10 minutes ago, lecudas said:

Oh, I like "Voice."

BTW, here is a first draft of a character sheet.

First thought is that Performing is not needed. Charm works for both Persuasion and Performance, with Cool filling the voids where Performance might feel more appropriate. And Cool is just cool.

Second thought is why not call the combat skills "Brawl, Two-Handers, One-Handers, and Ranged"—that way One-Handers can encompass thrown weapons. Otherwise your Orcish Hordes are gonna feel mighty useless throwing those spears. Alternate idea, keep Heavy Melee & Light Melee and add a fifth combat skill, "Thrown," which can utilize Agility or Brawn, user's choice.

Taking away Performing and adding Thrown would keep the skill count at 35, which is the same as Force & Destiny.

I think thrown weapons and ranged weapons could use both the same skill. The system is abstract, a character could have Ranged 3 and use just one weapon all his life. Each species prefer different weapons. Elves prefere long bows, dwarfs prefere hand axes or fireweapons, humans prefer everything, orcs prefer javalins, halflings prefer slings, etc.

And here, a throwing weapons could have a base damage as Brawn + damage, small range, etc. this would make this kind of weapon deadly in the right hands, like orcs or dwarfs.

I agree. High Brawn causes greater damage, not necessarily accuracy. I'm inclined to keep it as just Ranged.

Idk how ppl are dealing with this, but I'd go with a common bow damage = a common thrown weapon damage + 2 (an average Brawn 2). With this, species with 3+ Brawn could be deadlier than a regular archer, and who have Brawn 1 would deal less damage.

Just to game balance.

Example:

Long bow: damage 6.

Javalin: damage 4 + Brawn

17 minutes ago, Bellyon said:

Idk how ppl are dealing with this, but I'd go with a common bow damage = a common thrown weapon damage + 2 (an average Brawn 2). With this, species with 3+ Brawn could be deadlier than a regular archer, and who have Brawn 1 would deal less damage.

Just to game balance.

Example:

Long bow: damage 6.

Javalin: damage 4 + Brawn

I'd knock that Javelin damage down to 2 + Brawn. +4 would be like a massive greataxe, and is generally not going to be available on a thrown weapon. It's just way too abusable otherwise. You get your starting half-orc with a Brawn of 5 chucking a 9-damage weapon with Easy checks at short range... *shudders*

13 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

I'd knock that Javelin damage down to 2 + Brawn. +4 would be like a massive greataxe, and is generally not going to be available on a thrown weapon. It's just way too abusable otherwise. You get your starting half-orc with a Brawn of 5 chucking a 9-damage weapon with Easy checks at short range... *shudders*

Well, its easier csuse the range band, but he will be near the enemies as well. We can name this as a tradeoff.

Furthermore, i believe we need a reason to prefer thrown weapons, and here is the damage. I font think the difficult to attack is really an advantge, like i've said, easier to be engaged by the enemies.

So, to turn this more interesting, the damage with Brawn should have bigger than the average long weapons.

Btw i dont think a brawn 5 character with thrown weapon is something that break the system or be used as a minion oe rival. Think about this. Its strong, i assume, but not that problematic. And i guess bigger weapons could have a setback to be used.

9 minutes ago, Bellyon said:

So, to turn this more interesting, the damage with Brawn should have bigger than the average long weapons.

I think it's far easier and more balanced to 1. keep damage relatively low (you can match a longbow for damage with a javelin if you're Brawn 4) and 2. offer a Thrown skill.

That way a character has a built-in reason not to use a bow—they've trained in Thrown weapons and can use their Brawn for the pool.

Ooh. Also...maybe give javelins a Pierce rating. And crossbows too.

9 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

I think it's far easier and more balanced to 1. keep damage relatively low (you can match a longbow for damage with a javelin if you're Brawn 4) and 2. offer a Thrown skill.

That way a character has a built-in reason not to use a bow—they've trained in Thrown weapons and can use their Brawn for the pool.

