Lepus wrote:
Miihkali wrote:

While the basic idea is nice I don't really like the idea of rolling multiple dice and choosing best or worst. It is just not... elegant.
Having multiple dice rolled and one choosed also makes it difficult to calculate the probabilities.
Well, I don't really like having multiple dice rolls. Rolling just one dice is much simpler. Even rolling several dice and totaling them is better than choosing the best or worst from several rolls. And having multiple different dice is always cool.

Elegance is entirely subjective...

As for complexity, I linked a perfect tool for the job above.

And in fact, choosing the best or worst n out of a number of dice yields the most beautiful probability curve. Essentially you can adjust the mean deviation and expected value while maintaining postivie probability across the entire setof values.

Not to mention that choosing the largest or smallest takes zero time and has almost zero chance of error, while totaling is both time-consuming and error-prone.

Elegance is subjective, but I perceive it as the lowest needed amount of rules, exceptions, and rolls. It is simple to check the amount of dice from your sheet and then roll and pick the lowest or highest result... But it is even simplier to check which die to use and roll just once.

As for the probability machine you linked above, yes, it is easy to use, but I personally want to be able to comprehend probabilities inside my head instead of checking them from a table or something like that.

JimLotFP wrote:

* Constitution determines what die you use for rolling hit points, no matter what your class. Fighters roll twice and keep the highest, Magic-Users roll twice and keep the lowest, Dwarfs roll one die higher and roll three times and keep the highest, that sort of thing.

While the basic idea is nice I don't really like the idea of rolling multiple dice and choosing best or worst. It is just not... elegant. Also, this idea departs from the basic system in which the only thing you need to know about your character are stat modifiers and character class. Instead, you need to check also his Constitition die. If I'd go with this system I'd probably go with just four different dice: 1d4 (negative Constitution modifier), 1d6 (no Constitution modifier), and 1d8 (positive Constitution modifier). Magic-User would roll one die smaller, Fighter one die higher, and Dwarf two dice higher (so a Dwarf with positive Constitution modifier would roll 1d12).

Also, Magic-Users will have lower hit points than specialists even without specific penalties, as their level progress is slower. Eliminating Constitution modifiers plays in favour of weak characters as even they will get at least 1 HP per level.

Having multiple dice rolled and one choosed also makes it difficult to calculate the probabilities.

JimLotFP wrote:

* Magic saving throws modified by Charisma. It's the force of personality, not intelligence, that powers this stuff!

I like this idea, though it leaves Intelligence rather useless. (At least in our games Charisma has become one of the most important stats, as you will need to hire retainers if you want to survive.)

JimLotFP wrote:

* Shields should give bonuses to parrying. Also allow a single parry in a round without sacrificing your own attack. (as would a second weapon, but there'd be no bonus to the parry) Shields could also parry non-firearm missile fire. (Fighters get 2x the bonus to parrying that other classes do.)

So that you could always choose to gain AC bonus against one attack per round? But wouldn't that make one-on-one combat quite a bit longer? Also, this would greatly harm characters who are facing multiple enemies at once, which means that flashy heroic deeds would be much more uncommon. Personally I like the way in which you just choose your combat style for one round and that's it. Elegant and simple, but still gives some tactical depth.

JimLotFP wrote:

* Encumbrance should affect initiative in some way. Different encumbrance levels using difference dice is one option but I fear might complicate things. "for every encumbrance dot roll an extra die for initiative, use the lowest of the bunch" might work?

I like the idea of having different dice. Having multiple penalty dice, not so much. ENC 0 -> 1d12; ENC 1 -> 1d10, ENC 2 -> 1d8, ENC 3 -> 1d6, ENC 4 -> 1d4, overencumbered -> 1d2. These could be printed in the character sheet along with other encumbrance notes. Simple, fast, and having plenty of dice of different size and shape is always a plus. smile

JimLotFP wrote:

* Not original, but all weapon damage is d8, with the "roll twice, take the lowest/highest" for certain kinds of weapons.

Well, I don't really like having multiple dice rolls. Rolling just one dice is much simpler. Even rolling several dice and totaling them is better than choosing the best or worst from several rolls. And having multiple different dice is always cool.

JimLotFP wrote:

* Also thinking that by expanding the skill list a bit, we could give Fighters and Magic-Users some skill points to play with while also giving Specialists more points so it's still their thing without maxing the existing skills up faster. Very unsure about this one because it makes NPC statting more complicated and I want to avoid that.

