Forums of the Megaverse®

A couple of weeks back I posted about the possibility of 2.5e of Palladium RPG and what that would entail.

There was some debate about what would be good to change about the game, but both there and whenever I have had similar discussions with Palladium fans it is almost universally acknowledge that the rulebook could do with an almost total restructure to present the information in an easier manner to digest.

So here is a draft Chapter structure for what a 2.5e could look like: -

Contents
Introduction
-Introduction
Part 1 - Building a Character
-1) Character Creation, Step by Step
-2) Races
-3) Classes
-4) Skills
-5) Alignment
-6) Equipment
Part 2 - Playing the game
-7) Adventuring
-8) Combat
-9) Magic (all magic)
-10) Psionics (all powers)
-11) Treasure
Part 3 - The World of Palladium
-12) History of Palladium
-13) Gazetteer of the known world
-14) Organisations
-15) The Gods
Part 4 - Additional Rules
-16) Alternative character creation options
-17) Multi classing and Alternative Classes and Races
-18) Insanity
Part 5 - Antagonists
-19) Monsters
-20) Demons and Deevils
-21) Vampires
-22) Villains Nemeses
Part 6 - Closing Thoughts
-23) Why a new Edition
-24) Advice on Gamemastering
-Appendix

What do YOU think? Is this a better than 1e or 2e? What would you like to see changed?

All thoughts welcome

My group tends not to worry about the layout, which is less than optimal for sure, but the information contained therein, as it is can be lacking in clarity that causes arguments at the game table. When a player creates a character or does something based off something confusing in the book, an argument usually ensues. It is all well and good to say that the DM is always right, but it can really annoy the players which isn't something you want at a gaming table. Imagine a player who has telekinesis who just says i pick up the enemy by the head, face him the other way off the ground and stab him to death from behind as he cant parry or dodge and the argument that ensues from that. Players always test the boundaries, it might not be every character but I haven't met 1 player that hasn't tried at least once. Palladium boundaries are often hazy fog banks rather than defined structures.

kiralon wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 4:39 pm *snip*

This, right here.

The layout is more like a third or fourth level of concern, over the clarification of content

--
GS

I think its very important to also write about ranged combat in combat section. It was really confusing for me to understand ranged combat until I came to these forums and asked. Ranged attacks are quire fundamental.
I would also like a change to terminology; stop use "Melee action" and start use "Action" insteadt. Also what is an action?? Melee attack? Sure yeah, Ranged attack yepp!, Movement??? Dont know, Dropping a weapon, unsheath a weapon etc etc.

I would not mind a slight change to weapons to make them more different and at the same time a total revamp of Armor piercing. A flail maybe gets a bonus-D6 vs those with shield while a pick get a Piercing 3 (where each number lowers the opponents AR). Then each weapon doesn´t need more and more D6´s in damage and also helps bring forward the uniqueness of each weapon.

Well, that looks fine to me. I don't know that you need a lot of the demons and such in the book. That would step on other source books that provide either more in depth for creatures or have creatures that are specific to an area. But having all the combat rules in one place would help especially if they were streamlined and cleaned up.

-Vek
"Oh look. A section entirely devoted to vampires..."

You know I think Palladium did a better job in terms of "organization" of the core rule books in the 20th century than the 21st century examples in my library (and PF2E falls in the 20th category). Now I do agree that clarifications are need and should be the focus, and maybe some slight tweaking to placement (nothing comes to mind here).

Well, there are some obvious changes that could help miso has addressed. For example the book tells you to roll your rtsts first, and THEN select a race knowing full well that your stats are dependent on the race. And the races are conveniently located at the back of the book so that you have to flip there and then back to the occs and skills. Since you first have to select a race, the races should be first. Picking an OCC is the second step so those should be second. Place the character creation portion up front and in the order in which you create a character.

And simple things like paired weapons having only one description as opposed to being described in the combat section and under the skill. I'd also have the skill percentages and per level increases next to the skills in the list as well as the description. They did if for the GM screen and it's much clearer.

-Vek
"And please let me fix the wording of the spells."

GoliathReturns wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 9:22 pm

kiralon wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 4:39 pm *snip*

This, right here.

The layout is more like a third or fourth level of concern, over the clarification of content

--
GS

I understand what you are saying, but for me how you present the information IS part of the information.

If presentation and art didn't matter all these RPG books we love would have no art, no layout guide etc etc and just be blocks of text with no order.

The content for sure needs clarification and revision, but doing that and NOT doing the presentation would be awful.

And also the book should really be designed to make it as accessible as possible for new players, as the book would be the main entry for a lot of people.

Imo!

Mogge wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 2:27 am I think its very important to also write about ranged combat in combat section. It was really confusing for me to understand ranged combat until I came to these forums and asked. Ranged attacks are quire fundamental.
I would also like a change to terminology; stop use "Melee action" and start use "Action" insteadt. Also what is an action?? Melee attack? Sure yeah, Ranged attack yepp!, Movement??? Dont know, Dropping a weapon, unsheath a weapon etc etc.

I would not mind a slight change to weapons to make them more different and at the same time a total revamp of Armor piercing. A flail maybe gets a bonus-D6 vs those with shield while a pick get a Piercing 3 (where each number lowers the opponents AR). Then each weapon doesnt need more and more D6´s in damage and also helps bring forward the uniqueness of each weapon.

Yes I think Combat is the section that could use a general clarification, but I'm not sure if Palladium would do this as I think they quite like the lack of specificity, and are probably not sure themselves what the answer is to a lot of these questions.

Veknironth wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 2:58 pm Well, there are some obvious changes that could help miso has addressed. For example the book tells you to roll your rtsts first, and THEN select a race knowing full well that your stats are dependent on the race. And the races are conveniently located at the back of the book so that you have to flip there and then back to the occs and skills. Since you first have to select a race, the races should be first. Picking an OCC is the second step so those should be second. Place the character creation portion up front and in the order in which you create a character.

And simple things like paired weapons having only one description as opposed to being described in the combat section and under the skill. I'd also have the skill percentages and per level increases next to the skills in the list as well as the description. They did if for the GM screen and it's much clearer.

-Vek
"And please let me fix the wording of the spells."

Yes Character creation will be the next post!

Can you link that GM's screen with the skill %? Was that a Rifts one? ty

Well I'm pretty sure it's an official Palladium Books document so posting it here would be against the forums rules.

-Vek
"Plus, I don't where to link."

Veknironth wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2024 8:16 am Well I'm pretty sure it's an official Palladium Books document so posting it here would be against the forums rules.

-Vek
"Plus, I don't where to link."

I meant from the store! Did you mean the Rifts screen though or is there another?

Well what I'm talking about is a PFRPG specific screen.

-Vek
"We've officially diverged from the OP."