Cepheus Engine, AsenRG Edition

Is there any point in me doing this?


  • Total voters
    16

AsenRG

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
12,162
Inspired by the Traveller discussion, I'm making my own ruleset for Cepheus.
Why? Well, why not...maybe there's no point, feel free to vote.

Changes from standard Cepheus (in no particular order):
1) No dice modifiers for tasks (outside of combat, where it's by weapon). Still not sure about that one.
2) Simultaneous initiative.
3) Standard TN* is 7, and skills remove (or add, on opposed rolls) a level of difficulty, until you get to Easy (which is 4, since the difficulty step is 3). Further skill points are added to your roll on a 1-to-1 basis.
4) (Close) Weapons give you attack and defense bonuses on top of damage. Damage never goes above 4d+3 (except by adding Effect on top of this), but more dangerous weapons have stats like "roll 6d, keep the best 3".
5) Extremely good hits (Effect 3+) give you an advantage pool of 1/3 points of Effect. After rolling, you can also use a point to negate 3 points of armour, add it to your attack roll, or subtract it from the opponent's attack roll (not sure if this should count "as a point of skill"). Alternately, you could choose to exchange 3 points for an additional effect, which can be whatever you can imagine and describe, subject to Referee veto. However, you lose 1 point of Advantage on every round past the next (until you get 0 points).
6) Chargen tables use a format of "Skill or Skill or Skill", allowing more flexibility in chargen. Or just "skill groups".
7) Event tables grant you the skill bonus regardless of success, but success gives you other social bonuses.
8) Missile weapons don't give you bonuses to defense, but might give a bonus to attack, depending on range and whether someone is lying low.
9) You can "hunt for advantage" against a specific opponent. This means stuff like getting in-close** with an opponent and, for example, binding his blade with yours. It doesn't give you a bonus, but you get Effect/2 as advantage, minimum 1, on a success.
10 One of the possible effects of spending Advantage is exactly "resolving your move before a move that happens at the same time" (and I'm thinking of adding an option that for 2-3 Control/Advantage you could pull it off before a move that should happen later, like shooting someone before he could stab you).

*I've also been debating saying "screw that" and using a dicepool system instead...:grin:
**I'm thinking that suppressive fire should be working in the same way, but I'd like the opinion of someone who's been in some kind of armed or police forces, here...I ain't got that kind of training, sorry. But at least I'm smart enough to know that I should ask!
 
Last edited:

David Johansen

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
4,386
Reaction score
7,681
I did a Traveller hack some years ago. More one of my thought experiements. I got rid of most of the little universal codes.

I really never looked into Cephus.
 

SJB

Legendary Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2021
Messages
172
Reaction score
379
By “simultaneous initiative” do you mean the CT rule? If so, one can probably save space by cutting the combat rules!
 

Sosthenes

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
491
Reaction score
976
Go for it! Don't think I'd use it myself, as my Traveller urges would either go into the more lightweight-but-consistent end of the spectrum or, well, TNE.
(I do have some notes about a 3d6 Traveller variant, though, as that was one the ways I've pondered of getting a legal game in the GURPS spectrum)
 

AsenRG

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
12,162
Go for it! Don't think I'd use it myself, as my Traveller urges would either go into the more lightweight-but-consistent end of the spectrum or, well, TNE.
(I do have some notes about a 3d6 Traveller variant, though, as that was one the ways I've pondered of getting a legal game in the GURPS spectrum)
Yeah, I just like 2d6...amusingly, that's probably nothing but nostalgia. I've been playing backgammon and its variants, all of which use 2d6, long before I first saw an RPG, or even a gamebook:grin:!
I did a Traveller hack some years ago. More one of my thought experiements. I got rid of most of the little universal codes.
Admittedly, I'm not using most of them either...though I might retain them.

I really never looked into Cephus.
You should. It's basically MgT1e anyway.

By “simultaneous initiative” do you mean the CT rule?
Well, not quite, but "strongly inspired by". The one I have in mind has basically people acting simultaneously on similar actions (attack vs attack, shooting vs shooting), but some actions automatically happen before others (I think the order is attack without moving, shooting, attack with movement, or maybe that's how I've houseruled it).

I've been considering making them opposed rolls as well, kinda like in Advanced Fighting Fantasy...but with my Advantage system, it would get disturbingly close to Zenobia/43AD by Paul Eliott/Zozer Games.

If so, one can probably save space by cutting the combat rules!
Not sure I get what you mean here?
 

SJB

Legendary Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2021
Messages
172
Reaction score
379
Yeah, I just like 2d6...amusingly, that's probably nothing but nostalgia. I've been playing backgammon and its variants, all of which use 2d6, long before I first saw an RPG, or even a gamebook:grin:!

Admittedly, I'm not using most of them either...though I might retain them.


You should. It's basically MgT1e anyway.


Well, not quite, but "strongly inspired by". The one I have in mind has basically people acting simultaneously on similar actions (attack vs attack, shooting vs shooting), but some actions automatically happen before others (I think the order is attack without moving, shooting, attack with movement, or maybe that's how I've houseruled it).

