Stormbringer Redux #26 - Stormbringer Monster Strengths

I find how BRP does monster stats interesting because it is just a bunch of pioneering game designers guestimating or eyeballing what they think the numbers should be. This creates some wonky stats in early edition games, but has mostly been codified in later games.

BRP's massive statblocks have always been a big draw. Whereas OD&D stats started with the minimum of data needed for combat (AR, HD & HP, Attacks, MOV, XP and special abilities), BRP gives you the whole kit and kaboodle. On the plus side, it means you can roll up a pet or PC morphed into a beast or monster right away. On the down side, you have to roll up or calculate average stats before using any encounter, and stat blocks are always massive.

So today I'd like to compare monster stat strengths to see if they make sense.

Let us begin!

ANIMAL STATS COMPARISON

First, let's lay out ALL the animal & monster stats in the 1E book:
(NB This was mind numbing work, so if you see any mistakes tell me)

STR

1D10 Vipers

2D4+ Hawks (+1)

2D6+ Eagles (+1), Vultures (+1), Dogs (+3), Wolves (+6), Small Crocs (+18)

2D8+4 Dogs of the Dharzi

3D6 HUMANS

3D6+ Tiger (+12), Panther (+6), Constrictors (+12), Horse (+18), Large Crocs (+30)

3D8 Clakar

4D6+ Forest Bears (+6), Baboons (+6), Great Black Apes (+12), Cave Bears (+18), Mastodon (+36)

4D8+8 Creatures of Matik, Olab

5D8 Oonai

6D6 Sharks

8D8 Mist Giants

12D8 Dragon

CON

1D6+ Large Crocs (+12)

2D6 Hawks, Vipers

2D6+ Small Crocs (+6), Sharks (+6), Horse (+6) 

3D6 HUMANS, Baboons, Eagles, Vultures, Dogs

3D6+ Panther (+3), Wolves (+3), Mule (+3), Great Black Apes (+6), Forest Bears (+6),  Cave Bears (+6), Tiger (+6), Mastodon (+6), Constrictors  (+6)

3D8 Clakar, Dogs of the Dharzi

5D8 Oonai

6D8 Dragon, Olab

6D8+8 Creatures of Matik

8D8 Mist Giants

SIZ

1D10 Vipers

1D6+ Hawks (+3), Eagles (+6)

1D8+4 Dogs of the Dharzi

2D6 Vultures

2D6+ Great Black Apes (+12), Panther (+6), Dogs (+1)

2D8+4 Olab

3D6 HUMANS, Baboons, Wolves

3D6+ Forest Bears (+6), Tiger (+6), Small Crocs (+6), Large Crocs (+12), Cave Bears (+18)

3D8 Clakar

4D6+ Mule (+6), Horse (+12), War Horse (+25), Mastodon (+36)

4D8+4 Oonai

5D6 Constrictors

5D6+ Sharks (+6)

20D8 Dragon

18 Creatures of Matik, Mist Giants (Is this a typo?)

INT

1D4 Hawks, Vultures, Small Crocs, Large Crocs, Sharks, Vipers

1D6 Forest Bears, Cave Bears, Tiger, Panther, Eagles, Wolves, Dogs, Mastodon, Horse, Mule

1D6+ Great Black Apes (+1), Baboons (+1), War Horse (+3)

1D8 Dogs of the Dharzi

2D6 Constrictors

2D8 Clakar, Oonai

2D8+2 Olab

3D6 HUMANS

4D8 Dragon

7 Mist Giants (why not 2D6?)

POW

1D6 Small Crocs, Vipers, Horse

1D6+ Hawks (+3), Vultures (+3), Eagles (+6)

1D8 Creatures of Matik

2D6 Great Black Apes, Baboons, Forest Bears, Cave Bears, Panther, Wolves, Dogs, Sharks, Constrictors

2D8+4 Oonai

3D6 HUMANS, Tiger, Large Crocs, Mastodon

3D8 Clakar, Dogs of the Dharzi, Olab

4D8 Dragon

4D8+4 Creatures of Matik

5D8 Mist Giants

DEX

2D6 Baboons, Vultures, Mastodon

2D10 Vipers

2D6+ Dogs (+1), Small Crocs (+3), Large Crocs (+3), Wolves (+6), Constrictors  (+6), Eagles (+9), Panther (+12), Hawks (+12)