I don't think creating a new skill would be good to this. This could be use to the Light Melee, just as an example. We can break in different sub skills but I don't see reason to create this.

D&D also goes with a similar thing. Ranged weapons has a wide array of weapons, using Dex to hit. Thrown weapons also have the Strenght bonus in the damage.

I think we don't need one more skill.

And, like I've said, think that a character with a high Brawn stat, despite the high damage, have some flaws:

They are near to the enemies.

They have a limmited ammo.

You used the massive great axe as an example to be abusive. Think that a character would have only one of this weapon in hands to throw. Yes, he'll do a massive damage, but after that, he'll be next to the enemies and without their favorite weapon.

So, in no way I think it's abusive.

9 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

Ooh. Also...maybe give javelins a Pierce rating. And crossbows too.

Well, a lot of weapons have piercing damage. I think is ok to give a small armor penetration to these weapons.

But the crossbow should be very similar than a fireweapon. High damage, high range, slow fire rating.

Bow must have: average damage to low damage, average to longe range, fast fire rating.

Throwing weapons: high damage, short to average range, less ammunition.

I guess it's balanced enough.

Few weapons could break this, like a repetition crossbow, but this kind of weapon should be rare and too expensive.

Bigger weapons to thrown has fewer ammo than a small one (like a tomahawk vs. massive greate axe), despite any kind of setback if the weapon aren't made to this.

Probably just need someone to write up the more common weapons in Faerûn—might be easier to reach a consensus if we all had a table to look at

And leather shouldn't have more soak than padded armor. Time to clean up with this misconception!

I didn't saw the armors, but I really think we don't need to convert every single armor from D&D.

In D&D they have much more layers of protection (CA going to +1 to +10 almost) while in Geneys there are few layers.

More generic names to be adapted could be good in my opinion, just one armor instead of 3 or 4 could work.

In the description it's possible to write "sometimes this armor could be found with... or..." just to help the players to understand.

I would go with:

• Padded (Little more than heavy, quilted cloth, this armor provides only the most basic protection)
• Leather (Leather armor is made up of pieces of hard boiled leather carefully sewn together)
• Chain shirt Covering the torso, this shirt is made up of thousands of interlocking metal rings)
• Chainmail (Unlike a chain shirt, chainmail covers the legs and arms of the wearer. The suit includes gauntlets, maybe the helm)
• Breastplate / Half plate (Combining elements of full plate and chainmail, half-plate includes gauntlets and a helm, but the strongest part cover the torso)
• Full plate (This metal suit includes gauntlets, heavy leather boots, a visored helmet, and a thick layer of padding that is worn underneath the armor)

To me this covers all the fantasy tipical body protections (+ shields).

The shields are just 4:

• Buckler
• Light shield
• Heavy shield
• Tower shield

With a soak range of 0-4, a Defense range of 0-3, a hard point range (or Enchantment Capacity in a fantasy setting) of 0-6, Rarity/price/Encumbrance values and then all the endless possibilities of adding boost/Setback to checks I think the breadth of possibilities with armour goes far beyond 10. (Yes I know CA isn’t the only measure of armour in d&d)

1 hour ago, Richardbuxton said:

With a soak range of 0-4, a Defense range of 0-3, a hard point range (or Enchantment Capacity in a fantasy setting) of 0-6, Rarity/price/Encumbrance values and then all the endless possibilities of adding boost/Setback to checks I think the breadth of possibilities with armour goes far beyond 10. (Yes I know CA isn’t the only measure of armour in d&d)

I agree, but this kind of conversion don't need all possibilites just cause it's possible. There are no need to create, as basic equipments, all possibities. Check the Star Wars for example.

And the magical versions are always a different thing.

All these basic itens works as a regular version of what we can found almost everywhere in the world. They can be used as base to special versions as well.

But if we'd try to cover every single piece of armor and weapon of all the kingdoms in Faerun...