I've been considering making them opposed rolls as well, kinda like in Advanced Fighting Fantasy...but with my Advantage system, it would get disturbingly close to Zenobia/43AD by Paul Eliott/Zozer Games.


Not sure I get what you mean here?
IIRC the CT rules mean that even if the PCs wipe out the opposition they still have to take the incoming fire. Getting into a firefight is too risky unless one has surprise. And in that case the Referee might as well award the fight to the ambushers. Firearms are also useful for mowing down low TL natives, and again one does not need combat rules to resolve the massacre.
 

AsenRG

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
12,162
IIRC the CT rules mean that even if the PCs wipe out the opposition they still have to take the incoming fire. Getting into a firefight is too risky unless one has surprise. And in that case the Referee might as well award the fight to the ambushers. Firearms are also useful for mowing down low TL natives, and again one does not need combat rules to resolve the massacre.
Yeah, that's not what my experience had shown. Also, hear me out:
1) Yes, firefights are risky if you're engaging in them without cover, but then I'd argue that's part for the course. If you have cover, that should be -2/-3 to the attack rolls (probably -4 if you're prone). Lots of whiffing? Sure. Engage enemies when they're out of cover and not prone:devil:!

2) See the Control/Advantage system. One of the possible effects of spending Advantage is exactly "resolving your move before a move that happens at the same time" (and I'm thinking of adding an option that for 2-3 Control/Advantage you could pull it off before a move that should happen later, like shooting someone before he could stab you).
...ooops, I just noticed I forgot to mention that one. Thanks for reminding me:shade:!
 

SJB

Legendary Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2021
Messages
172
Reaction score
379
Yeah, that's not what my experience had shown. Also, hear me out:
1) Yes, firefights are risky if you're engaging in them without cover, but then I'd argue that's part for the course. If you have cover, that should be -2/-3 to the attack rolls (probably -4 if you're prone). Lots of whiffing? Sure. Engage enemies when they're out of cover and not prone:devil:!

2) See the Control/Advantage system. One of the possible effects of spending Advantage is exactly "resolving your move before a move that happens at the same time" (and I'm thinking of adding an option that for 2-3 Control/Advantage you could pull it off before a move that should happen later, like shooting someone before he could stab you).
...ooops, I just noticed I forgot to mention that one. Thanks for reminding me:shade:!
Sounds like there will be plenty of innovation in your system based on extensive table experience. Go for it!
 

AsenRG

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
12,162
Sounds like there will be plenty of innovation in your system based on extensive table experience. Go for it!
More like "changes to make the system work better for what I want it to do", but yeah, that's the idea. I mean, I do want both double kills and avoiding them to be possible...
And I promise to stick a quote from Silver's Paradoxes of the Defense in a sidebar next to the initiative system:angel:.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SJB

Nobby-W

Top 5% expertise in the Dunning-Kruger effect
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
6,558
Reaction score
13,708
I wonder if there should be a thread for 'I made a hacked version of Traveller. Shall we compare notes?'
 

AsenRG

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
12,162
Also, 11) I need to think of a way to make the wound system based on damage saves.
 

MoonHunter

Game Guru
Joined
Aug 8, 2018
Messages
42
Reaction score
144
Given your bullet points, I am not seeing much gain. I mean as a thought exercise, okay. Just not sure if it is much better.
 

JAMUMU

I prefer sports, where you can win
Joined
Mar 24, 2022
Messages
202
Reaction score
642
No, and you suk!

But also, I've got a couple of versions that I've read and never run. I'd be interested in subscribing to your newsletter.
 

AsenRG

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
12,162
Given your bullet points, I am not seeing much gain. I mean as a thought exercise, okay. Just not sure if it is much better.
You mean about the damage save? I'm not sure if it would result in much gain, either. But I like damage saves with conditions, and hey, if you don't try it, you'd never know...:tongue:

No, and you suk!
I know, but I'm good at it:grin:!
But also, I've got a couple of versions that I've read and never run. I'd be interested in subscribing to your newsletter.
Sure, this thread is fine:thumbsup:!

Also, I'm still considering whether to split the (close) combat system in two, temporary names being "duelling", and "brutal murder from up close". Maybe I should, nobody else is doing that:shade:!
 

xanther

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2018
Messages
1,982
Reaction score
2,597
I'm all for it. Sounds like a tweaked CT, but I'm not familiar with Cepheus. If you want feedback on specific tweaks just say so.

On combat, always thought Traveller got a bad wrap just because it was not like D&D. Combat in Traveller far more lethal and taking hits to attributes, ouch. Really changes the focus of the RPG, for the better in my view as it made us think and not just run into range and swing.

I share your love for d6, always had hard time getting 2d6 (or 3d6 for that matter) added together to work way I wanted though (it's the modifier thing) over an extended period of time.
 
Cthulhu Mythos - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Top