3D6 HUMANS, Sharks, Horse

3D6+ Forest Bears (+3), Great Black Apes (+6), Cave Bears (+6), Tiger (+6)

3D8 Dragon, Oonai, Creatures of Matik, Olab

4D8 Clakar, Mist Giants

Same as CON (3D8) Dogs of the Dharzi

CHA

1D8+2 Olab

3D6 HUMANS

ARMOR

1 Baboons, Panther, Eagles, Vultures, Horse

2 Great Black Apes, Tiger

3 Sharks (CON/3)

4 Cave Bears

5 Small Crocs

6 Mastodon

10 Large Crocs, Dragon, Creatures of Matik

Variable - Oonai

Immune to normal weapons (POW vs POW for enchanted) Mist Giants

PATTERN ANALYSIS

There is a lot of weirdness going on here. Some creatures have just a number for a characteristic, and there seems lots of duplication errors (Creatures of Matik and Mist Giant SIZ).

I might be guilty of apophenia, but let's try to suss out a system where it is easier to determine stats for creatures.

Before we begin with the details, let's start with a few definitions of things that pop out. 

Dice Ranges - We must remember that the whole array is humancentric, with the bell curve made by 3D6 as the norm of humans. Thus 3-8 is low for humans, 9-12 average, and 13-18 superior. Comparing all creature stats by this metric gives us an idea of relative strength.

1D6 Far below human ability
2D6 Less than human ability
3D6 Human norm
4D6+ More than human ability, the more dice the more superior.

Demon Dice - Using D8 instead of D6 really works well for me, as it reflects how they are supposed to have the edge as antagonists from another plane. In story terms, that extra bit of potential is what they get for aligning with Chaos I suppose. Alternately, using D4 instead of D6 reflects below human, animalistic arrays.

Oddball Dice - 1D10 Lower than human so inconsequential, but with a wide array.

Bonuses - Any bonus to the roll indicates there is a baseline from which their array of numbers starts.

+3 At least equal to minimum human (infants & invalids)
+6 At least equal to weakest humans (children)
+9 At least equal to average human
+12 At least equal to above average human
+18 At least equal to superior human
+36 At least equal to double human

As for Armor, the numbers seem not excessive, except I would probably bump up dragons by 5 points. I suppose one could whip up a system relating static animal armor ratings to variable human armors, but I prefer to leave a little chaos in and not worry about the bugbear of game balance.

UNDERSTANDING THE NUMBERS

In the Big Gold Book there is a breakdown of what SIZ means, but nothing really descriptive for the other attributes. I am a career educator, so I'm always trying to find a description that is simple yet easily graspable. Here is how I would describe each attribute in a way that would help anyone trying to figure out relative powers of attributes.

STR - To understand strength, a good metric is how many humans are required to handle or hold down the creature.
1D6 Can be handled one handed
2D6 Can be handled two handed
3D6 Same as handling a human
4D6-6D6 Too tough for one human to handle
7D6+ Too tough for any number of humans to handle

CON - Similarly, we can define CON by how much damage it takes to beat the creature.
1D6 Can be beaten bare handed
2D6 Can be beaten with small 1H weapon
3D6 Best beaten with a two handed weapon.
4D6-6D6 Too tough for one human to handle
7D6+ Too tough for any number of humans to handle

SIZ - Simple comparison with human size, but without numbers for easier comprehension.
1D6 One third human size
2D6 One half human size
3D6 Same as human
4D6-6D6 Larger than human.
7D6+ Larger than twice a human.

INT - This is a tough one, and most BRP stats never go above 3 or 4D6.
1D6 Dumb animal
2D6 Crafty animal
3D6 Same as a human
4D6-6D6 Smarter than human
7D6+ Godlike intelligence. Since the GM is only human, this is modelled by something else, namely GM fiat or psychic powers and the like.

POW - This is another tough one, 
1D6 Unclouded by emotion or spirit.
2D6 Simple emotions or spirit
3D6 Same emotional or spiritual range as a human
4D6-6D6 Much deeper or complex emotions or spirit than humans
7D6+ Too complex for any human to relate to

DEX - If STR shows us how hard it is to hold down a creature, DEX shows us how hard it is to catch them.
1D6 Easily caught
2D6 Caught with effort
3D6 Same as a human
4D6-6D6 Too quick or agile to catch without traps or assistance
7D6+ Too tough for any number of humans to handle

CONCLUSION

You have to hand it to the old BRP designers, like fine craftsman they put together relative statistics without any overarching or explicit guidelines (so far as I know). And like the Bio-engineering system of Hawkmoon, with a little effort to one can organize the statistics into a workable guide, useful for designers or house rules.

