Indeed!Wow - that sounds so much worse than it should be.
Not even the worst bit but one that jumped out immediately - I thought people figured out that randomly rolling attributes on a span of 0-100 with uniform probability was a bad idea decades ago. Even some of the first percentile driven games (like say Star Frontiers) understood you shouldn't do that. To see it in a modern game not written by a 12 year old figuring things out on first principles is shocking.
Call of Chtuluh and other Chaosium games have a large fan bases. It's just a question of preference. I like it.I don't get the appeal od a base d100 system. Do we really need that level of granularity? Most games that use it yould do just fine using d20 or even a d10.
I believe given the history of this whole project that was probably the point. It's supposed to be "old school" but it appears that unlike a lot of other "old school" projects - which use the lessons of last 4 decades of RPG design to try to create systems that give you the feel of an old school game while also giving you a solid gameplay experience - they seem to have decided to ignore the last 40 years of design lessons and just put together a game that could have been released in 1979.This system seems like a clunky throwback to the 80s. It feels like something 40 years old rather than a new release.
I don't think there's anything wrong with a 1-100 scale per se - though I think the granularity of 1% differences in ability don't usually change the gameplay, so most percentile systems can be replaced with a d20 rollunder approach- 5% granularity is usually sufficient.I used a 1-100 scale when I created Altus Adventum...many years ago. While I think I gave options to prevent the wild swings in scores, I don't think I'd ever use a 1-100 range again.
View attachment 149430
When most people (including myself) who put out OSR products, we have a choice on how to approach the design to emulate TSR.I believe given the history of this whole project that was probably the point. It's supposed to be "old school" but it appears that unlike a lot of other "old school" projects - which use the lessons of last 4 decades of RPG design to try to create systems that give you the feel of an old school game while also giving you a solid gameplay experience - they seem to have decided to ignore the last 40 years of design lessons and just put together a game that could have been released in 1979.
It works for some games. For FASA's Star Trek in the 80s it felt right -- percentages go well with sci-fi.I don't get the appeal od a base d100 system. Do we really need that level of granularity? Most games that use it yould do just fine using d20 or even a d10.
That makes sense. I guess I just never found the right game with d100 to experience them right. (I have a chtulhu sized hole in my RPGs experience).It works for some games. For FASA's Star Trek in the 80s it felt right -- percentages go well with sci-fi.
Did FASERIP use d100 for the Marvel game? (With the average stat being pretty low on the scale).It works for some games. For FASA's Star Trek in the 80s it felt right -- percentages go well with sci-fi.
But I can't recall CoC or RQ ever actually having you roll 1d100 for characteristics. Stats were 3d6 (or 2d6+6 for things like Size and Intelligence), the only things that were rolled on d100 were checks. The most recent edition of CoC has 1-100 stats, but you assign points, you don't roll them.Call of Chtuluh and other Chaosium games have a large fan bases. It's just a question of preference. I like it.
You probably could for a lot of things, but if you've got a feature that works really well on a 100 point scale, like Call of Cthulhu's sanity score, you might as well put as many things on those % dice as you can to maximize people's use of the same dice mechanic. And, in fact, CoC has doubled down on the % in recent editions. Converting the skill and stat checks to a d20 would be an unnecessary complication.I don't get the appeal od a base d100 system. Do we really need that level of granularity? Most games that use it yould do just fine using d20 or even a d10.
The skills have points assigned, but in CoC 7th ed, you're still rolling those stats on the 3d6/2d6+6/whatever. You're just multiplying by 5 to normalize into %-friendly scores so that the players can roll % dice for all their tests.But I can't recall CoC or RQ ever actually having you roll 1d100 for characteristics. Stats were 3d6 (or 2d6+6 for things like Size and Intelligence), the only things that were rolled on d100 were checks. The most recent edition of CoC has 1-100 stats, but you assign points, you don't roll them.
FASERIP used a d100 but attributes were not percentiles. You use a chart to translate your die rolls into success levels.Did FASERIP use d100 for the Marvel game? (With the average stat being pretty low on the scale).
I'm usually bummed out by the lack of mathematical smoke and mirrors in d100 systems (don't tell me the odds!), but some games do interesting things with it. Like in Delta Green:I don't get the appeal od a base d100 system. Do we really need that level of granularity? Most games that use it yould do just fine using d20 or even a d10.
I ran a playtest version of CHILL (until it and the company making it vanished due to licensing screwups) which used the exact same crit/fumble mechanic. I liked it because of the little extra excitement at the table rolling doubles brought.I'm usually bummed out by the lack of mathematical smoke and mirrors in d100 systems (don't tell me the odds!), but some games do interesting things with it. Like in Delta Green:
A critical success is a roll of 01 or any success where the dice match. So if your Agent’s skill is 50%, you achieve a critical success with a roll of 01, 11, 22, 33, or 44. A critical success automatically succeeds, and exceeds expectations.
A fumble is a roll of 00 (100) or any failure where the dice match. So if your Agent’s skill is 50%, you fum- ble on a roll of 55, 66, 77, 88, 99, or 00.
That thread includes a link to a press release from Wonderfilled indicating that they are planning to open a theme park based around Giantlands - an "immersive gaming destination".Here is another look. From Matty Helms at RPGPUB.
GiantLands
Dragonlance is post-apocalypse technically, isn't it? The Great Cataclysm I think it was called Oh so is Talislanta!www.rpgpub.com
Yeah, that's been bantered around for at least a year that I'm aware of. A dream. Pipe dream, but a dream nonetheless. I suspect it will be an amusement park in the same way the Dungeon Hobby Shop is a museum. I.e., something contained to someone's home. Kinda like how people set up their own mini haunted houses in their garage during Halloween.That thread includes a link to a press release from Wonderfilled indicating that they are planning to open a theme park based around Giantlands - an "immersive gaming destination".
![]()
GiantLands Theme Park Will be a Game Park Built on a Groundbreaking Vision
Press release content from PR.com. The AP news staff was not involved in its creation.apnews.com
This seems ... ambitious? let's say ambitious.