I like the way in which every character class is specialized. That makes every character in the group important. And it is elegant, as are many things in LotFP. Giving skill points to Fighters and Magic-Users would leave Specialist more or less useless.

JimLotFP wrote:

* Witch-Hunter: Because thinking of the accompanying illustrations the Fighter has to go to Alice because she's the murderous one. The Flame Princess was originally designated as a Specialist but that doesn't seem right since she was conceived as a Solomon Kane type character. So there's the Witch-Hunter, with the concept being a kinda fightey character whose main thing is being magic-resistant.

This sounds great! What would that mean, specifically? Good saving throws, at least, but what else? Some kind of counter-magic skills that improve that every level? Something like "Magic-User that tries to cast a spell on Witch-Hunter will take one d6 of damage per Witch-Hunter's level"?

JimLotFP wrote:

* Conquistador, basically the explorer-type. ("Explorer" itself being dishwater-dull as a name - legacy naming is useful because everyone recognizes it and little explanation is needed, but if you're adding something, don't let it fade into the background... Buccaneer might work?). Basically a fightey outdoorsey type, or a non-magical Ranger type ("Ranger" as a name being really being the wrong tone for the game).

Sounds good.

JimLotFP wrote:
CironeAE wrote:

Have you thought about moving demi-humans to the appendix and then using the extra space in the core rules section for a few of these new classes?

Not only thought about but long ago decided: Demi-humans and Clerics will go in the appendix, firearms to the main portion of the book, and Cleric spells folded into the MU spell lists.

Would there be lawful Magic-Users? Or do you have to be chaotic in order to heal someone? Will there be (non-magical) first-aid if clerics are eliminated?

First, sorry for necroposting. Then to the point. I like all those demi-human classes. There's really nothing to customise within your class, so having more classes gives more variety.

I like the idea of dwarfs being mercenaries. In a world where monster-infested treasure dungeons exist it is logical to have a group of specialised adventurers.

Don't hobbits add an additional smallness point to theirAC? Take that away with the restriction on big weapons, and you got a ranger/wildman. Good saving throws would represent their sharp instincts and extreme resilience.

Elfs could be replaced by a noble class. Elf starts more powerful and advances slowly, which sounds very much like an arrogant but well-educated noble to me. With some tweaking, lawful nobles using cleric spells could be included as well.

If you play with the new firearms rules, chainmail is no more available, while you still may buy AC in pieces. Buffcoat +1, breastplate +2, tassets +1, and helmet +1. This totals to five EC points -> 1 Encumbrance, as well as +5 AC, if I remember correctly. However, if you find chainmail from a dungeon or import it from a more backward land, I don't see any reason why you could not wear a chainmail, as well as a buffcoat, tassets, and a helmet. This would total +7 to your AC, and the price would be less than 200 sp.

Now, a plate armour costs 1,500 (or 1,000, if you buy it from a society which uses no firearms) and gives +6 to AC. So it is way more expensive (though much more cooler). Perhaps you combine it with a helmet and a buffcoat (depending on the nature of the plate armour), which would give nice +8 to your AC. Anyway, chainmail / extra armour combination is much more cost-effective, especially if you take the ENC to consideration. I don't really think this is a problem, especially as firearms ignore armour, but I still wanted to ask if anyone else has encountered this issue.

Another question: plate armour gives +2 ENC, while chainmail gives just +1. While I understand this from the viewpoint of the game balance, this is not really historical. Chainmail is both heavier and more clumsy than a suit of plates. The main reason not to use a plate armour is the fact that it is extremely expensive. It is also more difficult to maintain in a good condition, but I think that is out of the scope of the game. Again, this is not a problem, but I'd like to hear what you think about it. Personally, I would probably revert the ENC of chainmail and plate armour, as I'm a history fanatic. wink On the other hand, we have been playing LOTFP for more than two years, and no player character has yet saved enough money to buy a plate armour! big_smile

Personally, I think Elf's high experience requirements begin to stack rather early on. In general I'd say Elf and Magic-User have about the same amount of hit points (Elf gets more when levelling up, but Magic-User levels up more often). What really makes difference is the fact Elf can fight and cast at the same time. If I remember correctly, Magic-User must have his both hands free when casting a spell, and must not have too much encumbrance. Elf can wear a plate mail and a longsword, and still strike the enemy with a Magic Missile. On the other hand, Elf doesn't gain additional attack bonus and HP progression is miserable for a fighter. So Elf begins the game very powerful, but aside from new spells there is not much to gain.