Next, I want to see if I an organize and simplify monsters skills in a similar way. Finally, I will try and pare down monster stats to see how small an entry we can make for an instant GM reference, which should be useful no matter what edition you're running.

Threat Levels in Horror Gaming pt 2 - advancement

 I realized that in the last post I did not articulate a way to change threat levels. Here are some ideas for progressing from one threat level to the next:

Babes in the Woods

Lose 1/10 Sanity, finish 1 adventure, OR kill one Mythos creature.

Fighting Back

Lose 1/4 Sanity, finish 3 adventures, OR kill three types of Mythos creatures.

Hunted Becomes Hunters

One party member goes insane, the party finishes a major campaign, OR kill one servitor or major Mythos opponent.

Nuclear Option

The only way out is death, insanity, or retirement to NPC ally status.

Threat Levels in Horror Gaming

 Horror gaming in older systems such as Call of Cthulhu often does not work as intended because players don't follow the tenets of the genre. Whereas the first stop on many a PC's journey is the gun shop, arming up is usually a last resort for characters from cosmic horror, and is arguably futile.

In game terms, this mismatch often translates to a jarring gaming experience, such as a cakewalk against supposedly unstoppable odds, or a TPK from misuse of lethal weapons. I have had an entire campaign derailed by an attempt to rob dynamite from a construction site, and a PC commit suicide after being stopped for wielding firearms in broad daylight.

To keep the horror in horror while letting the PCs be heroes, I'll be using the following 4 levels of  threat escalation to determine what resources player characters should have access to.

Note that the key to using threat levels is to communicate them clearly to players and gain their agreement that the current level for individuals or the entire party matches their roleplaying motivation, backstory, or experience.

1 Babes in the Woods

The investigators don't know the horror is real yet, and are unprepared for it.Weapons are limited to improvised or any provided by occupation (ie a Policeman or woman would have a Luck roll to see if they are carrying their service revolver, nothing more). Opponents are usually human or near-human, such as cultists or disguised serpent men. Conversely, downed PCs may be captured or wake in hospital, and should rarely be killed.

2 Fighting Back

The investigators have caught a glimpse of the true nature of the universe, and the horrors within. PCs are limited to any legal armament that they have the time and finances to secure, but still have to conceal or secure these while in public or risk investigation by the authorities. They will still be unarmed in social or official venues. Opponents are bestial or monstrous, such as Byakhee or Mi Go. One PC may be killed, but fleeing should allow others to avoid a TPK.

3 The Hunted Become The Hunters

Investigators are now seasoned and somewhat paranoid, being the object of frequent attack, and never have less than one concealed weapon on them at all times. PCs have gained access to illegal armament, and are often in emergency situations where they can be wielded openly. Opponents can be aliens or servitors of the gods themselves, such as the Wendigo, or Cthuloids. If players aren't cautious, they should be warned that deaths of one or all party members are in the cards.

4 The Nuclear Option

Investigators can have any weapon, and may even call on airstrikes or torpedoes. However, considering that they are up against the Old Ones or Outer Gods themselves, this should be effectively useless, a time-biding measure to stave off armageddon. PCs are putting themselves in mortal peril, and the possibility of deaths or even TPKs should be acknowledged by all at the table.

Note that the Keeper can adjust the level of threat to match the campaign. Call of Cthulhu games typically can start as level 1 Babe In The Woods horror one shots, or else could be level 2 investigators. However, Esoterrorists characters are created with their first supernatural meeting behind them, so usually start out at level 2 or 3.

200th Post - Stormbringer 1E Rules Clarification

So I have evidently written 200 posts on this blog.

Bully for me! Sometimes it has come fast and furious, sometimes it has been a slog. But ultimately it has been worth it as thought exercise, practice in writing, and of course expression of my love for games.

Thanks to all you readers who have come along for the ride.

