[Rq-rules] Re: Background Experience

[alan richards]

>
> From: Lev Lafayette lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au
>
> > 2. (Int+Int+Pow) points per year instead of 30.
> > It doesn't float my boat.
> > For a start 'average human' Int in RQIII is 13 so
> > your 'average' human
> > character would have 36 points per year not 30. So
> > only use this if you want
> > to inflate the number of skill points received
> > (which is not necessarily a
> > bad thing).
> > Secondly it seems clunky to me.
>
> How is it clunky? It just means that they have a
> variable number of skill points to spend rather than a
> fixed amount.
>
> Not everyone learns at the same rate and it's probably
> largely due to intelligence and partially due to
> motivation (POW).



Can we put this down as personal preference? I add enough complications
anyway, without PERSONALLY wanting to add this step. But Cthulhu has had
background skill points based on EDU and a personal interest pool based on
INT for a couple of decades and seems to have survived nicely.


> > 3. 1:1 basis to 50%, 1:2 basis to 75%, 1:3 basis to
> > 90% and 1:4 basis from
> > then on.
> > Blurgh, Yuck. I hate it. I must be missing something
> > here coz a rule like
> > this seems to find its way into most people's House
> > Rules for RQIII. I
> > really cannot be bothered with double-entry book
> > keeping. That being said
> > your version seems to be as good as any other.
>
> I've encountered versions which are harder ;-)


Indeed, like I say yours is as good as anything else I have seen. And plenty
of people seem to houserule in this way. Its just not for me.


And I must say that I'm thoroughly charmed by the fact
that one can still reasonably call RQ III "current"
without sounding silly after 22 years!


With my optimist's hat on this is a great compliment to the original
authors. With my pessimist's hat on 18 months ago I was expecting all this
to be academic when MRQ was going to sweep all before it.



> All the best,


And to you




> From: Simon Phipp <soltakss at yahoo.com>
>
> Alan Richards:
> > 1. I am a big fan of starting background experience at age 10 not 15.
> And
> > likewise not inflating cultural skills. (Query: In canon RQIII I think
> that
> > only Weapon Skills have a cultural base all others are common to all
> members
> > of a species?) I usually insist that the 5 Years between 10 and 15 are
> spent
> > in a randomly rolled background and the 'standard' 2d6* years may be
> spent
> > in a background (or backgrounds) of the player's choice.
>
> Which makes sense as having adults begin at 15 or 16 is a modern idea.
> Children were apprenticed out in the Middle Ages at an early age and taught
> a profession. In the past, when life expectancy was very low, people mated
> in their very early teens when puberty started, which is when they
> effectively became adults.
>
> I'm not so sure about being in a randomly rolled profession. That might be
> OK if you are using the "give me any character and I'll play it" mode, but
> doesn't really fit the "my character has a detailed backstory" mode.



The old problem of
'I want to play a Thief'
'Sorry sunshine the dice say that you're a Merchant'

The Cannon RQIII rules say roll for background. I want to add the
possibility that players can choose what their characters do after
childhood. There's nothing to stop someone from allowing players to choose
their character's background and also what they do after childhood.



> From: Peter Brink <peter.brink at brinkdata.se>In my next game I will mix the
> game systems of Stormbringer 5, RQ II and
> III (in effect it will be like the new DBRP). I've decided to use a
> system where the characters start their adult life as 10 year olds and
> begin play as 20-22 year old. The player may choose up to three
> different career paths for their characters. For example a character may
> have started her adult life as a beggar, later she became a thief and
> finally she joined a band of brigands (mercenaries). Each profession
> offers 8 skills and the player may divide 350 percentiles among the
> skills offered by the profession(s) chosen.



Much like Peter has just suggested!




> It's a simple and neat system that offers the player a reasonable amount
> of flexibility yet it forces him to keep himself within the bounds of
> the profession(s) chosen.



Certainly this option provides the most flexibility of any of the options
floated here. And deals with the comedy low skill chances endemic to Canon
RQIII characters (Aldryami and Mostali created with Elder Secrets excepted).
Do you still impose the cap of 75% for skills with a check box and 100% for
those without?



Al
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070115/fe31b14e/attachment-0001.html