Personally, I would give Elves +1 to their Charisma modifier, but that might have more to do with the fact that Elf is my favourite class than with reality or game balance.


(3 replies, posted in LotFP Gaming Forum)

If you want to make barbarian class to favour going without armour, you may give barbarian character +1 to AC and melee AB per encumbrance point unused. So a character with 4 ENC would have base AC 12 and base AB 1, while a barbarian with 0 ENC would have base AC 16 and base AB 5. Just an idea. The downside of the system is that barbarian begins play rather powerful, but there's really nothing to gain with experience, except HP.


(7 replies, posted in LotFP Gaming Forum)

Our games have been rather lethal. We have been playing LOTFP for around two years now, usually thrice a month, and I have lost four characters. Two of them died, one started to turn into a naga and committed suicide, and one was trapped in a pocket dimension. I think I played for almost a year with the one who survived longest. On the other hand, one of my friends has only lost one character and that was mostly because the campaign was nearing its end and he decided to die with a style. So your gaming style matters a lot. I'm rather quick-tempered, so I just can't sit and watch the others do the job. On the other hand my friend is very patient guy and never as reckless as I am.

Also, our gaming style doesn't favour quick gaining of levels. Our GM is very stingy with treasure and I think we have never had a fourth-level character. Also we often spend several sessions with just role-playing out discussions, politics, and such. As you don't gain experience from killing, but from looting, HP is much more important than fighting skills, in my opinion. Monsters tend to be very tough and it's just better to survive and run. With the treasure, naturally. And that's why you need HP.

Also, what I have learned is that you definitely need to hire retainers. When you get the money, Charisma becomes perhaps the single most crucial stat. Gaining loyal NPC friends is extremely important.


(3 replies, posted in LotFP Gaming Forum)

We have allowed stacking of 20 arrows in the quiver, and no player character has ever had more than that...

As for rations, torches, and such, each weighs one point of ENC and that has worked well enough for us. It sometimes makes logistics very difficult in dungeon or wilderness, but on the other hand that's part of the game's charm.


(216 replies, posted in LotFP Gaming Forum)

Hi, I'm 21 years old and I live in Turku, Finland, with my wife, synthesisers, and records. I'm interested in history, music, films, and 20's & 30's pulp literature.

I don't remember when I first role-played, but I was quite interested in such games from about 10-year-old. I had troubles with finding a group, though, so my fascination was manifested mostly through reading magazines and rule-books. That sounds really lone and it truly was. Anyway, I have been gaming actively for several years now, mostly Call of Cthulhu but some others as well. I'm currently active in two groups. The another one has been dedicated for CoC, but as we formed the other we --after hacking through couple of Conan-inspired BRP adventures-- decided to play something 'old school'.

LotFP proved to be the most interesting of these systems and now we have played it for almost a year. I really like the style and spirit of the game. Clearly separated character classes is a great idea, each has its own specialty and doesn't interfere with the others. Thus all types of characters are needed. Still 'level inflation' is avoided: even though the PCs become able to stand more damage etc. failure is always equally likely. The characters simply can survive from increasing number of failures before they are defeated. Thus there's no need to constantly increase the power level of 'regular' enemies and thus nullify the character improvement.


(2 replies, posted in LotFP Gaming Forum)

Giordanisti: I like your idea. Even though Goblins may not fit every setting as they seem slightly 'otherwordly' when compared to other demi-human races of LotFP, they seem to be very sympathetic little people. The idea of water-allergy is interesting! As LotFP has a great encumbrance system, we have actually started to track our stuff and thus water and food have became valuable resources when roaming wastelands or dungeons. The ability to absorb water from air could prove to be vital!

I wrote a description about these 'Desert-Goblins' in the style of the rule book; you can see it here. Tell me what you think about it. There may be some grammar mistakes as English is not my native tongue. If you find one, please tell me. I modified your stats slightly. To balance it out, I made their minimum HP 5. I may change that... Another possibility is to give them extra money, given they are traders. Perhaps 4d6 x 10 or something like that, but that may be too much micromanagement.