Anyway, last week I had a blast running Stormbringer 1E over Discord for some gents in the EU. I ran The New Hall of Risk, my homage to the old scenario from the 1st companion that I personally think is the most Moorcockean scenario I have ever read.

And IT happened. Someone rolled 01 for their Nationality. We all know what this means....

Melnibonean. RIP game balance, you were an illusion at any rate, and good riddance. Everyone was excited.

So the player has a Melnibonean. Noble plus Warrior from the outset. He also has the stats to be a Sorceror under the Nationality rules. As Nobles can have a second class, he rolls again and gets Priest. Although we've been rolling with the punches of unbalanced character generation system (which I love), some other players object that this might be too powerful.

The player of the Melnibonean, Lord Soo Teeb, decides he is OK with compromising and dropping Warrior if he can keep Priest. He also rolled High Priest under that occupation, so we all agree with his concession.

So here is basically my thinking:

If you roll a Melnibonean, you can theoretically have a total of Warrior (+ Assassin chance) + Noble (+ one other chance) + Sorceror. That is 5 occupations worth of skills and starting goods.

Honestly, I have no problem with this, but other players or the group might feel it is OP. Here are my two suggestions:

Option 1 - If you roll Melnibonean, you follow the Nationality description and ignore the chances for extra professions under the Occupation descriptions. So you get a Warrior Noble, but ignore the Warrior chance to be Assassin and the Noble chance to get another Occupation.

Option 2 - If you roll Melnibonean, you can have the choice of a maximum of THREE Occupations, no matter how many you have been lucky enough to roll. So if you get Warrior + Assassin + Noble + other + Sorceror, choose three of those.

How about them apples?

Play report coming soon.

Roguelike Lessons

Over at Kill Ten Rats, there is a somewhat deprecating response to Roguelike games.

As for myself, I simply LOVE Roguelikes, especially this Nethack in which you'll find many of my ghosts littered about. The biggest criticism KTR makes is that Roguelikes have no balance in terms of scaling encounters, and he uses the term ‘difficulty cliff’ to differentiate from the ‘difficulty curve’ of games like Destiny or RPGs like D&D 4E.

I think he has misunderstood the appeal of Roguelikes, at any rate ones like the one I play. There is no difficulty curve, nor is there a cliff. There is just pure chaos. You are just as likely to find a Wand of Death as to run into a goblin holding one. You WILL die at some point. I am not a ‘get off my lawn’ grognard, nor a masochist. I just don’t have time for a difficulty curve that strings me along forever – I WANT the game to end badly.

The idea of a difficulty curve is anathema to me. If you like having the game adjust for you, which I found both boring and somewhat patronizing in the few 4E games I played, then have at it. Some people play Monopoly, others obscure Teutonic boardgames, others poker, none is better, each suits a different taste or lifestyle.

Playing Roguelikes suits my life right now, but they also have valuable lessons for tabletop DMing.

1 Dungeons Should Be Breakable – Although there was a lot of posts about Jacquaying dungeons a few years back, i.e. allowing multiple entrance and egress points and thus avoiding topographic railroads, Roguelikes blow this out of the water. In Nethack, pick up a pick axe or mattock and you can make your own damn entrances and exits, even between levels. Or dig a pit, stand on the far side and let monsters tumble in, slay them and take their stuff. The pick axe is the ultimate tool of agency. However, the time and energy spent digging also tires the character and draws attention, which brings us to the next lesson…

2 You should know what you’re getting into – Anyone complaining about dying in a game of D&D, unless they are dealing with a dick DM and their complaint is about them and not the game, seems to have misunderstood the game and its setting. You are a murder hobo in a world red in tooth and claw and out to get you. Dying is not a question of ‘if’ it is a matter of ‘when’ unless you retire the character or switch to another game. Which brings us to….

