same sized hole in a same sized target. Nor a target made of exactly the same substance. If Granny has got frail little arms with a 6 inch circumference, that means that her arms are only 2" across. If the RMC has biceps with a 20" circumference, then they're roughly 7" acros
×
×
  • Create New...