I've got OBAM! And some questions...

[Mokkurkalfe]

First of all, splendid work. My horseriding player's are gonna love this. Still, I have a few questions.

Why the armour-limiting on the berserker gift? It seems suspicously D&D-ish.

Doesn't the soldier's low WP make him too vulnerable to Pain? I haven't played with that template, but that's what it seems like to me.

And a plea for help...
I've had TROS since it was first released, more or less, yet I have still no sense of TROS money! I simply do not know how much 'much' is. Does anyone have any helpful tips?

Anyway, great work with OBAM. Bladed hooves... Like the swooping maneuver as well. Brilliant. And the Ghost story freaked me out!

[Brian Leybourne]

Why the armour-limiting on the berserker gift? It seems suspicously D&D-ish.

If you read the description of the gift, the very word Berserker comes from Bare-Sark, Sark meaning "armor". Bare of Armor... no armor... make sense now? :-)

Doesn't the soldier's low WP make him too vulnerable to Pain? I haven't played with that template, but that's what it seems like to me.

Hmm... yes, I guess it does. One of the disadvantages of any RPG system is that you can't model everything... I was going on the angle that a soldiers WP was low because he had been trained to follow orders without thinking about them too much or deciding that they didn't sound safe or whatever, but I must admit I didn't consider the pain thing. I guess maybe given that I would bump the WP up by +1.

Anyway, great work with OBAM. Bladed hooves... Like the swooping maneuver as well. Brilliant. And the Ghost story freaked me out!

Cool, glad you liked it. I've had some amazing feedback, which is great (my first book and all). Yeah, I quite enjoyed writing the ghost story, although I think my personal favorite is the Ghul one for "freak" value (just imagine yourself being the guy at the bottom of the grave at the end...)

Amusing thing I recently spotted in the book... in the Mere story, I described the creature as having pulled back the bedclothes as it fed on the girl. In New Zealand, that would mean pulling the sheets back, but the artist who read the story and then drew the picture for it obviously understood something quite different by "bedclothes", thus the resulting picture which my mother and sister had a go at me about :-)

Brian.

[Richard_Strey]

Also concerning OBAM (PDF Version):
The italics in the damage tables is kind of hard to read. Are there plans to change that or do I have a faulty viewer (tried 4.0 and 5.0)?

Edit:
Just saw the other OBAM thread w/ Jake's comments. Duh. So make this one vote for clearer tables. Would different sizes be doable? So everyone could pick what they needed or are able to d/l.

[Mokkurkalfe]

I read the description, but saying
"Berserker means 'no armor', therefore a berserker may have no armor"
is kinda D&D-ish as well.  Myself, I'll probably use an explanation like "Unrestrained fury needs an unrestrained body" and instead only allow the berserker to go into rage if he has no CP penalties from armor.
It's a small difference, but it makes alot more sense to me.

A little of topic...
Regarding Sorcery and the Fey, don't make the Fey more powerful, give them more depth. I have seen *so* many supplements where the race at hand is showered with bonuses yet given no disadvantages to compensate, making them unbalanced.

[Richard_Strey]

Mokkurkalfe, I'd look at berserking from the other side. Not "I can go berserk. Why can't I do it with armor?" rather, due to the culture of the berserkers (*your* culture in this case) you'd never get the idea to wear armor in the first place. Your mojo protects you, after all. If you were an armor-wearer, you wouldn't be a berserker in the first place.

[Mokkurkalfe]

I can go with the explanation that berserkers scorn armor, thinking it's for wussies.  But it somehow doesn't justify a rule saying they CAN'T wear armor. And go berserk in it that is.  
OTOH, it's my game now, so I can do any changes I want.

[Brian Leybourne]

Joakim,

That's true, but if you read the info in the microdot at the end of the 17th sentence on page 83 of the rulebook, playing the game your own way and not Jake's means you have to forward him $100 per session.

Sorry man, but it is in Black & White in the rulebook...

On a more serious note, of course you can do things any way you see fit. Actually, I quite like your "as long as you have no armor CP penalty" idea.

Brian.

[contracycle]

Just have their mates laugh and point at them.  Potential girlfriends despise them for being chicken.  Their dad takes them out for a quiet word about how they are bringing shame on the family.  Etc.

[Pantera]

I'm another Swede who just got the game! :)
(and also OBAM)


Regarding berserks, there are some different spekulations about the origin of the word. But most probably the word "berserkr" from ancient Icelandic is related, and it means "a man who wears bear-skin". It could also be the two ancient Icelandic words that means "wearing shirt".

The Swedish word is "bärsärk". There is also a word "bärsärkagång" (berserk-walk or path), which basically is a description of someone doing a berserk path of destruction.

[Mike Holmes]

As I understand it, the etymology of the term is indeterminate. There are sides that say that it's Bare, and those who say its Bear.

Really doesn't much matter, however. The fact is that Berserkers did go into battle sans much in the way of armor if armored at all. That's agreed upon.

As for whether or not it makes a good rule, I think it does. Consider that achieving the Berserk state is a mental feat. To do so, you have to whip yourself up into some sort of ecstatic state. No doubt the characters in these games who do so, also believe that there's something spiritual going on.

In any case, the preparation is a form of ritual. And part of that, apparently, is getting bare.

I might allow a player to have their character try it without the proper preparations, but I'd make it very difficult. Even moreso if his friends were watching, as social pressure kicks in. Again, this is all in their heads, and ritual limitations seem appropriate to me.

Mike