3 If you don’t like it, there are other games – This sounds so trollish on the interwebs, but make no mistake I am not trying to troll KTR. If Roguelikes seem broken or unfun to you, find something that does work and is fun for you. I cannot stand poker – it just bores and confuses me. Everyone at my workplace loves it and has poker nights, which I skip. Unfriendly? Maybe, but better than me starting to resent some wonderful coworkers just because our tastes differ. And speaking of social effects of gaming…

4 Alignment should have social effects – Alignment in D&D is often a stick to keep character’s actions in line with some ideal. Too often there is little ‘carrot’ to balance this out. In Nethack, creatures of a similar alignment do not attack one another automatically. You may want to strip a pick axe off a dwarf in the mine level, but if you’re a lawful Valkyrie, you’ll have to find a store selling one. If you decide to ignore your alignment and kill a dwarf, you’ll be asked if you really want to, and your dwarficide will worsen relations with your god, who can uncurse objects and may even bestow legendary items on you if you sacrifice to them. This is a wonderful mechanic, and one that I would add to my own D&D games. Speaking of house rules…

5 Games should be hackable – Like Dwarf Fortress but on a smaller scale, Nethack allows players to use the elements of the system and setting in ways that have unforeseen consequences. If you plan on stealing from a shop, digging a circle of pits around the shopkeeper will keep them from chasing you (but you’ll have to sneak your pick axe into the store in a sack first or be denied entrance). If you cast a spell while drunk or confused, it may have altered effects, and I have inadvertently created rustproof armor and weapons this way. Tabletop RPGs should allow for even more unforeseen flexibility than Nethack with its limited programmed elements, and a DM not taking advantage (or letting players take advantage) of this flexibility is missing out on the greatest feature of the game itself.

So, go out there and play a Roguelike today. You may not like the overall experience, but you will learn something, whether to do or to avoid, that will improve your DMing and make your game suit your style and needs more.

Unofficial Palladium Repair Kit Part 1

There’s been some demand on my blog for a re-issue of the Palladium Patch, a houserules document I floated on the internet a few years back that seems to have disappeared, despite the good reception it got at the time. The patch is a set of houserules that are easily implemented (i.e. no complex calculations), make chargen simpler, and combat faster and more thrilling.

I’ve decided to split the patch into three parts – Character Generation, General Combat, and MDC Combat. I’ll be ordering the suggestions from the easiest to implement to the hardest, so you Palladium diehards can try the easiest and work your way down if you like how the game is changed. Since I’m re-making this patch from memory, I’ve included my reasons for the houserules, and will post a shorter rules-only pdf when the entire document is done.

Part One – Character Generation

1) Simplified Skills

Palladium skills are marked by arbitrary percentages and attribute or combat bonuses that unbalance the game – witness the overpowered Boxing skill. This modification should make chargen faster and customizable besides balancing it out.

Forget rules as written – instead, characters start with a number of skill slots as determined by their OCC in games that include them, or the random roll background in games that don't. Players use these slots to 'make' skills, using the old Palladium nomenclature (without the arbitrary bonuses and percentages) or making up their own. For every slot spent, the player can choose one of the following:

- A skill percentage equal to an appropriate attribute x 1% (can be chosen multiple times for cumulative higher skill level)
- A + 1 to ONE combat roll (initiative, damage by a specific weapon type, dodge, parry, or either melee or missile strike - can be chosen multiple times as above)
- A + 1 to ONE attribute (can be chosen multiple times as above)
- For three slots, a character can get one extra attack, specify melee or missile

For instance, you could recreate the original Palladium Climb skill of 50% + 5 per level for five slots (5 x attribute, either PS or PP seems applicable), or make your own Climb skill of 3 x attribute (either PS or PP)%, plus + 1 to PS and PE for the same cost. Use your own judgment to determine which attributes should be the base for which skills. Some skills could be based on  more than one attribute (i.e. Climb could be PS or PP based), in which case the player may choose to apply the highest one.

2) Balanced Attribute Bonuses (Choose option a or b)

The Palladium attribute bonus system is super top-heavy, with no penalty for low attributes and a wide range of unremarkable attributes topped by overwhelmingly powerful high attributes. To remedy this, you can either add modifiers for low attributes (option a) or replace the existing chart with a more balanced bell curve (option b).

2a) Low Attribute Modifiers

To balance out Palladium’s high attribute modifiers and encourage roleplaying, here are modifiers for low attributes.