12 hours ago, Bellyon said:

• Padded (Little more than heavy, quilted cloth, this armor provides only the most basic protection)
• Leather (Leather armor is made up of pieces of hard boiled leather carefully sewn together)

Heathen! Padded armor is way more effective than leather and very effective against slashes and even piercing to some extent!

22 hours ago, Bellyon said:

They have a limmited ammo.

This raises a question:

Should we apply the Prepare 1 and/or Limited Ammo 1 quality to crossbows?

Should shortbows and longbows suffer the Limited Ammo quality (as they do in SWRPG)?

6 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

This raises a question:

Should we apply the Prepare 1 and/or Limited Ammo 1 quality to crossbows?

Should shortbows and longbows suffer the Limited Ammo quality (as they do in SWRPG)?

I dont think bows or crssbows should suffer with this. Usually the... I missed the name in english to the thing that hold the ammo, usually have enought for a adventure, so no need to this.

But like a rocket gun, hand axes or javelins aren't that abundant. And think that this kind of weapon is already the own ammo, while there is no weapon named "arrow". So, if you have 4 hand axes, you have 4 ammo.

That depends on how slow these weapons fire compared to other weapons in the system, which is what all those values modify.

Limited Ammo 1: 1 manoeuvre reloading for every shot

Prepare: 1 manoeuvre every now and then (generally when first getting the weapon out then after moving, but gm discretion is applied).

In Star Wars bows fire slowly compared to blasters, but in Forgotten Realms the bow is possibly the fastest normal weapon in the game, excluding very rare repeater crossbows ect.

14 hours ago, Bellyon said:

I agree, but this kind of conversion don't need all possibilites just cause it's possible. There are no need to create, as basic equipments, all possibities. Check the Star Wars for example.

Two things for consideration:

1) Armor is not a focus of many ae established character in Star Wars, and yet the game is still replete with many armor choices. Why should a medeival high fantasy game in a setting known to have certain armor styles not at least give a nod to those very basic styles of armor?

2) Star Wars basic equipment still had a relatively high degree of granularity. For example, under blaster type weapons they had Light repeaters, heavy repeaters, rifles, carbines, pistols, etc. I think it's possible to go too far to the "simplistic" extreme and just say "you got one handed blasters and two handed blasters, you don't need any more possibilities than that." IMO there should be a decent amount of equipment options in a campaign setting like Forgotten Realms. Let's not go overboard—shortswords and scimitars do not need separate weapon entries—but let's at least have the illusion of options

I feel like some armour in a fantasy setting is going to help protect against Crit injuries too, giving ranks in Durable if not increasing the Crit Rating of a weapon.

2 hours ago, Richardbuxton said:

In Star Wars bows fire slowly compared to blasters, but in Forgotten Realms the bow is possibly the fastest normal weapon in the game, excluding very rare repeater crossbows ect.

I'm taking my cues specifically from the Bowcaster, which requires a maneuver every time it is fired to load another quarrel. That seems reasonable to me. In D&D you've got the "Loading" rule which shows how crossbows are slower to fire than longbows, but here you've got different mechanics. I think that a maneuver to fire is a completely reasonable thing—and you could have a talent that removes that maneuver. Call it "Crossbow Expert," perhaps

I believe it's important to represent the slowness of crossbows compared to true bows—Otherwise, why even use a longbow if your crossbow has higher damage and longer range?

2 hours ago, Bellyon said:

But like a rocket gun, hand axes or javelins aren't that abundant. And think that this kind of weapon is already the own ammo, while there is no weapon named "arrow". So, if you have 4 hand axes, you have 4 ammo.

There are arrows in Star Wars. Just saying. Special ammo and all that. That's why bows are considered Limited Ammo 1. You load it, fire it, and now it's not loaded anymore.

5 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

I believe it's important to represent the slowness of crossbows compared to true bows—Otherwise, why even use a longbow if your crossbow has higher damage and longer range?

Well, compared to a bow, you can fire and move or do something else. With a crossbow you must use the move action to reload.

A high level bowmaster could fire with a move action. A crossbowmaster could fire and move. I think is good if got my idea.