Phoenix

[Kurgan]

Hello Albert,


AS> Only two combat systems have EVER impressed me for games. P&P and Heros.

    Blech. The Hero system, in my opinion, sucked. Oh, it worked, and
    for that it was a viable property (since it got the job done), but
    it was prone to rules-raping, and it didn't make much sense. It
    came across to me like a weird amalgam of complicated *and*
    beer-n-pretzels, if that's actually possible.

    Then again, I did have a blast, many years ago, playing in a
    Champions tournament at a sci-fi convention. I threw every point
    into strength, and made a brick. It was hilarious, and we had a
    good time despite the rules. :)

    Another thing worth mentioning is that our current discussion over
    combat systems is pretty much restricted to physical combat. Let's
    not forget such absolute gems as The Morrow Project, which had the
    most realistic firearms rules ever to see print. The initial rules
    for making an attack were simplistic, but afterwards the weapon
    statistics and damage ratings were completely accurate, being
    derived from real statistics. Very cool. If I ever used P&P for a
    more modern setting, I would use The Armory, by Kevin Dockery,
    which is the same system used in MP presented in a volume with
    notes for adapting it to other games. Good stuff.


AS> A stupid game made off Wizards (an animated movie) had a surprisingly nice
AS> Magic system.

    Heh heh, I've got that game! It's fun.


AS>    P&P has, by far, the best Skill-Based character creation/advancement
AS> system I've seen.

    No argument there. :)


Best regards,

   Kurgan                         mailto:Kurgan at Fastmail.fm