Roll attributes as normal, but just as a roll over 16 allows an extra d6 to be added, a roll of 5 or under subtracts d6 from the attribute. Add the following data to the lower spectrum of the attribute bonus chart:

	Below 3	3	4-5	6-8
IQ Skill modifier	- 6%	- 5%	- 4%	- 3%
ME Mental save	+ 4	+ 3	+ 2	+ 1
MA Chance to Annoy/Bore*	60%	55%	50%	45%
PS Damage modifier	- 5	- 4	- 3	- 2
PP Strike, Parry, Dodge modifier	- 3	- 2	- 2	- 1
PE Save vs coma/death, poison	+ 10% + 3	+ 8% + 2	+ 6% + 2	+ 5% + 1
PB Chance to Repel/Disgust*	50%	45%	40%	35%
Spd

* These rolls are involuntary and the GM makes them in secret whenever the character is in a social situation.

2b) Simplified Attribute Bonuses

This is suggested for a simpler, universal attribute range to avoid the unbalanced attributes and superhuman bonuses. Forget the original attribute bonus chart, as well as the added d6 to attributes for high rolls on 3d6. Substitute the following table and just roll 3d6 or the racial number of d6 for the character.

Below 3	3	4-5	6-8	9-12	13-15	16-17	18	Every 2 above
–        4 or –        20%	–        3 or –        15%	–        2 or –        10%	– 1 or – 5%	0	+ 1 or  + 5%	+ 2 or + 10%	+ 3 or + 15%	Add + 1  or 5%

The top number is added to d20 rolls such as saves, the bottom to relevant skills or saves. For instance, IQ would modify all intelligence based skills from the Science and Technical categories, while PP would modify Physical skills such as Prowl and Acrobatics. Some skills could be modified by more than one attribute (i.e. Climb could be PS or PP based), in which case the player may choose to apply the highest one.

If using this attribute chart, it is also suggest that Social Skills be added as a category and skills such as Charm or Intimidate etc be based on MA, while skills like Seduce or Impress etc be based on PB.

3) The R.A. Attribute

Combat strikes in Palladium are not specified as melee or missile, so it is unclear to which type strike bonuses apply.

This ambiguity is cleared up by introducing the Ranged Attack (RA for short) attribute. It uses the same modifiers as PP, but only applies to missile weapons, from thrown knives to bows to guns to cannons. If RA is introduced, PP now only applies to melee attacks from handheld weapons or barehanded fighting.

4) Drop Levels

Palladium characters get enough SDC that the extra Hit Points from levels are superfluous, while the arbitrary improvement of skills with levels is a pain to look up. Especially for gritty games, drop levels entirely.

To improve skills, use the BRP method – once a skill is used successfully for a dangerous or dramatic reason, mark it. At the end of the game session, roll against each ticked skill again. A failure grants an improvement of 1d6%. This reflects how improvement is easier for the unskilled and harder as you master a skill.

For Hand to Hand and WPs, instead have characters gain an Improvement Point each time they roll a natural 20 when using that hand to hand style or weapon during combat, with a limit of one point for each HtH skill or WP per fight. When the character accumulates a number of Improvement Points equal to the next skill level, their WP rating advances to it. For example, a sniper with level 3 WP in Rifle needs to roll a natural 20 four times before progressing to level 4 in the WP and getting the relevant WP bonuses.

Non-D&D ‘March Mania’ Blogcornocopia - Day 6

Other blogs can be found HERE.

The questions can be found HERE.

6 What non-D&D monster do you think is as iconic as D&D ones like hook horrors or flumphs, and why do you think so?

Jeez, what was I thinking when I made this question up? I think D&D is iconic largely because of its monsters, so that gives it a huge edge over other games in terms of memorability. As for Cthulhu, a lot of people would go there, but since its bestiary is ripped from Lovecraft, I’ll try and stick with a non-IP game.

And that game would be RIFTS! Palladium’s Rifts is bubbling over with gonzo ideas, some great and some terrible, and so it is with its monsters. There is a cybernetic-stealing demon in one of the smaller supplement books (I forget the name) that had us quaking in our boots back when I played the game. Since non-magic characters invest heavily in body modifications to even survive in Rifts’ crazy Megadamage world, having some dimensional being rip them off your body (OUCH), attach them to its own, then use them against you is both terrifying and iconic for the game.

Sadly, PCs are usually so overpowered in Rifts that even this creature didn’t have as big an impact as it should have. When I GMed Rifts, only the times that I gave monsters every power and trick and let them use equipment and subterfuge would they pose much of a challenge to the player characters, who often cried foul that monsters and NPCs could act as intelligent and duplicitous as them. Sad that the lack of menace due to player entitlement undercut so much promise in the game and its bestiary.